The Adrien Quatennens affair continues to divide the rebellious

To the rebellious group, the management of the Quatennens case is of course not the subject on which we dwell the most. But we can say that there are globally two categories: those who consider that the case is over; And the others. Little doubt that Jean-Luc Mélenchon is in the first category. Thursday evening, on BFMTV, he did not appreciate having to answer questions about this case. “Leave him alone!” “Launched the rebellious leader before simply leaving the set. Among his relatives, this Friday, the chef was right on the criticism of the media treatment of the case: “Perhaps when we find Adrien hanging in his garage, you will realize what has been done”, dares even a leader of France insubordinate to journalists.

On BFMTV, therefore, Jean-Luc Mélenchon was invited to react to the session incident created on Tuesday evening during the very first intervention by Adrien Quatennens in the Hemicycle since his return. He was booed by the deputies of the majority, and applauded standing by about twenty rebellious parliamentarians. Some, like Sophia Chikirou or Sébastien Delogu, even moved to surround and support the deputy from the North. This scene, where we applaud a man who has just been convicted of domestic violence, has something to make uncomfortable, even when we are not at the forefront of the feminist fight. Nothing shocking however for the leader of LFI questioned this Friday: “I do not think that the image is terrible. We knew that Aurore Bergé [la présidente du groupe Renaissance] was up to something. Comrades considered it necessary to cover the boos. Others consider that these rebels have fallen into the trap set by the macronists.

Faintness

The malaise is not new. Palpable since September, it has seriously intensified following the two interviews that Adrien Quatennens gave immediately after his sentencing, to The voice of the North and on BFMTV in December. During his two speeches, the deputy places himself as a victim and uses classic anti-feminist arguments, in total contradiction with the program of the rebellious on the subject. “I was a social worker before becoming a member of parliament and I had to manage cases of domestic violence. Adrien Quatennens uttered some of the same words as the aggressors, “explained a few days ago, angry, a rebellious in favor of a strong sanction against the deputy from the North, for which these interviews have changed the situation.

They indeed arrived just after the LFI group made the decision to exclude Adrien Quatennens for four months, until mid-April, and asked him to take a course on gender-based and sexual violence before returning. But in mid-April, will it be automatic reinstatement, a review clause or something else? Interpretations diverge completely. For a member of the Ile-de-France management, it is an automatic return. For a somewhat embarrassed member of management, it’s a review clause, with potentially a new vote. The angry deputy quoted above does not know whether to exclude Quatennens definitively, but she “needs to speak with the group. The interviews struck a chord. But I am not able to say if it returned or not. »

soap operas

On the management side, no problem: if the group decides that it wants to discuss the subject again in mid-April, the subject will be discussed again. But it is nevertheless emphasized that “the people who pleaded for a heavier sanction, like those who wanted a lesser one, lost, and that a decision must be respected. But is it still credible, this decision, when rebellious deputies come to physically support Quatennens in the Hemicycle? “Yes”, and the manager relativizes: “Adrien has to live with the injustice done to him from his point of view. He was described as a violent man, which he is not, and he wanted to correct his image. But it is not understandable that he poses as a victim. He got the register wrong. »

If we understand that for the pro-Quatennens, this soap opera which weighs down the rebellious is above all fed by the journalists, others consider that it is the management which is at the origin: “It is them who never stop leaking each stage of his return, ”explained a rebellious Ile-de-France in January. Several newspapers have echoed the information that it was Sophia Chikirou, a deputy close to Jean-Luc Mélenchon, who orchestrated the com plan of Adrien Quatennens. “The truth is that he is being betrayed by those who claim to defend him. They are the ones who push it down. The only one who benefits from it is Manuel Bompard, who has taken over the coordination of the movement, ”continues the same.

Minor subject

Everything suggests that the strategy of those who ardently want the return of Adrien Quatennens can be summed up in four words: it will settle down. “Politics are also states of fact, he will come back, that’s how it is, describes a rebellious person in view of the management, yet opposed to his return. There is no state of mind to have. What are we going to do, sling? It will not work. And then there are bigger things…” If he had been guilty of tax evasion, would he have already been definitively excluded? “Oh, that’s clear! exclaims the same, moreover not the only one to say it. The key is there: the Quatennens affair proves that sexist and sexual violence remains a minor subject. As a result, no one is willing to spend a portion of their political capital to make a feminist issue a matter of principle.

Tuesday evening, several ecologist and communist deputies left the Hemicycle at the time of the intervention of the deputy from the North, to mark their disapproval. A mark of helplessness, too: “It was a question of marking the occasion for the first time”, explained one of them, Marie-Charlotte Garin, eco-friendly MP for Lyon. Another elected member of Nupes, known for her feminist commitment, recognized this a few weeks ago: “The alliance will not break on this. And rebellious France probably no more. “They annoy me, your questions, blow to journalists a torn rebellious framework. But the truth is that if I were in your place, I would ask the same ones”. As a symbol of an untenable position, but which will probably be held.

source site