Book Review: Martine Herzog-Evans, Droit de l’exécution des peines
| Author | Nicola Padfield |
| DOI | 10.1177/2066220317724938 |
| Published date | 01 August 2017 |
| Date | 01 August 2017 |
| Subject Matter | Book Reviews |
https://doi.org/10.1177/2066220317724938
European Journal of Probation
2017, Vol. 9(2) 192 –198
© The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/2066220317724938
journals.sagepub.com/home/ejp
Book Reviews
Martine Herzog-Evans, Droit de l’exécution des peines [The law on the implementation/execution
of sentences], 5th edn. Dalloz Action, 2016; 1522 pp.: ISBN 978-2-247-137771-8, £78.00 (pbk)
Reviewed by: Nicola Padfield, University of Cambridge, UK
Not many readers of this journal will actually read this book – it is a designed as a
detailed guide for legal practitioners in France, and it is not for the faint-hearted. The
current edition is 1500 pages long. But that does not mean that it is not a rich treasure
trove waiting to be mined.
French sentencing law is very different to its English equivalent. Judges impose the
sentence swiftly and briefly. This sentence can then be adjusted appropriately as the
offender progresses through the sentence – hence the need for juges d’application des
peines. But this book is not simply about the application of punishments – but more
about the exécution or implementation of sentences. What is the difference? Many of the
distinctions in French law are difficult for the outsider (well, for me, anyhow) to grasp.
Reading this book puts the words and concepts into their detailed context – and it really
helps the outsider to get under the skin of a very different legal scheme.
It is not only concepts (words) such as application/ exécution that are difficult to
understand. We find in France a variety of jurisdictions, and quasi-jurisdictions, a variety
of players in the process, none of which neatly align themselves with other systems. Of
course not – politics and constant change is a feature of the French system, as elsewhere.
Do not get me wrong – I would criticise those systems that appear fossilised in the 19th
century, but you can have too much change, and too much complexity. In order to be fair,
the law must be transparently clear.
It is worth exploring the coverage of Martine Herzog-Evans’ book to spot some cru-
cial differences with other jurisdictions. It starts with a useful short Titre (Part) 0 (why is
this not 1?) on sources, divided into four chapters. Herzog-Evans is of course herself a
comparatist, with a keen eye on pan-European developments, and she cannot resist a
wise commentary in the Introduction as she seeks to educate legal practitioners. Thus,
she comments on page 4 that the concept of ‘community sanctions and measures’ has no
legal meaning (valeur juridique), strictly speaking, but a value under the umbrella of the
Council of Europe. Chapter One serves as a reminder that both France and England
‘enjoy’ a mind-boggling and confusing array of relevant law. I was once taught to believe
that the French, with the benefits of a codified system, enjoyed more consistency and
coherence than us poor common law souls! But the reality is, of course, that the line
between what goes in the Code pénitentiaire, the Code pénal and the Code de procédure
penale is not straightforward, and underneath these, there is a morass of delegated
724938EJP0010.1177/2066220317724938European Journal of ProbationBook Reviews
2017
Book Reviews
To continue reading
Request your trial