Rapport (Rapport De Recherche) Année : 2025

Justice sans audience

Alice Dejean de la Bâtie
Amélie Gogos-Gintrand
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1136884
  • IdRef : 133326683
Pauline Gervier
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1137246
  • IdRef : 133377083
Bertrand Maumont
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1137154
Liza Veyre
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1051878
Mélanie Chevreul
  • Fonction : Auteur
  • PersonId : 1483134
  • IdRef : 256402116

Résumé

Although its functions differ according to the written or oral nature of the procedure, the hearing is historically and ontologically associated with the trial and with everything that symbolises Justice. Despite this anchoring, the hearing is no longer a sacred time-space, since its abolition is now accepted in favour of entirely written civil or criminal proceedings, giving rise to a judgment on the record and therefore without a hearing. While much work has already been done on the weakening of the role of the hearing and the transformation of its physiognomy, the aim of this research is to examine more radically whether it is being maintained or disappearing in the handling of certain types of litigation. The advent of justice without a hearing is therefore a reality whose scope has been significantly amplified by the health crisis. Taking note of this new paradigm, this research conducted by a multidisciplinary team of researchers in law and political science, and sociologists, designed as an impact study, assesses the consequences of eliminating the hearing phase for all parties involved in the trial. It focuses on two complementary areas: the first looks at litigants, questioning the usefulness of hearings, the social acceptability of their abolition and the compatibility of this abolition with the fundamental rights of the trial; the second focuses on the perception of justice without hearings by legal professionals and the impact of these procedures on the organisation of their work and the meaning of their missions. Based on an empirical analysis combining various qualitative and quantitative survey methods, it appears that the decline in court hearings is viewed with mixed feelings by those involved in the justice system. Firstly, despite observing a real decline in court hearings in judicial practice, professionals remain relatively attached to them. Indeed, even if hearings are in some cases seen as a waste of time, the majority of them consider that it would in fact be difficult to do without hearings, as they are such an important organisational marker and stage in the decision-making process. Litigants, meanwhile, express their attachment to hearings through a generally more positive view of proceedings with hearings than without, as the latter seem to undermine their sense of being heard and of having their procedural rights respected. The findings highlighted the effective reduction in the number of hearings in legal proceedings, made possible by the absence of any fundamental incompatibility between a judgment without a hearing and the fundamental principles of procedure. Despite this observation, the lukewarm reception given to the abolition of hearing time by justice professionals, and the difficulty of envisioning the development of justice without a hearing, actually point to the need to rethink the hearing.

Bien que ses fonctions diffèrent selon la nature écrite ou orale de la procédure, l’audience est historiquement et ontologiquement associée au procès et à tout ce qui symbolise la Justice. Cependant, malgré cet ancrage, l’audience n’est plus un espace-temps sacré puisque sa suppression est désormais admise à la faveur de procédures civiles ou pénales entièrement écrites, donnant lieu à un jugement sur dossier et donc sans audience. Prenant acte de ce nouveau paradigme, le rapport montre que le recul de l’audience est apprécié de façon très mitigée par les acteurs de la justice. L’attachement des professionnels à l’audience reste relativement fort. Si dans certains cas, ils vivent l’audience comme une perte de temps, la majorité d’entre eux considèrent qu’il serait en réalité difficile de s’en passer, tant elle est un marqueur organisationnel et une étape du processus décisionnel. Les justiciables s’expriment, quant à eux, à travers une vision globalement plus positive des procédures avec audience que sans audience, ces dernières semblant heurter leur sentiment d’être entendus et de voir leurs droits procéduraux respectés. Ainsi, si le rapport permet de mettre en lumière le recul effectif de l’audience dans les procédures judiciaires rendu possible par une absence d’incompatibilité fondamentale entre jugement sans audience et principes fondamentaux de la procédure, il conclut à la nécessité de repenser autrement l’audience.

Fichier principal
Vignette du fichier
21.43_JUSTICE_SANS_AUDIENCE_rapport.pdf (3.81 Mo) Télécharger le fichier
Origine Publication financée par une institution
Licence

Dates et versions

hal-05363290 , version 1 (13-11-2025)

Licence

Identifiants

  • HAL Id : hal-05363290 , version 1

Citer

Aurelie Bergeaud Wetterwald, Anaïs Danet, Alice Dejean de la Bâtie, Laura Delcourt, Armand Desprairies, et al.. Justice sans audience. 21.43, IERDJ Institut des Études et de la Recherche sur le Droit et la Justice. 2025, pp.392. ⟨hal-05363290⟩
1800 Consultations
170 Téléchargements

Partager

  • More