1200 Participants For The International Conference Of Algiers (7 & 8 June 2008)

An Exceptional Participation For An Exceptional Conference

For their second international conference, our Algerian fellow-members wanted something to be remembered. The least which can be said is that they achieved their goal. Everyone will remember the Algiers conference as an exceptional success, as well from the point of view of the quality of the interventions as of that of its organization. 1200 participants from 27 countries, 21 speakers, as well as the presence of Belaiz Tayeb, Minister for justice, and the high authorities of the legal world give an idea of the width of this unprecedented event.
During two days, in the huge conference room of the El Aurassi hotel, the interventions impeccably followed one another, crowned by a summary report that will go down in history. Press and media largely relayed this conference with titles as revealing as “A Judicial Officer Must Imply Himself Against Money Laundering” (La Liberté, n°4788 - 9 June 2008) or “The Algerian Statute Of Judicial Officers Proposed As A Model For The Arab World” (La Tribune, n°3940 - 9 June 2008).
The more than 1200 fellow-members and participants could ask many questions to the speakers and the exchanges were rich and varied. Here is a report of the various interventions, starting with a very solemn inaugural session.

Facilitating Relationship Between People And Encouraging Economic Exchanges

In his welcome speech, Mohamed Chérif, president of the National Chamber of the Judicial Officers of Algeria, thanked Abdelaziz Bouteflika, President of the Republic of Algeria, to have agreed to place this event under his high patronage. He announced his feeling of pride and recognition for the degree reached by the profession in Algeria and for the framework in which it evolves. “This profession conveys a message based on the values of justice, equity and the guarantee of social peace. It avoids recession and supports the economic circuit which encourages commercial activities within the framework of legal security. Results can be reached only thanks to free and independent judicial officers” he declared.
Putting in parallel the “Doing Business” report of the World Bank, the conclusions of professor Thomashausen at the time of the 18th international congress of the UIHJ in Tunis in 2003, and the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, Jacques Isnard, president of the UIHJ, evoked the importance of the independence of the judicial officer as an essential element of the Rule of law. “In the current context where finally constraint is essential, the intervention of the judicial officer, secular arm of civil justice, appears as a necessity. If it were to be different, we would end with a ludicrous and powerless justice, spreading the image of a weakened State” he estimated. Jacques Isnard mentioned his admiration and that of the board of the UIHJ to President Chérif and the organizers of the conference “to have taken up the challenge to propose such a considerable demonstration, undoubtedly one of most important ever organized, in co-operation with the UIHJ, on the African continent”. The president of the UIHJ also thanked Belaiz Tayeb and requested him to be his messenger near the president of the Republic tell him how much the UIHJ is sensitive to the marks of interest which he wished to express with regard to the occupation of judicial officer while agreeing to grant his high patronage to this second Algerian international conference. “Now the statute of Algerian judicial officers is amongst the more referent of the profession” he concluded.
Belaiz Tayeb, Minister for justice of Algeria, welcomed all the participants and wished for all a pleasant stay in his country and in “Algiers the White, capital of love and peace”, at the time of the seminar of which he recalled was placed under the high patronage of his excellence the president of the Republic, Abdelaziz Bouteflika. The Minister for justice paid homage “to the development of the system of the judicial officers within the framework of the reform, system that was always an example in the complementarity and the sharing of experience in the field”. He showed his high knowledge of the history of the UIHJ by indicating that our organization has worked for fifty years at the unification of the occupation of judicial officer and of enforcement procedures in the world, “to facilitate relationship between people and to encourage economic exchanges”. Mr. Tayeb recognized the importance of the exchanges of the experience at international level and told about the many reforms to allow legal decisions to find an application and an effective execution. The Minister for justice congratulated Mohamed Chérif and the National chamber of the judicial officers of Algeria to have organized a “demonstration of such a size”. Then he declared opened the second international conference of Algiers.

The Judicial Officer, Bulwark Against Corruption

The participants were invited to visit the many stands which had been set up for the occasion. During this time, those who had chosen to remain in the conference room could view a documentary directed by René Duperray, general secretary of the UIHJ, and by Francoise Andrieux, general reporter of the next congress of Marseilles, on the documents initiating proceedings.
Then Ahmed Ali Salah, director of Civil Affairs and the Seal, presented the broad outlines of the enforcement procedures under the terms of the new Algerian Code of civil and administrative procedure of 2006. After having recalled that the enforcement phase is essential to guarantee civil rights, Mr. Ali Salah indicated that the reforms had stressed the reinforcement of commercial relations and investment, in particular concerning the recognition of foreign decisions on Algerian territory.
The first workshop subject was “Legal security and economic development”. Its chairman was Abdesselem Dib, president of Chamber at the Supreme court of Algeria. In his presentation of the workshops, Mr. Dib estimated that development cannot be conceived without quality justice, which is a vain word without a strict execution. “The judicial officer is an essential element of the Rule of law. He shows by the enforcement of decisions the extent of the independence of his capacities. Bulwark against corruption, he contributes to the economic development of the State” he declared. The five intervening judicial officers were Patrick Safar (France), vice-president of the National school of procedure of Paris (ENP), Honoré Aggrey (Ivory Coast), permanent secretary of the UIHJ for central and Western Africa, Dominique Aribaut-Abadie (France), UIHJ expert, Leo Netten (Netherlands), 1st vice-president of the UIHJ, and Francis Guépin (France), member of the board of the UIHJ.
Patrick Safar treated the topic of “The strict enforcement of judgments, guarantee of quality justice”. For our fellow-member, the strict enforcement is the implementation of a legal decision which follows not only the wills of the legislator, therefore of the law, but also those of the judge who gives justice. The judicial officer finds himself thus at the crossing of two of the principal capacities which found a democracy, the lawmaking, which expresses the will of the people as a voter of the laws, and the judiciary, which formulates and which modulates this will by passing judgments. As a professional in charge of enforcement, the judicial officer acts as guarantor towards citizens of the respect of these two pillars of the democracy. He must comply with the rules which govern enforcement procedures and ethical rules which govern his profession. In this respect, our fellow-member referred to the professional charter of the UIHJ. A justice of quality must also respect the will of the judge. That requires on behalf of the judicial officer a rigor which generates an absolute respect of the decision of the judge but which must also consider social realities. “Our true social role is there, to apply with rigor but with understanding and flexibility the decisions of the judges given in a precise legislative framework and thus to fully contribute to the image of a justice of quality” concluded the vice-president of the ENP.

A Dynamic Reality

Following this contribution, Honoré Aggrey treated the topic of “the judicial officer, essential element of the Rule of law and guarantor of the democratic institutions”. “How the judicial officer can contribute to the making, the maintenance and the reinforcement of the Rule of law? In what way can he be a guarantor of the democratic institutions? What is the Rule of law?” questioned our distinguished fellow-member. To find an answer, he started with the concept of Rule of law as regards justice, evoking this notion as a concept, “a dynamic reality”, being the subject of many debates between lawyers, politicians and philosophers. As regards justice, Honoré Aggrey estimated that its characteristic elements were:

And to deduce from it that the absolute respect and the application of these criteria made possible the rising of a professional impossible to circumvent: the judicial officer, essential element of the Rule of law and guarantor of the democratic institutions. “The judicial officer, privileged auxiliary of justice, is in the middle of any debate on legal institutions. His varied attributions and his field of competence make him one of his essential actors” declared the secretary permanent of the UIHJ. Then he evoked the European Court of Human Rights and its Pini v/Romania case, establishing the judicial officer as an essential element of the Rule of law. “One can deduct from it that the judicial officer, a key component of this device, is guaranteeing democratic institutions since they are defined as being the whole of the fundamental laws which govern the political and social life of a State” he estimated.
In the same vein, Dominique Aribaut-Abdaie exposed the topic of “the effectiveness of the enforcement of judgments: standard of independence of justice”. Endorsing the declaration of Caliph Omar Ibn el Kh'Atab, known as The Fair, our colleague indicated that “There is no point in saying the law if it is not enforced”. Dominique Aribaut-Abadie estimated initially that the means granted to judicial officers are a pledge of independence. The State and the legislator, while allowing judicial officers certain exorbitant prerogatives so that they can correctly carry out their public service activities which is justice, ensure their independence. Taking the example of France, she quoted three main principles in force in her country:

In a second time, the UIHJ expert developed the topic of independence of judicial officers, essential condition to efficiency. To fulfill his mission, the judicial officer must be kept away from all authorities and from all kinds of influences. He should be subjected to no hierarchy, because the independence of justice does not only mean the independence of the Judge but also that of the judicial officer. Then to notice that investors engage little in the countries which do not offer a legal security and which do not have effective justice, “because they do not have any guarantee in the event of an incident of payment and this is strongly prejudicial to the economy of the country”.

A Regulator And A Stabilizer Of The Economic And Financial Life

Leo Netten then presented the topic of: “The judicial officer: a force against corruption and an asset for the development of economy and investment”. The 1st vice-president of the UIHJ pointed out that the activity of the judicial officers is in the tertiary sector, that of services. He is at the disposal of public authorities, private individuals and companies. “Among the Member States of the UIHJ, the majority of judicial officers independently exert their ministry with a statute of public officer” he indicated. They are subjected to various professional rules and of very strict principles of control which constitute a guarantee against corruption. For example, he cannot exert pressures by announcing measures which he could take neither under the terms of his mission, neither under the terms of the law nor under the terms of the title which was given to him. The judicial officer is also an asset for the development of economy. He provides specific services to citizens and businesses: service of documents, enforcement of court decisions, statements of facts, auctions, amicable debt collecting, etc. For Leo Netten, “the judicial officer acts as a regulator and stabilizer of the economic and financial life”. Then, the first president of the UIHJ stated that, with globalization, Internet and the disappearance of borders, market economy has spread in almost all countries. An immediate consequence is that the legal system must adapt to this evolution. Industries, banks, energetic sector, telecoms,..., insist more and more for the adoption of international regulations which will secure their investments. He concluded his intervention by estimating that “the judicial officer, with his liberal statute, is undoubtedly an asset in the development of the economy and an important actor for investors, not only because he fights corruption, but also because he is a guarantor that investments carried out will be protected at least at law level.”.
The first workshop was concluded by the intervention of Francis Guépin on “the judicial officer and the separation of powers”.

To Ensure The Maintenance Of A Family Tie

The second workshop had as subject “the enforcement of legal decisions”. It was again placed under the chair of Abdesselem Dib. The four under-topics were treated by six judicial officers: Noureddine Laraba (Algeria), Anne Kérisit and Rose-Marie Bruno (France), ENP and UIHJ expert, Mourad Skander (Tunisia), member of the board of the UIHJ, Abel-Didier Pansard, former President of the ENP, and Abdellah Mebarkia, member of the national Chamber of the judicial officers of Algeria.
Noureddine Laraba and Anne Kérisit treated the topic of the “goods subjected to enforcement measures”. Noureddine Laraba evoked the specificities of the Muslim law. Following the example of the Romano-Germanic civil law, in Algeria, all the goods of the debtor are subjected to enforcement measures in the absence of contrary indication of a legal text. A creditor can proceed to several civil enforcement procedures at the same time. There are also protective measures resulting in freezing the goods of a debtor. There also exists a certain number of non-attachable goods by law. In a very clear and complete talk, Anne Kérisit developed the topic under a quadruple angle:

Anne Kérisit precisely described the difficulties which can occur when the debtor opposes to distraint while stating that the good does not belong to him, as well as other practical difficulties: joint goods, incidence of marriage settlements, joined bank accounts, etc. She also evoked absolute and relative unavailability. Our colleague then noticed that, from one legislation to another, inheritances are often of a great heterogeneity. “What is necessary, even vital, in a country can appear completely superfluous in others” she pointed out. In the same way, human dignity orders to leave the debtor with enough to survive and to ensure maintenance of a family tie. Hence un-attachable goods to allow “the safeguard of general and some private interests” and the taking into account, in certain countries, of “religious convictions”. Anne Kérisit finished her intervention by giving an outline of French specificities through the law provisions of 1991 and 1992.
Rose-Marie Bruno then treated “the various forms of enforcement”. She initially evoked the execution in kind, such as the obligations to give or restore, do or not do, which generally turn into damages when not enforced. Our colleague then evoked the history of enforcement on physical person, since the time of Ancient law and the possibility of reducing the debtor to slavery, until the removal of imprisonment for civil debts, to the maintenance of the sole enforcement on goods. This enforcement concerns all goods: tangible and intangible, except when not distrainable. And Rose-Marie Bruno to conclude that “if one can say that the various forms of enforcement adapt to the evolution of the inheritance of the debtors, complexity lies nowadays in the multiplication of commercial exchanges on the scale of the planet”.

A Scenario Written As For A Play

The third under-topic concerned “the various actors of the enforcement of legal decisions” and was treated by Abel-Didier Pansard. The former president of the ENP of Paris distinguished parties and third parties. In civil law, a party is defined as a natural or legal person who takes part in a legal document or a convention. In civil procedure, a party is a natural or legal person committed in a law suit. Then Abel-Didier Pansard precisely defined the quality of a party in civil enforcement procedure, being the creditor, holder of a personal right, or the debtor, related to the creditor by this personal right. Concerning the concept of third parties, he specified that in civil law, the third party designates a person unconcerned by a legal document, and that in process law, the third party is the person who is neither the applicant nor the defendant. In civil enforcement procedure, the third party is the person who is neither creditor nor debtor, but which can be subjected to certain obligations with respect to creditors and debtors, in particular within the framework of seizure between his hands or when required, i.e. solicited in the capacity of knowing, witness or anybody likely to provide information. “The scenario is thus written as for a play and each actor must play his part by respecting it under prosecution” ended our fellow-member.
Mourad Skander and Abdellah Mebarkia completed the speech of Abel-Didier Pansard by presenting the enforcement bodies. For Tunisia, the analysis of the texts which compose the corpus of enforcement measures in this country shows a duality of systems. In the first system, enforcement is carried out by judicial officers out of the courts. This system reveals them as a principal body of enforcement. In the second system, of exception, enforcement supposes the exercise of an action lead by the parties under the aegis of the judge, this last being considered as a secondary enforcement body. In the first system, the judicial officer plays the central role, says our fellow-member Skander: only judicial officers must enforce court decisions. At the sides of the judicial officers, the law places at their disposal auxiliaries who have the duty to assist them so that they can conclude their mission of execution: prosecuting attorneys, public prosecutors, commanders and officers of the police force. They are, according to the terms of the “enforcement formula”, held to lend assistance in order to carry out enforcement. Concerning the secondary bodies, Mourad Skander evoked initially the attributions of enforcement entrusted to judges. He indicated that enforcement judges, specialized in disputes in enforcement matters, do not exist in Tunisia. It appears of great importance in other systems of the Arab countries or in France. But they does not take part in the enforcement procedures themselves. In the Tunisian system, the judge himself exerts some enforcement attributions. These attributions refer in particular to the validation of arrestments and the sale of real estates. However, our fellow-member evoked the limits of the system of judiciarized enforcement. For him, this system appears increasingly archaic insofar as it generates a considerable waste of time and useless expenses to regulate an often artificial dispute. The more so as the increase in the mass contentious is not balanced by an increase in the legal personnel. Hence the necessity for setting up new standards adapted to the nature of each profession:

A Public Service Activity

The third workshop was placed under the moderation of Francis Guépin. It had as subject: “Enforcement Professionals - the judicial officer”. It included the interventions of four judicial officers: Adrian Stoïca (Romania), member of the board of the UIHJ, Patrick Sannino (France), treasurer of the National chamber of the judicial officers of France, Akli Menaoum (Algeria) and Mathieu Chardon (France), 1st secretary of the UIHJ.
Adrian Stoïca treated the “various statutes of enforcement agents”. For our fellow-member, distraint, often regarded as the second level of a lawsuit, represents the guarantee of the achievement of an enforceable title, guarantee in close correlation with the independence and the impartiality of the enforcement agent. He began his presentation by recalling the destiny of debtors in the Ancient Rome, by putting it in parallel with the statute of enforcement agents (apparitor, soterim, viatores, officials or executores). Adrian Stoïca indicated that the first known shape of enforcement agents with liberal statute appeared in France in 1560, under Charles IX. “This statute, later improved, was highlighted in the French internal law and then in the internal law of other countries like a model of guarantee offered to citizens for the whole distraint procedure, considering which it is in narrow correlation with the independence and impartiality which is necessary for him” he specified. Statute of public servant or judicial officer with liberal statute? he asked himself. An enforcement agent with a liberal statute is a liberal, private and independent professional, who holds the monopoly of distraint under the terms of a delegation of public authority granted to him by the State. It is a public service activity that constitutes an integral part of the administration of justice. Some States adopts the principle of externalization of the public services with an aim of reducing the budget of the State, of simplifying the apparatus of State and of ensuring improvement of the quality of these services in the interest of their recipients. This autonomy is carried out by making this professional body liable while it voluntarily accepts to comply with unquestionable ethical and professional rules. After having specified the other bodies of distraint which exist in particular in Romania, the speaker concluded that the fact that distraint is carried out by several bodies weighs down this activity. This is why he estimated that the legislator must create only one category of enforcement body which fills all conditions required by the Rule of law, mainly the independence and the impartiality of those compared to all the participants in the distraint.

A Private, Liberal And Independent Professional

Patrick Sannino then centered his intervention on the judicial officer, a liberal, private and independent professional. For him, the transfer by a State of some of its prerogatives is not without conditions. The triple responsibility to which the judicial officer is subjected (civil, penal, disciplinary) and the tariff are there to prove it. But the quality of public and ministerial officer of the French judicial officer should not occult the fact that, in spite of the supervision which the State exerts on him, the judicial officer is also - and it is there the force of the model which exists in particular in France - a private, liberal and independent professional. Our fellow-member successively examined the three wings of the triptych of this model “which combines the effectiveness of the freedom of a business to the guarantees of control of the Official Authority”. These capacities could be those of civil servants of the State, but, “it should be mentioned that the effectiveness of enforcement is definitely higher in countries which, like France, wished to delegate such missions to professionals who are not civil servants”. Like any liberal professional, the judicial officer is subjected to a disciplinary responsibility with respect to his fellow-members. He is also subjected to a tariff and he is civilly liable when he causes damages to somebody. Concerning his independence, the judicial officer is indeed not subjected to the authority of a superior, like a civil servant can be towards his authority. Control of the public prosecutor is made especially to guarantee the effectiveness and the efficiency of his activity. It makes it possible to check that the judicial officer exerts his duty in accordance with ethical and statutory rules.
Akli Menaoum showed the characteristics of the model of Algerian judicial officer. The liberal profession of judicial officer which was in force before and after independence (1962) was temporarily removed in 1965 then reintroduced in 1991. Our fellow-member indicated that the law of January 20th, 2006 came to reorganize the profession by maintaining its statute of regulated liberal profession. This law gave more capacities to the judicial officers who exert today almost the whole of the activities recommended by the UIHJ in its project in favor of a multi-field judicial officer.

A Law Professional At the Service Of Justice, Citizens And Economic Actors

To close the third workshop, Mathieu Chardon treated the topic of “New prospects for the occupation of judicial officer in the 21st century”. For the first secretary of the UIHJ, “since its creation, in 1952, one of the objectives of the UIHJ is to contribute to the creation of a judicial officer harmonized around principles which aim at raising the profession to a row of excellence so that it fulfills its role fully: to be at the service of justice, citizens and the economic actors. Today, to satisfy this evolution, the harmonization of the profession on a world level appears inescapable, just like appears fundamental the diversification of its activities”. It is around these two axes - harmonization of the profession and diversification of the activities - that Mathieu Chardon developed the topic which was assigned to him. For him, the harmonization of the profession passes by the installation on a world level of the liberal, private and independent professional describes by the preceding speakers. This specialized law professional at the service of justice and citizens must be a high level lawyer with a reinforced statute. Then, he pointed out the broad outlines of the project of judicial officer introduced at the time of the congress of Washington, making the promotion of the multiple activities that can be embraced by the profession, gathered in four broad topics:

“Justice is a need, an indispensable condition of social development and economic. Without the help of judicial officers, can one speak about justice? To think of new prospects for the occupation of judicial officer in the 21st century is essential for its future” concluded our fellow-member.

A Perfume Of Harmony

Then came the time of the always delicate and very awaited summary report. The one presented by Francoise Andrieux constituted the summit of two days where presentations shone by their qualities and complementarities. “When you look closely at the program of these two days conference, there floats a perfume of harmony. Throughout the many topics we heard speakers of various horizons and legal cultures, and yet no cacophony, no discordance: the full orchestra of justice was perfectly in tune and allowed us to hear one of its most beautiful symphonies!” Francoise Andrieux declared as prolegomena of her speech. In a Rule of law, the State must be expressly held responsible to carry out legal decisions. Making the effectiveness of these decisions depend on the goodwill of the ones who pronounce them would be unconstitutional. That would be equivalent to denying to justice the capacity conferred to it by fundamental law. Effectiveness thus implies efficiency, she said at the end of a legal analysis of these two concepts. And to continue: “We can consider that exists a passive effectiveness of justice, which I will connect to the organization of justice and thus to its actors and bodies and to their respective attributions, and an active effectiveness, which I will connect to its enforcement of legal decisions, guarantor and driving force of legal security and economic development”. The passive effectiveness is appreciated in comparison with the organization of justice through its actors, judges, enforcement agents and other bodies. The judge must be released of the constraints of enforcement and his role circumscribed to the application of legal provision taking into consideration the cases which are subjected to him. He must also solve the difficulties which are exposed to him. Liberal and independent professional judicial officers are the guarantors of the effectiveness of civil rights, being in the delivery of secured data or in the effective enforcement of court decisions.“The independence of the liberal judicial officer is initially an independence with regard to all powers, including judicial power” underlined Francoise Andrieux. As for the active effectiveness of justice, it implies concepts of enforcement and legal security. It is impartially that the enforcement agent will make sure that enforceable titles are duly enforced, in a correct and subtle way, by taking account of the interest of the creditor and the situation of the debtor. The judicial officer must have the tools of procedure which allow an effective and fast action while respecting the dignity of the debtor. He must have the choice of the measures which he can take according to the situations occurring to him. After more than forty-five minutes of a remarkable demonstration which held the assistance speechless, our eminent colleague concluded by indicating that “where the legal decisions remain dead letters for lack of a body of liberal and independent judicial officers, insecurity is established”. A thunder of applause then resounded in the room and more than a thousand people gave Francoise Andrieux a memorable standing ovation.

Last Thanks

Such a conference could not have been completed without wishes for the future. Thus was read out the Declaration of Algiers and recommendations, reproduced hereafter.
To conclude, president Isnard again thanked president Chérif for the perfect organization of the conference and congratulated him, and his team, for the success which it met. He also again praised the authorities and the Minister for justice, Belaiz Tayeb, for their unwavering support with regard to the judicial officers of Algeria and their recognition towards the UIHJ.
But no great conference without festivities. Representatives of the UIHJ and of the National chamber of the judicial officers of Algeria, as well as foreign guests and speakers all had the honor and the joy of being invited on Thursday evening to share the traditional lamb barbecue with the Minister for justice, to the spellbinding sound of a wonderful Eastern orchestra. On Friday evening, the festivities continued with a very exotic and very appreciated gala evening that each one will keep in memory as a moment of great conviviality and confraternity. Thus was written an important page of the history of the judicial officers of Algeria.

The Declaration Of Algiers

The whole of the experts having taken part in the second international conference of Algiers which has been just completed:

Express the wish that, under the aegis of the National chamber of the judicial officers of Algeria, with the support of the UIHJ and the co-operation of Algerian authorities, a conference is organized very soon in Algiers by gathering the whole of Arabic countries with an aim of continuing the work undertaken at the time of this second conference which will be used as reference to their common reflection.

Recommendations

1.