Nuñez defends the government’s plan to assume the lawful use of weapons in police operations

Paris – 06.07.2026: Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez on Monday reaffirmed the government’s position on the upcoming vote concerning Proposition de loi No. 691. The bill provides for a presumption regarding the lawful use of firearms by police and gendarmes. Nuñez stressed that this is a rebuttable presumption: new findings — such as video recordings or conclusions by the public prosecutor’s office — could invalidate this presumption at any time.

The bill was proposed by the Les Républicains group and introduced by MP Éric Pauget. The revised version provides for a “presumption of lawful use of the weapon.” In substance, this would shift the burden-of-proof rules in favor of law enforcement: the use of a weapon would initially be considered justified provided it was necessary and proportionate. The precise wording — whether it refers to a presumption of legality or legitimacy — is considered crucial for the subsequent standard of investigation.

Opposition comes from parts of the opposition, professional associations in the justice sector and human rights organizations. They warn that a statutory presumption could weaken independent investigations into serious incidents and make judicial oversight of the state’s use of force more difficult. References to European case law emphasize the state’s obligation to ensure effective, independent and prompt investigations when people are killed or seriously injured by security forces. Left-wing MPs have announced that they will submit amendments and call for opposition.

Supporters from conservative blocs as well as representatives of police unions argue that risks to officers on duty have increased and that a legal framework regarded as ambiguous hampers rapid decisions in dangerous situations. They cite cases in which officers and staff face lengthy proceedings, even though their actions were later found to be lawful. Nuñez affirmed that the public prosecutor’s office remains responsible for investigations and that the usual control mechanisms — internal investigations, IGPN reviews and judicial scrutiny — will continue to apply unchanged.

In the Assemblée nationale chamber, the vote is scheduled for 7 July 2026. The dispute concerns not only the wording but also the procedural consequences: what requirements must be met to rebut the presumption, how video footage from body cameras and surveillance cameras is to be secured, and what deadlines and transparency obligations apply to investigating authorities? Legal commentators point out that even small shifts in evidentiary rules can have a major impact on the course of investigations and the public’s ability to understand decisions.

The issue touches on the long-standing conflict between security interests and rule-of-law oversight in France. Regardless of the outcome of the vote, the debate on balancing security protection, the operational effectiveness of the forces and the quality of independent investigations will likely continue — with possible consequences for training, operational regulations and the handling of evidence in criminal proceedings.