Background: Due to the increase of crime in South Africa and the overcrowding of correctional facilities, there has been increasing pressure on courts to find and implement alternatives to imprisonment. In this regard, the so-called "desirability of prosecution" reports and diversion for youths is in general use throughout the country. A new trend is, however, an increase in requests of "desirability of prosecution" reports for adults by some courts, while others are still unaware of their potential use and its accompanying diversion for adults. This state of affairs has caused some uncertainty amongst probation officers regarding what precisely is expected of this type of investigations and the reports that must be presented to the courts. Objective: The primary aim of the study was to determine the nature and required content of the so-called "desirability of prosecution" report for adults. Method: The empirical research focused on magistrates' and control prosecutors' expectations regarding the particular type of report. It utilised a combination of quantitative and qualitative research methods and involved three magistrates and seven control prosecutors from three different towns in three different provinces in central South Africa. Results: From the questionnaires and interviews it, first of all, became clear that not all the respondents were aware of the fact that the so-called "desirability of prosecution" reports and accompanying diversion can also be used for adults. It, secondly, showed that the vast majority of respondents viewed it as a mechanism that showed great promise and that it has already been utilised with some success by some courts. The study also produced a variety of guideline for the compilation of such reports. / Thesis (M.A. (MW))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2007.

Background: Due to the increase of crime in South Africa and the overcrowding of correctional facilities, there has been increasing pressure on courts to find and implement alternatives to imprisonment. In this regard, the so-called "desirability of prosecution" reports and diversion for youths is in general use throughout the country. A new trend is, however, an increase in requests of "desirability of prosecution" reports for adults by some courts, while others are still unaware of their potential use and its accompanying diversion for adults. This state of affairs has caused some uncertainty amongst probation officers regarding what precisely is expected of this type of investigations and the reports that must be presented to the courts. Objective: The primary aim of the study was to determine the nature and required content of the so-called "desirability of prosecution" report for adults. Method: The empirical research focused on magistrates' and control prosecutors' expectations regarding the particular type of report. It utilised a combination of quantitative and qualitative research methods and involved three magistrates and seven control prosecutors from three different towns in three different provinces in central South Africa. Results: From the questionnaires and interviews it, first of all, became clear that not all the respondents were aware of the fact that the so-called "desirability of prosecution" reports and accompanying diversion can also be used for adults. It, secondly, showed that the vast majority of respondents viewed it as a mechanism that showed great promise and that it has already been utilised with some success by some courts. The study also produced a variety of guideline for the compilation of such reports. / Thesis (M.A. (MW))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2007.

Chargés de mettre en œuvre la loi pénale contre les personnes soupçonnées d’infractions, les procureurs bénéficient traditionnellement d’un large pouvoir d’appréciation qui est en général encadré par la loi et par des instructions hiérarchiques que les procureurs doivent suivre lorsqu’ils prennent leurs décisions. Avec une analyse fondée sur des observations et des entretiens dans les systèmes français et anglo-gallois, cette étude comparative vise à comprendre comment les systèmes de justice pénale étudiés s’efforcent de combiner les nécessités du contrôle des autorités de poursuites dans des sociétés démocratiques modernes avec la souplesse et la réactivité nécessaires à l’application de la loi résultant de la marge d’appréciation laissée aux procureurs. Il existe actuellement peu d’études empiriques et systématiques du processus de décision des autorités de poursuites. Cette thèse montre qu’aucun des systèmes observés ne parvient à un équilibre satisfaisant entre le degré de responsabilité et le pouvoir de décision des procureurs. En France, bien que le contrôle démocratique et hiérarchique des procureurs soit bien développé en théorie, il reste limité en pratique, en raison en raison de la primauté du principe d’individualisation dans la culture juridique et du statut professionnel des procureurs comme magistrats indépendants. En Angleterre et au Pays de Galles, les procureurs font partie d’une structure particulièrement bureaucratique et centralisée qui impose une stricte uniformité des décisions de poursuites aux dépens du pouvoir de décision et de l’autonomie des procureurs dont le rôle se limite à des tâches simples et répétitives en raison de la segmentation de la procédure de poursuites. Cette structure autoritaire de contrôle, conjuguée à un équilibre historique des pouvoirs en faveur de la police, semble empêcher les procureurs de prendre des décisions qui pourraient être mal vues par leur hiérarchie ou la police. Enfin, le manque de ressources et une recherche constante d’efficacité dans chacun des systèmes juridiques étudiés ont produit une bureaucratisation de la procédure pénale, certaines tâches étant déléguées à du personnel peu qualifié et les affaires mineures étant expédiées le plus rapidement possible selon un traitement standardisé. / Tasked with enforcing the criminal law against suspected offenders, public prosecutors have traditionally enjoyed broad discretion, which is usually structured by legal and policy guidelines defining rules prosecutors should follow when making their decisions. Basing its analysis upon direct observations and interviews in the two jurisdictions under study, this comparative thesis endeavours to understand how the French and Anglo-Welsh criminal justice systems attempt to combine the necessities of accountability for public prosecution services in modern democratic societies with the flexibility and reactivity needed in the application of the law provided by prosecutorial discretion. There have been few systematic, empirical accounts of the decision-making process of these national prosecution services.This thesis argues that neither system observed achieves a satisfactory balance between accountability and discretion for public prosecutors. In France, although democratic and hierarchical accountability channels are well developed in theory, oversight is weak due to the primacy of the concept of ‘adaptation’ in the legal culture and the strong professional ethos of procureurs as independent judicial officers. In England and Wales, public prosecutors are part of a highly bureaucratic and centralised structure which strictly enforces consistency in prosecutorial decisions at the expense of much discretion and autonomy for individual prosecutors whose responsibility is limited to narrow and repetitive tasks due to the segmentation of the prosecution process. This overbearing accountability structure, coupled with a historical balance of power in favour of the police, appears to prevent prosecutors from making decisions perceived as unpopular with their hierarchy or the police. Finally, pressure on resources and a drive for efficiency in both jurisdictions have resulted in the bureaucratisation of the criminal justice process with part of the prosecution workload being delegated to unqualified staff and minor cases being processed as quickly as possible into a one-size-fits-all system.

Au-delà de l’instabilité qui la caractérise, la mise en état des affaires pénales s’illustre par sa métamorphose. A mesure de la multiplication des modes de traitement de la délinquance et de l’enrichissement des possibilités d’investigation en enquête de police, celle qui ne devait être qu’un préalable à l’ouverture d’une information judiciaire s’impose comme le cadre ordinaire dans un système qui n’avait pas été pensé pour elle. En résultent un recul des droits de la défense et du juge auxquels ni une vision d’ensemble de la procédure, ni les dernières réformes, pour une large partie inspirées des droits européens, n’ont pleinement pallié. Mettre les implications de la montée en puissance de l’enquête de police à l’épreuve des droits européens fait ressortir différents motifs d’inquiétude sur la pleine compatibilité du système actuel avec les standards supranationaux. Ils viennent ainsi au soutien d’aménagements promus tant par la doctrine que par des praticiens pour remédier au déséquilibre constaté. Si la mise en conformité du droit interne doit servir de guide aux ajustements préconisés, ces derniers doivent néanmoins être examinés à la lumière de leur simplications sur le système vu dans son ensemble. Le souci de cohérence encouragerait à promouvoir des solutions plus mesurées, combinant à un renforcement relatif des droits durant l’enquête de police, une articulation des cadres procéduraux d’investigation centrée sur le renforcement du contrôle du juge. La perspective de l’intégration d’un Parquet européen, dont la création a été formellement actée le 12 octobre 2017, et qui se caractérise par sa perméabilité avec les ordres juridiques nationaux, rend ces propositions précaires. Les ajustements que son intégration supposera soulèveront à court ou moyen terme, la question d’une recomposition de la mise en état des affaires pénales, favorable à la restauration de son équilibre et de sa cohérence. / Beyond the inconstancy which defines the pre-trial phase of proceedings, it is characterised by its metamorphosis. Because of the multiplication of ways of dealing with delinquency and the increasing possibilities of police inquiry, the pre-trial phase of proceedings, which should have been just a precondition to the preliminary judicial investigation, turns out to be the common framework, in a system not built for it. It leads to the decline of the rights of defence and of the judge. Neither a global perspective of the procedure nor the last reforms, for the most part inspired by European laws, fully overcame it. Confronting the consequences of police inquiry increasing with European rights, highlights several concerns on the full compatibility of the current system with the supranational standards. They support accommodations, encouraged by the searchers as well as the professionals, to solve observed imbalances. If the compliance of French law must guide the recommended adjustments, they should be reviewed in the light of their impacts on the global system, where inquiry and information still coexist. The will of consistency may encourage to promote more measured solutions, combining a moderate strengthening of the rights during police inquiries to an articulation of the investigation proceedings frameworks, focused on a reinforced control of the judge. The perspective of the integration of an European Public Prosecutor’s Office, which creation was formally acknowledged October 12th 2017, characterised by its openness to other national legal systems, makes these propositions uncertain. At short or medium term, adjustments ensued by its integration will lead to rethink the pre-trial phase of proceedings, to ensure its balance and consistency.