Antoine Garapon

How is the authority of law challenged by digital technologies? Is the digitisation of law an appropriate means to achieve legal impartiality? This book provides an interdisciplinary approach to understanding the impact of the ongoing digital transformation of legal systems. Digital law differs from traditional law in that it relies on decision-support software and networked databases. Such mechanisms must be understood not only in technical terms but also in their social and historical dimensions: the computational foundations of digital law should be situated within the long history of the mechanisation of writing. Digitalisation constitutes a graphic revolution which, in the legal domain, transforms the very conditions of impartiality. Whereas the legality of traditional legal systems is grounded in territorial sovereignty, digital law is no longer anchored in a sovereign territory. It not only increasingly transcends established borders, but also dispenses with the spatial embeddedness that has underpinned legal authority. Digital legality must therefore be reconceptualised to consider how automated systems may be integrated into the social space within which law operates.

How is the authority of law challenged by digital technologies? Is the digitisation of law an appropriate means to achieve legal impartiality? This book provides an interdisciplinary approach to understanding the impact of the ongoing digital transformation of legal systems. Digital law differs from traditional law in that it relies on decision-support software and networked databases. Such mechanisms must be understood not only in technical terms but also in their social and historical dimensions: the computational foundations of digital law should be situated within the long history of the mechanisation of writing. Digitalisation constitutes a graphic revolution which, in the legal domain, transforms the very conditions of impartiality. Whereas the legality of traditional legal systems is grounded in territorial sovereignty, digital law is no longer anchored in a sovereign territory. It not only increasingly transcends established borders, but also dispenses with the spatial embeddedness that has underpinned legal authority. Digital legality must therefore be reconceptualised to consider how automated systems may be integrated into the social space within which law operates.

Antoine Garapon, the author of notably "Le Gardien des promesses" (1996) and "Bien juger" (2001), is the director of the Institut des Hautes Etudes sur la Justice (IHEJ) and a member of the editorial board of the French magazine Esprit. His other works include "Peut-on r parer l'histoire?" (2008), "Juger en Am rique et en France" (2004), "Des crimes qu'on ne peut ni punir ni pardonner "(2002) and "Et ce sera justice" (2001). The French legal system has entered a new era based on a new model - that of neoliberal justice. Cost control, performance iedicators, judges' remuneration iedexed on merit, generalised treatment of penal affairs in real time, introduction of a French version of the guilty plea, generalisation of transactions, mandatory minimum sentences, extended detention (on public safety grounds, beyond the expiry of the term of imprisonment), judging the mentally ill: these controversial innovations cannot be dI'missed as the product of authoritarian whims or of a passing trend. But how should we consider them? Do they deserve to be demonised, as has frequently been the case? Or, on the contrary, if the legal system needs to be reformed, do these developments constitute the direction that'should be taken? After describing the new neoliberal model - both in terms of the internal French legal system and of global international justice since they go hand in hand - this book evaluates the difficulty in judging neoliberalI'm because it rests on a much deeper consensus than is generally believed, and thus cannot be denounced as a new form of totalitarianI'm (which it opposes). Instead, this consensus is based on a new idea of liberty, one that would enable us to manage our lives and to become modern human beings - while ignoring the difficulties posed by democracy. That is why this book concludes by adopting a critical position and arguing in favour of a renewed conception of justice.- Beyond technical discussions and party politics, this is an in-depth analysis of the very coherent evolution that French justice has undergone in the past few years.- An iedispensable tool of critical thought to reach an iedependent opinion.

During the past few years, there has been an increase in cases of civil litigation for reparation of damages brought on by wars, crimes against humanity, slavery and colonisation. "Historical injuries and injustices" are the terms used by claimants in iedividual and class action lawsuits when seeking restitution, reparations or settlement for damages resulting from State policy - the spoliation of Jewish property during World War II, forced sterilisation of colonised peoples, occupation of Native people's land, for example. Reparations for war damages, official apologies and acts of repentance have existed in the past. Following the Nuremberg trials, the international criminal justice system grew and developed. And now, private law is being called upon to make restitution for historical debts. But what really matters to claimants in such cases: the financial settlement or acknowledgment of the crime? Can historical offences be repaired? Can a monetary settlement act as reparation? Can it help victims fied peace and appeasement? Antoine Garapon traces the rise of civil responsibility lawsuits which aim to obtain reparation for historical crimes. He describes the beginnings of these actions in the United States, with the reparation of Holocaust victims, and he highlights the problems and limitations of engaging in such actions, whose repercussions can be likened to opening Pandora's box. This is a timely contribution to the ongoing French debate about colonisation and historical repentance. It is also a highly original examination of a new way of healing old wounds - but is this new way simply an expression of the commercialisation and Americanisation of justice? Can such reparations open the way to reconciliation? And what do they reveal about our society's conception of what is just? The role of money in contemporary justice is thoroughly analyzed in this up-to-date study. In view of certain crimes, a settlement may seem outrageous, even obscene. But could this be an oversimplification? Antoine Garapon is a magistrate, the founder of the Institut des Hautes Etudes sur la Justice and a member of the editorial board of the French magazine Esprit. He is the author of Le Gardien des promesses (1996), Bien juger (2001), Des crimes qu'on ne peut ni punir ni pardonner (2002) and Juger en Am rique et en France (2003).

The American legal system, based on common law, differs significantly from the French. The differences can be seen in nearly every aspect of the application of justice: the significance of the trial, the nature and role of the judge, the relationship between truth and legal evidence, the role of the jury, the significance of the sentence, and the role of the public prosecutor. Why do these differences exist? What are their origins? What notions of law and justice are they based on? How do American judges and juries reason? At a time when some in France express fears that the French legal system is being ? Americanised", while others deplore its sclerosis, here is a book that will help readers understand what is at stake. With a preface by Stephen Breyer, United States Supreme Court Judge. A former juvenile judge, Antoine Garapon heads the Institut des hautes tudes sur la justice and is one of the editors of the French magazine Esprit. He is the author of Le Gardien des promesses, Bien juger, Et ce sera justice and Des crimes qu?on ne peut ni punir ni pardonner. A legal expert, Ioannis Papadopoulos has studied law in Greece, France and the United States. He is an official representative of the Institut des Hautes Etudes sur la Justice.

After long years of silence, the painful subject of prison sentencing is finally being discussed in the public arena. In most cases, the point of view adopted is one of humanitarian iedignation coupled with a denunciation of prison violence. The present French government is committed to a significant review of sentencing laws, requiring the justification of prison sentences, at a time when public opinion seems much more interested in improving prison conditions and in guaranteeing prisoners the most formal of rights. But once the angles of denunciation and technical improvements have been exhausted, the problem that remains is less one of deciding what should not be done, than of what should be done. In other words, we will finally have to fied an answer to that most difficult of questions: What is the meaning of a sentence? This is the issue that the present book faces squarely and directly, from the philosophical, ethical and political angles. The authors? goal is less to confront different viewpoints than to defend a shared belief: a just sentence is one that restores bonds. Antoine Garapon, a former juvenile judge, is the founder of the Institut des hautes tudes sur la justice. He is an editor for the French magazine Esprit and the author of Gardien des promesses and Bien juger. He co-edited La Justice et le Mal with Denis Salas. Fr d ric Gros, a philosopher, is a lecturer at the University of Paris-XII. He is the author of Michel Foucault, Foucault et la folie and Cr ation et g nie, published by Presses Universitaires de France (PUF). He is the editor of the latest volume of posthumous lectures by Michel Foucault, L? Herm neutique du sujet, recently published by Gallimard. Thierry Pech is a researcher at the Institut des hautes tudes sur la justice.