Analyse
14 juillet 2021

Préserver la primauté du droit à une procédure régulière et à un procès équitable dans le contexte particulier de la pandémie de coronavirus (En anglais)

Bastille Day Newsletter 2021 - Enforcement & Court Decisions

 

The Coronavirus crisis has confronted judges, lawyers, clerks, and litigants with unprecedented difficulties, which have sometimes led to an acceleration of the digitalization of justice and in particular of criminal justice[i]. This can notably be witnessed with the issue of “video-hearings” in criminal proceedings.

To face the peculiar situations generated by the crisis, several texts were adopted aiming at adapting the rules of criminal procedure and those applicable to the criminal courts, including Order no2020-303 of 25 March 2020[ii] and Order no.2020-1401 of 18 November 2020[iii] which have proved to be quite controversial.

Article 5 of Order no.2020-303 provides for the possibility to use audiovisual means of telecommunication before all criminal courts, except for those dealing with crime cases, without needing to obtain the parties’ consent[iv]. Article 2 of Order no.2020-1401 provides for the very same possibility before all criminal courts, no distinction being made[v].

On 12 February 2021, the summary proceedings judge of the Council of State (“Conseil d’État”), highest French administrative court, judged that Article 2 of Order no.2020-1401, insofar as it allows the use of videoconferencing in criminal courts, without the parties’ consent and without subjecting this option to any legal condition or any precise criterion, seriously infringed the rights of defense[vi].

This decision is in line with that of 27 November 2020, in which the Council of State also suspended the possibility for the Assize Court, criminal court solely responsible for judging crimes, to impose videoconferencing under the same conditions[vii]. In view of the oral nature of criminal proceedings, the Council of State emphasized the fundamental need for the parties to the trial to be physically present during the closing arguments, particularly because the accused has a right to speak last[viii].

However, the decision only applied to the hearing of severe criminal cases, due to their complexity. To the contrary, the Council of State considered that for criminal matters involving a lesser category of crimes, the increased use of videoconferencing was “made necessary by the great practical difficulties encountered by prison administration in extracting prisoners, given the particularly heavy burden imposed by the current health situation, and by the fight against the spread of the pandemic within prisons and judicial courts”[ix].

Furthermore, the Council of State reminded that judges were supposed to assess whether such difficulties justify the use of videoconferencing considering the inmate’s health and the stakes of the hearing, and to ensure that the means of telecommunication chosen enable certification of the inmate’s identity and guarantee the quality of the transmission and the confidentiality of communication, especially when it comes to attorney-client privilege[x].

Finally, the Council of State indicated that using videoconferencing could help avoid postponing hearings, thus contributing to the respect of the right of litigants to have their cases heard within a reasonable time[xi].

And yet, a month later, the Council of State censored Article 5 of Order no.2020-303, providing for the possibility of video-hearings before all kinds of criminal courts, for its “unconventionality”[xii]. In this decision of 5 March 2021, it stated that, given the importance of the guarantee attached to the physical presentation of the accused before the court, the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic could not justify any infringement to the right to a fair trial guaranteed by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights[xiii].

It must also be noted that the Constitutional Council, in charge of analyzing the conformity of the legislation to the French Constitution, had already ruled on the unconstitutionality of Article 5 of Order no.2020-303. While recognizing that such a provision pursued “the objective of constitutional value of health protection” and satisfied the “constitutional principle of continuity of justice functioning”[xiv], the Constitutional Council ruled that Article 5 of Order no. 2020-303 is unconstitutional because the judges’ decision to use audiovisual means of communication in criminal cases is not subjected to any legal condition or bound by any precise specific criteria[xv].

It stems from these various decisions that the question of whether imposing video-hearings complies with the respect of defense rights is a sensitive one, certainly still subject to differing views. Besides, the Covid 19 crisis has raised not only videoconferencing issues, but also issues related to the public’s access to hearings (Article 4 of Order no. 2020-1401)[xvi] and the extension of pre-trial custody periods (articles 15, 16 and 17 of Order no. 2020-303)[xvii].

The challenge lies in deciding whether the restrictions imposed on the normal functioning of justice sufficiently guarantee due process and fair trial rights and are justified and proportionate to the sanitary situation at the time of the hearing[xviii].

Contenu similaire

Événement
Formation enquête interne - CY Université
3 avril 2023
La conduite des auditions dans le cadre d’une enquête interne
Mise en lumière des difficultés relatives à la conduite des entretiens tant du côté des personnes auditionnées que des personnes...
Analyse
CumEx files
13 janvier 2022
CumEx files, de l’optimisation fiscale à la fraude fiscale ?
Focus sur les révélations des “CumEx files” ou "CumCum" et décryptage des pratiques d’optimisation fiscale par arbitrage de dividendes qui...
Événement
5 juin 2023
Formation EFB : L’enquête interne
Quand et comment mener une enquête interne ? Dans quel contexte ? Quel est votre rôle en tant qu’avocat ?...
Revue de presse
revue de presse
2 juin 2023
Revue de presse – Semaine du 29 mai 2023
Cette semaine dans l’actualité, la 32e chambre du tribunal judicaire de Paris a prononcé sa première condamnation pour manipulation de...
Revue de presse
revue de presse
26 mai 2023
Revue de presse – Semaine du 22 mai 2023
Cette semaine dans l’actualité, le PNF a signé ses 16e et 17e CJIP, le ministre comorien des affaires étrangères est...
Analyse
23 mai 2023
Le ministre délégué aux comptes publics annonce un plan de lutte contre la fraude fiscale...
Dans le cadre d’un débat au Sénat, après la publication par la commission des finances d’un rapport relatif à la...
Revue de presse
revue de presse
19 mai 2023
Revue de presse – Semaine du 15 mai 2023
Cette semaine , la CEDH a autorisé le partage d'écoutes téléphoniques par le procureur à destination de l'autorité de la...
Revue de presse
revue de presse
12 mai 2023
Revue de presse – Semaine du 8 mai 2023
Cette semaine, François Ruffin a été débouté par la CEDH, une information judiciaire a été ouverte pour soupçons de détournement...
Événement
11 mai 2023
La pratique des enquêtes internes
Julie Zorrilla et Roxane Castro sont intervenus hier auprès des étudiants du Master Droit pénal financier de CY Université, pour...
Revue de presse
Revue de presse Compliance Pénal des affaires
5 mai 2023
Revue de presse – Semaine du 1er mai 2023
Cette semaine dans l’actualité, une nouvelle CJIP a été signée par le parquet de Paris avec une banque espagnole, et...
Analyse
3 mai 2023
L’impact des sanctions internationales dans les contentieux et arbitrages internationaux
Les sanctions internationales, mesures politiques, diplomatiques et de droit international public affectent également les relations commerciales. Navacelle en synthétise les...
Revue de presse
revue de presse
28 avril 2023
Revue de presse – Semaine du 24 avril 2023
Cette semaine dans la revue de presse, le Parquet national financier a perquisitionné les locaux du député Pierre Morel-A-L’Huissier pour...
Revue de presse
Revue de presse Navacelle
21 avril 2023
Revue de presse – Semaine du 17 avril 2023
Cette semaine dans la revue de presse, sur le plan international, l’écocide a été reconnu par le Parlement européen, la...
Publication
The Practitioner’s Guide to Global Investigations - 7th Edition
21 avril 2023
Guide du praticien des enquêtes internationales (2023)
NAVACELLE co-auteur du chapitre français de la septième édition du guide du praticien des enquêtes internationales publiées par le Global Investigations...