Two tweetss. For the first time since that he recognizedin September, having slapped his wife, with which he is in the process of divorce, the deputy LFI Adrien Quatennens spoke publicly last weekend. Via two tweets, therefore, about the shamelessness of a building in Lille, of which he is the chosen one. It is that, little by little, Adrien Quatennens begins his return. His sick leave, which lasted several weeks, is now over. And the party, through the voice of Manuel Bompard, announced the color last week: “We are working collectively on the terms and schedule for the return of Adrien Quatennens. “The subject was on the agenda of the meeting of the office of the France insoumise group last Monday, and of the group meeting on Tuesday.
It is still very difficult to see precisely what modalities are involved. Some speak of conditions, others of sanctions, but nothing concrete. It is about training on violence against women. “But that is the training that everyone has had, he was already in the background when it took place”, notes a deputy “friend” of Adrien Quatennens. And it seems very light. In terms of sanctions, an LFI MP known for her feminist positions considers that the question to be asked is that of what is “politically right or not”… while noting that the MP from the North has already lost his position as coordinator of the movement and his plans for 2027. “It’s super difficult. If I don’t speak, it’s also because my idea isn’t made up. »
“The question is really asked”
The word was passed so that nothing leaks out. “The space for debate is the group meeting, not the press”, stings the “friend” quoted above. “I can just tell you that we are discussing”, adds a neo-deputy whom we will not fault. If there is silence, it is because the internal debate is really taking place, believes the feminist MP interviewed. “I am loyal. Jdon’t put pressure on the outside because I know that the question is really asked, that speech is free and that it is not Jean-Luc who will decide alone. »
Really ? Jean-Luc Mélenchon has said on several occasions, and again recently to Releasethat Adrien Quatennens was to returnr. The debate therefore takes place all the sameUnder the pressure of the former presidential candidate, “withdrawn but not retired”. “I’m not sure it helps Adrien’s cause internally when Jean-Luc makes this kind of statement. I think that’s also what tenses up those who don’t want his return, ”continues the same MP. Officially, “in the group, everyone agrees that he should not be excluded (…) nor that his resignation be asked for”, affirms the president, Mathilde Panot. Unofficially, there are opponents, but they do not show up.
Blind spot
“There are feminists, but above all there is a big generational divide in the group on this issue, notes the MP feminist questioned. Speech is free but within certain limits. Because he is a comrade and there is necessarily affect. Obviously, those who have doubts do not express them. »
However, at some point, a decision will have to be made. And everyone insists that it will be, here too, collective. A vote is possible, say some, in a movement which does not however have as a first quality a highly developed internal democracy. “ We do There have been votes since the start of the school year, and it’s not a drama”assume the feminist MP already mentioned. Sur minor subjects, of course, “but it obviously helps to legitimize a decision”, she believes.
The rhythm itself is part of the debates. Because if for the relatives of Adrien Quatennens, the question is pressing, for the others, it is rather urgent to wait. “We also have in mind that a court decision will eventually arrive [Adrien Quatennens est visé par une plainte de son épouse, et le parquet de Lille a ouvert une enquête]… “, remarks the feminist deputy. So the date of return of the deputy from the North will already be an indicator to know which camp has succeeded in making its point heard.
There remains, in all this debate, a blind spot: why a return of Adrien Quatennens? The new MP already quoted makes it a matter of principle: “The right to return and rehabilitation is also a subject”, she judges. A surprising justification for facts that are not three months old, and quite far from the priorities of feminist associations, which further stigmatize impunity in this kind of business.
Politically, the member of the North – despite all the talent that we recognize him well beyond the rebellious benches – can he then be anything other than a ball and chain? The feminist MP interviewed – who had taken a long time to answer “no” to the question of exclusion – stammers and evades it. The answer of the deputy “friend” is much clearer: “We will need him when the pension file is on the table. His contribution will be important, including when we talk about women’s pensions and inequalities. In short, we will forget.