The Memorial of Lyon is a reality. It represents an act of acknowledgement and a sign of respect for all the victims of genocide. Therefore its dimension exceeds by far the social miserliness. Furthermore, the Memorial of Lyon belongs to human justice, the one of the Righteous and not of the cheap lawyers who attempt through fallacious means to challenge its existence, without realizing that  in this manner, they collaborate with the deniers of genocide. This achievement is a gift which was due long ago, very long ago, to the victims of genocide. We therefore cannot let ourselves be trapped in a judicial process as if it was a judicial vice. The form of justice cannot transgress the depth. The law is the law certainly. But there is also nomology. The legislator knows this well. Also it is enough to proceed in this direction.  But the spirit of the law exists and it is known to all in Montesquieu’s country.

In front of collaborationism, Jean Moulin chose illegality. He would have been tried by the Vichy government, he would certainly have been convicted for an illegal act, no matter which one. Now a group of selfish individuals, is trying to accuse the Mayor of Lyon for allowing the construction of the Memorial. All this is crap! On human terms and for the memory of the victims, it would have been preferable that his decision was ultimately illegal. It wouldn’t be but beautiful because it does not constitute an evil, in terms of human values. If the Mayor gave priority to human values versus social principles, he followed therein the tradition described by the tragedy of Sophocles namely Antigone. He is all the more worthy of it. And if by chance we come to an agreement between lawyers, it would be once again a victory of social miserliness over the legacy of humanity. The Memorial exists but each one of us, henceforth, is responsible for its future.