from Gerald Posner Just the Facts
A bitterly divided French National Assembly last week voted to approve sweeping legislation titled The Bill To Strengthen The Fight Against Sectarian Excesses And Improve The Support Of Victims.
Article 4, derisively dubbed the “Pfizer Article” by critics, is the
most controversial. It creates a new crime punishable by 1 to 3 years in
prison and fines of €15,000 to €45,000 for speech or actions that
causes others to “abandon medical care.”
Article 4 almost
did not make it into the act. It was the subject of heated debate. It
was removed from the bill, then reinstated, initially defeated, then
amended, and finally passed by a small margin.
What constitutes criminal behavior under Article 4? This is its text. (see above)
You are not alone if you had to read its provisions a couple of times
and still thought it made no sense. And it is not a problem of having
translated it into English. It is as indecipherable in its original
French. That’s the point, however. Article 4 is drafted in the broadest
possible language, without any restrictions or objective guard rails to
trigger its provisions.
Although the word Pfizer does not appear in the legislation, nor does the term mRNA,
the often-raucous debate in the National Assembly was largely directed
at the anti-vaccine groundswell that had taken root online during COVID.
Pharmaceutical companies lobbied behind the scenes for its passage.
Supporters contended the law would ensure public safety in any national
health crisis or a future pandemic. It was, said its sponsors, a
“required tool to stop the spread of misinformation” that could
otherwise undermine government public health policies.
Make no mistake, Article 4 is a template for other governments
looking for a legal means of controlling public discourse when it comes
to health and medical treatments. Arthur Delaporte, the Socialist Deputy
of the National Assembly, celebrated its passage by declaring, “With this article, we are defending science."...
read more here