The recent news

Le secteur de l'énergie s'est institutionnalisé sur l'électricité et le gaz. Il convient donc ici de regarder son fonctionnement institutionnel et procédural dans un tel cadre, puisqu'il ne s'agit plus de réfléchir sur son "cadre".

Un certain nombre de questions ouvertes se posent, notamment :

• Faut-il souhaiter plus de principe concurrentiel dans le secteur énergétique ?
• Entre Régulation énergétique et Régulation environnementale, qui décide de jure de l’équilibre ?
• Le Régulateur de l’Énergie est-il le Superviseur des opérateurs du secteur ?
• Le Régulateur de l’Énergie est-il en charge de l'application du Droit de la concurrence dans le secteur énergétique ?
• Le contrat est-il l'avenir de la Régulation énergétique ?
• Existe-t-il par le Droit une Europe de l’Énergie ?
• Le Conseil supérieur de l'énergie est-il un Régulateur ?

Cela permet enfin de déboucher sur l'étude d'un cas :

L'arrêt du Conseil d’État, 13 mai 2016, Société Voltalis

Accéder aux slides servant de base à la leçon.

Référence complète : Frison-Roche, M-A., La violence, ce lien qui unit la GPA et le mouvement #MeToo, Huffington Post, 6 mars 2018.

Lire le document de travail bilingue ayant servi de base à l'article.

La GPA est un des moyens par lequel la Route de la Violence dont les femmes sont les pavés est construite par les entreprises.
Le mouvement de lutte contre les violences faites aux femmes proteste contre cela.
Il souligne que cette violence est bâtie sur le "consentement" et le "sourire" des victimes.
Les auteurs de cette violence la justifie en se prévalant de ces consentements et de ces sourires : ils les font circuler comme "preuve" : le mouvement #metoo montre que c'est faux, que cela doit s'arrêter.
Nous-même, nous devons arrêter d'emprunter comme consommateurs cette Route de la Violence.

Lire l'article.

Co-organisation scientifique du colloque de la Cour de cassation, avec l'appui de l'Association Française de Philosophie du Droit, Droit & Éthique, 31 mai 2018.

Il est classique d'affirmer que le Droit et l'Éthique sont liés, voire sont intimes. Mais beaucoup en doutent, voire estiment que le Droit ne serait qu'une technique, appréciée à l'aune de son "efficacité", le "bon juriste" étant le technicien apte à apporter de la sécurité aux projets bâtis hors de lui. Le déclin de l'État, l'élan technologique fait rayonner une telle conception, qui se traduit notamment dans la façon dont le Droit est enseigné, est élaboré, est appliqué.

Mais si justement  parce que les lieux d'expression et de garde des valeurs sont en quelque sorte "compromis" le Droit et l'Éthique étaient plus que jamais liés ?

Lire le programme. 

Avec notamment la participation de :

• Éliette Abécassis,

• Milad Doueihi,

• Frédérique Dreifuss-Netter,

• Marie-Anne Frison-Roche,

• Philippe Ingall-Montagnier,

• Marc Mossé

• Marie-Aimée Peyron,

• René Sève.

Dans le dernier numéro de la Revue de droit d'Assas (n°15, décembre 2017), est retranscrite l'allocution d'Yves Lequette prononcée en 2016 devant des étudiants du Master 2 de "Droit privé général" de Paris 2.

Il y évoque ce qu'il est pour lui "le rôle d'un professeur".

Il estime que l'exprimer est indissociable de ce qu'a été sa vie de professeur. Et immédiatement, il évoque Henri Battifol et Henri Mazeaud.

Puis, il parle de l'écriture et de l'enseignement, estimant que c'est cela la vie de professeur, instant sur le plaisir que ceux-ci procurent.

Il explique que les cours magistrats servent à faire passer l'esprit d'une discipline, ouvrant sur le "pourquoi" des choses, et c'est pourquoi il les a préféré aux séminaires, assurant les "grands cours" pour les étudiants de premières années. Il évoque ses deux temps préférés, celui où il était professeur à Sceaux ; c'est amusant parce qu'à cette époque-là j'étais son étudiante, dans les préfabriqués qui tenaient lieu d'amphi, celui où il prît soin de semer l'inquiétude dans les étudiants plus grands du troisième cycle.

Yves Lequette évoque des "années de plénitude".

En lisant cela, l'on comprend bien qu'Alma Mater existe.

Lire l'article.

Le cycle de conférences Pour une Europe de la compliance débutant le 2 mars 2018 est organisé par le Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC), en collaboration avec l’École d'affaires publiques de l’École d’Affaires Publiques de Sciences po (Paris), le Département d’Économie de Sciences po,,École de Droit de l'Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris I), l’École doctorale de Droit privé de l'Université Panthéon-Assas (Paris II) et les Éditions Dalloz.

__________

Consulter la présentation générale du cycle

Consulter la liste des conférenciers.

Consulter les informations relatives aux conférences :

Consulter la manifestation publique du 2 mars 2018.

Consulter la manifestation publique du 12 avril 2018.

Consulter la manifestation publique du 30 mai 2018.

Consulter la manifestation publique du 7 juin 2018.

Consulter la manifestation publique du 6 septembre 2018.

Consulter la manifestation publique du 4 octobre 2018.

Consulter la manifestation publique du 15 novembre 2018.

Consulter la manifestation publique du 13 décembre 2018.

Rose MacGowan spoke not only to denounce the sexual violence against women in the Hollywood system, but to explain why women have not said anything so far, why victims smiled when they were scorned, why they expressed a satisfaction when they were used as things, and that for so many years: they were afraid and ashamed. She explained that at first they had at ceremonies organized by Hollywood to the glory of Hollywood wearing black dresses. She explained that it was not enough and that it took the explosion of this kind of rage that finally the truth comes out.

Indeed, weak signals - such as mourning one's own dignity - are not enough when what is involved in overthrowing is what has been built in the last thirty years, from the United States and whose main victims are women: what must be named expressly "The Road of Violence"..

____

Women are the cobblestones. We are the consumers. We are walking on this Road of Violence, we pay considerable sums to the industrialists who built this Road of Violence and develop it every day more by new highways, by drawing from the body of women, this inexhaustible wealth. We do it happily because the human beings we walk on, instead of shouting their pain and protesting against what we are doing to them, smile, affirm their satisfaction, seem to be asking for more.

That must stop. And that can stop. Because if we stop using this Road of Violence, then the industry of human, which is motivated and guided only by the magnitude of the profitability, will stop.

If we, active or potential consumers, do not do it, then women will be released themselves by violence, exhausted that we step on them. But if of ourselves we stopped to take this Route?

Because it does not take the only form of sexual violence in the film industry. Women are used and offered for the satisfaction of all our other desires. No limit, because they are so happy. This construction of the markets by new offers passes by the erasure of our own conscience. It is above all against our blindness that we must fight.

_____

Indeed, the solution is not that victims wear black dresses, which paradoxically refers to what would be even more "discretion" on their part, even "distinction", a solution that erases them even better. It is certainly not that the victims are fading away, they must not fade any more than they must apologize, they must not "disappear" anymore.

However, in order for us as consumers to borrow this "Road of Violence" and pay for the industries that build it, we must not even be aware of the fact that we consume human beings, an act of consumption we are rather reluctant. By ethics or because the Law reminds that the human being is a person and not a thing.

To provoke our act of consumption, the woman is thus masked. She is masked by a smile and a "consent". The argument is often returned to the faces of victims, perpetrators or their lawyers reminding that they have good "consented" to get into the bedroom, they "knew very well" that awaited them, they had a " interest "to do so (eg a role in a film). And to show pictures where we see the victims with the perpetrator of violence, both smiling, which would be the proof that they were "agree" or even "friends" and that we should not get involved. The moral order invading private life, that would be the enemy, the State not having to slip under the veil of women.

This argument is used systematically when it comes to organizing the transfer of women and children on a large scale. The surrogacy industry encourages us to pay agencies, clinics, doctors and lawyers to get a baby. The images and testimonies of "happy GPA" invite us to participate in the showdown with the States for the easy obtaining of a link of filiation between this child of which we wanted the birth in the world and us. Since for the moment the Law protects women by the prohibition of the GPA, any debate is good to take, any evolution of the Law going towards a "liberalization" of the practice. Industry leads us on the "good road".

What becomes of the mother? She disappeared. She is nothing. We are told that she is a "third party" vis-à-vis a relationship of filiation that is derived from the desire to parent. She ? She is only the mechanical instrument from which the child comes. Why worry about her? In the photos that are poured on the networks and in the debates, the women smile. In the recordings, they say: "I am happy, my only happiness is to make the happiness of others".

Thus, as consumers of women and children, we can walk on this Road. We know that mothers are poor, that they are paid. But what if they say they are happy? This is inevitably true, since they say it.

While we know that they are the mothers, the promotion of this industrial practice by the intermediaries most often established as a non-profit association in London or the United States underlines that these women have "freely consented" and that they have an "interest" because by the money received they can take care of their family. Everybody is happy. Fear, shame and guilt are never mentioned.

And so, thanks to our blindness, built by the industry and commerce of the human, and through which they thrive, the Road of Violence is unfolding around the world as never before previously.

____

No, the recognition of the practices is not the solution, it is on the contrary the cement that the industry awaits to consolidate the Road of the Violence, this infamous Road paved on the smiles of the victims, so happy to prostitute themselves and to make the "magnificent gifts" of surrogacy), paved with "consents" to fade ("I agree to be nothing, and it gives me pleasure, because my only pleasure is your pleasure" ), paved on altruism and privacy ("do not interfere with anything, do not ban anything, never mention the defense of the human being, let us stay with the administrative difficulties to be regulated, what is the use of State").

You can take a position one way or the other. But we must name the realities. Either we admit to living in a world where everything is yielding and acquiring. And we say Yes to the sale of women. Which are an abundant but valuable raw material. Either we do not admit it. By ethics, which posits that a human being can not have status of thing. And the Law must not only maintain the prohibition of surrogacy, but must achieve the international effectiveness of this prohibition. That it is difficult, yes but this is another question. Do not offer businesses Law, and not only Law but also Ethics, to pave the Road to Violence, still adding to the strength they have to do it.

___

Cryptocurrencies seem to be admitted, delivered from the State. And many rejoiced.

Let's take the question on the side of Law.

In France, we remember an article written in 1968 by the great lawyer Carbonnier : L'imagerie des monnaies  (Imagery of Coins), seeing in Caesar's face engraved on the coin the image of the State itself, guarantor of the entire monetary and exchange system.

In Europe, we remember the discussions on the image of the euro, how each state in the zone could express its existence while the guarantee was common and concentrated in the same central bank, preferring a public building to a character.

Today the currencies to be virtual do not have less an "image".

One could even say that they have only that, since it is no longer the State which, by the face of Caesar is inserted there.

But other faces can be imbued. Could the law find fault with it, because some figures would be "reprochable" because only Caesar would be beyond reproach? Could the Law draw any consequences from it, because some figures would be "engaging", less than that of Caesar but still a little?

Certainly, not faces that the Criminal Law rejects, not that of Jack the Ripper, not that of Hitler. But other historical figures less clearly banned, in this period where it is easily argued that everything would be "questionable" and therefore admissible and that besides everything would be "to discuss", the currency thus expressing this flow of discussion , speech that goes from hand to hand, from post to post on virtual networks?

Still, figures are block around them. This is particularly true in communities that can thus elect them to trust each other: just like their "Caesar", and knowing each other well, lend themselves more easily with confidence, to pay each other, while they would not lend to others, they would not buy from others.

Why no. Since we accept the principle of this currency, based on the only technical security (double encryption) and trust between people (intersubjectivity of a circle that has been chosen), without mentioning the issue of the debtor as a last resort, in order to challenge Caesar and public finances.

But let us take the hypothesis that the figure embedded in the virtual currency is that of Jesus. And the hypothesis is not fancy.

Indeed, the "religious currencies" are multiplying.

And the platforms that offer them insist on the fact that these tokens that are exchanged between people who believe in Jesus place great trust in the "son of God" and are therefore particularly trusting each other, for example in their respective capacity to keep their commitment. Outside the Law. On their respective ability to help each other. Outside the Law.

Is it necessary to forget the affirmation that it was necessary "to render to Caesar what was Caesar's"?

Let's ask some questions in Law.

- Reflections on what could or should be the "regulation" of non-state currencies, whether we call them virtual or not (in what does this change the nature of the currency?), That we secure them by encryption technology and / or by the decentralization of information, should they also relate to images?

- Are non-state currencies so much that the religious image, as long as it is not contrary to public order, is permissible, notably in legal systems where the constitutional principle of secularism has as its object and effect not only to neutralize the religious significance of religious objects but also to protect religious freedom?

- Can "religious currencies" be protected and have specific economic and financial significance, as the United States Supreme Court admitted in the Hobby Lobby judgment of June 30, 2014? Europe is not the United States.

- If the image of Jesus is encrusted on the currency, can we consider that the corpus is also inserted so that the platform that attracts a particularly interesting clientele (solvent, "responsible", holding its commitments, etc.) ? This insertion of the religious corpus, as the state was through the face of Caesar would operate not de jure but de facto, so that the company holding the platform should respond to third parties by the factual belief that this may have generated in third parties.

- Moreover, do not these "religious currencies" produce a specific systemic risk? Not that such and such a religion could collapse, or this or that religious effigy to undergo a haircut with a domino effect on all the saints, waves of doubt provoking a mistrust of all the faithful ones because the various religions are doing well, but precisely because the mark of these religious communities to which these platforms specifically appeal is to make "their own law" prevailing over the law of the Dtate, considered inferior since it comes only from men and not from God.

And now the churches are starting to coin money...

At the very least, it will be necessary in Ex Post that the faithful do not come to seek the state by guaranteeing if there is bankruptcy, because Caesar does not meddle in the affairs of Jesus. To each his currency and each to reread Carbonnier, one of the finest readers of the Bible

______