Former Fire Chief Challenges Sanction for Unauthorized ISSEP Visit
Lyon, February 21 – The administrative tribunal of Lyon on Thursday, February 12, 2026, examined the appeal of a former fire chief from Villeurbanne-Cusset, who was temporarily excluded from duty for three days in August 2024. The sanction stemmed from an incident in April 2024, where he hosted students from the Institute of Social, Economic and Political Sciences (ISSEP), a private political science school founded by Marion Maréchal, at the fire station without prior authorization from his superiors.
Unauthorized Visit Leads to Disciplinary Action
The former chief, who also headed the “East group,” allowed the students to interact with fire equipment, including sports gear, and answered their questions in a video that was later circulated on YouTube. The key issue was the lack of official permission for the visit and the absence of insurance coverage in case of an accident.
On August 23, 2024, the Departmental and Metropolitan Fire and Rescue Service (SDMIS) of Rhône and Lyon Metropolis, along with Rhône Prefect Fabienne Buccio, issued a three-day temporary exclusion as a disciplinary measure against Xavier Eginard, the fire chief involved.
Allegations of Disloyalty and Image Association
Authorities accused Eginard of “associating the image of the SDMIS with ISSEP without referring to his hierarchy.” While Eginard, who retired on September 1, 2024, had previously been publicly associated with Eric Zemmour’s “Reconquête!” movement during the 2022 presidential elections as a “security delegate” – an affiliation not cited in this specific case – the current disciplinary action focuses solely on the unauthorized ISSEP visit.
Eginard maintains that given his role and responsibilities, he did not commit any disciplinary offense and sought to have the sanction annulled, requesting €30,000 in damages. He was neither present nor represented by a lawyer at the tribunal hearing.
Tribunal Deliberates on “Breach of Loyalty”
During the hearing on February 12, 2026, the public rapporteur acknowledged that there was no specific procedure in place for hosting students at a fire station, suggesting that the mere act of hosting students without prior notification might not be considered a fault in itself. However, the rapporteur argued that Eginard’s participation in the video “without taking precautions regarding the impact on the image of the SDMIS” constituted “negligence” and a “breach of his duty of loyalty.” Consequently, the rapporteur recommended rejecting Eginard’s appeal.
The lawyer representing the SDMIS and the prefecture also asserted that the “faults” were “established” in the case, emphasizing that the video remains accessible on social media. He suggested that further action might be necessary to ensure its removal.
The administrative tribunal of Lyon has reserved its judgment and is expected to render a decision in the coming weeks. Since the incident, Xavier Eginard returned to ISSEP in January 2025 to deliver a conference titled “The Courage to Command: A Leader’s Choice.”
Background and Context
This case highlights the complexities faced by public service officials regarding external engagements and the need for clear protocols concerning institutional image and authorization. The SDMIS seeks to maintain neutrality and avoid any perceived political endorsements, especially in an era of heightened public scrutiny.
The decision of the tribunal is anticipated to set a precedent for similar situations, clarifying the boundaries of professional conduct for public servants when interacting with external organizations, particularly those with political affiliations. The outcome will be closely watched by both public institutions and political organizations.
The incident also underscores the growing influence of social media, as the persistent availability of the video played a significant role in the ongoing legal arguments. The SDMIS’s concern over the video’s continued presence suggests a broader challenge in managing digital footprints and their implications for institutional reputation.
The administrative tribunal’s ruling will be crucial in defining the scope of “duty of loyalty” for public officials in France, especially concerning their interactions with politically aligned entities. This case serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between individual freedom of association and the professional obligations of public service.
The legal proceedings underscore the importance of clear guidelines for public servants when engaging with external groups, particularly in politically charged environments. The tribunal’s final decision will provide further clarity on these matters.
