[Special Feature: Understanding "Immigrant Societies"] New Challenges for France as an Immigrant Society

France, where the birth rate began to decline in the late 18th century, started supplementing its labor shortages with foreign workers in the mid-19th century. The number of immigrants increased significantly during periods of labor shortage—between the two World Wars, during the post-war period of rapid economic growth, and from the 2000s onward. Even during economic downturns, the influx of people continued to grow through channels such as family reunification and asylum applications. In 2015, "first-generation immigrants" (those born in a country other than France) numbered approximately 7.5 million (about 11% of the population, Héran 2018), ranking seventh in the world and third in Europe after Germany and the United Kingdom.

Until the first half of the 20th century, the majority of immigrants were of European origin. However, after World War II, migration from outside Europe, including former colonies, increased. Currently, 31.7% are from the EU, 43.5% from the African continent, and 24.8% from other regions (INSEE, 2013). Furthermore, the number of second-generation immigrants (those with at least one immigrant parent) is estimated at approximately 8.5 million. Combining the first and second generations, they total about 16 million, accounting for approximately 24% of the population (Héran 2018).

In France, which has such a long history of accepting immigrants and currently hosts a large immigrant population, the process of becoming an "immigrant society"—the theme of this special feature—has been underway from an early stage. In that process, the country has faced various challenges; some problems have been overcome, while others remain unresolved. This article addresses the issue of "discrimination" as a challenge for France's immigrant society, aiming to provide implications for Japanese policy.

One of the biggest differences between France and Japan as "immigrant societies" is the existence of an established path for "immigrants to become citizens." French nationality law adopts jus soli (right of the soil), alongside jus sanguinis (right of blood). Consequently, foreign nationals born in France automatically acquire nationality and become "citizens" upon reaching adulthood (18 years old) if they meet certain conditions. Furthermore, criteria for "naturalization" are clearly defined, and in 2013, 39% of first-generation immigrants had acquired it (INSEE). Between 1999 and 2017, a total of 2.478 million people became citizens through both automatic acquisition and naturalization, meaning an average of 130,000 people, or about 0.02% of the population, become "French" every year.

The ideology of French republicanism supports the social integration of immigrants. Based on Article 1 of the Constitution, which states that the "Republic is one and indivisible," citizens are guaranteed equality before the law regardless of differences in "origin, race, or religion." While this may seem obvious, this principle of "indivisibility" is applied quite strictly. For example, asking about attributes such as race, ethnicity, or religion in official statistics is not done, as it is considered a discriminatory act that violates this principle. This is also why affirmative action systems based on attributes like race, as seen in the United States, are not implemented. This thorough "color-blind" principle is the most significant characteristic of French immigrant society.

However, even after being granted nationality and becoming "citizens" in the eyes of the law, immigrants face various difficulties. Not only are they treated as "immigrants" and subjected to discrimination based on their appearance, but they have also suffered from socio-economic disparities. According to a 2015 survey on immigrant integration in 34 OECD member countries, the employment rate for immigrants in France was 57%, which is lower than in Germany (69%) and the UK (68%), and even lower than in Italy (59.5%), a country of newer immigration. Among EU member states (average 62%), only Spain, Belgium, and Greece rank lower than France. The poverty rate also exceeds 30% (compared to 13% for general households), and the "immigrant-non-immigrant economic gap" is at the highest level among OECD countries. While figures for the second generation have improved compared to the first generation, the gap with the general population remains large and stays at a low level compared to other member countries, representing a reality that stands in stark contrast to the "principle of equality" in the French Constitution.

Reflecting this reality is the high level of perceived discrimination among second-generation immigrants. Although the gap with the general population is more limited and has improved compared to first-generation immigrants, many still feel they have been discriminated against (see figure). Notably, while the sense of being discriminated against is decreasing among those of European origin, it is increasing among the second generation of African and Asian origin.

The development of exclusionism also influences the high sense of discrimination among immigrants from outside Europe. In particular, the far-right party "National Front" (renamed "National Rally" in 2018) rose to prominence in the early 1980s by advocating for the exclusion of immigrants. It has expanded its influence for over 35 years, exerting an impact on French immigrant society that cannot be ignored.

In response to these movements, efforts to combat immigrant discrimination have been undertaken from various angles since the early 1980s. In 1983, young people of Arab and African descent from former colonies took the lead in organizing the "March for Equality," modeled after the Black Civil Rights Movement in the U.S. and Gandhi's non-violence movement. This triggered nationwide movements to eliminate far-right hate speech and hate crimes.

Since the 2000s, activities addressing specific forms of discrimination in areas such as employment and housing have accumulated. First, surveys on the actual state of discrimination have come to be widely conducted. As previously mentioned, collecting racial and ethnic statistics has been treated as a taboo in France, and consequently, surveys on discrimination against specific groups were not common. However, the recognition that "anti-racism cannot progress without factual surveys" gradually took root, leading to various investigations. For example, several NGOs have conducted "testing" (undercover investigations) where two resumes with identical educational backgrounds and qualifications but different ethnic attributes are sent to companies to compare hiring outcomes, or two investigators with different ethnic attributes visit banks or commercial facilities in succession to examine differences in treatment. These have provided data and an understanding of the specific conditions of immigrant discrimination. This is not limited to the private sector. The independent administrative body "Defender of Rights" investigated Airbus's employee roster in 2012, revealing that employees with Arab-sounding surnames had faced employment discrimination. Furthermore, the Ministry of Labor conducted resume surveys of 40 companies with over 1,000 employees, revealing that both for management and general staff positions, those with "North African" names were at a disadvantage in hiring compared to those with "European" names.

Second, there has been a significant increase in discrimination lawsuits. Following an EU directive in 1997, the "Anti-Discrimination Act" was passed in 2001, shifting the burden of proof in civil litigation from the plaintiff to the defendant, requiring employers to prove that "racial discrimination did not occur." This led to an increase in the number of people taking legal action, and NGOs began to position litigation as one of their movement strategies. Additionally, a May 2017 decree (décret) made class-action lawsuits regarding "discrimination in the workplace" possible. Compared to individual lawsuits, class actions pose a greater threat to companies in terms of both financial cost and reputation, and are expected to have a deterrent effect on discrimination. Thus, legal struggles and their support have gained further importance in the fight against discrimination.

Third, the establishment and activities of government agencies specializing in the enforcement of discrimination laws can be cited. Based on Article 13 of the Treaty of Amsterdam, which came into effect in 1999 (granting the European Council the power to prohibit discrimination based on race, etc.), the EU adopted the "Employment Equality Directive" and the "Racial Equality Directive" in 2000. In response, the French government established the "High Authority for the Fight against Discrimination and for Equality" (HALDE) in 2005.

HALDE was established as a public specialized agency to investigate and deliberate on all forms of discrimination, including not only racial discrimination but also gender, disability, and sexual orientation. It reviews discrimination complaints, provides mediation and settlement services, proposes settlement payments, and creates recommendations. While its activities overlap with those of private anti-racism NGOs, its scale is overwhelmingly larger, employing over 40 legal experts. It was also granted special powers, such as the ability to conduct unannounced inspections of companies accused of discrimination and to impose fines if discrimination is proven.

The creation of the option of HALDE's sanctions, which involve simpler procedures than general litigation, held great significance for victims and supporting NGOs. By increasing the means of reporting discrimination and simplifying the process, it became easier for victims to speak out, leading to their empowerment.

HALDE also engaged in a wide variety of activities, including surveys on the state of discrimination, recommendations to the government, publishing books, providing grants for artistic works dealing with anti-racism, anti-discrimination educational activities in schools, companies, and public institutions, and training sessions for victims. Furthermore, whenever the media or politicians made discriminatory remarks or writings, it issued protest statements or filed lawsuits, working toward the elimination of discriminatory attitudes in the immigrant society.

In 2011, HALDE was merged with three other rights protection agencies (the Mediator of the Republic, the Children's Defender, and the National Commission for Ethics in Security) and continues its activities as part of the "Defender of Rights." In addition to the activities from the HALDE era, it provides survey results and expertise in the capacity of an "amicus curiae" (friend of the court) during discrimination lawsuits. Efforts are also being focused on human rights education programs for the prevention of discrimination.

In Japan, which is moving toward becoming an immigrant society, anti-discrimination efforts will be increasingly required. While the role of private organizations is important, it is essential for the state to take responsibility for addressing discrimination. In particular, it will be necessary to enact a law for the elimination of racial discrimination, establish an independent national human rights institution in accordance with the 1993 "Paris Principles," and set up a government agency like HALDE to demonstrate a strong stance against discrimination.