Good evening, and welcome
to International House
and to the University
of Chicago,
and to this very
special program.
My name is Denise
Jorgens, and I'm
the director of
International House
and the president of
International Houses Worldwide.
The mission of international
Houses Worldwide,
which is currently a network of
17 houses on four continents,
is to enable students and
scholars from around the world
to live and learn together
in a diverse community that
builds lifelong qualities
of leadership, respect,
and friendship.
Here at International
House of Chicago,
this mission is achieved
by daily interaction
among our residents, through
our unique facilities
and residential life activities,
and our new graduate commons
program, as well as through our
internationally-focused public
programs designed
to foster diversity
of thought and experience.
This evening's program
is one of nearly 200
held at International House of
Chicago and around the world.
None of these programs would
be possible without the support
and participation of
organizations across our campus
and around the world.
Co-sponsors for
tonight's program
include International House;
Global Voices Program;
the France Chicago
Center; cultural services
of the French Consulate
here in Chicago;
the Center for the Study of
Race, Politics, and Culture;
the Center for the Study
of Gender and Sexuality;
the University of
Chicago French Club;
the Franke Institute
for the Humanities;
and Alliance
Francaise De Chicago.
And now I'd like to
invite Jennifer Wild,
associate professor in the
Department of Cinema and Media
Studies, to introduce
our speaker.
Professor Wild, along with her
colleague in the law school,
Mary Anne Case, will
co-moderate a discussion
following the talk.
Thank you all for
joining us tonight,
and I look forward to seeing
you at many future International
House events.
Thank you.
[APPLAUSE]
Good evening, everybody.
Thank you.
It is my great
pleasure and honor
to introduce and welcome
Madame Christiane Taubira
to the University of Chicago.
Tonight's talk is part of the
Marianne Midwest Series, which
means that it will be being
streamed live to satellite
audiences made up of
members of university
and/or Alliance Francaise
communities in Minneapolis, St.
Louis, Milwaukee, Detroit,
Columbus, Grand Rapids,
Bloomington, and Cincinnati.
At the conclusion of
Madame Taubira's remarks
tonight, we'll have
time for questions
both from the audience
members here in Chicago,
and from our virtual audience
members throughout the Midwest.
Madame Taubira is not
simply the former Keeper
of the Seals and Minister
of Justice of France.
She is a globally-recognized
champion of human rights
and a public intellectual
who has remained intensely
focused on the values
of equality and dignity
for all, regardless
of country or origin.
Across her career and
in her nine books,
Madame Taubira has pursued
justice at every level,
giving voice to
those who have either
been silenced by history,
institutions, laws
and governments,
or who have been
relegated to the social margins
because of their difference.
It has been said
that in her books--
as in her political
work and discourse--
that she speaks directly
to each citizen,
often infusing her
thought and speech
with the poetry or the spirit
of the poets she most admires.
For example, at the end
of her 2002 book Slavery
As Told to My Daughter,
she speaks to her daughter
but she also speaks
directly to us, the reader.
Quote.
"Your heart is immense and
your energy inexhaustible.
And I know that after
having bandaged these wounds
and overcome these
calamities, you will still
have enough strength
to help those
who are sleeping in
abundance to discover
the enchantment of sharing."
Born in Cayenne, Guiana,
an overseas department
in France in South
America, Madame Taubira
studied economics, sociology,
African-American ethnology
at the University of Paris.
Upon her return
to Guiana in 1978,
she taught economics, directed
the National Historical
Conservatory and School of
Engineering, Technology,
and Applied Arts, as well as
co-founded several cooperative
to support local
farming and fishing.
As the first woman to be
elected deputy or representative
from Guiana, Madame Taubira
represented its first district
at the National
Assembly in France
for four consecutive terms
between 1993 and 2012,
during which time she
was also elected deputy
to the European Parliament.
She rose to national
prominence in 1999,
when she introduced a bill that
became the Taubira Law, which
recognized slavery and the
history of the slave trade
as crimes against humanity.
This remarkable law
includes stipulations
to integrate the inherited
effects of colonization
and enslavement in
education, research,
and in contemporary studies
of economic and social
disenfranchisement.
Madame Taubira is
also the first woman
from the overseas departments
and the first woman
of African descent to run
for the presidency of France.
As the 2002 presidential
candidate for the radical Left
Party, she campaigned
for a sixth republic,
which proposed an economy
that measured growth
in terms of human, social,
and environmental progress.
In 2012, Madame Taubira was
appointed Keeper of the Seals
and Minister of Justice under
French President Francois
Hollande.
As Minister of
Justice, Madame Taubira
was the principal architect of
the revolutionary Mariage Pour
Tous, or Marriage
For All Law, which
granted the freedom
of choice and equality
in marriage to
all men and women.
While her argument for
this law before Parliament
has been recognized as one of
the great political oratory
events of our
time, in her speech
to Parliament after the
legalization of gay marriage,
she spoke directly to the
young people of France.
And I quote.
"We know that the responsibility
of our public power
is to fight against
discrimination.
Our republic demands this.
Tonight we would especially
like to speak to the adolescents
in our country-- boys
and girls-- who have
been hurt during this debate.
We speak to those children
who found themselves
in the midst of deep
and frightening chaos.
They discovered a society
where a wave of selfishness
led many to loudly protest
against the rights of others.
We simply want to tell
these adolescents they
are at home in our society.
We recognize them
in this society.
We recognize their
contradictions, talents,
shortcomings, qualities,
and fragility.
These are the things that
make each and every one of us
unique.
That is the strength
of our society.
It is even the basis
of our society.
It is the basis of our
relationship to society."
So with this, I ask you to give
a generous welcome to Madam
Minister Christiane Taubira.
[APPLAUSE]
Thank you.
Thank you, thank you
for this warm welcome.
As far as I know, the
attendance tonight
all over the Midwest
network is composed
with English-speaking people as
well as French-speaking people.
And I will say that all of you
like hearing the two languages.
English-speaking people, I
guess due to the musicality
of the French
language-- its tone
and the words themselves--
how sexy to combine both
the sound and the significance.
And for French speaking people--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I have to share the time with
this man, this gentleman.
Thank you.
So I warn all of you, it's
very difficult for me--
it's very hard on
this side for me--
first to try to make short
sentences as I didn't promise,
and to be stopped frequently.
So I hope you'll enjoy, and
at least you will appreciate.
I'll do my best.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I would like to
talk about justice
and service of equality.
Started already.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I'm going to work in four parts.
First, I would like to talk
about the concept of equality
and what it means
for the public.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Then, how justice is a
means to achieve equality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Then, how justice can guarantee
equality in a democracy.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And how justice itself can
be guaranteed in a democracy.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The concept of equality
itself-- obviously we
are thinking of the
fight against inequality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But life is full
of inequalities.
We often are witnesses.
However, all inequalities
are not the same.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Most of you must have
experienced inequality.
However, sometimes
we are witnessing
situations of inequality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
What I would like to talk
about in terms of inequality
are the "structuring,"
quote unquote, inequalities.
There are two of
them that I would
like to talk about tonight,
and I will explain to you why.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Structuring equality is
equality between men and women.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It is structuring in that
it concerns a little more
than half of humanity.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Then, it's an equality that is
based on a criteria of nature.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And being that it's based
on a criteria of nature,
it is a matrix for all
other inequalities.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
If we accept the fact that
nature justifies inequality,
then we're accepting of
all other inequalities,
whether these are pretexts
for inequality or inequality
per se.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
If a society accepts this
inequality based on a matrix
and on structure, then
there is no other defense
against inequality,
against biases.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
If we accept this
first inequality
due to the base of
criteria of nature,
then all other inequalities
should be accepted.
It means that we
are accepting them,
whether it be the color of
the skin, religious beliefs,
origin, and other criteria.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Another structuring
inequality is
the one between people
who are free and slaves.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Whether it be
slavery in a system
that fully recognizes
itself as a slave system
or whether you have various
degrees of servitude,
this is a structuring
inequality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Because if we accept
this oppression,
obviously we accept to
question human integrity.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
This structuring
inequality actually
exposes any human being to
be submitted to a denigration
of the human condition.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Whatever the place,
whatever the time,
these two types of
inequalities must be fought off
without letting go.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Both one and the other
are a risk for us.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Particularly inequality to
which women are subjected--
men and boys have to
understand that it
is a danger to them as well.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But equality goes beyond the
fight against inequality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It's a human ambition.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Social, as well as ethical.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Even more so in practically
all matters of societies,
you have proofs of this concept
of inequality or equality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It translates into
human rights, such
are they are formulated
in various texts of laws,
during all of our history.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
For human rights, we are
referring to-- generally--
13th century documents.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Mainly Magna Carta in 1215.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
That was conceived and
developed in England.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We can also use documents
dating back to the 17th century.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
In 1628, the British
Bill of Rights?
Petition of Rights.
1628.
And the Bill of Rights a
little bit later in 1689.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
That's a very clever [INAUDIBLE]
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
That was for the 17th century.
Now for the 18th century,
we have the Declaration
of Independence here in
the United States, 1776.
All men are created equal.
All men are created equal.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And the Declaration
of Human Rights,
which relates to the Declaration
of Independence of the United
States.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
This Declaration of
Human Rights obviously
shows a universal declaration--
basically, that's its basis.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And its first article says
that men are born and stay
free and equal in rights.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
This is our usual
frame of reference.
However, if we look into
the rest of the world,
we see equivalent references.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The code Ur-Nammu, which dated
back to the era of 2100 BCE,
is a code that was
enacted in Iraq.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The Hammurabi code, which
is a little more recent--
about 1750 BCE.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It was too long,
it was too long.
Which one?
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
[INAUDIBLE] was enacted
by the Mandingo tribes.
It was not a tribe.
It was a civilization?
It was an empire,
a big, big one.
And since we're talking about
the Magna Carta in 1215,
this is something that would
be about in the same century
at this.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
In all parts of the world,
we find ancient documents
that are very clear and that are
stating that all human beings
are equal.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Basically, we are faced
with natural rights.
Or at least we can
consider them as such.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The rights of people.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Basically it comes from
custom law, or [INAUDIBLE]
meaning that societies
have a capacity
to consider all their citizens,
all their people, as equal.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
This does not mean that in
the past there did not exist--
or currently there does
not exist-- societies
that are based on inequality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We will get back to
that in the Q&A session.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Let's now go to
justice and how it's
considered a mean
to serve inequality,
to achieve equality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It is obvious that
if we proclaim
that society has equality,
but we do not give ourselves
the means to establish and
to enforce this equality,
this concept has no basis.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And justice is a
means by which we
can make possible the
exercise of equality
in an effective,
efficient manner.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It's the same way that there
are several kinds of freedom,
whether it's freedom
to go back and forth,
whether the freedom
of expression,
freedom of conscience.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
In order to have a
meaning, equality
has to be characterized.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I'm talking about
natural rights.
However, that doesn't
mean that everyone agrees
with these natural rights.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And if it was necessary to have
a Declaration of Independence,
in 1948 a declaration
of human rights--
Universal Declaration
of Human Rights--
it's because there
were forces that
were trying to go
against this equality
and these human rights.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And we also can go far back
and find signs of equality
in front of the law,
when faced with the law.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
For example, in the
Athenian democracy.
For example, about
500 years BCE.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
In the second century
of the common era,
we can go back to the Edict
of Caracalla [INAUDIBLE].
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And also, again,
this Declaration
of Human Rights
that states that men
are equal in front of the law.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Whether the law
punishes or protects.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And Anatole France
talks about the majesty
of the law that forbids
equally rich and poor to sleep
under a bridge, to beg
and to steal bread.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Equality in front
of the law also
draws you attention to the
effectiveness of equality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
These words of Anatole
France remind us
that whether people
are rich or poor,
it's a certain
way of being poor.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And it explains all
the debates about what
equality is in reality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
There were intense debates
between philosophers
and naturalists-- for
example, Voltaire and Buffon--
about the meaning
of spiritual, moral,
and other types of equality.
Social, too Because social
one is very, very important.
Extremely important.
Yes.
It's a more effective
equality, the social one.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
What matters is
that we have to have
an anthropological
approach to equality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Because then it sends us back
to the following question.
The freedom that
we are defending--
are they for all human
condition, or only
for people who are close to us?
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It's an essential, a
crucial matter, and also
one of the fundamentals of
the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights in 1789.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Are you sure?
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Which brings us to the question
that societies are faced with,
in that the inalienability--
Yeah, I'm not alone,
fighting against this word.
--Of men and citizens can be
made vulnerable and attacked.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The refugee matter is not
a provision of matter.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Because human migrations are
starting again in the world--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Because of wars--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And because of
misery and poverty.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Due to the inequal distribution
of wealth in the world.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It starts again due
to global change.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Because there is an upheaval
in the world and that
we are witnessing.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And in a few months,
in a few weeks,
we're going to have to face
this new era of human migration.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
When faced with
these people, we now
have to think about the
matter of human rights
as well as citizen rights.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And now justice is
not only a means
to achieve equality, but also
a way to guarantee equality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Justice ensures equality of
citizens among themselves--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And protects them against
any bad acts coming
from one side or the other.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Justice also protects
citizens against the state--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
At least in
democracies, in states
where you have the rule of law.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Because one of the
fundamental principles
in a state with the rule of
law is that the law limits
the powers of the state.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And a real democracy
is a society
where you can witness an
abuse of the state's power
and put a term to it,
put a limit to it,
or stop it altogether.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And that's when justice
is going to be notified,
in that if a man or a woman who
is not a citizen of the country
says that his right-- her
rights-- have been attacked.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And that's why in
all democracies,
you also have laws
that guarantee
the protection of people,
whether citizens or not
citizens.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Now what guarantees
justice itself?
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
First it has to be
independent in relation
to the political powers.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
In a democracy,
it's a prerequisite
that justice be independent
from the executive branch.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
In order to be able
to render decisions,
including in matters where it's
an abuse of power by the state,
justice has to be independent
from the state and the powers
that be.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Which is a big responsibility
for the magistrates--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Who can have a power
that far outweighs
the power of the state.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But we have to be
watchful, in order
not to position
themselves above the law.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Justice as a means in
service of equality-- justice
is going to structure democracy.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Justice itself
must be protected,
must be guaranteed against
all sorts of abuses.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And that's possible thanks
to the social contract.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And we live in an era
where our societies
have to face the matter
of the social contract--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Which means a way
that we're going
to reinvigorate the
fundamentals of life in common.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We can have laws that are fair.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
If we don't have the means
to make these laws effective,
we cannot guarantee equality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We can have legal
institutions that are solid.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But if the laws themselves
do not guarantee equality--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Citizens do not benefit from
the protection to which they
are entitled in a democracy.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
To go back to what I was
mentioning earlier about
the differences-- or at least
the subtle nuances between
various forms of equality--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
In any given period
of time in history,
there were forces
that were opposed
to the principle of equality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And as strong and as clear
as a democracy can be today--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Nobody can state or pretend
that our laws are perfect--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Or that our institutions
are beyond reproach.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
So a warning to the
young generation.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Do not think that my generation
has done all the work that
needed to be done,
there's nothing
that needs to be
undone, or nothing
that needs to be redone.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
You have a role to play.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The world is closer to
imperfection than perfection.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
There's a lot of disorders.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But we can go beyond that.
We have to fight that.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
You can never forget this
advice-- that's not an advice,
but that we have to
consider as an advice
given by Georges Bernanos.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
This will help you under our
protection, our watchfulness--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And our affection,
our great affection--
Tenderness.
I prefer tenderness.
I agree.
Thank you.
You know the song-- Aretha
Franklin sings this song.
Try a little tenderness.
I stand corrected.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
So you can count
on our tenderness
to apply this advice.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It is not the rule of
law that guards us,
it's us who are guarding
the rule of law.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Never forget.
Merci, thank you.
Thank you.
[APPLAUSE]
Is this on?
Yes.
So for those of you
here in Chicago,
I invite you to line up
behind the microphone
here in the center of the aisle.
And I would remind everyone
that in the interest of covering
as much ground as possible to
please formulate your questions
so that they are concise.
Thank you.
Shall we all while
they are lining up
begin-- we are also
in communication
with a large number
of other universities
who are putting in
questions online.
I'm going to take those
questions as well interspersed
with yours.
Let me begin in the order in
which these questions were
received.
And so the first one we have
is from Wayne State University.
The question is as follows.
The questioner believes
that equality and justice
is only possible when the
leadership is representative
of the diversity of the
people they represent.
With that said-- and in
view of the upcoming French
presidential election--
the questioner
wants to know of
Madame Taubira, when
do you think French people
will be ready to elect
a person from the minority?
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I take the question
very seriously,
because it's really
a matter in France.
And I do believe that the French
society is quite able to deal
every day with diversity.
I don't know what diversity
means, as a matter of fact.
I do believe that humanity
is diverse, everywhere,
at every time--
and more and more
because the world is a
reserve of the human history.
And in the human history,
there was the colonial empires
with so many, so many
movements and migrations.
Not migrations, because
slave trade and slavery
were not migrations.
But people were displaced
from one continent to another.
And people-- they navigate.
And now all the
societies everywhere
are mixed everywhere.
So the world itself is diverse.
Anyway, in France-- I was saying
that French people every day,
they are resistant in France.
I know that--
especially I know that.
But the French
people every day deal
[INAUDIBLE] with diversity.
So I do believe that they're
able, if they believe and trust
someone.
Yes, just because it's
a very political people.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Politicized people.
So I think they're
able to do so.
But a lot of people who
speak loud every day
are not able to stand with that.
So I don't know if you
think about someone
from the diversity--
So I'm reading the question.
I don't what--
OK.
So we don't know.
Yeah, we just know the question.
Yes.
Yes, not the thinking
behind her question.
It's OK.
So somebody should
be lining up here,
otherwise I will keep going to
questions from the internet.
And again, in the
order received.
From Truman State University.
Given the controversy of
the Lois Memorielles--
that is to say, the
Laws of Historical
Remembrance-- over the
years before and after
the first [INAUDIBLE]
Taubira regarding reparations
to the memory and
descendants of slaves
prior to its final
abolition in 1848.
Do you, Madame Taubira,
perceive historians
and the general public to
be less divided and more
supportive than in
the years following
this monumental legislation?
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
What was the question?
Are they less divided
and more supportive
now than they were immediately
after the legislation was
passed?
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It quieted down.
This being said, controversies
do not bother me.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Really, democracies need a
supportive need discussions.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We just need good
will, good faith--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Candidness in arguments.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The idea that some people never
accept an approach or a law
does not bother me.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
However, in a democracy
when a law is passed,
it has to be enforced.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
This law was voted upon and it's
enforced for the last 15 years.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
During the debates,
historians were protesting.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
However, most of those
who were protesting
did not read the law.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Because the law
protects research.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
My approach is not to
guilt trip or vengeance.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I myself-- in order to
understand the world,
to understand what's
happening now,
and to have a vision
of the future-- I
need the benefit of
other people's knowledge.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And when I created
this draft bill,
one of the prerequisites
for me was to create
and to support research.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And maybe some of the historians
who are against the law
have seen its effects under the
form of grants, scholarships,
and various other forms
of grants inventions.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And more broadly, they must have
realized that in any case you
cannot delete history.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
To the contrary, you have
to be able to master it,
to control it.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
In order to be able to apprehend
and comprehend the current era.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And therefore, to be
master of your future,
your personal destiny, and
the collective destiny,
as well as your domain.
The floor is yours.
So one observation
and one question.
The observation is I want to
thank you for your service
to justice and equality.
I think it was Pope Paul VI
who said long ago, if you
want peace work for justice.
And we heard today, if you
want justice work for equality.
And it's all connected,
so thank you for that.
Thank you, sir.
Second-- what I'm
wondering these days
with all that's going
on in the world,
particularly in
France-- I'm wondering
how we balance the European
Convention on Human Rights
Article VIII, dealing
with the right to privacy.
How do we balance
that with the need
to protect the citizenry
against terrorism?
For example, it's been reported
that France has increased
its surveillance of
email, instant messaging,
public communication, even
private communication,
in an apparent
contradiction to Article
VIII of the European
Convention of Human Rights.
So I'd just be
interested in your views,
in light of that
fundamental human right.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you for your
words, and thank you
for this very
important question.
I try to explain you
as clear as possible,
because it's a complex matter.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
In France, we adopted
effectively a law
about intelligence gathering.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
What we need to know
is that this law
establishes
traditional framework
for the activity of civilians.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Because there was no legal
framework for this activity
in a democracy.
That's the first thing.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Second thing to know
is that this law
was being drafted before the
terrorist act of January 2015.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Parliament was working on
the drafting of this bill.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But it's true that after
the terrorist acts of 2015,
the government took
over the project
and sped up its execution or
establishment, implementation.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
At the time I was
Minister of Justice,
and it was a period that was
very sensitive, very important
for me.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Because after these
terrorist acts,
the collective community demand
for security, for safety,
was really strong.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Which is normal.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And politicians started
one-upping each other
when it came to security.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
What was necessary was
to, at the same time,
guarantee French
citizens security--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
To the best of our ability.
But at the same
time, we could not
afford to bring down
democracy and laws in France.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It was very difficult,
very sensitive.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But I believe I'm entitled
to be proud of the work I
did as Minister of
Justice in [INAUDIBLE]
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
First, I wanted to state very
clearly, very explicitly,
the facts.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
One, that this
traditional framework
was progress for democracy.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And two, that the
surveillance was also
an infraction against the right
to privacy, the right to family
communication,
personal communications
in general-- basically,
your privacy.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Therefore, it goes
contrary to common rights.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Therefore, I stated that yes, we
need to protect French people.
Therefore, to be able
to monitor people who
are preparing terrorist acts.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But we have to make
sure that we're only
monitoring these people and
not the citizens themselves.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Civilians say that-- and
it's logical in their mind--
if you should be able actually
to monitor one person,
but surveillance
goes beyond this.
Not only you
monitor that person,
but the person or persons
around that first person,
and people around the
second layer of persons.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
For me, we had to put in place
a control of surveillance
services departments.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I established four levels
of controls in the law.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It was very difficult, including
vis-a-vis a commission of laws
of the National Assembly.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
This committee is supposed
to protect freedoms.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But the environment was so
heavy that this committee itself
was restricting
freedoms, pretty much.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Thankfully, I was able to
convince quite a few deputies
who were able to vote,
including against some
of the provisions of
the laws committee.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Four levels of control--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The control by an independent
administrative committee.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Which can even go against a
decision by the prime minister,
by notifying the Conseil d'Etat.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
A jurisdictional controlled
by the Conseil d'Etat,
which is our highest
administrative court.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And for the first
time in France,
magistrate have a security
clearance in France.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Which means that they
can have access directly
to classified documents.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Whereas until now, they
could ask what was in there
and we could tell
them just nothing.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And a democratic control
that allows any citizen
to go in front of
the Conseil d'Etat.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And to use
[INAUDIBLE] procedure,
meaning that you require a
decision within 48 hours.
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
And a control that
allows deputies
to have access to the files.
Now I'll just ask everyone
to do its own job.
I promise the next
answers will be shorter.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We understood.
You give it in English, too.
But maybe [INAUDIBLE], everyone,
and as to what this young man
said, if you didn't tell us,
because it's very important.
So please translate.
I would like to join the
previous person who asked
a question, and to thank you.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I like both compliments,
I would like to thank you.
And a compliment from the
youths who are enthusiastic,
so I'm flattered.
And also I like the
compliments from people who
are not as youthful as you are.
They have wisdom, they have
knowledge, so thank you.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
With youth and enthusiasm,
sometimes we're
lacking subtlety.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
As far as I think,
that for drug users
we have to treat the problem
more in terms of health
than in terms of justice.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
For drug trafficking,
I believe it is a crime
and we have to sanction it.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I do realize that when
it comes to drugs,
there is a whole piling
of discrimination,
maybe economic
circumstances that
push people to fall into
that trap, the trap of drugs.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But drug trafficking is a crime.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
For the other aspect now.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
As Minister of Justice,
I created a committee--
a financial committee--
that would stand guard--
No, it's not a committee,
it's a-- a prosecutor.
It's a national prosecutor.
A financial prosecutor, then--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
That would fight insider fraud,
that would fight corruption
and various other scorges--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
By giving it the means,
by giving it magistrate,
and by creating a chamber
where they would meet
and they would treat
the various matters.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We are in a democracy, and
in a democracy proceedings,
procedures are important.
They matter.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
These are the rules according
to which we can judge.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Whether poor people, whether
weak or strong people.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It's true that powerful
people have the means
to avail themselves to
the services of experts
who have expertise.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And we can see that matters of
a certain nature do take time
and are carried over and over.
And we can see that this is
due to various procedures,
procedural maneuverings.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But the rights of defense
are very important,
including when powerful
people are concerned.
As well as weak people,
they have rights,
and it is important.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But judges, magistrates
have to be independent.
If they say, for
example, that someone who
stole a few grapes has to go
to jail-- whether I like it
or not, I have to accept that.
They have to be independent.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I can see that something
is bothering you,
and I have to say
that I do respect
the presumption of innocence.
Now, some people have
been indicted, judged,
and then they've been
re-elected although they've
been declared guilty.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Citizens, voters.
People are waiting.
So I am going to go to
the people-- you all
should know that I'm being
fed questions from about
a dozen other locations.
Let me put three of these
questions together into one.
They are each questions
about your inspiration.
One question is about
your repeated insistence
that literature inspires
you, and the role
of literature in the
development of your thought.
Another is about whether
Olympe de Gouges, who
fought for the rights of many
minorities, women, slaves,
and orphans inspires you.
And the third question
is about why you still
find yourself inspired by
Enlightenment liberalism
in situations where the
questioner at least might
think a communitarian
perspective might be a better
one.
I don't understand the last one.
I'll cite the question exactly.
Considering your
personal experience,
your perspective remains
surprisingly in line
with Enlightenment liberalism.
What convinces you that this
is the best perspective, as
opposed to a more
communitarian perspective?
So we've got these three
sources of inspiration for you,
or potential inspiration--
literature, Olympe de Gouges,
and the enlightenment.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Literature, I assume
you all like it?
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It's a permanent
belief, at least for me.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
My only suffering is that I
will not live thousands of years
in order to be able to read all
the good books in the world.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And there will be many
books to be written,
so I'd like to
read them as well.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Maybe among yourselves
there are great authors.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I enjoy immensely literature.
First, it helps me to love
the world, whatever its state.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Because literature brings
to me the psyche of others--
their life, their thinking.
And culture.
Culture.
Imagineering.
Close enough.
Yes.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Literature is a witness to what
is supreme in the human being--
also, the vulnerability
and various other elements.
As I know all of you
understand what I say,
so I don't say the gentlemen
anything about a few words
he didn't translate.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Literature is a source
of energy for me.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I have a free relationship
with literature.
For example,
well-being, pleasure--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It makes me stronger.
And even if it didn't,
it's still bliss for me.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Olympe de Gouges understood
everything in his time.
Her time.
Fine.
Gender studies, I need.
No, not gender studies.
That's a fact.
It's a truth.
It's nature, by the way.
Yeah.
Did you understand
about nature as the base
of all inequalities.
Did you understand that?
I tried to explain
that a few minutes ago.
So you were busy
translating, so you
need some time to understand.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Olympe de Gouges
was a revolutionary.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Because she understood,
and this was interesting.
At the time, the two main
matters were women and slaves.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
She wrote a play about
slaves, for example.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
For example, in
the United States
slaves were on American soil.
Whereas for France, there
were no slaves in France.
France had an empire, had
colonies, and slaves resided
in colonies, not in France.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Olympe de Gouges understood that
there were two contradictions
in the French Revolution--
first, to accept
the fact that there
were slaves, which
went against the principles
of the revolution;
and second, that women
were not considered
equal to men, although men are
supposed to be equal-- to be
born equal and to stay equal.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It's a great figure who
should be better known.
She wrote a declaration of not
human rights, but women rights,
and women citizens right.
So she deserves to
be better known.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And I gave the building of the
Ministry of Justice in France,
I gave it the name
of Olympe de Gouges--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
In order for her to
exist in a public space.
The questioner
also added-- do you
think she'll be admitted
to the Pantheon one day?
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
A few people asked when the
French president decided
for new people at the Pantheon.
He chose two men and two ladies.
Olympe de Gouges was not,
but it was a proposal.
I agree.
I should like Olympe de Gouges
to be in the French Pantheon,
but the best pantheon
is a mind one.
If we succeed to settle Olympe
de Gouges in people's mind,
it's a Pantheon.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The last question is my concept,
my reflection on equality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
What the questioner is
calling my liberal vision.
Enlightenment liberalism.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
When it comes to the
whole group of freedoms--
Yes, I do like it.
What else do you want
me to say about it?
Yes.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The Enlightenment period is
a period of great debate--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Where minds were liberated.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It was a coming-of-age of the
individual as a subject of law.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Until then, the
individual person
was under the
fealty of religion.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It was kind of harnessed by a
whole series of prohibitions.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And constantly was reminded
or treated with its relation
to the past.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The Enlightenment thinks that
the individual or the person
is a subject of laws,
but he has to contribute
as well to the collective,
to the community development.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The past becomes an inheritance
that we are bearing together.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But it stops now being harnessed
on the present and the future.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
So the individual becomes
a subject of the law,
but also he becomes
autonomous, independent.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Therefore, he
becomes responsible.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I like this conception.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
If we keep the emancipation, the
liberation of the individual--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Which means that thanks to
knowledge, know-how, culture,
he can choose his free status.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Oh, I'm so sorry, it's because
I speak too much and too long.
My mind is like an ocean.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I will ask my
question in English,
and I'll translate
if you would like.
I want to say how proud I
am of your accomplishment--
political, intellectual.
When you speak, you remind
me of great intellectuals
such as Frantz Fanon
and Aime Cesaire,
products of the [FRENCH].
I don't know how
to translate that.
My question is,
how can you explain
the similarities between
the Front National,
Marine Le Pen,
which prohibit now
a Muslim woman from wearing
their traditional outfit
in the beach, and the
American Republican
Party of Donald Trump that
proposed a full ban of Muslims?
How can we understand this as
people of different religions
and people of color?
How can we react to
this politically extreme
with a structured way that
doesn't radicalize our views,
our ideologies?
Thank you.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Actually, my question was
related to what he was asking.
So you were talking
about upholding equality.
So how are you going
to uphold equality
when you think of the fact
that we are having xenophobia
in the air, both in
the United States
and in France-- when
one part of a population
doesn't look at the other
part with fear and distrust?
So do you have some advice
for the establishments
on both sides of the Atlantic,
as well as the public?
And are you personally going
to do something about it,
maybe run for public
office afterwards?
Thank you.
Which one?
No, don't answer.
Mrs. Taubira, thank you very
much for being here tonight,
and for being such a model for
French and the world citizens.
I have a question, actually,
about affirmative action
and quotas, because they
have long been prohibited
in the United States.
And now they've begun
to be a bit accepted.
Is affirmative action
through the implementation
of quotas part of the
idea of justice to you?
Thank you.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I'm going to go back
to the questions.
Yes, equality.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Affirmative action is a
requirement for equality.
No, I spoke about equality
for employment, but not
affirmative action.
No, it's not exactly the same.
Because I do believe
that in your country--
in Brazil, in India, I
understand affirmative action.
Because due to the history
of these societies,
due to their rules,
affirmative action
was a program allowed to repair
discrimination, exclusion,
hiding people as a
whole, as communities
due to their relationship--
historical relations.
That's the way I understand
affirmative action.
When I speak about equality in
employment-- equal employment
opportunity-- I
speak about equality.
I do believe that each
society has her own history.
And due to this history-- due
to the ways the values were
organized, conceptualized,
and settled down--
the answers are different.
In the United States,
it seems to me
that there are new debates
against affirmative action.
It seems to me.
There was a time where
affirmative action
seems to be the answer.
And since a few
years, it seems to me
that more and more people
say affirmative action is not
yet justified.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
In France, I'm not
in favor of what we
call positive discrimination.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Given the way that the
French nation was made,
with a principle of
equality and citizenship.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Committee blocks
are not conceivable.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It's possible here, its history.
It's possible in England, in
Brazil, in India, its history.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But we also have
unequal societies.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
In India, for example,
you have various castes--
for example, the untouchables.
And it's cast in
the law, they don't
have the same rights as others.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And France was constituted
as a nation on a civic base--
not an aggregate of
various communities,
but one block, one nation.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Which allows us to demand
equality for all citizens.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The matter of knowing
how we're going
to fight against xenophobia--
which is in the air,
as you said earlier.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It's to fight, and
mainly to fight together.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
In all societies,
civil society can
get organized, and
not necessarily
on a community-wide basis.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I can be bothered
by discriminations
and fight against
discriminations.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
I may not be the
subject of it itself,
meaning I cannot be
submitted to discrimination--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And not accept discriminations.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
So in society, all
people who are subjected
to discrimination--
whether it's xenophobia,
racism, homophobia--
they have to fight.
But also other parts
of the population
who are not concerned should
fight together with them
in solidarity.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
It has to be done.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We are in the 21st century.
We have very elaborate
technologies, know-how,
and we still have
people who are not
able to accept people who
look different from them.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And you have people
who want to get
elected to the highest
levels of government,
and who loud and
clear are enunciating
discriminatory statements.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The laws must keep
them from this.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
But society has to
make this impossible.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And the only way is to fight.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We should not be victims.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We cannot be victimized.
They want us to become victims.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We are survivors to all
forms of discrimination.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We are warriors against
all forms of injustice.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And we are concerned by any form
of injustice against anybody,
anywhere.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And the way to keep
that from happening--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
Is to be our own rampart.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We cannot let
ourselves be crushed.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We cannot be won over.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We cannot be weakened.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
We must be stronger
and stronger.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The more the attack is unfair--
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
The more, the stronger we get.
[SPEAKING FRENCH]
And we will have the last word.
And maybe it's the last word.
[APPLAUSE]
Thank you.
Thank you.
