Analysis
16 September 2021

The French DPA (“Convention judiciaire d’intérêt public”) on the way to simplification

On 4 August 2021, a new Decree was promulgated aiming to simplify formalities required for the conclusion of the CJIP between Public Prosecutors Office and the legal person concerned.

 

Since the Sapin II law on transparency, fighting corruption and modernisation of the economy published on 10 December 2016, the Judicial Public Interest Agreement (hereinafter CJIP) is an alternative to prosecution offered by a French Public Prosecutor to a legal entity targeted by criminal inquiries or investigations regarding a limited type of offenses which allows the latter to enter into an agreement and avoid criminal charges in exchange of a fine and the implementation of a compliance program[1].

Initially, it was intended to apply to a certain number of offenses such as corruption and influence peddling. However, since 2016, two additional laws[2] and a decree[3] had extended the scope of application of the CJIP to a certain number of tax and environmental offenses.

Yet, on 4 August 2021 and after some years of practice, a new Decree[4] was promulgated aiming to simplify the formalities required for the conclusion of the CJIP between the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the legal person concerned.

The previous procedural framework made it mandatory for the French Public Prosecutor to address the offer of a CJIP via a registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt[5] and to grant the legal entity with a time frame for its consideration. The legal representatives of the legal entity then had to inform the Public Prosecutor of the acceptance or refusal of the CJIP by letter or through a statement made by the latter to the Public Prosecutor, who would draw up a formal report [6].

The 2021 Decree repeals all of the above and instead provides that “the offer for a CJIP is signed by the public prosecutor and, if accepted, by the representatives or lawyers of the legal entity”[7]. In that sense, the Decree implements the rights for the legal entity to be assisted by a counsel[8].

In the same vein, the obligation to pay the fine provided for in the CJIP with a certified cheque no longer applies [9].

Related content

News
ABA
6 December 2022
Launch of the international guide to corporate internal invgestigations
NAVACELLE co-hosted the launch of the ABA guide in Dubai along with Al Tamimi & Company, Bär & Karrer and Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP.
Press review
2 December 2022
Press review – Week of 28 November 2022
In this press review, you will discover several important judicial events: the French Supreme Court clarified the status of victim of an act of terrorism and the compensa...
Press review
Week of 21 November 2022
25 November 2022
Press review – Week of 21 November 2022
In this press review, you will discover the opening of a preliminary investigation by the French National Financial Prosecutor’s Office for misappropriation of public f...
Analysis
21 November 2022
Judicial Agreement of Public Interest for aggravated tax fraud laundering and illegal canvassing
Credit Suisse escapes prosecution and agrees to pay a public interest fine of 123,000,000 euros under the 13th deferred prosecution agreement concluded by the National an...
Press review
Week of 7 November 2022
14 November 2022
Press review – Week of 7 November 2022
In this press review, you will find clarifications from the Court of Cassation on the legality of an extradition of an EU national to another Member State, even in the ab...
Event
9 November 2022
Webinar: A comparative approach to professional secrecy and attorney-client privilege in criminal proceedings
Stéphane de Navacelle spokes at the Mondaq and Monfrini Bitton Klein webinar on "professional secrecy and attorney-client privilege in criminal proceedings".
Analysis
7 November 2022
The implementation of the cumulation of criminal and administrative penalties for tax infringements
While the principle of cumulating criminal and administrative penalties for tax infringement is well entrenched, its implementation is subject to conditions that must be ...
Press review
Week of 31 October 2022
4 November 2022
Press review – Week of 31 October 2022
In this press review, you will find details on the new methods adopted by the French national anti-terrorist prosecutor's office to investigate war crimes in Ukraine. In ...
Press review
Week of 24 October 2022
28 October 2022
Press review – Week of 24 October 2022
In this press review, there are several important events on the judicial level. Indeed, a judicial public interest agreement (“CJIP”) between Credit Suisse AG and th...
Press review
Week of 17 October 2022
21 October 2022
Press review – Week of 17 October 2022
In this press review you will find two significant events: (1) Lafarge pleads guilty in the United States for providing material aid to terrorist organizations, (2) the F...
Press review
Week of 10 October 2022
14 October 2022
Press review – Week of 10 October 2022
In this press review, you will find two important judicial events: An environmental CJIP has been concluded between Nestlé France and the Charleville-Mézières prosecut...
Analysis
12 October 2022
Discussions on secrecy in law enforcement proceedings and on AML/FT regulation
On October 5th, 2022, the annual conference of the AMF Enforcement Committee was held. During this event, members of regulatory authorities, magistrates, professors and a...