Emergency Freedom Petition: Presentation and Operation

The emergency freedom petition is an urgent procedure that allows the administrative judge to intervene within 48 hours when an administrative decision causes a serious and manifestly illegal violation of a fundamental freedom.

This mechanism was established by Law No. 2000-597 of June 30, 2000, and appears in Article L. 521-2 of the Administrative Justice Code (CJA). It is similar to the suspension petition, but differs in the urgency and severity of the situations concerned.

---

1. Competent Court

• The request must be brought before the administrative court competent at first instance.
• Even if the main case falls under another jurisdiction (administrative court of appeal, Council of State), only the administrative court is competent to examine an emergency freedom petition.
• The territorially competent court is the one that would judge the substantive appeal (example: challenge of lack of maintenance in prison).

⚠️ If the applicant refers to an incompetent court, the emergency judge dismisses the request without transmitting it (art. R. 522-8-1 CJA).

---

2. Admissibility Conditions

• No lawyer needed to file the request.
• The request must cite Article L. 521-2 CJA from the first page.
• The emergency freedom petition is inadmissible if the main appeal is late: it does not allow "recovering" an expired deadline.
• It is prohibited to combine in the same request the emergency freedom petition and the suspension petition.

👉 Legal entities must prove their representative's capacity. 👉 A minor can act in emergency freedom petition in certain exceptional situations (example: an isolated foreign minor).

The judge can immediately dismiss manifestly inadmissible requests (art. L. 522-3 CJA).

---

3. Substantive Conditions

For the emergency freedom petition to be granted, three conditions must be met:

a) Violation of a Fundamental Freedom

Among recognized freedoms: freedom of movement, freedom of expression, freedom of worship, right to strike, right to property, right to normal family life, right to asylum, right to emergency housing, etc. These freedoms must be reconciled with public order imperatives.

b) Serious and Manifestly Illegal Violation

• Seriousness: beyond a simple procedural irregularity.
• Manifest illegality: the illegality must be flagrant and indisputable.

c) Urgency to Rule

Urgency is characterized if the contested decision causes immediate and serious harm to the applicant or public interest. The filing must be made quickly: a late request cannot invoke urgency.

---

---

4. Hearing Proceedings

• The judge summons the parties if the request is admissible and serious.
• In principle, a single judge rules; exceptionally, three judges may be assembled.
• The procedure is adversarial but accelerated: the essential part of the debate takes place at the hearing.
• The instruction closes at the end of the hearing unless extended.
• The public rapporteur does not intervene, unless the case is judged in collegial formation.

---

5. Judge's Powers and Decision

• The judge rules in principle within 48 hours.
• They can order all necessary measures: suspension of the administrative decision, injunctions to the administration, etc.
• Their decision is provisional: it does not constitute final annulment of the contested act.

---

6. Appeals and Contestation

• Modification or removal: the judge can adapt their measures if new elements appear (art. L. 521-4 CJA).
• Appeal: administrative court orders can be contested before the Council of State within 15 days.
• Cassation: screening orders fall under cassation review (art. L. 523-1 CJA).