International Journal on Criminology Volume 3, Number 1, Spring 2015 | Página 18

of criminality. However, it matters little whether an act of terror is, in practice, the result of
collective or individual endeavor (even if acting alone is not necessarily the same thing as
acting in isolation). The actions of often radicalized “lone wolves” (an expression that came
to the fore at the time of the attacks carried out by Mohamed Merah in Toulouse, in March
2012, and which was revived to describe Mehdi Nemmouche after the killings that took
place at the Jewish Museum in Brussels) are as much an example of organized criminality as
those orchestrated by large, clearly identified terrorist networks such as Al-Qaeda, AQIM,
and others. The French approach to organized crime has some clearly original features in
this regard, compared with the view adopted by the United Nations Convention against
Transnational Organized Crime (also known as the Palermo Convention of December
2000): the most important international instrument addressing this question. In its words
of, the description of an “organized criminal group” must be reserved for “a structured group
of three or more persons, existing for a period of time and acting in concert with the aim of
committing one or more serious [...] in order to obtain, directly or indirectly, a financial or
other material benefit.”
B. The content of the term
International Journal on Criminology
While now simultaneously covered by the new category of “organized crime,” created
by the aforementioned Perben II Act of March 9, 2004, terrorism offenses are still different,
inasmuch as they include a certain number of common law felonies and misdemeanors
committed for a particular purpose. Activities likely to be described as terrorism—and there
are many—are listed in art. 421-1 to 421-6 of the Penal Code. Here we find most importantly
willful attacks on the life and physical integrity of the person, including abduction and
unlawful detention, but also the hijacking of means of transportation, associating with
criminals (with notable distinctions depending on the degree of involvement of the individual
terrorist: did they lead the action, or did they simply participate?), theft, extortion, causing
destruction, defacement, or damage, along with a range of offenses related to information
technology, membership in paramilitary groups and officially dissolved movements,
possession of weapons, explosive substances, and nuclear materials, money laundering,
handling stolen goods, and criminal association. To this list, which might be described as
traditional, contemporary legislators have added several newly coined, yet not totally distinct
offenses. Let us take “ecological terrorism” (Penal Code, art. 421-2) as a first illustration: this
criminal act consists of the introduction into the atmosphere, on the ground, in the soil, in
foodstuff or its ingredients, or in waters, including territorial waters, of any substance liable
to imperil human or animal health or the natural environment. A second example: “financial
terrorism” targets the flows of money from legitimate sources toward illegitimate ends (Penal
Code, art. 421-2-2). Thirdly, arising from Law No. 2012-1432, dated December 21, 2012, is to
some extent a terrorist version of “subornation:” it is punishable by 10 years’ imprisonment
and a fine of €150,000 to make offers or promises, offer donations, gifts, or any other kind of
advantage, or to threaten or exert pressure on an official in order to make him/her commit
an act of terrorism (Penal Code, art. 421-2-4). This separate measure against instigation must
not be confused with the misdemeanor of “defending terrorism”—pursuant to the provisions
of the 1881 law on the freedom of the press, in force until modified by the law of November
13, 2014—or with direct incitement to commit terrorist acts (Penal Code, art. 421-2-5).
17