Monumental Goal

► Full Reference: G. Loiseau, “L’intensité de l’obligation de vigilance selon les secteurs : le cas des opérateurs numériques” (The intensity of the Duty of Vigilance in different sectors: the case of digital operators), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (dir.), L’obligation de Compliance, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Lefebvre-Dalloz, coll. “Régulations & Compliance“, 2025, pp. 559-569. - read the general presentation of the book, L’obligation de Compliance, in which the contribution is published - ► This article is written in French. English summary of this contribution (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance – JoRC): The author develops the case of digital operators. He highlights the paradox of a Law that started from a text laying down the principle that hosting providers are not liable, because of their technical neutrality, and ended up with the DSA imposing due diligence on them, but he points out that this obligation only arises once a notification has been made to the digital operator, and that there is an express prohibition of any general obligation to monitor information. Moreover, there is no general duty of vigilance incumbent on digital operators, even if recent case law seems to be tightening the role imposed on hosting providers. The Monumental Goal here is to fight against illegal content, but freedom of expression must also be preserved and regulations vary according to the type of content, whereas the DSA has a more general conception, aims at a logic of accountability and prevention of systemic risks. But wanting to make platforms “accountable” Ex Ante, without touching the liability regime Ex Post, may pose a problem. The duty of vigilance will vary depending on whether the digital operator plays a passive or active role. This may lead platforms to adopt prior measures that may constitute structural obligations, with the trusted third party taking the form of a trusted signaller. The platform is thus made responsible for its own vigilance, but despite the possibility of enhanced vigilance, this does not have to extend to investigative measures. There are, however, specific enhanced vigilance obligations for very large platforms, justified by the risks involved and the types of content (terrorism, pornography). - 🦉This article is available in full text to those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche’s courses -

- ► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche & G. Loiseau (dir.), Durabilité de l’Internet : le rôle des opérateurs du système des noms de domaine. Compliance et régulation de l’espace numérique (Sustainability of the Internet: the role of the operators of the domain name system. Compliance and regulation of the digital space), Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Institut de Recherche Juridique de la Sorbonne (André Tunc – IRJS), Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne University, 21 Fabruary 2025 - ► General presentation of this symposium: The digital space has been built on and as a system. Its primary interest is of a negative nature: it consists of to be preserved against the prospect of systemic failure, of not collapsing. Like all other systems, this ‘Monumental Goal’ specific to the digital system justifies resources that incorporate this concern for the future. As with all systems, it integrates and relies on the specific technical nature of this system. The digital space is largely based on the invention, technology and architecture of domain names. Domain names, as an addressing system, enable users to enter the digital space and find other Internet users. The uniqueness and solidity of the domain name system, entrusted to a single root and decentralisation, makes this community possible for those who use the digital space and ensures the technical durability required, without which the digital space would be compromised. The architecture, operation, operators and what they do under the control of legislators, regulators, judges and legal subjects are therefore examined from a dual technical and legal perspective, in the light of the imperative of sustainability. This allows to progress in 4 stages. Firstly, to examine the permanence in time and space of the domain name system, insofar as it is the foundation of the Internet and the digital system. This technical construction gives rise to legal qualifications, not only for the present but also for the future, since the Web3 offers new technical solutions. Secondly, this technical sustainability is an imperative that is built into the operators of the domain names themselves, which are inter-linked not only at national level but also at global level, this cross-linking being necessary for the security of the system. The State is present through public law techniques that enable surveillance, control and possible recovery. Thirdly, it imposes constraints on the operators subject to them in order to serve this monumental goal of technical sustainability, and these constraints themselves generate as many powers as they need to usefully achieve this mission. This proportionality must be at the heart of the method and the requirements. The relationship between constraints and powers also stems from it. Fourthly, this imperative of technical sustainability, which is global in nature, gives way to imperatives of societal sustainability, more localised in space and time, when domain name operators are called upon by the legitimate authors of binding standards, legislators in the first instance, to express concerns such as the protection of people involved in the digital space and whose rights are compromised or who are in danger. This second type of sustainability, which is more localised and less inherent in the architecture of the Internet, is justified by the available power of the operators concerned and their adherence to social imperatives. The resulting constraints and powers are therefore not the same. The 2 sustainabilities must then be articulated in a conception that is both teleological and pragmatic. - - ► Speakers (they will speak in French, but the book to be published will be in English): 🎤Pierre Bonis, Chief Executive Officer of the Association française pour le nommage Internet en coopération (Afnic) 🎤Lucien Castex, Adviser of the Afnic Chief Executive Officer for Research internet and society and Internet governance 🎤Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, Full Professor of Regulatory and Compliance Law, Director of the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) 🎤Claire Leveneur, Senior Lecturer at Paris-Est Créteil University 🎤Grégoire Loiseau, Full Professor at Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne University 🎤Samir Merabet, Full Professor at the University of West Indies 🎤Antoine Oumedjkane, Senior Lecturer at Lille University 🎤Frédéric Sardain, attorney at law, Jeantet law firm - read below a detailed presentation of this event⤵️

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Monumental Goals, normative anchoring of Compliance Law", in Series of videos Overhang / Surplomb, 1st February 2025 - watch on LinkedIn this video of the Series Surplomb/Overhang - watch on LinkedIn this video of the Serie Surplomb/Overhang, published in the Newsletter Surplomb/Overhang, by MAFR - 🎬watch below this video of the Serie Surplomb/Overhang⤵️ - Surplomb/Overhang, by mafr the Serie of videos dedicated to Regulation, Compliance and Vigilance

🌐 follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law  - ► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Monumental Goals, coll. "Compliance & Regulation", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, 2023, 528 p. - ► This book in a few words: Seize Compliance by its mind: its Monumental Goals. The notion of "monumental goals" of Compliance was proposed in 2016 by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche¹🕴️M.A. Frison-Roche, 📝Compliance Law, 2016.. It has become explicit in the texts and the resolution of cases, for example to fight against climate change, make human beings effectively equal, force to be extraterritorially vigilant about suppliers.  Compliance Monumental Goals are targeted ex ante by regulations, contracts, CSR, and international treaties. Creating an alliance between business and political authorities, aiming for a new form of sovereignty. The presence in litigation of these Monumental Goals of global dimension renews the responsibilities and the Judge office. Describing and conceiving these Monumental Goals makes it possible to anticipate Compliance Law, which is more powerful every day. - 📕 In parallel, a book in French Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance, is published in the collection "Régulations & Compliance" co-published by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz.  - 📅 This book follows a cycle of colloquia 2021 organized by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and its universities partners.  - 📚   This book is inserted in this series created by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche for developing Compliance Law. 📚   read the presentations of the other books of this Compliance Series:  📘M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed), Compliance Juridictionnalisation, 2022 📘M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Tools, 2020 - ► go to the general presentation of this 📚Series ​Compliance & Regulation, conceived, founded et managed by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, co-published par the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant.  - ► General construction of the book:  The book opens with an Introduction, ​which proposes the Monumental Goals as definition of Compliance Law putting them at its "beating heart", giving this new branch of law its originality and specificity, explaining what, in the History of the United States and Europe, gave birth to this singular corpus and justifies a substantial definition of Compliance Law. The concept of Monumental Goals is explained, justifying both systemic and political nature of Compliance Law, the practical consequences of which legal specific rules are thus better identified and limited, since Compliance Law does not lead to all-obedience. We can then determine what we can expect from this Law of the Future that is Compliance Law. From there, the book unfolds in 5 chapters. A first chapter is devoted to the "radioscopy" of this notion, in itself and branch of Law by branch of Law. A second chapter aims to measure how the Monumental Goals are questioned by a crisis situation, for example in a health situation, but not in that example, if they aggravate it and must be discarded, or if, on the contrary, they are exactly conceived for this hypothesis. of crisis, risks, catastrophes and that it is advisable to exploit them, in particular in order, in this "test", to benefit from the alliance between the political authorities, public powers and crucial operators. Once made explicit and tested, the Monumental Goals must find a sure way to be taken into account. This is why a third chapter aims to measure in principle and in practice how the Proportionality method can help the integration of Compliance, thus giving a new dimension to the Law without dragging it into insecurity and illegitimate grabbing of powers. But because Compliance Monumental Goals express a very great ambition, the question of a bearable, even beneficial relationship with the international competitiveness of companies, standards and systems must be opened. This is the object of the fourth chapter.   Finally, because the Monumental Goals express by nature a new ambition of the Law in a world which must not give up in what could be the prospect of its abyss, the fifth chapter has for object the relationship between the Monumental Goals of Compliance and Sovereignty. - ► Table of Content : INTRODUCTION 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Main Aspects of the Book. The Monumental Goals of Compliance Law 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Compliance Monumental Goals, Beating Heart of Compliance Law   CHAPTER I. THE VERY IDEA OF MONUMENTAL GOALS, THE BEATING HEART OF COMPLIANCE LAW 🕴️R.-O. Maistre, 📝What are the Monumental Goals for the Regulator in a Rapidly Changing Audiovisual and Digital Landscape? 🕴️A.-V. Le Fur, 📝Interest and “raison d’être” of the Company: How Does It Fit Together with the Compliance Monumental Goals? 🕴️A. Le Goff, 📝Monumental Goals Perceived by the Firm: Serene Business or Business under Pressure? 🕴️J.-F. Vaquieri, 📝The “Monumental Goals of Compliance” from the Company’s Perspective – the Case of Enedis 🕴️M. Malaurie-Vignal, 📝Monumental Goals of Market Law – Reflection on the Method 🕴️C. Peicuti et 🕴️J. Beyssade,📝Feminisation of Positions of Responsibility in the Workplace as a Goal of Compliance. Example of the Banking Sector 🕴️I. Gavanon, 📝Data Protection Law in the Digital Economy Confronted to Monumental Goals 🕴️B. Petit, 📝The Monumental Goals of (European) Labour Law: a Changing System with Balances to be Consolidated 🕴️G. Beaussonie, 📝Do Criminal Law and Compliance Form a System? 🕴️Ch. Huglo,📝Under what Conditions could Climate Law Constitute a Priority Monumental Goal?   CHAPTER II. IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPLIANCE MONUMENTAL GOALS IN ARTICULATION WITH THE MAJOR PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY 🕴️L. Rapp, 📝Compliance, Proportionality and Normativity 🕴️B. Bär-Bouyssière, 📝Proportionality and Compliance 🕴️A. Mendoza-Caminade, 📝Proportionality and Evaluation. The Example of Intellectual Property Law 🕴️L. Meziani, 📝Proportionality in Compliance, the Guarantee of Public Order in Companies 🕴️M. Segonds, 📝Compliance, Proportionality and Sanction. A French Perspective 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Definition of Proportionality and Definition of Compliance Law   CHAPTER III. COMPLIANCE MONUMENTAL GOALS TESTED BY CRISIS SITUATIONS 🕴️A. Oumedjkane, A. Tehrani et P. Idoux, 📝Public Norms and Compliance in Crisis Periods: Testing Monumental Goals. A Few Thoughts 🕴️J. Bonnet, 📝The Crisis, an Opportunity to Seize Compliance as a Mode of Communication for Public Authorities 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Place and Role of Companies in the Creation and Effectiveness of Compliance Law in Crisis   CHAPTER IV. EFFECTIVENESS OF COMPLIANCE MONUMENTAL GOALS AND INTERNATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS 🕴️B. Deffains, 📝Compliance and International Competitiveness 🕴️J.-Ch. Roda, 📝Compliance, Internal Investigations and International Competitiveness: What are Risks for the French Companies (in the Light of Antitrust Law)? 🕴️F. Marty, 📝The Case for Compliance Programs in International Competitiveness: A Competition Law and Economics Perspective 🕴️S. Lochmann, 📝ESG Rating Agencies and Compliance as an Effective Way of Increasing International Competitiveness 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Assessment of Whistleblowing and Vigilance Obligation with regard to International Competitiveness   CHAPTER V. COMPLIANCE SUPPORTED BY MONUMENTAL GOALS, A NEW WAY FOR SOVEREIGNTY 🕴️R. Bismuth, 📝The Ambiguous Relations between Corporate Compliance and Sovereignty 🕴️L. Benzoni, 📝International Trade, Competitivity and Sovereignty: Towards a Political Economy of Compliance 🕴️S. Pottier, 📝In Favour of European Compliance, a Vehicle of Economic and Political Assertion 🕴️Ch. André, 📝State Sovereingty, Sovereingty of the People: What Social Contract for Compliance? 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝The Principle of Active Systemic Proximity: Corollary of the Renewal of the Principle of Sovereignty by Compliance Law -

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Place and Role of Companies in the Creation and Effectiveness of Compliance Law in situation of crisis", in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Monumental Goals, series "Compliance & Regulation", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, 2023, pp. 325-340. - ► Article Summary:  This article has a very topic: the place of private Companies, regarding the chapter's issue: "the ordeal of a crisis". The crisis constitutes a "test", that is to say, it brings evidence. Let us take it as such. Indeed, during the health crisis, Companies have helped the Public Authorities to resist the shock, to endure and to get out of the Crisis. They did so by force, but they also took initiatives in this direction. From this too, we must learn lessons for the next crisis that will come. It is possible that this has already started in the form of another global and systemic crisis: the environmental crisis. In view of what we have been able to observe and the evolution of the Law, of the standards adopted by the Authorities but also by the new case law, what can we expect from Companies in the face of this next Crisis, willingly and strength? -   🚧Read the bilingual Working Paper, with more developments, technical references, and hypertext links. - 📘go to the general presentation of the book, Compliance Monumental Goals, in which this article is published - ► read the presentations of the other Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's contributions in this book:  📝Compliance Monumental Goals, beating heart of Compliance Law,  📝Definition of Principe of Proportionality and Definition of Compliance Law, 📝 Assessment of Whistleblowing and the duty of Vigilance - .  

🌐 follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law  - ► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Monumental Goals, series “Compliance and Regulation“, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, 2023, 518 p. - ► This book in a few words: Seize Compliance by its mind: its Monumental Goals. The notion of “monumental goals” of Compliance was proposed in 2016 by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche¹🕴️M.A. Frison-Roche, 📝Compliance Law, 2016.. It has become explicit in the texts and the resolution of cases, for example to fight against climate change, make human beings effectively equal, force to be extraterritorially vigilant about suppliers. Compliance Monumental Goals are targeted ex ante by regulations, contracts, CSR, and international treaties. Creating an alliance between business and political authorities, aiming for a new form of sovereignty. The presence in litigation of these Monumental Goals of global dimension renews the responsibilities and the Judge office. Describing and conceiving these Monumental Goals makes it possible to anticipate Compliance Law, which is more powerful every day. -  In parallel, a book in French Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance, is published in the collection “Régulations & Compliance” co-published by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz. - 📅 This book follows a cycle of colloquia 2021 organized by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and its universities partners. -    This book is inserted in this series created by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche for developing Compliance Law.    read the presentations of the other books of this Compliance Series:  M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed), Compliance Juridictionnalisation, 2022 M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Tools, 2020 - ► go to the general presentation of this Series ​Compliance & Regulation, conceived, founded et managed by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, co-published par the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant. - ► General construction of the book: The book opens with an Introduction, ​which proposes the Monumental Goals as definition of Compliance Law putting them at its “beating heart”, giving this new branch of law its originality and specificity, explaining what, in the History of the United States and Europe, gave birth to this singular corpus and justifies a substantial definition of Compliance Law. The concept of Monumental Goals is explained, justifying both systemic and political nature of Compliance Law, the practical consequences of which legal specific rules are thus better identified and limited, since Compliance Law does not lead to all-obedience. We can then determine what we can expect from this Law of the Future that is Compliance Law. From there, the book unfolds in 5 chapters. A first chapter is devoted to the “radioscopy” of this notion, in itself and branch of Law by branch of Law. A second chapter aims to measure how the Monumental Goals are questioned by a crisis situation, for example in a health situation, but not in that example, if they aggravate it and must be discarded, or if, on the contrary, they are exactly conceived for this hypothesis. of crisis, risks, catastrophes and that it is advisable to exploit them, in particular in order, in this “test”, to benefit from the alliance between the political authorities, public powers and crucial operators. Once made explicit and tested, the Monumental Goals must find a sure way to be taken into account. This is why a third chapter aims to measure in principle and in practice how the Proportionality method can help the integration of Compliance, thus giving a new dimension to the Law without dragging it into insecurity and illegitimate grabbing of powers. But because Compliance Monumental Goals express a very great ambition, the question of a bearable, even beneficial relationship with the international competitiveness of companies, standards and systems must be opened. This is the object of the fourth chapter. Finally, because the Monumental Goals express by nature a new ambition of the Law in a world which must not give up in what could be the prospect of its abyss, the fifth chapter has for object the relationship between the Monumental Goals of Compliance and Sovereignty. - ► Table of Content : INTRODUCTION 🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A., 📝Compliance Monumental Goals, beating heart of Compliance Law   CHAPTER I. THE VERY IDEA OF MONUMENTAL GOALS, THE BEATING HEART OF COMPLIANCE LAW 🕴️Maistre, R.-O., 📝What monumental goals for the Regulator in a rapidly changing audiovisual and digital landscape? ; 🕴️Le Fur, A.-V., 📝Interest and “raison d’être” of the company: how do they fit with the Compliance Monumental Goals? ;; 🕴️Malaurie, M., 📝Monumental goals of Market Law. Reflection on the method 🕴️Peicuti, C. & 🕴️Beyssade, J.,📝The Feminization of Responsability positions in Companies as a Compliance Goal. Example of the banking sector 🕴️Petit, B., 📝The Monumental Goals of (European) Labour Law: a Changing System with Balances to be Consolidated 🕴️Vaquieri, J.-F.,📝 The “Monumental Goals” perceived by the company. The example of Enedis. 🕴️Huglo, Ch., 📝Under what conditions could Climate Law constitute a priority Monumental Goal? CHAPTER II. IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPLIANCE MONUMENTAL GOALS IN ARTICULATION OF THE MAJOR PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY 🕴️Rapp, L., 📝Proportionality and Normativity 🕴️Bär-Bouyssière, B., 📝Practical obstacles to the effective place of Proportionality in Compliance 🕴️Meziani, L., 📝Proportionality in Compliance, the guarantee of public order in companies 🕴️Segonds, M., 📝Compliance, Proportionality and Sanction. The example of the sanctions taken by the French Anticorruption Agency  🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A., 📝Definition of Proportionality and Definition of Compliance   CHAPTER III. COMPLIANCE MONUMENTAL GOALS TESTED BY CRISIS SITUATIONS 🕴️Oumedjkane, A., 🕴️Tehrani, A. & Idoux, P., 📝Public Norms and Compliance in times of Crisis: Monumental Goals tested: Elements for a Problematic 🕴️Bonnet, J., 📝The Crisis, an opportunity to seize Compliance as a Mode of Communication by Public Authorities 🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A., 📝Role and Place of Companies in the Creation and Effectiveness of Compliance Law in Crisis   CHAPTER IV. EFFECTIVENESS OF COMPLIANCE MONUMENTAL GOALS AND INTERNATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS 🕴️Deffains, B., 📝The economic challenge of international competitiveness of Compliance 🕴️Marty, F., 📝The Case for Compliance Programs in International Competitiveness: A Competition Law and Economics Perspective 🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A., 📝Assessment of Whistleblowing, and the obligation of Vigilance   CHAPTER V. COMPLIANCE SUPPORTED BY MONUMENTAL GOALS AND NEW WAY FO SOVEREIGNY 🕴️Bismuth, R., 📝Compliance and Sovereignty: ambiguous relationships 🕴️Pottier, S., 📝In favour of European compliance, a vehicle of economic and political assertion 🕴️André, Ch., 📝State sovereignty, popular sovereignty: what social contract for compliance?  🕴️Frison-Roche, M.-A., 📝The Principle of Active Systemic Proximity, a corollary of the renewal of the Principle of Sovereignty by Compliance Law -

► Full Reference: I. Gavanon, “Data Protection Law in the Digital Economy Confronted to Monumental Goals”, in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Monumental Goals, coll. “Compliance & Regulation“, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, 2023, pp. 137-146. - read a general presentation of the book, Compliance Monumental Goals, in which this article is published. - ► Summary of the article: -

► Full Reference: A. Mendoza-Caminade, “Proportionality and Evaluation. The Example of Intellectual Property Law”, in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Monumental Goals, coll. “Compliance & Regulation“, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, 2023, pp. 221-236. - read a general presentation of the book, Compliance Monumental Goals, in which this article is published. - ► Summary of the article: -

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance (Compliance Monumental Goals), coll. “Régulations & Compliance“, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2022, 520 p. - In parallel, the English version of this book, Compliance Monumental Goals, is published in the collection co-published by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant.  - 📅This book comes after a cycle of colloquia 2021 organised by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC)and its Universities partners.  - This volume is the continuation of the books dedicated to Compliance in this collection. ► Read the presentations of the other books in the series: the following books: 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance (Compliance Jurisdictionalisation), 2023 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche and M. Boissavy (eds.), Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquête interne – CJIP – CRPC (Compliance and rights of the defence. Internal investigation – French Judicial Public Interest Agreement – French guilty plea procedure), 2024 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), L’Obligation de Compliance (Compliance Obligation), 2025 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance et Contrat (Compliance and Contract), forthcoming 🕴️L. Laref (ed.), Compliance et vigilance bancaire (Compliance and Banking Vigilance), forthcoming 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, Le système juridique global des noms de domaine. Structure multi-acteurs et durabilité de l’Internet (The Global Legal System of Domain Names. Multi-Stakeholder Structure and Sustainability of the Internet), forthcoming 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Le système probatoire de la Compliance, forthcoming   the previous books: 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Les outils de la Compliance (Compliance Tools), 2021 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Pour une Europe de la Compliance (For the Europe of the Compliance), 2019 🕴️N. Borga, J.-Cl. Marin and J.-Ch. Roda (eds.), Compliance : l’entreprise, le régulateur et le juge (Compliance: the Company, the Regulator and the Judge), 2018 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Régulation, Supervision, Compliance (Regulation, Supervision, Compliance), 2017 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Internet, espace d’interrégulation (Internet, Space of Interregulation), 2016 Read the presentations of the other titles of the collection. - ► General presentation of the book: Seize Compliance by its mind: its Monumental Goals. The notion of “monumental goals” of Compliance was proposed in 2016 by Marie-Anne Frison-Roche¹M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Le droit de la compliance", 2016. It has become explicit in the texts and the resolution of cases, for example to fight against climate change, make human beings effectively equal, force to be extraterritorially vigilant about suppliers.  Compliance Monumental Goals are targeted ex ante by regulations, contracts, CSR, and international treaties. Creating an alliance between business and political authorities, aiming for a new form of sovereignty. The presence in litigation of these Monumental Goals of global dimension renews the responsibilities and the Judge office. Describing and conceiving these Monumental Goals makes it possible to anticipate Compliance Law, which is more powerful every day. - 🏗️General construction of the book : The book opens with a double Introduction, the first summarizing the book (in free access) ​and the second, more substantial, proposing  the Monumental Goals as definition of Compliance Law putting them at its “beating heart”, giving this new branch of law its originality and specificity, explaining what, in the History of the United States and Europe, gave birth to this singular corpus and justifies a substantial definition of Compliance Law. The concept of Monumental Goals is explained, justifying both systemic and political nature of Compliance Law, the practical consequences of which legal specific rules are thus better identified and limited, since Compliance Law does not lead to all-obedience. We can then determine what we can expect from this Law of the Future that is Compliance Law. From there, the book unfolds in 5 titles. A first Title is devoted to the “radioscopy” of this notion, in itself and branch of Law by branch of Law. A second Title aims to measure how the Monumental Goals are questioned by a crisis, for example in a health situation, but not in that example, if they aggravate it and must be discarded, or if, on the contrary, they are exactly conceived for this hypothesis. of crisis, risks, catastrophes and that it is advisable to exploit them, in order, in this “test”, to benefit from the alliance between the political authorities, public powers and crucial operators. Once made explicit and tested, the Monumental Goals must find a sure way to be considered. Therefore a third Title aims to measure in principle and in practice how the Proportionality method can help the integration of Compliance, thus giving a new dimension to the Law without dragging it into insecurity and illegitimate grabbing of powers. But because Compliance Monumental Goals express a very great ambition, the question of a bearable, even beneficial relationship with the international competitiveness of companies, standards and systems must be opened. This is the object of the fourth Title.   Finally, because the Monumental Goals express by nature a new ambition of the Law in a world which must not give up in what could be the prospect of its abyss, the fifth Title has for object the relationship between the Monumental Goals of Compliance and Sovereignty. - ► Understand the book through the Table of Contents and the summaries of each article:   DOUBLE INTRODUCTION 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Résumé de l’ouvrage Les buts monumentaux du droit de la compliance (free access : click here to read this article (in French))  🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Les Buts Monumentaux, cœur battant du Droit de la Compliance   I. LA NOTION DE BUTS MONUMENTAUX DE LA COMPLIANCE (“THE IDEA OF COMPLIANCE MONUMENTAL GOALS”)  🕴️R.-O. Maistre, 📝Quels buts fondamentaux pour le régulateur dans un paysage audiovisuel et numérique en pleine mutation ? 🕴️A.V. Le Fur, 📝Intérêt et raison d’être de l’entreprise : quelle articulation avec les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance ?   🕴️A. Le Goff, 📝La part des banques dans la concrétisation des Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance 🕴️J.-F. Vaquieri,📝Les “Buts Monumentaux” perçus par l’entreprise. L’exemple d’Enedis 🕴️M. Malaurie-Vignal, 📝Les Buts Monumentaux du droit du marché. Réflexion sur la méthode 🕴️D. de La Garanderie, 📝Sur les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance sociale  🕴️C. Peicuti & 🕴️J. Beyssade, 📝La féminisation des postes à responsabilité dans les entreprises comme But de la Compliance. Exemple du secteur bancaire 🕴️I. Gavanon, 📝Le droit des données personnelles dans l’économie numérique à l’épreuve des Buts Monumentaux 🕴️B. Petit, 📝Les Buts Monumentaux du droit (européen) des relations de travail : un système mouvant aux équilibres à consolider    🕴️G. Beaussonie, 📝Droit pénal et Compliance font-ils système ? 🕴️Ch. Huglo, 📝À quelles conditions le Droit climatique pourrait-il constituer un But Monumental prioritaire ?   II. MISE EN OEUVRE DES BUTS MONUMENTAUX DE LA COMPLIANCE EN ARTICULATION DU PRINCIPE MAJEUR DE LA PROPORTIONNALITÉ (“IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPLIANCE MONUMENTAL GOALS IN ARTICULATION OF THE MAJOR PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY”)  🕴️L. Rapp, 📝Conformité, proportionnalité et normativité   🕴️B. Bär-Bouyssière, 📝Les obstacles pratiques à la place effective de la proportionnalité dans la Compliance 🕴️A. Mendoza-Caminade, 📝Compliance, proportionnalité et évaluation 🕴️L. Meziani, 📝Proportionnalité en Compliance, garant de l’ordre public en entreprise 🕴️M. Segonds, 📝Compliance, proportionnalité et sanction   🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Définition du principe de proportionnalité et définition du Droit de la Compliance     III. LES BUTS MONUMENTAUX DE LA COMPLIANCE ÉPROUVÉS PAR LES SITUATIONS DE CRISES (“THE COMPLIANCE MONUMENTAL GOALS TESTED BY CRISIS SITUATIONS”) 🕴️A. Oumedjkane, A. Tehrani et P. Idoux, 📝Normes publiques et Compliance en temps de crise : les Buts Monumentaux à l’épreuve. Éléments pour une problématique 🕴️J. Bonnet, 📝La crise, occasion de saisir la Compliance comme mode de communication des autorités publiques   🕴️N. Sudres, 📝Gel hydroalcoolique, Covid-19 et Compliance. Des insuffisances de la démarche de conformité à l’émergence d’îlots de Compliance 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Place et rôle des entreprises dans la création et l’effectivité du Droit de la Compliance en cas de crise    IV. EFFECTIVITÉ DES BUTS MONUMENTAUX DE LA COMPLIANCE ET COMPÉTITIVITÉ INTERNATIONALE (“EFFECTIVENESS OF COMPLIANCE MONUMENTAL GOALS AND INTERNATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS”)  🕴️B. Deffains, 📝L’enjeu économique de compétitivité internationale de la Compliance 🕴️J.-Ch. Roda, 📝Compliance, enquêtes internes et compétitivité internationale : quels risques pour les entreprises françaises (à la lumière du droit antitrust) ? 🕴️F. Marty, 📝L’apport des programmes de conformité à la compétitivité internationale : une perspective concurrentielle 🕴️S. Lochmann, 📝Les agences de notation ESG et l’effectivité de la Compliance face à la compétitivité internationale 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Appréciation du lancement d’alerte et de l’obligation de vigilance au regard de la compétitivité internationale     V. LA COMPLIANCE PORTÉE PAR LES BUTS MONUMENTAUX, NOUVELLE VOIE DE SOUVERAINETÉ (“COMPLIANCE SUPPORTED BY MONUMENTAL GOALS AND NEW WAY OF SOVEREIGNTY”)  🕴️R. Bismuth, 📝Compliance et souveraineté : relations ambigües 🕴️L. Benzoni, 📝Commerce international, compétitivité des entreprises et souveraineté : vers une économie politique de la Compliance 🕴️M.-A. Boursier, 📝Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance : mode d’expression des États 🕴️S. Pottier, 📝Pour une Compliance européenne, vecteur d’affirmation économique et politique 🕴️Ch. André, 📝Souveraineté étatique, souveraineté populaire : quel contrat social pour la Compliance ? 🕴️M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Le principe de proximité systémique active, corollaire du renouvellement du principe de souveraineté par le Droit de la Compliance - 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on Instagram 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law  🌐s’abonner à la Newsletter MAFR Surplomb

► Full Reference : G. Beaussonie, “Droit pénal et Compliance font-ils système ?” (“Do Criminal Law and Compliance form a system?”), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance, coll. “Régulations & Compliance“, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2022, pp. 157-166. - read a general presentation of the book, Les Buts Monumentaux de la Compliance, in which this article is published - ► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): By nature, Criminal Law is a system that is not intended to develop, principles which limit it being internal to it. Nevertheless if Proportionality is respected, its extension may be legitimate to preserve “fundamental social values” because Criminal Law is the branch of Law concerning what is grave, grave in consequences as in causes. Not always being concerned by Efficiency, the temptation is important to supplement Criminal Law with other repressive mechanisms , not only Administrative Repression but today Compliance which pursues concordant objectives and aims by the “Goals Monumental ”to what would be most important and therefore for which Efficiency would be required, in particular because victory (for example against corruption) should be global. Efficiency is obtained by the internalisation in powerful companies, but this efficiency comes at a price and Criminal Law should not impose too many obligations to do maintaining only a potential link with the commission of a “real offense ”. Its association with Compliance can therefore also only be exceptional and must not lead to forget that Freedom must always remain the principle. -

► Full reference : Frison-Roche, M.-A., Building by Law the Unicity of Compliance Tools from the Definition of Compliance Law by its "Monumental Goals", in Frison-Roche, M.-A. (ed.), Compliance Tools, serie "Régulations & Compliance", Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, 2021, pp. 35-46   Summary of the article : The "tools of Compliance" do not stack on top of each other. They form a system, thanks to a unity drawn from the goals that all these multiple and different tools serve: the "Monumental Goals" by which Compliance Law is defined. All these tools are configured by these goals and for mastering all these techniques, it is essential to put them all in perspective of what Compliance Law is, which is designed teleologically with regard to its goals. Extension of Regulatory Law and like it, Compliance Law is built on a balance between the principle of competition and other concerns that public authorities claim to take care of. Compliance Law has moreover more "pretensions" in this respect, for example in environmental matters. All the means are then good, the violence of the tools marrying without difficulty with the voluntary commitments since it is the goals which govern this branch of Law. As legal solutions adopted show, a common method of interpretation and common levels of constraint for all Compliance Tools result from this definition. Starting from the goals (in which legal normativity is housed), the interpretation of the different tools is thus unified. Moreover, the different degrees of constraint do not operate according to the consideration of sources (traditional legal criterion) but by the goals, according to the legal distinction between obligations of means and obligations of results which result from the articulation between tools, of which the establishment is an obligation of result, and the goal, of which the achievement is only an obligation of means. -   📝 Read the bilingual working paper on which rely this article. 📝 Read a general presentation of the book in which this article has been published.   -

Full Reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A. Place and Role of Companies in the Creation and Effectiveness of Compliance Law in Crisis, Working Paper, May 2021.  -   This Working Paper has been elaborated as basis for a conference in the colloquium of Mai 17, 2021 (done in French: Normes publiques et Compliance en temps de crise : les buts monumentaux à l'épreuve. This video is made with English substitutes.  It is also the basis for an article in the book Compliance Monumental Goals, the English version of which is co-published by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant. Summary: This article has a very topic: the place of private Companies, with regard to the chapter's issue: "the ordeal of a crisis". The crisis constitutes a "test", that is to say, it brings evidence. Let us take it as such. Indeed, during the health crisis, it appears that Companies have helped the Public Authorities to resist the shock, to endure and to get out of the Crisis. They did so by force, but they also took initiatives in this direction. From this too, we must learn lessons for the next crisis that will come. It is possible that this has already started in the form of another global and systemic crisis: the environmental crisis. In view of what we have been able to observe and the evolution of the Law, of the standards adopted by the Authorities but also by the new case law, what can we expect from Companies in the face of this next Crisis, willingly and strength    Lire ci-dessous les développements.

Full reference: Bayrou, F., Electricité: le devoir de lucidité (Electricity: the duty of lucidity), note n°4 from the Haut-Commissariat au Plan (French government planification agency), 23rd of March 2021, 37 p.   Read the note (in French) Read the summary of the note done by the Haut-Commissariat au Plan on is official website (in French)

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., New SEC Report to Congress about Whistleblower Program: what is common between American and European conception, Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation, 1st of December 2020 Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation   Summary of the news Like every year since the adoption of the Dodd-Frank Act, the Securities and Exchanges Commission (SEC) and especially its Office of the Whistleblowers (OWB) handed to the Congress of the United-States a report about the success of its program concerning whistleblowers, especially estimated with the amount of financial rewards granted to them during the year. This report especially presents the amount granted to whistleblowers, the quality of the collected information and the efficacy of SEC's whistleblowers' protection process. If Americans condition the effectiveness of whistleblowing to the remuneration of whistleblowers, Europeans oppose the "ethical whistleblower" who shares information for the love of Law to the "bounty hunter" uniquely motivated by financial reward and favor the former to the later, as it is proven in the French Law Sapin II of 2016 (which do not propose financial reward to whistleblowers) or the British Public Interest Disclosure of 1998 (which just propose a financial compensation of the whistleblower's losses linked to whistleblowing).  However, American and European conceptions are not so far from each other. As United-States, Europe has a real care for legal effectivity, even if, because of their different legal traditions, Americans favor effectivity of rights while European favor effectivity of Law. If it places effectivity at the center of its preoccupations, Europe should conceive with less aversion the possibility to financially incite whistleblowers. Moreover, United-States and Europe share the same common willingness to protect whistleblowers and if rewarding would enable a better protection, then Europe should not reject it, as shows the recent declarations of the French Defenders of Rights. It is not excluded that both systems converges in a close future. 

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Facebook: Quand le Droit de la Compliance démontre sa capacité à protéger les personnes (Facebook: When Compliance Law proves its ability to protect people), interview with Olivia Dufour, Actu-juridiques Lextenso, 23rd of November 2020 Read the interview (in French) Read the news of the Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation about this question

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "Compliance Law, an adequate legal framework for GAIA-X", in Pan-European GAIA – X Summit, The World with GAIA-X, November18, 2020. - 🧮See the general presentation of the Summit - 📈​See the slides, basis of this intervention. - ► Summary of the intervention: Europe may offer an adequate legal framework for the GAIA-X project through Compliance Law. Compliance Law is a new form for Regulatory Law, driven by "Monumental Goals", negative Monumental Goals, for instance prevention of systemic failures, and positive Monumental Goals, for instance innovation or stability. This very new branch of Law works on these Monumental Goals, which must be explicit and internalized in Crucial Enterprises. These Crucial Enterprises concretize these Goals, supervised by public Authorities.  European Compliance Law already works, for instance about Personal Data protection (case law and GDPR) or prevention banking systemic failures (Banking Union), Compliance Tools being in balance with Competition principle. European Union Law is moving from the Ex-Post Competition Law to the Ex-Ante Compliance Law, internalizing Monumental Goals in Crucial Enterprises.  There is a perfect adequacy between European Compliance Law and GAIA-X. This project built by Crucial Enterprises must be supervised by public authority, maybe a specific or the European Commission. The governance of GAIA-X must be transparent and accountable. This private organization must use it powers in respect of the proportionality principle, controlled by the public supervisory body. The legal framework is required but it is sufficient.  - 📈see the slides, basis of this intervention. - 🎥watch the video of this intervention.  -    

This working paper served as a basis for an interview organized by Olivia Dufour in French in Actu-juridiques-Lextenso on 11st of January 2021.   

Full reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, 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 the article (in French) - 🚧Read the working paper, written in English, on which this article is based, with additional developments, technical references, and hyperlinks   English 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:  Frison-Roche, M.-A., L'apport du Droit de la Compliance à la gouvernance d'Internet, 2019 Frison-Roche, M.-A. (dir.), Internet, un espace d'interrégulation, 2016 - 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on Instagram 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law