The topic of the accusatorial principle has been elaborated many times in the Czech legal environment, however, is still topical. In particular, the as yet not implemented recodification of criminal procedure maintains discussions on the application of the accusatorial principle and its manifestations in criminal proceedings alive. The author of the master's thesis processes the topic of the accusatorial principle and the related issues in a context of Czech-French comparison, which is not common in professional publications. This master's thesis aims to provide a comprehensive insight into topic of the accusatorial principle in both Czech and French legislation and compare the two legislations. The result of the comparison is used to formulate de lege ferenda proposals and to determine whether it is possible to draw inspiration from French legislation. The above-mentioned aim of this master's thesis is accomplished through the three thematic units, into which the content of this master's thesis can be divided. In the first theoretical unit the theory of the accusatorial principle and its historical development are presented to the reader. The second presents the current legislation in the Czech Republic and France. And finally, the third thematic unit contains a comparison of Czech and French...

The principal questions addressed in this portfolio of eleven publications concern the reforms to French justice at the end of the twentieth and beginning of the twenty-first centuries. The portfolio is accompanied by a supporting statement explaining the genesis and chronology of the portfolio, its originality and the nature of the submission's distinct contribution to knowledge. The thesis questions whether the reforms protect the rights of the defence adequately. It considers how the French state views its responsibility to key figures in criminal justice, be they suspected and convicted criminals, the victims of offences or the professionals who are prosecuting the offences. It reflects upon the role of the examining magistrate, the delicate relationship between justice, politics and the media, breaches of confidentiality and the catastrophic conditions in which suspects and prisoners are detained in French prisons. It then extends its scope to a case study of the prosecution of violent crimes before the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and discovers significant flaws in procedures even at international levels. In concluding, it asks whether, given the challenges facing the French criminal justice system, French courts are adequately equipped to assure justice when suspects charged with the most serious international crimes appear before them under the principle of universal jurisdiction. The research, carried out over a number of years, relies predominantly on an analysis of French-language sources and represents a unique contribution to the understanding and knowledge of French justice for an English-speaking public at the turn of the twenty-first century.

The principal questions addressed in this portfolio of eleven publications concern the reforms to French justice at the end of the twentieth and beginning of the twenty-first centuries. The portfolio is accompanied by a supporting statement explaining the genesis and chronology of the portfolio, its originality and the nature of the submission's distinct contribution to knowledge. The thesis questions whether the reforms protect the rights of the defence adequately. It considers how the French state views its responsibility to key figures in criminal justice, be they suspected and convicted criminals, the victims of offences or the professionals who are prosecuting the offences. It reflects upon the role of the examining magistrate, the delicate relationship between justice, politics and the media, breaches of confidentiality and the catastrophic conditions in which suspects and prisoners are detained in French prisons. It then extends its scope to a case study of the prosecution of violent crimes before the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and discovers significant flaws in procedures even at international levels. In concluding, it asks whether, given the challenges facing the French criminal justice system, French courts are adequately equipped to assure justice when suspects charged with the most serious international crimes appear before them under the principle of universal jurisdiction. The research, carried out over a number of years, relies predominantly on an analysis of French-language sources and represents a unique contribution to the understanding and knowledge of French justice for an English-speaking public at the turn of the twenty-first century.

Cette étude de l’impartialité des magistrats dans la procédure pénale française à l’aune du droit de la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme propose une analyse renouvelée de ce principe, clé de voûte, d’un procès pénal juste.Tout d’abord, l’objet de l’étude induit de définir le principe d’impartialité grâce au droit conventionnel. Ce dernier a forgé le principe d’impartialité et est encore retentissant en la matière. Cependant, la théorisation d’ampleur des appréciations conventionnelles relatives à l’impartialité faisant défaut, la présente étude a vocation de remédier à cette carence. La définition conventionnelle de l’impartialité sert de socle à la présente étude et l’analyse de la jurisprudence conventionnelle, relative à l’impartialité, permettra de déterminer les points de convergence ou de divergence entre le droit conventionnel et le droit français. Ensuite, l’impartialité est soutenue, permise par divers principes de procédures ; l’indépendance, la collégialité, la publicité, la motivation, la séparation des fonctions, l’oralité, le contradictoire, qui n’ont pas la même intensité selon la procédure pénale envisagée. L’étude de la teneur des principes procéduraux soutiens de l’impartialité, devant les juridictions de droit commun et les juridictions spécialisées, permet de déterminer les disparités de garanties de l’impartialité dans la procédure pénale française. En outre, la question de l’impartialité des magistrats avant le jugement se pose avec beaucoup d’acuité. D’une part, le droit conventionnel s’est prononcé récemment sur l’extension ou non du principe d’impartialité en amont du jugement. D’autre part, le juge d’instruction dont la suppression est souvent envisagée comme une solution favorable à la procédure pénale, par ceux qui souhaitent le voir disparaitre, n’est pas opportune au regard du principe d’impartialité. L’étude permettra de démontrer que la phase d’instruction, bien que perfectible, apporte, une réelle plus-value à l’impartialité dans la procédure pénale et qu’au contraire, l’impartialité des magistrats du parquet est soit sporadique, soit absente. / This study about magistrates impartiality in the french criminal procedure in the light of the law of the European Convention on Human Rights focuses on a renewed analysis of this key principle during a fair trial.Firstly, the object of this study leads to the definition of the principle of impartiality thanks to the law of the ECHR that still molds it.However, the absence of theorising conventional appreciations regarding impartiality leads us to find a solution to this deficiency. The conventional definition of impartiality serves as a base to this study. The analysis of the ECHR jurisprudence regarding impartiality enables the determination of the converging and divergent elements between french and conventional law.Furthermore, impartiality is allowed thanks to various procedural principles : independance, collegiality, public disclosure, motivation, the separation between presiding judges and the prosecution services, orality, hearings in court with both parties. The study of the content of procedural principles as a support to impartiality, during proceedings in front of common and specialized jurisdictions, enables the determination of the differences of the garanties of impartiality during the french criminal procedure.In addition, the question of the magistrates impartiality before judgement has to be tackled with much acuteness. This is the reason why the suppression of the examining judge (juge d’instruction), often wanted by some, is not appropriate as far as impartiality is concerned. This study shows and proves that the inquiry, even if improvable, brings a real added-value to impartiality during the criminal procedure and that, on the contrary the prosecution services impartiality is either sporadic or absent.