Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Human Dignity in France

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Human Dignity in Europe

  • 252 Accesses

Abstract

Traditionally, and France is no exception to this, the concept of human dignity was absent from historic declarations of rights, which originally focused on equality and liberty. It was only after the Second World War that human dignity entered the legal arena and it was only in the 1990s that the concept earned legal recognition through case law in France. Far from disrupting the French legal system, the concept was assimilated easily.

The purpose of this chapter is to present the situation regarding human dignity in France, emphasizing the ambiguities and limits of its use and explaining the reason why its assimilation appears to have been relatively easy. It is shown, throughout the chapter, that the function of human dignity is not primarily the protection of something that was unprotected before, but rather the expression of the circumstances in which such protection is required.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This official translation is interesting since the Conseil Constitutionnel used the French “dignité de la personne humaine” (dignity of the human person) and not “dignité humaine” (human dignity).

  2. 2.

    This includes the Constitution, its Preamble, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 26 August 1789, the Preamble of the Constitution of 1946, the basic principles recognized by the laws of the Republic, and the constitutional principles and goals.

  3. 3.

    These results were provided by the Legifrance website.

  4. 4.

    “Legislation ensures the primacy of the person, prohibits any infringement of the latter’s dignity, and guarantees respect for the human being from the outset of his life.”

  5. 5.

    “The remains of a deceased person, including the ashes of one whose body has been cremated, must be treated with respect, dignity, and decency .”

  6. 6.

    Al 2: “This protection is established and assured with full respect for individual liberties, for fundamental rights and for the dignity of the person.”

  7. 7.

    Some administrative sanctions were also imposed based on the concept of human dignity in the domain of electronic communication but these sanctions are quite rare (CE, 9 October 1996, Association Ici et Maintenant or CE 30 August 2006, Association Free Dom). Since these decisions are based on the revised 1986 Telecommunication Act, which mentions the concept of human dignity explicitly as a justification for limiting the freedom of communication, it is not considered in this section.

  8. 8.

    This, of course, is not a specificity of French judges. The same tendency could be observed, for example, in Germany.

  9. 9.

    “The Parliament felt that such practices are dangerous for public safety and security and fail to comply with the minimum requirements of life in society. It also felt that those women who conceal their face, voluntarily or otherwise, are placed in a situation of exclusion and inferiority patently incompatible with constitutional principles of liberty and equality”.

  10. 10.

    Learned Hand should be quoted regarding this question: “I venture to believe that it is as important to a judge called upon to pass on a question of constitutional law, to have at least a bowing acquaintance with Acton and Maitland, with Thucydides, Gibbon and Carlyle, with Homer, Dante, Shakespeare and Milton, with Machiavelli, Montaigne and Rabelais, with Plato, Bacon, Hume and Kant, as with the books which have been specifically written on the subject. For in such matters everything turns upon the spirit in which he approaches the questions before him. The words he must construe are empty vessels into which he can pour nearly anything he will. Men do not gather figs of thistles, nor supply institutions from judges whose outlook is limited by parish or class. They must be aware that there are before them more than verbal problems; more than final solutions cast in generalizations of universal applicability. They must be aware of the changing social tensions in every society which make it an organism; which demand new schemata of adaptation; which will disrupt it, if rigidly confined” (Learned Hand 1960, p. 81).

  11. 11.

    “L’administration pénitentiaire garantit à toute personne détenue le respect de sa dignité et de ses droits.”

  12. 12.

    “Article 3: Conformément aux motifs de la présente ordonnance et dans un délai de dix jours à compter de sa notification, il est. enjoint à l’administration pénitentiaire de procéder à la détermination des mesures nécessaires à l’éradication des animaux nuisibles présents dans les locaux du centre pénitentiaire des Baumettes.”

  13. 13.

    “Quel que soit l’objectif poursuivi par les programmes et en dépit du consentement exprimé par leurs participants, il est. impératif, au regard du respect de la dignité de la personne humaine, que ces participants disposent de moments et de lieux où ils ne sont pas soumis à l’observation du public. Le Conseil demande donc que ces programmes comportent des phases quotidiennes d’un répit de durée significative et raisonnable ne donnant lieu à aucun enregistrement sonore ou visuel ni à aucune diffusion”.

  14. 14.

    But was not then used by judges to criticize the ban (supra).

  15. 15.

    https://www.ourbodytheuniversewithin.net/mission-statement

  16. 16.

    “les restes des personnes décédées doivent être traités avec respect, dignité et décence; que l’exposition de cadavres à des fins commerciales méconnaît cette exigence.”

  17. 17.

    From an economic point of view, the problem will be to identify the externalities and the costs they are creating for the society.

  18. 18.

    Article 1: “cette liberté ne peut être limitée, dans le respect de l’égalité de traitement, que dans la mesure…” (That freedom may be restricted, with due respect for equal treatment, only to the extent).

  19. 19.

    Article 1: “L’exercice de cette liberté ne peut être limité que dans la mesure requise, d’une part, par le respect de la dignité de la personne humaine…” (The exercise of this freedom may be limited only to the extent required, on the one hand, by respect for the dignity of the human person). The principle of equality is still present but not explicitly through the notion of the “caractère pluraliste de l’expression des courants de pensée et d’opinion” (The pluralistic nature of the expression of currents of thought and opinion).

  20. 20.

    At the level of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it is possible to note the use of the idea of ‘equal dignity’, which allows for the ‘hybridization’ of dignity and equality.

  21. 21.

    “Attendu, cependant, qu’un médecin ne peut être dispensé de son devoir d’information vis-à-vis de son patient, qui trouve son fondement dans l’exigence du respect du principe constitutionnel de sauvegarde de la dignité de la personne humaine, par le seul fait qu’un risque grave ne se réalise qu’exceptionnellement.”

References

Books and Articles

  • Berkowitz P (2010) Can Sarkozy justify banning the veil? Wall St J, p A19

    Google Scholar 

  • Braibant G (2001) La Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne. Seuil, Points, Essais, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmi A (2011) La Dignité Humaine et les Droits de l’Homme. In: UNESCO (ed) Recueil de cas sur la Dignité Humaine et les Droits de l’Homme. Organisation des Nations Unies pour l’Éducation, la Science et la Culture, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Chenede F, Deumier P (2013) L’oeuvre du Parlement, la part du Conseil constitutionnel en droit des personnes et de la famille. Les Nouveaux Cahiers du Conseil constitutionnel 39(2):7–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Cossalter P (2014) La dignité humaine en droit public français: l’ultime recours, Revue générale du droit (www.revuegeneraledudroit.eu), Etudes et réflexions 2014, numéro 4

  • Deleuze G, Guattari F (1994) What is philosophy? Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupré C, Jones J (2013) Introduction to the special issue on dignity. Liverpool Law Rev 33:173–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabre-Magnan M (2007) La dignité en Droit: un axiome. Rev Interdisciplinaire d’Études Jurid 58:1–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gan S (2009) Human dignity as a right. Front Philos China 4(3):370–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Häberle P (2009) Europaïsche Verfassungslehre, 6th edn. Baden Nomos, Baden

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (2010) The concept of human dignity and the realistic utopia of human rights. Metaphilosophy LLC 41:464–480

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hand L (1960) In: Dillard I (ed) The spirit of liberty, papers and addresses of learned hand, 2d. Alfred Knopf, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennette-Vauchez S (2011) A human dignitas? Remnants of the ancient legal concept in contemporary dignity jurisprudence. Int J Const Law 9(1):32–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ishiguro K (1989) The remains of the day. Faber and Faber, New York City

    Google Scholar 

  • Khaitan T (2011) Dignity as an expressive norm: neither vacuous nor a panacea. Oxf J Leg Stud 32(1):1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macklin R (2003) Dignity is a useless concept. BMJ 327:1419–1420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marin Castan ML (2007) La Dignidad Humana, los Derechos Humanos y los Derechos Constitucionales. Revista de Bioética y Derecho 9:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • McCurdden C (2008) Human dignity and judicial interpretation of human rights. European J Int Law 19(4):655–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mora JE (2000) La Dignidad de la persona Humana en la Jurisprudencia Constitucional Española. Cuad Bioet 42:257–272

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinker S (2008) The stupidity of dignity. The new republic. Available online at https://newrepublic.com/article/64674/thestupidity-dignity

  • Rao N (2013) The trouble with dignity and rights of recognition. Virginia Law Rev Online George Mason Law Econ Res Pap 99:29–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross A (1957) Tû-Tû. Harv Law Rev 70(5):812–825

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder D (2008) Dignity: two riddles and four concepts. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 17(2):230–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder D (2012) Human rights and human dignity: an appeal to separate the conjoined twins. Ethic Theory Moral Pract 15:323–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Une Ve République plus démocratique - Comité de réflexion et de proposition sur la modernisation et le rééquilibrage des institutions de la Ve République, présidé par Edouard Balladur (2007), Rapport au Président de la République. Documentation Française, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldron J (2013) Is dignity the foundation of human rights?. New York University public law and legal theory working papers. Paper 374, pp 1–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Wintrich JM (1957) Die Bedeutung der “Menschenwürde” für die Anwendung des Rechts. Bayerische Verwaltungsblätter, Munchen

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein L (1965) Conférence sur l’éthique. In: Rhees R (ed) Philos Rev LXXIV(1), janvier 1965, translated and published in Wittgenstein L, Leçons et conversations. Folio essais, Paris, pp 141 et s

    Google Scholar 

Case Law (by Date)

    Conseil Constitutionnel (Constitutional Council)

    • Décision n° 74-54 DC du 15 janvier 1975, Interruption volontaire de grossesse

      Google Scholar 

    • Décision n° 94-343/344 DC du 27 juillet 1994 – Loi relative au respect du corps humain et loi relative au don et à l’utilisation des éléments et produits du corps humain, à l’assistance médicale à la procréation et au diagnostic prénatal

      Google Scholar 

    • Décision n° 94-359 DC du 19 janvier 1995 – Loi relative à la diversité de l’habitat

      Google Scholar 

    • Décision n° 2001-446 DC du 27 juin 2001 – Loi relative à l’interruption volontaire de grossesse et à la contraception

      Google Scholar 

    • Décision n° 2010-14/22 QPC du 30 juillet 2010a – M. Daniel W. et autres [Garde à vue]

      Google Scholar 

    • Décision n° 2010-613 DC du 7 octobre 2010b – Loi interdisant la dissimulation du visage dans l’espace public

      Google Scholar 

    Conseil d’Etat (Council of State)

    • CE SECT., 18 December, 1959, SARL “Les films Lutétia”, n° 36385 & 36428

      Google Scholar 

    • CE Ass., 27 October 1995, Commune de Morsang-sur-Orge, n° 136727

      Google Scholar 

    • CE SSR., 9 October 1996, Association “Ici et maintenant”, n° 173073

      Google Scholar 

    • CE, ASS., 12 April 2002, Papon, n° 238689

      Google Scholar 

    • CE SSR., 30 August 2006, Association Free Dom, n° 276866

      Google Scholar 

    • CE Ord., 5 January 2007, Ministre de l’Intérieur c. Association “Solidarité des Français”, n° 300311

      Google Scholar 

    • CE Ass., Avis, 16 Febuary 2009, Madame Hoffman-Glemane , n° 315499

      Google Scholar 

    • CE ORD., 22 December 2012, Section française de l’Observatoire international des prisons, n° 364584, 364620, 364621 & 364647

      Google Scholar 

    • CE Sect., 6 December 2013, Thevenot, n° 363290

      Google Scholar 

    • CE ORD., 9 January 2014a, Société Les Productions de la Plume et M. D., n° 374508

      Google Scholar 

    • CE ORD., 10 January 2014b, SARL Les Productions de la Plume et M. D., n° 374528

      Google Scholar 

    • CE ORD., 11 January 2014c, SARL Les Productions de la Plume et M. D., n° 374552

      Google Scholar 

    • CE ORD., 26 August 2016 Ligue des droits de l’homme et autres – association de defense des droits de l’homme collectif contre l’islamophobie en France, n 402742 & 402777

      Google Scholar 

    • CE ORD., 16 April 2015, SARL “Grasse Boulange”, n° 389372

      Google Scholar 

    • Independent Authority

      Google Scholar 

    • Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisel, communication n 449 of 14 May 2001

      Google Scholar 

    Civil Courts

    Download references

    Author information

    Authors and Affiliations

    1. CRDP, FIDES, University of Paris Nanterre, Nanterre, France

      Régis Lanneau

    Authors
    1. Régis Lanneau
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    Corresponding author

    Correspondence to Régis Lanneau .

    Editor information

    Editors and Affiliations

    1. Faculty of Law, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland

      Paolo Becchi

    2. Faculty of Law, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland

      Klaus Mathis

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    Copyright information

    © 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

    About this entry

    Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

    Cite this entry

    Lanneau, R. (2018). Human Dignity in France. In: Becchi, P., Mathis, K. (eds) Handbook of Human Dignity in Europe. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27830-8_13-1

    Download citation

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27830-8_13-1

    • Received:

    • Accepted:

    • Published:

    • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

    • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-27830-8

    • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-27830-8

    • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Law and CriminologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

    Publish with us

    Policies and ethics

    Search

    Navigation