French National Financial Prosecutor’s Office

► Full reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, “What the Legislator can, or cannot, do: the example of the French judicial public interest […]

► Full reference : P. Goossens, « Quand se justifie et quand s’arrête la collaboration ? À propos de la CJIP » (When Is Cooperation Justified and When Does It End? On the CJIP), in M.-A. Frison-Roche and M. Boissavy (eds.), Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquête interne – CJIP – CRPC, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. “Régulations & Compliance“, 2024, pp. 309-315. - ► English Summary of this article (made by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance – JoRC) : The author explains that, in the classical legal system, the lawyer engages in a “defence by opposition”. The so-called “Sapin 2” law adds to it a “defence by cooperation”, which fits more or less well with the former. The article lists both the advantages and the drawbacks of the logic of cooperation that the lawyer must take on. With pragmatism, the lawyer must handle both, in particular so that the rights of the defence of the company and its interests find their place in the CJIP mechanism.

► Full reference : E. Russo, « L’enquête interne au cœur des enjeux de conformité et de justice négociée : analyse de la position de l’AFA et du PNF » (The Internal Investigation at the Heart of Compliance and Negotiated Justice Issues: an Analysis of the Position of the AFA and the PNF), in M.-A. Frison-Roche and M. Boissavy (eds.), Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquête interne – CJIP – CRPC, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. “Régulations & Compliance“, 2024, pp. 123-129. - ► English Summary of this article (made by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance – JoRC) : The author takes up and relies on the publications by the National Financial Prosecutor’s Office (PNF) and the French Anti-Corruption Agency (AFA) of updated guidelines on the judicial public interest agreement (CJIP) and of a practical guide on internal investigations, which show the continuum between the two and express a willingness to cooperate with companies, in an international context and on an Anglo-Saxon model. The author stresses that the investigation is at the heart of Compliance for companies, in that it ensures the effectiveness of many requirements of the so-called “Sapin 2” law, such as whistleblowing, and strengthens the whole. Regarding the rights of the defence, both those of the persons interviewed and those of the company, which must not remain passive, the author stresses that the legislator could frame internal investigations more closely and considers that, when the investigation reaches a certain scale, the company has an interest in entrusting its conduct to a lawyer. Moreover, he clearly takes the view that it is desirable for the lawyer to combine the role of investigator with that of defender of the company, contrary to the recommendation of the AFA and the PNF, which see them as incompatible.

► Full reference : J.-F. Bohnert, « Les conditions de réussite de l’enquête interne dans les rapports entre le Parquet national financier et l’entreprise mise en cause – l’enquête interne au soutien de la défense de l’entreprise » (The Conditions for a Successful Internal Investigation in Relations between the National Financial Prosecutor’s Office and the Company Concerned – the Internal Investigation in Support of the Company’s Defence), in M.-A. Frison-Roche and M. Boissavy (eds.), Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquête interne – CJIP – CRPC, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. “Régulations & Compliance“, 2024, pp. 77-82. - ► English Summary of this article (made by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance – JoRC) : In his contribution, the National Financial Prosecutor recalls that he has expressed his conception of internal investigations in guidelines and a guide, documents which “describe a practice and meet objectives of transparency and predictability for the public and economic players”. He considers that a company confronted with a suspected offence must decide whether to launch an internal investigation, in particular in order to reorganise itself. If this approach contributes to establishing the truth, it will be credited in any subsequent proceedings. The conditions and procedures of the investigation must be satisfactory, in particular as regards the gathering of information, the procedural guarantees offered to persons and the drafting of the investigation report. If the report reveals “conduct not in compliance with the procedures established internally”, the company may draw the judicial and/or disciplinary consequences. The author stresses that the analysis must be carried out independently of the drafting of the report so as not to bias the presentation of the facts. It is recalled that the guidelines invite the company to spontaneously inform the PNF of the facts revealed by the investigation, which allows the company to claim a “negotiated and softened criminal response” because of this “attitude of cooperation and good faith” and the “seriousness” of the investigations carried out, while the PNF conducts a criminal investigation. The PNF may moreover request disclosure of the execution reports, engagement letters, etc. of the internal investigation. On the other hand, a “defensive” internal investigation, for example opened after the opening of the criminal investigation, could be counterproductive. Conversely, cooperation may be established, the PNF being able to propose a document framing an internal investigation, a timetable, etc., which may result in continuous links between the PNF and the company throughout the internal investigation. The PNF considers that, if lawyers intervene in this context, they must be different from those who intervene in the parallel or subsequent criminal proceedings.

► Full reference : J.-Fr. Bohnert, « Les conditions de réussite de l’enquête interne dans les rapports entre le parquet national financier et l’entreprise mise en cause – l’enquête interne au soutien de la défense de l’entreprise » (The Conditions for a Successful Internal Investigation in Relations between the National Financial Prosecutor’s Office and the Company Concerned – the Internal Investigation in Support of the Company’s Defence), in M.-A. Frison-Roche and M. Boissavy (eds.), Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquête interne – CJIP – CRPC, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. “Régulations & Compliance“, 2024, pp. 77-82. - ► English Summary of this article (made by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance – JoRC) : In a presentation very close to the 2023 guidelines of the National Financial Prosecutor’s Office (PNF) and to the soft law produced with the French Anti-Corruption Agency (AFA), the author sets out how the company must act in a climate of trust and cooperation. The company must objectively investigate what could engage its criminal liability, in a transparent and fair manner, bearing in mind the possible cooperation with the PNF with a view to a CJIP and the credit the PNF gives to the company’s diligence in conducting an internal investigation, just as contrary attitudes are logically considered as opposite factors in the calculation.

🌐 follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn 🌐 subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law - ► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le PNF devrait avoir ouvertement compétence en matière de CJIP environnementale : la CJIP "Guy Dauphin Environnement" du 17 mai 2023" ("The French National Financial Prosecutor’s Office should have open jurisdiction over environmental Judicial Public Interest Agreement: the "Guy Dauphin Environnement" Judicial Public Interest Agreement of 17 May 2023"), Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, 20 May 2023. - 📧Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation - 🔴 The Judicial Public Interest Agreement GDE of 15 May 2023 or how the French National Prosecutor's Office is rightly meddling in Environmental Compliance The Parquet National Financier (French National Financial Prosecutor’s Office) does not have jurisdiction over environmental matters, and this is regrettable. For it is very well placed to obtain, in particular for the benefit of associations, adequate measures for the future, which refers to the definition of Compliance Law. This is what he is actually achieving through the Convention judiciaire d'intérêt public – CJIP (Judicial Public Interest Agreement) GDE. - 📧read the article ⤵️

► Full Reference: Convention judiciaire d'intérêt public – CJIP (Judicial Public Interest Agreement), Parquet national financier – PNF (French National Financial Prosecutor's office) and Guy Dauphin Environnement, 15 May 2023. - 🏛️read the agreement (in French) - 📧read the article published in the Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation, entitled "Le PNF devrait avoir ouvertement compétence en matière de CJIP environnementale : la CJIP "Guy Dauphin Environnement" du 17 mai 2023" ("The French National Financial Prosecutor’s Office should have open jurisdiction over environmental Judicial Public Interest Agreement: the "Guy Dauphin Environnement" Judicial Public Interest Agreement of 17 May 2023") -

► Full Reference: Agence française anticorruption – AFA (French Anti-Corruption Agency) and Parquet national financier – PNF (French National Financial Prosecutor's Office), Internal anti-corruption investigations. Practical Guide, march 2023.  - 📜read the guide -