Home<\/span> – Accuei<\/span><\/a>l<\/span><\/b><\/font><\/p>\n Kh\u00e9ma\u00efs CHAMMARI: Maitre Alya CHERIF-CHAMMARI, victime d\u2019une proc\u00e9dure abusive et d\u2019un harc\u00e8lement\u00a0 policier inqui\u00e9tant.<\/font><\/p>\n Luiza Toscane: Yassine Ferchichi condamn\u00e9 \u00e0 l\u2019errance ?<\/font> <\/p>\n JSS: Mohsen Cherif, chanteur tunisien, crie \u201cVive Netanyahu\u201d en plein concert!<\/font> <\/p>\n Alarabiya: Campaigns demand revoking his citizenship – Tunisian singer slammed for pro-Israel cheers<\/font> <\/p>\n Tuniscope: Les tarifs du m\u00e9tro grimpent mais pas le service<\/font> <\/p>\n R\u00e9alit\u00e9s: Voyages de W. Churchill en Tunisie pendant la guerre<\/font><\/strong><\/div>\n <\/font><\/div>\n Maitre Alya CHERIF-CHAMMARI, victime d\u2019une proc\u00e9dure abusive et d\u2019un harc\u00e8lement\u00a0 policier inqui\u00e9tant.<\/font><\/p>\n <\/strong><\/font><\/div>\n \u00a0 \u00a0Depuis le 21 juillet 2010, mon \u00e9pouse , Maitre Alya CHERIF-CHAMMARI avocate pr\u00e8s de la cour de cassation et militante associative f\u00e9ministe, fait l\u2019objet d\u2019un harc\u00e8lement administratif et policier qui a abouti , le 2 ao\u00fbt, \u00e0 la confiscation de son permis de conduire dans des conditions pour le moins abusives et arbitraires. A\u00a0 l\u2019origine de cette affaire il y a eu un accident de la circulation aux cons\u00e9quences heureusement sans gravit\u00e9s dans une rue du centre ville de Tunis tr\u00e8s passante\u00a0 et o\u00f9 Alya, roulant au pas, a l\u00e9g\u00e8rement accident\u00e9 ( orteil du pied fissur\u00e9 et petit h\u00e9matome) une dame \u00e2g\u00e9e de 88ans qui marchait sur la chauss\u00e9e , les trottoirs \u00e9tant encombr\u00e9s par les \u00e9talages des commer\u00e7ants et par les marchands ambulants. \u00a0Alya a\u00a0 alors fait\u00a0 l\u2019objet le jour m\u00eame, le 21 juillet , d\u2019un traitement\u00a0 inhabituel et discriminatoire durant plus de six heures ; les lenteurs d\u00e9lib\u00e9r\u00e9es de la proc\u00e9dure suscitant m\u00eame l\u2019incompr\u00e9hension de la personne accident\u00e9e qui n\u2019a pu rentrer chez elle que huit heures apr\u00e8s l\u2019accident ! Une semaine plus tard \u2013 et alors que je venais de partir pour le Maroc- mon \u00e9pouse a commenc\u00e9 \u00e0 faire l\u2019objet d\u2019un harc\u00e8lement t\u00e9l\u00e9phonique des services de la police routi\u00e8re alors m\u00eame que toutes les proc\u00e9dures l\u00e9gales avaient\u00a0 \u00e9t\u00e9 dument respect\u00e9es : consultations m\u00e9dicales et radiologiques de la personne accident\u00e9e en cabinets priv\u00e9s\u00a0 puis au service d\u2019urgence d\u2019un h\u00f4pital, diagnostics convergents, constat de la police avec transport sur les lieux trois heures apr\u00e8s les faits,\u00a0 \u00e9tablissement et signature d\u2019un PV, accomplissement des d\u00e9marches normales aupr\u00e8s de la compagnie d\u2019assurances. Apr\u00e8s six appels t\u00e9l\u00e9phoniques\u00a0 du 28 au 31 juillet visant l\u2019intimidation et une convocation comminatoire remise en son absence \u00e0 notre domicile le samedi 31juillet \u00e0\u202611h 45\u2019 l\u2019invitant \u00e0 y r\u00e9pondre \u00ab imm\u00e9diatement \u00bb ; Alya s\u2019est vue retirer, le lundi 2 ao\u00fbt , son permis de conduire sans recevoir de document attestant ce retrait ! Les dispositions l\u00e9gales pr\u00e9voient pourtant (article 94bis du code de la route) que\u00a0 le retrait imm\u00e9diat du permis de conduire n\u2019intervient dans ce gente de circonstances qu\u2019en cas de d\u00e9c\u00e8s ou de blessure grave ce qui n\u2019est manifestement pas le cas. Le conseil de l\u2019Ordre de avocats a bien entendu \u00e9t\u00e9 r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement tenu au courant de ce traitement abusif ainsi que Mr le Procureur de la R\u00e9publique qui a estim\u00e9 que seul l\u2019aspect juridictionnel- qui se d\u00e9roule normalement- \u00e9tait de son ressort ; le retrait de permis \u00ab proc\u00e9dant d\u2019une d\u00e9cision exclusivement administrative \u00bb. C\u2019est dans ces conditions que mon \u00e9pouse a d\u00e9cid\u00e9, le 4 ao\u00fbt, de d\u00e9poser plainte pour abus de pouvoir aupr\u00e8s de l\u2019inspection g\u00e9n\u00e9rale des services du minist\u00e8re de l\u2019int\u00e9rieur en faisant \u00e9tat de son intention de d\u00e9poser un recours devant le tribunal administratif. \u00a0 Au terme de ces deux semaines de traitement abusif et pour le moins contrariant, j\u2019ai d\u00e9cid\u00e9 de sortir du silence que j\u2019avais observ\u00e9 jusqu\u2019ici dans un souci d\u2019apaisement car j\u2019ai la conviction aujourd\u2019hui que la proc\u00e9dure abusive et arbitraire \u00e0 laquelle est confront\u00e9e mon \u00e9pouse s\u2019inscrit dans le cadre des mesures et des tracasseries constantes dont ma famille et moi-m\u00eame faisons l\u2019objet depuis dix huit mois : surveillance permanentes et ostensible de notre domicile, fouilles pouss\u00e9es de mes bagages \u00e0 l\u2019a\u00e9roport sur la base de la proc\u00e9dure discriminatoire dite A6, d\u00e9cision d\u2019interdire \u00e0 quiconque en dehors de ma famille la plus proche d\u2019acc\u00e9der \u00e0 notre domicile et de m\u2019interdire l\u2019acc\u00e8s aux locaux d\u2019associations et de parts l\u00e9gaux , filatures renforc\u00e9es et \u00ab collantes \u00bb (ces trois mesures n\u2019ont cess\u00e9 qu\u2019\u00e0 la suite de mon\u00a0 recours \u00e0 la gr\u00e8ve de la faim) et orchestration de campagnes de presse diffamatoires et haineuses d\u2019une presse de caniveau assur\u00e9e de son immunit\u00e9. \u00a0 La provocation \u00e0 laquelle est confront\u00e9e mon \u00e9pouse Alya CHERIF-CHAMMARI doit cesser. Son dossier d\u2019accident de la circulation doit \u00eatre trait\u00e9 conform\u00e9ment \u00e0 la lettre et \u00e0 l\u2019esprit des dispositions l\u00e9gales en vigueur et en mettant un terme aux multiples manipulations\u00a0 et abus d\u2019autorit\u00e9 que nous avons constat\u00e9s ces derniers jours. \u00a0Kh\u00e9ma\u00efs\u00a0 CHAMMARI <\/font><\/strong>\u00a0 Rabat le 5 ao\u00fbt 2010.<\/div>\n <\/strong><\/div>\n Yassine Ferchichi \u00e9tait hier l\u2019invit\u00e9 inattendu de la conf\u00e9rence de presse convoqu\u00e9e par la Rencontre Africaine pour la D\u00e9fense des Droits de l\u2019Homme (RADDHO) et la section s\u00e9n\u00e9galaise d\u2019Amnesty International, qui s\u2019est tenue dans les locaux de la RADDHO \u00e0 Dakar et qui a fait le point sur l\u2019affaire Abdoulaye Wade Yinghou, d\u00e9c\u00e9d\u00e9 depuis le 14 juillet 2010 dans le Commissariat de Yeumbeul (Quartier de la banlieue dakaroise) \u00e0 la suite de son arrestation par des \u00e9l\u00e9ments de la police, lors d’une manifestation contre les d\u00e9lestages des jeunes de Yeumbeul B\u00e9ne Baraque, et qui n\u2019est \u00e0 ce jour pas inhum\u00e9. Yassine Ferchichi a fait part de son inqui\u00e9tude grandissante : il a \u00e9t\u00e9 somm\u00e9 le 3 ao\u00fbt par le propri\u00e9taire des lieux de quitter le logement mis \u00e0 sa disposition par les autorit\u00e9s s\u00e9n\u00e9galaises depuis le 3 juin dernier. Ces derni\u00e8res ne se sont pas expliqu\u00e9es sur les faits. Mais l\u2019essentiel est ailleurs. Depuis son arriv\u00e9e au S\u00e9n\u00e9gal, Yassine Ferchichi n\u2019a jamais re\u00e7u d\u2019assurance sur sa prise en charge par les autorit\u00e9s. Et quand il l\u2019a re\u00e7ue, verbalement, cette derni\u00e8re a \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9mentie dans les faits. C\u2019est ainsi qu\u2019il s\u2019est retrouv\u00e9 \u00e0 la rue en mai dernier. C\u2019est ainsi qu\u2019il n\u2019a jamais pu \u00eatre op\u00e9r\u00e9 d\u2019une fracture, qui s\u2019est consolid\u00e9e en mauvaise position. Et c\u2019est de la m\u00eame fa\u00e7on qu\u2019il ne doit sa survie qu\u2019\u00e0 des aides et \u00e0 des gestes de solidarit\u00e9 occasionnels. Avec cette nouvelle menace d\u2019expulsion, Yassine Ferchichi se retrouve aussi d\u00e9sempar\u00e9 qu\u2019au premier jour de son s\u00e9jour forc\u00e9 au S\u00e9n\u00e9gal. Pour rappel, Yassine Ferchichi, de nationalit\u00e9 tunisienne, interdit du territoire fran\u00e7ais, a \u00e9t\u00e9 expuls\u00e9 sans pr\u00e9avis \u00e0 Dakar par les autorit\u00e9s fran\u00e7aises le 24 d\u00e9cembre 2009, apr\u00e8s que la Cour Europ\u00e9enne des Droits de l\u2019Homme ait enjoint \u00e0 la France de ne pas le renvoyer en Tunisie, o\u00f9 il courait le risque d\u2019\u00eatre soumis \u00e0 la torture. Depuis son arriv\u00e9e au S\u00e9n\u00e9gal, o\u00f9 il n\u2019a pas de papiers d\u2019identit\u00e9 et de s\u00e9jour, il vit dans la pr\u00e9carit\u00e9, l\u2019errance et l\u2019incertitude. Luiza Toscane<\/font><\/strong>, 5 ao\u00fbt 2010<\/div>\n <\/strong><\/font><\/div>\n <\/font><\/div>\n 03\/08\/2010 Par Jss<\/strong> \u00a0<\/div>\n <\/font><\/strong><\/p>\n <\/strong><\/div>\n \u00a0<\/p><\/div>\n <\/strong><\/div>\n <\/font><\/div>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n By Daniel Calingaert and Sarah Cook<\/strong><\/font><\/span><\/p>\n 04\/08\/2010<\/span><\/b><\/font>\u00a0<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n Daniel Calingaert is deputy director of programs at Freedom House, a nonprofit organization receiving funding from the U.S. State Department, Google, and other sources to promote Internet freedom. Sarah Cook is a research analyst specializing in Asia. She served as assistant editor for the 2009 publication Freedom on the \u00ab\u00a0Net. This article appears in the \u00ab\u00a0Defining Internet Freedom\u00a0\u00bb issue of eJournal USA<\/span><\/i>.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n As access to online technologies has grown exponentially in recent years, the Internet has increased opportunities to enrich public discourse, expose abuses of power, and facilitate citizen activism. It has provided greater space for free expression in both democratic settings and countries where traditional broadcast and print media are restricted. Many governments have responded with measures to control, regulate, and censor the content of blogs, Web sites, and text messages<\/span><\/p>\n These developments raise several fundamental questions: What are the primary threats to Internet freedom? Will the Internet bring freedom to oppressed people or will it strengthen the power of repressive regimes which control it? Are democratic societies immune from Internet repression or are threats to digital media freedom emerging there as well? Freedom House explored these questions in Freedom on the \u00ab\u00a0Net, a 2009 survey that rated Internet freedom in 15 countries, spanning four continents and covering a range of national regulatory environments from free to highly repressive. According to the findings, threats to Internet freedom are growing and diversifying both in the array of countries that impose restrictions and in the range of methods employed. Authoritarian rulers understand the power of the Internet and are actively curtailing its impact. A few highly repressive governments — such as that of Cuba — restrict access to a very small segment of the population. There are few public Internet access points, and the cost of service is prohibitive for the vast majority of citizens. Other authoritarian governments, such as those in China, Iran, and Tunisia<\/font><\/b>, actively promote Internet use to stimulate innovation and economic growth, but place wide-ranging controls over digital media to prevent their use by government critics. These regimes maintain extensive, multilayered systems of censorship and surveillance to stifle online dissent or exposure of official corruption. They place severe limits on the content that citizens can access, post on the Internet, or transmit via cell phones. Surveillance of Internet and mobile phone communications is pervasive, and citizens who criticize the government online are subject to harassment, imprisonment, and torture. In less restrictive settings, for instance in Egypt, Malaysia, and Russia, the Internet has emerged as a haven of relatively free speech in otherwise restrictive media environments. The space for free speech, however, is slowly closing, as governments devise subtle methods to manipulate online discussion and apply deliberately vague security laws to intimidate and arrest their critics. This intimidation leads to self-censorship among online journalists and commentators. Even in more democratic countries — such as the United Kingdom, Brazil, and Turkey — Internet freedom is increasingly undermined by legal harassment, opaque filtering procedures, and expanding surveillance. Web 2.0 Just as the number of Internet users has grown exponentially since 2000, the second generation of Web design and the emergence of online social networks have empowered average users to produce and disseminate information. Where traditional media transmit information vertically to audiences, Web 2.0 applications spread information horizontally, and have thus profoundly affected how we communicate. Tens of millions of ordinary citizens around the world have become content publishers and distributors. They write online journals; produce videos; investigate sensitive issues; and comment on political, social, and other topics. In restricted media environments, bloggers often stand at the forefront of efforts to push the bounds of free expression. Web 2.0 applications promote not only independent expression but also freedom of association. They facilitate discussions and interactions among individuals, regardless of physical location. They build online communities of citizens with shared interests and make possible the rapid spread of information, such as news updates or calls to action. Digital media are thus used extensively for civic activism.In Kenya, activists launched an initiative called Ushahidi during a burst of postelection ethnic violence in 2007. It catalogued incidents using messages sent by ordinary citizens with their mobile phones and posted them onto a map to track the unfolding events. The program has since been deployed again in the context of other tumultuous events: elections in India, fighting in Gaza, and earthquake relief in Haiti. As a result of its horizontal configuration, the Internet usually provides greater space for free expression than traditional media. All of the countries surveyed in Freedom on the \u00ab\u00a0Net, with a single exception, received a higher rating for Internet freedom than for overall media freedom, as measured on the same scale by Freedom House’s Freedom of the Press survey. The difference in ratings for Internet freedom and traditional media freedom was most pronounced among countries ranked \u00ab\u00a0partly free.\u00a0\u00bb Repression 2.0 The horizontal nature of the Internet both empowers citizens in ways that traditional media cannot, and makes the flow of information far more difficult to control. Regardless, authoritarian governments try to restrict horizontal communication and impede the spread of domestically generated content they find objectionable. Although the primary aim is to silence domestic critics and prevent the emergence of political alternatives, the controls imposed to accomplish this necessarily are more intrusive and directly affect larger numbers of people than restrictions on traditional media. Several countries have developed an array of censorship and surveillance methods to curtail Internet freedom: * Access to Web 2.0 applications such as Facebook and YouTube is blocked permanently or temporarily. These blocks are often imposed around particular events, as the Chinese government did during the 2009 unrest in Xinjiang. Burma cut off all access to the global Internet for several days in 2007 after the violent crackdown on peaceful protests in the \u00ab\u00a0Saffron Revolution.\u00a0\u00bb Iran denies home and Internet cafe users access to broadband. * Technical filtering at the level of Internet service providers (ISP) prevents access to specific online articles or Web sites. Where employed more extensively, the filters effectively \u00ab\u00a0black out\u00a0\u00bb broad swaths of information. Filters can target keywords, particular Web addresses, or entire domain names. At least 25 countries, according to the Open Net Initiative, conduct technical filtering of the Internet in some capacity. * Human censors monitor and manually remove blog posts. They shut down online discussion forums that address forbidden subjects, such as human rights violations, criticism of political figures, or official corruption. Authorities in Russia and elsewhere resort to behind-the-scenes phone calls to pressure bloggers or Web site hosts to remove certain content. * Rather than rely entirely on direct intervention by government agencies, some regimes increasingly \u00ab\u00a0outsource\u00a0\u00bb censorship and surveillance to private companies’to Internet service providers, blog-hosting companies, cybercafes, and mobile phone operators. Companies risk fines or loss of business licenses if they fail to filter political content, monitor Internet activity, or collect data on Internet users. Users are required to register with an ISP when they purchase Internet access at home or at work, so they cannot operate online anonymously. * A number of governments use clandestine, paid pro-government commentators or state-funded Web sites to influence online discussions. The Chinese government employs an estimated 250,000 or more \u00ab\u00a050 Cent Party\u00a0\u00bb commentators, who reportedly receive 50 Chinese cents for each pro-government post. * Authoritarian governments use general press laws against insult, blasphemy, leaking state secrets, etc. to punish online dissidents. Cuba prosecutes online journalists under generic charges such as presenting a \u00ab\u00a0pre-criminal social danger.\u00a0\u00bb China has issued more than 80 decrees that specifically address Internet-related issues and imposes among the harshest prison sentences in the world for online violations, typically between three and ten years. Numerous prosecutions have also occurred in Tunisia<\/font><\/b>, Iran, Syria, Egypt, and Malaysia, where laws against insulting the head of state or Islam are most frequently invoked. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, for the first time in 2008, more online journalists were behind bars than traditional journalists, due to either legal prosecution or extralegal detention. * When not imprisoned, bloggers and online journalists face intimidation, including 24-hour surveillance, harassment, arbitrary arrest, and even torture. Egypt permits a relatively open Internet environment but targets a few prominent individuals to make an example of them and create a chilling effect on their peers. * Blogs and Web sites are hacked or subjected to denial-of-service attacks, which disrupt or shut down the sites. On the first anniversary of Burma’s Saffron Revolution, for example, independent news Web sites hosted in Thailand, such as the Irrawaddy and the New Era, became targets of cyber attacks. The full panoply of repressive methods is used to control the Internet in the most restricted environments, for instance in China, Iran, and Tunisia<\/font>,<\/b> ranked \u00ab\u00a0not free\u00a0\u00bb in Freedom House’s study. They have developed sophisticated, multilayered systems to control the free flow of online information. Other countries, such as Egypt, Malaysia, and Russia, allow substantial freedom online but seem headed toward greater controls. They encourage expanded access to the Internet and rarely directly block online expression, despite their heavy restrictions on traditional media. However, they exert more subtle state influence on content via proactive manipulation or behind-the-scenes pressure, repress citizen attempts to mobilize online, and impose harsh penalties on their online critics. Freedom House ranks these countries \u00ab\u00a0partly free.\u00a0\u00bb Internet Freedom and Restrictions in Democratic Settings Countries that scored in the \u00ab\u00a0free\u00a0\u00bb range in the Freedom on the \u00ab\u00a0Net study included Estonia (the best performer in the pilot sample), the United Kingdom, South Africa, and Brazil. These countries all have a generally open environment for new media, with few or no government obstacles to access, a low level of content control, and few violations of users’ rights. Democratic settings have also shown the capacity for \u00ab\u00a0self-correction\u00a0\u00bb following public exposures of restrictions on Internet freedom. In Turkey, a parliamentary inquiry was launched into surveillance practices by law enforcement agencies following a series of scandals. Even within these relatively free environments, however, areas of concern have emerged. In Brazil, judicial decisions that lead to content censorship are a growing threat, while YouTube has been blocked repeatedly both there and in Turkey. Meanwhile, in countries such as the United Kingdom or Turkey, censorship decisions are made with a serious lack of transparency, even if the information targeted is primarily small amounts of well-defined content, such as child pornography. The lack of public lists of blocked Web sites or opportunity to appeal censorship decisions creates the risk of restrictions spreading to politically and socially important information. Citizens Fight Back Despite the growing range of threats and controls, citizens operating even in highly Internet-restricted environments are findings creative ways to produce and spread information. In Cuba, with its tight controls on access, citizens share downloaded Internet content offline, often through USB devices, a phenomenon termed \u00ab\u00a0sneakernets.\u00a0\u00bb In China, persecuted Tibetans, Uighur Muslims and Falun Gong practitioners have used digital media to send abroad documentation of torture, while domestically challenging Communist Party propaganda via blogs and underground DVDs. In Tunisia<\/font><\/b>, the blog NormalLand discusses Tunisian politics by using a virtual country with a virtual leader, and with various government positions being assigned to other local bloggers. Citizens have also been able to use the Internet and mobile phones for activism against censorship itself. In 2009, Chinese netizens organized online resistance to the planned introduction of Green Dam Youth Escort censorship software. Domestic criticism’expressed via social networking tools and online petitions’along with foreign pressure persuaded the Chinese government to delay the large-scale introduction of Green Dam. The broader political implications of online activism are especially striking in \u00ab\u00a0partly free\u00a0\u00bb internet environments. In Egypt, the Facebook group Elbaradei for Presidency has attracted more than 235,000 members in approximately five months. Malaysia’s opposition political parties conducted a large part of their March 2008 general election campaigns through digital media’including blogs, YouTube and SMS (short message services on mobile phones), which contributed to unprecedented ballot-box gains. Conclusion Digital media technologies promise improved flow of information, enhanced civic participation and activism, and ultimately, greater freedom and quality of life. Nonetheless, the Freedom on the \u00ab\u00a0Net pilot study amply documents that this potential cannot be taken for granted. As Freedom House prepares a second, 37-country edition of the study for release in 2011, this has become more evident. From Kazakhstan and Belarus to Australia, restrictive new laws have been approved or are being considered. Vigorous efforts by netizens and their advocates in democratic countries are a necessary response to these and other restrictions on online freedom. In a fast-changing digital world, the proponents of free expression must take the initiative to defend and advance freedom on the Internet.<\/span><\/p>\n (Source: TMCNET le 4 aout 2010)<\/font><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Source: <\/font><\/strong>http:\/\/www.tmcnet.com\/usubmit\/2010\/08\/04\/4939858.htm<\/font><\/strong><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong><\/div>\n <\/strong> <\/div>\n <\/strong><\/div>\n <\/p>\n <\/font><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/font><\/p>\n <\/font><\/div>\n \nBassam Bounenni: R\u00e9actions anormales pour actes de normalisation<\/font><\/h2>\n
Kapitalis: Tunisie. Slim Baccouche s\u2019explique sur \u2018\u2018Ya ghriba\u2019\u2019<\/font><\/h2>\n
TMCNET: Freedom on the \u00ab\u00a0Net: A Global Assessment<\/font><\/h2>\n
Le Temps: Et vogue la gal\u00e8re\u2026<\/font><\/h2>\n
Yassine Ferchichi condamn\u00e9 \u00e0 l\u2019errance ?<\/font><\/h2>\n
R\u00e9actions anormales pour actes de normalisation<\/font><\/h2>\n
Mohsen Cherif, chanteur tunisien, crie \u201cVive Netanyahu\u201d en plein concert!<\/strong><\/font><\/h2>\n<\/div>\n
Tunisie. Slim Baccouche s\u2019explique sur \u2018\u2018Ya ghriba\u2019\u2019<\/font><\/h2>\n
Campaigns demand revoking his citizenship Tunisian singer slammed for pro-Israel cheers<\/font><\/h2>\n
Les tarifs du m\u00e9tro grimpent mais pas le service<\/font><\/h3>\n
Et vogue la gal\u00e8re\u2026<\/font><\/h3>\n
Voyages de W. Churchill en Tunisie pendant la guerre<\/font><\/h3>\n
\n
\n \n Home<\/font><\/span> – Accueil <\/span>– <\/span><\/font><\/font>\u0627\u0644\u0631\u0626\u064a\u0633\u064a\u0629<\/font><\/span><\/a><\/b><\/strong><\/font><\/h3>\n<\/p>\n