The execution of Buffet and Bontems (1972)

Source : Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616.

Cover of the newspaper Express, December 4^th-10^th 1972 (Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616) Claude Buffet (1933-1972) was sentenced to life in prison by the Assizes court of the Seine for having murdered a young woman in the Bois de Boulogne during an attempted robbery. On January 27^th 1965, Roger Bontems (1936-1972) was sentenced to twenty years for having seriously injured a taxi driver that he attacked. Incarcerated in the prison of Clairvaux (Aube), these two prisoners organized an escape plan. On the morning of September 21^st 1971, both of them complained of stomach pains during breakfast. They were taken to the nurses’ office where they threatened a nurse, a guard and another prisoner with knives and took them hostage.  Television allowed the public to watch the events in real-time (see the link to the INA Archives pour tous). When the police finally broke in the next morning, the guard and the nurse were dead, their throats cut by Buffet. Buffet and Bontemps were sentenced to death by the Assizes court of Aube on June 29^th 1972. Robert Badinter, Bontems’ lawyer, and Buffet’s lawyer requested pardon for their clients, which the President Pompidou refused. Buffet and Bontems were guillotined on November 28^th 1972 at the Santé Prison. This case was the catalyst for Robert Badinter’s abolitionist campaign: his book L’Exécution (1973) summarizes the trial following the Clairvaux mutiny and their execution. For more information: See the biographical article on Roger Bontems on Wikipedia and that on Claude Buffet. See an extract of a news report on the subject at INA Archives pour tous: Avant sujet procès Buffet, JT 20H ORTF 24/06/1972 5m05s. Bibliography on the website Criminocorpus.

Changes in the polls: From 1969 to 1972

Source : Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616.

Extract from France-Soir, October 18^th 1969 and November 26^th-27^th 1972 (Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616) A 1969 poll showed that a majority of the French population was largely in favor of abolishing the death penalty (58 %). The poll was conducted the day after the year 1968, which inaugurated a period of “moral liberation” during which not a single sordid crime made the front pages of newspapers. A previous poll, conducted in 1962, had already revealed a quasi-majority favoring abolition. In 1972, an IFOP poll, conducted during the trial of Buffet and Bontems, gave a completely opposite result: 63 percent of those asked were content with the Penal Code as it was, and only 27 percent preferred abolition. The polls on this delicate question evolved according to the criminal cases treated by the media. If an odious crime were on the front page of newspapers or on television, public opinion switched in favour of maintaining the death penality. For more information: For a graph of public opinion, see the one made by polls done since 1978 on the website of Sofres.

“France is scared” (Roger Gicquel, TF1, February 18th 1976)

Source : Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616.

Extract from La Gueule ouverte, February 25^th 1976 and cover of the Point, March 1976 (Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616) Roger Gicquel pronounced this famous phrase on the French television channel TF1 as a response to the crime Patrick Henry (born in 1953). Henry had kidnapped a 7-year-old in Troyes on January 30^th 1976 and demanded a ransom of a thousand francs. The child was strangled, and the murderer hid the body in his apartment while trying, in vain, to extort the ransom. The police quickly suspected him and put him into custody, but he was eventually freed. After his liberation, this newscaster stated that perpetrators of kidnappings should be given the death penalty. Henry was finally arrested again on February 17^th 1976 and the police found (with his help) the child’s body in his apartment. The journalist’s phrase hit the nail on the head because it corresponded with a sentiment of revolt in public opinion faced with the cynical behavior of Patrick Henry, who had previously gone before television cameras to proclaim his innocence and support the death penalty, despite the fact that he was really the perpetrator of the crime. In the following months, the press echoed this emotion, gaining support for capital punishment: the guillotine was often represented, by caricature and other means, on the cover of weekly papers. For more information: See the biographical article on Patrick Henry on Wikipedia. See also the television program presented by Roger Gicquel on the website INA Archives pour tous: La France a peur (Roger Gicquel), TF1, 2/18/1976.

Defenders and adversaries of the death penalty: associations

Source : Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616.

Extract from France-Soir, February 24^th 1976 (Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616) The discovery that Patrick Henry was indeed the murderer of the kidnapped child, Philippe Bertrand, made for a difficult relationship between the National League against crime (Ligue nationale contre le crime), a recently-created group which battled crime (specifically against children) and supported the application of the death penalty, and Georgie Viennet’s Association against the death penalty (Association contre la peine de mort). Hence the fact that abolitionists were accused of extravagance and of inflating petition numbers in favor of abolition. Each group came to the Elysée to try to get support for their cause. This newspaper was part of the anti-abolition majority, and in their conclusion, they evoke “photos of innocents”.

For or against – in song

Je suis pour (Sardou), L’assassin assassiné (Julien Clerc) During important moments of their combat (like when death sentences were pronounced), associations for or against the death penalty would collect the signatures of important intellectuals and entertainment stars. Some of these people were took up a strong position, such as the two singers featured here who wrote or sang activist songs. Michel Sardou wrote this song with the explicit title “Je suis pour” (“I am for”), making his position clear the day after the murder of little Philippe Bertrand by Patrick Henry. Julien Clerc, in “L’assassin assassiné” (“The assassin assassinated”), sings of the last person who was guillotined. For more information: To hear extracts of these songs, go to the site of Michel Sardou  (Extrait sonore) and that of Julien Clerc (Extrait sonore).

For or against – in song (continued)

More and more pardons

Source : Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616.

Extract from France-Soir, January 11^th 1977 (Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616) Whereas president Pompidou pardoned all those condemned to death under his government as a rule, with the exception of Buffet and Bontems, president Valéry Giscard-d’Estaing declared himself as against capital punishment, but also that abolition should only be exacted if public opinion supported it and said he would, thus, apply the punishment “in certain cases”.  During his time in office, he refused to pardon three criminals: Christian Ranucci (executed on July 28^th, 1976), Jérôme Carrein (executed on June 25^th, 1977) and Hamida Djandoubi (executed on September 10^th, 1977).

The last to be executed: Hamida Djandoubi (L’Aurore, September 12th, 1977)

Source : Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616.

Extract from L’Aurore, September 12^th, 1977 (Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616) Hamida Djandoubi (1949-1977), a worker on the docks of Marseille, lost a leg following a work accident and ended up in a life of crime. On July 3^rd, 1974, he tortured and killed his lover, who had contributed to the fact that he had spent time in prison for procurement. The appeals court of Bouches-du-Rhône, the same court which had sent Christian Ranucci to the guillotine in March 1976, sentenced him to death on February 25^th 1977. He was guillotined at the prison des Baumettes on September 10^th 1977. For more information: See the biographical article on Djandoubi on Wikipedia.

Changes in the Catholic Church (L’Aurore, January 21st 1978)

Source : Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616.

L’Aurore, January 21^st 1978 (Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616) The Catholic church started to increasingly question capital punishment in the 1950s. The execution of Jacques Fesch, who became a fervent Catholic during his incarceration, may have contributed to this change of opinion. Jacques Fesch (1930-1957) was sentenced to death by the Assizes court of the Seine on April 6^th 1957, for having killed a policeman during an armed robbery in Paris. He was guillotined on October 1^st, 1957. His Lettres de prison received the sympathy of catholic opinion, who called him the “guillotiné de Dieu”. The social commission of the French episcopacy declared itself formally against the death penalty in the beginning of 1978. The Aurore, a newspaper that supported this decision, took care to present this as a text that did not engage the church as a whole, and accompanied their article with an eloquent commentary on the fate of those condemned to death.

Patrick Henry’s trial: the death penalty vanquished in the Assizes court (France-Soir, January 27th, 1977)

Source : Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616.

Extract from France-Soir, January 27^th 1977 (Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616) The trial of Patrick Henry enthralled public opinion, as was the case for all crimes committed against children. In this type of trial, the death penalty was practically a foregone conclusion. Moreover, at this time, the condemnation of Christian Ranucci for the same type of crime in the Assizes court of Bouches-du-Rhône in March 1976 was still fresh in people’s memory. Patrick Henry’s trial took place on January 19^th and 20^th 1977 at the Assizes court of Aube, in a climate of strong hostility against the perpetrator. His defense lawyers were Bocquillon and Badinter. The latter based his plea entirely on the question of the death penalty. Given public opinion at the time and the larger issue at hand, the jury’s response – condemning Patrick Henry to life in prison – showed courage and marked a turning-point that Robert Badinter underlined in the interview he did with France-Soir. The newspaper, in return, also reported on the hostile reaction of their readership to “balance” the victory of the abolitionists. For more information: See the biographical article on Patrick Henry and on Christian Ranucci on Wikipedia. Also, see extracts from television footage of the trial of Ranucci and Patrick Henry on the website of INA Archives pour tous and see the reaction of Robert Badinter to the verdict. A bibliography is available on the site of Criminocorpus: the case of Christian Ranucci, the case of Patrick Henry.

Patrick Henry’s trial: the death penalty vanquished in the Assizes court (France-Soir, January 27th, 1977) (continued)

Source : Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616.

The impossible parliamentary debate: amending the executioner’s remuneration

Source : Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616.

Extracts from the newspaper Libération, October 25^th 1978 and from the newspaper Rouge, October 25^th 1978 (Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616) In October 1978, abolitionist representative Pierre Bas, who was part of the right-wing majority in the Chamber of Deputies, proposed an amendment that would remove the executioner’s compensation. This tactic of abolishing the death penalty by cutting off the executioner’s remuneration was nothing new: the tactic had already been in 1906, but when the Clemenceau government organized a Chamber debate followed by an official vote, it was fruitless (the remuneration was taken away and then reinstated).  Under the 5^th Republic, the rights of members of parliament were limited, and Pierre Bas’s proposed amendment (supported by left-wing members) was, like the attempts that preceded his, destined to failure. The minister of Justice, Alain Peyrefitte, requested an all-or-nothing vote on his budget, which would prevent any discussion of the amendment. As the newspaper Libération put it on the day after this decision, “it’s small, but it’s efficient” (Libération, October 26^th 1978).

The voteless debate of 1979 (L’Aurore, June 15th 1979)

Source : Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616.

Extract from the neswpaper L’Aurore, June 15^th  1979 (Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616) Under pressure from abolitionists, who were gaining more and more support from the right-wing parliamentary majority, Minister of Justice Alain Peyrefitte agreed to hold a “debate of principle” (débat d’orientation) in the National Assembly on the subject of the death penalty but…with no vote. The “debate” held in October 1979 never occurred – the Attorney General pleaded in favor of a progressive abrogation of the death penalty accompanied with a severe alternative punishment. Attendance in the Assembly was sparse, however, since the representatives saw no point in participating in a voteless debate.

The last men sentenced to death (Le Parisien, January 5th 1981)

Source : Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616.

Extract from Le Parisien, January 5^th 1981 (Archives of the Parisian Police Prefecture, DB/616) In the beginning of 1981, Le Parisien published the results of a Sofres poll stating that the French population overwhelmingly preferred the death penalty to be applied, despite the fact that four individuals were at that moment awaiting a presidential pardon. The poll also showed that many people wanted a parliamentary debate on the question, but politicians in power preferred to wait until the presidential election in spring. Even though François Mitterrand continued to use his presidential power to pardon criminals during his electoral campaign, it was not until the left finally officially won that the fate of these four criminals was decided: they were pardoned by the new president. The last of them to be pardoned, Philippe Maurice, was sentenced to life in prison. While incarcerated, he passed the equivalent of his GED, continued his studies, and received his PhD in history at the University of Tours in December 1995, with a dissertation on “The family of Gévaudan in the 15^th century”. Now one of the most renowned specialists in medieval history, he obtained partial liberty in fall 1999 and then conditional liberty the following year. Today, he is a researcher at the EHESS (Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales) and he continues to be actively involved in the fight against the death penalty. His book, De la haine à la vie [From hate to life] (Paris, 2001) describes the story of his life, which justifies the abolitionists (such as Jaurès, the abbot Lemire in 1908, and Robert Badinter in the debate of 1981) who refused fatalism and never lost hope in Man and his capacity to reenter society, even if the contemporary organization of penal institutions did not facilitate this task. Jean-Luc Rivière, who was sentenced to death in 1980, is still in prison today. The European Court of Human Rights criticized France for Rivière’s incarceration given that he was diagnosed with psychosis while in prison and has shown suicidal tendencies (dépêche Reuters, July 11^th 2006). Mohamed Chara, sentenced to life in prison in 1982, died in prison on December 29^th 1991, having pleaded innocent from the beginning to the end of his incarceration. For more information: See the website of the League of Human Rights, n° 116 d’Hommes et Libertés consacré à la peine de mort that includes a summary of Philippe Maurice’s book and several citations. See the biographical article on Philippe Maurice on Wikipedia.

Robert Badinter: against a justice of elimination

Source : Journal officiel, session of September 17th 1981, p. 1138-1143.

Extract from the speech of Robert Badinter, Attorney General, Journal officiel, session of September 17^th 1981, p. 1138-1143. Born in 1928, lawyer and law professor Robert Badinter played a key role in the abolition of the death penalty in France. He was profoundly affected by the execution of Bontems (1972), an accomplice in the fatal hostage situation at the Clairvaux prison, who he had defended in court. When his client was sentenced to death, Badinter began a fight against capital punishment in general, first by publishing a book on the case (L’Exécution) and then by systematically taking on clients who faced the death penalty. During Patrick Henry’s trial, Badinter’s defense put capital punishment into question and his forceful conviction won over the jury. Joining Mitterrand’s presidential campaigns in 1974 and 1981, and acting as minister of Justice from June 23^rd 1981 through February 18^th 1986, he was a major actor in abolition, encouraging quick debates after the left’s victory, a debate that would finally get to the bottom of the question without the distracting issue of a “replacement punishment”. Badinter’s speech in the national assembly attacked all the main arguments of abolitionists. He declared himself against a “justice of elimination” when partisans of capital punishment argued that the guillotine prevented repeat offenses of particularly dangerous criminals. Badinter insisted that executed criminals, in the U.S. and in France, were overwhelmingly from lower-class or less privileged backgrounds: on the edges of the death penalty, there was a form of racism and a rejection of the marginalized (foreigners, manual laborers, the unemployed), a category to which most of the condemned belonged. He also argued that the justice system was not infallible, and that it became a lottery when capital punishment was rare. Badinter encouraged his audience not to lose hope in those accused and to give them the possibility to redeem themselves and rejoin the society that had often excluded them. Arguing for a system of justice founded on “reason and humanity”, Robert Badinter followed in the steps of the Enlightenment philosophers who had inspired Lepeletier de Saint-Fargeau’s report and the speeches of Jaurès. For more information: See the biographical article on Robert Badinter on Wikipedia. Read the complete text of his speech on Criminocorpus: Peine de mort. Débat parlementaire de 1981. To hear an extract of the speech, see the site INA Archives pour tous: Discours de Robert Badinter, “the dissuasive value of the death penalty”, recorded directly at the National Assembly, FR3 09/17/1981, 1m51s. Listen to the conference of Robert Badinter of March 12^th 2002 at the ENS, the Abolition of the death penalty, the history of a combat, on the site Diffusion des savoirs de l’Ecole normale supérieure. Bibliography on Robert Badinter available on Criminocorpus.

Robert Badinter: against a justice of elimination (continued)

Source : Journal officiel, session of September 17th 1981, p. 1138-1143.

Robert Badinter: the reasons for the delay in France

Source : Journal officiel, session of September 17th 1981, p. 1138-1143.

Extract from the speech of Robert Badinter, Attorney General, Journal officiel, session of September 17^th 1981, p. 1138-1143. When Badinter was Attorney General of France (Garde des sceaux), he spoke during the 1981 parliamentary debate on the death penalty referring, as many socialist representatives did, to the two-century-long combat for abolition. Aside from speaking of the satisfaction of bringing France back ‘up to par’ with other European nations who had abolished the death penalty, Badinter suggested a possible explanation for why France had not done so earlier: the “French delay”. He remarked that the struggle for abolition was largely a cause of the French left, who had only been in power for short periods of time – and most often, during periods of tension or crisis (like the Liberation, for example) which prevented abolition from occurring. Badinter’s proposed political explanation allows us to see how French history has been uniquely marked by numerous revolutionary episodes, which turned the guillotine into a political weapon for the regimes in power. For more information: See the complete text of Badinter’s speech on Criminocorpus: Peine de mort. Débat parlementaire de 1981.

Pascal Clément: a motion of inadmissibility

Source : Journal officiel, session of September 17th 1981, p. 1144-1145.

Extract from the speech of Pascal Clément, Journal officiel, session of September 17^th 1981, p. 1144-1145. Lawyer Pascal Clément was born in 1945 and became a representative of the Loire in 1978 as part of the party UDF, Union pour la démocratie française. He thought that a lack of debate where all opinions could be aired put representatives under unfair pressure. For this reason, he suggested organizing a referendum that could solicit the opinion of the French people and amending the Constitution to authorize such a move. He also proposed a motion of inadmissibility because there was no proposed replacement punishment. While paying homage to abolitionists and claiming that he understood their generous desire to save lives and allow criminals to redeem themselves, Clément spoke of the “reality” of crime and of a society which needed to be “shielded from violence”. Clément took the side of victims, and stated that society had “the right to kill to defend itself”. For more information: See the biographical article on Pascal Clément on Wikipedia. Read the complete text of the speech on Criminocorpus (in original French): Peine de mort. Débat parlementaire de 1981.

Pascal Clément: a motion of inadmissibility (continued)

Source : Journal officiel, session of September 17th 1981, p. 1144-1145.

Philippe Séguin: the issue of an alternative

Source : Journal officiel, session of September 17th 1981, p. 1145-1147.

Extract from the speech of Philippe Séguin, Journal officiel, session of September 17^th 1981, p. 1145-1147. Philippe Séguin, a high-level civil servant born in 1943, was Prime Minister of France between 1977 and 1978. In 1981, after the presidential election, he became a representative of the Vosges and one of the right-wing figureheads (of the party RPR, Rassemblement pour la République) who defended the abolition of the death penalty the most ardently. His whole speech aimed at making abolition permanent by dissipating consent via the establishment of either an alternative punishment or with sentencing reform which would efficiently prevent repeat offences. Aware that the Attorney General wanted to keep the symbolic nature of the project, he declared that he was ready “in any and all cases” to vote for it, and he retracted his amendments in order to do so. For more information: See the biographical article on Philippe Seguin on Wikipedia. Read the complete text of the speech on Criminocorpus: Peine de mort. Débat parlementaire de 1981.

Philippe Séguin: the issue of an alternative (continued)

Source : Journal officiel, session of September 17th 1981, p. 1145-1147.

Philippe Marchand: proud of the Socialist Party; proud of France

Source : Journal officiel, session of September 17th 1981, p. 1148-1150.

Extract from the speech of Philippe Marchand, representing the socialists in parliament, Journal officiel, session of September 17^th 1981, p. 1148-1150. Philippe Marchand, born in 1939, became a representative of Charente-Maritime in 1978. The Socialist Party held the majority in the National Assembly, and their numerous representatives were conscious of being “redundant” in a sense. Speaking for the socialists, Philippe Marchand congratulated his party for being at the root of a great moment in history when the law of retaliation was put to rest after a long abolitionist combat that he attributed not only to the political left wing, but to religious authorities and organizations for human rights. For more information: Read the complete speech on Criminocorpus: Peine de mort. Débat parlementaire de 1981.

Colette Gœuriot: Fighting for the “cause of humanity”

Source : Journal officiel, session of September 17th 1981, p. 1156-1157.

Extract from the speech of Colette Goeuriot (Communist Party), Journal officiel, session of September 17^th 1981, p. 1156-1157. Colette Goeuriot, born in 1939, was a communist representative from Meurthe-et-Moselle elected in 1978. Goeuriot lent a humanist touch to the communist party vote by adding her voice to others who fought for abolition, as she defended her “cause of humanity”. She notably cited the arguments of communist abolitionists who came before her, linking her party platform to a question of principle: her argument was that there were no “born-criminals”, and the most efficient way to fight crime was to orient society towards justice, liberty and responsibility. On the other side of this spectrum, she viewed the death penalty as a denial of the inner humanity of all people, including criminals, an inner humanity that she stated must be “widened, deepened and bettered.” For more information: See the complete text of her speech on Criminocorpus: Peine de mort. Débat parlementaire de 1981.

Colette Gœuriot: Fighting for the “cause of humanity” (continued)

Source : Journal officiel, session of September 17th 1981, p. 1156-1157.

Abolition: the law of October 9th 1981

Source : Journal officiel, October 10th 1981, p. 2759.

Law n° 81-908 of October 9^th 1981 regarding the abolition of the death penalty (Journal officiel, October 10^th 1981, p.2759) The Chamber of Deputies voted for the abolition of the death penalty on September 18^th 1981 with a vote of 363 against 117, the absolute majority being 241 votes. The Senate held debates from the 28^th through the 30^th of September and voted 160 against 126 in favor of abolition. The law was published in the Journal Officiel on October 10^th 1981. Since then, several laws have been proposed to reinstate the death penalty by representatives of the French right wing for particularly serious crimes. For more information: The death penalty is still a part of the penal codes and practices of many countries. For information on this, consult the website of Amnesty International.