The extent of investigation in the heart of the legal debate.

The extent of investigation in the heart of the legal debate.
Intervention of Elisabeth Chauvet, judge children in Nîmes, the Congress of the FN3S in June 2010 on the reform of the extent of Investigation and educational guidance (IOE).
Pleased to be present - in this period that turmoil, who sees multiply reforms and restrictions on all sides - I speak of the judicial institution - but I am also referring to all public services - where most of the ads are bad newsproposals or bonds, day after day, pan after pan, undermine our working tools, and this in a way which reached us with full force in our professional practices - just like the idea of what we can bring to our society. And, while it is true that, since 20 years, we had constantly decrypt it to what we knew well that we were going - here where this would lead us - necessarily - one day or the other - and we denounce the slow but certain advance, I would say that today ' today, it happened.
This degradation of our public service of justice for minors, we feared and denounce, is happen. She is at work. In the offices of justices of the children, observation posts as well as place of decision, the difficulties are there, major: less places of placement, judicial protection young major unfunded, disengagement of the PJJ of educational assistance; increase in the time of implementation of the decisions, services are faced with many obstacles. But, when early January, I agreed to prepare this intervention on the question of the investigation, at the request of Mr BARBEZIER, on behalf of the APEA with which we have had a collaboration of high quality when I was a judge in MontpellierI did not know how the subject was topical, and if topical...
I did to take the measure that it there was a few days, to reading of the establishment of the judicial measure of socioeducational investigation (M J I SE), provided by PJJ for 2011. Although within the shock produced by the discovery of this project, which seems to sweep a setback of handle everything which constitutes the know-how, the culture and efficiency based on knowledge of the Humanities at work since almost 50 years, and constantly updated, (both by new legislation by reflections and various technicalities), I am sought me not return, in advance, in a controversy that is likely to be redundant, and tiresome, since I know that Mr CABOURDIN will intervene late morning.
Anxious to know not only my own thoughts, or those of the judges of the children of my jurisdiction - TGI de Nîmes, I had at heart to examine, through meetings, my colleagues. They were mostly in ignorance of this project (often drown in their overloaded cabinets work). I have therefore participated in the General Assembly of the AMFJF, in March, as well as the debates organized by the Union of the judiciary, and got contact reflections starts. Therefore, all of these points of view will that I outline you, mine own not from support or add a note.
. Among the judges, the amazement is unanimous... even if declined differently according to sensitivities or trade union memberships and each other. This intervention, and since I am not in a Union setting, I tried to register me firmly in the perspective that Edward Saïd, Professor at Columbia University, in an article in le Monde diplomatique was published in 2002, under the title "humanism"", the last bulwark against barbarity" called humanist criticism: "Do work memory, replace the current errors in historical perspective, and make its place complexity, to expand control of possible fields and replaced by deeper thinking and analysis on the long term the short bursts of irrational anger trap us".
In simpler terms, I have attempted to answer the question that taps me: what happened?
How could this proposal for reform of the investigation germinate in the DPJJ - in complete hiatus with the search of excellence that educational assistance - since its creation by the order of 1958, always developed and pursued?
Can we forget that in 1970, during debates on the draft reform of parental authority, the Dean Carbonnier had declared, before the National Assembly "Educational Assistance." "Excellence, it did there not affect"!
That has happened - even specifically that no legislative change is certifying a will of the legislator to revise downward the scope or quality of the protection of the child?
On the contrary, the child protection does not continue to be proclaimed National priority, flagship of our civilized society from the low?
That has happened, even though improvements and considerable progress has been made since a decade educational assistance: adversarial proceedings, counsel, assistance of experts of the ad hoc administrator, appeal decisions... time coaching?
What past, and - crucial question - what happens and what tomorrow who are singing are we?
And if this reform of the investigation, knowing the central place it occupies in the legal debate, and the consequences it engenders for judicial decision-making, was only the prelude to developments even more dark?
I therefore propose it first to situate our discussion of this day in the general context that knows the justice, the judicial institution in General: judges, be you A right, judge, be you A left!
You don't not know it: since a few years, attacks on the independence of the judicial authority are multiplying, the whole of the judicial institution is assigned objectives that make it more difficult to judges to fill the role of guarantor of individual freedoms conferred on them by the Constitution :
Plethora of laws move at a frantic pace, giving rise to that of some people call a "legislative pressure".
The draft laws are often the subject of fragmented votes, resulting in inevitable inconsistencies: (can be seen at the end of a law dealing with any other issue, a "piece" of Act rejected previously, reappear in the first vote...).
Bills which professionals are not (mostly) not consulted.
(Note that access to the law, with legal aid, is more difficult that serious threats on swathes of judicial jurisdiction, on the means available to us; the introduction of certain technicalities can produce devastating effects).
This in a context of lack of registry staff that continues to worsen, (so where we are taken to be the upper limit of what we can do we same), each guarantor of the rights of the individual decision becomes a challengeIf we keep the concern to safeguard the human encounter as an inseparable element of our decisions.
Every day a little more, the lessons learned from the disaster of Outreau - awareness of the importance of the human dimension... fade...
And this is not finished, since a next Act - the LOPPSI Bill, is currently in between the National Assembly and the Senate.
For knowledge have been, it is clear that it is a ènième text repressive safe as all those who have voted at breakneck since 2007, which poses milestones further the Organization of a company that might not otherwise be inspirational to society of control. (With also a few small provisions concerning minors who drowned in the Act, reappear with some of precisely those who had been (somewhat) deleted our broad mobilization against the labelling of the risk of delinquency beginning 3 years..., 2007...).
For the modernization of justice, there provides a still broader modern techniques application, without however frame them the least of the world by the minimum ethical guarantees to ensure that they remain... in the service of human, not the reverse.
What warnings our philosophers and thinkers have yet not repeated us?
In this general context of threat that weighs on justice in General, of juvenile justice is not in remainder: children, be you the criminal judges, judges, GARDEZ you civil.
Of juvenile justice is also, of course, crossed by the tide: the founding texts of the juvenile justice - order from 1945 to the criminal and articles 375 et seq. of the civil code civil, have been since their inception and to this day at least, remarkable stability. Their height and their plasticity allowed the creation of new tools, the transformation of the old, and an adaptation continually renewed the runaway evolution of society since fifty years (the order of 1945 has been reviewed 22 times).
But it is clear that we are witnessing currently to the assertion of a kind of frenzied reform, a willingness to operate, this time, substantive changes.
This is the case in criminal where very soon, the order of 1945 will be repealed in favour of a new criminal code of minors, from the observations emanating from the report Varinard.
Educational assistance made several attempts to change legislation, both in terms of procedure on the merits, since several years.
If they were not successful, it is that they have encountered resistance massive and organized of all of the professionals - you all social workers - and some of your directions.
Remember we experiments tempted by some departments in 2003 to given an overall mandate to the General Council - support for him to implement according to its own criteria and ways and amounted to a transfer of jurisdiction thus of the judiciary in favour of the administrative judges.
The judges of the children remember also that, in 2007, the Chancery ordered them to distribute in criminal judges and judges of the civil - to load for each 270 judges of motivating their refusal children. 269 have argued their refusal... This experimentation therefore had to be abandoned by the Chancellery.
What this reform announced the investigation?
It is presented as a progress, improvement, a concern to meet the needs of the judiciary. However these in never formed the wish (we would like so many other improvements...). She enrolled in any of the comments that we were able to (wish of a social "fast" for a period of 2 months survey). It is presented to us as a simple almost technical amendment, - a simple modification of its duration, for compelling reasons of compatibility with the period of 6 months allotted by law for the judge to decide, as a simple cutting modulesa mere attempt of classification on the basis of a simply more modern terminology.
But, beyond these soothing words, how can we not see the choice of excellence of justice to minors through one of its foundations: the quality of the investigation? Economic measure or pursuit of the objective once to see the judicial protection of children to fold and term see cut the wings of this actor is the judge of the children, the decision-maker, independent, and mostly still holder of dual civil/criminal jurisdictionThis faculty "to take office", maintained by the Act of March 5, 2007, and still allows particular that juvenile offender receives educational assistance measures? When a judge finally exclusively devoted to a still more sprawling criminal?
The evolution of justice for minors in the last fifty years seems to me make arguments to that effect. Could actually be distinguish 4 major periods:
I. the origin: juvenile justice, sovereign mission of the State.
Orders from 1945 to 1958, (the second being come in some way enrich the first) were made by the juvenile justice that Alain Bruel, former President of the TPE of Paris, called "the jurisdiction of the subject".
Based on a personalist approach to issue new understanding of human logic based on the considerable contributions of the human sciences (psychology, psychoanalysis, education sciences, sociology), it was based on the assertion of the educability of all minors, including juvenile offenders, and the priority given to education on law enforcement in a global vision of education for all (in civil as in criminal). A single actor, J E, with the double jurisdiction guaranteed effectiveness. Investigation held first place, on the basis of the decision of civil and criminal, the minor cannot be tried if he was the subject of such a measure.
This model of juvenile justice the rest inspired more than one country in Europe.
II. the 1980s: 1986 decentralization laws have operated, for the protection of childhood, a new distribution of competences between the State, the departments and municipalities.
The burden of the protection of the child is transferred to the General Council (minors in danger and juvenile offenders being retained by the State in respect of his kingly duties).
This transfer of skills mark the beginning of the disengagement of the State, which clearly seeks to do more to ensure all of expenditure relating to the protection of minors - which, it is true - evolution of society requires, continues to develop.
The judges who were on duty at the time remember the recurring complaint of funders 'makers are not payers "!
The criminal, jointly to a radical reversal of the criminological reflection, it is on the passage to the Act and its impact on society (the victims) that now focuses attention, rather than on personality and the prospect of future development of the minor.
It will follow a repressive outbid, and enhancement of the concept of control over the educational meeting.
In addition the breach opened in the civil penal unit, the disregard for the personality and family situation of the minor is the germ of a shift of the investigation the criminal.
Therefore, the civil and criminal experienced almost opposing developments.
III. the 1990s: all criminal
It is the implementation of zero tolerance, experienced in New York in 1994, and transposed into France without the slightest assessment of its potential impact on the cultural differences. In fact, as Alain Bruel said bluntly, it is a slightly updated version of the saying "who steals eggs steals an ox".
Can now assess the extent of the devastation committed:
-gridlock if the paralysis of the juvenile criminal justice; delay in the delivery of judgements, establishment of waiting lists for the support of the educational measures, random execution of convictions.
Beyond the visible and quantifiable damage, negative impact on quality was considerable.
- and its real-time processing corollary: inspired stock assessments, and designed by the Moinard Attorney. Very beyond the European requirement of a reasonable time, which requires the respect of a balance between speed and quality, the legislature has, since 1996, surrendered to the obsession of the immediacy by multiplying the rapid proceedings, abstracts deadlines and appearances closely spaced.
In such a context it is clear that investigations of personality began a be perceived as delay factors to consider.
Have developed meet socioeducative (SERP) information gathered in a few hours, where the notice written educational department placed with the tribunal, prepared on the basis of a few minutes and one or two calls telephone maintenance, has become a "decision support" considered as sufficient...
One may well wonder the rest on the landslide which it is operated in practice of the judges of the children, which, indeed, without even that they be he formal obligation, have reduced significantly the number of investigative measures.
It is not question of denying the influence in this evolution towards a more rapid justice of the immense changes that then crossed our society:
The progress of technology, and the place she started to occupy in a general way, computerization and the acceleration of the means of communication have induced a general phenomenon of shrinkage of time and space.
Can however only deplore the absence of any reflection on the consequences - for our youth and our knowledge-making, this breach of classical temporality, in the words of Paul VIRILIO: is it only questioned the effects of dehumanization linked to the deletion of the chronodiversité (same duration is experienced very differently by the media world)(, j., the victim, the young person and his parents by the place they occupy) and the challenge implied the notion of process, so important as well for the manifestation of the truth for the evolution of individual perceptions, conflicts between people and the conduct of the entire educational action?
IV. the 2000 years. The flight of educational assistance
However, at the same time where juvenile offenders were sacrificed at the altar of security, the protection of children has benefited from significant progress: the year 2002 sees enact 3 legislation that will influence the protection of children in a decisive manner:
-1. Procedure: the Decree of 15 March 2002, by the introduction of the adversarial gives educational assistance a fully judicial character.
The judge is fully guarantor of individual freedoms, and in particular that of the parents in their exercise of parental authority. (Of course, this is not new for professionals, but it takes force of legislation and now appears in the code of civil procedure). The consequences are:
-Families now have access to the records of educational assistance
-I must now proceed systematically to a first interview before issuance of a measure of investigation (article 1184 code of civil procedure).
If this is not new, this has the effect to encourage judges to motivate their decision declaring a measure of investigation, reinvesting a specificity of the judiciary they had sometimes sacrificed at the altar of the bulk of their cabinet. (I will return to this central question of motivation, which seems to me could be opposed to the creation of the MJISE project)
-Counsel may be issued a copy of the file (to charge for him to respect the confidentiality rules), he thus giving its place in the educational assistance procedures
-2. The law of 02 March 2002 which promotes a right of users.
New obligations related thereto were at the time, particularly difficult to implement by your services, faced with the contradiction under mandate binding, any judicial action in accordance with the rights of parents as users... (this term of user, somewhat barbaric in our culture, attests clearly imported character of other cultures of this Act).
The fact that the child protection has not been excluded certify at least of the will of the legislature to consider as a full-fledged citizen parent (what the parent described currently in any criminal action contrast)(, likely to be the subject of multiple contracts for the education and measures of all kinds, to be criminally sentenced...)
- 3. At the same time on parental authority, the Act of 4 March 2002 gave a new definition of parental authority (JAF) adding to the classic definition of the duties of parents ("all rights and duties aimed the interests of the child belonging to the father and mother to protect in its security")(", his health and his character, to ensure her education") the following terms "and allow its development in the respect due to the person." "Parents associate the child in decisions which concern them, according to his age and maturity"
In this redefinition of the protection of childhood, of these enactments, the extent of investigation is reaffirmed in its central role. It remains, and is more than ever, the key of the judicial process:
the investigation report (IOE, social survey, expertise) becomes part of the judicial debate full: he takes evidence status, governed accordingly by the judicial system of the evidence. II is a cornerstone of the records, and will remain so throughout the procedure of AE, known, can last for many years. It is not rare that either he state when an important decision for the years after. Later, it will appear in the archives.
The Court of the second degree, if appeal is formed by one or the other party, the investigation report will constitute the essential element on which the Court of Appeal based its decision. Element, all the more important that it cannot rely on the undeniable "knowledge" situations that allows intervention in the continuity of the judge of the children and families.
He interested other magistrates, which may have been seized training – or the judgment of other procedures. Investigating judge if one of the members of the family is either victim or serious alleged a criminal or tort case. Family Affairs judge if the parental couple is at the same time in case of separation or other litigation. The guardianship judge
in the case of a request for emancipation of a minor or the establishment of a family Council. Attorney of the Republic. (The transmission of the report follows the rest rules accurate, respectful of the confidentiality of the records of Educational Assistance)
-the extent of investigation is more systematically "framed" by 2 hearings in the Office of the judge of children:
-The first contradictory debate is the subject of the first hearing before the judge, which gives to the making - or not, rather than the extent of investigation.
Order appropriate measure and entrusting it to a service is, according to the rules of procedure judicial, motivated. Motivation sets out the reasons for the referral to the judge, and appoints the issues. At most, it makes working assumptions, based on the only evidence before the judge.
It is, by definition, because the elements, on the record, and resulting from the hearing of the parties, are appreciated by the judge as insufficient and unsatisfactory to base a decision informed, i.e. to assess the situation and characterize the existence of a danger within the meaning of articles 375 et seq. of the civil code, that the I ordered a measure of investigation. These missing elements are obviously unknown.The judge cannot therefore in any preset way specific what there is to seek to understand, and what it expects well able to deal.
-The measure is justified often also of what the reporting elements are disputed by the families. It is essential that their word is taken into account, for the same height of credibility at this stage of the procedure, that elements provided by the service reporting. This is the issue of the effectiveness of the adversarial nature of the procedure (this is particularly true when the holders of parental authority opposed the intervention or prosecution of the intervention of the General Council).
It is thus that the judge lays the groundwork for what will enable, in the best cases, collect the accession of the family in the proposed measure, filling in that its specific mission, as defined in section 375-1 of the civil code. How could the judge exercise its mission pursuant to section 375-1 of the civil code, which is to "strive to collect the family joining the proposed measure" if it challenges the elements?
-The second adversarial debate takes place at a hearing held in the Council Chamber and which will result in a judicial decision.
The extent of investigation plays the dual role provided by the Act (section 1183 CPC):
It provides the specific elements that will form the legal basis for judicial intervention (regime of the evidence).
-by its guidance role, she defines possible protective action axes because overall economy and consistency protection of childhood, it is condition of the effectiveness of future judicial educational action. In addition to its legal nature, it is also more to demonstrate that the accession of the family to the extent is also the necessary condition, to carry out educational work if sufficient.
In this highly scalable and living material that is educational assistance, by all the currents of the time, the IOE measure always was recognized as a tool of excellence. Entitled justice services to which they are entrusted the rest took the measure of this requirement. Teams were formed in multiple disciplines, to improve the skills and knowledge-making. The systemic analysis training in particular have multiplied.
On the fundamental issue of the quality of the writings (the product of the work accomplished, that coming on the Office of the magistrate, who will appear in the record) services seek the opinion of the magistrate, his suggestions, criticism.
A just title, because the investigation report is under the crossfire of all actors in the judicial debate, - including j. - point focus of all the criticisms, the basis on which family - or his lawyer - will to challenge the measure envisaged by the magistrate. The lesser of its commas will be promoted in imperfection, or even error; the slightest wrong, or even approximate date will be designated as the cause of the alleged fiasco of the intervention, the so-called social worker seriously limited...
In addition to this, and this is an extremely pragmatic consideration, the judges find that it is smooth, and enlightened and human listening that professionals were able to develop the fiscal measurement, which produced the early exit of the impasse and despair expressed by parents at the first hearing.
However, for the magistrate, who is not himself lapsing into despair, it is clear that it is imperative that measures to produce effects. The Office of the magistrate is the place where you can see proceed indefinitely what I call the tragedy of repetition (the phenomenon called criminal recidivism - object of all the fighting...).
Educational assistance, it could say "it is" because nothing of determinant has happened... There were interventions, reflections, measures, huge expenses for the company... And nothing does is is password... With in more bitterness and despair - or consecutive failure hatred. And to the magistrate, his crowded Office, drowned.
It is this that it would be wise to analyze: when something happens - which will lead - term, at the end of the court action or to an easing of the situation already preparing its resolution, that is what happens?
Behold, modestly, some hypotheses, from the experience of 20 years as of I - and in 3 different jurisdictions - with very different geographical jurisdictions (Poitiers, the Thau Basin, and North and South of Nimes ZUP) support:
-the making of the IOE often comes in response to the recurring complaint of the parents to have been misunderstood by the services that have met previously (often social services - spectrum of the social assistant that "judge".)
Therefore the IOE responds to their demand to be heard, although continued often to an accumulation of interventions all the more frustrating than others (because they are there). It is not wrong to say that parents are often abused... regardless of their wrongs, victims of a misunderstood towards poor abused children compassion...
The IOE offers what the magistrate cannot do:
It has the time to listen which does not have the magistrate.
It has of multidisciplinarity, where the judge is only... with no collegiality.
It is enhances services constant effort towards professionalization: Organization of multidisciplinary teamwork, training in multiple domains (change techniques, systemic analysis, training in writing).
It is the strength of the intersubjective encounter his tool, both in the link that weave professionals with families (child), in the collaborative relationship between judges and the services. A professional told me "I write my report to the address of a judge;" and a brother telling me that he had formulated specific expectations in the service of investigation as written and the work done during the measurement. And if it was this which was full a search engine and if, to use a current and very different vocabulary...
While it is true that this dimension is complex to formulate, humans... intuition... listen... it remains not but unmistakable.
No doubt is this what the Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, in its judgment of 7 April 1993 stated in these terms: "the objectives specific to the jurisdiction of minors, the rule of psychological factors, the research of influence on mental structures of a minor call between it and its judge a singular relationship".
So should that this dimension is missing that is measured the importance...?
If I had done this intervention a few months ago, I in I would have ended there: the IOE, a perfectly relevant.
And we have discussed improvements...
Therefore take our thinking:
Since it is clear that the main users of this measure is in are not complaining, and did seek no change, why this reform?
In principle, it does not change a winning game.
That happened recently, that we have not seen coming, neither you nor us, just enter no logic to the exercise of our missions, which has no real problem - while we encounter in the daily life of our practices?
A. the RGPP
A new event, exceeding the only juvenile justice, determining, intervened in 2007: launched at the initiative of the President of the Republic of public policies (RGPP) general revision which is therefore applied to the expenditure of the State.
Indeed, the Jospin Government had already vote a law of organization of the statutes of finances (LOLF) introducing a steering in all jurisdictions by matching objectives of encrypted results expected to measure their performance.
The RGPP came to add a duty of programmed expenditure reduction in staff, with particularly short deadlines because of the urgency to reduce the amount of public debt.
The jurisdiction of minors faced, like the other workings of the administration of a particularly pernicious culture of the result.
Our justice now builds on the model of the company, whose good walking to be assessed exclusively from the profits that it produces.
She is invited to continue the precarious projects in a domain where all the circumstances the sustainability of the operation, and quantify fragile criteria such as the stabilization of a non-measurable objectives (the absence of recidivism for a juvenile offender) behavior...
If adding the desire to make sales at any cost, even to the point of absurdity, and practices of camouflage that meet, are beginning to have an idea of the magnitude of the loss of meaning due to the culture of the result with the Manager effectiveness.
In fact, more than efficiency, it would be better speak of efficiency, it being the most economical way to achieve the goals whatever they may be.
Criminal streamlining covered below, on a case to a catalogue of obligations to the support of the minor: regular pointing to the service, school attendance, participation in examinations etc. (By contrast, in confinement, are aggressively not on ways...)
It is the protection branch youth judicial, DPJJ, service of the State, accounting of funds of the State in the protection of children, has somehow failing this mission of implementation of the RGPP.
The DPJJ is executed in 2008 in the jurisdiction where it was then, by the provisional budget proposal multi-year 2008-2011, which required massive budgetary restrictions - on the basis of selective orientations.
Fulfilled the task step of load, with the damage that is known within the institution, and despite the disapproval of all of the judges: emptying its contents Act sometimes (including by organizing the non-payment of a measures PJM - or taking part of the lack of precision in the existing law (which as)) (we said, is particularly generalist), including disengages from the exercise of the AEMO measures (civil protection mission).
On the basis of the choices dictated by the logic of confinement dear to our rulers, huge credits were however devoted to the EFC, with threat of disappearance of REBS, and closure of number of structures of educational accommodation said classic, and the dismantling of many teams and quality educational sites.
Civil, it has maintained that the implementation of the only IOE (with strong incentives for judges to now entrust them the IOE measures in criminal as in civil) in contradiction of a movement that saw the teams to empty their psychologists(without counting the non-existence, long, psychiatrists)... This incentive was hardly the rest found echo with the judges.
B. the Act of March 5, 2007, organized a transfer of jurisdiction of the judicial administrative protection of childhood, now entrusting to General advice assessment missions of all situations say at risk, and implementation of aid measures and support to families - therefore they y membership.
Was the seizin of justice justified therefore more alternative way, assuming that where the assessment by the General Council would not be possible, either because of the refusal of the family to accept their proposed educational assistance.
This Act, relatively balanced, but extremely expensive for departments, has been implementation of gradual (still incomplete) by them, under the vigilance of procurators of the Republic, which ensured not to seize the judge that in cases strictly prescribed by law (the offices of the judges of the children have however not désempli...)
The promulgation of this law has aroused a certain relief, since the jurisdiction of the judiciary was not purely and deleted. The civil-criminal split would have induced the disappearance of the children judge, dreaded, had not not been place...
C. it is circular for the protection of the childhood of May 6, 2010, which created the amazement.
If it is intended to clarify the respective competences of the judicial and administrative authority defined by the Act of March 5, 2007, and to institutionalize indispensable at the departmental level for consultation and coordination bodies, it is the Direction of the judicial protection of youth that it charge of "all of the issues affecting justice for minors and consultation" "between the institutions intervening at this title".
The DPJJ is therefore given a political role to set for the judicial protection of children.
As such, in liaison with the competent directorates, it develops standards and organization of the juvenile justice frameworks, provides, directly or by the voluntary sector that it empowers, assistance to the decisions of the judicial authority, and guarantees to the judicial authorityby control, audit and evaluation, the quality of aid in decisions and to support whatever the status of services and unsolicited institutions.
It must take its place in the coordination of all of the protection of childhood extends administrative protection to the judicial protection of civil and criminal...
The AFMJF had yet, as soon as the release of the preliminary draft of this circular, current November 2009, clearly articulated concerns that could that give rise to the responsibility entrusted to a service now Coupe of the field from where he kept his competence and know-how, and this in terms incisive and particularly relevant: "beyond the statement of principle of the role policy DPJJ for all questions relating to juvenile justice, it is for the less paradoxical to assert and attempt to justify the central place of services of the PJJ in the field of the protection of children at the time" "even where she disengages the educational assistance!"
It has been ignored these comments. The circular of May 6 gives DPJJ mission to guarantee the quality to the judicial authority of the decision support. Fact sheet 2 to the said circular provides very precisely that, "to respond to the need to adapt the extent of investigation necessary of magistrates, the direction of the PJJ must prepare a circular on the judicial investigation". At a minimum, if it the legitimate to propose a reform of the investigation, it does the legitimate certainly not to impose reform deemed inadequate by users and professionals who are the actors.
Risk or strategy? Everyone knows that it is easier to be drastic someone - or something that is not known. We know, we judges led to convictions in the criminal - or tortious; the jurors the live when they sit on the Foundation; lawyers based their argument on this reality: more is known, the less it is easy to condemn a person to delete... something....
Less the PJJ is the realities of educational assistance, more easily it will develop reforms fi skills and existing knowledge-making.
What she offers us today (necessary?) is the unfortunate illustration.
If, as the formulated Alain Bruel as early as the 1990s, the juvenile justice was in danger, if we remain so vigilant and attentive to the developments in progress, it must be recognized that this strategy, we do had not anticipated it - sobe that as it may, it was possible to influence him... So therefore, the loop is buckled...
1 The State, it is financially disengaged child protection (by the two laws of decentralization). To the power of decision, which remains still in the hands of the magistrates, independent, so likely to be extremely expensive, the State confers jurisdiction to its agents, the prefect in another setting, and then the Direction of the judicial Protection of youth, so "to frame" the judicial authority by devices designed by his care, with its own objectives...
2 Youth, judicial Protection Directorate has been loaded since the 1990s, gradually, to implement a policy less oriented taking account of the personality of young people-(against the wishes of its although professionals often) and turned towards an imperative of efficiency - on the model of the confinement (paying for) short term it must be said), applies, finger on the seam of the trouser, the budgetary restrictions required in the RGPP.
The DPJJ is not the loss of its (complementary criminal) educational assistance mission moves... (I speak of course directions). Is it not well on the contrary the pledge of his zeal in implementing the guidelines that are, not in doubt-pas, imposed?
This work having been done by a simple circular of May 6, 2010, i.e., without the need to legislate, entrusting this zealous Direction, exorbitant powers, notably allowing reform devices and tools, and criminal treatment, and educational Assistance.
It will more easily its mission that it will perform dores and already distant realities of land and the "culture" of educational assistance.
Here, and I to am sorry, the vision I have of this reform of the investigation.
I think that our Trade Union and professional associations will seek to examine the legality of such strategies...
Can a simple circular, emanating from the Executive power, that be abused the tools necessary for the application of the Act?
Can judges enforce the inadequacy of a tool (the investigation) to inform the magistrate with a view to making his decision - as the children's Court which has jurisdiction to refer a case to a later hearing if it considers that the investigative measures are insufficient...?
Too brief investigation does may be insufficient to carry out for the magistrate to "strive to collect the membership of the family" (art 1-375 of the civil code)?
And, to broaden the remarks in conclusion, I quote Professor Adorno: "the effort of knowledge on social practices is not the same order as the classic scientific approach..." "While it aspires to an intelligence of the order, and seeks his consistency in the nature deductive and predictive of its statements, this is an intelligence of disorder incorporating the desire, the emotional turmoil and conflict accompanying".
As said the complexity philosopher Edgar MORIN, "there is an another folly that inconsistency;" it comes instead from an excess of abstract consistency, by loss of contact with the concrete of life. "Rationalization shows us that the reason becomes madness when it closes on itself."
Elisabeth Chauvet, judge of the children at Nîmes (intervention FN3S, June 4, 2010)