Social Rights

The European Committee of Social Rights (ECSR) has published its decision on a complaint submitted by the European Federation of National Organisations working with the Homeless (FEANTSA) and the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) concerning the widespread adoption of municipal “anti-begging” decrees in France.

The complainant organisations alleged that many municipalities had adopted decrees prohibiting or penalising conduct associated with people living in poverty or homelessness, including begging, prolonged presence in public spaces, lying down in certain areas, gathering in groups and other informal survival activities. They also argued that these measures did not genuinely aim to protect public order but instead targeted visible poverty, reinforcing stigma and deepening social exclusion.

The ECSR concluded unanimously that the situation in France violates Article 30 of the Charter, which guarantees the right to protection against poverty and social exclusion, on two grounds:

• First, although maintaining public order may constitute a legitimate aim, the decrees were often vaguely framed, granting broad discretion to law enforcement authorities. In practice, enforcement frequently targeted the mere presence of homeless persons without objective evidence of genuine threats to public order. The ECSR emphasised that begging often constitutes a means of survival for people living in extreme poverty and that their systematic removal from city centres deprived them of one of the last avenues to meet basic needs. Fines imposed on persons without resources were ineffective, while repeated police interventions disrupted access to food distribution, shelter, healthcare and social support, reinforcing stigma. The ECSR therefore concluded that the proliferation of anti-begging decrees was not necessary in a democratic society.
• Second, the ECSR found that effective remedies were lacking. Although administrative review is formally available, those affected — often homeless and highly vulnerable — face significant barriers to bringing proceedings, while prefects rarely intervene and NGOs lack resources to challenge the number of decrees adopted. Court decisions often come too late to prevent their effects. The ECSR therefore concluded that remedies were ineffective in law and practice.

The ECSR also found unanimously that the situation violated the non-discrimination principle set forth in Article E read in conjunction with Article 30 of the Charter. The decrees, though formally neutral, disproportionately affected persons living in poverty and homelessness, reinforcing discriminatory treatment and stigma.

 Text of the decision