Is Eric Zemmour's court defeat something to celebrate?

Éric Zemmour is an old-style reactionary France-first politician, a little in the mould of the interwar Charles Maurras. Though unceremoniously blindsided by Marine Le Pen in the 2022 Présidentielles, he should not be written off yet. But this week Zemmour suffered a setback: the European Court of Human Rights rejected his appeal over a conviction for ‘inciting discrimination and religious hatred’ for comments targeting French Muslims. Zemmour’s opponents are celebrating – but the verdict suggests the Strasbourg court can be selective in the rights it chooses to back, and those it doesn’t.

The row stems from a TV interview Zemmour gave back in September 2016, in which Zemmour was promoting a slim volume he had written about what he saw as a conflict between Islam and French culture. Asked what should be done about the matter, he responded:

‘For thirty years, we have seen a process of invasion and colonisation likely to cause a flare-up’.

Zemmour then referred to banlieues on the edge of big cities, such as Paris, where many French Muslims live. He warned that a ‘struggle to Islamise a territory not yet Islamised’ was taking place there. In response to a question about divided loyalties, he answered that Muslims should choose between Islam and France: if followers of Islam thought their faith was not consistent with French values, then, he said, Muslims ‘must detach themselves from their religion.’

At one level, you can see this as a sage decision by an unelected and unaccountable European Court of Human Rights to avoid a clash with democratic lawmakers

For this interview, Zemmour was criminally prosecuted. He was convicted and fined €3,000 (£2,600) under a French law criminalising any words that might encourage discrimination against, or hatred of, any religious or national group.