The recent news

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

________

♾️follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Les Buts Monumentaux, cœur battant du Droit de la Compliance" ("Monumental Goals, beating heart of Compliance Law"), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance, coll. "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2022, p. 21-44.

____

📝read the article (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper which is the basis of this article, with additional developments, technical references and hyperlinks

____

📕read a general presentation of the book, Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance, in which this article is published

____

► Summary of the article:  Compliance Law can be defined as the set of processes requiring companies to show that they comply with all the regulations that apply to them. It is also possible to  define this branch of Law by a normative heart: the "Monumental Goals". These explain the technical new legal solutions, thus made them clearer, accessible and anticipable. This definition is also based on a bet, that of caring for others that human beings can have in common, a universality. 

Through the Monumental Goals, appears a definition of Compliance Law that is new, original, and specific. This new term "Compliance", even in non-English vocabulary, in fact designates a new ambition: that a systemic catastrophe shall not be repeated in the future. This Monumental Goal was designed by History, which gives it a different dimension in the United States and in Europe. But the heart is common in the West, because it is always about detecting and preventing what could produce a future systemic catastrophe, which falls under "negative monumental goals", even to act so that the future is positively different ("positive monumental goals"), the whole being articulated in the notion of "concern for others", the Monumental Goals thus unifying Compliance Law.

In this, they reveal and reinforce the always systemic nature of Compliance Law, as management of systemic risks and extension of Regulation Law, outside of any sector, which makes solutions available for non-sector spaces, in particular digital space. Because wanting to prevent the future (preventing evil from happening; making good happen) is by nature political, Compliance Law by nature concretizes ambitions of a political nature, in particular in its positive monumental goals, notably effective equality between human beings, including geographically distant or future human beings.

The practical consequences of this definition of Compliance Law by Monumental Goals are immense. A contrario, this makes it possible to avoid the excesses of a "conformity law" aimed at the effectiveness of all applicable regulations, a very dangerous perspective. This makes it possible to select effective Compliance Tools with regard to these goals, to grasp the spirit of the material without being locked into its flow of letters. This leads to not dissociating the power required of companies and the permanent supervision that the public authorities must exercise over them.

We can therefore expect a lot from such a definition of Compliance Law by its Monumental Goals. It engenders an alliance between the Political Power, legitimate to enact the Monumental Goals, and the crucial operators, in a position to concretize them and appointed because they are able to do so. It makes it possible to find global legal solutions for global systemic difficulties that are a priori insurmountable, particularly in climate matters and for the effective protection of people in the now digital world in which we live. It expresses values that can unite human beings.

In this, Compliance Law built on Monumental Goals is also a bet. Even if the requirement of "conformity" is articulated with this present conception of what Compliance Law is, this conception based on Monumental Law is based on the human ability to be free, while conformity law supposes more the human ability to obey.

Therefore Compliance Law, defined by the Monumental Goals, is essential for our future, while conformity law is not.

________

♾️ follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️ subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law 

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, The judge, the obligation of compliance and the company. The probationary compliance system, Working Paper, August 2022.

____

📝this Working paper had been made for an article: 

📕 published in its French version ("Le juge, l'obligation de compliance et l'entreprise. Le système probatoire de la compliance") in the book La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in the series 📚Régulations & Compliance

 📘published in tis English version in the book Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, in the series 📚Compliance & Regulation

____

► Summary of this Working Paper: To articulate the probationary system of compliance, it should first be admitted that Evidence is a general system, built on a "probationary square" functioning whatever the situation, and that it seems that Compliance Law rejects it, being incompatible with major probative principles, as soon as Compliance is defined as the obligation that companies would have to show (which is evidence) their respect for all the regulations applicable to them.

But fortunately, Compliance does not have to receive this definition. Compliance Law consists of all the principles, institutions, rules, and decisions which, in an alliance between public authorities and crucial companies, tend in a substantial way to the achievement of Monumental Goals. A branch of Ex Ante Law that protects systems and the human beings involved in them, Compliance Law aims to detect and prevent so that in the future systems will be less harmful than they would be if we do nothing, even will be better.

From this required action of companies, which requires the establishment of structures and series of behaviors, a specific probationary system emerges. It is composed firstly of specific proof objects, constituted on the one hand by the structures and on the other hand by the behaviors. Secondly, the specificity of compliance, often denounced, lies in the burden of proof, the burden of which rests on the company, but it is necessary to analyze the interference with the other branches of law, which compliance cannot have destroyed. . Thirdly, the scope of the probative issues is such that the means of proof have multiplied, according to the triptych of the effectiveness, efficiency and effectiveness expected of the compliance system itself regarding the Monumental Goals (and not the regulations). Fourthly, because Compliance Law is a branch of Ex Ante Law and the Judge is nevertheless at the center, it is logical that all efforts focus on the pre-constitution of evidence.

🔓read the developments below ⤵️

► Full Reference: Tardieu, H., Frison-Roche, M.A., Gouriet, M., Gronlier, P., Compliance, and resulting consequences on the labelling framework of Gaia-X, July 2022.

____

📝 read the article.

________

🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche sur LinkedIn

🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "L'appui du Droit de la Compliance pour la maîtrise quotidienne du Droit de la concurrence" ("The support of Compliance Law for the daily mastery of Competition Law"), in C. Lemaire & F. Martucci (eds.), Liber Amicorum Laurence Idot. Concurrence et Europe, vol. I, pref. C. Lemaire & F. Martucci, foreword B. Lasserre, Concurrences, 2022, pp. 369-374

____

► English Summary of the article: Competition Law has become so huge and has included so many regulations and "regulatory" perspective that we end up giving up trying to grasp it as a whole, preferring to become a specialist in one of its parts.  That would be to lose sight of the simple and strong reason that unites the whole and gives it its breath: Freedom.

Freedom experienced by the persons in their daily economic action, Freedom guarded by Competition Law, always returning to its principle: Free Competition. Therefore, the European Union places great emphasis on Competition. To make effective and to keep it in this state, “Competition Policy” is based on Competition Law, but if authorities and judges do not blame companies for their power, they do not rely on it.

To do this, Competition Law must be supported by Compliance Law, which strongly encourages companies to act for the effectiveness and the promotion of competitive principles. Competition Law is thus slipping from the Ex-Post towards the Ex-Ante, the commitments of companies leading them to cease being passive, even punished, to become convinced actors and themselves pedagogues. Something to please a great Professor of Competition Law, to whom homage is paid here.

____

📗read the Table of Contents of the book in which this article is published (in French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper which is the basis of this article, with additional developments, technical references and hyperlinks

____

📝read the article (in French)

________

► Référence complète : Frison-Roche, M.-A., entretien avec Olivia Dufour, « La Cour suprême a déclenché la bombe de la sécession. Que faire ? », 5 juillet 2022.

____

► Lire l'entretien 

____

💬 Entretien mené à propos du sens, de la valeur et de la portée système de l'arrêt Dobbs v. Jackson rendu par la Cour suprême des Etats-Unis le 24 juin 2022.

► Présentation de l'interview par Olivia Dufour : Alors que l'arrêt Dobbs v. Jackson du 24 juin 2022 de la Cour suprême des Etats-Unis sur l'avortement n'en finit pas de susciter l'émotion, déjà d'autres droits fondamentaux menacent de perdre leur qualité de droit constitutionnel fédéral. A commencer par le mariage homosexuel. Mais ce n'est pas la seule conséquence de cette nouvelle jurisprudence ultra-conservatrice. Pour le professeur Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, ce qui s'apparente à un "suicide institutionnel" de la part de la Cour a déclenché un mouvement de sécession. En d'autres termes, les Etats-Unis sont en passe de se désunir. Pour autant, rien n'est perdu. Explications. 

Les questions posées étaient les suivantes : 

Actu-Juridique : L'arrêt de la Cour suprême américaine sur l'avortement a beaucoup ému en France. En réalité, cela ne semble être que le début d'un mouvement de fond. Qu'en est-il ❓ ?  

🔑Réponse MaFR

Actu-Juridique : Qu'est-ce que cette conception originaliste qui semble désormais être celle de la Cour suprême 'arrêt de la Cour suprême américaine sur l'avortement a beaucoup ému en France. En réalité, cela ne semble être que le début d'un mouvement de fond. Qu'en est-il ❓  

🔑Réponse MaFR

Actu-Juridique : On comprend donc que l'avortement n'ayant pas été envisagé au XIX siècle, il ne peut pas être protégé par la Constitution au XXIème siècle❓  

🔑Réponse MaFR

Actu-Juridique : Cela engendre donc un séisme dépassant de loin les seules conséquence d'un revirement de jurisprudence ❓  

🔑Réponse MaFR

Actu-Juridique : C'est donc en vertu de cette logique que le port d'arme est qualifié, contrairement au droit à l'avortement, de droit constitutionnel à valeur fédérale ❓  

🔑Réponse MaFR

Actu-Juridique : Est-ce également cette nouvelle logique qui a présidé à l'arrêt du 30 juin 2022 sur la lutte contre les gaz à effet de serre ❓  

🔑Réponse MaFR

Actu-Juridique : En quoi l'arrêt sur l'avortement peut-il bouleverser les Etats-Unis ❓  

🔑Réponse MaFR

Actu-Juridique : Actuellement, l'opinion semble à la fois sidérée et impuissante, faut-il se résoudre à voir prospérer cette nouvelle jurisprudence ❓  

🔑Réponse MaFR

Actu-Juridique : En France, cet arrêt a suscité la crainte que l'avortement ne soit remis en cause ici aussi et certains réclament l'inscription du droit à l'IVG dans la Constitution. Est-ce une bonne idée ❓  

🔑Réponse MaFR

Actu-Juridique : Mais alors que faire pour protéger le droit à l'IVG en France ❓  

🔑Réponse MaFR

Actu-Juridique : Revenons aux Etats-Unis, comment empêcher que la Cour suprême ne revienne sur le caractère fédéral de nombreux droits ? Le Congrès pourrait-il intervenir ❓  

🔑Réponse MaFR

Actu-Juridique :Une telle situation pourrait-elle se produire en Europe ❓  

🔑Réponse MaFR

_____

♾️follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn

♾️subscribe to the  Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law

____

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance, Artificial Intelligence and Business Management: the right measure" ("Compliance, Intelligence artificielle et gestion des entreprises : la juste mesure"), participation to the Conference coordinated by Mustapha Mekki, L'intelligence artificielle et la gestion des entreprises. July 1st, 2022. 

____

🎥 see the conference (in French)

____

 consult the slides having been used as brief notes for deliver the lecture (inf French)

____

🚧read the bilingual Working Paper having been used as basis for this conference

____

📝This work will be the basis for an article.

____

► Summary of the Lecture: Of the next European Regulation on artificial intelligence, the European Commission has a quite neutral conception of AI for obtaining a consensus between the Member States, while the Regulators and certain States have a more substantial conception of technology, wanting its power to be used to protect people, firstly from these new tools themselves, secondly from what is an amplification of the evils of the classic world, such as hate or misinformation. This is the reflection of two conceptions of Compliance.

Firstly, Compliance can be defined as neutral processes that increase the effectiveness of what would be the obligation for companies or their desire for efficient risk management (in particular the consideration of "legal risks") to prove being "conform" to all regulations that are applicable to itself and all persons to whom the firm is accountable. This is often referred to as the "compliance obligation" or "obligation of conformity".

This conception implies considerable practical consequences for the company which, in order to succeed in this "total exploit", would then have to resort to artificial intelligence tools constituting a "total and infallible solution", which mechanically generate for it the obligation to "know " all the "regulatory mass", to detect all "non-compliances", to conceive its relationship to the Law in terms of "risk of non-compliance", fully supported by Compliance by Design which could, without human intervention , eliminate legal risk and ensure "compliance total efficiency" in Ex Ante.

The "legal price" of this technological dream is extremely high because all the "regulatory" requirements will then be transformed into obligations of result, any failure generating liability. The Compliance probationary system will become overwhelming for the company, both in terms of burden of proof, means of proof, and transfers, without exemption from proof. Objective responsibilities for others will multiply. The "law of conformity" will multiply Ex Ante systemic penalties, the border with criminal law being less and less preserved.

It is essential to avoid this, both for businesses and for the Rule of Law. For this, we must use Artificial Intelligence to its proper extent: it may constitute a "massive aid", without ever claiming to be a total and infallible solution, because it is the human who must be at the center of the compliance system functioning thank to the firms and not the machinery.

For this, it is necessary to adopt a substantial conception of Compliance Law (and not a sort of Conformity Law or Obedience Law). It does not at all cover all the applicable regulations and it is not at all "neutral", being in no way a series of processes. This new branch of Law is substantially built on Monumental Goals. These are either of a negative nature (preventing a systemic crisis from happening, in many but specific perspectives: banking, financial, health, climate, etc.), or of a positive nature (building a better balance, in particular between human beings, in the company and beyond).

In this conception which appears more and more strongly, artificial intelligence finds its place, more modest. As Compliance Law is based on information, Artificial Intelligence is essential to capture it and make first connections, first stages for successive analyses, done by human beings, making what is essential: the commitment of the company, both by the leaders and by all those who are "embarked" by a "culture of Compliance" which is at both built and common.

This restores the required seal between Criminal Law and what can be asked of the mechanical use of Artificial Intelligence; this puts the obligation of means back as a principle. This restores the principal place to the lawyer and the compliance officer, so that the culture of compliance is articulated with the specificities of a sector and the identity of the company itself. Indeed, the culture of compliance being inseparable from a culture of values, Compliance by design requires a dual technique, both mathematical and legal culture. It is why European Compliance Law, because it is rooted in the European humanist tradition, is a model.

________

For further:

📘Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), Compliance Monumental Goals, 2022

📘Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, 2022

📘Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), Compliance Tools, 2021

📓Frison-Roche, M.-A., L'apport du Droit de la Compliance à la Gouvernance d'Internet, 2019 

📕Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), Pour une Europe de la Compliance, 2019

📕Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), Régulation, Supervision, Compliance, 2017

📕 Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), Internet, espace d'interrégulation, 2016

📝 Frison-Roche, M.-A., Compliance Monumental Goals, beating heart of Compliance law,  2022,

📝 Frison-Roche, M.-A., Role and Place of Companies in the Creation and Effectiveness of Compliance Law in Crisis, 2022

📝 Frison-Roche, M.-A., Assessment of Whistleblowing, and the duty of Vigilance, 2022

📝Frison-Roche, M.-A., Drawing up Risk Maps as an obligation and the paradox of he "compliance risks", 2021

__________

► Référence complète : Frison-Roche, M.-A., Seuls les droits subjectifs techniques ne sont pas touchés par l'arrêt Dobbs: c'est sur eux qu'il faut construire une nouvelle théorie de l'entreprise, 29 juin 2022.

___

► Introduction de l'article : Tout d'abord il y a deux types de réaction possible face à un événement critiquable. Elles peuvent se cumuler mais chacune prend de l'énergie. Soit critiquer l'événement condamnable (puisqu'il est critiquable, renforçant ainsi la mauvaise opinion que l'on a de lui) ; soit en limiter la portée (puisqu'il est critiquable, autant faire en sorte qu'il ait le moins d'effet possible).

Que l'arrêt Dobbs v/ Jackson rendu le 24 juin 2022 par la Cour suprême des Etats-Unis soit critiquable, tout le monde en est à peu près d'accord. Des centaines de commentaires vont dans ce sens ; des milliers de réactions vont dans ce sens. L'on peut continuer à le critiquer. Cela renforce l'opinion que l'on a déjà. Cela prend de l'énergie.

Peut-être vaut-il mieux utiliser son énergie à limiter la portée de cet arrêt. Mettre son énergie dans cet effort-là. Or cet effort en requiert beaucoup. Donc puisqu'il est acquis que cet arrêt est critiquable, concentrons-nous sur les moyens pratiques d'en limiter la portée.

L'on songe à modifier le Droit français en inscrivant le droit à l'avortement dans la Constitution (I). Mais si l'on revient aux Etats-Unis, car l'arrêt de la Cour suprême n'a pas de portée sur le Droit constitutionnel français, il faut mesurer que tous les droits subjectifs "politiques" non-ancrés dans "l'histoire américaine" sont touchés par l'arrêt du 24 juin 2022, la portée de l'arrêt allant bien au-delà du droit à l'avortement (II). La Cour est donc délivrée de la totalité de sa propre jurisprudence, ce que ne sont pas les cours constitutionnelles européennes, et c'est en cela que l'arrêt est catastrophique car non seulement il touche tous les droits subjectifs "politiques", mais il efface toute la jurisprudence de la Cour concernant les droits subjectifs "politiques" que l'on pourrait dire "nouveaux" (III). Plus encore, trois jours après, la Cour suprême a rendu un arrêt concernant un droit politique ancré dans l'histoire américaine, le droit à la liberté d'expression, qu'elle a interprété très largement, pour bloquer le licenciement d'un enseignant sportif d'une école publique qui faisait des prières sur le terrain de sport, procédant ainsi à un revirement de jurisprudence. La Cour ne serait donc pas non plus liée par sa jurisprudence sur les droits subjectifs politiques ancrés historiquement, pouvant les interpréter d'une façon conservatrice, sans "conserver" l'interprétation "progressiste" que la Cour en avait faite (IV). La solution serait donc de travailler sur ce qui reste : les droits subjectifs non-politiques : or, ce sont des droits auxquels les juristes conservateurs, qui dominent la Cour, sont attachés parce qu'ils sont liés à la liberté contractuelle et à la liberté d'entreprendre. Ils seront en mauvaise position pour les restreindre. Cela désigne ceux qui vont devoir, et pouvoir, défendre les femmes, et plus généralement les êtres humains, aux Etats-Unis : les entreprises (V).

____

Lire les développements de l'article ⤵️