The recent news

Sept. 16, 2020

Teachings

Le Cours expose le contenu et les objectifs du Cours, assuré par Marie-Anne Frison-Roche qui y consacre de nombreux travaux et activités, notamment au sein du Journal of Regulation & Compliance, puis les modalités de validité ainsi que la bibliographie.

Contenu et objectif

La Compliance est un terme anglophone qu'il est difficile à traduire en langue française. Il est parfois traduit en "conformité", mais c'est en quelque sorte reculer pour mieux sauter car l'on ne sait guère définir juridiquement la "conformité". Le terme est d'ailleurs inséré dans des expressions comme "programme de conformité" ou "engagement de conformité", qui se réfèrent à autre chose. L'absence de définition nette est un handicap majeur en Droit et l'on affirme souvent que la Compliance ne relève pas de celui-ci, mais plutôt par exemple de l'éthique.

C'est pourtant au titre de violation de ces normes et obligations d'un corpus de Compliance que des sanctions très lourdes sont infligées à des opérateurs économiques. L'on s'aperçoit alors que  la Compliance a été élaborée dans des secteurs très particuliers, comme le secteur bancaire ou financier, pour des opérations très spécifiques, comme les flux financiers internationaux, ou des prohibitions particulières comme l'interdiction de corrompre ou de blanchir l'argent, ou pour exprimer les mises en œuvre d'engagement après des condamnations prononcées par les autorités de concurrence .

Mais tout d'abord c'est dans le Droit général de la concurrence que l'on trouve les premiers programmes de compliance . C'est ensuite et aujourd'hui dans des termes d'une généralité rarement atteinte que l'exigence de Compliance est aujourd'hui formulée, puisqu'il s'agirait de respecter la totalité de toutes les "normes" applicables en tous lieux par tout le monde. Plus encore, la Compliance serait la façon dont les opérateurs sont contraints de faire en sorte que les objectifs globaux des systèmes de régulation se concrétisent, puisque ces opérateurs privés "globaux" ont seuls la puissance pour y parvenir.

La Compliance devient alors l’internalisation de la Régulation .  Elle implique la supervision des opérateurs, notamment leur transparence , même s'ils n'agissent pas dans un secteur régulé. Le système juridique en est transfiguré, notamment dans son organisation naguère en branches distinctes : les branches du Droit ne seraient plus que des boites à outils (toolbox), interchangeables appréhendées à l'aune de leur effectivité pour la Compliance ...

Il est donc urgent de construire les principes directeurs de ce qui est en train d'apparaître : "Le Droit de la Compliance ". La Compliance ne semble pourtant s'appliquer qu'à des entreprises ou entités très puissantes, sans doute parce qu'elles sont puissantes, et l'on y retrouve toutes les branches du Droit : droit pénal , droit constitutionnel, droit international,, droit des obligations, droit administratif, droit de la régulation , droit de la concurrence , droit des données, droit financier, etc. Est pourtant en train d'émerger un "Droit de la Compliance ".

Voir ci-dessous l'explicitation du mode de validation, de la charge de travail, du format pédagogique et de la bibliographie. 

Sept. 16, 2020

Publications

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Se tenir bien dans l'espace numérique, in Penser le droit de la pensée. Mélanges en l'honneur de Michel Vivant, Lexis Nexis and Dalloz, 2020, pp. 155-168

Read Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's article (in French)

Read the working paper, written in English, on which this article is based, enriched with additional developments, technical references and hyperlinks

 

Summary of the article: 

The digital space is one of the scarce spaces not framed by a specific branch of Law, Freedom also offering opportunity to its actors to not "behave well", that is to express and diffuse broadly and immediately hateful thoughts through Hate speechs, which remained before in private or limited circles. The intimacy of Law and of the legal notion of Person is broken: Digital permits to individuals or organizations to act as demultiplied and anonymous characters, digital depersonalized actors who carry behaviors that are hurtful to other's dignity. 

Against that, Compliance Law offers an appropriate solution: internalizing in digital crucial operators the mission to disciplinary and substantially hold the digital space. The digital space has been structured by powerful firms able to maintain order. Because Law must not reduce digital space to be only a neutral market of digital prestations, these crucial operators, like social networks or search engines, must be forced to substantially control behaviors. It could be about an obligation of internet users to act with their face uncover, "real identity" policy controlled by firms, and to respect others' rights, privacy rights, dignity, intellectual property rights. In their Regulatory function, digital crucial firms must be supervised by public authorities. 

Thus, Compliance law substantially defined is the protector of the person as "subject of law" in the digital space, by the respect that others must have, this space passing from the status of free space to the one of civilized space, in which everyone is obliged to behave well. 

______

 

Read to go further: 

Sept. 16, 2020

Teachings : Generall Regulatory law

 

Résumé de la leçon.

L'on se dispute sans fin sur la "définition" de la Régulation et de ce qui constitue aujourd'hui le Droit de la Régulation. En effet, l'on a observé que des pans entiers de l'économie, de secteurs souvent caractérisés et par leur technicité et par leur dimension politique, sont aujourd'hui organisés d'une façon particulière, autour d'un Régulateur.

Ces régulateurs ont prise sur des "secteurs" ou des activités "sectorielles" (c'est pourquoi on les appelle parfois des "régulateurs verticaux"). Ainsi transport, poste, télécommunications, énergie, banque, finance, assurance, se sont chacun bâtis par des réglementations compliquées et comme imprégnées de l'objet technique sur lequel elles portent. Mais elles ont un point commun : un Régulateur, le plus souvent prenant la forme d'une Autorité administrative indépendante (AAI) ou d'une Agence, plus ou moins indépendante du Gouvernement, rendant des comptes au Parlement, doté de très multiples pouvoirs sur les opérateurs du secteur dont il a la charge. De fait le Régulateur est le symptôme du Droit de la Régulation.

Cette dimension institutionnelle a heurté la tradition juridique et politique française. Elle participe pourtant à l'émergence d'un "droit commun de la régulation", que les spécificités sectorielles continuent souvent de masquer. Ainsi le régulateur est ce par quoi le droit constitutionnel appréhende le droit de la régulation, il constitue donc le "bastion avancé" de celui-ci.

A partir de cette redistribution des personnages, mettant le Régulateur au centre, une règle nouvelle apparaît : le régulateur a autant de pouvoirs que cela est nécessaire, règle étrange pour un système juridique traditionnel, mais qui lui permet d'être présent à la fois en Ex Ante et en Ex Post.

Le Régulateur en est le titulaire juridiquement légitime dans un Droit de la régulation téléologiquement construit, qu'il s'agit de créer une concurrence dont le principe est simplement déclaré (premier cercle de la régulation), qu'il s'agisse de maintenir d'une façon définitive des équilibres instables affectés par une défaillance de marché (deuxième cercle) ou qu'il s'agisse de concrétiser des objectifs politiques que la "raison économique" ne connait pas.

A l'aune de ces impératifs techniques et économiques, qui font du régulateur un organe d'un genre nouveau, les distinctions juridiques classiques ne tiennent plus. Ainsi, la distinction empruntée au droit traditionnel entre "régulateur des libertés publiques" et "régulateur économique" est aujourd'hui inadéquate, comme le montre aussi bien la régulation financière que celle du numérique.

_____

 

Consulter les slides servant de support à la leçon

Accéder au Plan général du Cours de Droit commun de la Régulation.

Se reporter à la présentation générale du Cours de Droit commun de la Régulation.

_____

 

Consulter le Dictionnaire bilingue du Droit de la Régulation et de la Compliance (v. ci-dessous des entrées plus précises)

Consulter dans la Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation ce qui est plus particulièrement afférent aux Régulateurs (v. ci-dessous des articles plus précis)

_____

 

Consulter la Bibliographie générale du Cours de Droit de la Régulation

 

Consulter la bibliographie ci-dessous, spécifique à cette Leçon relative au Régulateur

 

 

Sept. 15, 2020

Conferences

Full reference : Frison-Roche, M.-A., Le "Droit européen de la Compliance" : un rempart contre la crise ? ("European Compliance Law": a bulwark against the crisis?"in Option Finances, Les Défis Conformité / Compliance (Conformity/Compliance Challenges), 15th of September 2020, Paris.

Read the program (in French)

Read the slides of the intervention (in French)

 

It was possible to attend to the manifestation in live

A bilingual video will be aviaible soon.

 

Summary of the intervention:

This intervention as keynote speaker was at the articulation between the first two sessions, one on "strategy in times of crisis" and the other on "good governance", and the third session on technology.

Because the question is: "?Does Europe has the pretension to prevent crisis, thank to Compliance Law ?" The answer must be: Yes or No.

If Europe has this pretension to allow answering Yes, and it must have it, it must have, through its public institutions and the crucial European companies - expressing their raison d'être - a clear, simple and coherent vision of the "monumental goals" that it pursues.

Compliance Law is adequate for such an "enterprise" (an "enterprise" always being an "adventure"!footnote-1902) since it is defined through its monumental goals, including crisis prevention, for which Europe must and is able to develop an exemplary model.

When this is done, and it is in the process of being done, it is necessary but sufficient to carry out the technical work of adjusting the legal technical tools with these monumental goals.

____

Sept. 10, 2020

Publications

This working document is the basis of an article written in French and published in the Recueil Dalloz in the Chroniques MAFR Droit de la Compliance (see the English presentation of this Chronique).

Read the presentation in English ot the other chroniques published by the Recueil Dalloz in these series Chroniques MAFR Droit de la Compliance

Sept. 2, 2020

Editorial responsibilities : Direction of the collection "Cours-Série Droit privé", Editions Dalloz (33)

Référence complète : Cayrol, N., Procédure civile, 3e éd., (À jour de la loi de programmation 2018-2022 et de réforme pour la justice), Coll. "Cours Dalloz-Série Droit privé", Dalloz, 2020, 582 p.

 

L'étude de la procédure civile est indispensable à tous les étudiants désireux d'embrasser une « carrière judiciaire » : magistrat, avocat, huissier, etc. Par nombre d'aspects, la procédure civile est bien, en effet, un droit professionnel, un droit à l'usage des professionnels du procès. La matière figure d'ailleurs aux épreuves des concours et examens d'accès à ces professions.

Mais la procédure civile n'est pas seulement un droit professionnel : elle traite de problèmes qui intéressent tous les juristes, quels qu'ils soient, qu'ils pratiquent ou non la procédure. La connaissance des notions procédurales de base est nécessaire pour la bonne compréhension de nombreuses questions de droit.

Lire la table des matières.

Lire la quatrième de couverture.

 

Voir l'ensemble de la collection "Cours Dalloz-Série Droit privé"

 

Updated: July 25, 2020 (Initial publication: July 1, 2020)

Publications

This working document served as the basis for an article, contribution in the collective book Compliance Tools, 2020

___

Summary of this working paper:

Training is a specific Compliance tool and a dimension that each Compliance tool expresses. 

Firstly, as a training it is a specific Compliance Tool, it is supervised by Regulators. It even becomes compulsory when it is contained in Compliance programs. Since the effectivity and the efficiency are legal requirements, what is therefore the margin of companies to design it and how can we measure its result?

Secondly, as each Compliance Tool contains, more and more, an educational dimension, we can take back each of them to detect this perspective. Thus, even sanctions and prescriptions, are lessons: lessons given, lessons to follow. The question is then to know who, in this so pedagogic Compliance Law, are the "instructors"?

___________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

Introduction:

Training is akin to these things - and very precious - that we do, or even dream of doing, but so poorly expressed from the moment we take them as an object of technical writing. Just do it.

It would be however unfortunate to publish a book on Compliance Tools without giving a particular place to training, the piece would miss in the puzzle.

So much money spent by companies, by fair or foul means, especially when Compliance programs imposed as sanctions contain heavy training obligations leading people to retain word for word everything that is forbidden to them, in order to always abstain from now on. Training is thus the sharp point of such Hard Law appearing under the steel of Criminal Law's sword in amphitheaters and e-learnings. 

But also so much speeches about the necessity of a "Compliance culture" which should be instilled to firms, Compliance spousing with joy in an harmony with their "raison d'être" and the historical identity of this group of people which is the company itself through trainings which tell Compliance as a link, an outstretched hand toward those with whom managers want to renew a moral contract in an ethic for which they give the good example. It is not Prohibition anymore but Communication and Community that set the tone of a human dialogue with employees, stakeholders, administration and judges. 

It is possible to assume that the former does not exclude the latter, that Training should target all of this, the learning of mandatory prescriptions to follow without discussion but also the adhesion to guidelines, and this because everyone has understood that they are funded.

Everything and its contrary, then. "Learning by heart" takes here its full sense: get everyone to remember mechanically in order for no one to misstep (with always more machines which massively teach us the regulatory corpus on our mobile screens) but also succeed in bringing our "heart" in Compliance, thanks to specific training methods (with always smaller groups, with always less public discussions in pleasant places). Everything and its contrary, then.

It would be imperative but also sufficient to cumulate. Doing everything. Those who propose training softwares as those who organize conferences, meetings and travels and are favorable to this addition of face-to-face and distancing methods, of mechanic and of human relations. Concretely, at the end companies observe that since the first does not replace the second, costs add up. But, in Compliance, costs constitute a grave default of it, training taking a large part of this default. Managers end up finding the addition too heavy, especially if they thought that training of people is one of the public school's mission and not one of private companies' purpose!footnote-1837.

Moreover, training to Compliance is not outside Compliance Law, which makes it specific!footnote-1838. Indeed, Compliance Law, corpus of Ex Ante mechanisms, targets to concretize "monumental goals"!footnote-1836. Set by public authorities, these monumental goals are internalized in companies in order for them to implement expected means in order for them to be reached in the future. These monumental goals can be negative (that corruption, money laundering, human rights violations, financial system crisis, etc. shall not occur), or positive (that ecological equilibrium shall be restored, that education shall be supplied, that healthcare shall be provided, etc.).

Compliance Law takes as criteria of effectivity for implemented mechanisms, their reality, but also their efficiency, that is their ability to make sure their goal is achieved.Training must achieve its goal. Thus, in Compliance, the purpose is not only the one of every training, that is transmitting a knowledge in order to making the student more learned!footnote-1839, but it is to contribute to the "monumental goal" of Compliance Law itself, which is a practical goal and not a scholar goal. For example, training about the applicable rules concerning corruption should have an effect to reduce corruption. And because corruption is itself a part of Compliance Law, in the same way the Regulation Authority can force to educate oneself or train others, the Supervision Authority should control not only the reality but also the effectivity and the efficiency of trainings. 

However, the effectivity and the efficiency of Compliance training, because they are full part of Compliance Law, should be controlled by the Authority not only in their reality but also in their concrete ability to participate in the pursued goal. Thus, to keep the example of fight against corruption, training plays in it an essential role because the firm faces an alternative: either a mechanic solution consisting in setting literal interdictions, for example the interdiction to give up a value greater than a certain amount (according to the "anti-gift" rule) with the risk of getting around that every literal prescription offers, or a a solution by training consisting in explaining to everybody that it is wrong to corrupt but that it is acceptable to give samples. Training rather bets on spirit while the machine integrates the letter. 

But this refers to the Regulation and Supervision Authority which will appreciate the company due diligences to reach the goals. One observes that, more and more, Authorities economize one step: rather than explain to the companies how educate people that work for them or with them, regulators educate directly.  Is on this point remarkable the "guide" published in 2012, whose second edition of 2019 has been updated in 2020, jointly by the Department of Justice (DoJ) and the financial regulator (Securities &Exchanges Commission - SEC) to know everything about the Foreign Corruption Practices Act (FCPA). Through the explanations offered to everyone!footnote-1840 of the principles, the reminded definitions, the told cases, they are behaviors prescriptions which are formulated especially for foreign companies by the prosecutor authority and the American sanction authority, allied in this handbook which has such weight that we can consider that it is as valuable as a guideline, soft law creator of Law and rights. 

In the concentration of all powers which is often reproached to the Regulator, there is also the magisterium of the teacher, the one who educates stakeholders. After having assumed, on the American model, that the regulator should be the "advocate" of the rules for companies, proving to them the interest  that they have to respect them, it is logical that, in what some have called "Regulation, Act 2" this Regulator's pleading about the good news of Regulation for the firm justifying thus that this one integrates it in Ex Ante was prolonged in magistral lesson: the "regulator-institutor" explains to everybody how using rules for an always still in progress Law ("Better Regulation"). 

While training was before only peripheral, it is now at the heart. If it is so important, as every other "Compliance tool", it should take what we expect from it. The publications about training most often exhibit what it should be and a sorrowful spirit measures what sometimes appears as a huge gap between descriptions and realities sometimes reported. 

Educating being without any doubt one of the most difficult actions, we should probably neither describe a paradise of maieutics nor write a hot paper against what already has  the merit to exist, but list what we can expect from Training mechanisms when they apply to Compliance, because here, rather more than for the other tools, it is a mean obligation. Which content should have a training ? (I). Because Compliance Law targets training as one of the mean to reach "monumental goals" which constitutes the substantial heart of this branch of Law, the training dimension is not limited to stamped training, finding back this pedagogical dimension in almost all the other tools (II). In that, Training appears as the alpha and the omega of Compliance.

 

 

July 15, 2020

Publications

Full Reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Training:  content and container of Compliance Law, in M.-A. (ed.), Compliance Tools, serie "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance & Bruylant, 2020, to be published.

This article is based on a bilingual Working Paper, including additional technical developments, pop-up notes and hypertext links.

 

Consult an overview of the volume in which the article was published.

 

___

 

Summary of the article

Firstly, as Training is a specific Compliance tool, it is supervised by Regulators. It becomes mandatory when it is contained in Compliance programs or sanction decisions. Since effectiveness and efficiency are legal requirements, what is the margin of companies to design them and how to measure the result?

Secondly, as long as each Compliance tool includes, more and more, an educational dimension, we can take each of them to identify this perspective. So even condemnations and prescriptions are so many lessons, lessons given, lessons to be followed. The question is then to know who, in this so pedagogical Compliance Law, are the "teachers"?

 

____

 

Consulter les résumés des autres articles composant l'ouvrage.  

 

____