Professional secrecy

► Full reference : M. Durand-Poincloux, D. Apelbaum et P. Sardi-Antasan, « Regard critique : La place des droits de la défense dans l’enquête interne selon le guide AFA/PNF » (A Critical Look: the Place of the Rights of the Defence in Internal Investigations According to the AFA/PNF Guide), in M.-A. Frison-Roche and M. Boissavy (eds.), Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquête interne – CJIP – CRPC, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. “Régulations & Compliance“, 2024, pp. 69-75. - ► English Summary of this article (made by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance – JoRC) : The authors present the guide published in 2023 by the French Anti-Corruption Agency (AFA) and the National Financial Prosecutor’s Office (PNF), Anti-corruption internal investigations. Practical guide, considering that the rights of the defence do not have in it the place that general principles would imply. They consider that the procedural guarantees are insufficient for the person prosecuted. Moreover, because the lawyer would not have the means he could legitimately expect, it is the rights of the company conducting the internal investigation that are thereby disregarded. The authors conclude that this guide thus amounts to a kind of “step backwards” in relation to the principles governing punitive law, in particular in that the report resulting from the investigation is protected by no secrecy.

► Full reference : M.-A. Frison-Roche, « Circuler dans le temps pour mettre en phase Compliance et droits de la défense » (Moving through Time to Bring Compliance and the Rights of the Defence into Phase), in M.-A. Frison-Roche and M. Boissavy (eds.), Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquête interne – CJIP – CRPC, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. “Régulations & Compliance“, 2024, pp. 33-58. - ► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche "Circuler dans le temps pour mettre en phase Compliance et droits de la défense ("Moving through Time to align Compliance with the rights of the defence")", in M.-A. Frison-Roche et M. Boissavy (dir.), Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquête interne – CJIP – CRPC, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. "Régulations & Compliance",  2024, pp. 33-58. - 📝read the article (in French) - 🚧read the bilingual Working Paper on which this article is based, with additional developments, technical references and hyperlinks - 📕read the general presentation of the book, Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquête interne – CJIP – CRPC, in which this article is published (in French) - 📝read also the presentation of the other article published par Marie-Anne Frison-Roche in this book : "Connaitre les pratiques pour redessiner les frontières et accroître les points de contact entre Compliance et droits de la défense dans l’enquête interne, la CJIP et la CRPC" (Understanding practices to redraw the boundaries and increase the points of contact between Compliance and the rights of the defense in Internal Investigation, Judicial Public Interest Agreement and French guilty plea procedure) - ► English Summary of this article: the subject of Compliance & rights of the defence is difficult to pin down because it often gives rise to totally opposing presentations, which express the initial confrontation between Compliance and rights of the defence, which seems irreducible. This initial confrontation must be acknowledged, and this is even more necessary to prevent it from becoming definitive(I) But in a society governed by the Rule of Law, the rights of the defence are central, and the hierarchy of norms dictates that they remain the privilege of all those who risk being punished in the future. Admittedly, if we look at the course of events in a linear way, the Compliance mechanisms come in Ex Ante, whereas the rights of the defence would only be activated when the repressive procedures would later come to bear on the moral or natural person. The question would therefore not even arise, or not in a central way. But this reasoning creates a false compatibility between Compliance and the rights of the defence (II. Indeed, it is the perspective of punishment in the future that forms the basis for the attribution of rights of the defence in the present. This consideration of the future not only allows but obliges the Law to "move in time", to always think in advance about what might happen tomorrow: this is how we must think about the Compliance methods of Internal Investigation, the DPA (or in the French legal system the Convention judiciaire d'intérêt public and the French Guilty plea procedure (CRPC) (III). As soon as these Compliance Tools are being used in practice, at the time they are being used, we must already think about how their results will be used, results which they have often been used for, because the Internal Investigation is a formidable piece of Evidence for obtaining a conviction and/or a DPA, etc. : therefore, the rights of the defence must shift over time, from the future to the present of the Information collect. Two ambiguities that affect Compliance Law itself, ambiguities which the rights of the defence help to clarify, now appear more clearly.  The first concerns the place occupied by the consent of the person who could have been protected by the rights of defence but //who exercises his/her will to renounce them (IV). Consent, in relation to the will of which it is the expression, is also linked with the future and allows Compliance once again to take precedence over the prerogatives of the individual who chooses not to benefit from it. The omnipresence of 'consent' in Compliance is enlightening here… The second ambiguity concerns the place of secrecy (V). Secrecy seems to be the prerogative of the rights of the defence. But it can also be an effective Compliance Tool when Confidentiality enables the company to detect and prevent breaches. It may even constitute the very Monumental Goal of Compliance Law. This happens when the Goal of Compliance Law, in which legal normativity is placed, becomes the protection of the individual, as is the case for personal information. That guides the European Judge, in line with the humanism that underpins European Compliance Law, in finding the right balance, this protection and effectiveness, depending on whether the information must be given or must be not.

► Full reference : S. de Navacelle, J. Zorrilla et L. Ragazzi, « L’enquête interne façonnée par la déontologie » (The Internal Investigation Shaped by the Lawyer’s Professional Ethics), in M.-A. Frison-Roche and M. Boissavy (eds.), Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquête interne – CJIP – CRPC, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. “Régulations & Compliance“, 2024, pp. 183-198. - ► English Summary of this article (made by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance – JoRC) : The authors explain that the lawyer to whom the company decides to entrust an internal investigation thus becomes a “lawyer-investigator”, this dual capacity shaping the investigation, since, as he remains a lawyer, it is imbued with his professional ethics. Relying mainly on the texts issued by the legal profession, for example the Vademecum on internal investigations, extracts of which are reproduced, they stress that the lawyer’s values are thus imported into the internal investigation, but they dispute that professional secrecy, a cardinal principle of the profession, should be challenged there by the National Financial Prosecutor’s Office and the French Anti-Corruption Agency, even though the Bar’s tradition of good faith could reconcile the interests at stake. Going through the internal investigation in chronological order, the article describes how the lawyer accepts his mission. The strength of his ethics is such that this should not prevent him from later defending the company if it is prosecuted, in particular on the basis of that same internal investigation. The authors describe how the lawyer defines its framework, in particular the stakeholders involved, then conducts the investigations, in particular interviews with persons likely to be implicated, up to the drafting of the investigation report, which must draw the consequences of the investigation. The authors regret that the confidentiality of this report is challenged, whereas, its author being a lawyer, it should not be.

► Full reference : B. Graulle and Y. Rahim, « Préserver le secret professionnel de l’avocat dans l’enquête interne et son résultat » (Preserving the Lawyer’s Professional Secrecy in the Internal Investigation and Its Outcome), in M.-A. Frison-Roche and M. Boissavy (eds.), Compliance et droits de la défense. Enquête interne – CJIP – CRPC, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, coll. “Régulations & Compliance“, 2024, pp. 199-211.

► Full Reference: B. Sillaman, “Privilege Lessons from the U.S.”, in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Bruylant, coll. “Compliance & Regulation“, 2024, pp. 251-255. - read a general presentation of the book, Compliance Jurisdictionalisation, in which this article is published - ► Summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): The French legal system is evolving, organizing interaction between lawyers with regulators and prosecutors, specially in investigations about corruption or corporate misconduct, adopting U.S. negotiated resolutions such as the Convention judiciaire d’intérêt public, which encourages “collaboration” between them. The author describes the evolution of the U.S. DOJ doctrine and askes French to be inspired by the U.S. procedural experience, U.S. where this mechanism came from. Indeed, the DOJ released memoranda about what the “collaboration” means. At the end (2006 Memorandum), the DOJ has considered that the legal privilege must remain intact when the information is not only factual in order to maintain trust between prosecutors, regulators and lawyers. French authorities do not follow this way. The author regrets it and thinks they should adopt the same reasoning as the American authority on the secret professionnel of the avocat, especially when he intervenes in the company internal investigation. - 🦉This article is available in full text to those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche’s courses -

► Full Reference: M.-A. Frison-Roche, "La compliance, socle de la confidentialité nécessaire des avis juridiques élaborés en entreprise" ("Compliance, the cornerstone of the confidentiality required for in-house legal opinions"), D. 2023, p. - 📝read the article (in French) - ► English Summary of the article: The French Law about the Ministry of Justice's 2023-2027 Orientation and Programming  ("loi d'orientation et de programmation du ministère de la justice 2023-2027") had introduced into the French legal system the confidentiality of in-house lawyers' opinions (before the  French Constitutional Council, on a question of parliamentary procedure, annulled this disposition, thus leaving the question still open).  This development is necessary in order to respond to the injunction for companies to comply more and more with the regulations, which is itself only one of the tools of a wider movement: Compliance Law. This branch of the law, notably through the French so-called Sapin 2 Act of 2016, the French Vigilance Act of 2017 and the European Digital Services Act (DSA), requires companies to implement the necessary means to satisfy the Monumental Goals contained in the laws or regulations. This presupposes, firstly, that companies have information (via alerts, risk mapping, vigilance, sustainability reports, etc.), enabling them to identify their conformity and non-conformity, so that they can, secondly, take effective action to put an end to current breaches, prevent future breaches and achieve the goals set by the Legislator. This Compliance System requires that the information made available to managers is reliable and honest. However, if non-conformity is not analysed and communicated in a way that is protected by confidentiality, the company will prefer not to know about it and will therefore be unable to take appropriate action, which will deprive the social community of its power to act in the future. This is why the confidentiality of in-house lawyers' opinions is based on the very definition of Compliance Law itself. - follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on Instagram 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 & M. Boissavy, "Enquêtes internes : une activité en plein développement pour les avocats" ("Internal investigations: a growing business for attorneys"), interview with Miren Lartigue, Gazette du Palais, 25 April 2023. - 💬read the interview (in French) - ► Presentation of the interview by the journal (in French): "Inspirées des Anglo-saxons et boostées par la loi Sapin II du 9 décembre 2016, les enquêtes internes sont de plus en plus utilisées par les entreprises françaises pour vérifier la réalité de pratiques douteuses en leur sein, découvertes ou alléguées. Parce qu’il s’agit d’un nouveau champ d’activité pour les avocats, le Conseil national des barreaux (CNB) y a consacré une journée lors de son colloque organisé les 20 et 21 avril 2023 sur le thème « Avocat et droits de la défense dans les enquêtes internes et la justice négociée », qui a réuni 750 participants sur deux jours. Matthieu Boissavy et Marie-Anne Frison-Roche, qui ont participé à l’organisation de cet évènement, nous expliquent les contours de ce nouveau métier." - ► Questions asked (in French):  Quels sont la place et le rôle de l’avocat dans les enquêtes internes et pourquoi le CNB a-t-il souhaité organiser une journée consacrée à ce sujet ?   ​​​Quel est leur rôle dans la réception des alertes ?   Et dans l’enquête interne proprement dite ?   Quelle est la complémentarité de l’avocat avec le juriste interne ?   Quels sont outils utilisés pour le calcul des préjudices, la collecte et le traitement des données ?   Comment s’applique la déontologie de l’avocat ?   Et qu’en est-il des droits de la défense ?   Quelle est l’étendue du secret professionnel de l’avocat ? -

► Full Reference: B. Silliman, “Secret professionnel et coopération : les leçons de procédure tirées de l’expérience américaine pour une application universelle” (“Privilege and cooperation, procedural lessons learned from the U.S for global application”), in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.), La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, coll. “Régulations & Compliance“, Journal of Regulation & Compliance (JoRC) and Dalloz, 2023, pp. 231-234. - read a general presentation of the book, La juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, in which this article is published - ► English summary of the article (done by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance): The French legal system is evolving, organizing interaction between lawyers with regulators and prosecutors, especially in investigations about corruption or corporate misconduct, adopting U.S. negotiated resolutions such as the Convention judiciaire d’intérêt public, which encourages “collaboration” between them. The author describes the evolution of the U.S. DOJ doctrine and askes French to be inspired by the U.S. procedural experience, U.S. where this mechanism came from. Indeed, the DOJ released memoranda about what the “collaboration” means. At the end (2006 Memorandum), the DOJ has considered that the legal privilege must remain intact when the information is not only factual to maintain trust between prosecutors, regulators, and lawyers. French authorities do not follow this way. The author regrets it and thinks they should adopt the same reasoning as the American authority on the secret professionnel of the avocat, especially when he intervenes in the company internal investigation. - 🦉This article is available in full text for those registered for Professor Marie-Anne Frison-Roche’s courses

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Et si le secret de l’avocat était l’allié de la lutte contre le blanchiment ?, interview realized by Olivia Dufour for Actu-juridiques, Lextenso, 15th of October 2020 Read the interview (in French) To go deeper on the place of the attorney in Compliance Law, read Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's working paper: The Attorney, Vector of Conviction in the New Compliance System

Full Reference : Frison-Roche, M.-A.,Attorney's Professional Secret & Filter mechanism in balance with fighting Money Laundering: constitutional analysis in favor of Attorney's Secret, Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation, October 9, 2020.   Summary: By its judgment of September 24, 2020, the Constitutional Court of Belgium released an essential judgment which considers: – Compliance Law which imposes obligations on entities to fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism is legal requirements which must be analyzed on the basis of these goals – the national transposition law is "broader" than the transposed European texts since it is anchored in the Constitution – the provisions of the law imposing the declaration of suspicion on an employee of the Attorney or on a Compliance Officer concerning information covered by the professional secrecy of the Attorney, the basis of Democracy, must therefore be canceled. This reasoning is remarkable and very solid. It is not unique to Belgium.   Lire par abonnement gratuit les autres News dans la Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation