Food for thoughts

♾️ suivre Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

♾️s'abonner à la Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Référence complète : M.-A. Frison-Roche, "synthèse", in I. Grossi (dir.), La société vigilante, Université d'Aix-Marseille, Institut de Droit des Affaires, 24 mars 2023.

____

► lire la présentation de l'introduction du colloque, également opérée : "Les buts monumentaux de la vigilance"

____

🧮Consulter le programme complet de cette manifestation

____

Cette réflexion finale a servi de base à un article ; La vigilance, pièce du puzzle européen. Lire le document de travail sous-jacent.

____

► Présentation de la synthèse : La synthèse du colloque a été réalisée sur le vif, à partir des notes prises au fur et à mesure du déroulement de la journée. L'écoute des uns et des autres a fait ressortir 4 points qu'il aurait été difficile d'isoler dans une partie du droit positif, parce qu'il a été manifeste que les propos ont porté parfois sur la Compliance, parfois sure l'obligation de vigilance, parfois sur le devoir de vigilance et le plus souvent sur la loi du 27 mars 2017, laquelle a donc servi de porte d'entrée à l'ensemble des réflexions. Mais elle n'a été qu'une porte d'entrée.

Le premier point est justement l'impression d'une ampleur de tantôt de "gloire" et tantôt d'"indignité" qui ont été déversées sur cette loi Vigilance. Les intervenants ont donc fortement divergé.

Le deuxième point est l'impression à l'inverse générale et commune, pour que les orateurs s'en félicitent, s'en inquiètent, s'en réjouissent ou s'en effondrent, d'un grand mouvement auquel nous assistons et que la Vigilance traduit ou/et porte.

Le troisième point est la multiplicité des branches du Droit qui sont utilisées ou touchées, là encore qu'on s'en réjouisse ou pas, et la nécessité de dépasser ces branches du Droit. Face à la Vigilance, des disciplines peuvent apparaître en opposition, tandis que des branches du Droit semblent entrer comme en résistance. La majorité des intervenants ont souligné que les branches du Droit, cette loi n'étant alors que l'expression d'un mouvement plus vaste, la Vigilance dépassant la Loi Vigilance, sont activées et transformées. Il en est ainsi du Droit international et du Droit processuel. L'idée étant que la Vigilance pourrait bien être l'expression d'une branche du Droit spécifique et nouvelle : le Droit de la compliance. Au-delà de la compréhension de ce qui se passe, l'enjeu technique est d'articuler les branches du Droit concernées, notamment dans le rapport entre dispositions spéciales et principes, entre Droit spécial et Droit commun.

Le quatrième point est l'absence de définition de la vigilance. L'on en a peu davantage entendu de ce que pourrait être une "entreprise vigilante"...L'existence d'un devoir portant sur une situation précise suffit-elle à transformer toute l'entreprise et que devient-elle alors dans son entier ?  Art pratique, le Droit n'aime pas les mystères. Car comment bien manier un instrument juridique dont la définition varie, dont on ne connaît que le régime, lequel varie au gré des réglementations, diverses et changeantes, ? Peut-elle varier selon les secteurs, selon les entreprises, selon les divers contrats qui sont partout ? 

Peut-être, en conclusion et comme cela fût évoqué par certains, au-delà de la directive attendue sur la Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence, c'est plus largement dans le puzzle des définitions que le Droit de l'Union européenne est en train de construire, en corrélation avec le reporting extra-financier, que l'on pourra trouver, dans la conception systémique et humaniste portant l'identité européenne, voire sa souveraineté, ce qui donne sens et simplicité à la Vigilance.

____

✏️lire les notes prises sur le vif pour opérer la synthèse

____

📝lire l'article publié suite à cette conférence

________

♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️ subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full reference: M.A. Frison-Roche, Thinking and using Vigilance through its Compliance Monumental Goals, Working Paper, March 2023.

____

🎤 This Working Paper has been done as basis for the  introduction of the colloquia La société vigilante ("Vigilant Company") at the Aix-Marseille University on March 24, 2023 (conference given in French) 

____

📝It is also the basis of the article that introduces a special issue on La société vigilante

____

► Summary of the Working Paper: The concept of "Vigilance" is difficult to define. Probably because even as it is becoming a standard, it has just entered the legal systems. And what a splash it is! To understand it, it must not be isolated. Neither in the only French law attracting all the attention, all the fears, all the hopes, the so-called Loi Vigilance ("Vigilance Law"), nor in the only technical mechanisms that make Vigilance a reality.

Vigilance is itself only a part of a deeper movement, of which it is the advanced point, allowing us to anticipate the evolution of the whole: Compliance Law.

In this light and for not getting lost in it, because the stakes are so high that one quickly loses the measure of things, with each party lashing out at the others, so Vigilance, the key element of Compliance, requires above all alliances,  that we can first examine the entry of Vigilance into the legal system and then understand it through the Monumental Goals which give the measure of it, i.e. both the scope and the limit, each one having to act within the margins that are theirs, States, companies, stakeholders, and judges.

A Will for tomorrow can then emerge today, carried by Europe.

____

🔓read the Working Paper⤵️

♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️ subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, Laws, Compliance, Contracts, and Judges: places and alliances, Working Paper, March 2023.

____.

📝this working paper is the basis for an article published in French (click HERE) in the 📚chronique of Compliance Law held in the Recueil Dalloz.

____

📚Read the other articles published by this Compliance Law Chronicle. open since 2018.

____

►Summary of this Working Paper: To understand the functioning of compliance systems in the articulation of the legal actors and the legal instruments used, whatever the technical sector considered, it is necessary to put the "law", the "contract" and the "judge" back into the perspective of legitimacy and efficiency regarding what Compliance is. 

At the very least, it is a 'conformity' mechanism. In this process of simple obedience, legislators, economic operators, and judges find themselves in the position of having to obey the law in a hierarchical conception.

In a more dynamic and ambitious conception, when Compliance Law is not reduced to a more astute method of obedience but draws substantial normativity from the Monumental Goals pursued, legislators and operators enter an alliance. The contract becomes a major instrument, and the Judge becomes a major actor, no longer to punish the non-obedient but to facilitate the links to help a sustainable system. 

Faced with issues such as digital, climatic, and technological challenges, where we are each so weak and isolated, we must not limit our conception and practices to the instrument of conformity but choose the substantial Compliance Law, i.e. the alliance of forces, which puts forward the contract and renews the office of the judge, with the Public Authorities remaining legitimate in setting the Monumental Goals since they commit the future of the social group.

________

🔓read bellow the developments⤵️

► 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

________

Le Droit se prête si bien au cinéma au travers de ces deux personnages spectaculaires que sont le juge et l'avocat, et leur sorte d'accessoire sans lesquels ils n'existeraient pas que sont le coupable, l'innocent, la victime, le voleur, etc. Des branches du Droit!footnote-2827, le pénal y est le plus chatoyant et l'on retrouve peu de notaires ou de tous les autres personnages que l'étudiant en Droit apprend à connaître.

Et précisément les professeurs de Droit qui enseignent cette immense matière sont presque absents des films. Le peu qu'ils y sont représentés est donc d'autant plus précieux.

Ainsi le film Just Cause, sorti en 1995, met en scène comme personnage principal, interprété par Sean Connery, Paul Amstrong, dans une histoire à rebondissements autour d'un jeune homme noir qui attend son exécution après sa condamnation pour avoir assassiner une petite fille atrocement, ce qu'il nie.

Sa grand-mère vient à une conférence où le professeur défend une position par principe hostile à la peine de mort, soulignant ce qu'il estime être la barbarie de l'électrocution, le nombre d'innocents exécutés et le pourcentage de noirs victimes d'erreurs judiciaires, débattant avec un collègue qui défend la peine de mort au nom des victimes ayant subi des atrocités.

L'on ne le revoit plus dans cette activité-là, où son titre de "professeur" lui est toujours donné, puisqu'il accepte le cas et commence alors pour lui une série d'aventures et de mésaventures.

Mais la représentation du professeur de droit est la suivante :

1. L'on comprend par la suite qu'il exerce à Harvard, qu'il a jadis aussi pratiqué, mais que depuis 25 ans il ne le fait plus. Il veut d'ailleurs refuser de prendre le cas car il considère qu'il ne "connait plus la réalité".

2. L'opposition est toujours faite entre lui, si savant dans les livres (qu'il se garde de citer) mais si ignorant des faits, en général et en particulier, le cas s'étant déroulé dans une petite ville du Sud des Etats-Unis.

L'on retrouve dans ce film l'idée commune que les professeurs de droit sont des sortes d'ânes savants, inaptes à comprendre vraiment ce qu'est la vie, par exemple qui sont les meurtriers et qui sont les victimes, qualifications pour lesquelles du sens commun est préférable (incarné par une institutrice) mais dont il est dépourvu, de par sa science juridique et de par sa classe sociale.

L'on retrouve ici sous ce personnage du "professeur de droit" la question du savant, ici le savant en droit, à comprendre les situations, à les reconstituer et à les qualifier, l'idée - fortement américaine - semblant être que l'enfermement dans un amphithéatre, ne sortant que pour faire des conférences tranchées, ne rendant peu apte.

♾️follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, , F. Ancel, N. Roret, "Les juges vont être de plus en plus présents dans le droit de la compliance" ("Judges will be more and more involved in Compliance Law"), interview with Olivia Dufour, Actu-Juridique, 1st March 2023.

____

💬read the interview (in French)

____

► Presentation of the interview by the journal (in French) : "À l’instigation du professeur Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, l’École nationale de la magistrature (ENM) a proposé pour la première fois début février une formation en compliance à destination des magistrats et des avocats. François Ancel, conseiller la Cour de cassation, Nathalie Roret, avocate et directrice de l’ENM et Marie-Anne Frison-Roche plaident d’une seule voix pour le renforcement du rôle des acteurs judiciaires dans la compliance."

____

► Questions asked (in French): 

• D’où est venue l’idée d’aborder ce droit en cours d’émergence qui semble encore très confidentiel ?

• En effet, on croit souvent savoir ce qu’est la compliance, en la confondant avec la conformité, pouvez-vous expliquer ce qui les distingue ?​​

• On constate, en lisant le programme de la formation, que toutes les branches du droit sont concernées par la compliance depuis le droit des sociétés jusqu’au pénal en passant par les contrats et la responsabilité. Pouvez-vous nous donner des exemples ?​

• Comment se redistribuent les rôles entre les avocats, les juges et les entreprises dans cette nouvelle configuration qu’est la compliance ?​

• En quoi est-ce important pour les magistrats d’appréhender ce nouvel univers ?​

• Ces transformations sont-elles cantonnées à la compliance ou peuvent-elles sortir de son champ ?​

• Par exemple qu’en est-il de la question très controversée du rôle de l’avocat à l’égard du juge ?​

• Avez-vous constaté lors de cette formation une amélioration du dialogue entre les différents acteurs ?​

• Cette formation va-t-elle être instituée de manière permanente dans la formation des magistrats et des avocats ? Une autre manifestation est-elle prévue ?

________

► Full reference: ECHR, Grand chamber, 14 February 2023, Halet c. Luxembourg, n° 21884/18.

____

► Read the judgment 

____

► See the judgment of the third section of the 11th May 2021 which is overruled by this decision.

________

► Full reference: Conseil constitutionnel (French Constitutional Council), decision n°2022-1035, QPC, 10 February 2023, Société Sony interactive entertainment France et autre

____

► Read the decision (in French)

________

♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️ subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Conforter le rôle du Juge et de l'Avocat pour imposer la Compliance comme caractéristique de l'État de Droit" ("Reinforce the Judge and the Attorney to impose Compliance Law as a characteristic of the Rule of Law"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 29-55. 

____

► This article is the introduction of the book.  

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper which is the basis of this article, with additional developments, technical references and hyperlinks 

____ 

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): One can understand that the compliance mechanisms are presented with hostility because they seem designed to keep the judge away, whereas there is no Rule of Law without a judge. Solid arguments present compliance techniques as converging towards the uselessness of the judge (I). Certainly, we come across magistrates, and of all kinds, and powerful ones, but that would be a sign of imperfection: its ex-ante logic has been deployed in all its effectiveness, the judge would no longer be required... And the lawyer would disappear so with him...

This perspective of a world without a judge, without a lawyer and ultimately without Law, where algorithms could organize through multiple processes in Ex Ante the obedience of everyone, the "conformity" of all our behaviors with all the regulatory mass that is applicable to us, supposes that this new branch of Law would be defined as the concentration of processes which gives full effectiveness to all the rules, regardless of their content. But supposing that this engineer's dream is even achievable, it is not possible in a democratic and free world to do without judges and lawyers.

Therefore, it is imperative to recognize their contributions to Compliance Law, related and invaluable contributions (II).

First of all, because a pure Ex Ante never existed and even in the time of the Chinese legists, people were still needed to interpret the regulations because a legal order must always be interpreted Ex Post by who must in any case answer the questions posed by the subjects of law, as soon as the political system admits to attributing to them the right to make claims before the Judge. Secondly the Attorney, whose office, although articulated with the Judge's office, is distinct from the latter, both more restricted and broader since he must appear in all cases where the judicial figure puts himself in square, outside the courts. However, Compliance Law has multiplied this since not only, extending Regulatory Law, it entrusts numerous powers to the administrative authorities, but it also transforms companies into judges, in respect of which the attorneys must deal with.

Even more so, Compliance Law only takes its sense from its Monumental Goals. It is in this that this branch of the Law preserves the freedom of human beings, in the digital space where the techniques of compliance protect them from the power of companies by the way that the Compliance Law forces these companies to use their power to protect people. However, firstly, it is the Judges who, in their diversity, impose as a reference the protection of human beings, either as a limit to the power of compliance tools or as their very purpose. Secondly, the Attorney, again distinguishing himself from the Judge, if necessary, reminds us that all the parties whose interests are involved must be taken into consideration. In an ever more flexible, soft, and dialogical Law, everyone presenting himself as the "advocate" of such and such a monumental goal: the Attorney is legitimate to be the first to occupy this place.

________

🌐♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le juge, l'obligation de compliance et l'entreprise. Le système probatoire de la Compliance" ("The judge, the compliance obligation, and the company. The Compliance probationary system"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p 409-442.

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper which is the basis of this article, with additional developments, technical references and hyperlinks 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): the article aims to identify the link that must be established between the company in its relationship with the compliance obligations it assumes and the judges to whom it is accountable in this respect: this link is established by evidence. The evidentiary system of proof has yet to be constructed, and it is the purpose of this long study to lay the groundwork. 

To this end, the article begins with a description of what is designated here as the "probatory square" in a "probatory system" that is superimposed on the system of rules of substantive legal system. This is all the more important because Compliance seems to be in frontal collision in its very principles with the general principles of the evidentiary system, in particular because it seems that the company would have to prove the existence of the Law or that it would have to bear in a definitive way the burden of proving the absence of violation, which seems to be contrary not only to the presumption of innocence but also to the principle of the freedom of action and of undertaking. In order to re-articulate Compliance Law, the obligations of compliance which legitimately weigh on the company, it is necessary to return to the probatory system specific to Compliance, so that it remains within the Rule of Law. This presupposes the adoption of a substantial definition of Compliance, which is not only compliance with the rules, which is only a minimal dimension, but implies that Compliance Law should be defined by the Monumental Goals on which the public authorities and the companies are in substantial alliance.

The evidentiary system of principle makes play between its four summits that are the burden of proof, the objects of proof this evidentiary square of principle, between the burden of proof, the means of proof and their admissibility. Compliance Law does not fall outside this evidential square, thus marking its full membership of the Rule of Law

In order to lay the foundations of the evidential system specific to Compliance Law, the first part of the article identifies the objects of proof which are specific to it, by distinguishing between the structural devices, on the one hand, and the expected behaviours, on the other. The first involves proving that the structures required to achieve the Monumental Goals of Compliance have actually been put in place. The object of proof is then the effectiveness of this implementation, which presents the effectiveness of the system. As far as behavioral obligations are concerned, the object of proof is the efforts made by the company to obtain them, the principle of proportionality governing the establishment of this proof, while the systemic efficiency of the whole reinforces the evidential system. However, the wisdom of evidence lies in the fact that, even though the principle remains that of freedom of evidence, the company must establish the effectiveness, efficiency, and effectiveness of the whole, independently of the burden of proof.

The second part of the article concerns those who bear the burden of proof in Compliance Law. The latter places the burden of proof on the company in principle, in view of its legal obligations. This burden comes from the legal origin of the obligations, which blocks the "round of the burden of proof". But in the interference of the different vertices of the evidentiary square, the question becomes more delicate when it comes to determining the contours of the compliance obligations that the company must perform. Moreover, the burden of proof may itself be the subject of proof, just as the company's performance of its legal obligations may also be the subject of contracts, which brings us back to the evidentiary system ordinarily applicable to contractual obligations. The situation is different when it comes to a "compliance contract" or when it comes to one or more compliance stipulations, concepts that are still not very well developed in Contract Law. 

Furthermore, as all branches of Law belong to a legal system governed by the Rule of Law, other branches of law interfere and modify the methods and solutions of proof. This is the case when the fact, which is the object of proof, can give rise to a sanction, the Law of repression imposing its own solutions in the matter of the burden of proof. 

In the third part of the article, the relevant means of proof in Compliance Law are examined, used in that Compliance Law is above all a branch of Law whose object is on the one hand information and on the other hand the Future. Open questions remain, such as whether companies could be forced by the Judge to build technologies to invent new means of proof. To show that they are indeed achieving the Monumental Goals they are charged with. 

In the fourth part, the vital character of the pre-constitution of evidence is shown, which is the reflection of the Ex-Ante nature of Compliance Law: evidence must be pre-constituted to avoid the very prospect of having to use it, by finding all the means to establish the effectiveness, efficiency and even the effectiveness of the various Compliance Tools. 

If companies do all this methodically, the Compliance evidence system will be established, in harmony with the general evidence system, Compliance Law and the Rule of Law.

________

► Full Reference: F. Ancel, "Le principe processuel de compliance, un nouveau principe directeur du procès ?" (The procedural principle of compliance, a new trial leading principle?), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 225-230. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): Through this article, the author formulates a proposal: elevating the principle of compliance to the rank of leading principle of the trial. To support this, the author firstly emphasizes the convergence of the aims of compliance and the purpose of the trial. Indeed, emphasizing that Compliance Law does not oust either the State or the judge, as soon as compliance means that the person must keep their commitments and that the trial is also based on this principle that the parties must conform to the principles and to their own "speech", compliance thus becomes a trial leading principle.

In a second part of the article, the author illustrates his point in a very concrete way. First, the protocols of procedure which are drawn up by the courts and the bars are commitments which should justify a form of constraint which, if it should not have the same form and nature as that of the law, must all the same even have consequences when a party fails to do so. Secondly, relying on French case law which sanctions a party which had accepted the principle of an arbitration and then systematically hinders its implementation, the author suggests that under the principle of compliance can be grouped the notions for the instant scattered of loyalty, consistency (estoppel) and efficiency.

Thus, this "open practice" echoing the "open way" of a procedural principle of compliance brings out this one.

________

► Full Reference: N. Cayrol, "Des principes processuels en droit de la compliance" ("General Procedural Law in Compliance Law"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 213-224. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): We could be satisfied with examining the reception of the principles of general Procedural Law in compliance litigation and the distortion that compliance techniques justify in procedural mechanisms. But the innovation that constitutes this emerging branch of law that is Compliance Law justifies going to more fundamental.

From this perspective, the pertinent question is the very legitimacy of procedural principles in this branch of law, in that Procedural Law is built on the notion of “Litigation” while Compliance Law deals with situation so enormous, concerning for example the fate of the planet, that this notion of litigation appears inadequate, and consequently the procedural law would be too limited in compliance matters.

If, however, this perspective is maintained of Compliance Law facing, in an almost warlike perspective, the greatest current challenges, general Procedural Law needs to be redesigned, in its very definition. Indeed, compliance trials call into question the future of systems and it is as such that they hold the entities, for instance the enterprises, that are at the heart of these systems. It is in this that liability trials are more “accountability” trials, allowing the judge to demand actions for the future, trials by which commitments are made and the “intentions” of the persons involved are challenged and required.

________

► Full Reference: Ch. Lapp, "La compliance dans l'entreprise : les statuts du process" ("Compliance in the company: the statues of processes"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p.141-150. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► The summary below describes an article following the colloquium L'entreprise instituée Juge et Procureur d'elle-même par le Droit de la Compliance (The Entreprise instituted Judge and Prosecutor of itself by Compliance Law) , co-organized by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and the Faculté de Droit Lyon 3. This manifestation was designed under the scientific direction of Marie-Anne Frison-Roche and Jean-Christophe Roda and took place in Lyon on June 23, 2021. During this colloquium, the intervention was shared with Jan-Marc Coulon, who is also a contributor in the book (see the summary of the Jean-Marc Coulon's  Article).

In the book, the article will be published in Title I, devoted to:  L'entreprise instituée Juge et Procureur d'elle-même par le Droit de la Compliance (The Entreprise instituted Judge and Prosecutor of itself by Compliance Law ).

____

► Summary of the article (done by the author): The Company is caught in the grip of Compliance Law, the jaws of which are those of Incitement (1) and Sanction that the Company must apply to ensure the effectiveness of its processes to which it is itself subject (2 ).

First, the Company has been delegated to fabricate reprehensible rules that it must apply to itself and to third parties with whom it has dealings. To this end, the Company sets up "processes", that is to say verification and prevention procedures, in order to show that the offenses that it is likely to commit will not happened.

These processes constitute standards of behavior to prevent and avoid that the facts constituting the infringements are not themselves carried out. They are thus one of the elements of Civil Liability Law in its preventive or restorative purposes.

Second, the sanction of non obedience of Compliance processes puts the Company in front of two pitfalls. The first  dimension place the company, with regard to its employees and its partners, in the obligation to define processes which also constitute the quasi-jurisdictional resolution of their non-compliance, the company having to reconcile the sanction it pronounces with the fundamental principles of classical Criminal Law, constitutional principles and all fundamental rights. The processes then become the procedural rule.

The second dimension is that the Company is accountable for the effectiveness of the avoidance by its processes of facts constituting infringements. By a reversal of the burden of proof, the Company is then required to prove that its processes are efficient. at least equivalent to the measures defined by laws and regulations, the French Anti-Corruption Agency (Agence Française Anticorruption - AFA), European directives and various communications on legal tools to fight breaches of probity, environmental attacks and current societal concerns. The processes then become the constitutive element, per se, of the infringement.

Thus, in its search for a balance between Prevention and Sanction to which it is itself subject, the Company will not then be tempted to favor the orthodoxy of its processes over the expectations of the Agence Française Anticorruption - AFA , regulators and judges, to the detriment of their efficiency?

In doing so, are we not moving towards an instrumental and conformist Compliance, paradoxically disempowering with regard to the Compliance Monumental Goals of Compliance?

________

► Full Reference: J. Heymann, "La nature juridique de la "Cour suprême" de Facebook" ("The legal nature of Facebook's "Supreme court""), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 151-167. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► The summary below describes an article following the colloquium L'entreprise instituée Juge et Procureur d'elle-même par le Droit de la Compliance , co-organized by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and the Faculté de Droit Lyon 3. This manifestation was designed under the scientific direction of Marie-Anne Frison-Roche and Jean-Christophe Roda and took place in Lyon on June 23, 2021.

In the book, the article will be published in Title I, devoted to: The Entreprise instituted Judge and Prosecutor of itself by Compliance Law.

____

► Summary of the article (done by the author): Taking place in the general theme aiming at making “words and things coincide”, the article offers some thoughts on the “conditions of the discourse” – in the sense in which Foucault understood it in his Archéologie des sciences humaines – relating to the phenomenon of “jurisdictionalization” of Compliance.

            The thoughts are more specifically focusing on the nature of the so-called “Supreme Court” that Facebook instituted to hear appeals of decisions relating to content on the digital social networks that are Facebook and Instagram. Is this really a “Supreme Court”, designed in order to “judge” the Facebook Group?

            A careful examination of the Oversight Board – i.e. the so-called “Supreme Court” created by Facebook – reveals that the latter, in addition to its advisory mission (which consists of issuing policy advisory opinions on Facebook’s content policies), exercises some form of adjudicative function. This is essentially conceived in terms of compliance assessment, of the content published on the social networks Facebook or Instagram with the standards issued by these corporations on the one hand, of content enforcement decisions taken by Facebook with the Law on the other hand. The legal framework of reference is yet rather vague, although its substantial content seems to be per se evolutive, based on the geographical realm where the case to be reviewed is located. An adjudicative function can therefore be characterized, even if the Oversight Board can only claim for a limited one.

            The author can ultimately identify the Oversight Board as a preventive dispute settlement body, in the sense that it seems to aim at avoiding any referral to state courts and ruling before any court’s judgement can be delivered. Some questions are thus to be raised, relating with both legitimacy and authority of such a Board. But whatever the answers will be, the fact remains that the creation of the Oversight Board by a private law company already reveals all the liveliness of contemporary legal pluralism.

________

► Full Reference: E. Silva-Romero and R. Legru, "Quelle place pour la Compliance dans l'arbitrage d'investissement ?" ("What place for Compliance in investment arbitration?"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 281-293. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► The summary below describes an article that follows an intervention in the scientific manifestation Compliance et Arbitrage, co-organised by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and the University Panthéon-Assas (Paris II). This conference was designed by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche and Jean-Baptiste Racine, scientific co-directors, and took place in Paris II University on March 31, 2021. 

In the book, the article will be published in Title II, devoted to: Compliance et Arbitrage.

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): The authors emphasize the new and growing place of Compliance in International Arbitration, particularly in the requirement of respect for ethical values, since arbitrators can implement Ethics, sometimes lacking in international trade, or even must put their power only at the service of investors who respect the Rule of Law.

Thus, Compliance is deployed through the classic control by the arbitrators of the legality of the investment, which applies both to the establishment of the treaty itself and to the investor. In a more recent way, the arbitrator can control about an investment project a sort of "social license to operate" of the investor, concept related to the social responsibility of the companies, appeared for the protection of the peoples indigenous. Moreover, Compliance can justify a substantial assessment by the arbitrator of the effective respect of the human rights and the environment protection via an investment treaty, the State party remaining able to act for the effectiveness of these concerns.

________

► Full reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, co-organisation de la formation ENM Droit de la Compliance, co-organisé entre l'École nationale de la magistrature et le Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC), les 2 et 3 février 2023. 

____

► General presentation of the course: The two-day session is designed for magistrates and practicing lawyers who are not necessarily specialized, to enable them, based on concrete cases, to understand the issues, objectives, and methods of compliance mechanisms in companies, including the increasing judicialization and the supranational dimension strengthen, modifying the office of the judge and the role of lawyers.

The analysis is made from the angle of Civil Law (contract, tort), Company Law, Labor Law and Criminal Law, but also governance, financial markets, regulatory, climate and digital issues.

____

► Brief bibliography: 

• M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023.
• ​M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), Compliance Monumental Goals, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2022.
• M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), Compliance Tools, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2021.
• N. Borga, J.-Cl. Marin, J.-Ch. Roda (dir), Compliance : l'entreprise, le régulateur et le juge, coll. Régulations & Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2018.
• M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), Pour une Europe de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2019.
• M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), Régulation, Supervision, Compliance, coll. "Régulations", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2017.

____

► Will speak: 

🎤François Ancel, Judge at the Première chambre civile de la Cour de cassation ( First civil chamber of the Court of Cassation)

🎤Guillaume Beaussonie, Professor at Toulouse 1 Capitole University 

🎤Jean-François Bohnert, Procureur national financier 

🎤Gilles Briatta, Group General Secretary of the Groupe Société Générale 

🎤Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, Director of the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC)

🎤Cécile Granier, senior lecturer at Jean-Moulin Lyon 3 University 

🎤Jean-Michel Hayat, Premier Président honoraire de la Cour d'appel de Paris

🎤Christophe Ingrain, Avocat à la Cour 

🎤Anne-Valérie Le Fur, Professor at Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines University 

🎤Stanislas Pottier, Senior Advisor to the General Management of Amundi

🎤Jean-Baptiste Racine, Professeur à l'Université Panthéon-Assas (Paris II)

🎤Juliette Thery, Membre du Collège de l'Arcom

____

Lire une présentation détaillée de la manifestation ci-dessous⤵️

♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

♾️ subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le jugeant-jugé. Articuler les mots et les choses face à l'éprouvant conflit d'intérêts" ("The Judge-Judged. Articulating words and things in the face of the testing conflict of interest"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche, (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 59-80. 

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper which is the basis of this article, with additional developments, technical references and hyperlinks

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): Since the topic of this article is part of a chapter devoted to the Company established as Prosecutor and Judge of itself by Compliance Law, chapter aiming to use the relevant qualifications, it is appropriate therefore to worry about the adjustment of words and things, of the way in which the relationship between ones and the others evolve, and of the more particular question of knowing if this evolution is radical or not when one speaks of "judge ".

because "judging" is a word that the Law has disputed with other disciplines, but that it has appropriated not so much to confer more powers on those who act in its name, for example that who supervise and punish, but on the contrary to impose limits, since to the one who judges it has put the chains of the procedure under foot, thus making bearable for the other the exercise of such a power. Therefore, those who want the power to judge would often want to not have the title, because having de jure the title of judge is being subject to the correlated regime, it is to be submitted to procedural correctness.

It is therefore to better limit that the Law sees who judges, for obliging this so-powerful character to the procedure. But the Law also has the power to appoint a judge and to fix the contours of all the characters in the trial. He usually does it with clarity, distinguishing the ones of the others, not confusing them. This art of distinction has constitutional value. Thus, not only the one who judges must be named "judge" but the procedural apparatus which goes with this character, and which constitutes a way of doing things and fundamental rights, are not "granted" by kindness or in a second step: it is a block. If you didn't want to have to endure procedural rights, you didn't have to want to be a judge. Admittedly, one could conclude that the procedure would therefore have become "substantial"; by this elevation, it is rather a fashion of saying that the procedure would no longer be a "servant": it is a kind of declaration of love for the procedure, as long as one affirms that at the acts of judging , or investigating, or prosecuting, are "naturally" attached the procedural rights for the one who is likely to be the object of these powers.

Compliance Law, in search of allies to achieve the Monumental Goals for the aims of which it was instituted, will require, or even demand, private companies to go and seek themselves, in particular through investigations. internal or active vigilance on others, for finding facts likely to be reproached to them. Compliance Law will also require that they prosecute those who have committed these acts. Compliance La will again demand that they sanction the acts that people have committed in their name.

This is clearly understood from the point of view of Ex Ante efficiency. The confusion of roles is often very efficient since it is synonymous with the accumulation of powers. For example, it is more efficient that the one who pursues is also the one who instructs and judges, since he knows the case so well... Besides, it is more efficient that he also elaborates the rules, so he knows better than anyone the "spirit" of the texts. This was often emphasized in Regulatory Law. When everything is Information and risk management, that would be necessary ... But all this is not obvious.

For two reasons, one external and the other internal.

Externally, the first reason is that it is not appropriate to "name" a judge who is not. This would be too easy, because it would then be enough to designate anyone, or even to do it oneself to appropriate the regime that goes with it, in particular for obtain a so-called legitimate power for obtaining that others obey even though they are not subordinate or from them they transmit information, even though they would be  competitors: it would then be necessary to remember that only the Law is able to appoint judge ; in this new Compliance era, companies would be judges, prosecutors, investigators!  Maybe, if the Law says it, but if it didn't, it would be necessary to come back to this tautology ... But are we in such a radicalism? Moreover, do judges have "the prerogative" of judgment and the Law has not admitted this power for companies to judge for a long time? As soon as the procedure is there in Ex Ante and the control of the judge in Ex Post?

The second reason, internal to the company, situation on which the article focuses, is that the company investigates itself, judges itself, sanctions itself. However, the legal person expressing its will only through its organs, we underline in practice the difficulties for the same human being to formulate grievances, as he/she is the agent of the legal person, addressed to the natural person that he/she himself/herself is. The two interests of the two are not the same, are often opposed; how the secrets of one can be kept with respect to the other, represented by the same individual? ... It is all the mystery, even the artifice of legal personality that appears and we understand better that Compliance Law no longer wants to use this strange classical notion. Because all the rules of procedure cannot mask that to prosecute oneself does not make more sense than to contract with oneself. This conflict of interest is impossible to resolve because naming the same individual X then naming him/her Y, by declaring open the dispute between them does not make sense.

This dualism, which is impossible to admit when it comes to playing these functions with regard to corporate officers, can come back to life by setting up third parties who will carry secrets and oppositions. For example, by the designation of two separate lawyers for the human being agent and the human being representative of the legal person, each lawyer being able to have secrets for each other and to oppose each other. These spaces of reconstitution of the so "natural" oppositions in procedure between the one who judges and the one who is judged can also take the technological form of platforms: where there is no longer anyone, where the process has replaced the procedure, there is no longer any human judgment. We can thus see that the fear of conflicts of interest is so strong that we resign ourselves to saying that only the machine would be "impartial", a derisory conception of impartiality, against which it is advisable to fight.

This then leads to a final question: can the company claim to exercise the jurisdictional power to prosecute and judge and investigate without even claiming to be a prosecutor, an investigating judge, or a court? The company's advantage would be to be able to escape the legal regime that classical Law attaches to its words, mainly the rights of the defense and the rights of action for others, the principle of publicity of justice for everyone, which expresses the link between procedure and democracy. When Facebook said on June 12, 2021 "react" to the decision of May 5, 2021, adopted by what would only be an Oversight Board to decide "as a consequence" of a 2-year suspension of Donald Trump's account, the art of qualifications seem to be used in order to avoid any regime constraint.

But this art of euphemism is very old. Thus, the States, when they wanted to increase repression, presented the transformation of the system as a softening of it through the "decriminalization" of Economic Law, transferred from the criminal courts to the independent administrative agencies. The efficiency was greatly increased, since the guarantees of the Criminal Procedure ceased to apply. But 20 years later, Words found their way back to Things: under Criminal Law, slept the "criminal matter", which requires the same "Impartiality". In 1996, a judge once affirmed it and everything was changed. Let us therefore wait for what the Courts will say, since they are the masters of qualifications, as Article 12 of the French Code of Civil Procedure says, as Motulsky wrote it in 1972. Law has time.

________

► Full Reference: S. Schiller, "Un juge unique en cas de manquement international à des obligations de compliance ?" ("A single judge in the event of an international breach of compliance obligations?"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 453-464. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the author, translated by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): Given the very international nature of the topic apprehended, the actors involved and therefore the compliance disputes, it is essential to know if a person can be implicated before several judges, attached to different states or even if he can be condemned by several jurisdictions. The answer is given by the non bis in idem principle, which is the subject of a abondant case law on the basis of Article 4 of Protocol n°7 of the ECHR, clearly inapplicable for jurisdictions emanating from different States.

To assess whether breaches of compliance obligations may be subject to multiple sanctions in different states, it will first be necessary to ascertain whether there is a textual basis to be invoked.

At European level, Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights now allows the principle of ne bis in idem to be invoked. Applicable to all areas of compliance, it provides very strong protection which covers not only sanctions, but also prosecutions. Like its effects, the scope of Article 50 is very broad. The procedures concerned are those which have a repressive nature, beyond those pronounced by criminal courts in the strict sense, which makes it possible to cover the convictions pronounced by one of the many regulatory authorities competent in matters of compliance.

Internationally, the situation is less clear. Article 14-7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights may be invoked, if several obstacles are overcome, including the decision of 2 November 1987 of the Human Rights Committee which restricted it to the internal framework, requiring a double conviction by the same State.

Even if these principles are applicable, two specificities of compliance situations risk hampering their application, the first related to the applicable procedural rules, in particular the rules of jurisdiction, the second related to the specificities of the situation.

The application of the non bis in idem rule is only formally accepted with regard to universal jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction, that is to say extraterritorial jurisdiction, which is only part of the jurisdiction. . The Cour de cassation (French Judiciary Supreme Court) confirmed this in the famous so-called “Oil for food” judgment of March 14, 2018. The refusal to recognize this principle as universal, regardless of the jurisdiction rule in question, deprives French companies of a defense. Moreover, the repression of breaches of compliance rules is more and more often resolved through transactional mechanisms. The latter will not always fall within the scope of European and international rules laying down the non bis in idem principle, for lack of being sometimes qualified as "final judgment" under the terms of Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 14-7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Breaches in terms of compliance are often based on multiple acts. This results from prescriptions the starting point of which is delayed at the last event and a facilitated jurisdiction for French courts when only one of the constitutive facts is found in France. In terms of compliance, the non bis in idem principle therefore generally does not protect companies and does not prevent them from being sued before the courts of two different countries for the same case. It nevertheless grants them another protection by obliging them to take into account foreign decisions in determining the amount of the penalty. The sanction against Airbus SE in the Judicial Convention of Public Interest (CJIP) of January 29, 2020 is a perfect illustration of this.

Breaches in terms of compliance are often based on multiple acts. This causes delays in the starting point of prescriptions, starting point delayed at the last event, and this facilitates judicial jurisdiction for French courts when only one of the constitutive facts is found in France. In terms of compliance, the non bis in idem principle therefore generally does not protect companies and does not prevent them from being sued before the courts of two different countries for the same case. It nevertheless grants them another protection by obliging them to take into account foreign decisions in determining the amount of the penalty. The sanction against Airbus SE in the Convention judiciaire d'intérêt public -CJIP (French Judicial Convention of Public Interest)  of January 29, 2020 is a perfect illustration of this.

________

► Full Reference: A. Bruneau, "L'entreprise juge d'elle-même : la fonction compliance dans la banque" ("The company judge of itself: the compliance function inside the bank"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 115-131. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the author): First of all, it should be remembered that the compliance function was born within finance, and that by being structured, it has evolved to support the transition from regulatory law to compliance law. Through these changes, compliance has gone from an ex-post controlling function to an ex-ante binding function. The LIBOR crisis imperfectly illustrates the primacy of this transition. The evolution of this role is illustrated by concrete examples

Firstly, the management of reputational risk is a fundamental part of the company as prosecutor and judge of itself. Reputational risk is a significant element for a financial institution, because it can have negative consequences on its capitalization, or even culminate in a systemic crisis. Avoiding a large-scale financial crisis is also part of the monumental goals of compliance.

In order to avoid complex and inopportune scenarios, compliance law intervenes as early as possible and identifies issues that may impact reputation. The regulations require the implementation of certain ex ante mechanisms. The French law known as "Sapin 2" requires the implementation of tools that concern all companies (and not just banks). Indeed, beyond the risk of reputation, it is essential to consider the risk of corruption. Consideration of reputational risk may justify refusing to execute certain transactions. From this perspective, compliance must assess the potential consequences of entering into a relationship with a new client upstream, sometimes to decline the provision of services. The compliance function therefore unilaterally judges the relationship with a view to managing the company reputational risk.

Secondly, the internal sanction mechanism established by compliance law is also discussed in this article, in particular the internal sanctions adopted by compliance in a financial institution.

Compliance can act as a prosecutor via management committees set up within the business lines. In addition, compliance can determine and apply sanctions against employees. In this way, there is a dual role of prosecutor and judge for the compliance function within the framework of an extraordinary mechanism of ordinary law.

Finally, the analysis deals with the case of the "judge-judged": following a decision by the bank, the regulator may take an even stricter position by believing that the bank is applying its guidelines incorrectly. Thus, the compliance law, which takes hold within the banking enterprise, finds itself under the judgment of its own regulator. The company finds itself judged and comes to be a prosecutor and judge of itself, but also of its clients.

__________

► Full Reference: A. Bavitot, "Le façonnage de l'entreprise par les accords de justice pénale négociée" ("Shaping the company through negotiated Criminal Justice Agreements"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 187-198.  

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the author): Negotiated justice is "the situation in which the criminal conflict is the object of a trade in the etymological sense of the term negotio, i.e. a debate between the parties to reach an agreement".

Thus, the French legislator has succumbed to globalized mimicry by creating the Convention judiciaire d'intérêt public (Public Interest Judicial Agreement), first in matters of probity and then in environmental matters. What is the nature of this deal of justice? Validated by a judge's order, it does not entail any declaration of guilt, has neither the nature nor the effects of a judgment of conviction and is not registered in the judicial record. Possible at the investigation stage as well as at the pre-trial stage, the Public Interest Judicial Agreement is original in that it makes it possible to avoid either the prosecutor's proceedings or the judge's wrath.

A detailed study of the agreements signed shows that in order to negotiate in the best possible way, the company can and must shape itself. The company will shape the facts of its agreement, shape its charge and, finally, shape its sentence. The article offers a concrete analysis of these three dimensions of corporate shaping to better approach understanding the legal nature of negotiated criminal justice agreements.

________

► Full Reference: S. Scemla and D. Paillot, "La difficile appréhension des droits de la défense par les autorités de contrôle en matière de compliance" ("The supervisory authorities face difficulties to apprehend the rights of the defence in Compliance matters"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 241-249.

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the authors): Since 2016, French companies subject to the provisions of the so-called “Sapin 2” Law must implement eight stringent anti-corruption measures, such as a risk mapping, a whistleblowing procedure or a third-party due diligence procedure.

To ensure their compliance with these obligations, the Sapin 2 law created the Agence française anticorruption - AFA (French Anti-Corruption Agency), which had been assigned three missions: firstly, to help any person prevent and detect corruption; secondly, to control the quality and effectiveness of the anti-corruption programs deployed by the companies; and thirdly, to sanction any breaches, through its Sanctions Committee.

As pointed out by the French Conseil d’Etat, the powers devolved to the administrations have multiplied and became stratified. While the Conseil d'Etat suggests to improve both the conduct and the effectiveness of administrative controls by harmonising their practices and simplifying their prerogatives, it is urgent to remedy the numerous procedural failures that undermine the rights of defence.

In fact, the AFA exercises various powers when undertaking its controls. Some of these powers are not provided for by the Law, and most of them infringe fundamental rights and freedoms among which the adversarial principle and the freedom not to self-incriminate. For instance, the AFA does not necessarily draft minutes of the interviews it conducts, thus depriving the interviewee of the possibility to challenge the statements reported by the AFA to the Sanctions Committee.

From a more structural point of view, the scope of the AFA's mission is extremely broad. The Law allows the AFA to request the communication of "any professional document or any useful information", without defining the notion of usefulness. Also, the AFA considers that the entity cannot benefit from the legal privilege that would cover their documents, and considers that an entity who voluntarily hands over a document, without expressing any reserves, waives its right to the benefit of its legal privilege.

Apart from the severe consequences that could arise if another proceedings was to be initiated by a foreign authority, the concept of "voluntary handover" does not faithfully reflect the reality. Indeed, the controlled entities only cooperate under the threat of being prosecuted on the basis of an obstruction to the control, which compels them to communicate documents even when facing the risk of contributing to their own incrimination.

These many procedural deficiencies encountered during AFA controls must therefore be reformed, as recommended by the Conseil d’Etat, so as to require the authorities to take into account the rights of the defence.

________

♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️ subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, série "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, 500 p. 

____

► This book in few words: Sanctions, controls, appeals, deals: judges and lawyers are everywhere in the Compliance mechanisms, creating unprecedented situations, sometimes without a solution yet available.  Even though Compliance was designed to avoid the judge and produce security by avoiding conflict. This jurisdictionalisation is therefore new. Forcing companies to prosecute and judge, a constrained role, perhaps against their nature. Leading to the adaptation of major procedural principles, with difficulty. Confronting arbitration with new perspectives. Putting the judge at heart, in mechanisms designed so that he is not there. How in practice to organize these opposites and anticipate the solutions? This is the challenge taken up by this book.

____

📘 In parallel, the English version of this book, Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, is published in the series co-published by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant. 

____

📅  This book comes after a  cycle of colloquia organised in 2021 by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and its Academic Partners.

____

This volume is the continuation of the books dedicated to Compliance in this collection.

► Read the presentations of the other books on Compliance in this collection:

• further books:

🕴️M.A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕Le système probatoire de la compliance, 2025

🕴️M.A. Frison-Roche (ed.), 📕L'obligation de compliance, 2024

🕴️M.A. Frison-Roche et M. Boissavy (ed.), 📕Compliance & droits de la défense. Enquête interne - CJIP - CRPC, 2023

• previous books :

🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), 📕 Les buts monumentaux de la Compliance, 2022

🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), 📕 Les outils de la Compliance, 2020

🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), 📕 Pour une Europe de la Compliance, 2019

🕴️N. Borga, N., 🕴️J.-Cl. Marin & 🕴️J.-Ch. Roda (ed.), 📕 Compliance : Entreprise, Régulateur, Juge, 2018

🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), 📕 Régulation, Supervision, Compliance, 2017

🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), 📕 Internet, espace d'interrégulation, 2016

📕 Read the presentations of the other titles of the collection.

____

► General presentation of the book: There have always been Judges and Lawyers in Compliance Law, because this branch of Law is an extension of Regulatory Law in which they have a core place. This results from the fact that the decisions taken in respect of Compliance are contestable in Court, including Arbitration, those issued by the Company, such as those of States or Authorities, the Judge in turn becoming what Compliance Law is effective.

The novelty lies more in the phenomenon of "jurisdictionalisation", that is the trial model penetrates all Compliance Law, and not only the Ex-Post part that it includes. Moreover, it seems that this jurisdictionalisation influences the non-legal dimension of Compliance. This movement has effects that must be measured and causes that must be understood. Advantages and disadvantages that must be balanced. If only to form an opinion vis-à-vis Companies that have become Prosecutors and Judges of themselves and others ...: encourage this "Jurisdictionalisation of Compliance", fight it, perhaps influence it? In any case, understand it!

___

🏗️ General construction of this book:

The book begins by a double Introduction, the first (in free access) summarizing the book, the second, substantial, relating to the need to reinforce the Judge and the Lawyer to impose the Compliance Law as a characteristic of the Rule of Law. 

The first Part is devoted to what is specific to Compliance Law. of Compliance: the transformation of companies into Prosecutors and Judges of themselves, even of others.

The second Part relates to Compliance general procedural Law, the procedure being the way between the dispute and the judgement. 

The third Part continues this journey to the judge and aims to measure the influence of the reasoning and requirements of Compliance Law in dispute resolution methods where it was not, with some exceptions, present, but where it has a great future: Arbitration.

Because trial and judicial decision are inseparable, because legal techniques and the Rule of Law should not be divided but compliance techniques could paradoxically be the weapon of their dissociation, because the power to judge and the procedures surrounding the latter must not be dissociated, because therefore Compliance mechanisms and the Rule of Law must be thought out and practiced then, the rise in power of one must be the sign of the rise in power of the other, and not the price of the 'weakening of the Rule of Law, the fourth Part relates to the Judges in the Compliance mechanisms and culture. 

____

DOUBLE INTRODUCTION

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Lignes de force de l'ouvrage La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance free access to the full text 

🕴️M.A. Frison-Roche, 📝Conforter le rôle du Juge et de l'Avocat pour imposer la Compliance comme caractéristique de l'État de Droit

I. L'ENTREPRISE INSTITUÉE PROCUREUR ET JUGE D'ELLE-MEME ET D'AUTRUI PAR LE DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE ("THE COMPANY ESTABLISHED PROSECUTOR AND JUDGE OF ITSELF AND OTHERS BY COMPLIANCE LAW")

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche,📝 Le "jugeant-jugé". Articuler les mots et les choses face à l'éprouvant conflit d'intérêts 

🕴️C. Granier, 📝Réflexions sur l'existence d'une jurisprudence des entreprises

🕴️L.-M. Augagneur, 📝La juridictionnalisation de la réputation par les plateformes

🕴️A. Bruneau, 📝L'entreprise juge d'elle-même : la fonction compliance dans la banque

🕴️J.-M. Coulon, 📝Le Droit de la Compliance dans le secteur d'activité de la construction et les contradictions, impossibilités et impasses auxquelles les entreprises sont confrontées

🕴️Lapp, Ch., 📝La compliance dans l'entreprise : les statuts du process

🕴️J. Heymann, 📝La nature juridique de la "Cour suprême" de Facebook

🕴️D. Latour, 📝Les enquêtes internes au sein des entreprises

🕴️A. Bavitot,  📝Le façonnage de l'entreprise par les accords de justice pénale négociée

🕴️S. Merabet, 📝La vigilance, être juge et ne pas juger

II. LE DROIT PROCESSUEL À L'OEUVRE DANS LE DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE  ("GENERAL PROCEDURAL LAW IN COMPLIANCE LAW")

🕴️N. Cayrol, 📝Des principes processuels en Droit de la Compliance

🕴️F. Ancel,📝Le principe processuel de compliance, un nouveau principe directeur du procès ?

🕴️B. Sillaman, 📝Secret professionnel et coopération : les leçons de procédure tirées de l’expérience américaine pour une application universelle

🕴️A. Linden, 📝Motivation et publicité des décisions de la formation restreinte de la Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés (CNIL) dans une perspective de compliance

🕴️S. Scemla,🕴️D. Paillot, 📝La difficile appréhension des droits de la défense par les autorités de contrôle en matière de compliance

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Ajuster par la nature des choses du Droit processuel au Droit de la Compliance

III. L'ARTICULATION DE LA COMPLIANCE ET DE L'ARBITRAGE INTERNATIONAL ("ARTICULATION BETWEEN COMPLIANCE LAW AND INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION")

🕴️J.-B. Racine, 📝Compliance et Arbitrage. Essai de problématisation

🕴️E. Silva-Romero,🕴️R. Legru, 📝Quelle place pour la Compliance dans l'arbitrage d'investissement ?

🕴️C. Kessedjian, 📝L'arbitrage au service de la lutte contre la violation des droits de la personne humaine par les entreprises 

🕴️M. Audit, 📝La position de l'arbitre en matière de compliance

🕴️J. Jourdan-Marques, 📝L’arbitre, juge ex ante de la compliance ?

🕴️E. Kleiman, 📝Les objectifs de la compliance confrontés aux acteurs de l’arbitrage

🕴️F.-X. Train, 📝Arbitrage et procédure parallèles exercées au titre de la compliance

🕴️Cl. Debourg, 📝La compliance au stade du contrôle des sentences arbitrales

IV. LE JUGE DANS LE DROIT DE LA COMPLIANCE ("THE JUDGE IN COMPLIANCE LAW")

🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Le juge, l'obligation de compliance et l'entreprise. Le système probatoire de la Compliance

🕴️J. Morel-Maroger, 📝La réception des normes de la compliance par les juges de l'Union européenne

🕴️S. Schiller, 📝Un juge unique en cas de manquement international à des obligations de compliance ?

🕴️O. Douvreleur, 📝Compliance et juge du droit

🕴️F. Raynaud, 📝Le juge administratif et la compliance

🕴️E. Wennerström, 📝Quelques réflexions sur la Compliance et la Cour européenne des droits de l'Homme

________

► Full Reference: F.-X. Train, "Arbitrage et procédures parallèles exercées au titre de la compliance" ("Arbitration and parallel proceedings exercised in Compliance Procedure"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 355-368. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► The summary below describes the article that follows an intervention in the scientific manifestation Compliance et Arbitrage, co-organised by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and the University Panthéon-Assas (Paris II). This conference was designed by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche and Jean-Baptiste Racine, scientific co-directors, and took place in Paris II University on March 31, 2021. 

In the book, the article will be published in the Chapter III, devoted to: Compliance et Arbitrage international.

____

► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): Firstly, the article insists on the principle of the autonomy of the international arbitration procedure, in relation to which parallel procedures remain watertight, whether they are criminal or done under Compliance Law. In the arbitral proceedings taking place independently, the arbitrators before whom the facts also referred to in these parallel proceedings, in particular the facts of corruption, are alleged before them as facts through their unlawful nature: it is at this title that they can and must apprehend them, using the standard of proof which is the bundle of clues.

Secondly, the article highlights the limits of the autonomy of international arbitration. These may be de facto limits because in the search for evidence by arbitrators, red flags are often insufficiently consistent evidence to establish a sentence, especially since this sentence may be subject to control by the judge of its conformity to international public order, the annulment by the judge being able to be based on external elements, even after the arbitration procedure. It may then be wise for the arbitrators, who are not forced to do so, to suspend their proceedings to wait the results of the parallel proceedings initiated under Compliance Law, so that the procedures and their results could be harmonious.

________

► Full Reference: S. Merabet, "La vigilance, être juge et ne pas juger" ("Vigilance, to be a judge and not judging"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 199-209. 

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article (done by the author): Vigilance presents two diametrically opposed dangers. The company is caught in the crossfire. On the one hand, there is a risk that it exercises its role at a minimum, so that the obligations imposed on it are ineffective, thereby risking its own liability.   On the other hand, the danger is that the company oversteps its role and takes the place of the Judge. Does Vigilance always present the same dangers? Does it systematically involve the same role of the company? To be vigilant, is it to judge? The answer to these questions depends on the content of the obligations involved in Vigilance. However, these now seem very diverse.

How to distinguish between the various duties of Vigilance? A first approach could consist in considering a formal identification which leads to distinguish stricto sensu Vigilance, that which is envisaged by the French so-called "Sapin 2" law and identified as such, and the related obligations, such as for example the duty of moderation of companies on social networks, which without being baptized "duty of vigilance", nevertheless come close. The extension of Compliance obligations blurs the line between what exactly falls under Vigilance and what not. A more substantial approach should be taken to consider the degree of control exercised by the company. Understood in this way, it is possible to distinguish two categories: Negative Vigilance, which implies the identification of a risk, and Positive Vigilance, which even more supposes the neutralization of the risk. The first assumes a limited role for the company, while the second encourages it to act positively, even before an Authority has spoken. In this case, the role of the company is closer to that of the judge. That shows that all the obligations of vigilance cannot therefore be understood in a unitary manner.

As soon as the company is led - if not to take the place of the Judge - to act before the Judge even has the opportunity to pronounce himself/herself, then it seems legitimate to supervise the implementation of the company's duty of Vigilance, through a form of proceduralisation of Compliance. The company, as its employees or partners, would benefit from more Vigilance supervision. Insofar as all Vigilance obligations do not call the same role of the company, it is necessary to consider guiding principles of Vigilance, more or less intense depending on whether it is Negative or Positive Vigilance. 

________

► Full Reference: B. Silliman, "Secret professionnel et coopération : les leçons de procédure tirées de l’expérience américaine pour une application universelle" ("Privilege and cooperation, procedural lessons learned from the U.S for global application"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, p. 231-234.  

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► English summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): The French legal system is evolving, organizing interaction between lawyers with regulators and prosecutors, especially in investigations about corruption or corporate misconduct, adopting U.S. negotiated resolutions such as the Convention judiciaire d'intérêt public, which encourages "collaboration" between them. 

The author describes the evolution of the U.S. DOJ doctrine and askes French to be inspired by the U.S. procedural experience, U.S. where this mechanism came from. Indeed, the DOJ released memoranda about what the "collaboration" means. At the end (2006 Memorandum), the DOJ has considered that the legal privilege must remain intact when the information is not only factual to maintain trust between prosecutors, regulators, and lawyers.

French authorities do not follow this way. The author regrets it and thinks they should adopt the same reasoning as the American authority on the secret professionnel of the avocat, especially when he intervenes in the company internal investigation.

____

🦉This article is available in full text for those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's courses