Find all our publications related to open data and judicial decisions:
In the context of the draft law on the programming of justice currently being debated by the National Assembly, the Minister of Justice, Nicole Belloubet, welcomed the new framework of the text providing access to judicial decisions and improved knowledge of case law.
Open Data: Guarantees related to security breaches and respect for privacy
Committed to anonymizing court decisions, the Senate had put forward, in Article 19, particularly restrictive measures for the publication of court decisions, guaranteeing any direct or indirect identification of a party or member of the judicial body.
The Law Committee subsequently amended the text significantly, now proposing a dual level of protection distinguishing between:
the identification of individuals on the one hand, and any breach of security or respect for privacy
on the other hand, “The names and surnames of natural persons mentioned in the decision, whether they are parties or third parties, are redacted prior to being made available to the public.
When its disclosure is likely to jeopardize the security or respect for privacy of these individuals or their associates, any element allowing identification is also redacted.”ifier les parties, les tiers, les magistrats et les fonctionnaires de greffe »
It is regrettable that the text, as it currently stands, remains silent on the address or any other element that could indirectly identify the parties. Furthermore, the concept of “respect for privacy” referred to in the text has not been linked to a specific list of sensitive data, leaving its interpretation to complex case law.
Two amendments encouraged the inclusion of a specific list of sensitive data as provided for in Article 8 of the Law of 6 January 1978 on Information Technology, Data Files and Civil Liberties, but these were ultimately not adopted.
Open Data and Court Decisions: Judges Appointed but Not Classified
However, a specific amendment was also adopted concerning the anonymity of judges. The text proposes maintaining their names in court decisions, subject to safeguards preventing any profiling or ranking of judges or their decisions.
“The personal data of judges and court clerks may not be reused for the purpose or effect of evaluating, analyzing, comparing, or predicting their actual or perceived professional practices.
Violation of this prohibition is punishable by the penalties stipulated in Articles 226-18, 226-24, and 226-31 of the Penal Code, without prejudice to the measures and sanctions provided for by the Law of January 6, 1978.”
In this respect, the bill aims to prevent any reuse of the personal data of judges and court clerks by processing that could lead to evaluating, comparing, or attempting to predict their actual or perceived professional practices.
The anonymity of judges, particularly defended by the Senate, will require the joint committee to find a compromise solution.
The increasing importance given to case law remains a concern with regard to the principles of French law, which are based not on court decisions but on legislative texts and, more generally, the law itself.
Encouraging the use of court decisions to support one’s claims could ultimately give court decisions, as in Anglo-Saxon models, a much greater weight in the French judicial system, with the corollary being a new role for judges that would weaken our balance of power.
