Food for thoughts

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Compliance & Regulatory Soft Law, legal Certainty and Cooperation: example of the U.S. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network new Guidelines on AML/FT, Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 2nd of September 2020

Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

Summary of the news

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) is an organ, depending on the American Treasury, in charge of fighting against financial criminality and especially against money laundering and terrorism financing. For this, it has large control and sanction powers. 

In August 2020, the FinCEN published a document untitled "Statement on Enforcement" which aimed to explicit its control and sanction methods. It reveals what firms risk in case of offense (from the simple warning letter to criminal pursuits passing through financial fines) and the different criteria on which FinCEN is based to use one sanction rather than another. Among these criteria, we find for examples the nature and the seriousness of committed violations or the firm's history but also the implementation of compliance program or the quality and the spread of the cooperation with FinCEN durning the investigation. 

One of the objectives of the publication of such an information document is to obtain the cooperation of firms by creating a confidence relationship between the regulator and the regulated firm. However, it is very difficult to ask to the firms to cooperate and to furnish information if they can fear that this same information can be used later as proof against them by the FinCEN. 

Another objective is to reinforce legal security and transparency. However, the FinCEN's declaration does not seem to commit it, because it is not presented as a chart but as a simple declaration. Indeed, the list of the possible sanctions and the criteria used by the FinCEN are far from being exhaustive and can be completed in concreto by the FinCEN without any justification.

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., The always in expansion "Right to be Forgotten"​: a legitimate Oxymore in Compliance Law built on Information. Example of​ Cancer Survivors Protection, Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 25th of August 2020 

Read by freely subscribing other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

Summary of the news

The "right to be forgotten" is an invention of the Court of Justice of the European Union during the case Google Spain in 2014. It implies that digital firms block the access to personal data of someone who asks it. This "right to be forgotten", which permits to impose secret to third parties has largely been generalized by GDPR in 2016. This new fundamental subjective right is a very political and European right. United-States which, on the contrary of Europe, did not experience nazism, links the "right to be forgotten" to the protection of consumer, conception which especially leads California Consumer Privacy Act adopted in 2018 to link this right to a situation of absence of necessity of this data for the firm which obtained it. 

In Europe, this willingness to protect directly the person increases the scope of such a subjective right. Thus, in France and in Luxembourg, since 2020, a cancer survivor can thus ask that such an information is not accessible among his or her health data, especially for insurance companies which use them in their risk calculus to set premium amount. Netherlands will do the same in 2021 to fight against discrimination between banks' and insurances' clients. 

The "monumental goal" is therefore not so much here the protection of individual freedoms as the protection of the vulnerable person, which is bye the way the keystone of a Compliance Law, concealing sometimes prohibition to circulate information (as here) and sometimes obligation to circulate information (in other cases, where the alert must be given) depending on whether vulnerable people are protected either by one or by the other.

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Being obliged by Law to unlock telephone is not equivalent to self-incrimination: Cour de cassation, Criminal Chamber, Dec. 19, 2019, Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 21st of August 2020

Read by freely subscribing the other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

Summary of the news

The Cour de Cassation (French Supreme Judicial Court) made a decision on 19th of December 2019 about a case concerning a refusal to communicate his mobile phone's unlock code to the police while the police found him with a significant quantity of narcotic and a lot of cash and that there was a certain probability that this mobile phone get proofs of culpability of its owner. The individual was indicted not for narcotic trafficking but for not having communicate its unlock code which constitute an offense to article 434-15-2 of code pénal, from the loi du 3 juin 2018 renforçant la lutte contre la criminalité organisée, et le terrorisme et leur financement (law reinforcing organized crime, terrorisme and their financing).

The accused invokes before the court its right to not incriminate oneself. Indeed, the configuration face to policemen was such that if he refused to communicate its unlock code, he will be punished because of this obligation to communicate his code and that if he accepted, he will also be sanctioned because of the proofs contained into the mobile phone. Such a configuration therefore offered him no alternative to confessing, which is contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights and to European and national jurisprudence.

Face to such a case, the Cour de Cassation chose to segment the information and proposed the following solution: if the researched information cannot be obtained regardless of the suspect willingness, it is not possible to constraint this person to communicate this information without violating its procedural rights, but if the information can be obtained regardless of the suspect willingness then the individual is obliged to communicate his code. In the current case, as it was possible for policemen to obtain information contained in the phone by technical means, longer but existent, then the refuse of communication of the unlock code by the suspect constitute an obstruction that should be sanctioned. 

Such a decision is an exemple of the conciliation by the judge of two fundamental but contradictory "monumental goals" of Compliance Law: transparency of information towards public authorities and very sensible personal data protection. 

​To go further, read Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's working paper: Rethinking the world from the notion of data

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., When Compliance Law is violated, does the "right to be (re)compensated"​ exist, and must it be encouraged or not? - The Marriott case, Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 20th of August 2020

Read by freely subscribing the other news of the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

Summary of the news

In August 2020, Marriott International, online hotel room booking platform, has be sued before an English court by a consulting firm through a "class action" technic. The firm ask to Marriott International compensates the clients whose personal data jas been hacked while Marriott International which was in charge of this data, did not implement all it could to protect these data. According to the plaintiff firm, making the online platform responsible in Ex Ante of the clients' data security and constraint it to compensate injured clients in case of failure is a more important incentive for the firm to do its best to protect this data than a simple fine.    

Many similar actions are ongoing, especially during English Courts where the practice of "class action" is more developed. The question is therefore to know whether it is interesting to encourage the development of this kind of process in France. Concretly, a substantial subjective right (here the right to have its data protected) exists only if it is accompanied by a procedural right to size the judge in order to he or she activates it. The right to ask for a compensation in case of violation of these Compliance obligations but also is therefore not only a strong incentive for firms but also a condition of effectivity of these same obligations, knowing that the effectivity is the major care of Compliance Law.  

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Why the decision of the French Constitutional Council of 7.08.2020 about authors of terrorist offences is so informative for Compliance & Criminal Law, Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 13th of August 2020

Read, by freely subscribing, the other news in the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation 

Summary of the news

On 7th of August 2020, the Conseil Constitutionnel (French Constitutional Court) made a decision concerning the constitutionality of a French law implementing safety measures against authors of terrorist offenses after their sentence. The law permitting to impose, through an act from the administration, various controls or interdiction to communicate with some people for authors of terrorist offenses after the end of their sanction.  

Although the Conseil Constitutionnel estimated that such dispositions was disproportionate with regards to the objective, which prompted it to censor the text, it recognized that, since terrorism seriously disturbs public order through intimidation and terror, the fight against terrorism contributes to the objective of constitutional value consisting of preventing attacks on the public order. Thus it is not the nature but the intensity of the proposed measures which pushed the Conseil Constitutionnel to state this text not constitutional. By the way, the Conseil affirms that if the legislator submits it a law whose the measures are more proportionate to the goal, these, although Ex Ante and justified only by the existence of a risk, will be declared in conformity with the Constitution.

The Conseil Constitutionnel confirms here that the fight against terrorism financing is a "monumental goal" of Compliance Law. 

Full reference: Frison-Roche, M.-A., Against money laundering, what time matters? Does it work, between ExAnte and ExPost? (BIL case), Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation, 11th of August 2020

Read, by freely subscribing, the other news in the Newsletter MAFR - Law, Compliance, Regulation

Summary of the news

The activity of money laundering is detrimental not only in itself but also because it permits the development and the sustainability of other criminal activities such as drug trafficking, weapon trafficking or human beings selling. Fighting against money laundering could permit to indirectly fight against these underlying activities, by the way very difficult to fight. Thus, the fight against money laundering has become a "monumental goal", which justifies the adoption of tools sometimes much more powerful than those used by classical criminal Law. For the sake of efficiency, the legal obligation to prevent money laundering is given to every body able to do it, as banks, real estate agents or gaming society, under the penalty of sanction. 

On 10th of August 2020, the Luxembourgish financial market supervisor convicts the International Bank of Luxembourg to pay a fine of 4,5 millions of euros because of weaknesses detected in its process of fight against money laundering. However, when the sanction has been pronounced, the bank had already remedied the weaknesses identified. It is important to observe that what is important for Compliance Law, it is not that a non compliant behavior is punished but rather that the crucial firm modifies its behavior in order to being more efficient in the realization of the "monumental goal", only concern of the public authority. Thus, an Ex Post sanction against the crucial operator is not an end in itself and can be justified only if it permits to incite the crucial operator to act or rather to desincite to do anything. Compliance Law is an Ex Ante legal system. 

To go further, read: 

• Frison-Roche, M.-A., Le couple Ex Ante - Ex Post, justificatif d'un droit spécifique et propre de la Régulation, 2006 (in French)

Full reference: Perben, D., Rapport relatif à la profession d'avocat (written in French), Report to the French Minister of Justice, July 2020, 42p.

Read the report

Like the precedent cycles dedicated to the general topic of Compliance, aiming to build a "Compliance Law" and aiming also to be published in the series Regulation & Compliance, coedited by the Journal of Regulation & Compliance and Dalloz, this cycle continues to deepen a specific aspect of this emerging branch of Law which has been applied before being designed.  

The year 2020-2021 will give rise to two full and distinct cycles, the former deepening a key concept of Compliance Law, that are "monumental goals" and the later deepening a phenomenon with multiple roots and consequences: "the juridictionnalization of Compliance". 

The juridictionnalization of Compliance is perhaps as ancient as Compliance mechanisms themselves.  

These various conferences will take place in different places, according to the role played by the very numerous universities which, this year once again, support the Journal of Regulation & Compliance for the realization of this cycle. This cycle will give rise to two books, one in French: La Juridictionnalisation de la Compliance, and the other in English : Juridictionnalization of Compliance. 

This cycle of colloquia The juridictionnalization of Compliance will start in October 2020 and will take place until December 2021.

Full reference : Frison-Roche, M.-A., Avocat et Compliance - L'avenir du personnage et de son outil : Droit, Humanisme et Défense ("Attorney and Compliance - the future of the character and his tool: Law, Humanism and Defense),article of synthesis fo the collective publication "Compliance", Dalloz Avocat, March 2020, April 2020, June 2020, Dalloz Avocat, June 2020, p.321-324

Read the synthesis article (in French).

Read the editorial of the March 2020 Issue, presenting the problematic : "The Attorney, Vector of Conviction in the New Compliance System". 

______

Summary of the article: In the future, the place of lawyers in compliance mechanisms, including in Ex Ante, will develop for three reasons, which emerge from all of the contributions. First of all because Compliance is a matter of Law, a lawyer is a lawyer and in the future it is a matter of Law and not on technical terms that Compliance demands its meaning and legitimacy. Then because Conformity must be defined in relation to the person, the lawyer expresses the humanist conception of the rules and Compliance Law will only be tolerable in the future if it is for "monumental goal" of protection of the person. Finally, because Compliance with ordinary repression, that the lawyer in his heart defends and must be and remain at the center of Compliance Law.

______

Full reference: Chacornac, J. (ed.), Lanceurs d'alerte: regards comparatistes (written in French), Editions de la Société de Législation Comparée, Vol. 21, avril 2020, 192 p.

This book follows the conference organized by the Centre français de droit Comparé on 23rd of November 2018

Read the fourth of cover (in French)

Read the table of contents (in French)

Read the presentation of Marie-Anne Frison-Roche's article: L'impossible unicité de la catégorie des lanceurs d'alerte, which is the introduction of the book

_____

Référence complète : C.E., 20 mars 2020, Président de l'Autorité des marchés financiers et Arkea Direct Bank

Lire la décision

Référence générale : Frison-Roche, M.-A., L'avocat, porteur de conviction dans le nouveau système de Compliance, Dalloz Avocat, mars 2020.

This editorial opens a thematic collective publication about Compliance.

A synthetic article on all the contributions, published in May 2020, mirrors it: "Attorney and Compliance - The future of the character and his tool: Law, Humanism and Defense"

_____

English Summary of the article (written in French) : 

If we perceive Compliance Law as an aggression of the private company and a binding set of mechanisms that have no meaning and added value for it, then the attorney has a utility: to defend the business. It can do so not only during the sanctions phase, but also to prevent it.

But this function is not central.

He and she becomes so if we understand Compliance Law as being a body of substantial rules, pursuing a "monumental goal": the protection of the person, goal injected by political bodies and taken up by the operator. From this, the company must convince everyone to take it back, inside the company and outside. In a general and contradictory debate, the attorney carries this conviction, because he and shed is always convincing those who in the end judge (market, public opinion, etc.) that is their raison d'être.

Read the article

____

Read the Working Paper underlying this article, with the technical references and all the articles serving as the basis for all the assertions in this article

Référence complète : LEROYER, Anne-Marie, Droit des successions, Coll. "Cours Dalloz-Série Droit privé", Dalloz, 4ième éd., 2020, 526 p.

Consulter la 4ième de couverture.

Consulter la table des matières.

Référence : Dershowitch, A., interview, émission "HardTalk", BBC Word, 24 février 2020.

Regarder l'émission

This Working Paper written in English is the basis for an article published in French in the French journal Dalloz Avocat , in March 2020.

Summary of the working Paper.

If we perceive Compliance Law as an aggression of the private company and a binding set of mechanisms that have no meaning and added value for it, then the attorney has a utility: defending the business. It can do so not only during the sanctions phase, but also to prevent it.

But this function is not central.

It becomes so if we understand Compliance Law as a body of substantial rules, pursuing a "monumental goal": the protection of the person, goal injected by political bodies and taken up by the operator. From this, the company must convince everyone to take it back, inside the company and outside. In a general and contradictory debate, the attorney carries this conviction, because he and she is always convincing those who at the end judge (market, public opinion, etc.) that is their raison d'être.

(In this short document, the pop-ups refer to the different works that develop each of the points)

Référence complète : Frison-Roche, M.-A., Haine sur Internet : il faut responsabiliser les opérateurs numériques, entretien avec Olivia Dufour, Actu-juridique Lextenso, 15 janvier 2020. 

Les questions posées étaient : 

• Pour lutter efficacement contre la haine sur Internet, la proposition Avia demande aux plateformes d'intervenir sous le contrôle du CSA. Ce système, inspiré de l'économie, est-il transposable dans un domaine aussi sensible que la liberté d'expression ?

​

• Comprenez-vous la crainte du Syndicat de la magistrature que les plateformes ne se transforment en organe de censure ? N'est-ce pas un défaut de conception du texte ?

• Pensez-vous que l'on puisse se passer de la protection du juge judiciaire en matière de liberté d'expression ? Précisément dans cette loi, estimez-vous qu'il a sa juste place ou que celle-ci devrait être renforcée ?

Lire les trois réponses données dans l'interview.

______

Référence générale : Frison-Roche, M.-A., "La justice pénale est passée de l'inquisitoire à l'accusatoire" (By Compliance, Continental Criminal Justice Mechanisms have come from Inquisitorial Procedure to Adversarial System), Interview in French about the impact of the "conventions judiciaire d'intérêt public", the French equivalent of DPI, and Compliance Procedures in French Law, Lettre des juristes d'affaires, n°1416, October 14, 2019.

Summary :

In this interview and through the three questions asked, the answers show that we have gone from an inquisitorial system to an adversarial system, which is a  sort of Revolution especially in matter of proofw. The French legal system must be adapted, but also or, above all, this conception of Compliance efficiency is a mechanism without a judge. The expression of "deal of justice" is excessive, because precisely if there is a "deal", there is no a "judge" : the prosecutor was not a judge.

These mechanisms are also handled by the administrative Independant Bodies of Regulation or Supervision, which act here as "prosecuting authorities", that is to say as prosecutor. They also "deal" the non-appearance of the judge, the opposite of "justice", in a classical conception which is the figure of the judge. It is true that in the case of the "convention judiciaire d'intérêt public" the French Law requires an approval by the judge of the CJIP: it is then that the stake moved. There is a change of culture: the prosecutor is in the center, the Regulator or the Supervisor are the "prosecuting authority" and it is as approval authority that the judge or the administrative Sanctions Committee intervenes. But later.

When the essential are the proofs obtained in the first lapse of time. The firm or the person can be evaded by asserting his "right to the judge". This judge who seeks the truth while an authority to pursue wants something else: win.

We must understand that. 

Read the Interview (in French) and the answers to these three questions: 

• 1. En quoi les mécanismes de justice négociée, relativement récents en France, bouleversent les concepts hexagonaux de l’ordre judiciaire ? /  How the negotiated justice mechanisms, relatively recent in France, upset the hexagonal concepts of the judiciary?
• 2. Les entreprises ont-elles véritablement le choix d’accepter ces « deals de justice » ? / Do companies really have the choice to accept these "deals of justice"?
• 3. En matière de lutte contre la corruption, les autorités de poursuite se comportent désormais comme des juges puisqu’ils exigent des engagements pour le futur. Quels sont les risques ? / In the fight against corruption, prosecution authorities now behave like judges since they demand commitments for the future. What are the risks ?

L'ouvrage de Christophe André, Droit pénal spécial, vient de paraître dans sa 5ième édition, dans la collection Cours Dalloz - série Droit privé.

Il fût un temps où l'on ne faisait pas plus "spécial" que le Droit pénal spécial.

Déjà le Droit pénal, que l'on disait "autonome" était spécial (et merci à l'auteur d'en rappeler les bases en début d'ouvrage), mais en son sein l'on ressemblait l'ensemble de chacune des infractions. Un peu comme le Droit du contrat et les contrats spéciaux. 

Mais le Droit pénal spécial l'implique plus encore, parce que le Droit pénal général est lui-même spécial, puisqu'il est une exception au principe de liberté et que ce principe d'exception implique un isolement de chaque infraction close sur elle-même.  L'effet de catalogue serait de la nature même de ce Droit si "spécial". 

Comme l'écrit parfaitement Christophe André lorsqu'on arrive au Droit pénal spécial, alors on aborde un "droit très spécial". Il est d'ailleurs usuel de lui consacrer un ouvrage autonome....

Celui qui non seulement fait du Droit des affaires mais même travaille dans un entreprise sans faire particulièrement de Droit fera du Droit pénal des affaires dès l'instant par exemple qu'il s'occupe de gouvernance ou de relations avec les investisseurs. Les mécanismes de Compliance sont visés comme mettant en place un Droit qui n'a plus rien à voir avec le Droit pénal classique, construit même à l'inverse de celui-ci. 

C'est d'une façon liée que l'auteur s'inquiète en affirmant que toute cette pluie particulière de crimes et délits spéciaux, soustrait à un Droit pénal qui semble disparaître ferait naître un "droit d'exception". 

C'est vrai et c'est bien l'enjeu du "Droit de la Compliance" dans son rapport avec le Droit pénal. Qui ne fait que mettre encore plus nettement en valeur la question que ne l'avait déjà fait les rapports entre Droit de la Régulation et Droit pénal.

En effet, lorsqu'on affirme que la "répression" est l'arme principale du Régulateur, que le nombre de sanctions est la mesure de son succès, que les sanctions ne sont que l'outil nécessaire et naturel de l'efficacité de la règle ordinaire, tournant généralement autour de l'information et de la liberté d'aller et de venir (dont la liberté de la concurrence est dérivée), on ôte à la répression son caractère "spécial" pour la rendre ordinaire. Et par un oxymore dont les entreprises sentent chaque jour la pointe c'est en la rendant ordinaire que la répression devient un "droit d'exception", puisqu'il s'est affranchi d'un "principe d'exception" que posait le Droit pénal général.

C'est le principe d'efficacité qui continue à cela. 

Il paraît premier aux économistes.

Il paraît secondaire aux juristes.

Ce n'est pas une question théorique, c'est une question pratique.

Ainsi la décision de la Commission des sanctions de l'Agence Française Anticorruption, dans sa décision du 4 juillet 2019 est une parfaite illustration de cette tension. L'autorité de poursuite que constitue le président de l'AFA avait estimé que l'efficacité du système objectif et structurel de compliance justifiait une sanction sans avoir à prouver un comportement. La Commission des sanctions s'y refuse, dès l'instant que l'entreprise a suivi les recommandations émise par l'AFA, sauf au directeur de celle-ci a démontré un manquement malgré cela.

Comme quoi en matière de droit pénal tout est question de technique probatoire, cette articulation entre le droit pénal substantiel et la procédurale pénale, celle par laquelle ce Droit sort du sommeil dans lequel pourtant sa réussite voudrait qu'il demeure.

____

►Référence complète : Krouti M., Dufourq P., Décryptage des nouvelles lignes directrices sur la mise en œuvre de la convention judiciaire d'intérêt public, in Dalloz actualité, 12 juillet 2019. 

_____

Jean de La Fontaine écrivit une fable, dont le titre : Le Berger et le Roi

En voilà le texte. 

Deux démons à leur gré partagent notre vie,
Et de son patrimoine ont chassé la raison.
Je ne vois point de cœur qui ne leur sacrifie.
Si vous me demandez leur état et leur nom,
J'appelle l'un Amour, et l'autre Ambition.
Cette dernière étend le plus loin son empire ;
Car même elle entre dans l'amour.
Je le ferais bien voir ; mais mon but est de dire
Comme un Roi fit venir un Berger à sa Cour.
Le conte est du bon temps , non du siècle où nous sommes.
Ce Roi vit un troupeau qui couvrait tous les champs,
Bien broutant, en bon corps, rapportant tous les ans,
Grâce aux soins du Berger, de très notables sommes.
Le Berger plut au Roi par ces soins diligents.
Tu mérites, dit-il, d'être pasteur de gens ;
Laisse là tes moutons, viens conduire des hommes.
Je te fais Juge souverain.
Voilà notre berger la balance à la main.
Quoiqu'il n'eût guère vu d'autres gens qu'un ermite,
Son troupeau, ses mâtins, le loup, et puis c'est tout,
Il avait du bon sens ; le reste vient ensuite.
Bref, il en vint fort bien à bout.
L'Ermite son voisin accourut pour lui dire :
Veillé-je ? et n'est-ce point un songe que je vois ?
Vous favori ! vous grand ! Défiez-vous des Rois :
Leur faveur est glissante, on s'y trompe ; et le pire
C'est qu'il en coûte cher ; de pareilles erreurs
Ne produisent jamais que d'illustres malheurs.
Vous ne connaissez pas l'attrait qui vous engage.
Je vous parle en ami. Craignez tout. L'autre rit,
Et notre ermite poursuivit :
Voyez combien déjà la Cour vous rend peu sage.
Je crois voir cet aveugle à qui dans un voyage
Un serpent engourdi de froid
Vint s'offrir sous la main : il le prit pour un fouet.
Le sien s'était perdu, tombant de sa ceinture.
Il rendait grâce au ciel de l'heureuse aventure,
Quand un passant cria : Que tenez-vous, ô Dieux !
Jetez cet animal traître et pernicieux,
Ce serpent. C'est un fouet . C'est un serpent, vous dis-je.
A me tant tourmenter quel intérêt m'oblige ?
Prétendez-vous garder ce trésor ? Pourquoi non ?
Mon fouet était usé ; j'en retrouve un fort bon ;
Vous n'en parlez que par envie.
L'aveugle enfin ne le crut pas ;
Il en perdit bientôt la vie.
L'animal dégourdi piqua son homme au bras.
Quant à vous, j'ose vous prédire
Qu'il vous arrivera quelque chose de pire.
Eh ! que me saurait-il arriver que la mort ?
Mille dégoûts viendront, dit le Prophète Ermite.
Il en vint en effet ; l'Ermite n'eut pas tort.
Mainte peste de Cour fit tant, par maint ressort,
Que la candeur du juge, ainsi que son mérite,
Furent suspects au prince. On cabale, on suscite
Accusateurs et gens grevés par ses arrêts.
De nos biens, dirent-ils, il s'est fait un palais.
Le prince voulut voir ces richesses immenses ;
Il ne trouva partout que médiocrité,
Louanges du désert et de la pauvreté ;
C'étaient là ses magnificences.
Son fait, dit-on, consiste en des pierres de prix.
Un grand coffre en est plein, fermé de dix serrures.
Lui-même ouvrit ce coffre, et rendit bien surpris
Tous les machineurs d'impostures.
Le coffre étant ouvert, on y vit des lambeaux,
L'habit d'un gardeur de troupeaux,
Petit chapeau, jupon, panetière, houlette,
Et je pense aussi sa musette.
Doux trésors, ce dit-il, chers gages qui jamais
N'attirâtes sur vous l'envie et le mensonge,
Je vous reprends ; sortons de ces riches palais
Comme l'on sortirait d'un songe.
Sire, pardonnez-moi cette exclamation.
J'avais prévu ma chute en montant sur le faîte.
Je m'y suis trop complu ; mais qui n'a dans la tête
Un petit grain d'ambition ?

Lire ci-après l'exégèse et l'analyse de la fable