Skip to content
[Édito] The ambiguities of the health pass – Debates

Since the onset of the health crisis, Parliament has given the government the possibility of sovereignly deciding our actions. He did not deprive himself of it. Everyone can judge the merits of their decisions. In any case, these prerogatives of the executive are extended until September 30, in accordance with a new law. And it was during the parliamentary debate that the introduction of a health pass was introduced by government amendment. A provision that risks fueling many controversies. First, because it has not been the subject of any impact study. In addition, consulted on the subject, as is customary, the CNIL (National Commission for Informatics and Freedoms), in particular, demanded that the law define “in a precise manner, the purposes, the nature of the places, establishments and events concerned ”. This is clearly not the case. This pass attesting that a person is vaccinated, recovered or spared by covid-19, can, it is said, be in paper or digital form, via the TousAntiCovid application. Who does not see, however, the risk of generalization of the second method, with the possibilities of monitoring that this implies? The law does not fix, either, the conditions under which the sesame will be required. For demonstrations of more than 1,000 people, says the government. Until he changed his mind. The CNIL had also underlined “the need to ensure the temporary nature of the device”. With all the more insistence that the list is long of the “temporary” devices that our administration knew how to perpetuate. The debate between security and privacy is not new. Clarity is the best precaution against drifts. It is therefore understandable that the deputies of the left, in their appeal to the Constitutional Council, recall these “requirements of clarity and intelligibility of the law”.

Support a professional editorial staff at the service of Brittany and the Bretons: subscribe from € 1 per month.

I subscribe

Source link