We must always say what we see;
Above all, one must always, and this is more difficult, see what one sees.
Charles Péguy
We are witnessing a magnificent internal competition between the right and left brains of the Ministry of Higher Education, Research and Space: in a defamation lawsuit, the University of Strasbourg is providing "functional protection" to the plaintiff student, while the CNRS is providing protection to the defendant researcher… And the minister isn't arbitrating but simply keeping score. It must be said that pitting universities against the CNRS is a long-standing tradition within the ministry: Frédérique Vidal, when she was minister, wanted the CNRS to investigate "Islamo-leftism" at the university. This was met with laughter from the academic community and readers of the [publication name missing]. FigaroShe had not launched the investigation in question.
Let's briefly recall the recent events: Iman El Feki, a doctoral student in sociology at the University of Strasbourg, sued Florence Bergeaud-Blackler, an anthropology researcher at the CNRS (French National Centre for Scientific Research). Bergeaud-Blackler had denounced the young doctoral student's influence and her participation in the "Islamization of knowledge," accusing the Muslim Brotherhood ideology of having gradually taken root in universities over the past thirty years.[1]Apart from her doctoral work (I assume), Iman El Feki "is conducting research on the prevention of radicalization, particularly in connection with the prison services in the Grand Est region." According to Le FigaroThis student “shares Rima Hassan’s texts on her social networks, appears veiled in her official photos, and wants in particular to give importance to “religious mechanisms” in monitoring radicalized individuals once they are released from prison.”
In addition, Iman El Feki had shared an image of a "radical march" calling for "the liberation of Palestine from the sea to the Jordan," a well-known anti-Zionist political slogan.[2]She has every right to call for this march, as a political activist – although there is barely room for a cigarette paper between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, and anti-Semitic propaganda is punishable by law – but she does not have the right to do so as a doctoral student at the University of Strasbourg.
The Strasbourg court ruled her complaint invalid, "for failing to specifically cite the offending passages in the texts published about her by Florence Bergeaud-Blackler." Ms. El Feki was perfectly within her rights to consider herself defamed and to sue Ms. Bergeaud-Blackler. The latter's claims have no connection whatsoever with the research Ms. El Feki is conducting at the University of Strasbourg and concern only her activism, which she appears to be extending to the regional prison service. The desire to implement "religious mechanisms" in the monitoring of certain prisoners can be freely criticized, just as one can criticize the presence of chaplains in prisons. One has the right to condemn Muslim infiltration. The court has ruled: there is no defamation in Ms. Bergeaud-Blackler's writings, and Ms. El Feki's case was dismissed.
That Ms. Bergeaud-Blackler, a CNRS researcher, received legal protection from her employer is perfectly normal and is required in all cases where a civil servant is prosecuted for statements justified by their research. The accusation concerned her academic activity (she specializes, specifically, in the infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood into society), and it was in her capacity as a CNRS researcher that she was prosecuted. What is truly unbelievable is that the president of the University of Strasbourg, Frédérique Berrod, saw fit to provide legal protection (that is, to pay the legal fees) to a student who is in no way a tenured or contract employee of the state or the university, performs duties related to another organization, and is active in a political movement with antisemitic undertones.
A letter from the president of the University of Strasbourg, Frédérique Berrod, continues Le FigaroThis student even assured her of the "institution's support in this matter." That seems audacious! Was there a vote by the University Council? Or is the president alone "the institution"? So it would be "the institution," even more than Ms. Berrod, that is endorsing Ms. El Feki's anti-Zionist remarks? The University of Strasbourg is thus supporting the plaintiff, offering a pledge of submission to radical Islamic orthodoxy: this is a first step towards dhimmitude, the legal regime to which non-Muslims, the "dhimmis," are subjected in Islamic lands.
This university president also claims to have "reported Florence Bergeaud-Blackler's writings to the CNRS." This is the lowest form of denunciation! So the CNRS is supposedly unaware of Ms. Bergeaud-Blackler's "writings"? Is it the role of a university president to police the CNRS and evaluate the work of its researchers? What kind of country do we live in, where academic freedom is so blatantly trampled by those who should be defending it? Where a university president arrogates to herself the right to "report" a researcher's statements and writings to her supervisory body? To have her judged according to her own criteria, which strike me as anything but tactful?
I haven't seen any reaction from the minister who oversees both the University of Strasbourg and the CNRS, Mr. Philippe Baptiste. Has he seen nothing? Does he have nothing to say in the face of what is first and foremost a misappropriation of public funds and then a slanderous denunciation (since the court dismissed Ms. El Feki's case)? Or does he prefer not to see, not to hear, not to speak?
