Don't think that. I complied with the rules for my last trip to Germany (TXL) arriving with my negative <48hrs PCR test (if I did not have it, I would have needed to have it upon arrival and quarantine), but 0 control on arrival. Same experience in Italy end of august. This entire thing is a complete joke.

My interpretation is that if coming from an extra-european country you will be tested either at departure or on arrival. Just like what they did with high risk countries the last 3 months..


Otherwise, his tweets confirmed that you need a compelling reason to travel abroad. Basically, another restriction to individual freedoms.

This source is unreliable and often very late in updating. It's a small group of EU bureaucrats trying to interpret and google translate for some 30 countries..
Only national official websites (and TIMATIC) carry the official information.

Same at FRA and DUS...

This more or less reproduces what was in an earlier decree and which has been in force since the removal of the lockdown last June. What it says is that prefects (i.e. representatives of the State at local level) are empowered to take certain measures regarding the isolation of individuals arriving in France. It does not require them to do so (except for individuals who have covid-19 symptoms). It is just there to make sure that they have the powers in case it is needed. It does not, in itself, mean that they will use them, at any rate at this point and time.

Actually, I do not think that it is "extremely clear". The legislation limiting movements to specific purposes is silent regarding its application to international movements so it is a question of interpretation whether it applies to them or not. If you read it literally and assume that it applies to international movements, then it would apply to inbound movements as well as outbound movements. It would mean that a French national, for instance, could only enter France for one of the specified reasons as listed on the attestation derogatoire.
I don't think that this reading is correct. The rules on confinement are not designed to apply to international movements. They are meant to restrict movements within France to limit the spread of the virus on the territory. There are covid-related rules regarding international movement but this is a distinct set of rules with its own, distinct system of attestation derogatoire (from which (inter alia) French nationals and intra-EU movements are exempted).

Now, you could argue that perhaps the lockdown rules do not cover international travel but they in any event prevent all domestic travel and therefore travel to the airport from your home and that, even if you were allowed to go abroad, you are not allowed to go to the airport unless for one of the reasons listed in the attestation derogatoire. This is true on a literal reading of the legislation but, if so, it is also true for inbound as well as outbounds movements. So, it would mean that somebody whose entry to France is otherwise authorised would, on arrival in France, have to remain at the airport until the lockdown is lifted or turn back to their country of origin (or another country willing to accept them). I don't think that this is a correct reading either. I would have thought that an exception for domestic travel linked to international travel must also be read in the legislation.

In truth, it seems to me that the question of international travel did not even enter the mind of the legislator when drafting the lockdown rules. They are simply not designed with international travel in mind and I cannot find any official document that suggests that the lockdown rules apply to international travel. Now, whether you'd be able to have a meaningful discussion on this with your average cop stopping you on your way to the airport is another matter but if you do reach the airport, I would be extremely surprised if you were stopped at the border.by a DCPAF officer. AIUI, the DCPAF applies rules relating to international travel (including restrictions on entry for individuals coming from non-EU countries from which movement is restricted on covid grounds) but do not concern themselves with lockdown rules as such. Some of the contributors on this board, including highly respected ones, think that this is not the case. Do we have evidence for this or is this just an assumption?

FWIW, I traveled from abroad (intra-EU) yesterday (i.e. after the "tolerance" period), including traveling about 150 kms by public transport (train and bus) between the airport and my home in France. My passport was checked on entry into France but no question was asked regarding the purpose of my travel nor my final destination, etc...

When traveling between the airport and my home, I was not asked any question either so I cannot tell what would have happened had I been asked for an attestation. There were police officers at one of the stations but they were just patrolling normally and were not checking attestations. They did ask one person who was not wearing their face mask properly to put it right but that was about it in terms of covid rules enforcement.

Someone travelling to France from abroad could always tick the "motif familial imp�rieux" and then go from the airport to his home without any problem. You are always entitled to go back to your home country.

Travelling from your home to the airport to begin a tourism itinerary is really something different and not covered by the attestation.

Regarding the controls, you may or not may be controlled. But if you are, you risk a fine and loosing your ticket. That's how it is. Regarding the rules, they are no different if going from Paris to CDG to board a flight to Cancun or to the Gare de Lyon to catch a train to Marseille. I'm sure most people won't be controlled, but it does not mean that it will never be the case.

Why isn't the international travel question not covered by the decree ? Because the government knows perfectly that it's illegal to forbid it's citizens to leave the country. So they are happy that the "d�placement d�rogatoire" don't even allow you to go to the airport without a compelling reason.

Really hope that someone denied at an airport border will raise this issue to a court, so we will have a clear answer. Since, what's sure is that we will never have a clear answer on whether the controls are enforced or not.

i will tell you saturday .. i m going to work .. then after flying bsl cdg gru... if i m denied i will report..
but for airfrance nothing needed since flying from bsl
to go to the airport is easy .. planned with my boss

But if you work you will be allowed for sure. That's not a problem. What we are complaining about is the fact that you cannot leave the country for another purpose that those stated on the attestation. The question is how heavy the controls are at the border. If you want to provide us a useful report, show only your passport at the border and tell us if you were ask for any additional document

Wish I would be able to travel to GRU just to escape the french nightmare for the next weeks.... Enjoy your trip.

To be honest i m only going with my passeport..no paper ... so i will do a full report ... when i asked airfrance should i book stuttgart ams gru instead she said no bsl departure is OK to not be stopped in cdg....
but report samedi

I'm supposed to take off tomorrow from TLS to MAD. I'm gonna go only with my passport, since it is perfectly legal for anyone to leave the country, attestation or not (whether I can enter Spain is a matter for the Spanish authorities, not the PAF). I will report tomorrow on how it went

Really? Remember that the ground of derogation is "motif familial imp�rieux" and not merely "motif familial". I can see how "motif familial imp�rieux" covers the situation where, for instance, my mother or brother is taken to hospital with a critical condition and I rush to go and see her or him or to look after their home if there is an urgent risk, etc... I am not clear how it would justify my traveling to see my spouse or partner because I miss them, for instance. Even if we were to give the "motif familial imp�rieux" a very wide definition that more or less equates it to "motif familial", what justification would that offer to a person who live on their own?
... in the same way as you are entitled to leave it, at least in the Western world. In the case of intra-EU movement, the right to leave your country to go into another EU country is even explicitly mentioned in EU legislation. I am not sure that your point is here.

... there may other reasons which are neither tourism nor work why one might travel but that is besides the point. The point is whether the restrictions on domestic travel in the decree apply to domestic travel to/from the airport in connection with inbound or outbound international travel. If you consider that they do apply, then it would mean, for instance, that a foreign national and resident would have to demonstrate that they fall in one of the exceptions listed on the attestation derogatoire before being allowed to travel to the airport to fly home and, conversely, that a French resident would have to show that they too fall in one of those exceptions to be allowed to travel from the airport to their home

If you are correct, this would mean that somebody residing abroad would not be allowed to travel to the airport to return home unless they can tick a box on the attestation derogatoire or that a French resident returning from abroad would not be allowed to travel from the airport to their place of residence unless they too can tick a box on the attestation derogatoire. Is this really your position? If not and If you accept that either of these categories can travel, then you accept that domestic and international travel are not the same and that there are derogations related to international travel which are not listed on the attestation derogatoire that would not avail for purely domestic travel.

I am not sure I follow you there. If international travel is not covered by the decree, then it means that it is allowed and, if it s allowed, then it is a necessary implicit corollary that I must be able to travel to/from the airport.

Then we'll see. You sound optimistic to me.

I don't think that a government can politically justify letting bookshops and hairdressers closed while allowing it's resident to go partying every week-end in Stockholm or Rio de Janeiro and coming back (even if they are tested).

They just don't want this to happen.

I'm sure we will see people on the forums being fined for going to an airport just to fly for leisure. We will see in the coming weeks.

The minister responsible of transport does not share your point of view. You need the so-called attestation to go abroad, and this attestation does not cover leisure travel even if it's abroad.

i dont think people will be fined at the airport .....
but if you are going for leisure be ready to go back home ..
but really d�pend on the police officer ...
My friend went yesterday to cayenne and nothing asked...
Only pcr of course

Hi there. I'm planning a trip from Italy to Spain.
I tought to do LIN-CDG with AZ and CDG-MAD with AF: two separate tickets, only hand baggage.
I can do it as usually I suppose to do in the "pre covid era", or I can't do a "self connection" due to some reason? Can I simply I'll go to the new gate, once arrived in CDG without doing security check, healty check and so on?
Many thanks