The phrase “Aren’t you ashamed?” reverberated across French television on , instantly transforming a standard political interview into a flashpoint for debate about human rights, diplomatic strategy, and the responsibilities of European lawmakers. The sharp exchange between journalist Sonia Mabrouk and Member of the European Parliament Manon Aubry, broadcast on CNews and Europe 1, centered on the imprisonment of Franco-Algerian writer Boualem Sansal and quickly escalated into a nationally discussed confrontation.
The core of the dispute lay in Aubry’s abstention during a vote on a European Parliament resolution calling for Sansal’s immediate release. Sansal, a vocal critic of the Algerian government, had been imprisoned in Algeria since and had already received a prior conviction. Mabrouk’s pointed question wasn’t merely a challenge to Aubry’s political stance; it was a direct accusation of moral failing, framed around Sansal’s outspoken opposition to what Mabrouk characterized as “Islamism and antisemitism.”
A Direct Interrogation on Live Television
The confrontation was deliberate and visually charged. Mabrouk began the interview by displaying a photograph of Sansal, directly addressing Aubry with the accusatory question: “Aren’t you ashamed?” She specifically criticized La France Insoumise (LFI), Aubry’s political party, for refusing to support the resolution demanding Sansal’s freedom. The moment was designed to be confrontational, aligning with Mabrouk’s established journalistic style of directly challenging politicians on their decisions, particularly those concerning fundamental liberties.
Aubry responded by defending her party’s position, arguing that the issue wasn’t simply about a symbolic vote, but about strategically influencing the situation on the ground. She maintained that a more nuanced approach was necessary to exert pressure on the Algerian government and secure Sansal’s release. She believed that a purely confrontational stance could be counterproductive.
The European Parliament Vote and its Aftermath
The European Parliament had overwhelmingly approved the resolution on , calling for Sansal’s “immediate and unconditional” release and condemning the repression of journalists and activists in Algeria. The vote passed with a significant majority – 533 in favor and 24 against – demonstrating broad international concern over Sansal’s case. However, several French LFI MEPs voted against the resolution, while Aubry and another representative abstained, a decision that fueled the controversy and ultimately led to Mabrouk’s direct challenge.
Aubry explained her abstention by stating, “This text risked further straining relations between the EU and Algeria.” She argued that escalating tensions could jeopardize ongoing diplomatic efforts to secure Sansal’s release, emphasizing the need to maintain open channels of communication with the Algerian authorities. Her position reflected a belief that a more cautious, diplomatic approach was more likely to yield positive results.
A Calculated Diplomacy and an Uncertain Future
Aubry further elaborated on her strategy, posing a critical question: “The question is: how do you get Boualem Sansal out of prison? Through confrontation or through diplomacy?” She asserted that her approach was “now shared by many,” suggesting a growing recognition within political circles of the complexities involved in securing Sansal’s freedom. Despite this, she reiterated a fundamental principle: “A writer should not be imprisoned for their ideas, whatever they may be.”
The exchange between Mabrouk and Aubry highlighted a fundamental disagreement over the most effective way to advocate for human rights in politically sensitive situations. Mabrouk’s approach prioritized a forceful public condemnation of the Algerian government and a direct challenge to those perceived as failing to adequately support Sansal’s cause. Aubry, advocated for a more measured, diplomatic strategy, prioritizing ongoing dialogue and avoiding actions that could potentially escalate tensions and hinder efforts to secure Sansal’s release. The incident, occurring shortly before Sonia Mabrouk’s maternity leave, served as a potent reminder of the challenges inherent in balancing principles of human rights with the practical realities of international diplomacy.
The case of Boualem Sansal remains a significant one, raising questions about the limits of European influence in Algeria and the delicate balance between public advocacy and behind-the-scenes negotiation. As of today, , Sansal remains imprisoned, and the debate over the best course of action to secure his release continues.
