Investigating judge (France)

Last updated

In French criminal law, the investigation phase (instruction) in a criminal proceeding is the procedure during which an investigating judge (juge d'instruction) gathers evidence on the commission of an offense and decides whether to refer the persons charged to the trial court.

Contents

The investigating judge is the first instance of investigation. In the second instance (appeals), the investigating chamber of the French courts of appeal have jurisdiction. They rule on appeals of decisions by the investigating judges and of decisions by the liberty and custody judge (Juge des libertés et de la détention).

Background

Inquisitorial system

In an inquisitorial system, the trial judges (mostly plural in serious crimes) are inquisitors who actively participate in fact-finding public inquiry by questioning defense lawyers, prosecutors, and witnesses. They could even order certain pieces of evidence to be examined if they find presentation by the defense or prosecution to be inadequate. Prior to the case getting to trial, investigating judges participate in the investigation of a case, often assessing material by police and consulting with the prosecutor.

History

Eric Halphen, formerly a French investigative judge Eric Halphen 20060627 Fnac 04.jpg
Éric Halphen, formerly a French investigative judge

Precursors

Until the development of the Medieval Inquisition in the 12th century, the legal systems used in medieval Europe generally relied on the adversarial system to determine whether someone should be tried and whether a person was guilty or innocent.

Beginning in 1198, Pope Innocent III issued a series of decretals that reformed the ecclesiastical court system, empowering ecclesiastical courts to summon and interrogate witnesses on their own initiative. This was confired by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215. As a result, in parts of continental Europe, the ecclesiastical courts operating under the inquisitional procedure became the dominant method by which disputes were adjudicated. In France, the parlements — lay courts — also employed inquisitorial proceedings.

Origins

In France, the investigative judge has been a feature of the judicial system since the mid-19th century, and the preliminary investigative procedure has been a part of the judicial system from at least the 17th century. [1] The sweeping powers traditionally entrusted to the investigating judge were so broad that Honoré de Balzac called the investigating judge "the most powerful man in France" in the 19th century. [2] In a celebrated although exaggerated passage, Balzac wrote that "No human authority, neither the king nor the minister of justice nor the prime minister can intrude on the power of the investigating judge, no one can stop him, nobody gives him orders. He is sovereign, obeying only his conscience and the law." [3]

Reforms

Later, however, the authority of the investigating judges in France was diminished by a series of reforms. [2] In 1985, French justice minister Robert Badinter proposed limiting the investigating judge's role in making custody decisions; Badinter's successor, Albin Chalandon made the same proposal two years later. In 1990, Justice Minister Pierre Arpaillange convened a Human Rights Commission (Justice Penale et Droits de l'Homme), led by the legal scholar Mireille Delmas-Marty. [4] The commission concluded that France's criminal procedure code violated human rights standards, [4] noting that the investigating judge combined investigative and judicial powers in a single person.Salas 2002 , p. 498 The commission proposed a package of due process reforms, including the abolition of the post of investigating judge and the creation of a "liberty judge" (juge des libertés) in its place. Under the proposed system, the prosecutor and the police would have sole responsibility for conducting the investigation, and the liberty judge would be charged with overseeing pre-trial investigations. [4]

This proposal prompted an outcry from the conservative judiciary, as well as from scholars and the media; "in the context of repeated investigations of Socialist Party officials, the proposition appeared self-interested." [4] Less extensive reforms were adopted instead; legislation that became effective in 1994 provided a right to counsel for persons in police custody (garde à vue), and also transferred the decision on bail and pretrial detention "to a team of magistrates not involved in the particular case." Almost immediately, however, opponents of the reforms mobilized, upset with the substantial changes to historic French practice; several magistrates resigned in protest. The new minister of justice, Pierre Méhaignerie, pledged repeal. The reforms were reversed in August 1993, when a new law repealed the right to have counsel at the beginning of police detention (but retained the right to have counsel after 20 hours of detention); restored "the powers of the 'solitary' investigating judge involved in the case to bail or remand"; and again restricted the accused's access to the investigative dossier. [5]

Reforms resumed in 2000, with the enactment of the Guigou Law. This followed the report of the Truche Commission and a proposal to revise the French code of criminal procedure by Michèle-Laure Rassat  [ fr ]. [5] Among other reforms, the 2000 law abolished the power of the investigating judge to remand defendants into custody and created a new specialized judicial officer, the judge of liberty and custody (juge des libertés et de la détention) to make these determinations. [5]

Renewed calls for further reform to abolish or diminish the powers of the French investigating judge intensified after a series of botched investigations, [6] including what became known as the Outreau scandal. In that case, more than a dozen people near Boulogne were wrongfully imprisoned (and about half wrongfully convicted) on false charges of child abuse after a flawed investigation by an inexperienced judge. [7] [8] In 2009 and 2010, President Nicolas Sarkozy unsuccessfully attempted to abolish the post of investigating judge as part of a broader package of legal reforms. [8] [9]

Duties and procedure

Investigating judges initiate an investigation upon an order of the procureur (public prosecutor), or upon the request of a private citizen. The investigating judge may issue Letters rogatory, order the seizure of necessary evidence, compel witnesses to appear and give evidence, and request expert testimony; at an investigative hearing, the judge may have witnesses confront each other or the accused. [1] They may also authorize wiretaps. [9] At a later plenary hearing in open court, the investigative judge may issue an order of non-lieu ("no case") or, if the evidence is sufficient, will commit the case to the trial court. Charges of a serious misdemeanor or lesser felonies go to the criminal court directly. In contrast, major felonies are referred to the Court of Appeal for the pretrial hearing. The Court of Appeal decides whether to approve the judge's recommendation and, if it does, the case is turned over to the Assize Court. [1] investigating judges are not involved at trials, although, in France, criminal trials are "in many respects a continuation of the pretrial investigation", with the trial judge acting as the leading figure in the examination of witnesses. [10]

Types of magistrates

Today, investigating judges are one of four types of French magistrates, the others being trial judges (magistrats de siège), public prosecutors (magistrats debout), and policymaking and administrative magistrates at the Ministry of Justice. [11] Each investigating judge is appointed by the president of France upon the recommendation of the Ministry of Justice and serves renewable three-year terms. [1] Magistrates "can move between these four categories, and their career prospects may be subject to the political interests of the government (although promotions must be approved by a high council of the magistrature chaired in the past by the President of the Republic and now by the president of the cour de cassation) ." [12] This arrangement has prompted criticism on the ground that the judiciary is not fully independent of the government. [13]

Independence, and criticism

In 1996, political scientist Herbert Jacobs described the still-extensive powers and authority of the investigating judge:

The investigating judge ... is responsible for assuring the quality of the investigation that underlies the prosecution, [and] enjoys sweeping powers. In serious cases the magistrate directs the investigation personally, ordering any potentially relevant witnesses to appear and authorizing searches of premises, seizure of financial records, examination by experts and viewings of physical evidence as he or she sees fit. The investigating judge can delegate some investigatory decisions to police, but the responsibility lies ultimately with the magistrate. [14]

Statistics

In the year 2000, only about 7% of criminal investigations in France were directed by an investigating judge. [13] By 2010, that number had declined further to 4%, with police overseeing the rest. [9] Notably, in 2002, there were 562 investigating magistrates in France, with some 60,000 investigations ongoing at any given moment, so caseloads were large and individual attention to each was difficult. [6] But, investigating judges "are seen as important, independent arbiters, examining the most sensitive and serious allegations." [9] A few investigating judges, such as Renaud Van Ruymbeke, Thierry Jean-Pierre, and Éric Halphen have become widely known for their investigations into corruption and political scandals; such figures have investigated high-level government officials, including prime ministers, and made widely publicized visits to the headquarters of the major French political parties, reflecting their broad powers. [15]

Despite high media attention and frequent portrayals in TV series, examining judges are active in a small minority of cases. In 2005, there were 1.1 million criminal rulings in France, while only 33,000 new cases were investigated by judges. [16] The vast majority of cases are therefore investigated directly by law enforcement agencies (police, gendarmerie) under the supervision of the Office of Public Prosecution.

Employment and unions

In France, many magistrates belong to trade unions. About 60% belong to the Union syndicale des magistrats (USM), which is center-left, while about 30% belong to the leftist Syndicat de la Magistrature (SM). The unions represent the interests of magistrates, but by French law they are barred from striking. [17]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal justice</span> Justice to those who have committed crimes

Criminal justice is the delivery of justice to those who have been accused of committing crimes. The criminal justice system is a series of government agencies and institutions. Goals include the rehabilitation of offenders, preventing other crimes, and moral support for victims. The primary institutions of the criminal justice system are the police, prosecution and defense lawyers, the courts and the prisons system.

Bail is a set of pre-trial restrictions that are imposed on a suspect to ensure that they will not hamper the judicial process. Bail is the conditional release of a defendant with the promise to appear in court when required. In some countries, especially the United States, bail usually implies a bail bond, a deposit of money or some form of property to the court by the suspect in return for the release from pre-trial detention. If the suspect does not return to court, the bail is forfeited and the suspect may be charged with the crime of failure to appear. If the suspect returns to make all their required appearances, bail is returned after the trial is concluded.

An inquisitorial system is a legal system in which the court, or a part of the court, is actively involved in investigating the facts of the case. This is distinct from an adversarial system, in which the role of the court is primarily that of an impartial referee between the prosecution and the defense.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Magistrate</span> Officer of the state, usually judge

The term magistrate is used in a variety of systems of governments and laws to refer to a civilian officer who administers the law. In ancient Rome, a magistratus was one of the highest ranking government officers, and possessed both judicial and executive powers. In other parts of the world, such as China, magistrate is a word applied to a person responsible for administration over a particular geographic area. Today, in some jurisdictions, a magistrate is a judicial officer who hears cases in a lower court, and typically deals with more minor or preliminary matters. In other jurisdictions, magistrates are typically trained volunteers appointed to deal with criminal and civil matters in their local areas.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Prosecutor</span> Legal profession

A prosecutor is a legal representative of the prosecution in states with either the common law adversarial system or the civil law inquisitorial system. The prosecution is the legal party responsible for presenting the case in a criminal trial against the defendant, an individual accused of breaking the law. Typically, the prosecutor represents the state or the government in the case brought against the accused person.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Magistrates' court (England and Wales)</span> Lower court in England and Wales

In England and Wales, a magistrates' court is a lower court which hears matters relating to summary offences and some triable either-way matters. Some civil law issues are also decided here, notably family proceedings. In 2010, there were 320 magistrates' courts in England and Wales; by 2020, a decade later, 164 of those had closed. The jurisdiction of magistrates' courts and rules governing them are set out in the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Procurator fiscal</span> Public prosecutor in Scotland

A procurator fiscal, sometimes called PF or fiscal, is a public prosecutor in Scotland, who has the power to impose fiscal fines. They investigate all sudden and suspicious deaths in Scotland, conduct fatal accident inquiries and handle criminal complaints against the police. They also receive reports from specialist reporting agencies such as His Majesty's Revenue and Customs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal justice system of Japan</span>

Within the criminal justice system of Japan, there exist three basic features that characterize its operations. First, the institutions—police, government prosecutors' offices, courts, and correctional organs—maintain close and cooperative relations with each other, consulting frequently on how best to accomplish the shared goals of limiting and controlling crime. Second, citizens are encouraged to assist in maintaining public order, and they participate extensively in crime prevention campaigns, apprehension of suspects, and offender rehabilitation programs. Finally, officials who administer criminal justice are allowed considerable discretion in dealing with offenders.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judiciary of Israel</span> Part of the article of the series of government of Israel

The judicial system of Israel consists of secular courts and religious courts. The law courts constitute a separate and independent unit of Israel's Ministry of Justice. The system is headed by the President of the Supreme Court and the Minister of Justice.

In France, a cour d'assises, or Court of Assizes or Assize Court, is a criminal trial court with original and appellate limited jurisdiction to hear cases involving defendants accused of felonies, meaning crimes as defined in French law. It is the only French court that uses a jury trial.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pre-trial detention</span> Detention after arrest and charge until a trial

Pre-trial detention, also known as jail, preventive detention, provisional detention, or remand, is the process of detaining a person until their trial after they have been arrested and charged with an offence. A person who is on remand is held in a prison or detention centre or held under house arrest. Varying terminology is used, but "remand" is generally used in common law jurisdictions and "preventive detention" elsewhere. However, in the United States, "remand" is rare except in official documents and "jail" is instead the main terminology. Detention before charge is commonly referred to as custody and continued detention after conviction is referred to as imprisonment.

A private prosecution is a criminal proceeding initiated by an individual private citizen or private organisation instead of by a public prosecutor who represents the state. Private prosecutions are allowed in many jurisdictions under common law, but have become less frequent in modern times as most prosecutions are now handled by professional public prosecutors instead of private individuals who retain barristers.

An examining magistrate is a judge in an inquisitorial system of law who carries out pre-trial investigations into allegations of crime and in some cases makes a recommendation for prosecution. Also known as an investigating magistrate, inquisitorial magistrate, or investigating judge, the exact role and standing of examining magistrates varies by jurisdiction. Common duties and powers of the examining magistrate include overseeing ongoing criminal investigations, issuing search warrants, authorizing wiretaps, making decisions on pretrial detention, interrogating the accused person, questioning witnesses, examining evidence, as well as compiling a dossier of evidence in preparation for trial.

Following the common law system introduced into Hong Kong when it became a Crown colony, Hong Kong's criminal procedural law and the underlying principles are very similar to the one in the UK. Like other common law jurisdictions, Hong Kong follows the principle of presumption of innocence. This principle penetrates the whole system of Hong Kong's criminal procedure and criminal law. Viscount Sankey once described this principle as a 'golden thread'. Therefore, knowing this principle is vital for understanding the criminal procedures practised in Hong Kong.

Indonesia is a civil law country with five major codes. Its criminal procedure code, the Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana ("KUHAP"), determines the procedures and rights of individuals at different stages of the trial process.

<i>Tribunal correctionnel</i> French court of first instance for criminal matters

In France, the correctional court is the court of first instance that has jurisdiction in criminal matters regarding offenses classified as délits  committed by an adult. In 2013, French correctional courts rendered 576,859 judgments and pronounced 501,171 verdicts.

In France the jurisdictions of the ordre judiciaire, of the French court system are empowered to try either litigation between persons or criminal law cases. They may intervene:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">French criminal law</span>

French criminal law is "the set of legal rules that govern the State's response to offenses and offenders". It is one of the branches of the juridical system of the French Republic. The field of criminal law is defined as a sector of French law, and is a combination of public and private law, insofar as it punishes private behavior on behalf of society as a whole. Its function is to define, categorize, prevent, and punish criminal offenses committed by a person, whether a natural person or a legal person. In this sense it is of a punitive nature, as opposed to civil law in France, which settles disputes between individuals, or administrative law which deals with issues between individuals and government.

French criminal procedure focuses on how individuals accused of crimes are dealt with in the French criminal justice system: how people are investigated, prosecuted, tried, and punished for an infraction defined in the penal code. These procedural issues are codified in the French code of criminal procedure. It is the procedural arm of French criminal law.

This glossary of French criminal law is a list of explanations or translations of contemporary and historical concepts of criminal law in France.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 Encyclopedia Britannica 2002, juge d'instruction.
  2. 1 2 Gilliéron 2014, pp. 50, 319.
  3. ↑ Anderson 2011, pp. 167–68.
  4. 1 2 3 4 Vogler 2017, p. 148.
  5. 1 2 3 Vogler 2017, p. 149.
  6. 1 2 Lichfield 2002.
  7. ↑ Gilliéron 2014, p. 60.
  8. 1 2 Samuel 2009.
  9. 1 2 3 4 Saltmarsh 2010.
  10. ↑ Jacob 1996, pp. 213–14.
  11. ↑ Anderson 2011, p. 167.
  12. ↑ Anderson 2011, p. 168.
  13. 1 2 Fenyk 2000, p. 42.
  14. ↑ Jacob 1996, p. 213.
  15. ↑ Cole 2015.
  16. ↑ Les chiffres-clés de la Justice , French Ministry of Justice, October 2006
  17. ↑ Antoine Garapon & Harold Epineuse, "Judicial Independence in France" in Judicial Independence in Transition (ed. Anja Seibert-Fohr: Springer, 2012), p. 295.

Works cited

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.