L’appréhension ambiguë de la trahison par la procédure pénale

• Main Authors: Camille Viennot, François Desprez
• Format: Article
• Language: fra
• Published: L’Harmattan 2017-09-01
• Series: Droit et Cultures
• Subjects: Criminal procedure; Criminal justice; Evidence; Inquiry and investigation secrecy; Professional confidentiality; Denunciation
• Online Access: http://journals.openedition.org/droitcultures/4291

Perception of treason in criminal procedure contains major ambiguities. Although the exemplary nature of justice seems to prohibit use of unfair means in order to demonstrate the existence of a crime and to determine the persons responsible, the requirement of effectiveness, also related to criminal justice, leads to admit means deriving, more or less directly, from treason. Thus, treason is tolerated when the unfair behavior comes from a private party to the criminal process. Evidentiary elements coming from treason are admitted and statements made by persons under an obligation of confidentiality may be deemed appropriate. Beyond, criminal procedure manipulates treason. It encourages such behavior, notably giving a lesser sentence to the convert; besides, criminal procedure enables public authorities themselves to use some investigative powers grounded on unfair behavior, such as infiltration, to demonstrate the existence of criminal acts. Together, these elements show a favorable move towards treason in criminal procedure, which leads to seriously temper fairness in collection of evidence.