05.03.19, contribution11, compensation 28, officials, supervisors, prison, disability

blog: madic50.blogspot.com / Book: The Two forms, ed. Amazon

Paris, Tuesday, March 5, 2019

CONTRIBUTION (11) TO THE NATIONAL DEBATE PROPOSED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC IN 2019. INDEMNIFICATION (28) AND OFFICIALS IN INVALIDANT INJURIES. (Continuation of the reflection n ° 27 of 1st February 2019, see: madic50)

In previous reflections on the political and judicial use of compensation (see: February 1, 2019), I develop the design of a new procedure and I propose experimentation.

1) - The procedure

This new procedure recognizes the victims' immediate reparation for their fraud and justice for the quality of judging serenely. The policy is referred to the public debate.

The principles are as follows:

1- The procedure distinguishes the criminal from the compensation.

2- The public prosecutor examines the status of the plaintiff as a victim of the "undue consequence" of a legal action.

3- If this status is not recognized, the complainant is subordinated to the judicial process until the trial to make his point of view.

4- As soon as it is legally recognized, compensation is based on the determination of the sole general source of the fraud; in this case the police and therefore the state.

5- This compensation costs nothing or almost nothing to the public treasury. She is not spoliator. It can therefore be finally suitable.

6- The penal only concerns the examination of the facts and responsibilities of each.

7- The criminal investigation and the sequence of the trials can thus last the time professionally necessary without harming the victim.

8- The civil party is possibly present as a witness of the impartiality of the trial.

9- The victim is present if it is necessary for the examination of the facts by the Tribunal.

2) - Officials as subjects of the procedure

In the course of media information, I first focused this reflection on the "excessive consequences" of the actions of the police on civilians, regardless of their legal status.

The events of March 5, 2019 Condé-sur-Sarthe prison, indicate that this procedure can equally apply to the "excessive consequences" of the action of thugs; in this case a radicalized detainee and his wife.

The bloody assault of two supervisors by a jihadist exceeds the foreseeable confrontations between inmates and supervisors and their moral and judicial consequences already programmed by the administration.

1- The aggressors

They fall under ordinary criminal procedure. They can wait in jail they will not leave any time soon.

2- The supervisors concerned

a- For injuries with exceptional consequences, they are subordinated to a common procedure intended to establish a fault which nevertheless can be immediately qualified by the public prosecutor as to the fact, its origin, its seriousness.

b- Whatever happens, they will have to wait several years to receive an indemnity which will probably cover the expenses occasioned by this extraordinary aggression.

c- This will necessarily be fixed in relation to the incomes of the prisoners and payable in any case by the Public Treasury which will have to replace insolvent convicts.

d- The only significant compensation imaginable for the French magistrates is commercial indemnification.

However, it is possible to associate them with the experimentation of an immediate, consequent and non-pecuniary compensation of the Public Treasury.

It is sufficient that it be independent of the criminal procedure.

Once the compensation is collected, the supervisors will no longer be required to undergo a criminal procedure that is often difficult for the plaintiffs to support. Justice works calmly.

It would also be a mark of recognition of the state towards the supervisors. They would know that in the event of a disabling injury, their only future would not be to be forgotten.

Marc SALOMONE