Sarkozy to banish Napoleon's judges

There is nothing that Nicolas Sarkozy likes better than throwing a spanner in the works when no-one is expecting it. His latest wheeze, according to media leaks, is to do away with the pillar of the French criminal justice system: the investigating judge.

(Update late Wednesday: Sarkozy has today confirmed that he aims to abolish the old investigating system, as previewed in this post)

The juge d'instruction, also known in English as examining magistrate, is the all-powerful independent inquisitor whose role has been cenral since the days of the Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte.

The judges' powers have ben whittled down over the years and Sarkozy's move, if born out, will bring a further alignment of the French system with the Engilsh common law method, practised in the "Anglo-Saxon" world and elsewhere.  Some judges and experts have given a cautious welcome to a long-awaited overhaul of a system which limits suspects' rights and has led to recent spectacular abuses. But Sarkozy's plan, as reported by le Monde, smacks of another of the monarchical reforms that have the effect of reinforcing the President's powers. There has been an outcry from judges and leftwing politicians who are accusing Sarko of abandoning the French tradition of independent investigation and equality before the law.

"The Sarkozy state is sliding towards authoritarianism in all domains," said Jean-Marc Ayrault, the Socialist party's parliamentary leader. "The President is abusing the rule of law."

Though juges d'instruction now handle only serious crimes or sensitive cases, their demise, if confirmed, will end the two century tradition of the super-sleuth who works in secret. As Interior Minister in 2005, Sarkozy demanded reforms after the "Outreau" case in which a zealous young judge brought about the imprisonment of 13 innocent people on charges of child abuse. Half of them were also wrongly convicted and one committed suicide. The President decided on his legal upheaval last month after a Paris judge ordered the dawn arrest and detention of a newspaper executive in a minor libel case (see December post).

Sarkozy, a lawyer by profession, wants state prosecutors to run all inquiries, with a new style of independent judge acting as referee. Patrick Devedjian, a senior figure in Sarkozy's UMP party, said the new system would give more weight to the presumption of innocence.

Critics say that suspects will be forced to pay lawyers to mount their own defence investigation -- in "Anglo-Saxon style". Sarkozy is being accused of putting criminal cases under political control because prosecutors work for the Ministry of Justice. "This is a major step backwards for individual liberties," said Christophe Régnard, head of the main judges' union. "The Government wants to settle accounts with the independent judges who have been after politicians and business leaders since the 1980s."

The institution of the juge d'instruction stems from the church courts of the middle ages. It became central to the Napoleonic code of 1807. The magistrate has authority to arrest, imprison, search and summons in the course of what is supposed to be an open-minded inquiry into the guilt or innocence of the defendant. In the 19th century, Honoré de Balzac, the novelist, called him "the most powerful man in France".

The fearless judge, immune to pressure, became a familiar figure in fiction and the media. Some have become household names after their dogged pursuit of politicians and financiers in long-running scandals such as the 1990s Elf-Aquitaine corruption affair and the graft in the administration of Jacques Chirac when he was mayor of Paris in the 1980s.

There now only about 550 examining judges and they handle only only five percent of cases, but they are the most important ones, involving violent crime, major fraud, conspiracy or public figures. Prosecutors and police pursue the rest.

Most west European states that adopted the French inquisitorial system have now moved to the English-law accusatory method or adopted a hybrid. Spain is among the few to retain powerful independent investigators. The advantage of the French system, when it works, is that a suspect is treated to a thorough and impartial preliminary investigation.

The main flaw is that examining magistrates are not really impartial but investigate with the goal of bringing charges. They put priority on extracting confessions, often through the pressure of detention.Their conclusion of guilt loads the dice against the defendant at the later trial.

Yves Le Borgne, who is about to become deputy chief of the Paris Bar Association, welcomed the Sarkozy move today, saying it would clarify roles. "The juge d'instruction has to be schizophrenic, torn between the principle of  impartiality and the need to conduct an efficient inquiry," he said.

Mireille Delmas-Marty, a reformist law professor who has influenced Sarkozy, said that the President's measure must come with a reinforcement of defence rights and reform of the prosecutor's service. The French and English trial systems have borrowed from one-another over the years but big differences remain. In Anglo-American trials, cases are brought with less investigation and argued from scratch in court between prosecution and defence. In the French version the extensive investigation presumes a degree of guilt which the defendant must dispell. Sarkozy's reform could eventually change this.

Comments

[rocket]

Any change to the French justice system is welcome by me. They could also review the preventive detention while their at it.

A writ of Habeas Corpus might be in order to.

As the Australians say

We had the choice between French food and French justice and happily we chose French food.

[Richard]

The current system cannot work as it's against human nature to be independently minded. A juge d'instruction will always have a bias. Sarkozy is right to reform.

[dot king]

Presumption of innocence is too often overlooked, ignored.
It does seem as though this reform is double-edged, giving more power to govermnment and less independence for the justice system - perhaps that's where the opposition should look to make amendments.
Le Juge Alphen will be giving his view on the news any minute now, and a few minutes ago Maître Jacques Vergès was asked for his - he's in favour of reform because of the tendency to "instruire à charge" (particularly unhelpful to him :)).
Anyone see "Faites entrer l'accusé" yesterday evening? A case in point if ever there was.
18 years and 3 trials to come to the same conclusions using new DNA technologies as the first experts came to before such means existed. But in the meantime, a WITNESS had been held in garde à vue, interrogated 18 times, his home searched, his mother's home searched - and all because he said the accused wasn't where the police wanted him to be. And the accused himself spent a year in prison for a crime that all the evidence said he hadn't committed.
This, we hear a lot of in France, but how it compares with miscarriages in other countries with other systems, I don't know.

When I read "Le Pullover rouge" (Christian Ranucci - guillotined for a murder he is now believed not to have committed), I was chilled by a sentence in the opening chapter, I paraphrase: If you're arrested for something in France and you can't prove, within 48 hours that you didn't do it, then you're going to prison anyway.
It could happen to anyone.

[Bluecher]

Well, France has the Code Napoleon, and Germany and Austria have the remnants of NS law. Both are incompatible with free society and MUST GO. The only problem is, that in France and the Germanic countries, the left is in love with these laws. So it is very difficult to get rid of them.

[Rick]

A wicked thought occurs: is the ‘juge d’instruction’ an, albeit republican, survivor of the late (and unlamented) Episcopal and later Roman Inquisitions? The chaps who sorted out Cathars and Jansenists alike?

So, someone thinks ‘The Sarkozy state is sliding towards authoritarianism in all domains’ – this for daring to end a 200 year ‘tradition of the super-sleuth who works in secret’. How (one’s tempted to say ‘heroically’!) odd.

‘If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys.’ Are the ‘juges d’instruction’ well enough trained; and paid for such responsibilities? The British Crown Prosecution Service seems to attract second-rate legal eagles... no, legal sparrows! It would make sense to use public money on attracting talent, rather than throw it away on procedures that come to grief.

What happened to the Paris policeman who gave a mouthful of abuse to that ‘Liberation’ journalist with the Italian name? One hesitates to preach, but don’t Paris ‘bobbies’ realise that acting ‘oik-ishly’ leads to public lack of respect?

You mention a chorus of protest at the suggestion that a suspect might have to fork out money to ensure an adequate defence for himself. And it’s quite understandable, too.

Indeed, considering the way the English system seems to be grinding to a standstill, republican justice may have much to recommend itself.... even with barristers unacquainted with ‘coiffeurs’, foulmouthed cops, and schizoid examining magistrates.

[PAUL Ist]

Correction: aplogies to the Guardian! The article is in THE INDEPENDENT.

[PAUL Ist]

This was the conclusion of the journalist in the GUARDIAN to an article on the above subject. The cheap syllogistic thinking shows what a sad decline there has been among many journalists in the leading London newspapers since their becoming overweight and undernourished:

Sarkozy vs Bonaparte: A short history

* Both men are known for their short stature. Nicolas Sarkozy is 5ft 5in and Napoleon Bonaparte was one inch taller (actually above average height for the early 19th century).

* Both men had foreign ancestry: M. Sarkozy is half-Hungarian; Napoleon came from an Italian-Corsican family.

* Both men had beautiful wives who were taller than they were.

* They both set out to reform the judicial system. The Emperor's "Code Napoleon" remains the basis of much of French law to this day. M. Sarkozy has made some piecemeal changes – imposing rigid, minimum sentences for violent crimes and life terms on some sex offenders.

* Both men set out to change the way that France thinks about itself.

* Both liked to be regarded as peacemakers. Napoleon's idea of making peace was to make war. M. Sarkozy intervened successfully in the Russia-Georgia conflict in the summer, less successfully in the Israeli assault on Gaza this week.

[tf]

Another point worth mentioning is the phenomenon of child judges. I exaggerate only a bit. The person who becomes "the most powerful man in France" does not do so as a cap to a distinguished legal career. Nor has he risen through the ranks of detectives, having demonstrated his brilliance in the field. Rather, he's gotten excellent grades in high school, passed the tough entrance exam to magistrature school, and then... emerged with a diploma, knowing nothing more of life and human nature than what he's learned in the classroom. The judge in the Outreau case was assigned this dossier less than six months after he graduated.

[Edward Johns]

Rick, can you elaborate on how the "English system seems to be grinding to a standstill" please ?

[Lex Stevens]

Both systems have their advantages and disadvantages.

Pinochet would have never been brought to justice -- or rather had his final years made a misery -- had Baltasar Garzón not had the freedom to act of his own accord.

The Anglo-American style system has its drawbacks, and the rich and powerful can easily evade or manipulate justice for years. Many clerks and secretaries in the Clinton administration were saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees to defend themselves because of their proximity to their boss.

I tend to think that these powerful judges have their place, but they should be appointed when they are well advanced in their careers. Garzón ascended to the Audiencia National at the age of thirty two, which would have been about ten years into his legal career. That is too young in my estimation.

The bottom line for me is that the judiciary should seek the truth and not measure their effectiveness in volume of convictions and imprisonments.

[Edward Johns]

Rick, can you elaborate on how the "English system seems to be grinding to a standstill" please ?

[onix]

From the outside its hard to tell if this is good or bad, Usually when left wingers protest it destroys the independence or effectivity of the juridical system, that is true, so i hope there will be regulations to provide sth with the independence of these judges. Ofcourse they will be personally biased, yet a judge with some actual power to apply and not so much execute the law seems like a moderation to me. Being a criminal, at least you'd have a chance not to be treated like a worse one. Here you don't and that's partly new, so i think this change bodes no good.

[Daisy]

Here in Canada, prosecutors are forbidden by law from participating in the investigative phase of a case. The police investigate and once they've laid charges, it is assigned to a prosecutor who decides if there are reasonable prospects for conviction. If there are none, charges will be withdrawn. If the case goes ahead, he/she can ask the investigating officers to acquire further evidence. All evidence has to be fully disclosed to defence. While we share a similar heritage in the British common law, in America, prosecutors can and do get involved in the investigative phase.

What are the chances Sarko will push through with these reforms and won't back down? I'm actually rooting for him on this one.

[Rick]

EDWARD JOHNS, you wrote ‘can you elaborate on how the "English system seems to be grinding to a standstill" please. Yup. Too expensive, too slow, accident-prone. Oh, and what have a couple of gladiators got to do with justice?

Aren’t the clever lawyers VERY gainfully employed elsewhere, drafting contracts and the like?

[Do-re-mi]

Ever since he was Interior Minister Sarko has tighned his grip. His type - obsessed with appearances seem way too keen on law/order and discipline (something really lacking in his own character)

The wife of a friend of mine is from Ivory Coast, once she stepped of the plane she was shocked by the gap of what she had read " le pays de la liberte" vs her reality " married to a French man but kept prisoner of their home thanks to some Pasqua's law, unable to work, racism, basic stupidity and paper-work hell ". Their love survived a cramped flat in Paris, one salary for a small family and being arrested one day by " flics faisant du zele" while having no papers, terrorised and made to feel like a cleaner who has stolen silver from her boss.
At Christmas the nurse who owned up to administering the wrong medicine was kept " en garde a vue" ( why?) for ages when there it was not a necessity. Boy, "do we need to look like we are hard".
A relative ( working in the police) told me he hates his job more and more since everybody had to do " repression ", trying to sort out trouble en amont was out, they had to do results, keep up % and that was not just affecting morals but killing grey cells in some of his fellow workers.

Since it's frightening time, and Sarko seem to have taken LePen votes, it's security-batron-matraque because it reassure people.
Justice has always been very centralised in France and not at all independent, brown-nosing to politicians will get you somewhere.
The French-justice system need to change, but in the hands of someone like Robert Badinter.
Napoleon-lite will only bring more mess because he is only interested in his name on a law, not really to humanise proceedings.

[Michael Smith]

I can only speak as I find but my family, largely French through marriage, are extremely conscious of social matters but I have rarely heard heated debate about the French justice system.

Whether that is because they have given up or simply that they generally approve of the system is difficult to determine because it never enters the conversation.

That in itself is a measure of any dissatisfaction and I seem to recall there have been recent legal matters set before a single judge here in England.

[Edward Johns]

Thanks Rick, no examples then.
Where is the ideal or best nation for justice in your estimation ?

[Francois D]

I admit that this debate is very difficult and I am very ambivalent about this subject.

On one hand, I prefer that the investigation be headed by a judge rather than the police alone.

NS, announced that he would replace the "Juge d'Instruction" by a "Juge de l'Instruction", subtle semantic nuance meaning that, in its new role, the judge will superview the legality of the investigation and not its modalities.

Anyway after the Outreau scandal, something had to be done.

I agree for a large part with DO RE MI opinion. I am not convinced that there is a country more perfect than an another for justice. There are advantages and inconvenients everywhere because justice is not a science but an human activity.

Below an advise posted in Le Figaro blog and writed by a lawyer (translated by google translate)

__________

Lawyer for over 10 years, I suffered, even though the defendants indicted or civil action that I could defend the iniquities of judges who, in 99% of cases, charge and not instruct without genuine respect for victims. The Outreau case was nothing unusual except the turnaround at the hearing of an important witness. If this witness accuser had continued on his lies in court, all these unfortunate would continue to remain in jail prison shouting their innocence. Judge Burgaud has not faulted by youth, he just do as 99% of his colleagues do every day. Finally, our President announced the principle of reform, a good and legitimate rule, and without even knowing the contents of the reform which involves a lot of changes that we still do not know, criticisms are already vehement. It's crazy to react and not just about ideas or ideological positions! It looks like the judges ...

[Rick]

Search me, EDWARD. I had you down as a hot-shot lawyer wanting to draw me into a trap - aren't you?

Forgive me side-stepping the issue, but isn't justice to be found (often) in 'pre-legal' village councils, or headmen's courts? Or with the policeman giving a warning?

[Terry]

"The main flaw is that examining magistrates are not really impartial but investigate with the goal of bringing charges."

This is the most important point. By making them investigators, the judges now in effect become prosecutors. And, as Charles noted, the fact that a supposedly "independent" judge brought the charges, unfairly prejudices the defendant.

In America, a prosecutor has an additional duty imposed on him. The prosecutor is required to dismiss (or not bring) charges if he/she finds evidence that demonstrates the defendant is guilty. This doesnt always happen. But a prosecutor was famously disbarred for failing to do so last year. Perhaps, France does this already. Je ne sais pas.

[Dominique II]

The French Code Civil (nobody calls it the Napoleonic Code, or ever did, out of the weird AS world) does not have a good record re defendant rights. And the juges d'instruction bear their share of guilt in this sorry state of affairs. They have been using "prison préventive" with gay abandon as a physical and psychological pressure to get confessions - in effect, torture. My own personal experience with a famous one of yore helped me form the definite opinion that judges are natural born psychopaths.

However, scrapping them is no rosy way to achieve English common law bliss, as many posters seem to assume. For one thing, we are absolutely adverse to the very idea of common law.

More importantly, there may be some ingrained instinct in AS leaders' souls which prevents them from even thinking of interfering with the judicial process (cough, cough), but we French know for a fact what will happen the very moment judicial investigation is wholly in the French central authorities' hands. Some investigations will never be opened - guess which - and some will be pursued with extreme rigor - again, guess which. Sarko's record is only too clear: the judiciary is but one branch of power, and therefore his to wield, exactly like the executive - his by right - the legislative - his by the rule of the whip - and the media - his by the rule of advanced Berlusconization.

(All very well, but it's nonsense to say that no-one outside the "weird Anglo-Saxon world" calls it the Code Napoléon. Just google it in French and see... http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_civil_(France) Napoleon has been brought into this by much of the French news media cover in the past two days. CB)

[ken]

By putting the "Anglo-Saxon" label on the reform, of course true Frenchmen are supposed to break out in hives. But the label is not important; the important point is to separate the functions of investigating and prosecuting from conducting a fair and impartial trial. If the concern is really for the independence of judges, give them life or long tenure--not unaccountable power.

[Fernandez]

Terry -

"In America, a prosecutor has an additional duty imposed on him. The prosecutor is required to dismiss (or not bring) charges if he/she finds evidence that demonstrates the defendant is guilty."

I think you meant 'NOT GUILTY'!

Yes, the prosecutor (because he/she represents 'the people') is supposed to 'do justice' even if it means dismissing the charges. The defense is paid to get their guy off.

This, of course, is the most idealistic scenario. Prosecutors aren't always honest or perfect - as the Duke case shockingly demonstrated.

[Daniel Strohl]

DO-RE-MI,

"he is only interested in his name on a law, not really to humanise proceedings"

Or he is simply "interested" to make the proceedings faster and more efficient in trying to find new ways to avoid as far as possible to have (possibly innocent) people sitting in "détention préventive à la discrétion du juge" for months and thereby filling up prisons which are already overcrowded. This costs lots of money ("les caisses sont vides" :) and induces rebukes to the French state from international organisations, not always without good
reasons ...

May be the magistrates unions should think the matter over calmly, instead of "crier au loup" immediately - simply because the idea comes from Sarkozy.

The text quoted by FRANCOIS D (7 JAN - 20:38) is interesting. One may think that the point of view of a lawyer is as valuable as the point of view of an (unionised :) judge ...

[peter kinsley www.peterkinsley.com]

"Best Nation for Justice?" Depends: For whoremasters one Joe Grech sent a letter from London airport to the Judge: "I have no faith in British justice. Twelve times I was found innocent when I was guilty of living off immoral earnings. The thirteenth time I was innocent and found guilty. I am returning to Malta.."
For lovers: Court reporters used to recall a case where two police constables gave evidence of catching a couple committing an indecent act in their torchlight in a back alley, when the lady magistrate said: "Case dismissed." Panic in the constabulary and a request for a word in Chambers, where the lady Mag. said: "The officers are clearly lying. It is impossible to have sexual intercourse standing up."

[rocket]

Terry

"And, as Charles noted, the fact that a supposedly "independent" judge brought the charges, unfairly prejudices the defendant."

Hello... Welcome to the land of hypocrisy. Need you look any deeper into the French legal system to understand what is going on?

La justice s'arrête ou l'état commence.

[Julian Melford]

By any chance, is Brown planning to force innocent middle-class people to pay their own court costs too?

See consultation paper, CP28/08, The Award of Costs from Central Funds in Criminal Cases, on www.justice.gov.uk.

[rocket]

A problem in the US me thinks is encountered during the jury selection. Jurors are supposed to be impartial often without having a prior knowledge of the person or events they are to judge which could influence their decision. In the first and latest case of Oj Simpson, this is practically impossible for judge and jury, no matter what claims of impartiality may be bespoken.

[dot king]

I am looking forward to "Infra Rouge" on Fr2 this evening - a bit of an aside, but a docu about France's top lawyers, by the looks of it, with courtroom jousting as well as interviews.

In defence of judges - or one judge at least - it's to be hoped there are more like her: I was once requisitioned to a "confrontation devant le juge" in a case of Faux et Usage de Faux.
It was very clear-cut, but the (French) woman who had scanned and transferred a signature on to a document that the (British) complainants claimed they had never seen, was sitting ramrod straight and serene, putting forward the argument that she'd done this fraud for the best of reasons (love of the man in her life - who had manageed to avoid being implicated) and trying to hold the moral high ground, claiming that the British couple were "difficult".
I watched in admiration as the young (30's maybe) judge skillfully questioned this woman, politely, straightforwardly, hardly a change of tone in her voice, and demolished the other's outrageous stance without her even realising what was happening.
There were occasional dramatic outbursts from her avocat, to no avail.
It must have been the first time that judge had used an interpreter because she didn't leave me time to translate, so rather than interrupt, I was scribbling notes on to a pad and showing them to the British couple and then whispering to them whilst the judge was dictating to the greffière. At one point I wrote "she's very good".

So, if the judge is intelligent and competent, the s/he CAN instruct/investigate a case à charge et à décharge, but as someone mentions above, many are straight from magistrate school and have no experience to bring to bear.
I suppose like any profession where society should be served, there are those who are gifted and honorable in the way they work and with a care for those who come before them, and those who (very often in France) are simply following a family tradition with no real "feeling" for the job.
In the cases that hit the headlines, often the ineptitude of the juge d'instruction is often astonishing.
However, in general, I agree with Do-Ré-Mi, Sarkozy's motives are unclear, even if reform would be a good thing, it needs to be a reform that makes justice fairer whilst retaining its independence - and there should be consultation with the legal profession and not jusr another announcement out of the blue.
I know Sarkozy is a qualified lawyer, but did he ever practice? Anyone know?

[Daniel Strohl]

MARY FERNANDEZ,

"I think you meant 'NOT GUILTY'!"

Thanks for the correction, Mary. I was scratching my head after having read TERRY's post :)

DOMINIQUE II,

"(nobody calls it the Napoleonic Code")

As CB above, I am not so sure about this. It is obviously incorrect for a law specialist, but is rather widely used by laymen (like myself :).

KEN,

"give them life or long tenure--not unaccountable power".

The French judges are civil servants - therefore they have life tenure and are in principle "inamovibles" (irremovable).

Therefore, they should be much more at ease with planned changes - in any case, they will keep their jobs (even if somewhat mofified). This is unfortunately not the case with "ordinary" (not civil servants :) people who have to cope with the present economic situation and do therefore not have the time or the gusto to cope with somewhat metaphysical considerations ...

PS : I didn't know the funny expression "break out in hives". However, there is a French equivalent sometimes used : "ils vont attraper de l'urticaire; ils me donnent de l'urticaire".

[PAUL 1st]

Yes, Sarkozy worked from 1981 until he went into politics for a large law firm in Paris specializing in real estate.

Certain contributors would do well not to presume that Sarkozy is an ignorant, amateurish hick or that his intentions are necessarily always bad.

[Bob Samms]

Whenever we have a miscarriage of justice, some suggest we should have an investigative magistrate system. In France, in the same circumstances, they decide to get rid of theirs! All systems depend on the individuals running them, none is perfect. Mind you, in the Maigret detective stories by Siménon, Juge Comélieu was an interfering so-and-so, making Maigret arrest someone in cuffs for the benefit of press photographers, and in one case almost certainly sending an innocent man to the guillotine.

[Amin Aswet]

"loads the cards"
I thought dice are loaded and cards (or decks) stacked.

[Dominique II]

Daniel and Charles

Let's make a deal: I'll switch to "Code Napoleon" and President Sarkozy will be henceforth called "Sarko" - the tyranny of "usage" in linguistic evolution.

But I do agree the (questionable) use of "Code Napoléon" is not strictly limited to Anglophones, and I therefore sinned through oversimplification. Hey, this is a blog. Terseness wins over the profuse pro and con of a balanced presentation. Please accept my apology of a sort.

[dot king]

Paul 1st:

rundown of Sarkozy's "career" as follows:

1955 born
1973 Bacc
1974 joins UDR
1976 joins RDR
1976 elected conseil municipal Neuilly
1978 Paris X Nanterre Masters Degree in Law
Military service
1979 Institut d'Etudes politiques, leaves without diploma
1980 DEA in political sciences
1981 obtains Certificate of Aptitude for the profession of lawyer (avocat)
1983 elected Mayor of Neuilly

So, a maximum 2 years in practice as a lawyer - not exactly "experienced" and he was already active in politics long before he took up a lawyer's profession.

And this is copy-pasted from his wikipedia entry:

"En 1981, après avoir envisagé le journalisme, il obtient le certificat d'aptitude à la profession d'avocat (CAPA), suivant ainsi les traces de sa mère.

Il devient alors le collaborateur de l'avocat Guy Danet, puis l'un des trois associés du cabinet d'avocats parisien « Leibovici - Claude - Sarkozy », un cabinet qui compte onze avocats spécialisés dans le droit immobilier. Cependant, considérant l'exercice de la profession d'avocat étant incompatible avec toute autre activité, il renonce à l'exercer pendant ses périodes d'activité gouvernementale . . "

Note the "suivant ainsi les traces de sa mère" - following the family tradition as is so often the case.
And the following is interesting too: "considérant l'exercice de la profession d'avocat étant incompatible avec toute autre activité" - very telling.

But it's a respectable profession, n'est-ce pas, for someone with strong political ambitions - I expect those 2 years' practice look good on his CV and will stand him in good stead when his political career is over.
If someone had said "don't give up your day-job", he might hardly have known which they meant :)

[John Gregory Flinn]

" But Sarkozy's plan, as reported by le Monde, smacks of another of the monarchical reforms that have the effect of reinforcing the President's powers."

Did I hear someone ask Sarko if he was an "omnipresident" at a news conference (?) reported on last night's channel 2 news?
He huffed and puffed, and was not convincing.

My view is that elected parliaments have developed primarily to make work for the legal profession.
(That is until I need a lawyer...)

[Do-re-mi]

Daniel
"Or he is simply "interested" to make the proceedings faster and more efficient in trying "
In justice, that is scary, ask the Birmingham Six. Replacing une limace par une fusee brings its own problem. Blair was crazy with efficiency, how fun it is, dealing with the consequences of that. And the law should at least be a bit on the side of the little people. With Sarko's record in interior Ministry, I am sceptical. The state and judiciary should be totally separated and even at odds sometimes. Justice is not there to serve at the pleasure of the State or a Monarch ( we have a republic but sometimes I wonder)

Napoleon was a macho, we got his code. You hit first, shame, see how they get up and then judge, and by the way, the little woman does not count.

Look, I did not vote for the guy, don't like him much, and the other side is crap too.
He did not go to L'Ena and he was a lawyer( affaires donc pas au tribunal) so already there is a change, lacking gravitas and using " insulte a l'honneur" a bit too much.
He is not a " attention to details" kind of guy, more like " ideas and energy with a low boredom threshold and no follow through" one. He will put people in place but when " the plebe" starts to scream blue- murder, he will back down, because he wants to be liked, can't stand confrontation, taking a different opinion as a personal affront. He likes the chase, the ground work will go to someone else, not chosen because they are good but because they say amen.

One of the right "des personnes gardées à vue is le droit de s'entretenir avec un avocat de son choix dès la première heure de la garde à vue (l'entretien est confidentiel et ne peut excéder une durée de 30 minutes). Well you should not be interrogated without a lawyer present anyway. Some people can sign guilty when they are not.

[Terry]

Fernandez said:

"I think you meant 'NOT GUILTY'!"

Guilty, not guilty what is the difference?

Yes, I mucked that one up. These 3 a.m. feedings are killing me. I poured the milk in the bottle warmer rather than water the other day.

[qwerty]

And the following is interesting too: "considérant l'exercice de la profession d'avocat étant incompatible avec toute autre activité" - very telling. (dot king)

Dot, the lawyers' code of ethics in France is so stringent that basically if you are an avocat, you can exercise absolutely no other profession, even if it's not terribly commercial and therefore degrading (apart from writing books, artistic activities etc, and..politics. See Copé who's allowed to be a politician AND a half-time lawyer. When i think of all those opportunities for conflicts of interest...)

So it's not "considérant que", etc, it's a risk of being disbarred.

[rocket]

http://tinyurl.com/7e7lyu

I thought the title of this article was amusing. Obama not even in office yet and M Sarkozy laying down his conditions if we are to believe his quotes.

Most of the comments that I was reading seemed to be running against Dear Leader.

[Rick]

Am I alone to opine that the future of France’s judicial system, to say nothing of its ‘custo-ictims’, is of infinitely more consequence than the state of health of a ‘nouvelle maman’? Yet all of Napoleon’s judges can’t hold a candle to baby Zohra and her adjunct... Funny things, babies! Funny things, people...

[It's human nature, Rick. There has been a similar argument going on this week (on blogs and radio phone-ins) complaining that so much energy has been devoted to reporting the rescue of Jean Le Cam in the Vendée Globe yacht race while homeless people are dying in the French cold and Gaza is being bombed. A good story about one person often beats the greater misfortunes of a more abstract entity. Shakespeare knew that, as do today's news media -- to go to the other extreme. CB]

[dot king]

"So it's not "considérant que", etc, it's a risk of being disbarred."

QWERTY on Sarkozy the lawyer

Yes, but why go into the legal profession if you are already steeped in political activities, have ambitions (understatement), and (presumably) you know what's what?

[PAUL 1st]

@ DOT King

Thank you for the factual details, though I don't see why you have to spoil it all with sarcastic asides! They make you seem cynical. On the other hand, you could be right. Anything is possible.

[dot king]

Paul 1st - what sarcastic asides? I only put what can be seen on his wikipedia page. It was your putting the date 1981 in your post that made me go and look, because I knew he was already Mayor of Neuilly in his mid twenties which didn't seem to give him much time to have practiced law - and I'd forgotten about military service (which is difficult to imagine somehow).
And surely I'm allowed to comment, in my own inimitable fashion, on what I read on wiki?? :)