Abstract
Structural and procedural reforms were introduced in an attempt to modernise the judicial system since the late 1990s, which gave “new public management” precepts greater influence. To explain how judges perceive and have appropriated this new managerial approach, as well as its impact on the administration of justice and on punishment (Gautron 2014a), this contribution goes beyond legal texts and ministerial recommendations, drawing on the results of collective, interdisciplinary, quantitative, and qualitative research into how the handling of misdemeanours has evolved during the 2000s in five French courts. Conducted by legal academics, sociologists, and psychosociologists, our study is based on a representative sample of 7562 misdemeanour cases involving adult offenders, various direct observations and about sixty semi-directed interviews.
English translation by Naomi Norberg.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Alternatives to prosecution exist for cases in which prosecution seems inappropriate or too harsh. Rather than send the defendant to trial, the prosecutor’s office may order a so-called “third-way” measure (warning, mediation, etc.), which is sometimes carried out with the help of external partners (associations, city officials/employees, etc.), when it deems such a measure sufficient to put an end to the disturbance caused by the offense, ensure compensation of the victim’s harm, and contribute to the perpetrator’s rehabilitation (French Code of Criminal Procedure (CPP) Art. 41-1). Legally however, this constitutes dropping the case.
- 2.
Instituted in 1999 pursuant to French Code of Criminal Procedure (CPP) Art. 41-2, guilty pleas is the harshest alternative to prosecution. Unlike the other alternatives, it must therefore be approved by a judge. The penalties that may be ordered in this context are highly similar to criminal penalties in the strict sense (fines, surrender of one’s driver’s license, unpaid labor, etc.). Pleading guilty is therefore an intermediate solution between simple alternatives and trial.
- 3.
These were initially issued only for misdemeanour vehicle-code violations, but lawmakers extended their scope in 2007 and 2011 such that they may now be issued for narcotics use, theft, receiving stolen goods, destruction, deterioration, carrying a knife or blade, etc. (CPP Art. 495 et seq.).
- 4.
Sentencing without trial enables the public prosecutor to propose punishment, including prison, to a person who has confessed to committing the acts of which s/he is accused. Such punishment must then be approved by a judge (CPP Art. 495-7 et seq.).
- 5.
Misdemeanours (délits) are offenses of medium seriousness, that can be punished with a prison sentence of a few months to ten years (narcotics use, theft, etc.).
- 6.
The research group produced five, comparative monographs to describe the changes in each court as accurately as possible. The five courts are under the jurisdiction of three different appellate courts. The group was therefore able to analyse the differences between three of the lower courts and their corresponding appellate courts. The five courts have specific morphological features and differ in size, socio-demographic environment, and the volume and type of criminal cases. Two courts (labeled DIVE and BARI) are located in rural environments and have a fairly low volume of criminal cases (between 15,000 and 20,000 per year). Two others (ARNO and ETUC) handle between 30,000 and 45,000 criminal cases per year. The fifth court (CARD) is located in an urban center (more than 500,000 inhabitants) and handles more than 60,000 criminal cases per year. DIVE, ETUC and CARD are all under the jurisdiction of the same appellate court.
- 7.
Called “cadres du parquet,” these forms are sent once a year by the prosecutors’ offices to the Ministry of Justice.
- 8.
Previously, the police held suspects in custody after arrest and conducted their investigation without contacting the prosecutor (except in the case of felonies and the most serious misdemeanours), then sent their file by mail. Real-time processing means they must call the prosecutor at the end of custody to obtain his or her instructions as to the next steps to take: continue the investigation, question witnesses, transfer the suspect to the prosecutor’s office, issue a warning, etc.
- 9.
A warning consists of “indicating to the perpetrator, in the context of a serious discussion, the rule of law, the punishment provided for by the law, and the risk of punihment s/he runs if s/he repeats the offense. The objective is for the perpetrator to realise the consequences of her/his actions for society, for the victim, and for her/himself, without these being reduced to mere moral considerations.” Circular of March 16, 2004 on the criminal justice policy regarding alternatives to prosecution and use of deputy prosecutors, NOR: JUSD0430045C, BOMJ, no. 93, 2004.
- 10.
This alternative constitutes conditional closure of the case: the prosecutor conditions dropping the case on the victim’s being compensated (restitution of the item taken fraudulently or monetary compensation).
- 11.
The prosecutor may condition dropping the case on the regularisation of the situation constituting the offense. In other words, s/he can require the offender to comply with the law after s/he has been found to be in violation of the law (e.g., by purchasing auto insurance in the case of an uninsured driver). Since the circular of April 88, 2005 on the struggle against drug addiction and dependencies went into effect, prosecutors may require drug users to take medical tests designed to prove that they have stopped using drugs.
- 12.
Although such referrals generally concern drug users, there is no requirement to obtain care. This form of conditional case closure consists of asking the offender to make an appointment with a medical-social facility and transmit proof that s/he did so (certificate provided by the structure).
References
Bastard B., Mouhanna C. 2007, Une justice dans l’urgence. Le traitement en temps réel des affaires pénales, Paris, PUF.
Beyens K., Vanhamme F. 2007, La recherche en sentencing: un survol contextualisé, Déviance et Société, 31, 199-228.
Commaille J. 2007, La justice entre détraditionnalisation, néolibéralisation et démocratisation: vers une théorie de sociologie politique de la justice, in Commaille J., Kaluszynski M. (ed.), La fonction politique de la justice, Paris, La Découverte, 293-321.
Danet J. (coord.) 2013, La réponse pénale. Dix ans de traitement des délits, Rennes, PUR.
Garapon A. 2010, La raison du moindre État. Le néolibéralisme et la justice, Paris, Odile Jacob.
Gautron V., Raphalen P. 2013, Les stages: une nouvelle forme de pénalité ?, Déviance et Société, 37, 1, 27-50.
Gautron V. 2014a, L’impact des préoccupations managériales sur l’administration locale de la justice pénale française, Champ pénal/Penal field [En ligne], Vol. XI, URL: http://champpenal.revues.org/8715; DOI: 10.4000/champpenal.8715.
Gautron V. 2014b, La “barémisation” et la standardisation des réponses pénales saisies au travers d’une étude quantitative et qualitative de l’administration de la justice pénale, in Sayn I. (ed.), Le droit mis en barèmes, Paris, Dalloz, 85-97.
Garapon A. 2010, La raison du moindre État. Le néolibéralisme et la justice, Paris, Odile Jacob.
Kaminski D. 2009, Pénalité, management, innovation, Namur, Presses Universitaires de Namur.
Kaminski D. (ed.) 2013, La flexibilité des sanctions, Bruxelles, Bruylant.
Lenoir A., Gautron V. 2014, Les pratiques des parquets face à l’injonction politique de réduire le taux de classement sans suite, Droit et Société, 88, 591-606.
Rothmayr Allison C. 2013, Le droit et l’administration de la justice face aux instruments managériaux, Droit et Société, 84, 277-288.
Vigour C. 2006, Justice: l’introduction d’une rationalité managériale comme euphémisation des enjeux politiques, Droit et société, 63-64, 425-455.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gautron, V. (2016). Different Methods, Same Results as French Criminal Courts Try to Meet Contradictory Policy Demands. In: Hondeghem, A., Rousseaux, X., Schoenaers, F. (eds) Modernisation of the Criminal Justice Chain and the Judicial System. Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, vol 50. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25802-7_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25802-7_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-25800-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-25802-7
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)