Confidence in the Judiciary: What to Expect from France's Newly Proposed Bill

By: Chioma Menankiti

Edited By: Claire Lu and Tess Ballis

At a time when state survival depends heavily on confidence in institutions,[1] the French Minister of Justice, Eric Dupond-Moretti, has proposed a bill that reforms several aspects of French judiciary practice so as to increase public confidence in the country’s judiciary. The bill, termed ‘Bill for Confidence in the Judiciary,’ was presented to the French parliament in April this year by the Minister who claimed to have been inspired by a study conducted by SciencesPo Cevipof on public confidence in French Institutions.[2] The study showed that over 50% of the French public do not have confidence in the French justice system.[3] Participants expressed that their lack of confidence was founded on inadequate resources for judges to perform their responsibilities, a lack of independence of judges from political influences, and a bad-functioning judiciary system in the country.[4] In a bid to address this issue, Mr. Dupond-Moretti proposes some reforms to strengthen judicial guarantees, improve trial and sentence execution provisions and increase confidence in legal professionals.[5] Some of the pertinent provisions of this bill are discussed in this article. 

The first article of the bill provides for trials to be filmed and publicized, a practice which, except in some specific cases, is currently prohibited.[6] By allowing for this new possibility, the Minister aims to improve the knowledge the public has of the functioning of the country’s judiciary. The bill provides for the protection of minors, the authorization of parties, the right of retraction and the publication only after a verdict is reached. France, however, is not the first country to adopt televised proceedings as part of its judicial practice. In the US, popular cases like the O.J. Simpson trials were televised, and countries such as the United Kingdom[7] and Australia[8] have authorized video recordings of court proceedings on some occasions. Filmed proceedings can be advantageous  for educating the public on the judicial process and for inciting judges to be more impartial due to the public pressure on them. Moreover, as judges in France do not publish information on their verdicts,[9] televised proceedings could be revolutionary in educating law students. Despite these clear benefits, televised proceedings have been strongly criticized for inciting public hostility towards defendants[10] and for shifting focus from the pursuit of justice to the pursuit of fame.[11] Therefore, it is possible that this provision which seeks to improve public confidence in the judiciary may result in just the opposite. 

The second article shortens preliminary investigations to two years, allowing for an increase by a year for matters of delinquency, organized crime and terrorism due to their relative complexity.[12] The bill expresses that this article is driven by respect for the rights of victims and suspects as the former, for example, could suffer emotionally while awaiting justice for the wrongs committed against them. Although people often complain about the tardiness of preliminary investigations,[13] a research conducted by the Mattei Commission found that in 2020, over 70% of investigative procedures were concluded within six months of their initiation and almost 93% of all procedures last less than two years.[14] This suggests that the second article of the bill would only bring minor modifications to the current system in the conduct of preliminary investigations. It thus appears that the importance of this article lies in its reassurance to the public that justice will not be delayed. Moreover, the provision is important as it commits France to the goal of the ECHR that everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time.[15]

The third article of interest, Article 9, seeks to improve the current provision relating to the execution of sentences.[16] The article will terminate the application of the current penalty reduction system, which awards convicts automatic sentence reduction credits, and impose a new system scheduled to take effect on January 1st, 2023. The current penalty reduction system has been in use since 2004 but was criticized by the supporters of the proposed bill for being incomprehensible to citizens.[17] The bill proposes a new system where the judge can grant a sentence reduction to a convict who has shown sufficient proof of good or rehabilitative behavior. This radical change to the current system has faced condemnation for its “risk of lengthening short sentences and complicating reintegration”,[18] thus contradicting article 14 of the proposed bill whose purpose is to facilitate the reintegration of convicts into society by improving their social and labour rights.

In a similar light, article 11 of the bill establishes a prison employment contract system where convicts would be connected with a company, service or association responsible for the activities carried out by the convicts.[19] If passed, this provision will replace the current prison labor system, where prisoners, if they wish, can sign an act of engagement with the prison administration and complete tasks with different departments within the prison premises for a minimum wage of €1.62 ($1.97).[20] While this new system may award prisoners useful skills and work experience to aid their reinsertion into the society, evidence from the U.S. has shown that using cheap prison labor for work with private companies has produced some negative consequences. In the U.S., this system provides incentives for private companies employing cheap prison labor to lobby for policies that increase incarceration rates so as to maximize their profits.[21] With this outcome, there is a possibility that the practice, which in American correctional facilities has been termed “modern-day slavery,”[22] will produce similar results in France. Nonetheless, a lot remains unclear concerning this provision, such as the detainees’ remuneration and whether the employment will be compulsory or optional. This information is crucial in assessing the full impact this new system could have on public confidence in the French judiciary.

Although the bill for the Confidence of the judiciary addresses several aspects of the French judiciary, it fails to address more pressing issues like the link between the public prosecutor and the Minister of Justice. In France, public prosecutors are under the authority of and therefore accountable to the Minister of Justice. This close relationship between the judiciary and executive increases the risk of judiciary actions being influenced by the executive, especially in high profile cases involving politicians.[23] This conflict of interest is reflected in the prosecutor’s responsibilities, which include both supervising police investigations and representing the public during prosecutions- a judiciary function, and developing and implementing criminal justice policies- an executive function.[24] This arrangement even led the European Court of Human Rights to decide in Moulin v France n° 37104/06, that the public prosecutor was too attached to the executive to oversee Habeas Corpus rights in France.[25] Thus, in order to increase public confidence in the judiciary, this link must be eliminated. 

Once can be positive that the proposed bill will bring about important revolutionary changes to several aspects of the French judiciary that would potentially result in a more efficient, trustworthy judicial system in the country. The provisions of the bill target key areas of judicial practice that inform the public and contribute to legal education, improve prisoners’ employability, and ensure that justice is rendered timely amongst others. These are all characteristics of a good-functioning judiciary system and put France on the right track towards addressing the worries the public expressed with the current judicial system (see Paragraph 1). With the bill past its first hearing, eyes are on the Minister of Justice to see whether his bill, if passed, will indeed increase public confidence in the French judiciary.

Notes:

1. Miguel João, José Ramos, Sara Domingos, and Rui Cardoso. “The Independence Of The Judiciary In The Democratic Balance Of The 21st Century,” 2018.

2. Delphine Gotchaux et Mathilde Lemaire. “Réforme de la justice : trois questions sur le projet de loi présenté par Éric Dupond-Moretti en conseil des ministres,” Franceinfo, April 14, 2021. https://www.francetvinfo.fr/societe/justice/reforme-de-la-justice-trois-questions-sur-projet-de-loi-presente-par-eric-dupond-moretti-en-conseil-des-ministres_4370919.html

3. Claire Gatinois, and Jean-Baptiste Jacquin. “Eric Dupond-Moretti : « Les procès en laxisme sont intentés par les populistes extrémistes ».” Le Monde, April 14, 2021. https://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2021/04/14/eric-dupond-moretti-les-proces-en-laxisme-sont-intentes-par-les-populistes-extremistes_6076695_3224.html.

4. Sciences Po Cevipof. “En Quoi les Français ont-ils Confiance Aujourd’hui?- Vague 12”  Opinion Way, February, 2021 https://www.opinion-way.com/fr/sondage-d-opinion/sondages-publies/opinionway-pour-le-cevipof-barometre-de-la-confiance-en-politique-vague-12-fevrier-2021/viewdocument/2516.html

5. "45% des Français n’ont pas confiance en la justice.” Atlantico. March 28, 2017, https://atlantico.fr/article/pepite/45-des-francais-n-ont-pas-confiance-en-la-justice.

6. Assemblée Nationale. “Projet de loi no 4091 pour la confiance dans l’institution judiciaire.” https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/15/textes/l15b4091_projet-loi.

7. Gov.uk. “Cameras to Broadcast from the Crown Court for First Time.” 16 January, 2020 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cameras-to-broadcast-from-the-crown-court-for-first-time.

8. High Court of Australia. “Audio-Visual Recordings of Full Court Hearings in Canberra,” https://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/recent-av-recordings.

9. “How to Do French Legal Research | Law Library of Congress.” May 3, 2012. https://www.loc.gov/law/help/legal-research-guide/france.php

10. “Arguments For and Against Allowing Television Cameras into the courtroom,” https://www.unl.edu/eskridge/cj211cameras.html

11. Georgia Harley. “How Long Is Too Long? When Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied.” World Bank Blogs, March 25 2015.  https://blogs.worldbank.org/europeandcentralasia/how-long-too-long-when-justice-delayed-justice-denied

12. Assemblée Nationale. “Projet de loi no 4091 pour la confiance dans l’institution judiciaire.” https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/15/textes/l15b4091_projet-loi.

13. Adelaide Jacquin, and Emmanuel Daoud. “Projet de loi pour la confiance dans la justice: aspects de procédure pénale”, Dalloz Actualité, 28 April, 2021. https://www.dalloz-actualite.fr/flash/projet-de-loi-pour-confiance-dans-justice-aspects-de-procedure-penale.

14. Commission Relative aux Droits de la Défense dans l’Enquête Pénale et au Secret Professionnel de l’Avocat. “Le Renforcement de l’Équilibre des Enquêtes Préliminaires et du Secret Professionnel de l’Avocat” https://www.dalloz-actualite.fr/sites/dalloz-actualite.fr/files/resources/2021/02/rapport_-_commission_mattei.pdf.

15. Georgia Harley. “How Long Is Too Long? When Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied.” World Bank Blogs, March 25 2015.  https://blogs.worldbank.org/europeandcentralasia/how-long-too-long-when-justice-delayed-justice-denied

16. Assemblée Nationale. “Projet de loi no 4091 pour la confiance dans l’institution judiciaire.” https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/15/textes/l15b4091_projet-loi.

17. Ibid. 

18. Adelaide Jacquin, and Emmanuel Daoud. “Projet de loi pour la confiance dans la justice: aspects de procédure pénale”, Dalloz Actualité, 28 April, 2021. https://www.dalloz-actualite.fr/flash/projet-de-loi-pour-confiance-dans-justice-aspects-de-procedure-penale.

19. Assemblée Nationale. “Projet de loi no 4091 pour la confiance dans l’institution judiciaire.” https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/15/textes/l15b4091_projet-loi.

20. “Travail en prison.” October, 2021 https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F14153

21. Cindy Wu, and Prue Brady. “Private Companies Producing with US Prison Labor in 2020: Prison Labor in the US, Part II”, Corporate Accountability Lab, August 5, 2020. https://corpaccountabilitylab.org/calblog/2020/8/5/private-companies-producing-with-us-prison-labor-in-2020-prison-labor-in-the-us-part-ii.

22. Alexia Fernández Campbell. “The Federal Government Markets Prison Labor to Businesses as the ‘Best-Kept Secret.’” Vox, August 24, 2018. https://www.vox.com/2018/8/24/17768438/national-prison-strike-factory-labor.

23. Jacqueline Hodgson, and Laurène Soubise. “Prosecution in France” Oxford University Press, 2017. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2980309.

24. Ibid.

25. Nicole Atwill. “European Court of Human Rights; France: Applicant’s Police Custody Rights Violated as Public Prosecutor Not Competent Legal Authority Under Article 5 § 3” Law Library of Congress. December 13, 2010. //www.loc.gov/law/foreign-news/article/european-court-of-human-rights-france-applicants-police-custody-rights-violated-as-public-prosecutor-not-competent-legal-authority-under-article-5-3/

Bibliography:

“Arguments For and Against Allowing Television Cameras into the courtroom,” https://www.unl.edu/eskridge/cj211cameras.htl

“How to Do French Legal Research | Law Library of Congress.” May 3, 2012. https://www.loc.gov/law/help/legal-research-guide/france.php

“Travail en prison.” October, 2021 https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F14153

Adelaide, Jacquin and Emmanuel  Daoud. “Projet de loi pour la confiance dans la justice : aspects de procédure pénale”, Dalloz Actualité, 28 April, 2021. https://www.dalloz-actualite.fr/flash/projet-de-loi-pour-confiance-dans-justice-aspects-de-procedure-penale.

Assemblée Nationale. “Projet de loi no 4091 pour la confiance dans l’institution judiciaire.” https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/15/textes/l15b4091_projet-loi.

Atlantico.fr. "45% des Français n’ont pas confiance en la justice.” March 28, 2017, https://atlantico.fr/article/pepite/45-des-francais-n-ont-pas-confiance-en-la-justice.

Atwill, Nicole. “European Court of Human Rights; France: Applicant’s Police Custody Rights Violated as Public Prosecutor Not Competent Legal Authority Under Article 5 § 3” Law Library of Congress. December 13, 2010. www.loc.gov/law/foreign-news/article/european-court-of-human-rights-france-applicants-police-custody-rights-violated-as-public-prosecutor-not-competent-legal-authority-under-article-5-3/

Campbell, Alexia Fernández. “The Federal Government Markets Prison Labor to Businesses as the ‘Best-Kept Secret.’” Vox, August 24, 2018. https://www.vox.com/2018/8/24/17768438/national-prison-strike-factory-labor.

Commission Relative aux Droits de la Défense dans l’Enquête Pénale et au Secret Professionnel de l’Avocat. “Le Renforcement de l’Équilibre des Enquêtes Préliminaires et du Secret Professionnel de l’Avocat” https://www.dalloz-actualite.fr/sites/dalloz-actualite.fr/files/resources/2021/02/rapport_-_commission_mattei.pdf.

Delphine, Gotchaux et Mathilde, Lemaire. “Réforme de la justice : trois questions sur le projet de loi présenté par Éric Dupond-Moretti en conseil des ministres,” Franceinfo, April 14, 2021. https://www.francetvinfo.fr/societe/justice/reforme-de-la-justice-trois-questions-sur-projet-de-loi-presente-par-eric-dupond-moretti-en-conseil-des-ministres_4370919.html

Gatinois, Claire, and Jacquin, Jean-Baptiste. “Eric Dupond-Moretti : « Les procès en laxisme sont intentés par les populistes extrémistes ».” Le Monde.fr, April 14, 2021. https://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2021/04/14/eric-dupond-moretti-les-proces-en-laxisme-sont-intentes-par-les-populistes-extremistes_6076695_3224.html.
tps://www.gov.uk/government/news/cameras-to-broadcast-from-the-crown-court-for-first-time.

Harley, Georgia. “How Long Is Too Long? When Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied.” World Bank Blogs, March 25 2015.  https://blogs.worldbank.org/europeandcentralasia/how-long-too-long-when-justice-delayed-justice-denied

High Court of Australia. “Audio-Visual Recordings of Full Court Hearings in Canberra,” https://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/recent-av-recordings.

Jacqueline, Hodgson and Laurène, Soubise. “Prosecution in France” Oxford University Press, 2017. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2980309.

Miguel, João, José Ramos, Sara Domingos, and Rui Cardoso. “The Independence Of The Judiciary In The Democratic Balance Of The 21st Century,” 2018.

Reginia, Judge. “Cut! Arguments Against Televising Trials,” North East Journal of Legal Studies, 2014.

Sciences Po Cevipof. “En Quoi les Français ont-ils Confiance Aujourd’hui?- Vague 12”  Opinion Way, February, 2021 https://www.opinion-way.com/fr/sondage-d-opinion/sondages-publies/opinionway-pour-le-cevipof-barometre-de-la-confiance-en-politique-vague-12-fevrier-2021/viewdocument/2516.htm

Vie publique.fr. “Projet de loi pour la confiance dans l’institution judiciaire.” https://www.vie-publique.fr/loi/279445-loi-confiance-dans-linstitution-judiciaire-reforme-dupond-moretti.

Wu, Cindy and Brady, Prue. “Private Companies Producing with US Prison Labor in 2020: Prison Labor in the US, Part II”, Corporate Accountability Lab, August 5, 2020. https://corpaccountabilitylab.org/calblog/2020/8/5/private-companies-producing-with-us-prison-labor-in-2020-prison-labor-in-the-us-part-ii.