Parliament definitively approves the Ripost security law

Paris – 21 July 2026: The French Parliament has definitively approved the Ripost bill to strengthen public security. The text was introduced in March by Interior Minister Laurent Nunez and brings together numerous criminal and administrative measures against phenomena that, according to the government, affect daily life and the sense of security. Support came from the political centre, the conservative right and the Rassemblement National.

Ripost stands for immediate responses to incidents affecting public order, security and public peace. Following an accelerated legislative procedure, the Senate first approved the bill on 26 May 2026. The National Assembly approved it in an amended version on 15 July. A joint committee of deputies and senators agreed on a compromise text on 20 July.

A central section concerns the improper use of nitrous oxide, known as laughing gas. The rules are intended to punish more severely the sale, possession, transport and use for intoxicating purposes. The government refers to health damage and disturbances in public spaces. During the parliamentary procedure, it was also debated whether the substance should legally be classified as a narcotic; this broader classification is not part of the core of the adopted law.

Other provisions target unauthorized music parties, motor races in public spaces and the misuse of fireworks. In the case of large unauthorized music events, notification and sanctioning options are being tightened. The law also expands the tools available to prefects and security authorities, for example for the seizure of equipment. For the government, this linking of different areas of crime reflects an approach intended to respond quickly to recurring disturbances.

However, the text does not include only sanctions against individual conduct. It also contains provisions on occupied properties and furnished tourist accommodation, the powers of municipal security actors and the technical means available to the police. These include, under conditions defined by law, body cameras, drones, video surveillance and automated licence plate reading. This expansion of the state’s capacity to act was particularly controversial during the legislative procedure.

Left-wing and Green deputies criticized the heterogeneous nature of the initiative and questioned whether the accumulation of new criminal offences effectively addresses the causes of everyday violence and crime. Deputy Alexis Corbiere pointed out in a parliamentary question possible restrictions on individual freedoms, particularly through surveillance technologies, administrative sanctions and changes to police procedures. The state’s human rights defender had also assessed some provisions critically.

With the final approval, the parliamentary procedure is complete. Before it enters into force, the constitutionally prescribed steps of promulgation and publication still need to be completed. Its practical effect will subsequently depend on implementing decrees, implementation by prefectures, police and the judiciary, as well as judicial review of individual measures. The law therefore primarily represents an expansion of the legal arsenal, not automatic uniform application throughout the country.