France is continuing to ignore the threat posed by radicalisation, the former justice minister has said - despite a show of unity in the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo attacks.
Rachida Dati, who in February was named the European Parliament’s special rapporteur on radicalisation, said that France was not doing enough to combat the extremist rhetoric aimed at its young people. France, with the largest Muslim population in Europe, has seen more of its citizens travel to join the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isil) than any other European country.
“They had the same reaction as all French people,” she said, when asked by The Telegraph about the reaction of the government to the January terrorist attacks.
“Voila. They couldn’t have done anything differently.
“But the problem today is that they use that to push the problems under the carpet. They say oh no, we mustn’t talk about that. It doesn’t serve any purpose.
“But be careful – we have to talk about it. We all have a responsibility for that. We all have a responsibility for what goes on. So don’t behave as if nothing happened.”
Ms Dati, who served as justice minister from 2007 until 2009, under the presidency of Nicolas Sarkozy, said that the rampage by Said and Chérif Kouachi and Amedy Coulibaly, all self-proclaimed Islamists, emphasised the division in French society. Little had changed since, she said.
“January mobilised people, and it then became fractured,” she said. “It showed that the people were united against terrorism and barbarism.
“But it’s more serious than that. It’s more fractured than that. We cannot close our eyes for ever. There is Islamophobia. There is enormous inequality. There is unequal treatment of different populations. And this re-opened all that. Lots of French young people say ‘I’m not Charlie’.”
Does she understand why young people say “I’m not Charlie”? Should they be punished for that?
“I think it’s worse when they don’t say anything, then become delayed time bombs,” she said. “I would prefer they were open, and then put the subject out in the open.
“Yes, it’s shocking, but I would prefer we talk to these kids when they are seven, or 10, rather than waiting for them to get to 20, 27, when it’s too late.”
As part of her work with the European Parliament, Ms Dati is speaking to charities, prison workers, justice officials and families across Europe. In Denmark, which is generally thought to have the most successful deradicalisation programme in prison, she will speak to penal experts. In Belgium, which has - per capita - sent the most people to fight for Isil, she will speak to anti-radicalisation NGOs. In Britain on Monday she met charities working to support families of Isil-departees.
And the glamorous former magistrate, daughter of north African immigrants, praised Britain for not having any taboos about radicalisation - unlike France.
“I think the good thing is that you don’t have any taboos about the origins of people, religion,” she said. “You just see people. In France it’s more complicated.
“When there is an imperative, it must change. It must become less taboo.”
She said that Britain’s experience with radical preachers like Abu Hamza and Abu Qatada, and the aftermath of the 7/7 bombing, had spurred authorities to act.
“In the UK you have a lot of NGOs and organisations working against radicalisation. That’s a lot more advanced than in France. We have more associations for integration.
“So we cannot stay inactive. We have to professionalise our fight against radicalisation.”
She said that the priority was understanding why people became radicalised in the first place.
“There are some incredibly vulnerable people, but there are also some incredibly intelligent people,” she said. “They are structured, intelligent, and determined.
“And what are the vectors – around them, in prison, in their neighbourhoods? The main vector is the internet. So my proposal is that we cannot let the internet get away with it; diffusing Isil videos. So I would like criminal procedures against the internet companies, or being able to pursue them for complicity, for being apologists for terrorism.”
Another key element, she said, was professionalising the detection and prevention of radicalism.
“It’s like if you allow a serial paedophile to be cared for by a charity,” she said. “No. You can’t. It must be done by criminologists.
“Those schools need more help. They should work more with the police, and with the justice forces. You need professionals. And when a teacher has doubts, they need to ask for help very quickly.
“The training of imams and of social workers is really vital. And we’ve never done it until now. Well, you can see the results we are getting.”
Why were you chosen for the role? Is it the north African background, or experience as a magistrate and justice minister?
In 2008 she said she introduced the first training programme for imams in French prisons. But she also admits, in 2003, to having encouraged Nicolas Sarkozy, the then interior minister, to go to Toulouse and put a stop to a community policing pilot programme.
The programme was trialled in a rough suburb of Toulouse - where Mohamed Merah, the Toulouse terrorist, grew up. In March 2012 he killed three unarmed French soldiers, a rabbi and three small children at a Jewish school.
His story was the depressingly-familiar tale, shared by Coulibaly and Cherif Kouachi, of a petty criminal who ends up in prison, then becomes radicalised behind bars.
Wouldn’t more community policing have potentially prevented this?
“In the preparation I did, I found out that the police – who could have been doing interesting work, with training and teaching – had become their mates. They played football together, they went skating, they went to the swimming pool together. That is the work of social workers and teaching assistants.”
But surely what France is lacking is community policing, and informants?
“Each person plays their part,” she said. “I think that you need to have social workers doing social work, and police doing the policing.
“So I succeeded in convincing Sarkozy that it wasn’t working. And I totally defend that decision.”
She will present her findings to the European Parliament in June - a prospect she relished, she said.
“It’s so interesting for me. So you asked me about my origins - my origins have nothing to with it.
“It’s a question of security. It’s not political, either – it’s security.”