Tomorrow the inmates will go perhaps to hearings... stop

Tomorrow the inmates will go perhaps to hearings... stop

By Michel Huyette


We have all understood the message loop for many months now: the Government, putting forward the existence of budgetary constraints, decided to significantly reduce the means of public services, including by the very important reduction in the number of agents of the State.

If hospitals staff expressed concerns more and more, if teachers will greatly no longer be able to exercise fully their educational missions, justice is not spared by this problem, as shown in the news these days. But let's go back a little bit back to start.

Since the night of the time, inmates must appear before a judge transferred from prison to the courthouse by policemen or gendarmes. This mobilizes each week a very large number of people of these two bodies.

Spending cuts now the Ministry of the Interior and defence, and without people in sufficient numbers to ensure the missions of maintaining order, the Government decided, to relieve these two departments, that transfers should be provided by the prison administration (PA), attached to the Ministry of justice, and which manages prisons. The system is under experimentation.

The problem is that the prison administration staff is already well occupied, and critical tasks. Yet, should replace the thousands of policemen and gendarmes, ensuring every day transfers by all supervisors of the AP. It was therefore rather logical and reasonable to make the transfer of loads that once provided a recruiting sufficient agents of the AP so that the administration can really and effectively take the relay from previous.

And isn't. This never works like that. It is a bit like some laws, for example the collegiality of the statement. A December 1985 Act had planned rooms of education involved in the most important stages of education. But lack of means this text was repealed before even its entry into force by an act of December 1987. It is the establishment of a college education, provided by an act of 2007, training and which came into force has several times been postponed, fault of means and then because of a project, now abandoned, of deletion of the investigating judge....

In any event, the perverse effects of this inability to predict first means, then the amendment of the rules, do not was expected, as recently reported many magistrates.


At Nancy, an inmate to whom there is no reason to be benevolent has been released on the sole ground that the prisons administration do not led him to the Court despite the express request magistrates, lack of personnel to ensure this mission.

Should know indeed that in criminal procedure, and with regard to detention, the Act provides many times that a judge must review the situation of the imprisoned person and make a new decision to extend detention title if necessary. But the Act also, fortunately, that the hearing to be held in the presence of the parties concerned. And when they are not there, the judges must refer the case to another hearing... who may be at a date subsequent to the date limit of validity of the title of current detention. More title of detention, more than detention. Therefore the individual is compulsorily released, even if it is the worst of criminals.

This is not an isolated case. These days very concerned magistrates have repeatedly sounded the alarm and reported very many dysfunctions.

For example, in all the Department of Meurthe and Moselle, there is only 6 people for the PA to ensure transfers while needs are estimated at more than double for the only court of Nancy. This is why the AP informed judges that she would be unable to provide a number of transfers, while it would seem that one case of rape and two others a narcotics case.

At Thionville, an investigating judge was against three refusal of transfer of the part of the AP and the gendarmerie. It is therefore not in his Office for which he heard a record and individuals must also postpone debates with the aforementioned procedural risks. Indeed it is in a case of a confrontation, and in the other two of the debate on the extension of the detention.
And in this city, and the only service of the statement, 9 refusal of transfer have already brought to the attention of the judges.

The Metz git there was these days 4 refusal of extraction in the statement and one in the judge of the children.

Mills, mining claims were transmitted to the AP in August for hearings in October, and the refusal, "fly" in the words of a colleague, were sent this week only.


This is why it might be judicious to propose to the detainees to go to the Court by their own means, by asking them to stop so that it costs nothing, and asking them as kindly as possible do not take the opportunity to be beautiful.


All the above requires no long comments (read here). Thus, each will be his own opinion on how decided developments are managed.

Which is otherwise more serious, is the release of an individual that can be dangerous, with obviously a risk of recidivism. It is quite difficult to understand that the Government authorized police and gendarmerie services to refuse to replace the services of the AP fails.

There is no less that a retail is facing.

When an individual is released by the justice and re-offend, when well even the reasons do not keep in detention were real and strong, immediately magistrates are shown on the finger and the population is encouraged to lynch him in public.

But you no doubt noticed that when well even an inmate has been released due to the inability of the administration to manage the problems of transfer, this time it is total silence.


It is probably the fault to anyone.