France's CHRISTMAS TERROR PANIC: Have they gone too far?

In a controversial expansion of security measures, French authorities are extending Olympics-level surveillance to protect Christmas markets.

The measures, which include strict movement restrictions and daily police check-ins, are drawing criticism from legal experts and human rights advocates who say authorities are casting too wide a net.

Take the case of Khaled, a 20-year-old Chechen refugee in Strasbourg. Despite having no criminal record, he was barred from leaving the city and required to check in with police daily - restrictions that cost him his place in a cybersecurity college program. While a court eventually ruled these measures "disproportionate," the damage to his academic future was already done.

"I lost my place. This year has gone to waste," Khaled told Reuters, speaking under a pseudonym for fear of further career implications.

The heightened security comes as European Christmas markets face renewed scrutiny following Friday's deadly car-ramming attack in Magdeburg, Germany. However, France's broad application of its 2017 anti-terror law had people worried even before this incident.

The scope is significant: At least 547 people were placed under these administrative control measures (known as MICAS) for the Paris Olympics. Many, like Khaled, had never faced criminal charges. In Strasbourg alone, site of France's largest Christmas market and a 2018 terrorist attack, at least 12 people are currently under surveillance.

What's particularly striking is the success rate of appeals against these measures. Courts have overturned or suspended at least 55 Olympics and Christmas market-related orders this year - a dramatic increase from previous years when successful appeals were rare.

"The Olympics were a MICAS free-for-all," says David Poinsignon, a lawyer representing several affected individuals. "Now it's become almost an instrument of predictive justice."

While the Interior Ministry maintains these measures target only "very dangerous" individuals, critics including UN Special Rapporteur Ben Saul warn of potential "abuse, arbitrariness or discrimination" due to limited judicial oversight.

Reuters contributed to this article.