Publication
1 October 2021

A future bill to improve France’s anti-corruption framework

An analysis of the future bill to improve France’s anti-corruption framework for the International Bar Association.

 

The bill has since been published on 27 October, you can read the revised analysis of the Gauvain anti-corruption bill here.

 

Five years on from the enactment of the Sapin 2 law, the ambition of which is to ‘bring French legislation to best European and international standards and to contribute to a positive image of France in the world’,[1] an evaluation of its effectiveness was carried out by a commission led by two Members of Parliament (MPs) Raphaël Gauvain and Olivier Marleix. The commission published a report listing 50 recommendations for improving France’s anti-corruption endeavours.[2] The two MPs then decided to convert this into a draft bill which will consider some of the recommendations listed in the report. This draft bill, which has not yet been published, is currently under government review before its submission to parliament which is expected to take place in November 2021. The main areas for improvement identified by the MPs, which should be the subject of the draft bill, are outlined below.

 

Revamping the French Anti-corruption Agency and its missions

The Sapin 2 law introduced the French Anti-corruption Agency (AFA), an administrative service, headed by an independent magistrate, with national jurisdiction and responsible for monitoring the existence and effectiveness of anti-corruption programmes put in place by government agencies, local authorities and large companies and the implementation of injunctions issued by its Sanctions Commission. The AFA investigates potential breaches of the obligations imposed by the Sapin 2 law relating to anti-corruption measures and the AFA’s Sanctions Commission can impose fines and issue injunctions.[3] The AFA also has a mission of administrative coordination which involves the centralisation and dissemination of information to help legal entities that are subject to the law implement measures for preventing and detecting corruption-related offences. To that end, the AFA issues regularly updated guidelines.[4]

The report highlighted that even though the AFA’s controlling and sanctioning missions have been well regarded, they have been carried out to the detriment of its coordination mission.[5]

It suggests, therefore, the creation of a special committee to fight corruption, comprised of representatives of several ministries, in order to clarify the institutional organisation of the France’s anti-corruption policy.[6] This committee would be managed by the AFA,[7] which would therefore redirect its focus towards administrative coordination.

The AFA’s missions of support, control and sanctions, however, would be transferred to the already existing High Authority for the Transparency of Public Life (HATVP),[8] responsible for promoting probity and the exemplary behaviour of public officials,[9] which would then be renamed the High Authority for Probity. The report argues that this would ensure that the controls are performed with greater independence.[10]

 

Encouraging the resort to the Judicial Public Interest Agreement and the creation of specific plea bargaining for executives

One of the most prominent features of the Sapin 2 law was the introduction of the Judicial Public Interest Agreement (CJIP Agreement), an alternative to prosecution offered by a French Prosecutor to a legal entity targeted by criminal investigations regarding a limited scope of offences. Entering into a CJIP Agreement allows the latter to avoid criminal charges in exchange for a fine and the implementation of a compliance programme.[11]

The report gives a very positive assessment of the CJIP which is considered as a true success.[12] The MPs recommend that this mechanism is used more frequently, as it notably allows a more rapid dispute resolution in the context of cross-border corruption cases.[13] They also advise offering more guarantees to legal entities as a means of encouraging self-reporting[14] including the assurance that they will actually be offered a CJIP if they cooperate fully.[15] The level of cooperation of the legal entity could also be taken into account to reduce the level fines.[16]

Nevertheless, the report emphasises that this mechanism only concerns legal entities and not individuals. Therefore, the two MPs suggest the creation of a new negotiated justice mechanism applicable to individuals, which would take the form of an individual guilty plea negotiated in parallel with the CJIP.[17]

 

Broadening the spectrum of entities subject to anti-corruption obligations

Another suggestion for improvement relies on the need to ensure full equality between French and foreign companies regarding the fight against corruption.

Indeed, the Sapin 2 law currently applies to companies and public institutions of an industrial and commercial nature which employs at least 500 people as well as to companies belonging to a group of companies headquartered in France, which employs at least 500 employees, when such entities have a turnover greater than €100m.[18] This wording of the law excludes subsidiaries of large foreign companies headquartered abroad from its scope, which would actually meet the conditions set up in the Sapin 2 law if they were headquartered in France.[19]

The report, therefore, proposes to abandon the condition of location of the head office in France when considering groups of companies in order to subject small subsidiaries of large foreign groups established in France to the requirements of the Sapin 2 law.[20]

By the same logic, it suggests that obligations provided by the Sapin 2 law – such as the implementation of a code of conduct or a risk mapping system which currently apply to private entities – also be extended to public entities.[21]

 

Allowing the Prosecutor to request the appointment of an ad hoc investigator to conduct the internal investigation

Whereas until now the legal entity was free to choose the counsel who would carry out the internal investigation, the report suggests that, in order to ensure the independence of the internal investigator, the Prosecutor’s office should be allowed to request the appointment of an ad hoc agent or the creation of a special committee which would conduct the internal investigation, negotiate the CJIP and represent the company in court.[22]

 

Strengthening the guarantees granted to individuals involved in internal investigations

The conclusion of a CJIP with the Prosecutor largely depends on the level of cooperation of the inquired legal entity. Cooperation can notably be achieved by conducting an internal investigation within such entity. The Sapin 2 law has allowed for an increased use of internal investigations within companies, which contribute to a large extent to determining the truth. [23]

The report highlights that, in order to be truly effective, these must be accompanied by sufficient guarantees granted to individuals who may participate in such investigations.[24] Indeed, these individuals are exposed to a risk of disciplinary and criminal sanctions.[25] It suggests, therefore, granting a right to access the investigation’s files,[26] as a means of encouraging individuals to participate in the process.[27]

Related content

Press review
Press review - Week of 19 September 2022
23 September 2022
Press review – Week of 19 September 2022
In this week's press review, you will discover the criminal initiatives at the European Union level announced by the President of the European Commission, and the new Fre...
Press review
Press review - Week of 5 September 2022
9 September 2022
Press review – Week of 5 September 2022
In this press review you will find two cases regarding the criminal prosecution of foreign nationals. First, the review addresses the conviction confirmed by the French C...
Press review
Press review - Week of 29 August 2022
2 September 2022
Press review – Week of 29 August 2022
In this press review you will find the implications for France following the delay of transposition of the European directive on whistleblowers. The French Conseil d'Etat...
Press review
Press review - Week of 25 july 2022
29 July 2022
Press review – Week of 25 July 2022
In this review, you will discover two CNIL’s recent decisions, the first one aiming at protecting data rental cars’ users and the second one aiming at regulating the ...
Press review
Press review - Week of 18 July 2022
22 July 2022
Press review – Week of 18 July 2022
In this review you will discover a Dalloz study on the growing control of the European Courts on arbitration matters, a campaign of the CJEU against arbitration which is ...
Podcast
reforms suggested by compliance professionals
21 July 2022
Vigilance: reforms suggested by compliance professionals
Simplification of the legal framework, exemption from criminal liability, better coordination of litigation, a future authority responsible for the duty of vigilance and ...
Analysis
Transposition of the European Whistleblowers Directive: Towards a reinforcement of the French protection system
14 July 2022
Transposition of the European Whistleblowers Directive: Towards a reinforcement of the French protection system
The text of the law aimed at improving the protection of whistleblowers, drafted by the Joint Committee, was approved by the National Assembly on 8 February and by the Se...
Analysis
The challenges of environmental criminal law in the light of the deferred prosecution agreement in environmental matters
14 July 2022
The challenges of environmental criminal law in the light of the deferred prosecution agreement in environmental matters
A new deferred prosecution agreement in environmental matters is an opportunity to review the creation of this new mechanism serving French environmental criminal law, bu...
Publication
BDN 2022
14 July 2022
Bastille Day Newsletter 2022
On this 14th of July, lawyers at Navacelle offer you, as it does every year, a selection of noticeable events which occurred in France during the last 12 months in the fi...
Analysis
AFA and PNF Practical Guide on the internal anti-corruption investigation
14 July 2022
AFA and PNF Practical Guide on the internal anti-corruption investigation
The internal investigation, as a modulator in the detection of corruption or influence peddling, represents a fundamental tool for the actors of economic life in terms of...
Analysis
Assessment of the first months of activity of the European Public Prosecutor's Office
14 July 2022
Assessment of the first months of activity of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
The first activity report of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office for 2021 presents its promising beginnings and emphasizes on its internal organization as well as i...
Analysis
The Autorité de la concurrence publishes an update of its framework document on competition compliance programs
14 July 2022
The Autorité de la concurrence publishes an update of its framework document on competition compliance programs
The Autorité de la concurrence published his new framework document for the implementation of competition compliance programs. This communication reminds economic actors...