- Since Elisabeth Guigou’s resignation in the wake of the Duhamel affair, magistrate Edouard Durand and Nathalie Mathieu are in charge of piloting the “incest” commission launched by the government.
On his desk, d ‘thick folders are lined up next to each other. Since 23 last January and his appointment at the head of the commission “ incest ”, the children’s judge at the Bobigny court, Edouard Durand, now has to juggle with his new cap. The magistrate shares this task with Nathalie Mathieu, director general of the association Docteurs Bru and co-chair of the committee.
For two years, this body will have the mission of listening, collecting and supporting the words of underage victims of sexual violence . Aware of “the very strong expectations” of society on this question which has become political
since the publication of Camille Kouchner’s book , Edouard Durand displays solid determination. To lift the taboo, the magistrate calls for “seeing” and “hearing” the violence of this destructive phenomenon, and pleads for a strengthening of child protection.
What is the mission on Should the incest that you co-chair with Nathalie Mathieu serve?
The backbone of this committee is to organize a space for collect the words of victims of sexual violence and incest. There is a very strong expectation on their part, to be able to say what they experienced and their suffering. What is new is that this aspiration has received an important echo in society. The other duty, for the committee, is that this collection of the words make it possible to reinforce the culture of the protection of the children. Our mandate should last two years, with short, medium and long term objectives. If we are to achieve our long term goals, we need to start putting them in place now. Every day counts.
Who will compose the committee?
We are in the process of organizing it and we will announce its composition soon. We want it to be multidisciplinary, with as a common base an ability to see, identify and think about violence and the strategy of aggressors. Psychiatrists, child psychiatrists and psychologists will therefore be able to integrate it, as will jurists, lawyers, magistrates, child protection workers or investigators who have experience in collecting the voices of child victims. Since we are talking about violence and a very serious transgression of the law, there is necessarily a judicial dimension .
Victims of violence and involved in associations also have of great legitimacy. Finally, when we talk about incest and sexual violence against children, we are talking about issues for society over the long period of our history. It is therefore absolutely necessary to have an anthropological, philosophical, historical and sociological reflection.
Why did it take so long for such an initiative to emerge?
The protection of children has been built up gradually. The realization that the home could be the place of danger and not the place of protection took a long time to develop. For a long time, child protection only concerned orphaned and vagrant children, that is to say those outside the family home. The end of the years 1970 was then marked by a very important associative movement on the fight against violence against women and the protection of children. But when we talk about incest, we are still talking about a taboo . Because it is more convenient not to see this intimate violence. It wasn’t that long ago that we looked down on incest victims, we minimized, we trivialized, we were complacent with the aggressors. What’s going on changed?
What has changed is the awareness of 
In your book Sexual violence, put an end to impunity *, you judge “realistic” to say that the victims of this violence remain confronted with a system which “still ensures the impunity of the aggressors”. How is this impunity expressed?
You only have to compare the difference between the very important figures of sexual violence and the convictions of the aggressors. We know that both sexual violence and domestic violence are subject to a double underreporting. The complaints lodged remain much lower than the massive reality of the phenomenon. Conversely, the number of dismissal of these complaints remains very high. And the other under-revelation is that of the story of the victims, who always say less than the horror of reality. It is essential to succeed in reducing this gap in order to give victims’ confidence and to do justice.
What is the purpose of your book, and who is it for?
What we want is to strengthen the culture protection. For that, we must strengthen professional practices. The book caters to society as a whole with accessible expert contributions. But we also want it to be in the hands of the police, gendarmes, social workers, educators, doctors, psychologists, lawyers, judges, and that it becomes an operational tool. The idea is to allow both to develop a network culture, to provide clear benchmarks and legal keys. We can no longer: “It’s not so serious”
Have you read Camille Kouchner’s book, La Familia grande, and how do you see this testimony?
Yes, it’s a reading that I have impressed a lot. She helped me to think and see violence. What should be noted is that this book succeeds to that of Vanessa Springora , who himself succeeded The little girl on the ice of Adelaide Bon, published in 2018. The previous year, the so-called “Pontoise” affair had also aroused a lot of emotions . Regularly, a real fact arises in the public debate, in our collective conscience and obliges us to think about and to see this sexual violence.
Why the Pontoise affair gave rise to such reaction of public opinion? Because we have a man in his thirties, a girl of 10 years old, a blowjob in a local trash and that all of us “saw” the rape scene. But the temptation is always very great not to see. Faced with the violence that shakes, including child protection professionals, it is more convenient to say that we have not seen anything, that the real has not happened. But when the collective conscience is alerted, the social demand is reinforced.
The government said it was in favor of creation of a “staggered prescription” for underage victims of sexual violence. What is your position on this?
It is necessary to reflect on the law of prescription and legitimacy to see how it can progress to meet the aspirations of victims, while respecting our fundamental principles . Those who oppose an evolution in prescription law are also those who say: “Social networks must not become a media tribunal”. It’s a bit of a paradox! Sliding or staggered prescription could reduce some inconsistencies. Today, trials are still held with victims for whom the facts are prescribed and others for whom this is not the case when there is the same aggressor. It is legitimate, in my opinion, to provide consistency.
But should we not already allow time for the reform of 2018, which has already extended these limitation periods, to bear fruit?
Yes, it takes time to assimilate the legislative debate. Having said that, the social aspiration is very powerful and legitimate. It is therefore necessary to re-examine our legal system. The law must clearly state the prohibition. The public debate quickly focused on the need to reform our law . Can the law alone do anything against sexual violence?
I don’t know if the law can do everything, but it has to do what it is designed to do. And when the President of the Republic announced the launch of the work of our commission on incest, he also announced that he entrusted the Minister of Justice and the Secretary of State for child protection with the responsibility of a consultation to adapt the criminal law. He also promised the guarantee of s support for victims of sexual violence and the strengthening of screening for such violence in schools. It is an overall public policy. Shattered lives in the sanctuary of a children’s room. Stolen childhoods during family vacations, or times that should have been innocent and led to the worst. Today, the word is free. Thanks to courage. pic.twitter.com/etHFUU4eRh – Emmanuel Macron (@EmmanuelMacron) January 20, 2021 This case was and remains a collective trauma . I don’t think we can put it another way. What has this story changed? By saying, the 20 last January, to children victims of sexual violence “We believe you”, the President of the Republic gave part of the answer. Saying this to a child is not contrary to the fundamental principle of the presumption of innocence. It should also be remembered that the child victims in the Outreau case were all recognized as victims of rape. When a child reveals the violence he has suffered and sees in the eyes of his interlocutor, and particularly if this interlocutor represents the law, that he is not believed, he risks a psychic collapse. Providing justice is a delicate mission but it is a collective moral duty. Sexual violence, put an end to the ‘impunity , collective work (Ed. Dunod) There is 20 years The Outreau case broke out, which had discredited the words of children victims of sexual violence. What has this story changed in terms of support?