Nuñez defends the government’s plan on the presumption of legitimate use of weapons in police operations

Paris – 06.07.2026: Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez reiterated the government’s position on Monday regarding the upcoming vote on Proposition de loi No. 691. The bill provides for a presumption of the legitimate use of firearms by the police and gendarmerie. Nuñez stressed that this is a rebuttable presumption: new evidence—for example video recordings or findings by the public prosecutor—could refute it at any time.

The proposal comes from the ranks of Les Républicains and was introduced by MP Éric Pauget. The revised version provides for a «presumption of legitimate use of the weapon». In practical terms, this would shift the burden of proof in favor of law enforcement: the use of a weapon would initially be considered justified as long as necessity and proportionality are invoked. The details of the wording—whether it refers to a presumption of legitimacy or legality—are considered decisive for the subsequent investigative standard.

Opposition parties, professional judicial associations and human rights organizations are resisting the proposal. They warn that a legal presumption could weaken independent investigations into serious incidents and make judicial oversight of state coercion more difficult. References to European case law underline the State’s obligation to ensure effective, independent and prompt investigations in cases of deaths or serious injuries caused by security forces. Left-wing MPs have announced amendments and opposition mobilization.

Supporters from conservative forces and representatives of police unions argue that risks to officers have increased and that the legal situation is perceived as unclear, hampering swift decisions in dangerous situations. They refer to cases in which officers were subjected to lengthy proceedings, although the intervention was later found to have been lawful. Nuñez clarified that the public prosecutor nevertheless remains in charge of the proceedings and that the usual control mechanisms—internal investigations, IGPN reviews and judicial reassessments—should continue to apply unchanged.

The vote in the National Assembly is scheduled for 7 July 2026. Beyond the choice of words, the procedural effects are controversial: what requirements apply to rebut the presumption, how are bodycam and surveillance camera recordings preserved, and what deadlines and transparency obligations apply to investigative bodies? Legal commentary highlights that even small shifts in evidentiary rules can have significant repercussions for investigative proceedings and public understanding of decisions.

The issue touches on a long-standing conflict between security interests and rule-of-law oversight in France. Regardless of the outcome of the vote, the debate on the balance between police protection, the effectiveness of operations and the quality of independent investigations is likely to continue—with possible consequences for training, operational guidelines and the handling of evidence in criminal proceedings.