Juriste international - 2013-4

juristeI N T E R N A T I O N A L

juriste2013.4

Unio

n In

ternatio

nale

d

es A

vo

catsI

Rass

em

ble

r le

s avo

cats

du

mo

nd

e ●

Bri

ngin

g T

ogeth

er

the W

orl

d’s

Law

yers

●R

eu

nir

a lo

s ab

ogad

os

del m

un

do

1Rassembler les avocats du monde I4 ■ 2013

SommaireTable of contentsIndiceThème principal des illustrations : Barcelone IMain picture theme: Barcelona I Tema principal de las ilustraciones: Barcelona

Editorial I 2Editorial du Président 3 President’s Editorial 4 Editorial del Presidente 5 Message du Rédacteur en Chef 7 Message from the ChiefEditor 8 Mensaje del Redactor Jefe 9

Actualités de l’UIA IUIA News INovedades de la UIA I 10The UIA in Istanbul 11 The UIA in Brunico (Italy) 13 The UIA in Warsaw 14 The UIA in Houston 15 The UIA in São Paulo 16 L’UIA àIstanbul 17 Congrès de Macao - Macau congress - Congreso de Macao 18 Inaugural Speech of the 58th President of the UIA 24Secretary for Administration and Justice of the Macau Special Administrative Region 27 Secretary for Justice of Hong Kong 28Corruption and the Lawyer 30 UIA Young Lawyers 31 A young “Macanese lawyer’s” experience 31

Droits de l’Homme et de la Défense IHuman Rights and Protection of Lawyers IDerechos Humanos y de la Defensa I 34The Shot Heard Around the World 35 Certifying the Certification 38 Rencontre avec Karim Lahidji, Président de la FIDH 41 ThePromotion and Protection of Freedom of Expression and Privacy in the Digital Age 43 Guinée Équatoriale, une médiation menée avecsuccès 47

La Profession d'Avocat IThe Legal Profession I La Abogacía I 48ABS : les nouvelles frontières de la profession d'avocat 49 Le Cloud Computing 52 El alcance del derecho de defensa y la libertad deexpresión de los abogados en el debate forense en España 56

Pratique du Droit I Legal Practice I Ejercicio de la Abogacía I 62Intellectual Property (IPR) in China and Macau SAR 63 Data Breaches - From an EU Perspective 65 Singapore’s Personal DataProtection Act (PDPA) - An Overview 66 El embargo internacional de créditos en la UE 70 Asset Preservation - Japanese Regulations 74 Tribune Libre - Opinion - Tribuna Libre 78

Editorial

“Il est approprié que j’écrive mon premier éditorialpour le Juriste international dans un avion àdestination de Hong Kong, où je dois représenterl’UIA à l’occasion de la Rentrée Judiciaire et assurerl’exposé introductif de la Table Ronde desPrésidents. C’est la première fois que je reviens enAsie depuis ma prise de fonction, à l’issue de notrecongrès extraordinaire de Macao, et ce voyage estun symbole de mon engagement en faveur du rôleconsidérable et unique que l’UIA doit jouer dans laprofession juridique, partout dans le monde.

Ceux d’entre vous qui ont assisté à mon discoursinaugural à Macao m’ont entendu expliquer que lasingularité de l’UIA tient au fait qu’elle est la seuleassociation internationale de professionnels dudroit qui soit multilingue et multiculturelle. À ladifférence d’autres associations internationales dejuristes, nous n’imposons pas la prééminence d’unelangue ou d’une tradition juridique particulière – aucontraire, nous accueillons le droit de traditionciviliste tout autant que la common law, et l’anglaistout autant que le français, l’espagnol et cinq autreslangues officielles. Nous bénéficions autant de laparticipation active d’avocats originaires de pays endéveloppement et de pays industrialisés, que decelle de praticiens exerçant seuls et au sein de petitscabinets comme de ceux issus des plus grandesstructures internationales, et celle d’hommes et defemmes dont l’exercice professionnel couvretoutes les disciplines imaginables du droit. C’est làoù réside le génie de l’UIA, et c’est la raison pourlaquelle le fait d’en être membre et de s’y investir, estsi enrichissant pour chacun d’entre nous.

Parce qu’aucune bonne action ne reste impunie, lefait que nous ne communiquions pas uniquementen anglais a parfois donné la fausse impression quenous étions une organisation française où l’anglaisn’avait pas sa place. Tous nos membres savent bienque c’est inexact, mais ce mythe a freiné notredéveloppement dans les régions où l’anglais est unelingua franca reliant les juristes issus d’une série depays dont les langues maternelles ne sont pasparlées à l’extérieur de leur territoire, et qui ontrecours à l’anglais pour communiquer par delà lesfrontières nationales et régionales. Au premier rang

de ces régions se trouvent l’Asie et le Moyen-Orient, et l’une des priorités de mon mandat est detirer parti du fait que je suis un Président de languematernelle anglaise pour véhiculer le message queles juristes de ces régions qui s’expriment en anglaistrouveront, au sein de l’UIA, un lieu d’accueil uniqueet enrichissant.

Mais il ne faut pas se méprendre sur un point : lemultilinguisme est un atout dont il faut profiter, pasun fardeau à imposer. L’UIA regroupe plus de 40commissions et groupes de travail qui promeuventle développement de la réflexion juridique danstous les secteurs. Tous n’ont pas besoin defonctionner dans toutes nos langues de travail(anglais, français et espagnol). Selon le profil de sesmembres et les aptitudes linguistiques de sesintervenants, une commission peut être amenée àtravailler dans une seule, voire deux, des langues detravail. Il se peut que certaines commissions soienten mesure de fonctionner dans plus de langues qued’autres, et nous ne voulons surtout pas gêner leurtravail en les obligeant à traduire tout ce qui s’y ditdans chacune de nos langues. Une telle démarcheserait contreproductive, dans la mesure où elleréduirait, au lieu de l’accroître, le bénéfice quechaque membre retire d’un programme donné.Mais l’UIA, dans sa globalité, est résolumentmultilingue – et ce multilinguisme s’exprime toutaussi bien dans un large choix de programmesmenés dans une grande variété de langues, que dansl’exigence que chaque programme soit traduit danschaque langue.

En bref, le multilinguisme de l’UIA n’a rien d’undiktat politiquement correct que nous imposons ànos membres, mais constitue plutôt un avantageunique auquel nous leur donnons accès, afin quechacun puisse choisir de participer auxprogrammes présentant le plus grand intérêtprofessionnel. Contrairement à d’autresorganisations, vous avez votre place au sein de l’UIAsi vous ne parlez pas anglais – mais vous y avezégalement votre place si vous le parlez.

Cette universalité naturelle confère à l’UIA un rôleunique sur la scène juridique internationale et je

souhaite que nous assumions ce rôle dans la pluslarge mesure. À Hong Kong, j’ai partagé la TableRonde des Présidents les préoccupations que j’aiexprimées à Macao, selon lesquelles les avocatscommuniquent mal sur les enjeux de notre action.Quel que soit notre pays d’origine, un trop grandnombre de nos concitoyens semble ne pascomprendre la contribution fondamentale desavocats à la protection de l’État de droit – sanslequel la démocratie ne peut résister trèslongtemps. Nous donnons trop souventl’impression de chercher à obtenir des privilègesparticuliers pour nous-mêmes, quand, en réalité,ces « privilèges » que nous réclamons – le secretprofessionnel, l’indépendance des avocats et des juges vis-à-vis du pouvoir politique et lemaintien de normes éthiques élevées – profitentprincipalement, non pas aux avocats, mais auxcitoyens, entreprises, immigrants, syndicats etautres membres de la société civile que nous avonsla charge de représenter.

Si nos concitoyens comprenaient et appréciaient lavaleur de ce principe fondamental, ils œuvreraientpour que toute atteinte aux droits des avocats parles gouvernements soit politiquement intenable –parce qu’une telle atteinte entame parallèlementles droits de chacun des membres de la sociétécivile, ce qui est le premier pas vers la tyrannie.

Par conséquent, notre mission en tantqu’association internationale d’avocats, quelle quesoit la langue que nous parlons, l’endroit où nousvivons, ou la taille de la structure dans laquelle nousexerçons, consiste à diffuser ce message : raconternotre histoire de manière à faire comprendre à nosconcitoyens que les juristes sont là pour protégerla société, pas pour l’exploiter. Il est temps pournous tous de nous élever contre la démagogiefacile des gouvernements qui veulent affaiblir lesjuristes afin d’affaiblir leur propre peuple – et c’estce que je compte faire en tant que votre Président.J’invite chacun d’entre vous à se joindre à moi danscette mission essentielle et noble.

Stephen L. DREYFUSSPrésident de l’UIA

3Bringing Together the World's Lawyers I4 ■ 2013

Editorial du Président

I Stephen L. DREYFUSS

4 ■ 2013 I Rassembler les avocats du monde4

It is fitting that I am writing my first JuristeInternational editorial as UIA President on a planeto Hong Kong, where I will represent the UIA atthe Opening of the Legal Year and make theopening presentation to the Presidents’Roundtable there. This is my first trip back to Asiaafter taking office as UIA President at the end ofour extraordinary Congress in Macau, and itsymbolizes my commitment to the propositionthat the UIA has a significant and unique role toplay in the legal profession everywhere in theworld.

Those of you who attended my inaugural speechin Macau heard me say that what makes the UIAunique is that we are the only multilingual andmulticultural international association of lawyers.Unlike other international lawyers’ associations,we do not impose the dominance of anyparticular language or legal tradition – on thecontrary, we embrace the civil law as well as thecommon law, and English as well as French,Spanish and five more official languages.We enjoythe active participation of lawyers from thedeveloping world as well as from the developedworld, of sole practitioners and lawyers fromsmall firms as well as those from the largestmultinationals, and of men and women whosepractices embrace every conceivable legalspecialty. This is the genius of the UIA, and this iswhy UIA membership and active participation isso valuable for all of us.

Because no good deed goes unpunished, the factthat we do not communicate only in English hassometimes given rise to the misimpression thatwe are a French organisation where English hasno place. All of our members know this isuntrue, but this myth has inhibited ourdevelopment in those regions of the worldwhere English is the most common secondlanguage, a lingua franca linking lawyers from arange of countries whose native languages arenot spoken outside their borders and who useEnglish to communicate across national andregional frontiers. Chief among those regions areAsia and the Middle East, and one of the

priorities of my presidency is to take advantageof the fact that I am a UIA President whosenative language is English to communicate themessage that lawyers from these regions whospeak English will find a unique and enrichinghome within the UIA.

But there should be no mistake about one thing:multilingualism is an advantage to be enjoyed, nota burden or a handicap to be imposed. The UIAhas more than 40 commissions and workinggroups that advance the development of legalthought in every significant legal specialty. Notevery one of them needs to operate in all threeof our working languages (English, French andSpanish). Depending on the composition of acommission’s membership and the language skillsof its active participants, a given commission maysometimes operate in only one, or perhaps two,of the working languages. Some commissionsmay be able to work in more languages thanothers, and the last thing we want to do is toinhibit the work of any commission by imposingon it the obligation to translate everything it doesand every word that is spoken into each of ourlanguages. That would make no sense and wouldactually be counterproductive, since it wouldinhibit rather than enhance the benefit that eachmember gains from a given program. But the UIAas a whole is resolutely multilingual – and thatmultilingualism is as well expressed by a varietyof programs in a variety of languages as it is byrequiring that each program be translated intoevery language.

In short, multilingualism in the UIA is not sometyrannical political correctness that we imposeon our members, but rather a unique benefit thatwe make available to them so that each membercan choose to participate in programs that willbring him or her the most professional value.Unlike some other organisations, there is a placefor you in the UIA if you don’t speak English – butthere is also a place for you in the UIA if you do.

This natural universality gives the UIA a uniquerole to play on the international legal scene, and

during my presidency I intend for us to fulfill thatrole to the fullest. In Hong Kong, I shared withthe Presidents’ Roundtable the concerns Iexpressed in Macau that as a profession, welawyers are doing a poor job of communicatingwhat we are about. No matter what country wecome from, too many of our fellow citizensapparently do not understand the crucialcontribution lawyers make to the protection ofthe rule of law – without which no democracycan long endure. Instead, too often we give theimpression of seeking special privileges forourselves, when in reality the benefit of the“privileges” we seek – professional secrecy,independence of lawyers and judges frompolitical interference, and the maintenance ofhigh ethical standards in our profession – isprincipally enjoyed not by lawyers, but by thecitizens, corporations, immigrants, labor unionsand other members of civil society whomlawyers represent.

If our fellow citizens understood and appreciatedthe value of this fundamental principle, theywould make it politically untenable forgovernments and public officials to infringe onlawyers’ rights – because infringing on lawyers’rights simultaneously erodes the rights of everymember of civil society, and that is the first stepon the road to tyranny.

So our task as lawyers and as internationalassociations of lawyers, no matter what languagewe speak, where we live or what size law firm weare in, is to spread that message: to tell our storyin a way that will make our fellow citizensunderstand that lawyers exist to protect society,not to exploit it. It is time for all of us to stand upagainst the facile demagoguery of governmentswho want to suppress lawyers in order tosuppress their own people – and that is what Iintend to do throughout my term as yourPresident. I invite each of you to join me in thiscrucial, and noble, task.

Stephen L. DREYFUSSUIA President

President’s Editorial


Reunir a los abogados del mundo I4 ■ 2013 5”

Editorial del Presidente


Escribo mi primera editorial del Juriste Internationalcomo Presidente de la UIA precisamente duranteun vuelo a Hong Kong, donde representaré a la UIAen el “Opening of the Legal Year” y realizaré lapresentación inaugural en la Mesa Redonda dePresidentes. Es mi primer viaje de regreso a Asiadespués de asumir mi cargo como Presidente de laUIA al término de nuestro extraordinario congresoen Macao, y simboliza mi compromiso con la idea deque la UIA tiene un papel importante y único quedesempeñar en la abogacía en todo el mundo.

Aquellos de ustedes que escucharon mi discursoinaugural en Macao, me oirían decir que lo que haceúnica a la UIA es que somos la única asociacióninternacional de abogados plurilingüe y multicultural.A diferencia de otras asociaciones internacionales deabogados, no imponemos el dominio de un idiomao tradición jurídica concreto. Al contrario,abrazamos el derecho civil, así como el derechocomún, y tanto el idioma inglés como el francés, elespañol y cinco idiomas oficiales más. Nos gusta queparticipen activamente abogados del mundo en víasde desarrollo, así como del mundo desarrollado,abogados que ejercen solos y en despachospequeños, así como abogados de grandesmultinacionales, y abogados y abogadas que ejercencualquier especialidad jurídica imaginable. Ésta es laextraordinaria virtud de la UIA, y por eso nosenriquece tanto a todos ser miembros de la UIA yparticipar activamente en ella.

Pero, como reza el dicho, “el bien con el mal se paga”,y el hecho de que no comuniquemos sólo en inglésa veces ha dado la impresión equivocada de quesomos una organización francesa en la que el inglés no tiene cabida. Todos nuestrosmiembros saben que no es así, pero este mito hainhibido nuestro desarrollo en aquellas regiones delmundo donde el inglés es el segundo idioma máshabitual, una lingua franca que une a abogados dediversos países cuyos idiomas nativos no se hablanfuera de sus fronteras y que emplean el inglés paracomunicarse más allá de sus fronteras nacionales yregionales. Las principales de estas regiones sonAsiay el Medio Oriente, una de las prioridades de mipresidencia es aprovechar el hecho de que soy un

Presidente de cuya lengua materna es el inglés paratransmitir el mensaje de que los abogados de estasregiones que hablan inglés encontrarán en la UIA unlugar único y enriquecedor.

Pero no debemos equivocarnos en un sentido: elplurilingüismo es una ventaja de la que disfrutar, nouna carga o un hándicap que imponer. La UIA tienemás de 40 comisiones y grupos de trabajo quehacen avanzar el desarrollo de la reflexión jurídica entodas las especialidades relevantes del derecho. Notodos ellos deben trabajar en todos los tres idiomasde trabajo (inglés, francés y español). Según losmiembros que compongan una comisión y lascompetencias lingüísticas de sus participantesactivos, una comisión determinada puede trabajar aveces en sólo uno, o quizá dos, de los idiomas detrabajo. Unas comisiones podrán trabajar en másidiomas que otras, y lo último que queremos esinhibir el trabajo de ninguna comisión imponiéndolela obligación de traducir todo lo que haga y todas ycada una de las palabras pronunciadas en cada unode nuestros idiomas de trabajo. No tendría sentidoy, en realidad, sería contraproducente, ya que másque potenciar inhibiría el provecho que pueda sacarcada miembro de un programa determinado. Pero,en su conjunto, la UIA es decididamente plurilingüe, yese plurilingüismo se manifiesta de hecho en unadiversidad de programas y en una diversidad deidiomas, pues se exige que cada programa seatraducido a todos los idiomas.

En resumen, el plurilingüismo en la UIA no es unacorrección política tiránica que impongamos anuestros miembros, sino una ventaja única queponemos a su disposición, de modo que cadamiembro pueda decidir participar en los programasque le vayan a aportar el mayor valor profesional. Adiferencia de algunas otras organizaciones, en la UIAhay un lugar para usted si no habla inglés, perotambién hay un lugar para usted en la UIA si lo habla.

Esta universalidad natural le otorga a la UIA un papelúnico que desempeñar en la esfera jurídicainternacional, y durante mi presidencia espero quecumplamos esa función al máximo. En Hong Kong,compartiré con la Mesa Redonda de Presidentes las

preocupaciones que ya expresé en Macao de que,como profesión, los abogados estamos haciendomuy poco por comunicar nuestra labor. Vengamosdel país que vengamos, muchos de nuestrosconciudadanos no comprenden, al parecer, lacontribución crucial que realizamos los abogados ala protección del Estado de derecho, que sindemocracia no puede perdurar mucho. En cambio,a menudo damos la impresión de buscar privilegiosespeciales para nosotros mismos, cuando enrealidad del beneficio de los “privilegios” queperseguimos – secreto profesional, independenciade los abogados y jueces respecto de interferenciaspolíticas, y el mantenimiento de una ética rigurosa ennuestra profesión – no sólo disfrutan los abogados,sino también los ciudadanos, las empresas, losinmigrantes, los sindicatos de trabajadores y otrosmiembros de la sociedad civil a los que representanlos abogados.

Si nuestros conciudadanos comprendieran yapreciaran el valor de este principio fundamental, alos gobiernos y representantes públicos les resultaríapolíticamente insostenible infringir los derechos delos abogados; porque la infracción de los derechosde los abogados menoscaba simultáneamente losderechos de cada miembro de la sociedad civil, y ésees el primer paso hacia la tiranía.

Así que nuestro cometido como abogados y comoasociación internacional de abogados – cualquieraque sea el idioma que hablemos, el lugar dondevivamos o la estructura del despacho en el quetrabajemos – es difundir ese mensaje: contarnuestra historia de modo que nuestrosconciudadanos comprendan que los abogados estánahí para proteger a la sociedad, no para explotarla.Es hora de que todos nos levantemos contra lademagogia simplista de los gobiernos que quierenanular a los abogados para anular a sus propiosciudadanos; y eso es lo que pretendo hacer durantemi presidencia. Les invito a todos a sumarse a estaimportante y noble tarea.

Stephen L. DREYFUSSPresidente de la UIA


L’actualité de 2013, en matière de cyber-surveillance et de cyber-espionnage, a mis enévidence toute l’acuité des travaux accomplis par lacommission en droits de l’Homme numérique del’UIA.

Les révélations d’Edward Snowden ont permis devulgariser et de faire prendre conscience desopportunités, mais aussi des risques des Big Data.Les Big Data, c’est-à-dire l’exploitation en tempsréel d’un très grand nombre de données, de naturediverse (texte, image, contenu multimédia etc.),permet de dégager des corrélations entreplusieurs informations et d’en inférer des lois. Ainsi,Google Translate intègre de nombreuses pages detraduction pour déterminer la meilleuretraduction d’un mot, compte tenu de soncontexte. En se perfectionnant au moyen desdonnées de traduction disponibles, Google Translateaffine peu à peu ses traductions et se perfectionnesans cesse, à la différence de ses ancêtres, lesprogrammes de traduction, qui ne comportaientque des instructions de traduction, insuffisantespour prendre en compte la diversité de senspossibles d’un mot.

Vu sous cet angle, les Big Data offrent deformidables opportunités. Ainsi, dans le domaine dela recherche et du diagnostic médical, les Big Datapermettent d’établir des corrélations entrecertaines informations et d’en déduire undiagnostic, avec une forte probabilité d’exactitude.

Les possibilités de déduction et de prédictionoffertes par les Big Data risquent à terme demodifier notre manière de penser. La recherche dela causalité et du pourquoi, consommatrice detemps, risque de se faire rapidement dépasser parles déductions produites par les Big Data, qui nouspermettront de connaître une solution ou deprédire un résultat, sans nous donner la peine d’enrechercher le pourquoi. Certains spécialistesaffirment aujourd’hui qu’il serait possible à unmédecin, sur la foi de l’analyse de données, dedécider d’une intervention chirurgicale, sansnéanmoins en comprendre la raison.

Evidemment, l’aide que peuvent apporter les BigData dans la prédiction du comportement humainapparaît comme une chance. C’est néanmoinségalement une menace. Comment réagirons-nousen effet et quel usage ferons-nous des Big Data,lorsqu’elles permettront de prédire et d’identifierles individus potentiellement dangereux?Parviendrons-nous à conserver intacte laprésomption d’innocence? Cette question se posed’autant plus que les spécialistes des Big Data sontunanimes: les données peuvent demeureranonymes tant qu’elles sont rares. Dès qu’elles sontnombreuses, il est possible d’identifier les personnesqu’elles concernent. Il est donc illusoire, avec les BigData, de conserver l’anonymat des données.

Les questions soulevées par l’utilisation etl’exploitation des données nécessitent donc uneréflexion de fond. La protection de la vie privée etdes libertés individuelles, à l’ère des Big Data, nepeut se limiter au fait de donner ou non sonconsentement à l’utilisation des données parl’opérateur qui les collecte. En effet, l’utilisationsecondaire des données dans le cadre des Big Datan’a, dans la plupart des cas, pas encore été imaginéeau moment de leur collecte et donc au momentoù l’individu qui les communique donne sonconsentement à leur collecte et à leur utilisation.

Il est primordial que l’UIA contribue à la réflexionque suscitent la collecte, le traitement et lecroisement des données personnelles et plusgénéralement les nouvelles technologies, enmatière de droits de l’homme. C’est pourquoinous consacrons une large place à ces sujets danscette édition, en publiant les articles de MarcGallardo sur les droits de l’homme numérique,d’Elisabeth Thole sur le projet de directiveeuropéenne sur la protection des donnéespersonnelles, du Dr Andreas Respondek sur lanouvelle législation adoptée récemment àSingapour en la matière, et la synthèse des travauxdu Sénat International des Barreaux sur le cloudcomputing, par Francis Gervais.

Je ne peux terminer cet éditorial sans une penséepour Nelson Mandela. De son œuvre, je retiens

plus particulièrement la commission de la vérité etde la réconciliation. Cette commission avaitessentiellement pour mission d’établir la vérité surles exactions commises durant l’Apartheid. Pour cefaire, les coupables se voyaient offrir l’amnistie, à lacondition de révéler et de reconnaîtrepubliquement leurs torts, en face de leurs victimes.Ces dernières étaient invitées à témoignerpubliquement des sévices qu’elles avaient subis.

De cette façon, la commission poursuivait l’objectifd’établir la vérité, d’entendre les victimes quin’avaient, des années durant, pas eu droit à laparole, d’obtenir le repentir public des coupables etainsi, par l’écoute mutuelle des bourreaux etvictimes, de permettre d’apaiser leurs relations,voire de susciter le pardon et la réconciliation.Même si son bilan reste controversé – maiscomment aurait-il pu en être autrement, après tantde violences, de discriminations et de crimes? –,l’idée n’en demeure pas moins remarquable etcontinue d’inspirer la justice dite « transitionnelle »de nombreux pays.

En initiant la commission de la vérité et de laréconciliation, Nelson Mandela poursuivait sonobjectif de « bâtir une société dans laquelle tous les sud-africains, blancs ou noirs, pourront marcher la tête hautesans aucune crainte au fond de leur cœur, assurés deleur droit inaliénable à la dignité humaine – une nationarc-en-ciel en paix avec elle-même et avec le monde »(extrait du discours d’investiture de NelsonMandela du 27 avril 1994). En 2001, NelsonMandela rappelait la mission qu’il s’était imparti à sasortie de prison: « libérer à la fois l’opprimé etl’oppresseur »,expliquant que l’oppresseur « qui priveun autre homme de sa liberté est prisonnier de sa haine,il est enfermé derrière les barreaux de ses préjugés etde l’étroitesse d’esprit ».

En hommage à Nelson Mandela, conservons lamémoire vive de ce plaidoyer pour la paix, en letransposant, chaque fois que nous le pouvons, dansnotre exercice professionnel.

Bénédicte QUERENET-HAHNRédacteur en Chef - Juriste International

Message du Rédacteur en Chef

Rassembler les avocats du monde

I Bénédicte QUERENET-HAHN

The news in 2013, with regard to cyber-Surveillance and cyber-Espionage, has thrown lighton the acumen with which the UIA’s Commissionon the Rights of the Digital Person person hasworked.

Edward Snowden’s revelations made it possible topopularise and make people aware of theopportunities, but also the risks involved with BigData. Big Data, i.e. the use in real time of a vastnumber of data of different kinds (text, images,multimedia content, etc.) makes it possible todeduce correlations between different sets ofinformation and to infer laws from them. Hence,Google Translate incorporates a number of pagesof translation in order to determine the besttranslation of a word, taking its context intoaccount. By improving the quality of its translationsthrough the translation data available, GoogleTranslate gradually refines its translations andconstantly improves them, unlike its ancestors –translation programmes that only containedtranslation instructions that were not enough totake the diverse possible meanings of a word intoaccount.

Seen from this angle, Big Data offers wonderfulopportunities. Hence, in the field of medicalresearch and diagnosis, Big Data makes it possibleto establish correlations between certaininformation sets and to deduce a diagnosis fromthem, with a strong probability of accuracy.

The possibility of deducing and predicting offeredby Big Data is likely to change our way of thinkingover time. The search for causality – the ‘why’behind things, which takes up so much time, islikely to soon be surpassed by deductionsproduced by Big Data, which would enable us tofind a solution or predict a result without it beingnecessary for us to take the trouble of searchingfor the ‘why’ behind the problem. In fact, there aresome specialists today who assert that it would bepossible for a doctor to decide to go in forsurgery, based on faith on data analysis, withoutreally understanding the reason why.

Obviously, the help Big Data can provide inpredicting human behaviour seems to be awonderful opportunity. However, it is also a threat.How would we react and how would we use BigData, when it makes it possible to predict andidentify potentially dangerous individuals? Will wemanage to ensure that the principle of thepresumption of innocence remains sacrosanct?This question is all the more important since BigData specialists unanimously hold that data canremain anonymous as long as it is scarce.As soonas substantial data is available, it is possible toidentify the persons concerned. It would thereforebe illusory to believe that the anonymity of datacould be safeguarded once Big Data is available.

The questions raised by the use of data thereforecall for in-depth reflection. The protection ofprivacy and individual freedoms in the era of BigData cannot be limited to the operator whogathers the data merely granting or refusingconsent for its use. In fact, in most cases, thesecondary use of data within the framework of BigData had not even been imagined at the time thedata was gathered and, therefore, at the time theindividual communicating the data had consentedto it being gathered and used.

It is therefore essential for the UIA to contributeto the thinking on issues related to the collection,processing and cross-referencing of personal dataand, more generally, new technologies, in the areaof human rights. That is why we are devotingsignificant space to these subjects in this edition bypublishing articles by Marc Gallardo on the rightsof the digital person, by Elisabeth Thole on thedraft European directive on the protection ofpersonal data, by Dr. Andreas Respondek on thenew legislation adopted recently in Singapore inthis area and the summary of the International BarLeaders’ Senate’s work on cloud computing byFrancis Gervais.

I cannot end this editorial without a few wordsabout Nelson Mandela. Of all his work, what hasespecially remained in my mind is his Truth andReconciliation Commission. In fact, the

Commission essentially sought to establish thetruth about the abuses perpetrated duringApartheid. To do so, the guilty were offeredamnesty as long as they publicly revealed andacknowledged the wrongs they had committedvis-à-vis their victims. The latter were invited topublicly testify to the ill-treatment they hadsuffered.

Consequently, the Commission pursued theobjective of establishing the truth, listening to thevictims who, for years, were deprived of their rightto speech, obtaining public repentance from theguilty and, thereby, through a process in which thetorturers and the victims heard each other out,made it possible to instil peace in their relations,and even lead to pardon and reconciliation.Although its final outcome may remaincontroversial – and how could it be anything else,after so much violence, discrimination and crime –the idea is no less remarkable and continues toinspire the so-called “transitional” justice in manycountries.

By initiating the Truth and ReconciliationCommission, Nelson Mandela pursued hisobjective of “building a society in which all SouthAfricans, both black and white, will be able to walk tall,without any fear in their hearts, assured of theirinalienable right to human dignity – a rainbow nationat peace with itself and the world” (extract fromNelson Mandela’s inaugural speech on 27 April1994). In 2001, Nelson Mandela recalled themission that he had taken on when he had walkedout of prison: “the oppressor must be liberated just assurely as the oppressed”, explaining that theoppressor “who takes away another man’s freedomis a prisoner of hatred, he is locked behind the bars ofprejudice and narrow-mindedness”.

In homage to Nelson Mandela, let us ensure thathis plea for peace lives on in our memory bytransposing it in our professional practicewhenever possible.

Bénédicte QUERENET-HAHNChief Editor - Juriste International

Message from the Chief Editor

Bringing the world's lawyers together


4 ■ 2013 I Reunir a los abogados del mundo8

Bringing Together the World's Lawyers I4 ■ 2013 9

La actualidad de 2013, en materia de cibervigilancia yciberespionaje ha puesto de manifiesto toda laagudeza de los trabajos realizados por la comisiónsobre derechos de la persona digital de la UIA.

Las revelaciones de Edward Snowden han permitidopopularizar y han dado a conocer las oportunidades,así como los riesgos de los Big Data.. Los Big Data., esdecir, la explotación en tiempo real de un grandísimonúmero de datos de diversa índole (textos,imágenes, contenido multimedia, etc.) permiteestablecer correlaciones entre varias informacionesy extraer de ellos leyes. Así, por ejemplo, GoogleTranslate integra numerosas páginas de traducciónpara establecer cuál es la mejor traducción de unapalabra según su contexto. Google Translate seperfecciona constantemente, para lo cual utiliza losdatos de traducción disponibles con el fin de irafinando poco a poco sus traducciones a diferenciade sus antecesores, los programas de traducción,que contenían simplemente instrucciones detraducción, insuficientes como para tener en cuentala diversidad de sentidos posibles de una mismapalabra.

Visto desde este ángulo, los Big Data. presentanmagníficas oportunidades. Así, en el ámbito de lainvestigación y el diagnóstico médico, los Big Data.permiten establecer correlaciones entredeterminadas informaciones y deducir undiagnóstico, con una fuerte probabilidad deexactitud.

Las posibilidades de deducción y predicción queofrecen los Big Data.pueden llegar a modificar al finalnuestro modo de pensar. La búsqueda de lacausalidad y del por qué, que tanto tiempo llevan,pueden ser rápidamente superadas por lasdeducciones que producen los Big Data., que nospermitirán conocer una solución o predecir unresultado, sin que tengamos que buscar el por qué.Algunos especialistas afirman hoy que a un médicole resultaría posible decidir una intervenciónquirúrgica basándose en el análisis de datos, aun sincomprender el motivo.

Evidentemente, la ayuda que pueden prestar los Big

Data. para la predicción del comportamientohumano aparece como una oportunidad. Peropresenta también una amenaza. ¿Cómoreaccionaremos y qué uso haremos de los Big Data.cuando permitan predecir e identificar a losindividuos potencialmente peligrosos?¿Conseguiremos mantener intacta la presunción deinocencia? Esta pregunta se plantea sobre todoporque los especialistas en Big Data. son unánimes:los datos pueden permanecer en el anonimatomientras sean escasos. Pero en cuanto sonnumerosos, se puede identificar a las personas a lasque conciernen. Así pues, con los Big Data., conservarel anonimato de los datos es ilusorio.

Las cuestiones que plantean la utilización y laexplotación de datos exigen, por lo tanto, unareflexión de fondo. En la era de los Big Data., laprotección de la vida privada y de las libertadesindividuales no puede limitarse al hecho de que unapersona dé o no su consentimiento para lautilización de los datos al operador que los recopila.En efecto, todavía no se ha imaginado la utilizaciónsecundaria de los datos en el marco de los Big Data.en el momento de su recopilación y, por lo tanto, enel momento en que el individuo que los comunicada su consentimiento para su recopilación yutilización.

Es primordial que la UIA contribuya a la reflexiónque suscitan la recopilación, el tratamiento y el crucede los datos personales y, de manera más general, lasnuevas tecnologías, en materia de derechoshumanos. Este es el motivo por el cual en estaedición dedicamos un gran espacio a estos temas,con la publicación de los artículos de Marc Gallardosobre los derechos de la persona digital, de ElisabethThole sobre el proyecto de directiva europea sobrela protección de datos personales, del Dr. AndreasRespondek sobre la nueva legislación aprobadarecientemente en Singapur en la materia, y la síntesisde los trabajos del Senado Internacional de Colegiosde Abogados sobre el “cloud computing”, porFrancis Gervais.

No puedo terminar este editorial sin recordar aNelson Mandela. De su obra, me quedo

especialmente con la comisión para la verdad y lareconciliación. Esta comisión teníafundamentalmente como misión establecer laverdad sobre las exacciones cometidas durante elApartheid. Para eso, se aplicaba una amnistía a losculpables, a condición de que revelasen yreconociesen públicamente sus culpas ante susvíctimas. Estas últimas eran invitadas a dar testimoniopúblicamente de los malos tratos que habían sufrido.

De este modo, la comisión perseguía el objetivo deestablecer la verdad, escuchar a las víctimas quedurante años no tuvieron derecho a hablar,conseguir el arrepentimiento público de losculpables y así, mediante la escucha mutua deverdugos y víctimas, permitir que se apaciguasen susrelaciones, e incluso suscitar el perdón y lareconciliación. Aunque su balance sea controvertido– como no podía ser de otra manera después detanta violencia, discriminaciones y crímenes –, la ideano es por ello menos relevante y sigue inspirando ala justicia denominada “transicional” de muchospaíses.

Con la pueseta en marcha la comisión para la verdady la reconciliación, Nelson Mandela perseguía suobjetivo de “construir una sociedad en la que todos lossudafricanos, blancos o negros, sean capaces de caminarcon la frente en alto sin miedo en sus corazones, con lacerteza de su derecho inalienable a la dignidad humana– una nación arcoíris en paz consigo misma y con elmundo” (extracto del discurso de investidura deNelson Mandela de 27 de abril de 1994). En 2001,Nelson Mandela recordaba la misión que se habíaimpuesto al salir de prisión: “liberar a la vez al oprimidoy al opresor”, explicando que el opresor “que priva aotro hombre de su libertad es prisionero de su odio, estáencerrado detrás de los barrotes de sus prejuicios y de suestrechez de miras”.

En homenaje a Nelson Mandela, conservemos lamemoria viva de esta defensa de la paz,transponiéndola, siempre que podamos, a nuestroejercicio profesional.

Bénédicte QUERENET-HAHNRedactor Jefe del Juriste International

Mensaje del Redactor Jefe

Reunir a los abogados del mundo


Actualités de l’UIAUIA NewsNovedades de la UIA

11Reunir a los abogados del mundo I4 ■ 2013

The UIA, held a seminar on Foreign Investmentin & from Turkey, in Istanbul, on September 27and September 28, 2013, at the Swissôtel TheBosphorus, which is a member of The LeadingHotels of The World and located in the heartof Istanbul.

On Thursday, September 26, a welcomecocktail took place in Karataş & Gültekin LawFirm’s premises, located by the sea, where theparticipants were fascinated by themagnificent Bosphorus view.

The seminar began on September 27, withProf. Dr. Berin Ergin’s introductions of theesteemed participants, Prof. Dr. MetinFeyzioğlu, President of Turkish Bar Associationand Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ümit Kocasakal, Presidentof Istanbul Bar Association. After the openingspeeches, they gave their best regards to theUIA. The presidents mostly emphasized theinfringements of law on the current lawsuitfiled against the Istanbul Bar.

The first presentation was carried out by Mr. Sefa Güven and Emrecan Doğan dually, inregards to the needs of the society and itsconnection with technology, society-advancing investments, their financing modelsand legal infrastructure.

Mr. Michael Meyenburg, from Austria, gave aninformative speech regarding the advancinginvestments, their financing models and legalinfrastructure.

The third speech of the first session wasconducted by Mr. Hakan Çınar. In the speech,issues such as the foreign direct investment(FDI) market in Turkey, direct foreigninvestment inflow, new legal updates onTurkish Law, tax exemptions, privisationmovements were emphasized. Furthermore,the primary leading sectors were showntogether with the statistics of foreign directinvestment (FDI) in Turkey.

After the coffee break, Mr. Pascal Petrelexplained the FDI in Israel, Mr. Petrel underlinedthat unlike most countries, fewer taxes arecollected from investors and that the liberaleconomic system, which protects investors, isregarded as one of the advantages of FDI inIsrael.

Later on, Mr. Serhat Eskiyörük informed theparticipants regarding the current criticalprocedural issues and its effects in Turkey inregards to withdrawal from investment.

Following this speech, a lovely lunch was servedwhile the participants interacted with eachother, discussing and evaluating the first daysession in the companionship of deliciousTurkish food, in the Swissôtel restaurant.

In the second session, Federico Torzopresented the main legal and tax aspects,recent trends and developments of foreigninvestments into other countries and fromother countries into Turkey.

Afterwards, Barbaros Karaahmet answered alot of questions by carrying out an impressivepresentation that informed the participantsregarding the amount of FDI, which is $174.7billion in US for the year of 2012, “the leadingnations of FDI”, export – import indexbetween US and Turkey, business entities forforeign investors, tax system, labour andimmigration law issues.

Carlo Mastellone laid stress upon the legalframework and the reasons for relatively low

The UIA in Istanbul

I Hakan ÇINAR

attractiveness of Italy in regards to FDI,commercial relationship and export – importindex between Italy and Turkey.

Later on, Michael Meyenburg made a secondpresentation with respect to businessinvestment in Austria with an EU perspective.

The coffee break between the sessions allowedthe discussions to carry on interactively. Afterthe break, Federico Torzo made a secondpresentation about the employment issuesapproaches when investing and/or divesting inItaly. He perfectly explained the employmentcontracts, the reasons for termination, and itsprocedure, the rights of the employees and theclosure of a business as per the Italian legislation.

Following this speech, Mr. Mansur PourRafsendjani made a presentation concerning theForeign Direct Investment from the Germanpoint of view. First, he underlined many intriguingfacts about Germany concerning the population,the community and the state government. Afteracquainting the participants with this interestinginformation, he stated why Germany is one ofthe most significant EU member states and howthis fact provides business safety for theinvestors. The taxation and social securitysystem, brands and IP protection, export –import index of Germany and establishingbusiness presence were also emphasizedthrough the German perspective.

Mr. Miguel Torres’s speech concerned foreign(Turkish) investment in Spain. In this speech, heinformed the participants that the Spanishcompanies invest more in Turkey, than Turkishcompanies invest in Spain and that the Turkishinvestment in Spain is regarded as being belowthe expectations of the Spanish authorities.

Eventually, the first day session ended after thebrilliant presentation of Angus Forsyth, aboutinvestment vehicles from Turkey into Hong Kongand through Hong Kong into China.

After the first day session, a dinner was held withthe attendance of the participants, in Adile SultanSarayı, which is a palace dedicated to reputableAdile Sultan, who was the sister of SultanAbdülaziz, 32nd Ottoman Sultan.

The second day of the seminar consisted inthree parts. The first section was moderated by

Prof. Dr. Berin Ergin. Mansur Pour Rafsendjani,first speaker of the second day session, gave apresentation concerning FDI in Ukraine. Thesecond speech was made by Sandeep Singh, onthe topic of Indian Law on FDI.

Later on, the session carried on with thepresentation of Pascal Petrel, entitled A CountryOpen to Foreign Investments and Talents, whichfinalized the first session.

After a coffee break, the second session of theday, moderated by Serhat Eskiyörük andconsisting of two different topics, began. The firsttopic of the session concerned the investmentsin Russia, led by the speaker of the panel MansurPour Rafsendjani. The second presentation wascarried out by Mr. Olufemi Sunmonu regardingthe investments in Nigeria.

The last session of the day and the seminar, wasmoderated by Ms Yonca Fatma Yücel with theparticipation of two meritorious speakers. Thefirst speaker, Mr. Philip Botha, informed theaudience regarding the FDI in South Africa andthe second speech related to the investments inPoland was given by Mr. Jacek Bak.

Throughout this informative seminar, all of thespeakers addressed the topic of Foreign DirectInvestments in/from Turkey. By relaying significantfacts and knowledge, each of the esteemedspeakers enlightened the participants from allaround the world, regarding FDI.

Discussing foreign investments in/from Turkeygave participants an opportunity to analyse,compare and contrast the conditions ofinvestment throughout the world. Specifically,the focus was on how Turkish investors andtheir lawyers approach investments in foreignbusinesses. Participants also had a chance todiscuss possibilities for future mutualcooperation with each other.

The goal of this UIA seminar on Turkey’s role asa hub for international investments was twofold:providing information on how to invest in Turkeyand give professionals a chance to presentsignificant arguments on FDI.

Hakan ÇINARUIA Deputy Director of Legal Training

Ankara, [email protected]

4 ■ 2013 I Bringing Together the World's Lawyers

¡El equipo del Juriste International le invita a redactar un artículo!

Envíenos sus proposiciones de artículosen español, francés o inglés sobre latemática que le interesa en el ámbito delos derechos humanos, de la prácticageneral del derecho o relativo a laprofesión de abogado.

Juriste International invites you tobecome an author!

Send us your proposed articles inEnglish, French or Spanish on a subjectof your choice in the fields of humanrights, substantive legal issues or thelegal profession.

Para más información sobre nuestra carta de redacción:

For further information concerning our guidelines:

Pour plus d’informations sur notre charte de rédaction:

Union Internationale des Avocats25, rue du Jour75001 Paris

France

Anne-Marie [email protected]

Tel : + 33 1 44 88 55 66Fax : + 33 1 44 88 55 77

L’équipe du Juriste International vous invite à devenir rédacteur!

Faites-nous parvenir vos propositionsd’articles en français, anglais ouespagnol sur les sujets qui vousintéressent en matière de droits del’Homme , de pratique générale du droitou sur la profession d’avocat.

Call for

articles


If you have never been to a UIA winterseminar, and there have been already eight, youcannot miss this one. It shall take place inBrunico (Italia!), from February 23 to March 1,2014. The snow promises to be great. The foodof course will be wonderful. The scientificprogram is spectacular. But, most important ofall, a very enjoyable group of UIA lawyers willmake for memorable times for sure.

For those of you that do not know about theformat of this special UIA seminar, the only oneof its type, let me say that it is the perfectcombination of legal learning, exciting sports,and friendly networking. Scientific sessions areheld in the early morning and late afternoon.Fortunately, there are no simultaneous sessionsgoing on so that at least you know where togo. And in between you can choose to work orgo on the slopes. Not an easy choice for manyUIA lawyers. And it lasts a week. If you havealready been to one you know why, butotherwise you can come up for as many daysas you want.

The title of the seminar this year is LegalChallenges for 2014, probably because it is goingto be a challenge to retain all the good legaladvice that you are going to get from yourcolleagues. We are going to hold sessions on awide variety of topics, with lawyers from verydifferent jurisdictions and experiences.Monday: M&A involving emerging markets(China, India, African countries, etc.); Tuesday:Contract law, Sales of Goods, and Family Law;Wednesday: International Compliance and RealEstate; Thursday: Litigation (Libor claims,deferred prosecution agreements and civillitigation, etc.) and ADR; Friday: AdministrativeLaw. Do you still want more? By the way, if youare willing to be a speaker, please contact theorganizing committee as soon as possiblebefore the panels are full.

The venue of the seminar is the Majestic Hotel.Its name says everything you probably need toknow. Let me add that it is a typical alpine 4*

hotel, with an extensive breakfast buffet, it hasa spa area also (I have never managed to usethese facilities in prior seminars), and veryattractive prices for the UIA. The ski resort iscalled Plan de Corones or Kronplatz, it boasts116 km of ski slopes, and on top there is the“Concordia 2000”, a huge 2,2 meters bell thattolls for peace on a panoramic plateau withfantastic views. The closest internationalairports are Bolzano and Innsbruck, but largernearby airports include Venice, Verona, Milan,Salzburg and Munich. There is also a trainstation with connections to and from Italy,Austria, and Switzerland.

If you want to know more about where youare going, it is interesting to note that Brunicois in the region of South Tyrol, that only becameItalian after the First World War. 82% of thepopulation actually speaks German, in spite ofthe fact that you are in Italy. This is why it is alsocalled Brüneck. The town is in the Dolomites,

which was declared UNESCO World Heritagein 2009 because of its beautiful mountainlandscapes, cliffs, rock pinnacles and deepvalleys. And the controversial Italian filmdirector Nanni Moretti, winner of the CannesGolden Palm in 2001 with the movie La Stanzadel figlio, was born there in 1953.

Whether you like skiing or not, if you love tobe a UIA lawyer this is the place to meet andget to know closely interesting colleagues andshare lively legal and non-legal discussions in aninformal setting. The organizing committee isreally looking forward to welcoming you inBrunico and sharing a very pleasant week withall of you.

Francisco RAMOS ROMEURamos & ArroyoBarcelona, Spain

[email protected]

The UIA in Brunico (Italy)

Why you must come to the 2014 UIA Winter Seminar in Brunico

I Francisco RAMOS ROMEU

23-01,2014

FEB-MAR

The UIA Competition Law Commission isdelighted to invite you to join us in Warsaw forthe “Living with competition law issues” seminarto be held on March 14-15, 2014.

The seminar is organised under the honorarypatronage of Dr Małgorzata Krasnodębska-Tomkiel, the President of the Polish Office ofCompetition and Consumer Protection, inpartnership with International League ofCompetition Law (LIDC), the National BarCouncil (NBC) and the Warsaw Bar Council(WBC), with the support of MLex (as themedia partner of the event) and the PolishAssociation of In-house Counsels.

This seminar will be a good opportunity toexchange and discuss views on the mostimportant recent developments in competitionlaw. The special focus of this event will be on practical aspects of competition lawenforcement and guidelines for doing businessin line with the law.

The seminar is structured around four main topics:

Assessing Competition Law Risks – How to do it in practice?

Competition law is rarely “black and white”. In asignificant number of situations, it is difficult to tellwhether certain behaviour is risk free from theantitrust perspective. Even if we are able preciselyto identify a risk, the big question remains – howto determine the extent to which it shouldinfluence business decisions.

During this panel, experienced in-house legalcounsels, external lawyers and business peoplewill discuss how they approach the problem ofassessing competition law risk and translating itinto business behaviour.

Managing Competition Law Risks –Compliance and Beyond

It is trite to say today that “compliance matters”.

Businesses understand the importance ofimplementing compliance programmes. Butthere is no “one size fits all” approach to buildinga compliance culture.

During this panel, we will invite in-housecounsels, external lawyers and business peopleto discuss what is required for complianceefforts to be really successful. We will also try toanswer an important question: Is compliance theuniversal solution to all antitrust problems? Orrather – do we need to go further than this and,if yes, what else can be done to eliminate or atleast minimise the antitrust risk?

Competition Law Today – What Is Hot And What Is Not

During this panel, each of the invited experts willbe given the opportunity to discuss one of the“hot issues” in today’s antitrust world. Theexperts will be asked not only to identify risks,but also – in line with the discussions held duringprevious panels – to give guidance to theaudience on how to assess a given risk ineveryday business practice and what should bedone at the practical level to minimise its impact.

Dealing with Antitrust Investigations

The world is not perfect. Even the bestcompliance program does not make a company100% “waterproof”.

During this panel, we will ask in-house counselsand external lawyers what to do when a businessis under investigation for a potential breach ofantitrust rules. Issues such as the use of leniencyapplications, settlements and commitments, andthe relationships between the administrative,criminal and civil regimes of liability and differentnational laws will be touched upon.

We are confident that our line-up of speakerswill inform, inspire and influence the thinking ofall delegates who attend this important event.You will hear leading law practitioners from

Polish and EU-based firms as well asrepresentatives of various business sectors whodeal with competition law in their everydaywork.

Warsaw, Poland’s main economic and businesscentre will be the host city of the seminar. Havingenormous investment potential, it is also one ofthe most important and fastest developingmetropolitan centres in the Central-EasternEurope.

The seminar is a must-to-attend event for alllawyers and in-house counsels who areinterested in providing high end legal advice thatis effective and meeting the business-rootedexpectations of our clients. Moreover, it isundoubtedly a unique opportunity to socialisewith colleagues from other countries and firms.

Aleksander STAWICKIPresident

of the UIA Competition Law CommissionWiercinski, Kwiecinski, Baehr SPK

Warsaw, [email protected]


The UIA in Warsaw

Living with Competition Law Issues

I Aleksander STAWICKI

14-15,2014

MARCH


The first and last words said on the moon, theenergy capital of the world, home to NASAand the world’s largest medical center,Houston is the 4th largest city in the UnitedStates and will be the venue for the 19th

meeting of the World Forum of MediationCentres. In 2012, Houston was voted the“coolest place to live” in the United States byForbes Magazine. With its world-class arts andsports scenes, vibrant economy, diversecommunity and renowned culinary delights,Houston is a great place to live and visit.

Since 1980, Houston has been at the forefrontof the modern mediation movement and ishome to some of the best and mostexperienced mediators in the world. In thatyear, it opened one of the first NeighborhoodJustice Centers in the nation and world,providing mediation services to Houston andits surrounding communities. When Texaspassed its Alternative Dispute Resolution Actin 1987, Houston, along with other Texas cities,became, and remains, one of the busiestjurisdictions utilizing mediation anywhere inthe world. Mediation has helped to significantlyreduce case loads for the courts and improvethe efficient administration of justice, oftenreducing the time necessary to get to trial byseveral years. While there are no statistics thatI know of, I would estimate that over the last25 years, there have been between 1,000,000

and 2,000,000 mediations conducted in Texas,with several hundred thousands of these beingin Houston, alone.

As such, the World Forum will be anopportunity to learn from and interact withmediators from Houston and around theworld who have conducted more than 20,000mediations and trained thousands of people inmediation. These include mediators fromvarious countries who have been at theforefront of the mediation movements in theirjurisdictions and are among the mostrespected and experienced mediators in thesecountries and beyond.

Come experience the uniquely interactive“Mining the Minds of Mediators” sessionswhere you will be able to ask the panelists andexperienced audience of mediators fromaround the world any questions you may haveabout mediation, whether you are justbeginning your practice or whether you havebeen mediating for years.

Other interesting sessions include Mediation:The Judicial Perspective Here and Abroad,International Mediation, and Energy Mediationin the Energy Capital, among others. Because ofthe number of very experienced mediators inHouston and Texas, the World Forum will beoffering, for the first time, a limited number of

attendees from overseas an opportunity toobserve a mediation, often with mediatorswho have themselves mediated severalthousand cases.

It is a rare opportunity not to be missed.

The World Forum also prides itself on the livelysocial activities that always accompany theprogram. Houston will be no different,including a night of authentic Mexican food andMariachi music and an evening of real TexasBlues and barbecue.

So come and join us as mediators from Texas,the United States and around the world gathertogether to share and compare theirexperiences, expertise and stories of mediationand its many facets. Observe Mediation: TexasStyle and see why mediation has flourishedthere. As always, the program will consider inits unique interactive format the topical issuesand best practices relating to mediation fromaround the globe.

We are looking forward to welcoming you toHouston!

Jeffry S. ABRAMSAttorney-Mediator

Houston, TX, United [email protected]

The UIA in Houston

The 19th UIA World Forum of Mediation CentresLearn from the Best in One of the Great Mediation Centres of the World

I Jeffry S. ABRAMS

21-22,2014

MARCH


The Foreign Investment Commission of theUIA will be organizing a seminar in Brazil about“Foreign Investments in Latin America”. Theseminar will take place in São Paulo, thebusiness capital of Brazil, the hub for foreigninvestment in Latin America, on April 11-12,exactly two months before the openingceremony of the World Cup 2014.

The typical two-day seminar will cover mostjurisdictions of the Latin American continent.Speakers from the continent will be presentingon the subject of doing business in theirrespective countries and also covering themost recent legislative changes that can eithermake it easier or complicate things for foreigninvestors.

We will have practising lawyers speaking aboutArgentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia,Ecuador, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay,Venezuela and Central America. As is wellknown, Latin America has always been the

destination for billions of dollars of foreigninvestment every year. We are not only talkingabout Brazil, one of the BRIC countries, but alsoabout other important economic realities suchas Mexico – a natural platform for doingbusiness with the US, Argentina and Colombia– the other two big economies of SouthAmerica, Bolivia and Peru – with Chinese yearlyrates of growth and Chile and Uruguay – withits friendly environment for foreign investment.Last, but not least Ecuador, Venezuela, Paraguayand Central America, which each present veryinteresting opportunities.

It is also important to note that the seminarformat will promote the debate betweenspeakers in a way that will enable a criticalreview of the environment for foreigninvestment in those jurisdictions. In thiscontext, we will have also the participation ofspeakers who are practising lawyers fromother continents. They will recount theirconcrete experience in doing business and

representing foreign clients in the Region. Wewill have also the testimony of someentrepreneurs and consultants.

The seminar, that will take place in one of thebest five star hotels of São Paulo, close toAvenida Paulista, will be a great occasion to beinformed and updated about the state of theart for foreign investment in the LatinAmerican continent. But not only that! It willbe a perfect occasion for networking withlawyers from all of Latin America, in a friendlyand happy environment that will be enhancedby charming Brazilian hospitality.

Eduardo Lorenzetti MARQUESUIA Deputy Director of Commissions

Campedelli, Marques e Zarif AdvogadosAssociados

São Paulo, [email protected]

The UIA in São Paulo

Foreign Investment in Latin America

I Eduardo Lorenzetti MARQUES

11-12,2014

APRIL


La commission droit du travail de l’UIAorganise un séminaire à Istanbul, le vendredi16 mai et le samedi 17 mai 2014.

Le thème de ce séminaire, « Le rôle dessyndicats et des comités d’entreprise dans la vied’une société », sera l’occasion de réfléchir surun sujet de grande actualité.

La participation des employés à la gestion del’entreprise qui a pour but d’assurer uneresponsabilisation des employés dans la prisede décision des entrepreneurs est devenue, denos jours, une réalité à laquelle les entreprisessont de plus en plus confrontées. D’ailleurs, ons’apercevra qu’une participation réelle desdifférents acteurs sociaux dans les décisionsde la vie économique de l’entreprise, serépercute sur le rendement de la société et,par conséquent, sur le bien-être des employés.

Afin de pouvoir discuter des différentessituations dans lesquelles les syndicats opèrentaujourd’hui, non seulement d’un point de vuelégal, mais aussi d’un point de vue économiqueet social, nous sélectionnons actuellement desexperts provenant du monde entier, pourregrouper, par rapport à ces problématiques,plusieurs hypothèses de travail, dansl’approche des différentes législations.

Le séminaire se focalisera surtout sur l’apportdes travailleurs à la vie de l’entreprise, à traversles syndicats et les comités d’entreprise, selonles différents systèmes juridiques.

Nous analyserons plus particulièrement les casdans lesquels l’information et la consultationdes syndicats et comités d’entreprises sontrequises, pour prendre des décisionsessentielles pour l’entreprise. Cela arrivesurtout dans les situations qui ont étéréglementées par des directives européennes,comme dans les cas de licenciementscollectifs, de cession d’entreprise ou debranche de l’activité, pour lesquels laparticipation des syndicats et comités

d’entreprise devient une condition delégitimité de la procédure.

Pour entrer dans le vif du sujet, nos expertsinternationaux interviendront sur le thème dela représentation syndicale, sous l’angle desdifférentes législations, ainsi que sur le thèmedes droits et des obligations des représentantssyndicaux, sans oublier de débattre desdifférentes façons de participer auxnégociations prévues par les contrats collectifset les effets de ces contrats sur l’employeur etses employés.

Le séminaire sera aussi l’occasiond’approfondir les changements les plus récentsdans le rôle social des syndicats et l’impact deces derniers sur la relation entre lemanagement et les syndicats et comitésd’entreprise.

Afin de donner une perspective pratique à lamatière traitée, nous aurons l’occasiond’écouter et d’apprendre, grâce à des avocatsde grande compétence tirée de leur propreexpérience, les principaux moyens utilisés dansla négociation avec les syndicats, dansdifférentes situations.

Nous aurons la chance de tenir ce séminairedans la charmante ville d’Istanbul, qui, centre

de l’empire byzantin, puis ottoman, a unelongue et riche histoire et qui constitue unvéritable trait d’union entre l’Europe et l’Asie,avec ses mosquées et ses musées quiregorgent de chefs-d’œuvre du passé, ainsi quesa cuisine à la charnière des saveurs orientaleset occidentales.

Mais Istanbul est aussi une ville qui est en trainde vivre une explosion économique et danslaquelle on peut retrouver des éléments, déjàpalpables dans certains pays, caractérisant lerapport, pas toujours amical, entre les sociétéset leurs employés. Ce séminaire offrira doncl’occasion aux participants locaux de s’inspirerd’expériences d’experts d’autres pays et depouvoir les utiliser pour rendre l’apport desreprésentants syndicaux des employés, auxentreprises locales, le plus efficace possible.

Nous espérons vous voir nombreux, à cetteoccasion, à Istanbul, les 16 et 17 mai 2014.

Federico TORZOPrésident

de la commission droit du travail de l’UIAStudio Legale Macchi Di Cellere Gangemi

Milan, [email protected]

L’UIA à Istanbul

Le rôle des syndicats et des comités d'entreprise dans la vie d'une société

I Federico TORZO

16-17,2014

MAY

macau[1]

October 31 - November 4, 2013

Opening ceremony

The opening ceremony took place at the Venetian Hotel. In his remarks, Jean-Marie Burguburu remindedus of the importance of Asia in today’s world economy: “The focus of the world is now pointing towardAsia, so we are delighted to be here in China.” Speaking about this year’s main theme, he added that Chinawas at the forefront of the fight against corruption. Therefore during the UIA congress, legal experts wouldincrease their knowledge about the corruption challenges that lied ahead.

Congress President, Jorge Neto Valente, addressed the audience in five languages stressing the multicultural character of the UIA and of Macau “a unique place in history and a harmonious mix of cultures.”

Florinda Chan, Macau’s Government Secretary for Administration and Justice as well as Mr. RimskyYuen, Secretary for Justice of Hong Kong emphasized on international cooperation in the legal context.

Law Firms speed-dating

Lawyers interested in being connected with law firms outside their own jurisdictions had been invited to present their law firm during a 3 min speed datingsessions dedicated to exploring opportunities of co-operation.

Résolution sur la

corruption

À l’issue du congrès, l’UIA a émis une résolution intitulée « corruption,transparence et justice » dans laquelle elle appelle les avocats, les États et lesorganisations internationales à agir pour faire progresser la lutte contre lacorruption.

Aux avocats et aux organisations représentatives de la profession, elle aparticulièrement demandé:

◗ qu’ils se forment et s’informent sur les mécanismes internationaux etnationaux existants pour la prévention et la lutte contre la corruption;

◗ qu’ils actionnent les mécanismes de contrôle des procédures en cas deconstat de violation des droits de l'homme et libertés fondamentales;

◗ qu’ils mettent leur expertise à disposition des États et organisationsinternationales ou régionales spécialisées dans la lutte contre lacorruption, notamment pour la création et l’évaluation périodique desinstruments juridiques adoptés en la matière.

Cette résolution fait suite aux débats animés du thème principal de cetteannée: « L’avocat face à la corruption » coordonné par Stéphane Bonifassi,Cabinet Lebray & Associés, Paris – France.

Florinda Chan, Macau’s Government Secretary for Administration and Justice

Jean-Marie Burguburu, UIA PresidentJorge Neto Valente, Congress President

Rimsky Yuen, Secretary for Justice of Hong Kong

4 ■ 2013 I Bringing Together the World's Lawyers18

UIA Congressmacau

[2]

Cong

rès

de l’

UIA

- 3

1 oc

tobr

e ›

4 no

vem

bre

2013

Losgalardonados

en el 57º congreso Durante el congreso de Macao, la Union Internationale des Avocats (UIA -

Unión Internacional de Abogados) premió a varios participantes por lacalidad de sus contribuciones científicas.

En la ceremonia de apertura del 31 de octubre, Delos Lutton, Presidente deHonor, entregó a Joel Fox (Jerusalén, Israel), el Premio Internacional JacquesLeroy – Mundo de los Negocios y Derechos Humanos, por su trabajo sobreel comercio justo Certifying the Certification - Fair Trade: how can we establishrules that are specific and realistic?

Durante la ceremonia de clausura, el 3 de noviembre, el Premio MoniqueRaynaud-Contamine al mejor informe científico del congreso fue entregadoa Francisco Ramos Romeu (Barcelona, España) y a Motoyasu Hirose (Tokio,Japón) en la categoría Joven Abogado.

Y, por primera vez, la UIA ha querido reconocer el trabajo realizado por sumejor comisión científica. Así, la Comisión Derecho Fiscal recibió a travésde su presidente, Tiago José Farça Marreiros Moreira (Lisboa, Portugal), lasfelicitaciones del jurado por todas las actividades que ha desarrollado a lolargo del año 2013.

Proyección de la

películaImpunidad

El 1 de Noviembre, tuvo lugar la proyección del documental “Impunidad”, realizado en 2012 porJuan José Lozano sobre los juicios iniciados contra paramilitares colombianos en los años 90. Losasistentes abrieron luego un interesante debate sobre la justicia transicional, el modo en que esta sepuso en práctica en Colombia y en otros países, sus riesgos y sus beneficios. Se plantearon variosinterrogantes especialmente sobre el lugar de las victimas en este tipo de procesos, en los que labúsqueda de la paz no parece compatible con la obtención de justicia, refiriéndose al recurso a lasjurisdicciones regionales o internacionales como eventuales soluciones a las fallas de lasjurisdicciones nacionales.

Francisco Ramos Romeu, Motoyasu Hirose, Joel Fox

Rassembler les avocats du monde I4 ■ 2013 19

macao[3]

31 octobre - 4 novembre 2013Ack

now

ledg

emen

ts

The UIA expresses its heartfelt thanks toCongress President Jorge Neto Valentefor his commitment to the success of this57th edition, and to the local organizingcommittee for its support.The UIA would also like to thank itspartners and exhibitors: Associaçãodos Advogados de Macau, FundaçãoMacau, Macau Governement Tourist

Office, CIMA – Corte Civil y Mercantil de Arbitraje, LexisNexis, ConsulegisEWIV, ALS Abogados, UGGC Avocats, Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, Ordre desAvocats de Paris, Swiss Chambers’ Arbitration Institution, FTM – AdvogadosAssociados & Consultores, LDA, IE Law School, INVEST Hong Kong, JurisFlow,Kamae, Thomson Reuters, Abreu International, Aspen Traduction, Fragomen,Cathay Pacific as well as its media partners: Conventus Publishing (Asia)Limited, El Mundo del Abogado, Iberian Lawyer, International Law Office, LaSemaine Juridique – Édition générale, Leaders League, Legal Today, Le Villagede la Justice, The Global Legal Post.

www.swissarbitration.org

S W I S S C H A M B E R S ' A R B I T R A T I O N I N S T I T U T I O N


Congreso de la UIAmacao

[4]

CongressWebsite

Available on the congress Website:

◗ Certificate of attendance,

◗ List of participants,

◗ Reports,

◗ Pictures of the congress.

www.uianet.org

Passation de

présidence

Lors de la cérémonie de clôture du congrès, Stephen L. Dreyfuss a reçu desmains de Jean-Marie Burguburu la Présidence de l'Union Internationale desAvocats. Moment clé du congrès, la passation de Présidence est unecérémonie importante dans la vie de l'UIA.

Dans son discours d'investiture, Stephen L. Dreyfuss a rappelé à l'assistance:« Dans tout ce que nous faisons, nous devons rappeler au monde que cene sont pas les intérêts des avocats que nous protégeons, mais les intérêtsd'une société gouvernée par l'État de droit plus que par la loi de la jungle. » Ila également présenté son programme pour l'année à venir: amener un plusgrand nombre de juges à s'impliquer dans les travaux de l'UIA et faire demême avec les juristes d'entreprises, afin que la profession d'avocat échangeet apprenne des autres professions du droit.

Jean-Marie Burguburu, Président sortant – Stephen L. Dreyfuss, nouveau Président de l’UIA

Stephen L. Dreyfuss, Président de l’UIA

Petit-déjeuner des femmes

UIA-ABA

Cette seconde édition du petit déjeuner des femmes UIA-ABAavait un air de speed dating! Grâce à une forte participation des femmes congressistes,de nombreuses cartes de visite ont été échangées en vue dedévelopper son réseau d’affaires dans une ambianceconviviale. De prochaines réunions sont prévues tout au long de l’annéedans différentes villes du monde. Renseignez-vous auprès de l’UIA.


Cong

rès

de l’

UIA

- 3

1 oc

tobr

e ›

4 no

vem

bre

2013

macao[5]

31 octobre - 4 novembre 2013

Congreso de la UIAmacao

[6]

Cong

rès

de l’

UIA

- 3

1 oc

tobr

e ›

4 no

vem

bre

2013

23

Tout d’abord, je vous invite à vous joindre àmoi pour remercier notre président sortant,Jean-Marie Burguburu, d’une présidenceexemplaire où il a parcouru le monde auservice de l’UIA, au service des avocats, etsurtout au service de l’État de droit.

Alors que tu assumes d’autres hautesresponsabilités en France, merci, Jean-Marie,pour tout ce que tu as fait pour l’UIA. Tu astout donné. Et merci de ton amitié et de l’aideque tu continueras à m’offrir tout au long dema présidence.

Antes de continuar, quisiera saludar a todosnuestros miembros de lengua española. Sinquerer imponerles el peso de escucharmehablar en su idioma durante más tiempo que lonecesario (lo que hago además con acentofrancés según me han dicho), rindo unmerecido homenaje a su compromiso connuestra asociación, un compromiso que serárecompensado sin duda por mi sucesor MiguelLoinaz y por nuestro congreso en Valencia en2015. Entretanto, quisiera manifestarlesformalmente mi deseo de que el español sigaocupando el lugar legítimo que le pertenece enla vida de la UIA.

D’une certaine façon, je termine aujourd’hui unlong parcours au sein de l’UIA, un périple qui acommencé à Strasbourg, il y a 23 ans, lors demon premier congrès, et qui ensuite m’aamené aux quatre coins du monde. J’aidécouvert, au début, une UIA extrêmement,voire exclusivement, francophone; en tant quecette créature rarissime, l’américainfrancophone, je m’en réjouissais. Mais ce soir,j’entame la présidence d’une UIA résolumentmultilingue et multiculturelle, forte dans sadiversité et fière de l’être! Si mes amis de l’UIAm’ont parfois appelé « le plus français des

Américains », je suis d’autant plus fier ce soird’assumer la présidence de la plusinternationale des associations internationalesd’avocats!

In American universities, the ceremony inwhich diplomas are awarded to graduatingstudents is called “commencement”. That’s anodd name for an event that marks the end of astudent’s university career. We call it that, ofcourse, because it really represents thebeginning of the student’s adult life – themoment when the student suddenly becomesa full-fledged member of civil society.

Though in a way, I am reaching the culminationof my UIA journey today, this is also the timewhen I begin its final chapter as the leader ofthis association for the coming year. This dayhas been many years in the making, and I wantto take this opportunity to tell you what I’velearned and what I intend to do at thiscommencement of my term as your president.

I want all of you to try to remember whatthings were like before you became a lawyer.This is much harder than it sounds, because Ithink you will find that you can’t remembermuch about what you thought about the lawand lawyers before you became one yourself.

In order to decide what I wanted to do asPresident of the UIA, I wanted to try toremember why I decided to become a lawyerin the first place. I wanted to remember what Ithought lawyers did, what role they played insociety, and why I wanted to become one ofthem.

I invite all of you to think back to those days.No matter what country you are from, whatlanguage you speak, what legal tradition you are

trained in – I think you will agree that there issomething that unites us all.

I think you all will agree with me, for example, thatnone of us chose the law for the money; there areplenty of other occupations whose economicrewards are far greater than those of the law.

And none of us chose the law in order to find aneasy, carefree way of life: when your profession isto take on the problems of others and makethem your own, carefree and easy does notdescribe your world.

And finally, none of us chose the law in order tohave a career that would permit us to work onlyfrom 9 to 5, from Monday to Friday – alwayskeeping evenings and weekends free for ourfamilies.

We knew then – and all of us certainly knownow – that the law places demands on us 24/7 (7 j/7, 24h/24) – and our families know it too – inmy case, my wife Lillian and our daughters Kateand Caroline, whom I am so proud to have withme here in Macau to share this moment. Theyhave sacrificed again and again so that I coulddevote myself to the UIA, and I want to thankthem publicly for their love and understandingover these many years.

So if it wasn’t for money, or for a carefree life, orfor a non-demanding career leaving lots of timefor our families, why in the world did any of uschoose the way of the law?

One reason, certainly, was for the intellectualchallenge. What makes our profession unique - ascompared for example to our colleagues in themedical profession – is that for us there are noclear, scientific answers to the questions we arefaced with every day.

Inaugural Speech of the 58th President of the UIA


macao[7]


Everything is a matter of degree, nuance, abalancing of competing interests in order toachieve an outcome through which, we hope,the parties will find justice.

But there are many other occupations that areintellectually rigorous and demanding. Whatwas it about the law that was unique, that madeeach of US want to become a lawyer ratherthan anything else?

La réponse est simple, mais universelle: il n’yrien de plus beau, de plus noble, que d’aider unautre être humain en détresse – que celle-cisoit pénale, financière, sociale ou émotionnelle.

Chacun de nous a choisi la profession d’avocatpour aider, pour protéger son prochain.

L’avocat est avant tout le bouclier du citoyen.Seul l’avocat s’érige entre son client etl’autorité arbitraire et impitoyable exercéecontre lui – que ce soit par l’État, ou par unepersonne physique ou morale.

En bref, nous sommes ceux qui empêchent lesplus forts de se prévaloir sur les plus faibles –n’est-ce pas cela qui distingue une sociétécivilisée de la jungle?

Nous en sommes tous convaincus, nous ensommes tous fiers, et nous avons raison del’être. Mais parfois cette fierté se détourne versl’orgueil, et quand nous nous félicitons tropnous perdons la bataille de communication, carc’est une vraie lutte pour nous de convaincrenos sociétés et nos concitoyens de la réalité etla sincérité de cette motivation bienfaisante quinous anime.

A recent poll in the United Statesdemonstrates this very well. The question:“please tell me how you would rate thehonesty and ethical standards of people inthese different fields” – very high, high, average,low, or very low. There followed a list of 21professions and fields of work.

The winners were predictable: in first placecame nurses: 85% of the respondents thoughtthat nurses’ level of honesty and ethicalstandards was high or very high. The nurseswere followed by pharmacists at 75%, andmedical doctors and engineers at 70%.

Some results, however, may surprise you: 58%of the respondents gave high or very highmarks for honesty and ethics to police officers– but only 52% gave the same rating tomembers of the clergy.

So I know you are all wondering: what aboutlawyers? What did these Americans think aboutthe honesty and ethics of lawyers? After all,ethics is central to everything we do, and wetalk about it all the time. Yet, no more than 19%of the Americans polled thought that the levelof honesty and ethics of lawyers was high or

very high. 42% thought our honesty and ethicswere “average”, and fully 38% of therespondents rated lawyers low or very low forethics and honesty.

Of course, the news was not all bad: with our19%, we came in slightly ahead of United Statessenators (14%) (and we all know from recentevents in the United States how well-respected

our senators are), and we also finished ahead ofstockbrokers (11%), members of the USCongress (10%) and, thank goodness, used carsalesmen (8%). Yet hard as it may be to believe,lawyers were considered to be less honest andethical than either bankers (28%) or journalists(24%).

Choquant? Pas vraiment. Comme l’a remarquéun confrère australien lors du dernier congrèsde l’American Bar Association à San Francisco,quand on arrive à l’hôpital se faire soigner, il n’ya pas deux équipes de médecins et

d’infirmières, l’une qui essaie de guérir lemalade et l’autre qui essaie de le tuer. Maisquand ils rentrent au palais de justice, nosconcitoyens n’ont pas forcément la mêmeimpression.

Nous le savons tous: quand un client a gain decause, ce n’est que son dû; quand il perd, c’estla faute de son avocat!

Seul l’avocat s’érige entre son client et l’autorité arbitraire et impitoyable exercée contrelui - que ce soit par l’État, ou par une personne physique ou morale.

macao[8]

Cong

rès

de l’

UIA

- 3

1 oc

tobr

e ›

4 no

vem

bre

2013


Nous avons trop tendance, parmi nous etentourés par nos pairs, à penser qu’il va de soique nous sommes dévoués à notredéontologie, que nous ne pensons qu’auxintérêts de nos clients, que nous n’existons quepour servir. Et c’est pourquoi nous nousautorisons à réclamer haut et fort que lesgouvernements et les pouvoirs politiquesrespectent nos droits, nos prérogatives, nosprivilèges.

Mais de l’extérieur, nous n’avons pas toujoursl’image que nous nous faisons de nous-mêmes.

After all, to the society at large, we are in a realsense the priests of a temple of our owncreation. If the law were not so complicated,citizens would not need lawyers to find a safeway through the legal maze. And this createsfear and doubt, and makes us the object ofmistrust and suspicion. We do not deserve it, atleast most of the time, but we cannot ignore it.

Because the consequences of society’scynicism and distrust of lawyers are grave.When national and international competitionauthorities want to open up the legalprofession to competition from non-lawyers,supposedly in the name of protecting theconsumer from high legal fees, it is because thepoliticians and the citizens they representbelieve that we are not serving our clients asmuch as we are serving ourselves. And whenlawyers, bars and international legalassociations such as ours complain about thesemeasures, we often play right into the image of

lawyers demanding special privileges for theirown sake – when in reality, the privileges wedemand are not for our own benefit, but forthe protection of those we represent.

And that is the cornerstone of my program forthe UIA in the coming year: in everything wedo, we must remind the world that it is not theinterests of lawyers we are protecting, butrather the interest of a society governed bythe rule of law rather than the law of thejungle. If we are truly to play our fundamentalrole as the shield of the “justiciable”, the person

answerable to the law – whether that personis a criminal defendant, a business owner, anemployee, a labor union, an immigrant or acorporation – we must remind ourgovernments and our peoples again and againthat we do this not for ourselves, but for thepeople;

Not for ourselves, but for our countries andour fellow citizens;

Not for ourselves, but for the survival of therule of law.

Within this context, my program for the UIAhas several parts:

First, in everything we do we must preserve,strengthen and especially communicate to theworld what makes us unique: we are aninternational, multilingual, and multiculturalassociation of lawyers united around ourcommitment to serve our clients and the causeof justice, not just ourselves.

Second, as lawyers we are part, but not theonly part, of the system of law by which ourcountries are governed. We should recognizethis. We should reach out to that other majorpart of the system of law – the judiciary – andbring them into the work we do. Theindependence of the judiciary, not merely therights of lawyers, must be a fundamental focusof our concern and our action around theworld.After all, what good is the independenceand autonomy of the lawyer if that lawyer must

practice before judges who are neitherindependent nor free: independent of thepolitical power of the state, and free to rendertheir decisions in accordance with the law, andonly in accordance with the law?

In too many of our countries, the judges andthe lawyers are permanent adversaries, whenin fact we should be the closest of allies –united in the struggle against anyone who seeksto make lawyers less than free and justice lessthan independent.

So we must bring judges into the work of theUIA – and along the way, we will learn valuablelessons about what kinds of arguments areconvincing and what kinds are self-destructive.We will learn more about how judges think,the constraints that worry them and thecourage that, all too often, they are called uponto display in the face of inadmissibleinterference with their independence.

And along with the judges, we must developbetter contacts with lawyers who work withincompanies and other businesses: in-housecounsel, juristes d’entreprise. In somecountries, they are lawyers; in some countries,they are juristes; but in all countries, they arelegal professionals who will bring much to thework of the UIA. Just as judges will help uslearn what arguments are effective and whatarguments are not, in-house counsel will helpus understand our clients’ perspective –because without a client and a client’s cause touphold, we lawyers are just an empty vessel.

And finally, as I said at the special meetings wehad here in Macau with our women colleagues,and with the lawyers for whom this is the firstUIA congress, I am committed to makingopportunities for leadership in the UIAavailable to everyone who is willing to work: towomen as well as men; to young lawyers aswell as the not-so-young; to lawyers from thedeveloping world as well as those from thedeveloped world; and to lawyers from Africa,Asia and South America, as well as those fromnorth America and Europe. Twenty-three yearsago, I sat where you are sitting this evening, andthe idea that I would one day be UIA presidentwas less than improbable. But the UIApresident of the year 2025 or 2030 is verylikely sitting among you tonight – and thatopenness and possibility are what make theUIA great.

No matter where we come from, no matterwhat language we speak, no matter what thelegal tradition in which we are trained, we havechosen this profession to help, to protect, todefend our fellow citizens.

That is why the UIA has defended, and willcontinue to defend, the cause of lawyersaround the world who are persecuted,prosecuted, imprisoned and sometimes killed –simply because they had the courage to do

[…] The privileges we demand are not for our own benefit, but for theprotection of those we represent.

macao[9]


what lawyers do: to speak the truth in the faceof overwhelming pressure to remain silent, toplace themselves between their clients and theimplacable and pitiless power arrayed againstthem, to place their own lives at risk to defendthose of their clients.

Most of us have never been called upon tomake that personal choice in our own lives andcareers as lawyers; but all of us are called uponto support the lawyers who, all around theworld, make that choice and suffer thoseconsequences every single day. And I pledge toyou tonight that the UIA will always supporttheir cause.

I conclude with what the French call “uneprofession de foi” – a statement of what Ibelieve in, and what will animate everything I doas your president. I believe that lawyers are aforce for good in the world. We should beproud of who we are, proud of what we do,and proud to devote ourselves above all to theprotection of those who have placed theirtrust in us, and sometimes, have placed theirvery lives in our hands.

Quelles que soient nos nationalités, quelle quesoit la taille de nos cabinets, quelles que soientles langues que nous parlons, nos originessociales, nos conditions économiques – l’UIAest, et sera toujours, la seule associationmondiale d’avocats où il y une place pour tous,un rôle pour chacun, une possibilité de leverson regard du quotidien et d’œuvrer ensembleà la réalisation de ces valeurs qui nous unissentdans notre diversité, ces valeurs qui sont sichères à nous tous: l’égalité de chacun devantune justice libre et indépendante, le droit dechacun à l’aide d’un avocat, et la préservation etl’expansion de l’État de droit, partout dans lemonde.

Vive la profession d’avocat, et vive l’UIA!

Stephen L. DREYFUSSPrésident de l’UIADiscours prononcé

lors de la cérémonie de clôture du congrès de Macao, le 3 novembre 2013

[email protected]

Your Excellency, Chief Executive of the MacauSpecial Administrative Region, Mr. Chui Sai On,Honourable President of the InternationalAssociation of Lawyers, Mr. Jean-MarieBurguburu,Honourable President of the Macau LawyersAssociation, Mr. Jorge Neto Valente,Distinguished guests and participants of theCongress,Ladies and Gentlemen:

On behalf of the Government of the MacauSpecial Administrative Region of the People’sRepublic of China, I would like to greet thedistinguish guests and to wish you a warmwelcome, especially for those who visit Macaufor the first time.

As you will have the opportunity to witness,Macau is an exiguous territory, being quiet andvibrant simultaneously combining its past withfuture, its tradition with modernity.

It is with great pleasure that the Macau SpecialAdministrative Region is hosting and sponsoringthis 57th Congress of the International Associationof Lawyers.

Proudly, we note that over 85 years of theestablishment of the International Associationof Lawyers, it is the first time that its Congress

is being held in Asia choosing the city of Macau.I am delighted to offer my congratulations tothe International Association of Lawyers andthe Macau Lawyers Association.

The multiculturalism of Macau has viableexamples such as in our being listed as the Cityof Heritage, internationally recognized by theUNESCO, and in the way of life and customsfor the populace.

It is also visible in the legal system, whichbelonging to the roman-german system of lawand being reformed in a strong and qualitativelegal tradition, has been compromising the localvalues and spirits, to be developed into asystematic enrichment of the legal order toreflect the harmony between a vast juridicalpatrimony of universal value and the sense oflocal characteristics.

Since the return of Macau to the Motherlandand under the Macau Basic Law theimplementation of the principles of “oneCountry, two Systems”, the “Macau governedby its people with a high degree of autonomy”,together with the efforts of the MacauGovernment and its people, our Region hassince then excelled a remarkable success,notably of the progresses at different levels,such as from the economy to the culture, from the promotion of education to the reinforcement of the social securitymechanisms.

The challenge of this success urges ourGovernment towards a constant surveillanceover the economic and social development andto adapt its institutions to the evolution of thesociety, in accordance with the aspirations ofthe population of Macau.

Regarding the perspective of Law, ourGovernment is safeguarding the principles and

macao[10]

Cong

rès

de l’

UIA

- 3

1 oc

tobr

e ›

4 no

vem

bre

2013

Secretary for Administrationand Justice of the MacauSpecial Administrative RegionRemarks Given for the Opening Ceremony of the 57th UIA Congress

I Florinda CHAN


values enshrined in our legal system, to adaptthe legal institutions namely to promote themodernization of the laws and other legalinstruments, to provide the means for abroader and stronger formation of the legaloperators, to create conditions for the accessand the achievement for a better realization ofjustice.

In an increasingly globalized world, professionalenrichment is largely sought through thesharing of experiences and knowledge and bydeepening relationship between people withdifferent countries, cultures, and backgrounds.In this regard, considering the decisive roles ofthe lawyers in our legal and judiciary system,whether in the prevention against the arising ofconflicts, or in the mediation of the differentinterests, or as vital players in thereinforcement of justice, the dialogues that thisCongress facilitates between the lawyers ofMacau and those of the rest of the world aresurely of special significance.

Last but not least, allow me to wish, on behalfof the Government of the Macau SpecialAdministrative Region, that the sessions of thisCongress may be a success and that drawingfrom the exchanging of experiences andexpertise amidst the professionals of differentbackgrounds, it may bring forth valuablecontributions for a harmonious developmentof a global system of Law and a betterapplication of Justice.

Thank you very much.

Florinda CHANSecretary for Administration and Justice

of the Macau Special Administrative Region Remarks given for the Opening Ceremony of

the Macau Congress, on October 31, 2013

Your Excellency the Chief Executive of theMacau SAR, Mr Chui; Friends of UIA;Distinguished Guests; Ladies and Gentlemen:

First of all, thank you for giving me this valuableopportunity to meet and address such adistinguished gathering of the internationallegal community. It is indeed my great pleasureand honour to join you at the openingceremony of this year’s UIA congress. The UIA,or International Association of Lawyers, iscertainly one of the most importantinternational organisations of lawyers. Thisyear’s congress is the first to be held in theterritory of China. This is a matter of significanceand I extend my warmest congratulations toboth the UIA and the Macau SAR.

Asia’s economic performance has beenremarkable in the past decade. Many Asiancities have become favourite destinations forcommercial activities, with China ranked as thetop choice. A natural consequence of thisphenomenon is the ever increasing demand forinternational legal and dispute resolutionservices in the Asian region. It is therefore evenmore important now than before to haveinformation sharing and exchange ofexperience amongst the legal communities ofthe Asian jurisdictions and the rest of theworld. The UIA congress is an importantplatform for such exchange and cross-fertilisation.

Over the years, Hong Kong and Macau havetaken on a unique role in connecting the Eastand the West. The two cities used to becolonies, but are now each a SpecialAdministrative Region of the People’s Republicof China, under the principle of “One Country,Two Systems”. Macau continues with hercontinental legal system, whilst Hong Kong

macao[11]


macao[12]

Cong

rès

de l’

UIA

- 3

1 oc

tobr

e ›

4 no

vem

bre

2013

remains and is the only common lawjurisdiction within the Greater China region.

I have no doubt that Hong Kong and Macauhave plenty of room for long-term co-operation in the legal context and beyond.Apart from international arbitration which Ishall mention later, the two places have joinedhands in projects which are of interest to theinternational legal community. For instance, theAsia Pacific Regional Office of the HagueConference on Private International Law,which was set up in Hong Kong in Decemberlast year, organised, jointly with theGovernments of Hong Kong and Macau, a verysuccessful workshop in Macau this March onthe 1993 Hague Intercountry AdoptionConvention.

As the Secretary for Justice of Hong Kong, I donot think I can resist the temptation to makeuse of this valuable opportunity to market oursteadfast policy to enhance the status of HongKong as the centre for international legal anddispute resolution services in the Asia-Pacificregion.

Apart from being an international financial andcommercial centre, Hong Kong provides afriendly environment for the international legalcommunity. This explains the presence of somany international law firms and registeredforeign lawyers in Hong Kong, which enables usto meet the needs of the international businesscommunity.

Hong Kong places great importance in theprovision of dispute resolution services, withspecial emphasis in international arbitrationand mediation. Our current ArbitrationOrdinance is based on the well-knownUNCITRAL Model Law. Our independent

Judiciary is highly pro-arbitration. We have thepresence in Hong Kong of leading arbitrationinstitutes and bodies, such as the Hong KongInternational Arbitration Centre, the AsiaSecretariat of the ICC International Court ofArbitration and the CIETAC Hong KongArbitration Center. Our enforcement networkis extensive. Arbitral awards made in HongKong are enforceable in over 140 jurisdictionsunder the New York Convention. In thisregard, may I reiterate our gratitude to theMacau Government in respect of theconclusion of the Arrangement ConcerningReciprocal Recognition and Enforcement ofArbitral Awards with Hong Kong in Januarythis year, which arrangement will becomeeffective before the end of this year.

As regards mediation, our new MediationOrdinance came into force this January.Further, in addition to the Hong KongMeditation Accreditation Association whichlooks after matters relating to theaccreditation of mediators, we have theSteering Committee on Mediation to overseethe development of mediation in Hong Kong.

Put shortly, apart from being a springboard toMainland China and the rest of Asia, HongKong has the necessary hardware and softwareto provide top-quality international legal anddispute resolution services. If our friends fromthe UIA are interested to know more, theHong Kong Department of Justice is more thanhappy to assist.

Coming back to the UIA, I am very delighted tonote Hong Kong’s enhanced interaction withthe association in recent years. I sincerely lookforward to fostering closer ties between HongKong and the UIA in the years to come.

On this note, I wish all participants of thecongress a joyful stay in Macau. I would alsostrongly recommend the participants to jointhe trip to Hong Kong scheduled for nextMonday, so as to experience its vibrant andcosmopolitan character. Last but certainly notleast, I also wish the UIA congress another yearof great success.

Thank you very much.

Rimsky YUEN Secretary for Justice of Hong Kong

Hong Kong, China

Reproduced with the autorisation of the Secretariat of Justice forHong Kong SAR. Text first publish in www.doj.gov.hk/eng/copyright/index.html.

Secretary for Justiceof Hong Kong

Remarks Given for the Opening Ceremony of the 57th UIA Congress

I Rimsky YUEN

Reunir a los abogados del mundo I4 ■ 2013 29

macao[13]

The 57th congress’s main theme, the role of thelawyer combating corruption, was the subject ofspirited presentations and discussion. Held on thefirst day of the conference (November 1, 2013) andchaired by Stéphane Bonifassi (France), the discussionspilled over into the Criminal Law Commission(November 3, 2013), chaired by Jerome Roth (USA).

The session’s 5 panels divided the issue into twoparts: indentifying/defining corrupt conduct, anddiscussing what lawyers can do to combat it.

Stéphane Bonifassi commenced the session with aseries of excerpts from his televised interviewwith Nicola Bonucci of the OECD. Mr Bonuccidescribed the comparatively recent phenomenonof the fight against corruption, commencing withmoney laundering legislation in individual countriesin the 1990s, followed by the OECD Convention(1997) and the Merida Convention (2004). It isonly since 2010 that fighting corruption has beena G20 priority. As was the case with many of theother speakers, he emphasised the scale andseriousness of the level of criminality involved.

Corruption is often seen as inevitable, or even asan effective way of doing business. However, in apowerful analysis of the dangers of acceptance ofcorrupt conduct, João Miguel Barros pointed outthat corruption was not only illegal and immoral;it is also bad for business, because it enables weakor incompetent businesses to flourish and reducesbusiness confidence. This was a theme to whichmany other speakers returned, such as Stephen D.Brodie (USA), who gave stark examples of thedamage to the Indonesian economy arising fromrampant and largely unchecked corruption,although some practical methods (such as creditcards for health check payments) were working.Concern about corruption in Indonesia had, inaddition, led to this being a significant issue in theforthcoming elections.

How is China combating corruption? ProfessorVincent Cheng Yang (Macau, China) providedsobering statistics on what he called the “massive”scope of corruption investigations in China. 84% ofthose investigated were charged, and 99% of thoseconvicted, with convictions at the highest level, themost recent being the Bo Xilai trial; Bo is one of32 officials at ministerial level to be investigated.This is in contrast to the picture painted byStephen D. Brodie (USA) of corruption inIndonesia.

What methods have been successful in combatingcorruption? Jerome Roth (USA) noted thesuccess of aggressive methods of investigationsuch as competing investigatory agencies, highfines and leniency for self-disclosure. MaximeDelhomme (France), Professor Yang (Macau,China), Sascha Grosjean (Germany) and DrElizabeth Thole (Netherlands) reviewed thesuccess of whistleblowers such as EdwardSnowden and personal data protection. LiuNanping (China) described how anonymous“netizens” in China used internet-basedinvestigative methods to expose corrupt officialssuch as “Brother Watch” (Yang Dacai), whosecorrupt activities were discovered afterphotographs of him wearing different expensivewatches were publicised on Weibo.

Two speakers dealt with areas where corruptionwas most harmful. Juan Sierra Hierro (Spain)described the essential nature of trust inarbitration proceedings, and how corruptioncould undermine the whole process, withpotentially serious ramifications for businessefficiency. The vulnerability of emerging Africancountries is another particularly sensitive area,where collusion in the financing of developmentprojects and bribes covering up illegal pollutionwere of particular concern to the Pan-AfricanLawyers Union.

What can lawyers do to combat corruption? Thespeakers in the last two panel sessions putforward three key messages: compliance, co-operation between countries, and cleverness.

UIA President of Honour Pascal Maurer(Switzerland) considered the key word wascompliance, a view endorsed by Mansur PourRafsendjani (Germany), who pointed to howinternal and external strategies were necessaryfor law firms dealing with corruption issues.Professor Yang (Macau, China) consideredinternational co-operation was essential; theUNCAC has 168 members, including China, andinteractions between countries were essential incombating a crime without borders. Liu Nanping(China) described his own “trick or treat” methodnecessary to deal with the “guanxi” that onlybecomes corruption in China when it is misused.Lawyers have to rely upon their professional andpersonal skills to outwit corrupt officials.

In summarising the session’s themes, Judith Gibson(Australia) noted that the skills UIA conferenceparticipants learned and discussed with each othercould provide vital tools and contacts forcombating corruption.

The discussion was continued in the Criminal LawCommission on November 3, 2013, where a paneldiscussion led by Jerome Roth (USA) reviewedthe adequacy of legislation for prosecutingpayment of bribes to foreign officials, ranging fromsuccesses (such as the UA and Canadianprosecutions following the UN “Oil for Food”scandal) to failures (such as Australia’s dismalrecord of one successful prosecution).

Judith GIBSONDisctrict Court of New South Wales

[email protected]

Corruption and the Lawyer

Main Theme of the 57th UIA Congress

I Judith GIBSON


macao[14]

Cong

rès

de l’

UIA

- 3

1 oc

tobr

e ›

4 no

vem

bre

2013

The 57th UIA Annual Congress held fromOctober 31 to November 3, 2013 in Macau wasa truly unforgettable experience, not only from aprofessional perspective, but also from a personalone. As a young Portuguese trainee lawyer whohas been living and working in Macau for over ayear and a half now, part of my training consistsin attending seminars and conferences that the Macau Lawyers Association (AAM) deemsrelevant for our legal education, and preparingthe respective reports. I must confess thoughthat when the AAM first declared that it wouldbe mandatory for trainee lawyers to attend, atleast, one session in the morning and anothersession in the afternoon every day during thecongress, I was not exactly thrilled by the idea ofspending my whole weekend writing reports.However, all the sessions I attended were sointeresting and thought-provoking that I am verythankful that Jorge Neto Valente (President ofboth the AAM and the 2013 UIA Congress)decided to make it mandatory for us to attendthe sessions. Indeed, my only regret was notbeing able to attend more than one session atthe same time. This article is thus based on myreports of the sessions, as well as on my personalexperience of the social events I attended.

Even though the congress only officially began onOctober 31, two related events took place onthe two previous evenings. Fortunately, a fewother trainee lawyers and I were invited toattend both of them, most likely because weoffered to help out as volunteers during thecongress. Both events took place at the MacauMilitary Club, which traces its roots back to 1870when it was founded as a private cultural andrecreational association for Portuguese armyofficers. On October 29, there was a dinner ofthe Association of Portuguese Speaking Lawyers(UALP), an association created in 2002 toenhance the strong ties which have always

existed between lawyers from Angola, Brazil,Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Macau, Mozambique,Portugal and São Tomé and Príncipe. Today theUALP represents over 600,000 lawyers andessentially aims to promote co-operationbetween its members and the various LawyersAssociations. At this dinner, I had the opportunityto meet many distinguished guests, of whom Iwould highlight António Marinho e Pinto(Bâtonnier of the Portuguese Lawyer Association(OAP) and President of the UALP) and alsoFernando Tonim (Representative of the UIA forthe Portuguese Speaking African Countries).

On October 30, there was the UIA ExecutiveCommittee dinner, where I had the rare pleasureto sit at the same table and enjoy the companyof Marie-Pierre Richard (Executive Director) andMarie-Christine Cimadevilla (Director of theRule of Law Project). Before dinner actuallystarted, I had already had the honour of beingintroduced to Jean-Marie Burguburu (nowImmediate Past President) and Miguel Loinaz-Ramos (now President Elect). Following a verypleasant dessert, Jorge Neto Valente and Jean-Marie Burguburu both made speeches, stressingthe importance of arriving at the OpeningCeremony before 6 pm, as the MacauGovernment Authorities were going to bepresent and the Ceremony would imperativelyhave to begin at 6 pm sharp.

The following day, the trainee lawyers whovolunteered to help out during the congress hada very busy time assisting all participants toregister at the Conrad Macau Hotel. When theregistration counter closed around 5 pm, wewent straight to The Venetian Macau, where theOpening Ceremony was going to take place. Wewere asked to welcome the guests as theyarrived and help them find their seats. It is onlyfair to say that we were welcoming la crème de la

A young “Macaneselawyer’s” experience

I Nuno SOARES DA VEIGA

UIA Young Lawyers

The Young Lawyers committee of the UIA heldits inaugural committee meeting during therecent Macau congress.

The committee meeting was one of the bestattended of the congress with 40-50 delegatesfrom a total of 19 different countries.

The session, led by Annmarie Carvalho of theUK, included Agustina Loinaz of Uruguay,Hansjörg Frenz of Germany and SamanthaDavies of the UK presenting on the topic of“Access to the legal profession: internationalregulation and development perspectives”.

These thought-provoking presentationssparked off a very interesting debate amongstthe delegates. One of the most interestingthemes included a discussion about whetherthe rising costs of studying to become a lawyer(in terms of a degree and the subsequentprofessional qualification) prevents thosetalented potential lawyers who are not fromreasonably wealthy backgrounds from enteringthe profession. The delegates agreed that morediversity in the profession in terms ofbackground, race, gender, etc., would be apositive development and that anything thatcould be done to encourage this could only bea good thing.

On a similar theme, access to justice wassomething of a hot topic amongst thedelegates and it was encouraging to hear thatmany of the delegates regularly carry out ‘probono’ or not-for-profit legal work in theirrespective jurisdictions, alongside conductingtheir own client work. From a purely UKlawyer’s perspective working in a jurisdictionwhere sweeping cuts to legal aid have beenbrought in this year, the enthusiasm for probono work amongst young lawyers, whorepresent the future of the profession, isheartening to see.

Annmarie CARVALHOFarrer & Co.

London, United [email protected]


crème of the world’s lawyers, as well as Macau’stop judges, prosecutors, law professors andother legal professionals. By mere coincidence, Iwelcomed Paulo Lins e Silva (UIA President ofHonour) who surprisingly recognized my familyname, as he had met my grandfather VascoSoares da Veiga (former Vice-Bâtonnier of theOAP) during a congress held years ago in BuenosAires. I must say that this encounter made mefeel proud that I was, at least to a small extent,following my grandfather’s footsteps. At around 6 pm, all guests of honour had arrived, includingthe Chief Executive of the Macau Government,as well as the Macau and Hong Kong Secretariesfor Justice, and the Opening Ceremony finallybegan. In the spirit of UIA tradition, theCeremony began with Jorge Neto Valente andJean-Marie Burguburu welcoming all participantsand wishing them successful sessions. Afterwardsthere were several performances on stage andthe Ceremony was followed by a welcomecocktail at The Four Seasons Hotel pool, duringwhich I was able to meet other young lawyers,such as Martin Pradel and Avi Singh, with whomI became very good friends.

The first day of the congress began with the mainsession. This year’s topic was “Corruption andthe Lawyer”. It surely did not come as a surprisethat the UIA chose this issue as the topic for themain theme, as the fight against internationalcorruption has been a major issue for theinternational community since the OECDConvention was signed in 1997. Manydistinguished speakers participated in thissession, including Nicola Bonucci (member of theOECD) and Juan Serrado Hierro (member ofCIMA – Corte Civil y Mercantil de Arbitraje). In hispresentation, Juan Serrado Hierro stated that agood example of the international effort andconcern with the fight against corruption is theCriminal Law Convention on Corruption(CLCC), which was opened for signature inStrasbourg on January 27, 1999, and entered intoforce on July 1, 2002 (upon being ratified by 14States).As of November 26, 2013, the CLCC hasbeen ratified by 45 States. Germany,Liechtenstein and the US, however, have thus faronly signed, but not ratified, the CLCC. Thesignatory States are convinced of the need topursue, as a matter of priority, a commoncriminal policy aimed at the protection of societyagainst corruption, including the adoption ofappropriate legislation and preventive measures.Therefore, the CLCC establishes that States are

required to provide for effective and dissuasivesanctions and measures, including deprivation ofliberty that may lead to extradition. Moreover,the CLCC incorporates provisions concerningaiding and abetting, immunity, criteria fordetermining the jurisdiction of States, liability oflegal persons, the setting up of specialised anti-corruption bodies, and protection of personscollaborating with investigating or prosecutingauthorities.

I did not stay until the end of the Main Sessionbecause I wanted to attend a very interesting butalso unusual session, namely “Speed Dating forlaw firms”. This session was chaired by Fred Kan(Regional Secretary of the UIA for Asia) and had thefollowing description: “Lawyers interested to beconnected with law firms outside their ownjurisdiction are welcome to go on stage to speakfor 3 minutes to introduce themselves. Mustregister first before allowed to go on stage”.Many lawyers from different jurisdictions hadregistered to take part in this session, for thiswas, without a doubt, one of the bestopportunities for networking during the entirecongress. Towards the end of the session allregistered lawyers had made their presentation,but as there were still 5 minutes remaining untillunch time, Fred Kan asked the audiencewhether anyone else wanted to take theopportunity.At that moment, a curious sensationtook over me, fueled perhaps by the fact that nolawyer from Macau had taken the stage, and Iunexpectedly raised my arm. When Fred Kan

pointed in my direction, I even had to lookbehind my back to make sure he was not callingsomeone else. As I was making my way to thestage I was slightly nervous, but by the time I hadfinished a 3-minute presentation about my lawfirm (Rato, Ling, Vong, Lei & Cortés – Advogados,an IFLR1000 Top Tier Firm established in Macausince 1985 and one of the sponsors of thecongress) and the audience was clapping, I feltquite relieved and glad that I had seized theopportunity.

Following an interesting lunch, where I had theopportunity to meet like-minded young lawyersfrom China and explore possible co-operationopportunities, I decided to attend a sessionconcerning “Infrastructure Buildings andConstruction Projects”. The speakers in thissession analysed the business opportunitiesavailable for overseas contractors in Hong Kong,Macau and Taiwan, as well as some of thechallenges faced by contractors when doingbusiness in these three territories. Moreover, theparticipants described the major constructionprojects that are currently under way in theabove-mentioned territories, of which I wouldhighlight the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge(HZMB), a proposed mega-size sea crossinglinking Hong Kong, Zhuhai and Macau. Theconstruction of the HZMB began in December2009 and is expected to be completed by 2016.As for the construction cost of the HZMB, thetotal contribution is expected to reachRMB¥15.73 billion.

macao[15]


33

macao[16]

Cong

rès

de l’

UIA

- 3

1 oc

tobr

e ›

4 no

vem

bre

2013

The working sessions of the first day of congresscame to an end around 5:30 pm. The first day ofcongress, however, was far from over and one ofthe most exciting social events was about to takeplace that evening: the informal reception andcocktail dinner. This dinner was held at theoutdoor plaza of the Macau Tower, which wasinaugurated in December, 2001. The Macau SkyTower is 338m high and besides a 360° viewingdeck, it features the world’s highest bungee jump.Not surprisingly, one of the performances heldincluded a man jumping from the top of theMacau Tower and unfolding a banner thatannounced “Welcome to the 57th UIA congress”in both English and Chinese. Equally amazingwere the stunning fireworks launched from aboat that was crossing the river. During thedinner I had yet another chance to meet manylawyers, but whom I was absolutely delighted tomeet that evening was Jacqueline R. Scott (Co-Director of Human Rights and Protection of Lawyers, member the UIA ExecutiveCommittee). The night ended at China Rouge,the most prestigious club in Macau, with a partyorganised by the Law Society of Hong Kong.

On the second day of the congress, I started byattending a session concerning Banking Law/TaxLaw/Mergers and Acquisitions/Foreign Investment.This session, which was chaired by Pedro Rebelode Sousa (SRS Advogados, RL) and includedpresentations regarding foreign investments intoand from China, was particularly interestingbecause the presentations were made not onlyby lawyers, but also by top bankers. Indeed, oneof the most fascinating presentations was madeby the CEO of Banco Nacional Ultramarino(BNU), Pedro Oliveira Cardoso. BNU, whichstarted its operations in Macau back in 1902, isthe oldest bank in the territory and, as acommercial and note-issuing bank, it has stronglycontributed over the past century to theeconomic and social development of Macau.Pedro Oliveira Cardoso stated that foreigninvestors aiming to invest in Macau can do sothrough BNU, which provides a wide range ofcommercial banking services, including deposittaking, consumer and mortgage loans, tradefinancing, fixed assets financing and investmentproducts. Already under his leadership, BNU’sbusiness expanded by 19.1% in 2012. Moreover,net interest income was 8.2% higher than theprevious year, amounting to MOP$434.9 million,an increase of MOP$32.9 million over theMOP$402 million recorded in 2011.

Later that day, I obviously decided to attend theYoung Lawyer’s session, which focused on thedifferent frameworks regulating the access to thelawyer profession. The panel was chaired byAnnmarie Carvalho and included SamanthaDavies, Augustina Loinaz, and also HansjörgFrenz. Following every presentation, there wasalways a thought-provoking discussion betweenthe panel and the audience regarding the prosand cons of each regulation and perspectives fordevelopment. Joana Alves Cardoso, a fellowtrainee lawyer in Macau, and I even had thechance to discuss the pros and cons of theAAM’s Regulation on the Access to the LegalProfession.

Like on the previous day, the working sessionscame to an end around 5:30pm, but the day wasonly getting started. The UIA Gala Dinner, themost prestigious social event of the entirecongress, was going to take place that evening atthe Hotel Grand Lisboa. This emblematicbuilding, inaugurated in 2006 and located in theheart of Macau, is shaped after a lotus leaf and isthe highest building in Macau. I must confess thatI was not at all expecting to attend the GalaDinner, as the price of the dinner was quite high.Fortunately, the very generous Partners at Rato,Ling, Vong, Lei & Cortés – Advogados decided toinvite all the associates and trainee lawyers forthe Gala Dinner. It was a splendid dinner, full ofglamour, wonderful speeches and amazingperformances on stage, including Jean-MarieBurguburu’s interpretation of an opera.

On the third and final day of the congress, Istarted by attending a session concerning FamilyLaw. Various presentations were made focusingon the pre-nuptial agreements and maritalregimes in various jurisdictions. Joana AlvesCardoso made quite a remarkable presentationabout pre-nuptial agreements and maritalregimes in Macau, particularly taking intoconsideration that she had only been invited as aspeaker on the previous day. In the afternoon, Iopted to attend the Human Rights/Labour Lawsession. During this session, which was a veryintense one, I realised that there is still so muchto be done in relation to improving basic humanrights throughout the world, not only in lessdeveloped countries, but also in the developedones. In fact, slavery and forced sex are stillimposed on foreign women that desperately tryto find jobs in the US (but the same could be saidabout Europe or China) and this is something

that should outrage each and every lawyer in theworld and something against which we must fightwith determination. Like someone said duringthe session, “Human rights are not here to makeus go to heaven; they exist to prevent us fromgoing to hell”.

The congress came to an end that evening withthe Closing Ceremony held at the ConradMacau hotel. The highlight of this Ceremony wasthe transfer of the presidency of the UIA fromImmediate Past President Jean-Marie Burguburuto the current President Stephen L. Dreyfuss,who is the fourth American lawyer to becomePresident of the UIA. Moreover, the MoniqueRaynaud-Contamine Prize for the best scientificreport at the congress was awarded to FranciscoRamos Romeu and to Motoyasu Hirose, in theYoung Lawyers’ category. Also for the first time,the UIA decided to honour the work done by itsbest scientific commission, which was the TaxLaw Commission. Via its President, TiagoMarreiros Moreira (Vieira de Almeida &Associados, Sociedade de Advogados, RL), thecommission received the jury’s congratulationsfor all the activities it had undertaken through theyear 2013.

In the end, it is time to congratulate once againboth the UIA and the AAM for this remarkablecongress, but also the “invisible” work of all thetranslators who translated most of thepresentations into English, French, Spanish,Portuguese and Chinese and thus made itpossible for lawyers from all around the world totake part in the working sessions. Since itsfoundation in 1927, the UIA has always held aunique place amongst professional lawyers’associations, not only because it is the oldest, butalso thanks to its international, multi-cultural andmulti-lingual dimension; and after this year’scongress, the UIA made me feel very proud tobe working hard in order to become a lawyer, forit is the most honorable profession one canaspire to achieve in life.

Nuno SOARES DA VEIGARato, Ling, Vong, Lei & Cortés - Advogados

Macau, SAR, [email protected]


Droits de l’Homme et de la DéfenseHuman Rights and Protection of LawyersDerechos Humanos y de la Defensa


PreambleTrayvon Martin could have been me.1

Those words, first uttered by President BarackObama, have now become iconic whendiscussing the shooting death of 17-year-oldTrayvon Martin. The masses watched theproceedings and awaited the fate of GeorgeZimmerman, the 29-year-old man charged inthe murder of Martin. With many bothintellectually and emotionally invested in thecase’s outcome, it would take the jury a littlemore than 16 hours to deliberate and comeback with a ruling – a ruling that came asdissatisfaction to many who desperately soughtjustice for the family of the slain teen.

On July 13, 2013, a six-woman jury acquittedGeorge Zimmerman of the murder of TrayvonMartin – in large part thanks to poorprosecutorial work by the State of Florida andthe state’s broad self-defense provisions. Thus,this article will explore the Zimmermandecision from this context. Particularly, thisarticle will consider the jury instructions andexamine Florida’s state laws on self-defensecontained therein, including what makes akilling “justifiable” under Florida self-defenselaw. As part of Florida self-defense law, thisarticle also will touch upon the Florida’s “standyour ground” law and explore this conceptwithin the grander scheme of American self-defense jurisprudence.

“We the People…”The Case of the

State of Florida v. George Zimmerman

I The Facts: What Happened?

While serving a ten-day suspension fromschool in February of 2012, Trayvon Martin, a17-year-old African-American student, wasvisiting his father in Sanford, Florida. GeorgeZimmerman, who was a 29-year-old part-timestudent and neighborhood watch captain at

the time of the incident, lived in Sanford at theRetreat at Twin Lakes townhouse complexwhere the shooting occurred.

On the night of February 26, Zimmerman waspatrolling his gated townhouse development.At 7:09 pm, Zimmerman called the non-emergency police-response line from hisvehicle to report a “suspicious person”(Trayvon Martin) in the neighborhood. Overthe phone, Zimmerman was instructed by thedispatcher simply to keep an eye on Martin andto not approach the teenager. Zimmerman,however, disregarded these directives andpursued Martin.

The phone call to police ended at 7:13 pm.Moments later, neighbors reported hearinggunfire. Law enforcement arrived on the sceneat 7:17 pm, four minutes after Zimmermanended his call with police. However, by the timethey arrived, Zimmerman had already shot andkilled Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman, showinginjuries he alleged came from his altercationwith Martin, claimed he killed the teen in self-defense, despite the fact that Martin himselfwas unarmed.

Unable to disprove Zimmerman’s account ofthe events that led to Martin’s death, the Stateof Florida (“State”) was reluctant to file anycharges against Zimmerman. However, as thecase gained more notoriety in the nationalmedia this changed. Pundits and political figures,including President Obama, weighed in on the issue. A petition calling forZimmerman’s arrest also formed and surpassed1.3 million signatures. Rallies began to take placein cities across the country calling for justice tobe served for Trayvon and the Martin family. Itwould take more than a month for the State tocharge Zimmerman with second-degreemurder. While the charge ameliorated many, asdiscussed below, this charge would be the firstof several legal and evidentiary tactical errorsthe State would make in its case against GeorgeZimmerman. This, in addition to the State’s

justification and self-defense laws, ultimately ledto Zimmerman’s exoneration.

I The Trial: Prosecution DoomsIts Case from the Start

Second-Degree Murder versusManslaughter

With an all-female jury empaneled, the case ofState of Florida v. George Zimmerman began on June24, 2013. Already with limited facts, theprosecution – from the outset – placed a nearlyinsurmountable burden upon itself by chargingZimmerman with second-degree murder, insteadof the lesser crime of manslaughter. In Florida, tofind a defendant guilty of second-degree murder,the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubtthat the defendant committed an act imminentlydangerous to another that demonstrates a“depraved mind” without regard for human life. Toshow that an act is “imminently dangerous toanother and demonstrating a depraved mind,” theState must establish three things:

1) That the act is one in which a person ofordinary judgment would know isreasonably certain to kill or do seriousbodily injury to another; AND

2) That the act is done from ill will, hatred,spite or an evil intent; AND

3) That the act is of such a nature that the actitself indicates an indifference to human life.

Manslaughter, on the other hand, only requiresthe State to show beyond a reasonable doubtthat the defendant intentionally committed an actor acts that caused the unjustifiable orinexcusable death of another. Obviously,compared with second-degree murder thisthreshold is a much easier burden for the State tomeet, because there is no element that requiresproof of ill will, hatred, spite, or evil intent.

The Shot Heard Around the World

The Self-Defense Case in the Trial of the State of Florida v. George Zimmerman

I Emmanuel TEDDER

In the Zimmerman case, the difficulty for theprosecution in meeting its burden arose fromhaving to prove the second prong. The Statepresented no conclusive evidence that showedbeyond a reasonable doubt Zimmerman actedout of hate, ill will, or spite. Moreover,Zimmerman – wisely – elected not to testify,and thus did not allow the State to elicittestimony regarding his state of mind at thetime of the shooting. With no sure evidencelinking Zimmerman to ill, hateful, spiteful, or evilintent, the State found itself fighting a losingbattle from the start, which only became moredifficult as its case-in-chief continued.

Prosecution Witnesses Were Poorly Prepared

In addition to “overcharging” Zimmerman, theprosecution also put on a poor case-in-chief,particularly in the witnesses they presented.Throughout the trial, it was obvious that theState did not prepare its witnesses properly.For example, when taking the stand more thanhalf of the State’s witnesses confirmedZimmerman’s account of what happened thattragic night. Other than Martin’s friend RachelJeantel, no prosecution witness reallychallenged the defense’s version of whathappened that night. Additionally, otherwitnesses for the State, such as the State’smedical examiner, appeared far less polishedthan their defensive counterparts. All-in-all,

witnesses that could have been great for theState seemed to leave the jury with far moredoubt and questions – and in a case where theburden on the State is to prove each elementof the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, thistoo was damning.

Within the Jury Instructions2: An Analysisof Justifiable Homicide, Use of Force, and“Stand Your Ground” Self-Defense

The crux of Zimmerman’s defense rested uponthe jury believing that he shot and killedTrayvon Martin in self-defense. In order tosupport this, Zimmerman’s team had to

convince the jury that both the killing of andthe use of deadly force on Martin wasjustifiable under the law. In her instructions tothe jury, Judge Debra S. Nelson used much ofthe language of Florida’s justifiable homicidestatute (Fl. St. § 782.02) and use of deadly forcestatute (Fl. St. § 776.013) to direct the jury asto what the law was and the jury’srequirements under it.

Justifiable Homicide and Use of Deadly Force

In Florida, the killing of a human being isjustifiable and therefore lawful under one ofthree conditions:

1) If necessarily done while resisting anyattempt to murder such a person; OR

2) If necessarily done while resisting anyattempt to commit a felony upon suchperson; OR

3) If necessarily done while resisting anyattempt to commit a felony in any dwellinghouse in which such person shall be.

While somewhat broad, Florida’s justifiablekilling provision is no broader than thejustifiable homicide statutes of othercomparable states. For example, underCalifornia law (Cal. Pen. Code § 197) a homicide

is justifiable when committed by any personwhile resisting any attempt to murder a personor commit a felony upon a person. Californiasimilarly provides a justifiable homicide defenseif the killing was done while in defense of thehome or property.

Additionally, in considering Zimmerman’s self-defense claim, the court also instructed thejury to deliberate as to whether Zimmerman’suse of deadly force in self-defense was justified.In Florida, it is a defense to second-degreemurder and manslaughter if the death of aperson resulted from the justifiable use ofdeadly force. A person is justified in using

deadly force if he reasonably believes that suchforce is necessary to prevent imminent deathor great bodily harm to himself. In decidingwhether Zimmerman was justified to usedeadly force, the jury must judge him by thecircumstances by which he was surrounded atthe time. The danger itself need not have beenactual; simply the appearance of the dangermust have been so real that a reasonableperson would have believed that the dangercould only be avoided through the use ofdeadly force. This is key, because it renders theactual danger irrelevant. The jury need onlydecide whether a reasonable person, underZimmerman’s circumstance, would actuallybelieve that the danger from Martin was real. Infinding for Zimmerman in this case, the juryclearly accepted that, given the circumstances,it was reasonable for Zimmerman to actuallybelieve his life was in danger during hisaltercation with Martin. Because of this, the useof deadly force – at least in the minds of the sixon the jury – was justified.

“Stand Your Ground”: Not Just a Florida Law

Probably the most famous fixation to comeout of the Zimmerman trial was the craze overFlorida’s infamous “stand your ground” law.However, it is important to note that thedefense never raised the “stand your ground”defense as justification for Zimmerman killingMartin. In fact, Zimmerman waived his right toa “stand your ground” pretrial immunityhearing and decided instead to try the case asone of self-defense.3

However, while the defense elected not to use“stand your ground” in the formal sense thejudge nevertheless instructed the jury on thelaw when discussing the defense of justifiableuse of deadly force. In Florida, if a person isattacked in a place where he or she has a rightto be while engaged in a lawful activity, he orshe has no duty to retreat. In fact, according toFlorida law (Fl. St. § 776.013(3)), he or she “hasthe right to stand his or her ground and meetforce with force, including deadly force if he orshe reasonably believes it is necessary to do soto prevent death or great bodily harm.”Traditionally only extended to the bounds ofone’s home, Florida’s law extends “stand yourground” and the use of deadly force doctrinesto nearly any and all lawful activity.


With no sure evidence linking Zimmerman to ill, hateful, spiteful, or evil intent,the State found itself fighting a losing battle from the start, which only becamemore difficult as its case-in-chief continued.

Rassembler les avocats du monde I4 ■ 2013

While Florida’s “stand your ground” law hascome under fire in the aftermath of Martin’sdeath, the “stand your ground” directive is notunique. In truth, it is generally the case inAmerican tort law that there is no duty toretreat when attacked. California, for example,also provides that a person is under noobligation to retreat and can try to repel theirassailant with force if necessary.4 In fact, nearlytwo dozen other states have similar “standyour ground” self-defense measures on thebooks (i.e., Ohio, North and South Carolina,etc.). This indicates that the philosophy of“stand your ground” is not just a Floridanotion, but a fairly ubiquitous principle inAmerican self-defense law.

“In Order to Form a More Perfect Union…”

Where Do We Go From Here?

The acquittal of George Zimmerman of boththe murder and manslaughter of TrayvonMartin has led many to wonder whether “standyour ground” self-defense laws are overbroad,confusing, or inconsistently applied. Whencomplemented with the obvious issues of race,guns, and justice, these thoughts, among manyothers, have led to a national examination ofthese types of self-defense laws. SinceZimmerman, there has been a continued outcryof support in favor of reformation. SybrinaFulton, Martin’s mother, spoke to a Senatepanel, in which she said that states must clarifyor otherwise change “stand your ground” self-defense laws. Fulton contended that in beingunclear as to when and how it is applied, “standyour ground” in its current form is far tooopen to abuse. Others, including moremothers of similarly slain teens, have joinedFulton in her outrage over the structure andapplication of “stand your ground” state self-defense laws.

Sadly, most states with “stand your ground”self-defense laws are conservative and leantoward policies that defend the rights of gunowners. Zimmerman comes at a time in thenation’s history where more than 85 gun-related deaths occur each day. It is at a timewhen African-Americans already suffer adisproportionate share of firearm homicidedeaths in America.5 And while the senselesskilling of Trayvon Martin remains very much amystery, it has served to highlight – on grander

scale – many issues that had receded from thenational consciousness.

Truly nothing positive can be taken away fromTrayvon Martin’s death. But at the very leastAmerica is once again engaging in dialogue andaction around issues of race and racial profiling,guns and gun control, equity or lack thereof inthe criminal justice system, and fairness in thelaw. Through this tragedy, we can only hope thatthe national “soul-searching” that PresidentObama so eloquently called upon all Americansto undergo is actually accomplished – and withany luck, the death of Trayvon Martin shallnever be in vain.

Emmanuel TEDDERMunger Tolles & Olson

Los Angeles, [email protected]

1 See, e.g., www.cnn.com/2013/07/19/politics/obama-zimmerman (July 7, 2013).

2 www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/Zimmerman_Final_Jury_Instructions.pdf.

3 Had Zimmerman elected to have a hearing, however, thecourt would have ruled whether his actions were protectedunder Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law, and depending onthe outcome it could have meant that Zimmerman wouldhave faced no criminal or civil trial at all.

4 See CALCRIM 3470.5 In 2010, African-Americans were 55% of the shooting

homicide victims while only making up 13% of the U.S.population. See www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/blacks-suffer-disproportionate-share-of-firearm-homicide-deaths/(May 21, 2013).

PUBLIEZ VOTRE PHOTO

DANS L’ANNUAIRE UIA 2014

Afin de mettre en valeur voscoordonnées dans l’annuaire2014, deux options voussont proposées :

▶ Insertion de votre photo avec un encadrement de vos coordonnées,

▶ Insertion de votre photo,du logo de votre cabinetavec un encadrement devos coordonnées en fondgrisé et insertion dudescriptif de votre choix (maximum 700 caractères).

Pour plus d’informationsveuillez contacter Romina BLANCH

Coordinateur développement & partenariat

[email protected]él.: +33 1 44 88 55 66Fax: +33 1 44 88 55 77

37


I Introduction

The market for fair trade goods is growing.Recent research has estimated internationaltrade in fair trade goods at $7 billion.1 In 2004the market was estimated at $1 billion.2 Withsuch rapid increase, one question whetherproducts sold as fair trade are actually fair trade.What rules and regulation could prevent fraudand misuse of the term fair trade? While we wishto regulate the market to insure compliance withfair trade standards, we also want rules that arerealistic and allow fair trade practices to growand expand.

Answers to the questions above demandthinking outside the box, and actually thinkingabout the box itself. A comparative analysis ofsimilar markets, primarily kosher certification inthe United States, shows that the best way toachieve regulation and compliance tocertification standards while allowing ongoinggrowth is by creating a regulated framework forpreexisting semi-private certifying agencies. Agood legal framework can ensure the growingsuccess of fair trade programs that protecthuman rights in developing countries.

I Part I - The fair trade market

Definitions

Fair trade in general is a social movement thatpromotes sustainability of producers indeveloping countries. It is defined by FINE, aninformal association of the four main fairtrade networks, as follows:

Fair Trade is a trading partnership, based ondialogue, transparency and respect, that seeksgreater equity in international trade. It

contributes to sustainable development byoffering better trading conditions to, and securingthe rights of, marginalized producers andworkers – especially in the South.3

This definition is not simple nor is regulating fairtrade. Many organizations have been created forthe purpose of regulation. Fairtrade International(FLO) is the leading certification organization.The first fair trade label was developed in theNetherlands in 1988 by Max Havelaar.4 Todaythere are more than a hundred differentcertifications.5 Each has its own definitions andown operational fair trade activities.6 Thismultiplicity of activities and definitions leave manyconsumers bewildered and unaware of theessential differences between the differentorganizations and their seals of certification. It isvital to create certification regulation that isintelligible to the consumers of fair tradeproducts.

Value market

The international fair trade market expandingrapidly and the fair trade market in the UnitedStates was estimated at $1.1 billion in 2009.7 Arecent survey by Business Insights, claimed that,“The global retail market for fair trade certifiedproducts has grown at a compound rate of32.5% over the period 2004-09”8 and that “thevalue of the fair trade market could reach €25billion [$32 billion]”.9 Along with growth comeproblems, some of which directly influence thelegal regulation for this unique market.

Growing pains

As fair trade becomes a global market, it nolonger embodies the notions of “dialogue,transparency and respect,”10 basic elements ofthe concept of fair trade. These elements work in

a small scale operation. However, the guaranteeof better trading conditions in developingcountries is vital to accessing the mainstreammarket for fair trade goods.11

Cooption of fair trade products12 is anotheroutcome of rapid growth mentioned in research.This refers to a situation where commercialorganizations influence regulatory organizations.Entities tasked with protection the publicinterest, instead serve special interests theyshould be regulating.13This is not only a problemof fair trade and it is common if other regulatedfields where economic players try to influenceregulation.

Geoff Moore suggests comparing fair tradecertification to certification of other “ethical”products, particularly organic.14 This is exactly theattempt of this paper.

I Part II - Comparing toother ethical certifications

Kosher, organic and fair trade are all consumermoral choice based markets. In each of therelevant markets, the consumer can choosewhether or not to purchase product with thespecial certification. This is different fromcertifications or regulations such as food safetyinspection15 or product labeling regulations.16 Inthe latter cases, products not certified areremoved from the shelves.

In addition, kosher, organic and fair trade marketsare regulated by third parties who providecertification that the product is as marketed.

Organic certification

In general, “Organic food refers to food

Certifying the Certification

Fair Trade: How Can We Establish Rules That Are Specific and Realistic?

I Joel A. FOX

JACQUES LEROYPrize

2013

macao


macao

produced without using conventional inputs ofmodern, industrial agriculture…”17 However,this definition in not universally accepted.

At first the organic market in the United Stateswas regulated by states.18 The agriculturalindustry wanted federal action. The OrganicFoods Production Act (OFPA) of 199019 waspassed in order “to assure consumers thatorganically produced products meet aconsistent standard.”20 This act was verycontroversial because of the attempt to createone universal standard of organic food.21

Today use of the USDA seal of organic ismonitored by the National Organic Program(NOP). This governmental authority regulatesthe standards used to define organic and the useof the USDA seal of organic.22

The goal of setting one government standardwas to bring the consumer the best and mostreliable standard of products, however by doingso, the ethical pluralism that exists in the organicmarket is lost.

Following the Organic Certification model inthe fair trade market would cause moreproblems than it solves. Implementinggovernment regulation or applying anotherinternational standardizing regulation to the fairtrade market would destroy pluralism andrestrain expansion. With strict diatomicregulation, where one can be certified or not,those who do not uphold the governmentalstandard would not be able to claim being fairtrade. There would be no alternativecertification. Consumers with a differentconcept of fair trade would not be able to findproducts that fit their varied definitions of fairtrade.

Kosher certification

Perhaps the development of kosher certificationoffers a better model for fair trade certification.Kosher food is food produced according toJewish law. Jewish law regarding food preparationis based on the Old Testament and rabbinicwriting.23 There are many different opinionsregarding the proper standard of kosher food,and all of the opinions claim to be kosher. Thereare kosher certifications organizations thatplaces greater emphasis on certain Jewish lawsand others that place emphasis of different laws.

Today, the kosher certified food market in theUnited States has been estimated at $200 billionin 2009.24

The success of kosher certification is based onthe disclosure model, educated consumers, andcompetition among certifying organizations. Thekosher market grew rapidly during the 20th

century and fraud increased as well due to thepremium consumers were willing to pay forkosher produce. To prevent fraud, New Yorkpassed a kosher fraud statutes.25 State legislatorstried to define a common standard for koshercertification. However, the New York statekosher fraud law was struck down in 2002because it created excessive governmentinvolvement in religious matters.26 To preventinterference in religious practices, New Yorkmodified regulations to focus on the certifiersand not the food product. The Kosher LawProtection Act of 2004 requires thatinformation identifying the person ororganization certifying the food as kosher beavailable to consumers.27 In the so calleddisclosure model,28 attention shifts from thefood to those who certify it as kosher. Theconsumer can choose which products to buyaccording to the standards and principles of thecertifying organizations.

While the disclosure model creates information,the second component of a successful system iseducated consumers who can make sense ofthe various standards. The more information theconsumer has the better choice he can makebut knowledgeable consumers are vital tomaking the model work. Shana Starobin andErika Weinthal write that “end consumers play akey role in oversight of the global food supplychain – not only by ‘voting’ with their dollars butalso by participating actively in the oversight andenforcement initiated by certifying agencies.”29

A third element that plays a significant role andexplains why the kosher certification systemworks well is competition amongst thecertifiers.30 Since different consumers of kosherproducts have different ideas about what isacceptably kosher for them, the competitionamongst the certifiers helps the consumer get abetter, “more kosher” product.

Application to the fair trade market

The above analysis of the organic and kosher

food market suggests the following two-pronged solution for creating a better fair trademarket and yet not limiting it scope.

First is a regulatory solution. To protect the fairtrade market from fraud and deception theremust be strong statutes in each country wherefair trade products are marketed. This is parallelwith the third tier in Sigman’s work KosherWithout Law.31 Statutes are needed to allowconsumers to buy that which they intend to buy.This regulatory tool prevents fraud but does notrestrict the scope or the variety of differentstandards.

Second, consumers need to differentiatebetween different standards. Individualcertification organizations must meet thischallenge. Consumers need to be educated tobetter understand the standards behind eachcertification organization. Websites likestandardsmap.org were created for this purpose.Strandardsmap.org’s goal is “to providecomprehensive, verified and transparentinformation on voluntary sustainability standards”and “provides users with information enablingthem to analyze and compare information on 100voluntary standards”.32

The private market should determine whichspecific standards are chosen by certifiers, as isin the case of the kosher market. Whencertifiers are required to divulge informationabout their standards, the consumers can decidewith their purchase whether or not they agreewith those standards. This will createcompetition amongst fair trade certifiers touphold higher standards, for those with higherstandards attract more customers. This is notthe case in the organic market which has onegovernmental standard. Certifiers will also bemotivated to educate their consumers andexplain their standards. Regulation to preventfraud, information about standards ofcertification and educated consumers are thekeys to controlling and enhancing the fair trademarket.

Joel A. FOXTel Aviv University

Buchman Faculty of LawTel Aviv, Israel

[email protected]

1 Wendela Huisman, Mark Boonman, Elmy Sarrucco-Fedorovtsjev and Terya Sarrucco, A Success story for Producersand Consumers, The Dutch Association of Worldshops(2011),available at www.european-fair-trade-association.org/efta/Doc/FT-E-2010.pdf.

2 Ibid3 Fair Trade Definition and Principles as Agreed by FINE (Fair

Trade Advocacy Office ed., 2001). available at www.fair-trade-hub.com/support-files/fair-trade-definition.pdf

4 Marie-Christine Renard, Fair trade: quality, market andconventions, 19 Journal of Rural Studies (2003).

5 Standards Map: Comparative Analysis and Reveiw of voluntaryStandards, available at www.standardsmap.org/.

6 A few of the major organizations are: Fairtrade International(FLO) www.fairtrade.net/fileadmin/user_upload/content/2009/standards/documents/2012-04-02_GTS_EN.pdf;The World Fair Trade Organization (WFTO) www.wfto.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=889&Itemid=290; European Free Trade Association (EFTA)www.efta.int/about-efta.aspx

7 Wendela supra note 18 Fair Trade Strategies for Food and Drinks Companies. pt. 82

(2011). available at www.marketresearch.com/Business-Insights-v893/Fair-Trade-Strategies-Food-Drinks-6424791/

9 Ibid10 FINE supra note 311 Geoff Moore, The Fair Trade movement : parameters, issues and

future research, 53 Journal of Business Ethics (2004).12 This issue has been extensively reviewed by Philip H. Howard

Daniel Jaffee, Corporate cooptation of organic and fair tradestandards, 27 Agriculture and Human Values (2009). and GeoffMoore, The Fair Trade movement : parameters, issues and futureresearch, 53 Journal of Business Ethics (2004).

13 Ibid14 Ibid15 Federal Meat Inspection Act (1906). available atwww.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Legislation/ucm148693.htm

16 Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (1966). available atwww.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-80/pdf/STATUTE-80-Pg1296.pdf

17 The Business of Food: Encyclopedia of The Food and DrinkIndustries (Gary J. Allen and Ken Albala ed., Greenwood Press.2007). available athttp://books.google.co.il/books?id=gNzmOUyiFRAC&pg=PA288&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

18 Benjamin N. Gutman, Ethical eating: Applying the Kosher foodregulatory regime to organic food, 108 The Yale Law Journal (1999).P. 2370

19 Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act (1990).available atwww.law.cornell.edu/topn/food_agriculture_conservation_and_trade_act_of_1990

20 Ibid21 Gutman supra note 18 , p. 237322 Mentioned in Emilly Ullman, Organic and Kosher Foods: A Tale of

Two Certification systems (2009), available atwww.google.co.il/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCgQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdash.harvard.edu%2Fhandle%2F1%2F8592150&ei=gYvQUdTOGYbzsgbTlYDoCA&usg=AFQjCNHfjkIr8aXVaw3Ic0oGDWW1rXa-rw&bvm=bv.48572450,d.Yms; See also For a detailed analysisof the final regulations, see Jessica Ellsworth, The History ofOrganic Food Regulation (2001), available athttp://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/8889458/Ellsworth.pdf?sequence=1.

23 The Kosher Primer, Orthodox Union (2004), available athttp://oukosher.org/blog/industrial-kosher/the-kosher-primer/.

24 Market Trend: Kosher - and halal - certified foods in the U.S.Summary. (2009). available atwww.marketresearch.com/Packaged-Facts-v768/MarketTrend-Kosher-Halal-Certified-Foods-1282406/

25 New York Agriculture & Markets - Article 17 - § 201-AKosher Food and Food Products; Packaging available athttp://law.onecle.com/new-york/agriculture-markets/AGM0201-A_201-A.html

26 Commack Self-Service Kosher Meats, Inc. v. Weiss, 294 F. 3d415 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 2002 available athttp://scholar.google.co.il/scholar_case?case=2393848810124571213&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr&sa=X&ei=XVHQUZaFB4HUswaKjoCIDQ&ved=0CCcQgAMoADAA

27 New York Department of Agriculture and markets available atwww.agriculture.ny.gov/KO/KOHome.html

28 Shayna M. Sigman, Kosher Without Law: The Role of NonlegalSanctions in Overcoming Fraud Within the Kosher Food Industry, 31Florida State University Law Review (2004). p. 587

29 Shana Starobin and Erika Weinthal, The Search for CredibleInformation in Social and Environmental Global Governance: The Kosher Label, 12 Business and Politics (2010). p. 15.

30 Much has been written on this subject on the religiousconsequences see Gil S. Epsteinand Ira N. Gang, The politicaleconomy of kosher wars (2002); On the economicconsequences see Sigman supra note 28.

31 Sigman supra note 28.32 Standards Map supra note 5

macao



Karim Lahidji a succédé à Souhayr Belhassen à la têtede la Fédération internationale des ligues des droits del’homme (FIDH) en mai 2013. Cet avocat iranienengagé a pris la défense de plusieurs centainesd’opposants politiques, avant d’être contraint à l’exil. Ilest membre fondateur de plusieurs organisations dedéfense des droits de l’homme qui ont été interditespar le régime islamique en 1981.

Juriste International: Vous avez été élu à laPrésidence de la FIDH en mai 2013. Quel est letravail de la fédération?

La FIDH est une fédération des ligues nationalesdes droits de l’homme. Le nombre de membress’élève à 178 organisations représentant 117pays.

La fédération est dirigée par un bureauinternational dont la mission est de s’assurer queles organisations membres peuvent jouer leurrôle de contre-pouvoir pour faire respecter lesdroits de l’homme et les libertés fondamentales.

À la création de la FIDH en 1922, on entendaitpar « pouvoir » le pouvoir politique. Mais depuisque la thématique « Business and Human rights »est discutée par le Haut-Commissariat desNations Unies aux droits de l’homme, il faut aussiconsidérer, à côté du pouvoir politique, lepouvoir économique comme une potentiellemenace pour les libertés et les droitsfondamentaux.

Défendre les défenseurs des droits de l’hommeau sens de la Déclaration des Nations Unies surles défenseurs des droits de l’homme en 1998,c’est là notre but principal. Mais nous défendonségalement les couches vulnérables, lespopulations déplacées lors de conflits, de guerresou d’interventions militaires; ou les victimes depréjugés qu’il s’agisse d’enfants, de femmes, dehandicapés, de travailleurs. Dans une grandepartie du monde, la question du genre et le statutdes homosexuels, ne sont pas reconnus maiscondamnés, devenant une raison d’exécutionlégale.

JI: Quels sont vos modes d’action?

Notre but est que les organisations puissentmener leurs activités. Pour que ce soit possible,nous organisons des missions, menons desenquêtes pour renforcer la crédibilité de nosorganisations sur place. Avec la présence dereprésentants de la FIDH, du bureauinternational ou de chargés de missions, parmilesquels souvent des avocats, nous pouvons fairedu plaidoyer auprès des autorités du pays, enprésence de nos ligues membres. Cela leurdonne plus de force et de représentativité.

Cela permet aussi de découvrir l’aspectintolérable de certaines situations. Ce matin1, j’aiappris qu’au Nord du Mali à la suite du coupd’État de l’année dernière, a été découvert uncharnier d’une vingtaine de cadavres des BéretsRouges. Vous savez que le Général putschiste aété inculpé il y a deux jours par la justicemalienne. Ces deux dernières années, nous avonseffectué plusieurs missions dans cette partie del’Afrique en présence d’avocats qui nous ont misen mesure de donner des éléments de preuvepour que les autorités et les responsables de cescrimes graves soient poursuivis et punis.

JI: Vous avez démarré votre carrière d’avocat en Iran.Pourquoi avoir choisi cette profession? Dans ce pays?À cette époque?

J’étais âgé de treize ans au moment du coupd’État qui renversa Mohammad Mossadegh,premier ministre démocrate libéral en 1953.Mohammad Mossadegh était un grand juriste,premier docteur en droit de l’histoire iraniennequi avait étudié en France et en Suisse. Je merappelle parfaitement le bombardement de sondomicile par l’armée car à l’époque notre maisonn’était pas très loin.

Quelques mois plus tard, j’ai vu dans la presse laphoto de ce premier ministre âgé de 74-75 ansen tenue de prisonnier devant une cour militaire,entouré de deux colonels de l’armée commeavocats. Je me suis posé la question: pourquoi

une cour militaire alors que c’est un civil, etpourquoi deux militaires pour avocats? J’ai suivice procès dans des revues qui publiaient lecompte-rendu de chaque audience. En tant quejuriste et victime, c’est Mohammad Mossadeghqui a fini par assurer sa défense. Peu à peu,prenant conscience de l’absurdité de la situation,j’ai senti monter en moi l’envie de devenir avocat.

Nous venions d’une famille de théologiensdepuis 10 générations et par conséquent, c’étaitune destinée fatale pour les hommes de lafamille. Je me suis donc préparée à faire desétudes parallèles avant d’atteindre mon objectif.

Après un stage de deux ans dans le cabinet d’unavocat arménien d’origine russe, j’ai obtenu en1966 mon permis d’avocat et créé mon proprecabinet. Même si je savais que sous régimedictatorial, la marge de manœuvre de l’avocat enmatière pénale était restreinte, j’ai quand mêmechoisi de me spécialiser en droit civil.

Dans les années 70, au début de ma carrière, il yavait en Iran deux juridictions : juridiction pénalepour les affaires de droit commun et juridictionpénale militaire pour les affaires politiques.Puisque les avocats civils ne pouvaient pas plaiderdevant les cours militaires, notre rôle était parconséquent limité à la défense des accusés dedroit commun.

C’est pour cette raison qu’avec une dizaine deconfrères, nous avons créé un groupe d’avocatsqui s’appelaient « les avocats avant-gardistes ».Notre idée était de faire entendre que notreprofession devait pouvoir s’exercer de manièretotale pour qu’il y ait une justice indépendante etune seule voix de recours pour les citoyens.C’est dans ce contexte que nous avons cherchéà tenir tête au pouvoir. Nous avons organisé desmanifestations pendant 4-5 ans au termedesquelles nous étions parfois arrêtés etincarcérés. La plupart des gens du groupe étaitdéjà identifiée comme militants, avocatsgauchistes, opposants politiques, y compris parnos confrères au sein du barreau.

Rencontre avec Karim Lahidji,Président de la FIDH

I Karim LAHIDJI

JI: À quel moment de votre parcours personnel avez-vous décidé de vous engager dans la défense des droitsde l’homme?

Trois événements internationaux m’ontdéfinitivement décidé:▪ l’assassinat de Martin Luther King en mai 1968,▪ l’invasion de la Tchécoslovaquie, ▪ la tenue à Téhéran de la 1re conférence mondiale

des droits de l’homme.Organisée par l’ONU, il y avait un panel trèsimportant d’ONG. J’ai effectué toutes lesdémarches envisageables pour m’y rendre maismalheureusement, je n’ai pas eu l’autorisation d’yassister. C’est là que j’ai décidé de partir à l’étranger.J’avais notamment appris la création d’AmnestyInternational à Londres et il fallait absolument queje rencontre ses responsables. J’ai entamé desdémarches et ai finalement obtenu mon passeporten 1971. Grâce à mes déplacements professionnels,je me rendais 4-5 fois par an chez Amnesty. J’ai aussirencontré la FIDH et l’association internationaledes juristes démocrates.

Pendant 7-8 ans, ces activités ont été clandestines.Mais à partir de 1977, avec l’arrivée du démocrateJimmy Carter à la tête de l’administrationaméricaine et son message orienté droits del’homme, la situation en Iran – quartier général desÉtats-Unis – s’est assouplie et j’ai pu créerl’organisation des juristes iraniens et l’Associationiranienne pour la défense des libertés et des droitsde l’homme qui devait annoncer le bilan désastreuxdes atteintes aux droits de l’homme pendant lerégime impérial.

C’est la raison pour laquelle j’ai été attaquée en avril1978 par la police secrète devant mon fils, et moncabinet a été plastiqué. L’UIA avait fait une demandeaux autorités iraniennes pour rencontrer le roi et arédigé un rapport. Quelques mois plus tard, legouvernement de l’époque faisait un pas enautorisant les avocats à plaider devant les autoritésmilitaires. J’ai été le premier à le faire depuis 1953.

Début 1979, les organisations que j’avais fondées étaient considérées comme les plusimportantes du pays. Nous protestions contre lesexécutions extrajudiciaires, les atteintes aux droitsde l’homme, d’expression, de la presse.

L’association des juristes iraniens a même publiéune brochure contre le premier code pénal quiavait en vue d’instaurer une justice islamique: loi dutalion, châtiment corporel, peine de mort pour unetrentaine de crimes et délits tels que: boire del’alcool, avoir des relations homosexuelles,adultères, etc.

Khomeiny a considéré que la brochure dévalorisaitles valeurs islamiques. Il a décrété une fatwa disantque ceux qui mettent en cause les valeursislamiques doivent être considérés commeshérétiques et encourent la peine de mort. Début1982, après avoir passé 10 mois dans laclandestinité, j’ai quitté le pays.

JI: Le Président Hassan Rohani en fonction depuis 6mois est lui-même docteur en droit. Cela constitue-il unespoir pour l’Iran?

Hassan Rohani est très différent de sonprédécesseur, plus modéré, moins extrémiste. Il afait du droit en Iran puis des sciences politiques enGrande-Bretagne. Pendant une trentaine d’années, ila exercé diverses professions au sein du Parlement,de commissions et d’instances de sécuriténationale. Il a eu pour mentor un ancien Présidentde la République, modéré lui aussi, HachemiRafsandjani. Ceci explique peut-être qu’il se soitimposé dans cette élection.

Mais son pouvoir reste relatif. Même si lors de sacampagne, il a parlé du respect de la constitution,des libertés fondamentales, de la libération desprisonniers politiques, il faut garder à l’esprit qu’enIran, selon la constitution, le Président n’est pas lechef de l’Exécutif. Il est sous l’autorité du chef del’État, qui lui n’est pas élu, puisque c’est le guidesuprême religieux. Le système politique iranienoscille entre le droit humain et le droit divin. De fait,la plupart des difficultés en Iran trouvent leursracines dans la Constitution théocratique.

Alors il faut espérer que le nouveau Présidentpuisse s’imposer et effectuer quelques réformes ausens large du terme, sur la justice par exemple où ily a beaucoup à faire, mais il faut aussi relativiser sonchamp d’action qui est très limité.

JI: Pensez-vous avoir un rôle à jouer en tant quePrésident de la FIDH sur les questions droits de l’hommeen Iran?

Après mon départ du pays, pendant quinze ans, pluspersonne n’a parlé de droits de l’homme en Iran.Puis dans les années 90, surtout après la guerre Iran/ Irak, et l’arrivée du pragmatique Rafsandjani à latête de la Présidence, les droits de l’homme ontrefait leur apparition dans les débats.

Cinq avocats dont une femme que vous connaissez,Shirin Ebadhi, Prix Nobel de la paix 2003, ont crééun Centre des défenseurs des droits de l’homme.Ces avocats ont repris le combat des droits del’homme pendant une quinzaine d’années, maisdeux d’entre eux – sans parler bien sûr du cas de

Shirin Ebadi – sont actuellement en prison:Abdolfattah Soltani et Mohammad Seifzadeh.Parmi les 178 organisations de la FIDH, nouscomptons deux associations iraniennes en exil.Celle précitée et l’autre dont je suis à l’initiative etqui a été créée en 1983 à Paris dans le cadre de laloi 1901.

Il faut que ces deux organisations puissentretourner exercer leur mission en Iran. C’est laraison d’être de la FIDH que de pouvoir aider nosorganisations membres à exercer librement leurmission dans leur pays. En tant que Président de laFIDH d’origine iranienne, voilà la requête quej’adresse au Président et aux autorités iraniennes.

JI: Quels sont les autres pays du monde où la professiond’avocat est, selon vous, en plus grand danger?

La profession est menacée partout. J’étais enLituanie le mois dernier. Notre organisationbiélorusse qui n’a pas été autorisée à organiser unséminaire sur place, l’a organisé à Vilnius avec laparticipation d’une cinquantaine de militants,notamment avocats. Nous faisions le mêmeconstat: les avocats biélorusses sont dans le mêmecas que les iraniens. Le prix de la défense desprisonniers politiques est trop cher à payer pour lesavocats. Le président de l’association biélorusse estlui-même condamné à trois ans de prison.

Il y a d’autres avocats emprisonnés en Syrie, enTurquie où d’ailleurs, nous avons mené une actionconjointe avec l’UIA dans le cadre de l’Observatoirepour la protection des défenseurs des droits del’homme.

Dans le cadre de l’Observatoire également, nousavons effectué une mission judiciaire dernièrementau Bangladesh à la suite de l’arrestation deresponsables de notre ligue bangladaise. Grâce àcette mission, nous avons finalement obtenu unemise en liberté sous caution.

Par le biais de l’Observatoire, nous passons unmessage afin que les barreaux et la professiond’avocats soit respectés; que cette dernièreobtienne une immunité professionnelle quandnécessaire. Il faut libérer nos collègues et l’ensembledes défenseurs des droits humains dans nos pays.

Karim LAHIDJIPrésident de la FIDH

[email protected]

1 Entretien réalisé le 4 décembre 2013 par Martin Pradel, Co-directeur droits de l’homme et défense de la défense de l’UIA et Marie-Pierre Liénard, Chargée communication et site Web de l’UIA.



I 1. The context

The influence of Information andCommunications Technologies (ICTs)infrastructures and extensive flows ofinformation have become natural in our day-to-day lives. The changing interaction betweenICTs and society clearly brings with it a widerange of new human rights opportunities – inform of big possibilities for communication,expression and empowerment. At the sametime, ICTs give rise to increased threats forhuman rights – in form of State or companies’interferences, particularly the rights tofreedom of expression and privacy.

In its resolution of the promotion andprotection of human rights on the Internet1, inJuly 2012, the Human Rights Council affirmed,“that the same rights that people haveoffline must also be protected online…regardless of frontiers and through anymedia of one’s choice”. It is the first-everresolution to affirm the extension of humanrights to the Internet to the same degree andwith the same commitment as human rights inthe real world, which also means ICTs,including the Internet and telecommunications,should never be taken as a pretext to includenew restrictions to the exercise of humanrights such as censorship or surveillance.

However, an increasing number of States areintroducing laws and practices that have anegative impact on the ability of citizens toexercise their human rights through the use ofICTs – i.e. the Internet and mobile telephony.Indeed, after the PRISM scandal and Snowden’srevelations related to the scope of masssurveillance of private communications, there isconsiderable debate about the protection ofhuman rights, in particular freedom ofexpression and privacy, and especially how topreserve both rights in the digital ageconsidering that an infringement upon oneright can be both the cause and consequenceof an infringement upon the other.

In addition, companies, especially thoseoperating across national boundaries that havegained unprecedented power and influence inthe Internet environment can also causesignificant harm by abusing human rights, eitherat the behest of governments and/or for theirown purposes and benefit. Too often, mostcompanies’ engagements with human rightshave been through voluntary codes andinitiatives but more should be done.

Ideally, to better promote and protect humanrights in the digital era, it is important to reach mandatory global principles andstandards aimed to address the human rightsresponsibilities and obligations for both Statesand companies.

This article is aimed at giving a broad overviewon the principles and standards that coulddrive the necessary change towards a betterprotection of the right to freedom ofexpression and the right to privacy in the digitalage. It merely represents a set of opinions andproposals under discussion in many humanrights advocacy organizations and in the UnitedNations as well.

I 2. A good foundation is already in place

The protection of privacy and freedom ofexpression across national borders benefitfrom the internationally recognized laws andstandards for human rights set out in theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights(UDHR), the International Covenant on Civiland Political Rights and the InternationalCovenant on Economic, Social and CulturalRights.

The right to privacy and the right to freedomof expression are both well established in theUDHR:

Article 12: ‘No one shall be subjected to arbitrary

interference with his privacy, family, home orcorrespondence, nor to attacks upon his honor andreputation. Everyone has the right to the protectionof the law against such interference or attacks’.

Article 19: ‘Everyone has the right to freedom ofopinion and expression; this right includes freedomto hold opinions without interference and to seek,receive and impart information and ideas throughany media and regardless of frontiers’.

Thus, the starting point for an internationaleffort to protect both rights in the digital erashould be to reaffirm and develop suchinternational frameworks – which should alsoinclude companies. For example, in August 2003,the UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion andProtection of Human Rights approved the UNNorms on the Responsibilities of TransnationalCorporations and Other Business Enterpriseswith Regard to Human Rights (also known asthe UN Norms). This document represents themost authoritative and comprehensive set ofstandards on business and human rights issuedto date and can serve as a good baseline todevelop some of the principles and standardsreferred in this article.

I 3. First of all... the right to access to the Internet

Although it is controversial whether the rightto access to the Internet can be considereda human right, it is certainly critical for therealization of a whole range of human rights,including the right to freedom of expression.Despite this, a greater part of the world still hasno access to the Internet. According to arecent survey2, for those living on less thanUS$2/day, entry-level broadband costs anaverage of 40% of monthly income, and in manycountries this figure exceeds 80% or 100%. Asa consequence, billions cannot afford toconnect to the network, therefore limiting theeconomic and social improvements that accesscould promote.

The Promotion and Protection of Freedom of Expression and Privacyin the Digital Age

I Marc GALLARDO MESEGUER

Therefore, the right to access to, andmake use of, the Internet should beensured for all and it shall not be subject toany restrictions except those which pass theso-called three-part test:

▪ It must be provided by law, meeting astandard of clarity and precision that issufficient to ensure that individuals haveadvance notice of and can foresee theirapplication – principles of predictability andtransparency;

▪ It must be strictly and demonstrablynecessary to achieve a legitimate aim –principle of legitimacy;

▪ It must be proportionate and not employedwhen less invasive techniques are availablewhich have not yet been exhausted –principle of proportionality.

States must commit to developing effectivepolicies to attain universal access to theInternet. Otherwise the Internet will become atechnological tool that is only accessible to acertain elite of people while perpetrating the‘digital divide’.

Moreover, as a minimum requirement, the rightto access to the Internet should preserve:

▪ Quality of service, which should evolve inline with advancing technological possibilities;

▪ Freedom of choice of system andsoftware use facilitating interoperability andthe growth of open standards;

▪ Ensuring digital inclusion, requiring thatall people has access to ICTs and tools ingeneral for information managing andprocessing. To this end, public Internet accesspoints should be made available, such aslibraries, community centers, clinics andschools.

▪ Net neutrality: basically meaning that alldata on the Internet should be treatedequally, not discriminating or chargingdifferentially by user, content, site, platform,application, type of attached equipment andmodes of communication. This principle isenshrined in Article 23 of the EUCommission Regulation Proposal on the

single market for electronic communicationsand subject to restrictions only whennecessary to apply reasonable trafficmanagement measures – i.e. to implement acourt order, to preserve the integrity andsecurity of the network, to prevent spam orto reduce the effects of network congestion.

I 4. Freedom of expression

The right to freedom of expression on theInternet is an issue of increasing interest andimportance as the rapid pace of ICT enablesindividuals all over the world to use theInternet and other technologies tocommunicate worldwide.

Similarly to the above-mentioned right toaccess to the Internet, the right to freedom ofexpression may be subject to restrictions – i.e.when necessary to respect the rights andreputations of others, but only if they pass thethree-part test – transparency, legitimacy andproportionality. A restriction on this right cantake various forms, from technical measures toprevent access to certain content such asblocking and filtering, to inadequate guaranteesof the right to privacy, which inhibit thedissemination of opinions and information.

As a minimum requirement, the right tofreedom of expression should cover3:

▪ Freedom of online protest, consisting onthe right to use the Internet to organize andengage in online and offline protest;

▪ Freedom from censorship, meaningfreedom from any restriction designed tointimidate Internet users or close downexpression online. Consider, for example, theobligation to register all blogs with a Stateauthority that can monitor them, a heatedtopic in several European Countries where anumber of bills have been proposed to thataim;

▪ Freedom from arbitrary blocking orfiltering of content, that is to seek, receiveand impart information and ideas throughthe Internet at any time. For example, severalcountries continue to block video-sharingwebsites like Youtube or block access to anywebsite containing terms such as

‘democracy’ and ‘human rights’. It shouldalso comprise the right to open data fromgovernmental sources of information;

▪ Freedom of media: freedom and pluralismof the media must be honored;

▪ Freedom of hate speech: beliefs andopinions of others must be respected.

When required to restrict communications orremove content by any government,companies should evaluate the impact of suchrequirements. This could be done through thefollowing actions4:

▪ Seek clarification or modification fromauthorized officials when governmentrestrictions appear overbroad or excessive,not required by domestic law or appearinconsistent with international rights andstandards on freedom of expression;

▪ Request clear written communications fromthe government that explain the legal basisfor government restrictions to freedom ofexpression, including the name of therequesting government entity and the name,title and signature of the authorized official;

▪ Challenge the government in domesticcourts or seek the assistance of relevantauthorities, international human bodies ornon-governmental organizations when facedwith a government restriction that appearsinconsistent with domestic law orprocedures or international human rightslaws and standards on freedom ofexpression.

All these measures are a good desideratum andmust be preserved even though they are noteasy to apply in practice because they eitherleave room to different interpretations and thefact of not complying with governmentrequests could end up with civil and evencriminal sanctions.

It is also important to consider the impositionof intermediary liability as a type of restrictionon the right to freedom of expression. ManyStates have adopted laws that impose liabilityupon intermediaries – i.e. search engines, ISPs,blogs, online communities, etc. if they do notfilter, remove or block content generated by



users which is deemed illegal. Several States,and it is the case for all EU countries, haveadopted what is known as ‘notice-and-takedown’ regime that protects thoseintermediaries from liability provided that theytake down unlawful material when they aremade aware of its existence. Despite this, inrecent years, intermediaries’ protection fromliability has suffered certain erosion, especiallythrough case law. For example, on October2013, the European Court of Human Rights5

concluded that a news portal has editorialcontrol over the comments’ section on its siteand therefore has to prevent unlawful third-party comments from being published eventhough it takes down the offensive commentsimmediately upon being notified of them.

In respect of users, companies should betransparent and:

▪ Clearly disclose to users the generallyapplicable laws and policies which require thecompany to remove or limit access tocontent or restrict communications;

▪ Disclosure to users in a clear manner thecompany’s policies and procedures forresponding to government’s demands toremove or limit access to content or restrictcommunications;

▪ Give clear, prominent and timely notice tousers when access to specific content hasbeen removed or blocked by the companyor when the company due to governmentrestrictions has limited communications.

I 5. Right to privacy

In November 2013, the United Nationsadopted a resolution titled ‘Right to Privacy inthe Digital Age’6 to protect the right to privacyagainst unlawful surveillance through the ruleof already established international law.Although this resolution is not legally bindingit’s important because it reflects world opinionand carry political weight after the dramaticrevelations in June 2013.

In particular, this resolution reaffirms thatStates must ensure that any surveillancemeasures taken to combat terrorism are incompliance with their obligations under

international law. And it also calls upon theStates:

▪ To respect and protect the right to privacy,including the context of digitalcommunications;

▪ To take measures to put an end to violationsof those rights and to create the conditionsto prevent such violations, including byensuring that relevant national legislationcomplies with their obligations underinternational human rights law;

▪ To review their procedures, practices andlegislation regarding the surveillance ofcommunications, their interception andcollection of personal data, including masssurveillance, interception and collection;

▪ To establish and maintain existingindependent, effective domestic oversightmechanisms capable of ensuring transparency,as appropriate, and accountability for Statesurveillance of communications, theirinterception and collection of personal data.

Accordingly, a formal protection of the right toonline privacy has to reach the transactionaldata arising from today’s communications viaonline and mobile telephone - the so-calledmetadata - that include personal informationof individuals, their location, their onlineactivities and related information about the e-mails and messages they send or receive. AsSnowden’s revelations have proven, ‘metadata’can be as sensitive and even more than thecontent of the communications itself andtherefore deserves strong human rightsprotection.

States must ensure that effective national legalframeworks and effective enforcement arecritical for ensuring full compliance withinternational human rights law against unlawfulor arbitrary intrusions on the right to privacy.In this sense, the European Court of HumanRights lately ruled7 that European countriesviolate privacy rights if they lack an adequatelegal framework that prohibits secretvideotaping or picture taking and fails toprovide effective remedies.

In particular, legal frameworks should ensurethat any communication surveillance measure

is subject to the three-part test and thuscomply with the principles of transparency,legitimacy and proportionality. It is also of theutmost importance that individuals have a legalright to be notified when they are subjected tocommunications surveillance and have hadtheir communications data accessed by theState, unless it is duly justified not to do so. Thislegal framework should be set internationally inorder to avoid conflicting laws or where thelaws of one jurisdiction conflict with the laws ofanother and governments should worktogether to resolve the conflict.

Furthermore, a group of 329 civil societyorganizations from all regions launched a set ofprinciples8 that interpret State’s human rightsobligations in light of new technologies andsurveillance capabilities.

The Principles look beyond the current set ofrevelations to take a broad look at howmodern communications surveillancetechnologies can be addressed consistentlywith human rights and the rule of law. ThePrinciples can be used by States around theworld to push for stronger legal protections atthe United Nations and other internationalbodies as well as at home.

The Principles make clear that:

▪ Critical Internet infrastructure mustbe protected: No law should imposesecurity holes in ICTs in order to facilitatesurveillance. The assumption underlying suchefforts – that no communication can be trulysecure – is inherently dangerous, leaving peopleat the mercy of good guys and bad guys alike.It must be rejected;

▪ Monitoring equals surveillance: Much ofthe expansive State surveillance revealed inthe past year depends on confusion overwhether actual “surveillance” has occurredand thus whether human rights obligationsapply. Some have suggested that ifinformation is merely collected and kept butnot looked at by humans, no privacy invasionhas occurred. Others argue that computersanalyzing all communications in real-time forkey words and other selectors are not“surveillance” for purposes of triggering legalprotections. These differences ininterpretation can mean the difference

between targeted and mass surveillance ofcommunications. Definitions matter. Statesshould not be able to bypass privacyprotections on the basis of arbitrarydefinitions;

▪ Metadata must be protected: What isimportant is not the kind of data collected, butits effect on the privacy of the individual. Thus,the law must require high standards forgovernment access. Metadata needs to betreated with the same level of privacy ascontent.

▪ Privacy must be protected acrossborders: Privacy protections must beconsistent across borders at home andabroad. Governments should notbypass national privacy protections by relyingon secretive informal data sharing agreementswith foreign States or private internationalcompanies. Individuals should not be deniedprivacy rights simply because they live inanother country from the one that issurveilling them. Where data is flowing acrossborders, the law of the jurisdiction with thegreatest privacy protections should apply.

▪ Proportionality must be restored:Authorities must have prior authorization byan independent and impartial judicial entity inorder to determine that a certain act ofsurveillance has a sufficiently high likelihood toprovide evidence that will address a seriousharm. Any decisions about surveillance mustweigh the benefits against the costs of violatingan individual’s privacy and freedom ofexpression. Respect for due process alsorequires that any interference withfundamental rights must be properlyenumerated in law that is consistentlypracticed and available to the public. A judgemust ensure that freedoms are respected andlimitations are appropriately applied.

Similarly to what should be assessed by companiesthat are required to restrict access to certaincontent or remove it, companies facinggovernment demands that compromise privacyonline, should also encourage governments to bespecific, transparent and consistent withinternational laws and standards on privacy.

Therefore, companies should:

▪ Seek clarification or modification fromauthorized officials when governmentdemands appear excessive and unlawful, not

required by applicable law or inconsistent withinternational human rights laws and standardson privacy;

▪ Request clear communications, preferably inwriting, that explains the legal basis forgovernment demands for personalinformation including the name of therequesting government entity and the name,title and signature the authorized official;

▪ Adopt policies and procedures to address howthe company will respond when governmentdemands do not include a written directive orfail to adhere to established legal procedure.

▪ Challenge the government in domestic courtsor seek the assistance of relevant authorities,international human bodies or non-governmental organizations when faced with agovernment restriction that appearsinconsistent with domestic law or proceduresor international human rights laws andstandards on privacy;

In respect of users, companies should betransparent and:

▪ Clearly disclose to users which generallyapplicable government laws and policiesrequire the participating company to providepersonal information to government authorities,unless such disclosure is unlawful;

▪ Disclose to users in a clear manner whatpersonal information the company collects,and the company’s policies and procedures forresponding to government demands forpersonal information;

▪ Assess on an ongoing basis measures tosupport user transparency, in an effectivemanner, regarding the company’s datacollection, storage, and retention practices.

What needs to be done…

The duty of governments to protect humanrights includes ensuring that national laws areconsistent with international human rights lawsand standards on freedom of expression andprivacy. At the same time, all companies andforemost those belonging to the ICT sector (i.e.telecommunications operators, electroniccommunications providers and other Internetcompanies) have the responsibility to respect thefreedom of expression and privacy rights of theirusers.

Many of these standards and principles are nowbeing discussed and developed by relevantinternational organisations, both public andprivate. And due to the fact that individualcountries have a tendency to repress rather toliberate the use of ICTs it’s crucial to seekprotection at the highest international levels andclosely monitor that these principles andstandards, once adopted, are not brusquelyinterrupted at the national level.

Lawyers worldwide have a central role to thatend and time has come to work together touphold human rights in the digital realm. Debateson human rights need no longer be limited bynational or cultural boundaries and we, aslawyers, should have the ability to spur to actionpolicymakers and business around the globe toensure that the Internet remains a place wherehuman rights are realized, not violated.

It is time for us to call upon all States andcompanies to promote and respecthuman rights to the best extent in thedigital age.

Marc GALLARDO MESEGUERPresident of the Privacy

and Rights of the Digital Person CommissionLexing Spain

Barcelona, [email protected]

1 The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rightson the Internet: A/HRC/RES/20/8.

2 Affordability Report 2013: http://a4ai.org/affordability-report-2013-launched/

3 Internet Rights & Principles Charter athttp://internetrightsandprinciples.org/wpcharter/

4 Global Network Initiative (GNI) atwww.globalnetworkinitiative.org/principles/index.php

5 Delfi AS v. Estonia, nº 64569/09.6 United Nations – General Assembly, 68 session of 20

November 2013: Promotion and protection of human rights:human rights questions, including alternative approaches forimproving the effective enjoyment of human rights andfundamental freedoms. A/C.3/68/L.45/Rev.1.

7 Söderman v. Sweden: Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 12November 2013. The ruling stems from a case in Swedenwhere a man secretly videotaped his stepdaughter while shetook a shower.

8 The 13 International Principles for the Application of HumanRights to Communications Surveillance or more commonly,the ‘Necessary and Proportionate Principles’http://necessaryandproportionate.orgThe principles are: legality, legitimate aim, necessity, adequacy,proportionality, competent judicial authority, due process,user notification, transparency, public oversight, integrity ofcommunications and systems, safeguards for internationalcooperation and safeguards against illegitimate access.


47

L’UIA se félicite du succès de sa mission demédiation conduite en janvier dernier auprèsde l’Ordre des Avocats de Guinée équatoriale.Menée par Me Fernando Tonim, cettemédiation a conduit à la levée immédiate de lamesure de suspension de deux annéesordonnée par l’Ordre à l’encontre de MeMbomio en date du 27 avril 2012.

La sanction prise à l’encontre de Me Mbomioreposait sur l’expression par ce dernier« d’opinions, de jugements et de critiques contre legouvernement et ses institutions ». Les proposlitigieux relevaient d’une plaidoirie tenue dansle cadre de la défense du Dr. WenceslaoMansogo Alo, défenseur des droits de l’hommeet membre de l’opposition au gouvernementen place. Ce dernier avait été condamné en mai2012 à trois ans de prison à l’issue d’un procèsdécrit par les observateurs internationauxcomme éminemment politique1. Il a fait l’objetd’une grâce présidentielle et a été libéré en juin2013.

Me Mbomio avait été suspendu en 2008 déjà,dans des circonstances similaires.

Saisie directement du contentieux par Me Mbomio, l’UIA s’est inquiétée de lamotivation de la sanction disciplinaire. Elle asollicité de l’Ordre des Avocats de Guinéeéquatoriale la transmission de tout élémentpermettant de comprendre cette motivation,et rappelé fermement les principes quiprotègent la profession, notamment l’immunitécivile et pénale qui doit être reconnue auxavocats pour toute déclaration pertinente faitede bonne foi dans le cadre de plaidoiriesécrites ou orales.

La réponse de l’Ordre des Avocats a faitnotamment apparaître un désaccordfondamental entre les parties sur les textesrégissant la profession et par conséquent surl’exercice des voies de recours dans le cadrede la procédure disciplinaire.

Le dialogue qui s’est installé avec l’Ordre anéanmoins permis d’envisager dès novembre2013 la tenue d’une médiation entre celui-ci etMe Mbomio. Me Fernando Tonim s’est doncrendu à Malabo à la fin du mois de janvier 2013et a pu conclure sa mission avec le plus grandsuccès.

L’UIA entend maintenir le dialogue avec lesautorités de l’Ordre des Avocats de Guinéeéquatoriale et œuvrer par différentes voiespour une meilleure reconnaissance par cebarreau des principes liés à l’indépendance desorganes régissant la profession.

1 Voir not. Le rapport de Human Rights Watch:www.hrw.org/news/2012/05/07/equatorial-guinea-opposition-figure-wrongly-convicted

Guinée ÉquatorialeUne médiation menée avec succès conduit à la levée de la sanction disciplinaire contre Me Ponciano Mbomio

La profession d'avocatThe Legal ProfessionLa Abogacía


Le Sénat International des Barreaux, convoquéle 31 octobre 2012 pendant les travaux ducongrès de Dresde, a largement traité le sujetdes ABS (alternative business structures).

Nous le savons, elles sont considérées commeune nouvelle forme d’exercice de la professiond’avocat, très développée surtout dans le mondeanglo-saxon.

En réalité, il s’agit de structures dans lesquellesles avocats sont reliés à d’autres professionnels,afin d’apporter un service complet au client.

Le débat est ouvert et l’UIA n’a pas encoreexprimé son avis à ce sujet, chargeant, toutefois,son Président d’honneur Delos N. Lutton deréaliser une étude.

Le présent article entend apporter unecontribution à ce débat, en rappelant que laCour de Justice de l’Union européenne s’estdéjà prononcée sur ce sujet dans un arrêt quiremonte à 10 ans. Le cas d’espèce concernait lacompatibilité avec les normes communautairesd’une loi hollandaise qui interdisait l’exercice dela profession d’avocat en collaboration avec unesociété d’expertise comptable.

L’affaire avait été soulevée par la voiepréjudicielle pour savoir si cette réglementationrestrictive violait les principes de la libreconcurrence ou était licite, voire nécessaire aubon fonctionnement de la profession d’avocat.

La Cour a répondu que cette réglementationest tout à fait licite, renforçant ainsi le principe del’incompatibilité de l’exercice de la professiond’avocat avec d’autres professionnels.

Voyons l’affaire: C-309/99, arrêt du 19 février2002:

M. Wouters, avocat au barreau d’Amsterdam,est devenu, en 1991, associé de la société ArthurAndersen & Co. Belastingadviseurs (conseillersfiscaux). À la fin de l’année 1994, M. Wouters a

informé le comité de surveillance de l’ordre desavocats de l’arrondissement de Rotterdam deson intention de se faire inscrire au barreau decette ville et d’y exercer sous la dénomination« Arthur Andersen & Co., advocaten enbelastingadviseurs ».

Par décision du 27 juillet 1995, ce comité aconsidéré que les associés de la société Arthur Andersen & Co. Belastingadviseursentretenaient un lien de collaboration, au sensde la Samenwerkingsverordening 1993, avec lesmembres de la société Arthur Andersen & Co.Accountants, c’est-à-dire avec des membres dela catégorie professionnelle des experts-comptables, de sorte que M.Wouters enfreignaitl’article 4 de la Samenwerkingsverordening1993. En outre, le comité a considéré que M. Wouters violerait l’article 8 de laSamenwerkingsverordening 1993 s’il entraitdans une collaboration dont la dénominationcollective mentionnerait le nom de la personnephysique « Arthur Andersen ».

Par décision du 29 novembre 1995, le Conseilgénéral a rejeté comme non fondés les recoursadministratifs que M.Wouters, Arthur Andersen& Co. Belastingadviseurs et Arthur Andersen &Co. Accountants avaient formés contre cettedécision.

Au début de l’année 1995, M. Savelbergh, avocatau barreau d’Amsterdam, a fait part au comitéde surveillance de l’ordre des avocats del’arrondissement d’Amsterdam de son intentionde nouer une collaboration avec la société PriceWaterhouse Belastingadviseurs BV, filiale del’entreprise internationale Price Waterhouse, quiregroupe non seulement des conseillers fiscauxmais aussi des experts-comptables.

Par décision du 5 juillet 1995, ce comité adéclaré que la collaboration envisagée étaitcontraire à l’article 4 de la Samenwerkings-verordening 1993.

Par décision du 21 novembre 1995, le Conseil

général a rejeté comme non fondé le recoursadministratif formé par M. Savelbergh et lasociété Price Waterhouse Belastingadviseurs BVcontre cette décision.

M. Wouters, Arthur Andersen & Co.Belastingadviseurs et Arthur Andersen & Co.Accountants, d’une part, et M. Savelbergh etPrice Waterhouse Belastingadviseurs BV, d’autrepart, ont alors introduit un recours devantl’Arrondissementsrechtbank te Amsterdam. Ilsont notamment fait valoir que les décisions duConseil général des 21 et 29 novembre 1995étaient incompatibles avec les dispositions dutraité en matière de concurrence, de droitd’établissement et de libre prestation desservices.

Par jugement du 7 février 1997, le Rechtbank adéclaré irrecevables les recours introduits parArthur Andersen & Co. Belastingadviseurs etArthur Andersen & Co. Accountants et rejetécomme non fondés ceux formés par M. Wouters, M. Savelbergh et la société PriceWaterhouse Belastingadviseurs BV.

Le Rechtbank a considéré que les dispositionsdu traité en matière de concurrence n’étaientpas applicables aux litiges au principal. Cettejuridiction a relevé que l’ordre néerlandais desavocats est un organisme de droit public instituépar la loi afin de promouvoir un intérêt général.À cet effet, il utiliserait, entre autres, le pouvoirréglementaire que lui a reconnu l’article 28 del’Advocatenwet. Il serait tenu de garantir, dansl’intérêt général, l’indépendance et la partialitéde l’avocat qui fournit une assistance juridique.Dès lors, l’ordre néerlandais des avocats neserait pas une association d’entreprises au sensde l’article 85 du traité. Il ne saurait non plus êtreconsidéré comme une entreprise ou comme ungroupement d’entreprises occupant uneposition dominante collective au sens de l’article86 du traité.

En outre, selon le Rechtbank, l’article 28 del’Advocatenwet ne transfère nullement des

ABS: les nouvelles frontièresde la profession d'avocat

I Bruno MICOLANO

compétences à des opérateurs privés d’unemanière qui porterait atteinte à l’effet utile desarticles 85 et 86 du traité. En conséquence, cettedisposition ne serait pas incompatible avecl’article 5, second alinéa, lu en combinaison avecles articles 3, sous g), 85 et 86 du traité.

Le Rechtbank a également écarté l’argumentationdes requérants selon laquelle la Samenwerkings-verordening 1993 serait incompatible avec ledroit d’établissement et la libre prestation desservices énoncés aux articles 52 et 59 du traité.L’aspect transfrontalier ferait défaut dans leslitiges au principal, si bien que lesditesdispositions du traité seraient inapplicables. Entout état de cause, l’interdiction de collaborationentre avocats et experts-comptables seraitjustifiée par des raisons impérieuses d’intérêtgénéral et ne serait pas démesurémentrestrictive. En l’absence de dispositionscommunautaires spécifiques en la matière, ilserait, en effet, loisible au Royaume des Pays-Basd’assortir l’exercice de la profession d’avocat surson territoire de règles visant à garantirl’indépendance et la partialité de l’avocatfournissant une assistance juridique.

Les cinq requérants ont fait appel de cettedécision devant le Raad van State.

Le Raad van de Balies van de EuropeseGemeenschap (Conseil des barreaux de laCommunauté européenne), qui est uneassociation de droit belge, a été admis àintervenir devant le Raad van State à l’appui desconclusions du Conseil général.

Par un arrêt rendu le 10 août 1999, le Raad vanState a confirmé l’irrecevabilité des recoursformés par Arthur Andersen & Co.Belastingadviseurs et Arthur Andersen & Co.Accountants. S’agissant des autres recours, il aconsidéré que la solution des litiges au principaldépendait de l’interprétation de plusieursdispositions de droit communautaire.

Le Raad van State se demande, d’une part, si, enarrêtant la Samenwerkingsverordening 1993 envertu des pouvoirs qu’il tient de l’article 28 del’Advocatenwet, le Collège des délégués n’a pasviolé les articles 85 et 86 du traité et, d’autrepart, si, en habilitant, par l’article 28 del’Advocatenwet, ledit Collège à arrêter desrèglements, le législateur national n’a pas violéles articles 5, 85 et 86 du traité. En outre, il se

demande si la Samenwerkingsverordening 1993est compatible avec la liberté d’établissement,énoncée à l’article 52 du traité, et avec la libreprestation des services, énoncée à l’article 59 dutraité.

Aussi le Raad van State a-t-il décidé de surseoirà statuer et de poser à la Cour les questionspréjudicielles suivantes:

«1) a) Convient-il d’interpréter l’expressionassociation d’entreprises figurant à l’article85, paragraphe 1, du traité CE (devenu article81, paragraphe 1, CE) en ce sens qu’on ne setrouvera en présence d’une telle associationque lorsque, et dans la mesure où, une telleassociation agit dans l’intérêt d’opérateurs, sibien qu’il convient de distinguer, pourl’application de cette disposition, les activitésque l’association déploie dans l’intérêtgénéral des autres activités, ou le seul faitqu’une association peut également agir dansl’intérêt des opérateurs suffit-il pour laqualifier d’association d’entreprises au sensde cette disposition pour l’ensemble de sonaction? Le fait que les règles généralementcontraignantes adoptées par l’organisme encause l’ont été en vertu de pouvoirslégislatifs et en qualité de législateurparticulier a-t-il une incidence pourl’application du droit communautaire de laconcurrence?

b) S’il est répondu à la première question, sousa), qu’il ne s’agira d’une associationd’entreprises que lorsque, et dans la mesureoù, une association agit dans l’intérêtd’opérateurs, le droit communautairedétermine-t-il – également – quand il s’agit dela sauvegarde de l’intérêt général et quand cen’est pas le cas?

c) S’il est répondu à la première question, sousb), que le droit communautaire intervient àcet égard, permet-il également de considérerque l’adoption par un organisme tel quel’ordre [néerlandais des avocats], en vertud’un pouvoir législatif destiné à garantirl’indépendance et la partialité de l’avocatfournissant une assistance juridique, de règlesgénéralement contraignantes régissant laconclusion de collaborations entre avocats etautres professionnels poursuit l’intérêtgénéral?

2) S’il y a lieu de conclure, sur la base desréponses à la première question, sous a), b) etc), qu’un règlement tel que [la Samenwerkings-verordening 1993] doit également êtreconsidéré comme une décision prise par uneassociation d’entreprises au sens de l’article85, paragraphe 1, du traité CE (devenu article81, paragraphe 1, CE), y a-t-il dès lors lieu deconsidérer qu’une telle décision, dans lamesure où elle arrête des règlesgénéralement contraignantes régissant laconclusion de collaborations du type encause en l’espèce afin de garantirl’indépendance et la partialité de l’avocatfournissant une assistance juridique, a pourobjet ou pour effet de restreindre laconcurrence à l’intérieur du marchécommun dans une mesure telle que leséchanges entre États membres en sontaffectés? Quels critères découlant du droitcommunautaire sont pertinents pourrépondre à cette question?

3) Y a-t-il lieu d’interpréter le terme entreprisefigurant à l’article 86 du traité CE (devenuarticle 82 CE) en ce sens que, si un organismetel que l’ordre [néerlandais des avocats] doitêtre considéré comme une associationd’entreprises, ledit organisme doit égalementêtre considéré comme une entreprise ou ungroupement d’entreprises au sens de cettedisposition, bien qu’il ne déploie lui-mêmeaucune activité économique?

4) Si la réponse à la question précédente estaffirmative et si, dès lors, il faut estimer qu’unorganisme tel que l’ordre [néerlandais desavocats] occupe une position dominante, untel organisme abuse-t-il de cette position encontraignant les avocats qui lui sont affiliés àse comporter, sur le marché de la prestationde services juridiques, vis-à-vis d’autrespersonnes d’une manière qui restreint laconcurrence?

5) Si un organisme tel que l’ordre [néerlandaisdes avocats] doit être considéré dans sonensemble comme une association d’entreprisesaux fins de l’application des règlescommunautaires de concurrence, y a-t-il lieud’interpréter l’article 90, paragraphe 2, dutraité CE (devenu article 86, paragraphe 2,CE) en ce sens qu’en relève également unorganisme tel que l’ordre [néerlandais desavocats] qui arrête des règles généralement



contraignantes concernant la collaborationentre avocats et autres professionnels dans lebut de garantir l’indépendance et la partialitéde l’avocat fournissant une assistancejuridique?

6) S’il y a lieu de considérer l’ordre [néerlandaisdes avocats] comme une associationd’entreprises, ou comme une entreprise ouun groupement d’entreprises, les articles 3,sous g), du traité CE [devenu, aprèsmodification, article 3, paragraphe 1, sous g),CE], 5, second alinéa du traité CE (devenuarticle 10, second alinéa, CE), 85 et 86 dutraité CE (devenus articles 81 CE et 82 CE)font-ils obstacle à ce qu’un État membreconfère à cet organisme (ou à un de sesorganes) le pouvoir d’arrêter des règlespouvant avoir trait, entre autres, à lacollaboration entre avocats et autresprofessionnels, alors que la tutelle desautorités sur ce processus ne leur permetque d’annuler un tel règlement sans pouvoirsubstituer leur propre règlement à celuiqu’elles ont annulé?

7) Une interdiction de collaboration entreavocats et experts-comptables, comme enl’espèce, est-elle soumise à la fois auxdispositions du traité consacrées au droitd’établissement et à celles consacrées à lalibre prestation des services, ou y a-t-il lieud’interpréter le traité CE en ce sens qu’unetelle interdiction doit satisfaire soit auxdispositions en matière de droit d’établissement,soit aux dispositions en matière de libreprestation des services, par exemple selon lamanière dont les intéressés souhaitenteffectivement réaliser leur collaboration?

8) L’interdiction d’un lien de collaborationintégré entre avocats et experts-comptables,comme en l’espèce, constitue-t-elle unerestriction au droit d’établissement, à la libreprestation des services, ou aux deux?

9) S’il résulte de la réponse à la questionprécédente que l’on se trouve en présencede l’une des deux restrictions qui y sontcitées, ou des deux, ladite restriction sejustifie-t-elle alors au motif qu’elle nerecouvre qu’une modalité de vente au sensde l’arrêt [du 24 novembre 1993,] Keck etMithouard [(C-267/91 et C-268/91, Rec. p. I-6097),] et n’est donc pas discriminatoire, ou

au motif qu’elle répond aux conditions que laCour a développées à cet effet dans d’autresarrêts, notamment dans l’arrêt [du 30novembre 1995,] Gebhard [(C-55/94, Rec. p.I-4165)]?».

La Cour a ainsi établi, entre autres:

À cet égard, il convient de prendre en compte lecadre juridique applicable aux Pays-Bas,respectivement, d’une part, aux avocats et àl’ordre néerlandais des avocats, composé detous les avocats inscrits dans cet État membre,et, d’autre part, aux experts-comptables.

S’agissant des avocats, il convient de rappeler àtitre liminaire que, selon une jurisprudenceconstante, en l’absence de règles communautairesspécifiques en la matière, chaque État membrereste, en principe, libre de régler l’exercice de laprofession d’avocat sur son territoire (voirarrêts du 12 juillet 1984, Klopp, 107/83, Rec. p.2971, point 17, et Reisebüro Broede, précité,point 37). Les règles applicables à cetteprofession peuvent, de ce fait, différersubstantiellement d’un État membre à l’autre.

Selon les conceptions en vigueur aux Pays-Bas,où l’ordre national des avocats est chargé parl’article 28 de l’Advocatenwet d’arrêter laréglementation devant assurer l’exercicecorrect de la profession d’avocat, les règlesessentielles adoptées à cet effet sontnotamment le devoir de défendre son client entoute indépendance et dans l’intérêt exclusif decelui-ci, celui, déjà mentionné, d’éviter toutrisque de conflit d’intérêts ainsi que le devoir derespecter un strict secret professionnel.

Ces obligations déontologiques ont desimplications non négligeables sur la structure dumarché des services juridiques, et plusparticulièrement sur les possibilités d’exercerconjointement la profession d’avocat et d’autresprofessions libérales actives sur ce marché.

Ainsi, elles imposent que l’avocat se trouve dansune situation d’indépendance vis-à-vis despouvoirs publics, des autres opérateurs et destiers, dont il convient qu’il ne subisse jamaisl’influence. Il doit offrir, à cet égard, la garantieque toutes les initiatives qu’il prend dans undossier le sont en considération de l’intérêtexclusif du client.

La profession des experts-comptables n’est, enrevanche, pas soumise, en général et plusparticulièrement aux Pays-Bas, à des exigencesdéontologiques comparables.

À cet égard, ainsi que M. l’avocat général l’arelevé à juste titre aux points 185 et 186 de sesconclusions, il peut exister une certaineincompatibilité entre l’activité de « conseil »,exercée par l’avocat, et celle de « contrôle »,exercée par l’expert-comptable. Il ressort desobservations déposées par le défendeur auprincipal que, aux Pays-Bas, l’expert-comptableexerce une mission de certification descomptes. À ce titre, il procède à un examen et àun contrôle objectifs de la comptabilité de sesclients, de manière à pouvoir communiquer auxtiers intéressés son opinion personnelle quant àla fiabilité de ces données comptables. Il s’ensuitque, dans l’État membre concerné, il n’est passoumis à un secret professionnel comparable àcelui de l’avocat, contrairement à ce que prévoit,par exemple, le droit allemand.

Il y a, dès lors, lieu de constater que laSamenwerkingsverordening 1993 vise à assurer,dans l’État membre concerné, le respect de ladéontologie de la profession d’avocat qui y estapplicable et que, compte tenu des conceptionsde cette profession qui y prévalent, l’ordrenéerlandais des avocats a pu considérer quel’avocat pourrait ne plus être en mesure deconseiller et de défendre son client de manièreindépendante et dans le respect d’un strictsecret professionnel s’il appartenait à unestructure qui a également pour mission derendre compte des résultats financiers desopérations pour lesquelles il est intervenu et deles certifier.

Au demeurant, le cumul des activités decontrôle légal des comptes et de conseil,notamment juridique, soulève également desquestions au sein même de la profession desexperts-comptables, ainsi que l’atteste le livrevert 96/C 321/01 de la Commission, intitulé« Rôle, statut et responsabilité du contrôleurlégal des comptes dans l’Union européenne »(JO 1996, C 321, p. 1; voir spécialement lespoints 4.12 à 4.14).

Un règlement tel que la Samenwerkings-verordening 1993 a, dès lors, pu êtreraisonnablement considéré comme nécessairepour garantir le bon exercice de la profession

d’avocat, telle qu’elle est organisée dans l’Étatmembre concerné.

Par ailleurs, le fait que des règles différentessoient, le cas échéant, applicables dans un autreÉtat membre ne signifie pas que les règles envigueur dans le premier État soientincompatibles avec le droit communautaire (voir,en ce sens, arrêt du 1er février 2001, Mac Quene.a., C-108/96, Rec. p. I-837, point 33). Même si,dans certains États membres, les collaborationsintégrées entre les avocats et les experts-comptables sont admises, l’ordre néerlandaisdes avocats est en droit de considérer que lesobjectifs poursuivis par la Samenwerkings-verordening 1993 ne peuvent pas, compte tenunotamment du régime juridique auquel sontsoumis respectivement les avocats et lesexperts-comptables aux Pays-Bas, être atteintspar des moyens moins restrictifs (voir, en cesens, à propos d’une loi réservant l’activité derecouvrement judiciaire de créances auxavocats, arrêt Reisebüro Broede, précité, point41).

Au vu de ces éléments, il n’apparaît pas que leseffets restrictifs de la concurrence tels que ceuximposés aux avocats opérant aux Pays-Bas parun règlement tel que la Samenwerkings-verordening 1993 aillent au-delà de ce qui estnécessaire pour assurer l’exercice correct de laprofession d’avocat (voir, en ce sens, arrêt du 15décembre 1994, DLG, C-250/92, Rec. p. I-5641,point 35).

À la lumière de cette motivation, la Cour a doncdécidé:

1) Un règlement relatif à la collaboration entreles avocats et d’autres professions libéralestel que la Samenwerkingsverordening 1993(règlement de 1993 sur la collaboration),adopté par un organisme tel que leNederlandse Orde van Advocaten (ordrenéerlandais des avocats), doit être considérécomme une décision prise par uneassociation d’entreprises, au sens de l’article85, paragraphe 1, du traité CE (devenu article81, paragraphe 1, CE).

2) Une réglementation nationale telle que laSamenwerkingsverordening 1993 adoptéepar un organisme tel que le NederlandseOrde van Advocaten n’enfreint pas l’article85, paragraphe 1 du traité, étant donné que

cet organisme a pu raisonnablementconsidérer que ladite réglementation,nonobstant les effets restrictifs de laconcurrence qui lui sont inhérents, s’avèrenécessaire au bon exercice de la professiond’avocat telle qu’elle est organisée dans l’Étatmembre concerné.

3) Un organisme tel que le Nederlandse Ordevan Advocaten ne constitue ni une entrepriseni un groupement d’entreprises au sens del’article 86 du traité CE (devenu article 82CE).

4) Les articles 52 et 59 du traité CE (devenus,après modification, articles 43 CE et 49 CE)ne s‘opposent pas à une réglementationnationale telle que la Samenwerkings-verordening 1993, qui interdit toutecollaboration intégrée entre les avocats et lesexperts-comptables, étant donné que celle-cia pu être raisonnablement considéréecomme nécessaire au bon exercice de laprofession d’avocat telle qu’elle est organiséedans le pays concerné.

En Europe, le débat sur les ABS ne peut doncfaire abstraction de cet arrêt important.

Bruno MICOLANOPrésident du 58e congrès de l’UIA

Studio MicolanoMilan, Italie

[email protected]

Ainsi s’exprimait le Président Jean-MarieBurguburu, à la fin de la séance du SénatInternational des Barreaux, tenue à Macao le 1er

novembre 2013, dans le cadre du congrès annuelde l’Union Internationale des Avocats (UIA).

Le Sénat International des Barreaux a été créépar l’UIA comme un organe consultatif pourpermettre aux Bâtonniers, Présidents debarreaux et d’organisations internationalesd’avocats, tant locales, que nationales etinternationales, de débattre sur des sujetsd’actualité touchant au droit, à la déontologie, àl’éthique et aux valeurs fondamentales de laprofession d’avocat.

Quel sujet plus d’actualité que celui du « cloudcomputing », connu au Québec sous le nom de« infonuagique » aurait pu être discuté?

L’avis de convocation à la séance, sous laresponsabilité du Président et de la Vice-Présidente du Sénat et de l’UIA, Jean-MarieBurguburu et Huguette André-Coret, se voulaitprovocateur:

« Les valeurs fondamentales de la professionsont-elles menacées? »

« À l’aire de la mondialisation, peut-on envisagerde ne pas avoir recours à cette nouvelletechnologie? »

tout en proposant des pistes de discussion:

▪ La technologie du cloud computing est enconstante progression dans les entreprises quil’utilisent largement.

▪ La profession d’avocat se doit d’accom-pagnerses clients et de relever avec eux le défi del’économie numérique.

▪ Les avantages de l’informatique en nuage sontcertains, les dangers sont réels.



▪ Comment arrêter le problème majeur de laprotection des données et trouver dessolutions qui prennent en compte lesobligations professionnelles et réglementairesqui doivent rester une priorité absolue pourles avocats.

Ouvrant la séance, le Président Burguburu, aprèsavoir fait un court survol de la question et aprèsavoir rappelé la mise en garde concernant lesdangers potentiels, d’une façon provocatricelançait:

« Y a-t-il encore un vrai secret professionnel? »

La Vice-Présidente, Huguette André-Coret, nousrappelait que la profession avait été forcéed’évoluer rapidement au cours des dernièresannées:

▪ Une première révolution fut l’introduction del’Internet et les moyens techniques etnumériques auxquels la profession a dûs’habituer.

▪ La 2e révolution serait-elle le stockage de nosdonnées sur des serveurs externes, le cloudcomputing?

La Vice-Présidente rappelait que différentsorganismes, dont le Conseil des barreauxeuropéens (CCBE) ainsi que l’American BarAssociation (ABA) ont émis des directives poursoutenir les avocats dans la transition vers cenouvel outil et son utilisation.

Elle insistait également sur l’importance de biensaisir les enjeux rattachés au cloud computing ensoulignant que comme professionnels, nousavions à participer à la réussite du barreaunumérique.

Ce fut ensuite Nicholas Fluck, Président de laLaw Society of England and Wales qui rappelaitque la profession devait s’ajuster à ces nouvellestechnologies, expliquant que leur mise en places’inscrit dans la continuité de la modernisation de

notre société: alors qu’auparavant, les villagesfaisaient appel à de la fourniture locale àl’électricité, aujourd’hui, ils se retournent vers dessystèmes plus globaux et même externes: lecloud computing est une nouveauté de mêmenature.

L’un des avantages du cloud computing, c’est de nepayer que pour les services que l’on utilise. Il y aégalement des désavantages rattachés à lacompréhension du système, de nos besoins etdes risques qui viennent avec l’utilisation de cettenouvelle technologie.

Le Président Fluck nous rappelait que mêmeavec ces nouvelles technologies, les avocats nepeuvent oublier une des raisons fondamentalesde l’existence de la profession, soit la protectionde la confidentialité des informationsappartenant à nos clients.

Ce fut ensuite au tour du Président AmbroseLam de la Law Society of Hong Kong, qui nousmettait également en garde contre les risquespouvant découler de l’accès par les organismesgouvernementaux aux informations confidentiellesque les avocats détiennent alors que certainsÉtats ont adopté des législations qui permettentun large accès à l’information détenue par tous, ycompris les avocats, sans faire de discriminationentre la source de provenance de l’information.

Le Président Lam faisait remarquer qu’il n’y avaitpas encore, à ce jour, de législation ou deconvention internationale sur l’utilisation ducloud computing et que c’était là un des sujetsauquel devait s’adresser l’ensemble de laprofession par le biais d’organismes internationauxcomme l’Union Internationale des Avocats.

Le Président Lam fut suivi par Monsieur Jani Trias,membre du Conseil de l’Ordre du Barreau deBarcelone. Ce dernier mentionnait le côtéconservateur de la profession, soulignant que lesavocats étaient friands de la conservation jalousedes documents qui provenaient de leurs clientset qui constituaient leurs dossiers.

De là, il conclut à une certaine imprudence dansla conservation des documents qui pouvait,malheureusement, se traduire trop facilementpar un simple transfert vers du stockagenumérique. Il était aussi d’avis que les ordresprofessionnels ont l’obligation de former etinformer les avocats des risques qui découlent del’utilisation du cloud computing tant par le biais deconférences que de textes et de publications.

Il notait que cette technologie est ici pourdemeurer et qu’on ne peut tout simplement pasfermer les yeux en espérant qu’elle disparaisse; ilconstatait également que par tradition, laréglementation est toujours en retard sur lesnouvelles technologies mais qu’il fallait tout fairepour rattraper ce retard.

Monsieur Trias rappelait que l’on devaitsérieusement envisager l’obligation d’imposerdes mesures de sécurité à la conservationd’informations confidentielles non seulement auxprofessionnels, mais faire en sorte que lesentreprises de conservation de l’information surbase numérique, soient également liées par uneobligation stricte de sécurité.

Nous avons ensuite entendu le Président duCCBE, Monsieur Evangelos Tsouroulis, quiexposait également les avantages de latechnologie numérique et les risques auxquelson devait sensibiliser les avocats. MonsieurTsouroulis soulignait l’obligation des professionnelsde s’assurer de la protection du secretprofessionnel, et de façon corollaire, de vérifierles effets de l’implantation et de l’utilisation decette nouvelle technologie sur cette obligationfondamentale.

Monsieur Tsouroulis souhaitait l’intervention desBarreaux étant d’avis que ces derniers ontl’obligation d’informer leurs membres, nonseulement sur les lois nationales qui s’appliquentà eux, mais également sur le droit étranger quipourrait devenir applicable dans la mesure où leserveur numérique se retrouverait dans unejuridiction extérieure.

Le Cloud Computing "Tout comme la langue d’Ésope, c'est à la fois la meilleure et la pire des choses !"

I Francis GERVAIS

macao

Nous avons ensuite entendu Monsieur JamesSilkenat, Président de l’ABA. Il citait dessondages démontrant que déjà 30 % desavocats utilisent le système d’entreposagenumérique, ce qui avait incité l’ABA à mettreen place un comité qui a déposé desrecommandations dont les principales sont:

▪ Un avocat devrait savoir quel fournisseur de services d’entreposage détient desinformations et comment elles sont protégées.

▪ L’avocat devrait s’assurer que son fournisseurprocède à l’encryptage des données.

▪ Le système devrait pouvoir permettre laradiation complète et sans exception desinformations qui se trouvent dans lessystèmes de stockage numérique, tout ens’assurant que pendant qu’elles y sont, lesavocats puissent en tout temps obtenir copiedes informations emmagasinées.

▪ Lorsque l’information qui sera transmisepour fins d’emmagasinage dans les systèmesnumériques, comporte des informationsimportantes pour le client, ce dernier devraitau préalable être informé de l’envoi de cesinformations dans des systèmes numériquesde stockage.

▪ Le contrat avec le fournisseur devraitcontenir une disposition imposant aufournisseur d’informer l’avocat lorsque lesdonnées qu’il conserve font l’objet d’uneprocédure judiciaire quelconque, tellequ’assignation à témoigner, mandat deperquisition, commission rogatoire et autres.

Monsieur Silkenat a souligné que l’ABA étaitconsciente des coûts d’implantation d’unsystème d’emmagasinage numérique, mais quela solution ne se trouve pas dans un système« bon pour tous » (one size fits all).

Finalement, nous avons entendu le BâtonnierYves Repiquet, qui avait accepté dereprésenter le Bâtonnier Christiane Féral-Schuhl, laquelle, pour des raisonsprofessionnelles, n’avait pu être présente. Lescommentaires du Bâtonnier Féral-Schuhlétaient attendus. Cette dernière exerçantdepuis de nombreuses années dans le secteurdu droit de l’information et des nouvellestechnologies et s’étant distinguée dans ce

domaine. Le Bâtonnier Repiquet a fait part dela position du Bâtonnier Féral-Schuhl tout en yajoutant une touche personnelle.

Ce dernier nous rappelait que le Barreaunumérique devenait une réalité et comprenantle cloud computing. Il rappelait que les avocatsdevaient s’y adapter sans, toutefois, oublier lesrisques qui découlent de l’utilisation de cettenouvelle technologie.

Tout comme plusieurs des orateurs quil’avaient précédé, il évoquait les risquesrattachés aux délais, à la restauration desservices en cas de panne, les chaînes decontrats, les défaillances, les exigences desécurité, les garanties que l’on peut exiger dufournisseur de même que la réaction que l’ondoit avoir en cas de fouille par l’État, tout enexprimant l’avis que des ordres doivents’investir dans la pédagogie mais non dans lafourniture des services.

L’intervenant insistait également sur le rôle desassociations internationales, entre autre poursoutenir la mise en place d’accordsinternationaux, de recommandations ou deguides pour que ne se perde pas l’une descaractéristiques fondamentales de notreprofession, la confiance que doivent avoir nosclients à notre égard sachant que nous feronstout, comme avocat, pour conserver laconfidentialité de leurs informations.

Après ces présentations, la Vice-PrésidenteHuguette André-Coret rappelait l’importancede la mise en place de ces systèmes et citaitPascal Buffard, Président du réseau des grandesentreprises CIGREF, lequel, lors d’une récenteconférence, indiquait: « La transformation dumonde et de l’entreprise à laquelle nous assistonsest une rupture identique, par son ampleur, à cellede la Renaissance et du passage de l’écrit aumanuscrit. Nous sommes en train de vivre la 3e

révolution de l’humanité après le passage de l’oralà l’écrit et de l’écrit à l’imprimerie ».1

Ce fut ensuite aux personnes présentes dans lasalle d’intervenir et de faire connaître leur pointde vue sur le cloud computing. Plusieursintervenants sont revenus sur différents pointsqui avaient été soulevés, en relation avec lesavantages ou les désavantages découlant de lamise en place de cette nouvelle technologie.

Plusieurs personnes ont observé que les ordresprofessionnels avaient un rôle actif à jouer: celuid’informer et de former leurs membres.

Parmi les intervenants, le Bâtonnier JeanCastelain se demandait s’il ne serait pasopportun que les ordres professionnelsparticipent à un programme de « labellisation dessystèmes » ou de certification d’un système quipourrait être utilisé par les membres. Ainsi, lesmembres pourraient, proposer à leurs clientsd’utiliser un système d’emmagasinage numériquede données, garanti par la profession etgarantissant la sécurité de l’information. Cettequestion a suscité beaucoup d’intérêt.

Me Jean-François Henrotte, nous mettait engarde contre la diabolisation du cloud couputing.Ce n’est pas parce qu’il y a des désavantages qu’ilfaut nécessairement repousser sa mise en placeet son utilisation. Au contraire, nous devrons,comme professionnels, apprendre à mieuxconnaître les niveaux de sécurité et les dangersqui découlent de son utilisation pour éviter lesécueils qui se présenteraient à nous.

Le Bâtonnier Gérald Tremblay, Président enexercice de la Fédération des OrdresProfessionnels de Juristes du Canada, soulignaitque la mise en place du cloud computing amenaitun changement dans la terminologie. L’utilisationdu numérique fait en sorte que plus jamais nousne pourrons être certains de la “destructiontotale” des informations, car en matièrenumérique, il existe toujours une trace ou, à toutle moins, des éléments retraçables par desspécialistes. Le Bâtonnier Tremblay se demandaitsi, avec ces prémisses, on pouvait quand mêmecertifier, malgré notre bonne foi, la sécurité totalede l’utilisation d’un système de stockagenumérique.

Les mesures de sécurité, dit-il, rendent plusdifficile l’accès aux données mais personne nepeut certifier qu’il y a un accès impossible auxinformations.

Le Président désigné, Stephen L. Dreyfuss, estégalement intervenu rappelant les avantages del’utilisation du cloud computing. Par exemple,lorsque, pour différentes raisons, l’étude estparalysée dans son activité et même à l’occasion,complètement anéantie.


macao


Sur ce point, le Bâtonnier du Québec, JohanneBrodeur, signalait un événement récent dontplusieurs bureaux avaient été victimes, détruisantleurs locaux et entraînant la perte desinformations que détenaient les avocats.

Elle suggérait à l’Union Internationale desAvocats de procéder à un recensement desdifférentes règles qui existent en matièred’utilisation de cloud computing, informations quipourraient devenir accessibles par leurpublication sur le site Web de l’UIA.

Pour le mot de la fin, le Président Burgubururappelait que le cloud computing est comme lalangue d’Ésope: il est capable du meilleur commedu pire. À cet effet, il mentionnait que le cloudcomputing était à la fois utile et dangereux parcequ’il pouvait, par exemple, emporter ladestruction des données tout comme il pouvaitéviter leur destruction et perte totale.Le Président Burguburu a fait part desconclusions qu’il retenait:

▪ Il est impossible de travailler sans avoir recoursà l’Internet et, de ce fait, au cloud computing.

▪ Il y a une absence de garantie totale de laconfidentialité qui découlerait de l’utilisation decette technologie.

▪ Il y a inefficacité de toutes les mesures deprotection qui pourraient être mises en place,qu’elles soient techniques ou juridiques.

Toutefois, ne voulant pas laisser une impressionpessimiste, il concluait:

▪ Nous ne pouvons reculer, mais seulementcontinuer dans la mise en place de l’utilisation dece service.

▪ Nous devons être plus attentifs que nousl’avons été quant aux risques et avantages quidécoulent de l’utilisation du cloud computing.

▪ Nous devons être conscients de la protectionde nos règles d’éthique et, à cet effet, il nousrappelait qu’il n’est peut-être pas approprié deconsigner aveuglément toutes les informationsque nous avons dans nos ordinateurs et quepeut-être certaines d’entre elles pouvaientêtre conservées secrètes.

▪ Il y a toutefois une double protection qui

provient du cloud computing à cause de laquantité énorme d’informations s’y trouvantrendant ainsi plus difficile de repérer uneinformation pointue qui pourrait, l’avoue-t-il,toutefois être retrouvée par hasard.

Donnant suite aux recommandations venant desparticipants, le Sénat International des Barreauxvous propose un court résumé de ce que l’onpourrait appeler, de façon non limitative, lesavantages et les risques qui découlent du cloudcomputing. Cette liste embryonnaire est toutefoissuffisamment élaborée pour permettre decontinuer la réflexion.

Avantages et risques DU CLOUD COMPUTING

I Avantages

1) Les données vous suivent partout;

2) Pas nécessaire d’acheter, d’installer etmaintenir des logiciels;

3) Utilisation de l’espace requis uniquement;

4) Mises à jour automatiques et instantanées;

5) Pas de gestion de système à mettre en place;

6) Éviter des pertes de profitabilité lors dechangements technologiques;

7) Réduction significative des frais généraux etdes dépenses afférentes aux technologies del’information (T.I.);

8) Possibilité de bénéficier de servicesinformatiques réduits et modelés à sesbesoins sans dépendre de leur localisation;

9) Façon rentable et commode d’entreposer dumatériel et de partager des donnéesélectroniques avec d’autres, y compris desclients et d’autres avocats.

I Risques

1) La réputation du fournisseur:▪ entreprise en démarrage;▪ expectative de longévité;

▪ l’historique de l’entreprise;▪ sa rapidité pour corriger des problèmes;▪ ses références;▪ sa fiabilité;▪ sa rapidité pour la mise à jour des services

fournis.

2) L’accès à vos propres données:▪ accès doit être rapide;▪ sans restrictions aucunes;▪ solution possible: entiercement des données?

3) Interruption des services du fournisseur:▪ la reprise des données;▪ les mécanismes en cas de conflit lors de la

terminaison des services;▪ expurgation complète des données du serveur

du fournisseur.

4) La nécessité de mots de passe:▪ qualité et étendue de la protection;▪ la surveillance par le fournisseur pour éviter

des activités suspectes.

5) La politique du fournisseur quant à la gestionde données confidentielles:

▪ gestion des données par le fournisseur et sesemployés;

▪ présence obligatoire d’obligations exécutoiresquant à la protection de la confidentialité et lasécurité des données;

▪ présence obligatoire d’un avis en cas d’obligationde dévoilement à des tiers.

6) Usage de cryptage par le fournisseur.

7) La politique de sauvegarde des données dufournisseur:

▪ fréquence;▪ dans un ou plusieurs lieux;▪ procéder aussi à vos propres sauvegardes.

8) Le système de sécurité du fournisseur:◆ Sécurité opérationnelle (procédures d’accès)◆ Sécurité des programmes (logiciels)▪ remise de ses procédures de base;▪ mise en place de murs coupe-feu;▪ mise en place de détecteurs de virus;▪ fréquence des inspections du système.

9) Les systèmes de sécurité des lieux (sécuritématérielle):

▪ locaux du fournisseur ou▪ sous location ou▪ co-location

macao

10) Les conditions du contrat de services:▪ examiner l’entente;▪ examiner les accords de licence et autres

ententes de service;▪ identifier les dispositions traitant de

confidentialité, sécurité et propriété desdonnées;

▪ les clauses de non-responsabilité;▪ les représentations;▪ les garanties;▪ les clauses de limitation de responsabilité;▪ les clauses d’indemnisation;▪ les couvertures d’assurance;▪ la loi applicable;▪ le niveau de services offert;▪ la sous-traitance;▪ les pénalités en cas de non-respect des

obligations; ▪ les modalités et conditions en cas de résiliation.

11) Les règles quant à la confidentialité ou ausecret professionnel en vigueur dans leslieux où le serveur se retrouve:

▪ le choix de l’État ou du pays;▪ le choix de la loi applicable;▪ les dispositions des lois concernant l’accès à

l’information;▪ les avis en cas d’atteinte à la protection des

données.

12) Les moyens de relève mis en place en casde:

▪ discontinuité des affaires;▪ désastre naturel.

Bâtonnier Francis GERVAISPrésident du Comité national du Canada de l’UIA

Secrétaire Général du Sénat International des Barreaux de l’UIA

Deveau, Bourgeois, Gagné, Hébert & Associées Laval, Canada

[email protected]

1 Le Figaro, 2 juillet 2013

I I. Prólogo

El abogado es el máximo valedor/interlocutor enel ejercicio del derecho de defensa de losintereses del ciudadano (art. 24.1), garantíaconstitucional inescindible del derechofundamental a la libertad de expresión quedimana del art. 20 de la Constitución Española, yque el letrado plasma día a día ante los tribunalesen nombre de su cliente.

Defensa y libertad de expresión se desenvuelvende forma inseparable formando las dos caras deuna misma moneda, y esta técnica o facultad deexpresión del abogado en ejercicio se consideraen el mundo occidental especialmente resistentey cualificada dada la naturaleza fundamental delos derechos ejercitados, teoría que nace de lasingular sentencia del Tribunal Europeo deDerechos Humanos de 22 de Febrero de 1.989,nº 3. (Caso BARFORD) y que en esencia viene apermitir una mayor beligerancia en la dialécticadel letrado, altamente inmune a ser censurada ocorregida, dado el carácter fundamental de latarea encomendada.

Esta resolución internacional se inspira y partedel art. 10.2 del Convenio para la protección delos derechos humanos y de las libertadesfundamentales, hecho en Roma el 4 denoviembre de 1950 que determina el derechode toda persona a la libertad de expresión, salvo“ciertas formalidades, condiciones, restriccioneso sanciones, previstas en la Ley”, para garantizar“la autoridad y la imparcialidad del Poder Judicial”según la siguiente redacción:

El ejercicio de estas libertades, que entrañandeberes y responsabilidades, podrá ser sometidoa ciertas formalidades, condiciones, restriccioneso sanciones previstas por la ley, que constituyanmedidas necesarias, en una sociedaddemocrática, para la seguridad nacional, laintegridad territorial o la seguridad pública, ladefensa del orden y la prevención del delito, laprotección de la salud o de la moral, la protecciónde la reputación o de los derechos ajenos, para

impedir la divulgación de informacionesconfidenciales o para garantizar la autoridad y laimparcialidad del poder judicial.

Por lo tanto, y como sucede con todos losderechos, incluso los fundamentales de lapersona, existe o debe existir un límite en suejercicio, y esta cualificada libertad de expresiónno puede convertirse en una patente de corsoque permita, por ejemplo, verter críticasgratuitas, innecesariamente exacerbadas oincluso injuriosas o difamatorias hacia losintervinientes en el proceso o miembros de lacarrera judicial, habiéndose perfilado y definidocasuísticamente por la doctrina constitucional elalcance del escudo protector del derecho dedefensa, anulando o confirmando lascorrecciones o sanciones disciplinariasimpuestas a letrados por las Salas de Gobiernoespañolas.

Por cierto, estas medidas disciplinarias,impuestas por los tribunales y confirmadas porlas Salas de Gobierno de los TSJ han sidoconsideradas desde antiguo por el TribunalSupremo (S. de 19 de Julio de 1997) a raíz de lasanción a un letrado cacereño dictada por la Sala2ª de la Audiencia Provincial de Cáceres, y elTribunal Constitucional (Sentencias 38/98 y92/95) como resoluciones jurisdiccionales y nomeros actos administrativos, al darse contraabogados en el curso de un procedimiento, ydictadas con todas las garantías, aún tratándosede funciones de policía de estrados, y por tanto,excluidas de su revisión por la vía contenciosoadministrativa, no siendo susceptibles derecurso contencioso.

Recientemente, en el asunto Reznik contra Rusia,Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos(Sección 1ª) Sentencia de 4 de abril de2013. TEDH 2013\66, el Tribunal otorga elamparo a una abogada rusa, sancionada por elColegio de abogados de Moscú por unasupuesta extralimitación en sus declaracionesante un programa televisivo, y ello manifestandoque:



El demandante es abogado de profesión ypresidente del Colegio de Abogados deMoscú. Cierto es que el status especial delos abogados les confiere una posicióncentral en la Administración de Justicia comointermediarios entre ciudadanos ytribunales, y tal posición explica lasrestricciones habituales en elcomportamiento de los miembros delColegio de Abogados. Sin embargo, tal ycomo el Tribunal ha subrayado en repetidasocasiones, los abogados también tienenderecho a la libertad de expresión y a opinarpúblicamente sobre la Administración deJusticia, siempre y cuando sus críticas norebasen ciertos límites (véase, entre otras,Sentencias Kyprianou contra Chipre (GS), núm.73797/2001 [JUR 2006, 237] , aps. 173-174,TEDH 2005-XIII; Amihalachioaie contraMoldavia, núm. 60115/2000 [JUR 2004,122814] , ap. 27, TEDH 2004-III, y Nikulacontra Finlandia, núm. 31611/1996 [JUR 2002,78022], ap. 45, TEDH 2002-II)

Sobre las injerencias en el derecho a la libertadde expresión en el ámbito de la justicia puedenconsultarse, en esta misma línea, las siguientessentencias a favor de la independencia y lalibertad de los letrados en su actuación:

TEDH (Sección 2ª). Caso Ayhan ErdoganTurquía, sentencia de 13 de enero de 2009.TEDH\2009\7.TEDH (Sección 1ª). Foglia Suiza, sentencia de13 de diciembre de 2007. TEDH\2007\91.TEDH (Sección 2ª). Steur Holanda, sentenciade 28 de octubre de 2003. JUR\2004\73140.TEDH (Sección 4ª). Nikula Finlandia,sentencia de 21 de marzo de 2002. JUR\2002\78022.

I II. La garantía deindependencia y libertad de los abogados

El actual artículo 542.2 de la Ley Orgánica,

Española Reguladora del Poder Judicial, aunparcamente, asegura en la misión profesionaldel abogado español la libertad eindependencia necesarias para sudesenvolvimiento ante los Tribunales deJusticia, ello en conexión inevitable con losderechos de defensa (art. 24.1 CE) y libertadde expresión (art. 20).

Esta vital independencia puede y debe hacersevaler ante los propios tribunales de justicia taly como recoge el art. 59 del recién renovadoEstatuto General de la Abogacía aprobado el12 de junio de 2013, aún no publicado (Antiguo41 del Estatuto de 10 de junio de 2001), queprevé una especie de causa de amparo – si bienmás dialéctica que operativa – ante el propiotribunal y a través de las Juntas de Gobierno delos Colegios correspondientes; esta protecciónno deja de ser, sin embargo, un mecanismolimitado de denuncia, pues deja en manos deltribunal que conoce el asunto el eventual

pronunciamiento en favor del letrado que veminada su independencia, lo cual sólo suele serefectivo cuando el ataque proviene de partes oterceros intervinientes en el proceso, más nodel propio tribunal, como sucede, a veces, en lapráctica.

El artículo citado del nuevo Estatuto dela abogacía establece que:

1. En su actuación ante los Juzgados y Tribunaleslos abogados son libres e independientes,gozarán de los derechos inherentes a ladignidad de su función y serán amparados poraquéllos en su libertad de expresión y defensa.

2. Si el abogado considerase que la autoridad, juez

o tribunal coarta la independencia y libertadnecesarias para cumplir sus deberesprofesionales, o que no guarda la consideracióndebida a su función, podrá hacerlo constar asíante el propio juzgado o tribunal y dar cuentaa la Junta de Gobierno. La Junta, si estimarefundada la queja, adoptará medidas activaspara amparar la libertad, independencia ydignidad profesionales.

3. Los Colegios notificarán los amparos concedidosa las autoridades, jueces o tribunales que hayancoartado la libertad o independencia de losabogados y denunciarán dichas conductas,cuando proceda, ante el Consejo General delPoder Judicial y las instituciones pertinentes.Asimismo, los Colegios de Abogadospromoverán fórmulas para ser oídos ante lasSalas de Gobierno de sus respectivos TribunalesSuperiores de Justicia en los expedientesgubernativos seguidos contra cualquier abogadoy sus recursos.

En aplicación de estas garantías, el Pleno delConsejo General del Poder Judicial confirmó lasanción de 180 Euros impuesta a un Juez titularde uno de los Juzgados Centrales de loContencioso Administrativo de la AudienciaNacional por la Sala de Gobierno de dichotribunal, al haberse excedido en la reprensiónpública a un letrado al que el Juez increpó,mandando callar al letrado, todo ello en tonocrispado, alto, y de modo descortés. El Consejoconsideró que el ejercicio razonable yponderado de la función jurisdiccional porJueces y magistrados requiere preservar elrespeto debido que merecen todos losciudadanos que se relacionan con laadministración de justicia.

El alcance del derecho de defensa y la libertad de expresión de los abogados en el debateforense en España

I Juan Manuel ROZAS BRAVO

El Consejo consideró que el ejercicio razonable y ponderado de la funciónjurisdiccional por Jueces y magistrados requiere preservar el respeto debido quemerecen todos los ciudadanos que se relacionan con la administración de justicia.

Esta misma figura se recoge en el texto de laLOPJ, que determina, según en artículo citado,la obligación de amparo de los abogados en sulibertad de expresión y defensa, mandatoque vincula igualmente a los poderes públicos,según dicción del art. 542 del mismo textoorgánico.

Desde el citado caso Barford, y comenzandopor la STC nº 25, de 1981, el TC español hadiferenciado claramente la libertad deexpresión del abogado respecto de otrossupuestos calificados de ordinarios, elevando lamanifestación del letrado en ejercicio a lacategoría, más reforzada, de expresión políticao libertad de cátedra, y esta tan cualificada yparticular catalogación (por su conexión conlos derechos fundamentales de los que dimana)la hace especialmente resistente einmune a las restricciones que en otrocontexto podrían operar, tesis esta que seplasma en el seno del TC español desde la SSnº 205/1994.

La cuestión a analizar en estos especialessupuestos de expresión por parte del letradoes cual es el límite de la dureza de susmanifestaciones y frente a quienes debeponderarse. Este segundo interrogante tienesencilla respuesta, dado que la extralimitaciónsólo puede predicarse de los intervinientes enel proceso o de la autoridad o funcionariosjudiciales, y es aquí donde se han enjuiciado,generalmente por la vía disciplinaria de la LOPJ(a la espera del tratamiento práctico que se depor los tribunales a las novedosas y no menosférreas sanciones/correcciones de la NuevaLey de Enjuiciamiento Civil, inaudita parte y sinrecurso posible por cierto, y objeto de lasmayores repulsas por parte de la abogacía), ymínimamente por el cauce penal, las faltas derespeto o actitudes injuriosas de los abogados,provocadas en el seno del derecho de defensa.

I III. La DoctrinaConstitucional

En este sentido, el TC mantiene la misma líneadivisoria que para el tratamiento del derechofundamental a la libertad de expresión versusderecho al honor, rechazando toda conductarayana con el menosprecio, la ofensa, el insulto,o el maltrato de palabra, excluyendo a partir deaquí el parapeto de la tutela fundamental del

derecho de defensa, si bien es doctrinaconstante y pacífica del alto Tribunal que en eltema de la colisión entre los derechosfundamentales de libertad de expresión y/oinformación y de protección al honor, ambosde proclamación constitucional, no se puedenestablecer apriorísticamente los límites ofronteras entre uno y otro derecho, y quedicha delimitación ha de hacerse caso por caso.

Partiendo de las ideas anteriores, el TC hadenegado el amparo, y confirmado lascorrecciones disciplinarias de origen impuestasa letrados por su extralimitación en lossiguientes supuestos, provenientes casi siemprede ataques contra la autoridad judicial y elministerio fiscal:

▪ La Sentencia de 11 de julio de 1994,nº 205, Recurso 2379/91, deniega el amparosolicitado contra la corrección disciplinariaimpuesta al letrado que, actuando en Sala,abandonó la misma “dando graves dedisconformidad”, “sacándose la toga y quedandoen magas de camisa” al habérsele negado unadeterminada prueba pericial, actitud que porel TC es de falta de respeto y menosprecioal Tribunal, amén de dejar en ese momentodesasistido a su patrocinado.

▪ El Auto de fecha 16 de marzo de 1998,nº 76, inadmite el recurso de amparo porcarencia manifiesta de contenidoconstitucional de la demanda, por laafirmación dirigida al tribunal de instanciaque denunciaba la infracción sistemática denormas procesales con la frase “no sabemosen aras de que intereses” lo que le valió alletrado la sanción de 25.000 pts., confirmadapor la Sala de Gobierno del Tribunal Superiorde Justicia de Asturias. El TC ahonda en elcontenido de la frase la cual considera gravee injuriosa por tratarse -de ser cierta- de laexistencia de un delito de prevaricaciónimputado al órgano judicial; en este caso, parael TC, la libertad de expresión se utiliza paralanzar una velada acusación, absolutamentegratuita e innecesaria.

▪ El Auto de 11/1/00, nº 10, niega el amparo,por la vía de la inadmisión motivada delrecurso, en el caso de un letrado que en lostrámites de un juicio civil de desahucio de laLEC de 1.881 acusó por escrito de serautores de oscuras maniobras al

secretario y juez titular, sin másexplicaciones.

▪ El Auto de 13/12/00, nº 299 inadmite elrecurso de amparo contra una sanción de150.000 pts. impuesta al abogado por falta derespeto a la autoridad judicial al emplearseafirmaciones tales como esto es un cachondeo,o el tándem que forman el Ministerio Fiscal y eljuez instructor para coger en bocadillo alabogado defensor es escandaloso, siendo dedestacar aquí que el TC valoranegativamente la sosegada actitud delletrado que, por escrito, y reflexivamente,plasmó tales expresiones con posterioridada los hechos objeto de su desmedida repulsa.

▪ La STC 226/01, de 26-11-01, dictada en elrecurso 3325/98, trata el supuesto de unabogado que ante el interrogatorio de untestigo declaró por escrito que la actitud deltitular del juzgado fue parcial, violenta,hostil y maleducada, únicamente tendentea exculpar al denunciado, confirmando lasanción disciplinaria impuesta por el juzgadoy resuelta en el mismo sentido por la Sala deGobierno del TSJ correspondiente.

▪ La sentencia del Tribunal Constitucionalde 8 de abril de 2002, Sala Primera,Ponente Excmo. Sr. Don Fernando GarridoFalla, deniega el amparo solicitado a unaletrada sancionada en su día por interrumpirla confesión judicial de su propio cliente,pretendiendo que se reflejara en el actadeterminadas matizaciones y/o explicacionesque el examinado no manifestaba, y asimismopor intentar escribir en el acta de la pruebasu disconformidad con el contenido de lamisma.

En esta sentencia (publicada por la RevistaActualidad Jurídica Aranzadi, nº 531 de 9 demayo de 2002) y a pesar de los votosparticulares del propio magistrado ponentey de Doña Maria Emilia Casas Baamonde, ysin apartarse de la doctrina contenida en lassentencias nº 157/96, 113/00, y 184 y 226/01,y coordinando o cohonestando el derecho ala libertad del abogado y el respeto a lasdemás partes y sujetos procesales, el altointérprete ratifica el carácter reprochable dela conducta de la letrada en el aspectoparticularmente relevante de iniciar depropia mano la escritura en el acta de la



confesión de una frase que no pudo terminarpor la intervención del Juez, cuando lo lógicohubiera sido limitarse a estampar la firma,actitud ésta que la letrada no podíadesconocer en cuanto a su antijuricidad porsu cuantificación profesional.

El auto del Tribunal Constitucional (SalaSegunda) núm. 178/2010 de 29 denoviembre. RTC 2010\178 confirma lasanción disciplinaria por expresionesdescalificadoras e irrespetuosas contra laJuez, pretendiendo arrojar dudas sobre suimparcialidad y diligencia, patentementeinnecesarias para el correcto ejercicio de ladefensa, inadmitiendo el amparo, aunqueentrando en las cuestiones de fondo,argumentando que la defensa de laspretensiones procesales patrocinadas porel abogado puede justificar una especialbeligerancia en la argumentación, por loque a la hora de enjuiciar si unacorrección disciplinaria impuesta envirtud del art. 553.1 de la Ley Orgánicadel Poder Judicial ( RCL 1985, 1578) esacorde con el contenido del derechofundamental a la libertad de expresiónhan de tenerse en cuenta lascircunstancias concurrentes, pero sinolvidar que el citado derechofundamental no permite franquear ellímite que supone “la descalificacióninnecesaria”.

Resolución que sigue los pasos de la mismasala Primera, auto núm. 395/2006, de 8 denoviembre. RTC\2006\395 y el AUTO delmismo TC (Sala Primera), sentencia núm.155/2006, de 22 de mayo. RTC\2006\155.

En el plano reverso, el alto intérprete, y en defensa de la libertad de expresión, yrevocando la sanción impuesta alabogado por el orden jurisdiccional, hadictado las siguientes resoluciones dignas demención:

▪ La sentencia de 19 de junio de 1995, nº 92/95, dictada en el recurso de amparo2479/92, otorga el amparo solicitado por unletrado que fue condenado en juicio de faltasinstruido por los supuestos delitos de“insultos, amenazas, calumnia, e injurias” por laactitud del letrado que en unas diligenciasprevias seguidas ante el Juzgado de

Instrucción de Denia y ante la negativa de lafuncionaria a exhibir las actuacionesoriginales comenzó a gritar y a decir alpersonal del Juzgado “Que se leyeran la LeyOrgánica y que si no se la sabían se fueran acasa” profiriendo gritos e insultos nodirigidos contra persona concreta.

En este caso se cuestiona también lapreferencia por el cauce disciplinario de losantiguos arts. 448 y ss. de la LOPJ, respectode la vía penal del juicio de faltas, y se anuladirectamente la sanción al no haberse dadoel cauce adecuado a las expresiones delletrado, que increpó y chilló a losfuncionarios judiciales por no facilitarle unosautos penales, entendiendo el TC que entodo caso está actuación venía enmarcada enel ámbito de la defensa de los derechos eintereses de su defendido, presente en elacto.

Esta sentencia del TC ha sido profusamentecomentada por Salvador Vilata Menadas,(derecho a la defensa en relación a sanciónimpuesta a un abogado por actuaciónforense, Revista General del Derecho nº617, pág. 13.117 y ss.) que estudia el principiode prohibición de exceso, como máximageneral del derecho público, y que rige elcampo de medidas restrictivas de derechossubjetivos de los ciudadanos, y quecomporta, tanto en su aplicaciónjurisdiccional como administrativa, trescriterios: (I) adecuación al fin, en cuanto a laexigencia de proporcionalidad; (II)protección de bienes jurídicos por lo que serefiere a la necesidad de adecuar el fin de laintervención a la protección concreta deintereses en juicio; y (III) el principio deintervención mínima referido al derechopenal en cuanto a la exigencia de que tansólo se debe reaccionar punitivamentefrente a hechos graves e intolerantes.

▪ La sentencia de 15 de octubre de 1996,nº 157, Dictada en el recurso nº 2563/93,otorga el amparo impetrado por abogadoque sufrió una corrección disciplinaria, porvulneración del derecho a la defensa, enactuaciones producidas en causa penal almanifestar frases como “... en un claro fraudede Ley, se ha burlado la normal adjudicación deun asunto a su juez natural para escoger al queinteresaba a la parte denunciante…”

El TC, descartando otros motivos deamparo, referente al derecho de igualdad ytutela judicial efectiva, admite la realvulneración del derecho fundamental a lalibertad de expresión en el ejercicio de ladefensa del letrado, pues el hecho decensurar supuestas irregularidades detectablesen el reparto de asuntos entre los Juzgadosde instrucción de Barcelona no puedencalificarse de antijurídicas, dado que en estaocasión, la grave acusación sería por orientarla defensa del patrocinado... hacia lavulneración del derecho al juez natural, ytales referencias – se trataba de las causas enlas que el Juez Estevill actuó como instructor– no resultaban innecesarias o gratuitas, alpunto de fortalecer la defensa de la letrada,lo que las adecuaba a un fin perfectamentelegítimo, y todo ello, una vez más, producidosin insulto o descalificación.

▪ La STC de 5 de mayo de 2000, nº 113,dictada en el recurso 4435/96, tratándose deabogado que había proferido descalificacioneshacia el ministerio fiscal, que dieron lugar a laincoación de diligencias previas y posteriorjuicio de faltas en el que fue condenado, poruna falta leve de injurias del antiguo art.570.1º del CP de 1973; las expresiones omanifestaciones escritas, en concreto,acusaban abierta y explícitamente alMinisterio Público el aprovecharse de lasituación de prisión provisional de losencausados (en prisión preventiva) para lainvestigación de otros hechos ajenos a lacausa, dilatando intencionadamente (sic)la situación de privación de libertad de susclientes.

El TC atiende aquí a la doctrina del carácterreforzado de la libertad de expresión en elmarco del derecho de defensa, con el sólolímite del insulto o la descalificación gratuitas,y que en este supuesto, pese a las gravescríticas vertidas, debían reputarseinexistentes, más aún cuando se defendía latutela de la libertad de un reo y elvehemente deseo de enjuiciamiento yresolución de la causa penal.

La resolución del mismo TribunalConstitucional (Sala Primera) en Sentencianúm. 232/2005 de 26 de septiembre. RTC2005\232, otorga el amparo solicitado a unletrado que fue sancionado por hacer

constar en un recurso de reposición que “sehace constar que el “Juzgado ha decidido sinjuicio” y que “ha dictado sentencia sin juicio”; asícomo las formuladas en su escrito de 14 de juniodel 2000, sobre incidente de oposición a laejecución, en cuya alegación cuarta acusa a laJuzgadora de inventarse en ejecución otraSentencia y, por último, en el de fecha 15 de juniodel 2000, en cuya motivación primera, párrafo 6,hace constar que el Juzgado ha tomado la gravedecisión de expropiar a su mandante inauditaparte y que se ha dictado una resoluciónprecipitada con rapidez inusual, inducida porfalsedades y manejos de la parte contraria.”

Y ello al concluir que las frases por las quefue sancionado el recurrente se encuentranamparadas por su derecho a la libertad deexpresión en el ejercicio del derecho dedefensa, ya que se emplearon con el fin defundamentar la oposición, en términosjurídicos, a las resoluciones judiciales que, através de los escritos en las que secontenían, formuló el recurrente en elejercicio de la función de defensa que comoLetrado desempeñaba en un proceso,expresiones que, además, no han traspasadoel límite del insulto ni de la descalificación ysin que de ellas derive la intención demenospreciar al poder judicial, en cuantofunción estatal, que constituyen los límites deesta específica manifestación del derecho a lalibertad de expresión, sentencia quecorrobora el apoyo del Ministerio Fiscal alrecurso, en cuanto a la ponderación de losintereses en juego, y teniendo en cuenta queson expresiones, por otra parte, que nopueden considerarse descalificatorias oinsultantes, ni tampoco que resulten gratuitaso inadecuadas para la defensa de losderechos e intereses de su defendida.

Finalmente la Sentencia núm. 145/2007 de18 de junio, RTC 2007\145, otorga elamparo solicitado al abogado que fuecorregido disciplinariamente por el TribunalCivil que le impuso una sanción porcalificaciones vertidas en escrito parapersonarse en el procedimiento civilexpresando sus dudas sobre el reparto deasuntos y solicitando su investigación, aldeclarar que éstas eran manifestacionesformuladas en el ejercicio de la función dedefensa y que no traspasan el límite delinsulto ni de la descalificación. Y ello pese a

poner en tela de juicio el igualitario repartode los asuntos en el juzgado, al expresar elTribunal Constitucional que, en este caso, sícabe apreciar que se ha lesionado orestringido ilegítimamente el derechoconstitucional a la libertad de expresión (art.20.1.a de la Constitución española) en elejercicio de la defensa pues las expresionesutilizadas en el escrito del letrado noexceden del límite tolerado por el ejerciciodel derecho de defensa, siendo expresionesutilizadas en los escritos forenses que eneste caso no pueden calificarse comoformalmente injuriosas o insultantes para eltitular de la potestad jurisdiccional. Según eltribunal, ninguna de las expresionesempleadas excede de los límites antesindicados de la libertad de expresión en elejercicio del derecho de defensa, ya que elrecurrente ponía de manifiesto sus dudassobre el reparto de asuntos realizado en elDecanato de los Juzgados y a solicitar a latitular del órgano jurisdiccional que realizasealgunas averiguaciones sobre el orden dedespacho ordinario de los asuntos, lo que enabsoluto puede considerarse descalificadoro insultante.

I IV. Consideraciones finales

1. La libertad de expresión del letrado en elejercicio dimanante de su función ante losTribunales de Justicia se encuentra revestidade una especial resistencia e inmunidad querefuerza todas y cada una de susmanifestaciones en defensa de interesesajenos, asimilándose a supuestos tales comola expresión política de ideas o la libertadde cátedra, dada su íntima unión con elderecho de defensa que dimana de lostextos constitucionales.

2. La libertad de expresión del letrado seencuentra indudablemente sustentada yreforzada por su independencia, vinculantepara todos los poderes públicos, que debenvelar por la garantía del derecho de defensa,ello en los términos establecidos en laConstitución y en las Leyes.

3. Únicamente analizando cada caso concretoy con especial restricción en la aplicación delas normas sancionadoras, se podrá corregiral abogado en ejercicio por el exceso en sus

manifestaciones, so pena de dotar a losórganos jurisdiccionales de facultadespoliciales que pugnarían con los principiosde proporcionalidad, intervención mínima yfundamentalmente de tutela judicialefectiva, debiendo estar presidida la laborde los tribunales en este aspecto por elrespeto debido a quienes se relacionan conla administración de justicia.

4. Las correcciones que los Tribunalespudieran imponer en uso de las facultadesde policía de estrados son verdaderasresoluciones jurisdiccionales, y noadministrativas, (artículo 553.1 de la LOPJ) yse encontrarían exentas de recursocontencioso-administrativo, por lo que losacuerdos de las salas de gobierno de losTribunales Superiores de Justica únicamenteserían susceptibles de impugnación enamparo ordinario.

Juan Manuel ROZAS BRAVODespacho RozasCáceres, España

[email protected]


Pratique du DroitLegal PracticeEjercicio de la Abogacía


It is an unquestionable fact that industry world-wide is losing huge profits due to massproduction of counterfeit products, not tomention the social costs involved. Besides thelosses on tax income, governments have tospend money and resources fightingcounterfeiters, whose activities are frequentlyrelated to other crimes. Ultimately, the victimsare the consumers who are becomingincreasingly exposed to health and safetyhazards.

The industries affected by counterfeiting are alsoincreasing, both by number and product sector,as counterfeiters target not only luxury goodsand fashion clothing but also a wider variety ofproducts, such as pharmaceuticals, toys, aircraftcomponents, spare parts and car accessories,washing powder, soaps, perfumes, razor blades,shampoos, deodorants and other personal careproducts.

I The US and EU reports on counterfeited goods

At the beginning of this year, US Customs andBorder Protection (CBP) reported that seizedcounterfeit goods worth around USD 1.26billion during the year 2012 increased by USD150 million since 2011, China being the topsource of counterfeit goods, accounting for 72%of goods seized.

In accordance with statistics published on August5, 2013 by the European Commission, customsseizure of articles suspected of infringing IPR

continues to increase: almost 90,000 detentioncases were registered during 2012 of anestimated value equivalent to genuine productsof approximately 1 billion Euros1.

The same report also mentions that China is themain source country from which IPR infringinggoods were shipped to the EU Hong Kong SARbeing also mentioned as the main origin forcertain product sectors, such as electroniccigarettes and their liquid fillings.

In face of the current situation, is the Chinesegovernment taking any action?

Opinions may vary in relation to the drive andeffectiveness of the adopted measures.Nevertheless, the answer to this question mustbe affirmative if we take into consideration recentadministrative actions, judicial reforms andlegislative updates, which represent a stepforward in the defence of IPR in China.

It also expected that the steady increase of trademark and patent registrations in China will boostthe social awareness of IPR.

In what specifically concerns trade marks filed inChina, the number of applications reached 1.6million in 2012, which represents a huge rise fromthe 17,000 applications submitted in 1999. Thiswill hopefully tighten the circle around articlesinfringing IPR, and also contribute to a progressiveincrease in the number of court cases in the nextfew years.

Alongside with the development of China’seconomy during recent years, the comprehensiveimplementation of the fundamental principle ofrule of law and the reform of the judicial systemis cautiously being implemented and improved.

The Chinese government’s efforts to protect IPRinclude a strategic guideline that set a goal ofmaking substantial progress in the creation,application, protection and management of IPR by2020 and one could say that some positive signsof the implemented changes are already surfacing.

Therefore, despite some critics and skepticism,China has been promoting the reform of thejudicial system steadily and pragmatically and it istaking measures to enhance the protection of IPR.

Intellectual Property (IPR) in China and Macau SAR

Trends and Developments

I Rui CUNHA & João GONÇALVES DE ASSUNÇÃO

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

200 000

0

400 000

600 000

800 000

1 000 000

1 200 000

1 400 000

1 600 000

1 800 000

Source: China Trade Mark Office2

China’s Trademark Applications from 1999 to 2012

I China’s Supreme People’sCourt (SPC) “White Paperon Intellectual PropertyRights Protection (2012)”

The last annual report on IPR protection issued bythe SPC reveals that Chinese courts arecommitted to strengthening the protection of IPR.

IPR cases increased substantially during 2012:87,419 civil cases, which represents 45,9% morethan in 2011, the increase in the number ofcriminal cases being the most significant, morethan doubling the previous year’s figures.

Regarding Macau, Hong Kong and Taiwan, courtshave concluded 1,429 foreign-related IPR civilcases and 613 cases involving parties from thesaid territories.

The numbers above show that pursuing civillitigation is becoming an important means toprotect IPR, and also, that China is committed tostrengthening protection in various areas ofintellectual property.

However, it should be noted that cases ofpreliminary injunctions are still significantly lowwhen compared to the number of cases takento court: 27 preliminary injunctions relating tointellectual property disputes were accepted bythe various levels of people’s courts.

Finally, it also should be noted that the people’scourt assisted the Ministry of Public Security incombating criminal infringement of rights andcounterfeiting, solving 43,000 cases concerningcrimes of infringement of IPR and ofmanufacturing and sale of fake and poor qualitygoods. More than 60,000 criminal suspects werearrested with a related amount of 11.3 billionRenmimbi.

I The Supreme People’sProcuratorate (SPP)statistics on IPR-relatedcrimes

Furthermore, the statistics released by the SPP3

on IPR-related crimes for the first half of 2013show that the procuratorate issued warrants toarrest 2,176 suspects in 1,428 IP rights-relatedcriminal cases, and have prosecuted 3,805persons in 2,253 cases.

From 2008 to 2012, 19,786 suspects were

arrested in 11,723 IP rights-related criminalcases, and 29,481 were prosecuted in 17,062cases.

The statistics show a yearly growth in IP rights-related crimes, with trade mark-related crimesaccounting for 80% of the total number of cases.

Considering the above figures, it is clear that thePeople’s procuratorates are playing a crucial rolein combating IP rights-related crimes.

On August 30, 2013, the Standing Committee ofthe National People’s Congress (NPC)approved major amendments to the ChineseTrade Mark Law, which will take effect on May 1,2014.

Such amendments bring several improvementsregarding trade mark application, opposition andinvalidation procedures. The Chinese TradeMark Law will also offer additional protection towell-known trade marks, and also, add sounds asobjects of protection of a trade mark.

In addition, the amended Trademark Lawstrengthens the IPR protection by increasing thestatutory maximum amount of compensationfor infringement of a registered trademark to 3million Renmimbi (around Euros 366,000),which is six times the current maximum amountof compensation.

As in any other country, companies play animportant role in the adequate protection oftheir IPR. Therefore, all companies, includingChinese companies, need to make sure thattheir trade marks are adequately protected,notably by adopting suitable technologies tomark genuine products (such as holograms,smart cards, markers and inks).

However, in order to implement effective anti-counterfeiting policies, companies must take intoconsideration that China has a territory withapproximately 9.6 million square kilometres andthe country has 22 provinces, 5 autonomousregions and 4 direct-controlled municipalities.

I The Macau SpecialAdministrative Region

In this regard, it should be stressed that whencompanies register their IP rights or implementtheir anti-counterfeiting policies in China, theyoften disregard the fact that the country has 2SAR’s – Macau and Hong Kong – both with

many differences in what concerns IPRlegislation and enforcement authorities.

For instance, in Macau, where Portuguese is anofficial language along with Chinese, trade marksand patents filed before the Chinese Trade MarkOffice or Patent Office are not automaticallyvalid, and specific filings must be made before thecompetent authorities.

Moreover, the Trade Mark Law currently in forcein Macau differs in many aspects from that ineffect in Hong Kong and in Mainland China andimportant amendments are expected to betabled by the government during next year.

Therefore, it is important to seek local advice inorder effectively to protect IPR in this specialadministrative region, namely regarding thenotifications to be made to the Macau CustomsService, which is the law enforcement agencywith specific competence to monitor theindustrial and commercial activities, controlexternal trade and protect IPR.

In conclusion, following the implementation ofthe Chinese government’s strategy in recentyears, trade mark consciousness for Chineseenterprises and for the whole of Chinesesociety has been enhanced. Nevertheless, a lotof work remains to be done in the field of IPRenforcement in order that notable results areachieved the near future.

Rui CUNHAC & C Lawyers

Macau SAR, [email protected]

João GONÇALVES DE ASSUNÇÃO C & C Lawyers

Macau SAR, [email protected]

1 Full report available for US and EU at www.cbp.gov andhttp://ec.europa.eu/

2 Annual Development Report on China’s Trade markStrategy 2012.www.saic.gov.cn/sbjenglish/sbyw_1/201308/t20130819_137363.html

3 The People’s procuratorates in the People’s Republic of China are law supervision organs of the state. The Supreme People’s Procuratorate (SPP) representsthe State in independently implementing the right of prosecution and one of its major tasks is to ensurethe unity and correct implementation of state laws.



Prompted by technological developments, anincreasing amount of data is processed bybusinesses everyday. Unfortunately, this situationhas also resulted in an increasing amount of databreaches. An example of a high publicity databreach was the Sony hack, which resulted in a fineof UKP 250,000 of the Information Commissioner.Data breaches can not only result in businessinterruptions, recovery costs and fines, but also thereputation of the business may be at stake.Nowadays data protection should be on theagenda of the board of every organisation. Thequestion does not seem to be whether a databreach will occur, but rather when. All the morereasons to pay close attention to the related legaldevelopments.

I Legal framework

Within the EU the current legal framework inrelation to data breaches is generally to befound in the implementation by the EUMember States of the EU Data ProtectionDirective of 1995 and the e-Privacy Directiveof 2002. The e-Privacy Directive was amendedin 2009, introducing a notification duty of databreaches for telecom providers. Thisnotification duty was recently further specifiedby a Commission’s Regulation, which enteredinto force in August 2013.

In view of reforming the legal framework for theprotection of personal data in the EU, theEuropean Commission launched a proposal inJanuary 2012, to replace the 1995 Data

Protection Directive by a general DataProtection Regulation. Other than the DataProtection Directive, the proposed DataProtection Regulation contains provisionsspecifically dealing with data breaches, including ageneral notification duty. These provisions canalso be relevant for data controllers outside theEU, as to a certain extent the Regulation is alsoto apply to them. However, the definitive text ofthe Data Protection Regulation is not yetestablished. More than 3,000 amendments hadbeen tabled initially, which had to be drasticallyreduced. This resulted in a compromise textbeing adopted by the European Parliament on

October 21, 2013. Due to the recent discussionsregarding the US Internet surveillance program‘PRISM’, Justice Commissioner Viviane Redingwishes to implement the Regulation as soon aspossible. It is the ambition to have adopted a textby May 2014.

Other relevant developments on an EU levelare the proposal of the Commission for aDirective concerning a high common level ofnetwork and information security (“NISDirective”), and the adoption by the EuropeanParliament and the Council of a Directive onattacks against information systems.

I Appropriate technical and organisational securitymeasures

When it comes to data breaches, prevention isa first point for attention. According to the Data Protection Directive, the data controllermust implement “appropriate technical andorganisational measures” to protect personaldata. The appropriate level of protection is

determined by the risks represented by theprocessing and the nature of the data. The stateof the art and the costs of the measures have tobe taken into consideration. In some EUMember States, like France, Belgium and theNetherlands, the national supervisoryauthorities have published specific guidelines onthe required level of security of personal data.

When the processing is carried out on behalfof the data controller by a service provider,such provider – the data processor – shouldprovide sufficient guarantees in respect of thetechnical security measures and organisational

measures, and must ensure compliance withthese measures. This must be governed by adata processing agreement in writing, bindingthe processor to the controller.

The Proposed EU Data Protection Regulationdefines the data security obligation differently,requiring both the controller and theprocessor to implement the appropriatetechnical and organisational measures.Again, todetermine the appropriate measures, thecontroller and the processor both have toevaluate the risks. Based on the compromisetext, the European Data Protection Board willbe entrusted with providing further guidancefor the required technical and organisationalsecurity measures. The original proposalreferred to the Commission for furtherspecifications.

I Notification duties

Currently, only the e-Privacy Directive imposesa notification duty for data breaches, which hasbeen further specified in the aforementioned

Data BreachesFrom an EU Perspective

I Elisabeth P.M. THOLE & Isabelle WARLAM

The Proposed EU Data Protection Regulation defines the data securityobligation differently, requiring both the controller and the processor toimplement the appropriate technical and organisational measures.

Commission Regulation. This specific databreach notification duty is limited to telecomproviders, obliging them to notify personal databreaches within 24 hours to the competentnational supervisory authority and withoutundue delay to the relevant data subjects, if thebreach is likely adversely to affect theirpersonal data or privacy.

The EU Data Protection Regulation introducesan obligation to notify personal data breaches,for all data controllers. According to thecompromise text, a data breach should benotified to the supervisory authority withoutundue delay. In the recitals this is presumed notto be later than 72 hours after theestablishment of a breach. Also here the datasubjects must be informed about the breach(after the authority has been notified) withoutundue delay, if it is likely that the breach willadversely affect the data subject’s personaldata, privacy, rights or legitimate interests.

In the Netherlands, the legislator decided notto await the Regulation. A bill is currently beingdebated in the House of Representativesintroducing a personal data breach obligationfor data controllers, similar to the one in theproposed Regulation.

In addition to the explicit notification dutiesabove, an implicit notification duty may alreadybe considered to follow from the current DataProtection Directive. More specifically thegeneral obligation to process personal data‘fairly’ and the obligation to provide datasubjects with information to guarantee suchfair processing in their respect, can be arguedto include an obligation for all data controllersto notify data subjects in case of a data breachthat could negatively affect them.

I Sanctions

Under the Data Protection Directive, it isentirely up to Member States to establish thesanctions to be imposed in case of a breach ofdata protection legislation. In the Netherlandsfor example, the Data Protection Authoritycurrently has very limited powers to imposefines. The bill discussed above is to empowerthe Authority to impose fines of EUR 450,000in case of breach of the proposed generalnotification duty.

Under the proposed Data ProtectionRegulation, the Authorities will be empoweredwith rather substantial fines for breaches of theRegulation. Under the compromise text thesefines may be up to 5% of the annual worldwideturnover of an enterprise or 100 million Euros,whichever is greater.

I Incident Road Map & Cyber Crime Insurances

For every organisation it is recommended totake a proactive approach towards databreaches by adopting an incident road map. Inaddition thereto, organisations may alsoconsider taking out a cyber crime insurancepolicy. Such policies should not only cover thefinancial consequences, but should also supportcompanies in their investigation of the cause ofthe breach. It is questionable whether fines canalso be insured. Taking out insurance of coursedoes not release an organisation from itsobligation to be compliant with the applicabledata protection rules. For this, proper (legal)advice may be needed.

Elisabeth P.M. THOLEVan Doorne N.V.

Amsterdam, The [email protected]

Isabelle WARLAMVan Doorne N.V.

Amsterdam, The [email protected]

I The PDPA comes into effect in phases

The trend for data collection and analysis isexpected to grow exponentially as theprocessing and analysis of large amounts ofpersonal data becomes possible withincreasingly sophisticated technology. Untilrecently, Singapore had no overall dataprotection law in force and had only sector-specific confidentiality obligations contained in various laws (e.g. Banking Act, Securities and Futures Act, Official Secrets Act, etc.). On 2 January 2013 Singapore enacted the “PersonalData Protection Act”1. Various key provisions ofthe PDPA will only become effective in phases,e.g. the “Do-Not-Call” Registry will come intoforce on 2 January 2014 and the main dataprotection rules will come into force on 2 July20142. This gradual coming into force will allowcompanies to review and adopt internalpersonal data protection policies and practicesand comply with the PDPA.

I Scope of the PDPA / key features

The PDPA governs the collection, use anddisclosure of personal data by organisations in amanner that recognises and balances both theright of individuals to protect their personaldata and the need of organisations to collect,use or disclose personal data for purposes thata reasonable person would considerappropriate in the circumstances (Sec. 4 PDPA).The Act does not define exactly what kinds ofpurposes regarding data collection are includedor excluded3 under the Act. But as the rationaleof the Act in general is to enhance the rights ofindividuals in order to protect consumers’personal data (including rights of access andcorrection, and to recognise the needs oforganisations to collect, use or disclosepersonal data for legitimate and reasonablepurposes4), every legitimate and reasonablecommercial and operational purpose should fall



under this category. The PDPA is intended tocurb excessive and unnecessary collection of anindividual’s personal data by businesses, andincludes requirements such as obtaining theconsent of individuals to disclose their personalinformation. The main features of the PDPA areas follows:

1. Establishment of a Data ProtectionCommission (“DPC”; www.pdpc.gov.sg) on02.01.2013 to administer and enforce theprovisions of the PDPA. The Commissionhas various powers under the PDPAincluding directing an organisation to: (I) stop collecting, using or disclosing

personal data;(II) destroy personal data; (III) comply with any directions from the

Commission; and (IV) pay a financial penalty of up to SGD1million.

2. Establishment of a Data Protection AppealPanel with Appeal Committees as a specialappellate department, Sec. 33 PDPA.

3. The PDPA applies to all private sectororganisations in Singapore as well as allorganisations located outside of Singaporethat are engaged in data collection,processing or disclosure of such data withinSingapore; therefore, the PDPA would applyalso to companies that were not incorporatedin Singapore, but which collect data onlinefrom a person in Singapore5.

4. Creation of a requirement of at least onedesignated individual within each organisationto be responsible for compliance with thePDPA (“Personal Data Officer”);

5. The requirement for organisations toimplement policies and practices to complywith the PDPA;

6. Introduction of general rules and exclusionsrelating to the collection, use and/ordisclosure of personal data;

7. To allow individuals to request access totheir personal data held by an organisation inorder to find out how organisations haveused or are using the personal datacollected, to correct any inaccurateinformation collected and to seek redressfor suspected breaches of the PDPA;

8. Introduction of a penalty and enforcementregime for breaches of the PDPA; a personwho suffers loss as a result of breach of therules on collection, use and disclosure, as

well as access to, correction and care ofpersonal data, shall have a right of action incivil proceedings in court; the court mayaward damages, injunctions or otherremedies as it sees fit, and

9. Introduction of a “Do-Not-Call” Registry(“DNC Registry”).

I “Personal Data” under the PDPA

Sec. 2 of the PDPA defines “personal data”(“PD”) that will be protected under the PDPAbroadly as data about an individual who can beidentified either from the data itself or fromother data that an organization is likely to haveaccess to.

I The Personal DataProtection Commission

The Commission is the central authoritysupervising, administrating and enforcing thePDPA with a broad range of competencies. It isempowered not only to provide consultancy,

advisory, technical, managerial or otherspecialist services relating to data protectionand to cooperate with foreign data protectionauthorities and organizations6, but also toconduct investigations upon complaint or of itsown motion7 and to give such directions8 toorganizations as it thinks is appropriate in thecircumstances9. Additionally, it may issuewritten advisory guidelines indicating themanner in which the Commission willinterpret the provisions of the PDPA10. By nowthe Commission has published two guidelines,

one on the key concepts in the PDPA11 andone on selected topics of the PDPA on 24Sept. 201312.

I Key obligations ofcompanies under the PDPA

The cornerstone of the PDPA is theprohibition of the collection, use or disclosureby organisations of personal data without theconsent of the relevant individuals, andgenerally requiring organisations to obtain theexplicit consent of individuals. The collection,use or disclosure is in general limited topurposes that would be consideredappropriate to a reasonable person in the givencircumstances, Sec. 18(a) PDPA. However, anindividual would be deemed to have given hisconsent for the collection, use or disclosure ofhis personal data if that individual voluntarilyprovides his personal data to an organisation,and if it is reasonable that the individual wouldvoluntarily provide the data under thecircumstances, Sec. 15 PDPA. For an explicitconsent, the individual needs to be providedwith certain information about the purpose ofthe data processing (”notification obligation”,

Singapore’s Personal Data Protection Act(PDPA) - An Overview

I Andreas RESPONDEK

The PDPA is intended to curb excessive and unnecessary collection of anindividual’s personal data by businesses, and includes requirements such asobtaining the consent of individuals to disclose their personal information.

Sec. 20 PDPA). Data processing for otherpurposes is not allowed, Sec. 18 PDPA.Consent for collecting, using or disclosingpersonal data gained by providing false,deceptive or misleading information is invalid,Sec 14(1),(2) PDPA.

Consent can be obtained through electronicmeans (online) and can be withdrawn at anytime. In this case the organization shall informthe individual of the likely consequences ofwithdrawing his consent, Sec. 16(2) PDPA. The respective consent cannot be taken as acondition for providing a product or service(beyond what would be reasonable for theprovision of that product or service).

On the other hand, there are numerousexceptions of purposes for collection, use anddisclosure of PD stated in the Act andespecially in the Schedules attached to andreferred to by the Act for many reasons, e.g. ifthe data is publicly available13, if it is necessaryfor evaluative purposes14 or to recover a debtowed by the individual whose data is affected15.It is advisable to check the broad catalogue ofexceptions in the Second, Third and the FourthSchedule to the PDPA every time PD are to becollected, used or disclosed, whether consentis necessary or dispensable.

In summary16, the main obligations of theorganisations falling under the regulations ofthe PDPA when it comes into force in January2014 will be to:

1. Appoint an officer to be responsible forensuring that the organisation complies withthe requirements of the PDPA and makesuch person’s contact details available to thepublic;

2. Obtain consent for the collection, use ordisclosure of personal data if necessary;

3. Make reasonable efforts to ensure that thepersonal data collected by or on behalf ofthe organisation is accurate and complete;

4. Protect the personal data in its possessionor under its control by making reasonablesecurity arrangements to preventunauthorised access, collection, use, disclosure,copying, modification, disposal or similar risks;

5. Provide individuals with access to thepersonal data stored by the organisationupon request, Sec. 21 PDPA;

6. Ensure that personal data is retained only foras long as it is needed;

7. Correct the personal data of individualsupon request, Sec. 22 PDPA; and

8. Protect all personal data in its custody.

However, the organization may continue to usepersonal data that have been collected beforethe data protection provisions of the PDPAcome into effect on July 2, 2014 for thepurposes for which the personal data werecollected, unless the individual has withdrawnconsent, Sec. 19 PDPA. If there is a differentpurpose for the use of the personal data,consent has to be obtained for this newpurpose once again.

I Right of Private Action, Sec. 32 PDPA

Individuals who have suffered loss or damage asa result of an organisation’s failure to complywith the abovementioned requirements of thePDPA will be able to seek redress through civilproceedings. In particular, the PDPA providesthat in the event that the Commissionestablished under the PDPA has already madea decision regarding the contravention inquestion, the civil proceedings will only be ableto commence after the decision has beenfinalised, as a result of there being no furtherright of appeal.

I Right of AdministrativeAction

Any party aggrieved by directions or decisionsmade by the Commission may within 28 daysapply to the Commission to reconsider certaindirections or decisions17, Sec. 31 PDPA.

In those cases mentioned before andadditionally against the decisions following thereconsideration procedure according to Sec.34(1)(b) PDPA, it is possible to appeal within 28days to the Chairman of the Appeal Panelestablished under Sec. 33(1) PDPA against

those directions or decisions, Sec. 34(1) PDPA.This appeal has priority over the application forreconsideration according to Sec. 31 PDPA, asit is required by Sec. 34(2) PDPA, when theappeal concerns the same matter. Bothprocedures shall not suspend the effect of theaffected decision or direction, except in thecase of an appeal against the imposition of afinancial penalty or the amount thereof orunless the Commission or the responsibleAppeal Committee in any particular casedecides otherwise. Further appeal against orwith respect to the decisions and directions ofthe Appeal Committee is to be made to theHigh Court and, after that, to the Court ofAppeal under the conditions of Sec. 35 PDPA.

I Do-Not-Call (“DNC”)Registry

Under this scheme, individuals may registertheir Singapore18 phone and fax numbers withthe DNC signalling that they do not want to becontacted by companies for so called “specifiedmessages” as defined in Sec. 37 PDPA, includingmarketing or commercial purposes regardingthe sale of goods or services of almost anykind19. This registration will not expire and istherefore permanent.

The DNC Registry does not cover messagessent for other purposes, such as service calls orreminder messages sent by organisations torender services bought by the individual.Messages for pure market survey or researchand those that promote charitable or religiouscauses are also not covered under the DNCprovisions, same as telemarketing calls ormessages of a commercial nature that targetbusinesses20.

The Commission is empowered to furnish oneor a several numbers of DNCs for differentkinds of specified messages, Sec. 39(1) PDPA.By now the Commission established threeseparate DNC Registries for voice calls, textmessages and fax messages21.

To send a “specified message” it is necessary tocheck the relevant registries first, if therecipient has not given consent separately.Therefore an organization has to apply for anaccount for a main account on the DNCRegistry website subject to a fee22.



By sending a “specified message”, theorganization has to ensure, that it containscontact details within the message to allow therecipient to contact for clarifications. E.g. forvoice calls it has to ensure that the callingidentity or phone number from which themessage is sent out from is not concealed23.

I Obligations for companies

Companies operating in Singapore will need toconsider the impact of the PDPA on theiroperations and ensure that, by July 2014, theirdata collection and handling processes complywith the new rules set out in the PDPA. Even ifforeign entities are not incorporated inSingapore, but as long as they collect, useand/or disclose personal data in Singapore, theprovisions of the PDPA will apply to them.

Companies that conduct direct marketingactivities will have a duty to check the DNCRegistry and will need to establish processes toensure that, by January 2014, they do notmarket goods or services to a telephonenumber listed on the Do-Not-Call Registrywithout obtaining clear and unambiguousconsent in writing from the subscriber or userof that telephone number.

I Conclusion

As the act contains a number of exclusions tothe formal precondition of consent forcollection, use and disclosure of PD, it’s alreadyforeseeable that an effective protection of PDcannot be achieved only on the basis of thisregulation. As the PDPA was meant to be justa baseline law24, this result is not surprising.Furthermore the complexity of the regulationmay make it hard especially for foreignorganisations being dependent on PDcollection, use and disclosure on Singaporeanterritory for their businesses, to foresee theneed of consent in every case. Only time willtell, how the PDPA regulations will be appliedby the Commission on a day-today basis andhow the Appeal Committees and the courtswill handle them in specific issues.

At the present state it only can be said thateven though organizational preparations withina company’s structure are mandatory (e.g.

designation of a Personal Data Officer), yet theregulation is overall business friendly and inmany cases still allows to make use ofSingaporean personal data for variouspurposes, in certain cases even withoutconsent of the individuals affected.

In light of the significant impact that the PDPAhas on the operations of all private sectororganisations, such organisations shouldprepare to be compliant with the PDPAprovisions and to thoroughly familiarisethemselves with the PDPA so that earlypreparations for the establishment of thenecessary compliance measures can be putinto place.

Dr. Andreas RESPONDEKRespondek & Fan

Singapore, [email protected]

1 The Act is accessible on the homepage of Singapore’sAttorney-General’s Chambers:http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=CompId%3A32762ba6-f438-412e-b86d-5c12bd1d4f8a;rec=0;whole=yes

2 Statement of the Data Protection Commission on theirhomepage: www.pdpc.gov.sg/personal-data-protection-act

3 See Data Protection Commission advisory guidelines onkey concepts in the PDPA, para. 8.1, p. 29:http://www.pdpc.gov.sg/docs/default-source/advisory-guidelines/chapters-3-to-9---important-terms-used-in-the-pdpa.pdf?sfvrsn=2

4 Statement of the Data Protection Commission on theirhomepage, footnote 2 above

5 Even though Singapore’s Ministry of Information,Communications and the Arts (MICA) acknowledgedthere may be difficulty in enforcement. See MICA’sstatement at the public consultation on 13 Sept. 2011,Consultation Paper p. 10 f., Sec. 3.22; the paper isavailable at:http://issuu.com/micasingapore/docs/dp_public_consultation_paper?e=3934662/2671272

6 Sec. 6 PDPA with a list of further general functions of theCommission

7 Sec. 50(1) PDPA8 Including the direction to pay a penalty of an amount not

exceeding SGD 1,000,000,-, see Sec. 29(2)(d) PDPA9 Sec. 29 PDPA10 Sec. 49 PDPA11 Containing the interpretation of key terms in the PDPA

like “reasonability” indicated by the Commission, seepara. 9 of this guideline, p. 30

12 Both guidelines are available under:www.pdpc.gov.sg/resources/advisory-guidelines

13 See Sections 2, 17(1), (2), (3), 21(4) referring to the

Second Schedule para. 1(c), the Third Schedule para. 1(c)and the Fourth Schedule para 1(d)

14 See Sections 2, 17(1), (2), (3), 21(4) referring to theSecond Schedule para. 1(f), the Third Schedule para. 1(f)and the Fourth Schedule para 1(f)

15 See Sections 2, 17(1), (2), (3), 21(4) referring to theSecond Schedule para. 1(f), the Third Schedule para. 1(g)and the Fourth Schedule para 1(i)

16 Further details can be obtained from the statements ofthe Commission at:www.pdpc.gov.sg/organisations/overview

17 Those based on Sec. 27(2), 28 and 29(1)(2) PDPA18 Part IX (Sec. 36 - 48) only applies if the sender or the

recipient uses a Singapore telephone numbers, see Sec.38 PDPA

19 It should be noted that many kinds of messages andpurposes to send messages are explictly excluded inSec. 37(5) PDPA in connection with the Eighth Schedule

20 See further exclusions listed in the Eighth Schedule tothe PDPA

21 See the statement by the Commission at:www.pdpc.gov.sg/organisations/do-not-call-registry-your-business/do-not-call-registry-business-rules

22 For further details about the procedure and the fees seealso: www.pdpc.gov.sg/organisations/do-not-call-registry-your-business/do-not-call-registry-business-rules

23 See also the statement by the Commission at:www.pdpc.gov.sg/organisations/do-not-call-registry-your-business

24 MICA Statement during the public consultation on Sept.11, 2011, para. 1.4. p. 1

I 1. Introducción

En el ámbito de la Unión Europea, con multitudde relaciones comerciales transfronterizas,grupos de empresas que actúan en variosEstados, y una economía moderna en que unaempresa puede ser simplemente un haz derelaciones de crédito sin ningún inmovilizadode valor en su balance, el siguiente no es unsupuesto infrecuente: después de obtener

una sentencia en un Estado miembro, elbeneficiario insta su ejecución ante los mismostribunales. Durante la investigación patrimonial,judicial o extrajudicial, resulta que el deudor estitular de 1) cuentas bancarias en entidadesfinancieras con domicilio en otros Estadosmiembros o con cuentas abiertas en sucursalesde otro Estado miembro o 2) créditoscontractuales o no frente a terceros condomicilio en otros Estados. Pero ¿puedeentonces el juez decretar un embargo de uncrédito cuando presenta estos elementos deextranjería? ¿Es posible una ejecución con

estos efectos transfronterizos dentro de la UE?Empecemos por pensar en la alternativa encaso de dar una respuesta negativa, que esquizá la respuesta estándar de la doctrina y lajurisprudencia nacionales. La alternativa a laejecución transfronteriza es solicitar elreconocimiento y ejecución de la resoluciónobtenida en el otro Estado, al amparo delReglamento 44/2001, y seguir su ejecuciónutilizando los mecanismos procesales internosde dicho Estado. El problema radica en que estaalternativa es a efectos prácticos inviablecuando hablamos de dinero y créditos, lopuede no paliarse adecuadamente con medidascautelares. En efecto, el reconocimiento alamparo del Reglamento 44/2001 obliga a abrirotro procedimiento en el Estado al que sequiere ir, lo que a efectos prácticos entrañamultiplicar los costes para el cumplimiento dela sentencia, si el deudor va moviendo el dinerode Estado en Estado. Aunque sean a cargo delejecutado, deben ser adelantados por elejecutante con el riesgo de que no puedarecuperarlos todos o una parte. Y son en todocaso costes sociales que se multiplican, y por lotanto es deseable reducirlos; Además, eltrámite del reconocimiento introduce unademora en el tiempo no desdeñable. El tiempoes especialmente problemático cuandohablamos de realizar derechos de crédito ycuentas bancarias que son fácilmente volátiles;Y por último, pero no menos importante,puede ocurrir que aunque se inste elreconocimiento en otro Estado – del ejecutadoo del tercero deudor – esto sea inefectivoporque los derechos de crédito no están enningún sitio físico y puede que el dinero nuncapase cerca de las manos del juez paraaprehenderlo. Es por ello que vale la pena y esnecesario estudiar las alternativas quepermitirían en su caso evitar el resultado quese anuncia.


macao Premio MoniqueRAYNAUD-CONTAMINE

2013

El embargo internacional de créditos en la UE(1)

I Francisco RAMOS ROMEU


I 2. Argumentos a favor delembargo internacional de créditos

Las razones jurídicas que abonan la jurisdiccióndel juez para dictar una orden de embargo apesar de que el tercero deudor tenga sudomicilio en el extranjero son múltiples. Noslimitamos a los argumentos principalesderivados del derecho internacional público,humanitario y comunitario, que son aplicables atodos los Estados miembros de la UE. Conciertas vacilaciones, son multitud los Estados,tanto de derecho civil como de derechocomún, que han permitido este tipo demedidas: Francia2, Alemania3, Países Bajos4,Reino Unido5, los Estados Unidos deNorteamérica6.

En primer lugar, el derecho internacionalpúblico parte de que los Estados tienen poderpara ejercer su jurisdicción sobre personas,bienes y actos fuera de su territorio, y portanto poder para dictar medidas de embargoextraterritoriales. Así lo dijo la CortePermanente de Justicia Internacional [CPJI] dijoen el Caso Lotus (1927).7 El límite que imponeel derecho internacional público, que reconocela CPJI, es que el Estado no puede ejercer esepoder sobre el territorio de otro Estado. Pero¿qué quiere decir esto? Esto está claro queimpide a los agentes públicos o a la policía deun Estado entrar en el territorio del otroEstado para aprender los bienes del deudor yllevarse el dinero. Pero no excluye que unEstado adopte un embargo dentro de sujurisdicción, ni que se ordene la retención de ladeuda a un tercero en otro territorio y se lenotifique por correo. No se afecta a lasoberanía de otro Estado por esto, porque nose hace, y mientras no se haga, ningún acto defuerza en el territorio del otro Estadomiembro. Hay que distinguir entre la fuerza“física” y la fuerza “jurídica”. Lo único quequeda claramente excluido es el ejercicio de lafuerza física en otro Estado, que no es muchasveces necesaria (También así Cuniberti 2008:975 y 990, tras un perfecto análisis entre losdistintos modos de intervención estatal). Pero,aunque la fuerza “jurídica” también estuvieraexcluida, no puede considerarse vulneraciónde la soberanía cuando el otro Estado haaceptado las notificaciones de actos judicialesde un Estado en su territorio como ocurre enla UE al amparo del Reglamento 1393/2007, y

como ocurre en muchos otros países alamparo del Convenio de la Haya de 1965(Michinel Álvarez 1999: 36, 38 y 43-46).8Ningún Estado dentro de la UE puede sentirsegenuinamente ofendido, especialmente porqueel objetivo es compartido, lo que nos lleva alsegundo argumento.

En segundo lugar, todos los Estados de la UEhan aceptado la importancia del derecho a latutela judicial efectiva (art. 47 de la Carta de losDerechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europeay art. 6 CEDH).9 Este derecho, imponesoluciones que favorezcan la efectividad de latutela judicial en la ejecución10, sin que puedairse contra el efecto útil de lo ejecutoriado.11 ElTEDH ha dicho que “el Estado tiene la obligaciónde poner a disposición del acreedor un sistemajudicial apto para ayudarle en la ejecución de sucrédito”.12 La eficacia de la justicia civil, decomún interés para los Estados, debe ser laprincipal consideración (McLachlan 1996: 50;Hess 2004: 12-13). Aunque la jurisprudencia hareconocido límites al derecho a la ejecución,debe haber un objetivo legítimo y que seadopten medios que guarden una relaciónrazonable de proporcionalidad, sin que quepavaciar el derecho a la ejecución de contenido,como dice el TEDH.13 Las medidas ejecutivasque puedan tener efectos extraterritorialesson una forma de dar cumplimiento al derechoa la ejecución y se fundamentan en él. Todos losEstados de la UE quedan obligados, lo queimplica que algunos tendrán que acordar laorden de embargo aunque tenga efectosextraterritoriales y otros tendrán la obligaciónde soportarla para que la justicia europea seaeficaz. Denegarlas sólo es admisible cuandohaya motivos solidos que puedan hacer cederal derecho a la eficacia de la justicia. Se invierteaquí por tanto la perspectiva, y habrá que vercuáles son esos motivos sólidos.

En tercer lugar, en la UE, la jurisdicción se basaen criterios aceptados por todos los Estadosmiembros (Reglamento 44/2001) por lo quetodos han aceptado que incluso sus nacionalespuedan ser condenados por otros Estados ysometidos a su poder coercitivo. Una vezasumida la jurisdicción de los tribunales sobreel deudor para condenarle, resulta ilógiconegar que este poder alcance a la ejecución delo ordenado sobre sus bienes y derechos,aunque se encuentren en el extranjero. Sepuede añadir que el efecto útil del Reglamento

44/2001 así lo impone.14 Se dirá que hay quedistinguir entre el poder de juzgar y el de hacerejecutar lo juzgado. Pero esto choca con elcarácter expansivo del poder del Estado quederiva de la soberanía15, el contenido habitualdel concepto de “jurisdicción” que incluye elpoder de juzgar y ejecutar lo juzgado, y que noes la interpretación más favorable a la tutelajudicial efectiva. De hecho, el Reglamento44/2001 no contiene un fuero especial oexclusivo para la ejecución, cuestión sobre laque volveremos en un momento.

Obviamente, pueden existir bienes sobre losque el ejercicio de jurisdicción por el Estadopueda ser problemática, por ejemplo porvulneración de una competencia exclusiva deotro Estado. Deberá ser valorado en el casoconcreto, pero para los derechos de crédito nolo veo problemático. En todo caso, esto nodebe ser una preocupación paralizante para elEstado que quiera acordar el embargo. Aunqueel respeto de la jurisdicción de otros Estadoses una consideración a tener en cuenta paraacordar el embargo, cuando se demuestre queefectivamente se produciría una injerencia enlas prerrogativas que otro Estado se hareservado, normalmente la ineficacia de laejecución vendrá de la denegación delreconocimiento de efectos por las autoridadesde ese Estado afectado cuando lescorresponda la última palabra.16

En cuarto lugar, el derecho comunitariocontempla el poder de los Estados paraadoptar medidas con efectos extraterritoriales.El propio Reglamento 44/2001 habla delreconocimiento de “mandamientos deejecución” (art. 32). Y cuando los tribunalesnacionales le han planteado la cuestión, el TJCEha dicho que pueden ampararse en lanormativa comunitaria para su librecirculación, aunque se tratara de medidasprovisionales. El caso más claro es el de laSTJCE 06.03.1980, Caso nº 120/79, Louise deCavel v. Jacques de Cavel, pero en otros en quepodía plantearse la discusión de su validez, elTJCE la ha orillado dándola por supuesta.Verdad es que el TJCE no ha sido todo lofavorable con estas medidas que uno hubieraquerido, por ejemplo, cuando son de carácter“cautelar”. Pero las limitaciones que hainstaurado para las medidas cautelares nodeberían jugar para las medidas ejecutivasporque las consideraciones para proteger la

macao

“provisionalidad” de las medidas cautelares o lacompetencia del juez natural respecto delfondo no se dan.17 Estamos ante medidasejecutivas para cumplir con una sentencia,después de seguir un proceso con todas lasgarantías procesales, y dentro de un procesoejecución que vuelve a tener todas lasgarantías.

En definitiva, el poder del juez comunitario paradictar embargos con efectos extraterritorialestiene un amplio apoyo legal en el derechojudicial comunitario y humanitario, tanto decarácter legislativo como jurisprudencial,desarrollado en los últimos años.

I 3. Refutación de algunosargumentos en contra

Por otra parte, los argumentos que se hanofrecido para negar la jurisdicción del juez paradictar esta orden de embargo con efectosextraterritoriales no son tan sólidos como sepretende, y han quedado superados.Examinamos brevemente tres argumentos,porque en buena parte quedan desactivadostambién por lo que ya se ha dichoanteriormente.

Un primer argumento en contra es que esimposible llevar a cabo actividades ejecutivasfundamentales de la ejecución, como actos queentrañan el uso de la fuerza, fuera del territoriodel tribunal. Dejando de lado la cuestión de sijurídicamente se vulnera en realidad lasoberanía de otro Estado, que ya hemos vistoque se puede responder negativamente, elargumento es apriorístico. Decae en el caso deque puedan llevarse a cabo los actos materialesnecesarios en una ejecución para la satisfaccióndel crédito. Se entiende que pueda haber másdificultades, que haya efectos propios de unaejecución nacional que no esté claro si sepodrán dar. Pero quizá también hayaalternativas, u otros efectos que sí podrándarse y que serán suficientes. Por ejemplo, sóloel riesgo de que el Estado de la ejecuciónimponga una sanción por desobediencia a laautoridad al tercero deudor que estádomiciliado fuera pero que algún día quizá viajeo tenga que hacer negocios en el Estado deejecución, algo no poco habitual en la UE,puede ser suficiente para compeler alcumplimiento del embargo. Y para que no

quepa duda, el Estado de la ejecución podríaincluso solicitar la entrega o extradición deltercero deudor al amparo de normativaaplicable en todos los Estados comunitarios.18

El embargo puede ser además fundamentopara solicitar la cooperación jurisdiccional delas autoridades judiciales extranjeras para llevara efecto el embargo.

Un segundo argumento es que soninembargables en la medida en que los bienesse encuentren en el extranjero porque lajurisdicción de los tribunales se extiendo sólo alterritorio nacional. Esto impide al juez adoptarmedidas ejecutivas sobre bienes que seencuentran fuera de su jurisdicción. Ya hemosvisto que esto no es así necesariamente, elderecho internacional público no impide a losEstados adoptar medidas con efectosextraterritoriales. Aunque un Estado podríahaber limitado unilateralmente su jurisdicción abienes que se encontraran dentro de suterritorio, un repaso indica que no es habitual.Es más, el derecho comunitario mencionadoanteriormente parece más bien apuntar en ladirección contraria: es obligatorio para losEstados dictar eventualmente medidas conefectos extraterritoriales para garantizar elderecho a una ejecución eficaz y dar efectividada sus poderes jurisdiccionales reconocidos. Enfin, existe un ulterior problema si se mantieneesta postura a ultranza porque ¿cuándo estánlos derechos de crédito en un determinadoterritorio para su embargo? Es una cuestiónque debe dirimirse acudiendo al derechoaplicable al crédito conforme a las normas deconflicto del tribunal asido. Las leyes de losEstados miembros divergen en cuanto alcriterio de localización: algunos Estados seremiten al domicilio del acreedor, otros al deldeudor, otros al lugar de pago, otros comoEspaña no prevén nada expresamente, etc.(Kennett 2000: 249-250); Hess 2004: 77). Puesbien, esto puede provocar que ningún Estado seacabe considerando competente porqueninguno considere que el crédito se encuentraen su territorio, lo que eso sí que afectaría a latutela judicial efectiva, denegando cualquierprotección jurisdiccional.

En tercer y último lugar, se ha dicho que elReglamento 44/2001 prevé una competenciaexclusiva “en materia de ejecución” del Estadomiembro del lugar de ejecución (art. 22.5).19

Pero la jurisprudencia del TJCE hasta la fecha,

en una interpretación razonable, ha dicho queeste artículo no reserva la realización deactividades ejecutivas únicamente para lostribunales del lugar donde se encuentren losbienes. Lo único que dice el precepto es quelos tribunales del “lugar de ejecución” son losexclusivamente competentes para las cuestionesque se susciten respecto de la ejecución.20 Seimpone además una interpretación restrictiva delas competencias exclusivas.21 La doctrinaconsidera que, como mucho, el artículo limita laintervención material (compulsión física) de lasautoridades competentes para la ejecución alterritorio del Estado en que se hayan (Cuniberti2008: 987). Pero es que también hay doctrina queha negado directamente que el Reglamentocontenga un fuero exclusivo para la ejecución,que por tanto habría que examinar conforme alderecho nacional (Michinel Álvarez 1999: 56 y65-66 respecto del antiguo Convenio deBruselas).

En fin, la aplicación de este fuero plantea seriasdificultades respecto de los derechos decrédito por su carácter virtual. ¿Cuál es el“lugar de ejecución de un crédito”? Sueleañadirse que es el domicilio del tercero deudoro lugar de cumplimiento voluntario del pagodel crédito. O hay una remisión a los criteriosde localización del crédito. O másgenéricamente se exige un “vínculo real” con elEstado como hace la doctrina alemana(Michinel Álvarez 1999: 33-34). Lo que estáclaro es una vez más no hay criterio uniformeentre los Estados.22 En estos casos puedeocurrir que un más de un tribunal se considerecompetente exclusivamente, lo que puedeprovocar conflictos insolubles y una graninseguridad jurídica, ya que varios tribunales senegarán a reconocer las actuaciones mutuas deotros Estados, con una seria merma de laefectividad de la tutela judicial.

I 4. A modo de conclusión

Para concluir, la aceptación de los efectosextraterritoriales del embargo, se imponecomo la única forma para combatir lanaturaleza virtual del crédito, su volatilidad, y lainexistencia de alternativas mejores. No hay unúnico fuero que garantice unos plenos efectosfrente a todas las partes o un fuero másefectivo, “natural”, o ideal. Si a esto se le añadeque, en un breve instante, un crédito puede


macao


volatilizarse de un lugar, para “aparecer” enotro, resulta evidente e derecho procesal nopuede quedarse atrás frente a la realidad deunas operaciones transnacionales complejas,que exigen de los tribunales respuestastambién ágiles y realistas. Un correctofuncionamiento de la justicia civil resultafundamental para que las relaciones jurídicas enel mercado interior comunitario sedesenvuelvan bien (Hess 2004: 15).

Francisco RAMOS ROMEU Ramos & Arroyo

Barcelona, Españ[email protected]

Bibliografía citada

ANDREA BIANCHI, Comment a Jurisdictional Rules inCustomary International law (por Harold G. Maier) enExtraterritorial jurisdiction in theory and practice (Ed. Karl M.Meessen), Ed. Kluwer Law International, pp. 73-102 (1996).

BOSCH, Ullrich, Extraterritorial Rules on Banking and Securities,en Extraterritorial jurisdiction in theory and practice (Ed. Karl M.Meessen), Ed. Kluwer Law International, pp. 200-224 (1996).

CUNIBERTI, Gilles, Le principe de territorialité des voiesd’exécution, Journal du Droit International nº 4/2008, pp. 963-997 (2008).

CUNIBERTI, Gilles, La ejecución de las medidas provisionales ycautelares extranjeras en materia civil y mercantil en Europa,Diario La Ley, Nº 7601, Sección Tribuna, 31 Mar. 2011, AñoXXXII (2011).

GASCÓN INCHAUSTI, Fernando, Medidas cautelares deproceso civil extranjero (art. 24 Convenio de Bruselas), Ed.Comares (1998).

JIMENO BULNES, Mar, Un proceso europeo para el siglo XXI,Civitas (2011).

HESS, Burkhart, Study No. JAI/A3/2002/02 on making moreefficient the enforcement of judicial decisions within theEuropean Union: transparency of a debtor’s assets, attachmentof bank accounts, provisional enforcement and protectivemeasures, disponible online enhttp://ec.europa.eu/civiljustice/publications/docs/enforcement_judicial_decisions_180204_en.pdf (2004).

KENNETT, Wendy, The Enforcement of Judgments in Europe,Oxford University Press (2000).

MCLACHLAN, Campbell, Extraterritorial orders affecting bankdeposits, en Extraterritorial jurisdiction in theory and practice (Ed.Karl M. Meessen), Ed. Kluwer Law International, pp. 39-63(1996).

MICHINEL ÁLVAREZ, Miguel Ángel, Embargo internacional decréditos, Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Vigo(1999).

1 El presente trabajo es un resumen de un estudio másextenso sobre la ejecución transfronteriza sobre créditos enla UE que ha recibido el Premio Monique Raynaud-Contamine 2013 concedido por la Unión Internacional deAbogados. Quiero agradecer los comentarios de losprofesores Manuel Jesús Cachón Cadenas y Rafael ArenasGarcía. Cualquier comentario es bienvenido:[email protected].

2 Sentencia de la Cour Cassation de 14.02.2008 (ArrêtExsymol), explicada en detalle Cuniberti (2008: 976-979).

3 Ver Prof. Ulrich Drobnig en McLachlan (1996: 61) y Bosch(1996: 201).

4 Ver Gascón Inchausti (1998: 230-231) que refiere casos deese país.

5 Así ha sido para las de medidas cautelares, conocidastradicionalmente como “Mareva Injunctions”. Caso MarevaCompañia Naviera SA v International Bulkcarriers SA [1975]2 Lloyd’s Rep 509. En este caso, la cuenta bancaria con eldinero de los demandados cuyo embargo preventivo sepretendía se encontraba en Londres. Con posterioridad, lostribunales ingleses extendieron las órdenes a bienes situadosen el extranjero, pero incluyendo una limitación que preveíalos efectos extraterritoriales sólo si la orden era reconocidaen el otro Estado. Caso Babanaft International Co SA v.Bassatne [1990] Ch 13. Ver McLachlan (1996: 39-44) yGoldrein y Wilkinson (1991: Capítulo 2). Sin embargo, laHouse of Lords en Sté Eram Shipping Co. Ltd. And others vs.Hong Kong and Shangai Banking Co. Ltd. [2003] UKHL 30no ha seguido el mismo criterio respecto de medidasejecutivas de embargo, un tratamiento no del todojustificado. Ver al respecto Cuniberti (2008: 979-982).

6 Republic of the Philippines v. Marcos, 862 F.2d 1355 (9th Cir.,1988); cert. Denied 490 US 1035. Citado en McLachlan(1996: 40). Ver también Bosch (1996: 203).

7 Sentencia de la Corte Permanente de Justicia Internacionalde 07.09.1927, Recueil des Arrêts – Serie A, nº 10,Publications de la Cour Permanente de Justice Internationale(1927), disponible online en http://www.icj-cij.org/pcij/series-a.php?p1=9&p2=1 (Caso Lotus). Aunque en los hechos quedieron origen al caso se trataba del ejercicio de jurisdicciónpenal, las expresiones utilizadas son suficientementegenerales para ser aplicables a todo tipo de jurisdicción, y laCIJ no da a entender que se trate de expresiones limitadas aesta jurisdicción.

8 Con el Reglamento (CE) nº 1393/2007, del ParlamentoEuropeo y del Consejo, de 13 de noviembre de 2007,relativo a la notificación y al traslado en los Estadosmiembros de documentos judiciales y extrajudiciales enmateria civil o mercantil, no debería haber ninguna dudasobre la posibilidad de notificar la orden transnacionalmente(también Hess 2004: 84-85).

Hess (2004: 83-84) cita un caso del Tribunal Supremo Alemánque mantiene que la notificación no es un “acto deejecución”. Lo mismo en Kennett (2000: 269-270) quetambién cita un caso del Tribunal Supremo Austríaco queadopta también el criterio de la jurisdicción alemana

9 El art. 81.2.e) del Tratado de Funcionamiento de laComunidad Europea (TFCE) establece que, en el ámbito dela cooperación judicial civil, se adoptarán medidas paragarantizar “una tutela judicial efectiva”. Jimeno Bules (2011:58-59) menciona la tutela judicial efectiva como objetivofundamental del derecho procesal europeo.

10 Ver STEDH 19.03.1997, Asunto Hornsby c. Grecia, Recurso18357/91, par. 40. Este principio se ha ratificado ensentencias posteriores como la STEDH 28.06.2000, AsuntoDimitrios Georgiadis c. Grecia, Recurso 41209/98, par. 25, laSTEDH 20.07.2000, Asunto Antonetto c. Italia, Recurso15918/89), par. 27.

11 Ver STEDH 28.07.1999, Asunto Inmobiliaria Saffi c. Italia,Recurso 22774/93, relativa a la ejecución de un desahuciodecretado por un juez que no se lleva a cabo por la fuerzapública al haber intervenido un cambio legislativo. En elmismo sentido también, ver la STEDH 11.01.2001, AsuntoLunari c. Italia, Recurso 21463/1993, la STEDH 21.03.2002,Asunto Vasilopoulou c. Grecia, Recurso 47541/99, y laSTEDH 07.05.2002, Asunto Bourdov c. Rusia, Recurso59498/00.

12 STEDH 26.04.2007, Asunto Durdan c. Rumanía, Recurso nº6098/03, par. 65. En el mismo sentido también, STEDH16.01.2006, Asunto Muzevic c. Croatia, Recurso 39299/02,par. 83.

13 STEDH 2.03.2004, Asunto Popescu c. Rumanía, Recurso nº48102/99, par. 66; y STEDH 31.03.2005, Asunto Matheus c.Francia, Recurso n1 62740/00, Par. 56.

14 La doctrina ha notado la aproximación ambivalente del TJCEal principio de efectividad y su efecto sobre las normasprocesales. Ver Kennett (2000: 27-28). La últimajurisprudencia del TJCE sobre el Reglamento 44/2001 hasido favorable a su uso en este ámbito: el TJCE la hautilizado para prohibir las órdenes anti-proceso (anti-suitinjunctions): STJCE de 27.04.2004, Caso nº 159/02, Turner v.Grovit y STJCE 10.02.2009, Caso 185/2007, Allianz SpA,Generali Assicurazioni v. West Tankers Inc.

15 Bianchi (1996: 77-78) dice que la jurisdicción es una cuestiónde grado. En el derecho internacional no hay unacategorización clara entre distintos tipos de jurisdicción. Esun fenómeno unitario, caracterizado por diversos niveles deejercicio de poder de la autoridad.

16 Aprovecho para indicar que en el embargo de derechos decrédito ese Estado con la última palabra no seránecesariamente el del domicilio del tercero deudor, porquela jurisdicción para conocer de litigios relativos al créditopuede corresponder a otro Estado, por ejemplo porsumisión expresa de las partes.

17 Me refiero al Asunto 125/1979, STJCE 21.05.1980, BernardDenilauler v. SNC Couchet Frères Denilauler. La doctrina hacriticado de hecho en general esta resolución (Cuniberti2011: 3).

18 Me refiere al Convenio de Extradición Europeo de 1957 ya la Decisión marco 2002/584/JAI del Consejo de 13 dejunio de 2002 relativa a la orden de detención europea y alos procedimientos de entrega entre Estados miembros.

19 Este argumento lo utiliza la STSJ Madrid (Sala Social) de08.06.2011 (AS 2011\2299) para denegar en una ejecuciónespañola el embargo de los bienes de una empresaholandesa que pudiera tener en Holanda. Se apoya en la STS(Civil) de 18.12.2009 (RJ 2010\294), pero a mi juicioerróneamente ya esta sentencia razonablemente lleva a laconclusión contraria o no en todo caso no fundamente esaconclusión.

20 Ver la STJCE 26.03.1992, Asunto 261/90, Mario Reichert,Hans-Heinz Reichert y Ingeborg Kockler C. Dresdner BankAG, par. 26. La sentencia añade la referencia al informeelaborado por el comité de expertos que redactó el textodel Convenio (DO 1979, C 59, p. 1).

21 STJCE 04.07.1985, Asunto 220/84, AS-Autoteile ServiceGmbH c. Pierre Mahlé.

22 No cambia mucho el problema si en vez de localizar elcrédito, la cuestión deviene la existencia del “vinculo real”.Se dice por ejemplo, que bastaría con el deudor del deudortuviera bienes en el Estado, o que hubiera un derecho realde garantía localizado en el Estado de la ejecución. Peroentonces habrá que “localizar” estos bienes, y se vuelve almismo problema, especialmente si son créditos también.

macao

A young Japanese man, Mr. X, aged 25, goes onholiday to Macau and ends up winning€10,000,000 (equivalent to approx. JPY 1.3 billion,which is hereinafter referred to as the “prize”). Heis reluctant to go home because he does not wantto tell his parents and his (soon to be ex!)wife/girlfriend that he has come into so muchmoney. The analysis of the situation will be asfollows under the laws of Japan:

I 1. What options/proceduresare available to Mr. X, if hewants to protect his newly-acquired assets from hisparents and girlfriend/wife

a – During His LifetimeI) Protection from his wife

Under the Civil Code (Law No. 89 of 1986) ofJapan, while each person of a married couplehas individual rights to his/her own maritalproperty, when “it is not obvious whethercertain assets exclusively belong to thehusband or the wife, such assets will bepresumed to be co-owned by the marriedcouple1.”

In the present case, it appears difficult to justifyany circumstances that could make the prizeobviously belong to either of Mr. X or his wife.If Mr. X’s expenses for travelling to Macauand/or purchasing the bet derive from theassets co-owned by the couple (unless, forinstance, Mr. X spends his own savings which hehad prior to marriage on these expenses), itwould be reasonable to consider that the prizearising from these costs and/or expenses (solong as there is a causal relationship betweenthese costs and/or expenses and the prize) willalso be co-owned by the couple.

It follows that it is theoretically difficult for Mr. X to protect the prize from his wife. InJapan, a married couple may divorce by mutualconsent without the intervention of the court;however, if Mr. X’s wife identifies this prize andthe couple fails to reach a consensus as to howto allocate their assets upon divorce, she mayproceed to file a suit against Mr. X seekingmonetary claims equivalent to half of the prizewhich Mr. X gained. Such claims are more likelythan not accepted by the court (to someextent at least, depending on the length of theirmarriage), in which case Mr. X may be obligedto allocate nearly half of the prize to his wifeupon divorce.

Practically speaking, however, in the event of asuit filed by Mr. X’s wife seeking for allocationof the prize in question, she, as the plaintiff,bears the burden of proof in respect of theexistence and the nature of the assets to beallocated by the couple (to put it another way,Mr. X has no obligations to disclose voluntarilyhis assets in the suit; no such system as“discovery” exists in Japan as it does in the US).Therefore, it would be even more difficult forMr. X’s wife to identify it if he retains the prizein a bank account (hopefully one without abranch office in Japan) opened outside Japan(especially in countries where he has no orlittle connection personally or professionally)or in a bank account opened in the name of anon-Japanese company owned by Mr. X.

II) Protection from his girlfriend

Under the laws of Japan, a “girlfriend” is notgranted any right to the property of herboyfriend (at least legally) and thus his girlfriendhas, at the outset, no right to his prize.Therefore, there is no need to discuss itsprotection from Mr. X’s girlfriend further.

In theory, however, if Mr. X’s “girlfriend”demonstrates by objective evidence (typically, thefact of long-standing cohabitation and any othercircumstances) that their relationship has beenquasi-marital and that she is accordingly his “de-facto wife”, she may be entitled to claim allocationof Mr. X’s assets by analogy to the position ofmarried couple (practically speaking, theacceptance of such claims by the court appearsunlikely, given the young age of the couple).

III) Protection from his parents

Under the laws of Japan, given that Mr. X is anadult2, his parents have no custodial right to hisproperty (at least legally) and thus his parentshave, at the outset, no right to his prize.Therefore, there is no need to further discuss Mr.X’s protection from his parents.

b – On Death (From PotentialBeneficiaries)?

Under the laws of Japan, it is in principle permittedfor any person to decide how to allocate his/herpersonal assets upon death by way of a “will”; whilethe legal successors except brothers and sistershave rights to their legally secured portion (inprinciple, half of the legally prescribed portion) tothe estate.

Practically speaking, similarly, the legal successorsbear the burden of identifying the details and thenature of Mr. X’s estate, meaning that, when Mr. Xconceals the location of his property to his family,etc., especially in a bank account opened outsideJapan and/or under the name of a non-Japanesecompany owned by him (in which case, Mr. X’sshares in such company will, in theory, alsoconstitute the estate), there would be practicaldifficulty for Mr. X’s legal successors to identify thewhole picture of Mr. X’s estate.

Asset PreservationJapanese Regulations

I Motoyasu HIROSE

macao MoniqueRAYNAUD-CONTAMINE

Award Young Lawyer

2013


I 2. What options/proceduresare available to Mr. X, if he wants to protect his wealth, including hisnewly-acquired assets, from potential creditors?

a – Principle - Scope of Non-ExemptProperty

When Mr. X’s creditors exercise their claimsagainst Mr. X (suppose, for example, if Mr. Xmakes big loans but fails to repay them whendue), if the prize in question rests in Mr. X’s name,under the laws of Japan, all the property in Mr. X’sname (irrespective of its location or nature(whether it is in the form of cash, real estate orshares or otherwise)) constitute Mr. X’s non-exempt property for the benefit of creditors,which follows that his creditors may, afterobtaining the title of debt (i.e. final decision of thecourt), enforce, by way of compulsory process, asnecessary, their claims against whichever of thenon-exempt property in Mr. X’s name.

Practically speaking, however, under the laws ofJapan, Mr. X has no obligation to voluntarily notifyor otherwise disclose the location and/or thenature of his non-exempt property to anycreditors (except in the event of insolvencyprocedures requiring the debtor to disclose theremaining assets under penalty of disqualificationfrom the discharge of debts and criminalprosecution); to put it another way, the creditorswill bear the burden of identifying his propertytargeted in the procedures of compulsoryenforcement within his non-exempt property,which would consequently pose, in analogy withthe aforementioned logic, more practicaldifficulties and accordingly decrease the chancefor the creditors to identify and proceed tocompulsory enforcement against it (fromprocedural points of view, it requires additionalcourt procedures in the jurisdiction where thetargeted non-exempt property is located).

b – Intervention of Corporate Entities

I) What if Mr. X Establishes a Non-Japanese Company?

What if Mr. X establishes Company A outside theterritory of Japan and transfers the prize or theproperty deriving there from to Company A?When Mr. X owns shares in Company A, such

shares in themselves constitute part of his non-exempt property, which can also be subject tothe attachment and enforcement by his creditorsif identified.

II) Piercing the Corporate Veil

Under the laws of Japan, in order to prevent thedebtor from evading his/her creditor’scompulsory enforcement by way of transfer ofhis/her own property to a corporation whichhe/she substantially owns and controls, thefollowing non-statutory rule (rather, theoriesestablished through case precedents)traditionally prevails:

When the legal personality is a mere façade orsomehow abused, the so-called theory of“piercing the corporate veil” disallows, to theextent necessary for resolving the dispute,separation of or distinction between thecorporation and the individual(s) substantiallycontrolling it. This rule is not statutory but hasbeen established by case precedents andtheories.

For instance, in the circumstances referred tobelow, in particular, Company A and Mr. X as wellas the debt of these parties can be seen asinseparable and identical, which follows that Mr.X’s creditors may be entitled to enforce theirclaims against the property in the name ofCorporation A as if it were Mr. X’s personalproperty (although it remains arguable whetherand to what extent this theory applies toprocedural rules in terms of legal stability).

In this regard, to be qualified as cases of abuse oflegal personality, it would be required for hiscreditors to demonstrate the facts of (i) Mr. Xcontrolling the corporate entity like a “tool” bytaking advantage of his predominant position; and(ii) illegal objective underlying the use of legalpersonality. When there is substantially nodistinction between the corporation and itsshareholders, some prevailing theories argue thatmeeting the aforementioned condition (i) wouldsuffice for the theory of “piercing the corporateveil” to be applicable.

III) Action Paulienne

What if Mr. X intentionally transfers his assets,especially the prize gained in Macau, to a thirdparty with a view to evading the compulsory

execution initiated by his creditors, suchcreditors could be entitled under the laws ofJapan to resort to so-called “action paulienne3”to revoke the legal effects of such transfer andthus demand return of the assets to Mr. X.

The conditions for exercising this action arethat (i) the debtor disposed of his/her assetsafter the creditor’s relevant claim had beencreated; (ii) the debtor is insolvent; and that (iii)the debtor disposed of his/her assets in theknowledge that such disposal would prejudicehis/her creditors.

In the present case, even assuming thatJapanese law governs Mr. X’s transfer of assetsto a third party, the creditors will, by analogy tothe cases of attachment of the debtor’s assetsin general, bear the burden of proactivelyidentifying the targeted assets and giving proofof the aforementioned conditions. As statedearlier, retaining the prize in a non-Japanesebank account or as equity in a non-Japanesecompany could similarly serve as passiveprotection against Mr. X’s potential creditors.

c – Recently Discussed Schemes

In recent times, it has been widely discussedhow to utilize the special purpose company(the “SPC”) as a bankruptcy-remote vehicle.The scheme being complicated, to put it simply,Mr. X establishes a SPC whose sole businessobjective is to administer certain real estate, inwhich Mr. X invests the prize. The real estateis to be entrusted to a trust bank, in which casesuch trust bank will acquire ownership to thereal estate. While Mr. X invests in and thus hasstake in the SPC, while acting as beneficiary ofthe interests accruing there from, theownership to the real estate, the value of whichwould be equivalent to Mr. X’s transformedprize, is to be retained by the trust bank. In thisway, wealthy individuals as well as corporationsin Japan attempt to have material portions oftheir assets isolated from their non-exemptproperty and thus remain protected in theevent of bankruptcy procedures; however, inorder for this scheme to be legally feasible, it isrequired to meet onerous and complexconditions set forth in the laws and regulationspertaining to the asset liquidation. Moreover,the authorities’ interpretation of the legitimacyof the scheme is vulnerable to frequentchanges.

macao


I 3. What options/proceduresare available to Mr. X, if hewants to protect himselfand his newly-acquiredassets, from the taxman?

a – Basic Legal Scheme Involving thePrize in Japan

I) Civil and Criminal Laws

In Japan, gambling such as in casinos as in Macauis illegal and thus subject to penal sanctions4.However, the relevant provisions of the offenceof gambling set forth in the Penal Code (LawNo. 45 of 1907) of Japan are inapplicable to theacts committed by Japanese nationals outsidethe territory of Japan5, which follows thatprocurement of the prize by way of gamblingoutside the territory of Japan will not be illegalunder the penal or civil laws of Japan.Therefore, there is no risk of the prize whichMr. X gained in Macau being confiscated by theJapanese authorities on the grounds of illegallyprocured profits6.

II) Tax Law

Under the tax laws of Japan, the prize gained byMr. X in a casino qualifies as “temporaryincome7” and is subject to the income tax, solong as Mr. X is a resident of Japan. This isbecause the Japanese income tax will beimposed on any income gained by residents ofJapan, irrespective of the geographic source ofsuch income (worldwide taxation). It does notmatter whether such income gained outsideJapan is brought back to Japan. For this reason,it is worth reviewing whether Mr. X will bequalified as “resident” in Japan.

“Resident” or “Non-resident”

The qualification of a person as “resident” ofJapan is, as mentioned below, subject to certainobjective criteria, which, to put it simply, wouldbe the place in which the taxpayer’s life isbased, as more fully explained below. On theassumption that Mr. X came to Macau for aholiday and that he had no fixed domicile inMacau at the time of gaining the prize, itappears generally difficult to contend that Mr. Xis to be qualified as “non-resident” of Japan.

Therefore, Mr. X is under the obligation to payconsiderable income tax imposed on the prizeas “temporary income” to the Japanese taxauthorities pursuant to the applicable laws8.

Calculation Method

To put it simply, under the tax laws of Japan, thebasis on which the “temporary income”, beingthe prize in question, is to be taxed as taxableincome will be calculated as follows:

(Prize – Bet – Travel Expenses – JPY500,000) x 1/2

In this regard, whether any bets not generatingprizes are deductible from the taxable incomeas costs and/or expenses remains arguable andthis has been squarely disputed in a Japanesecourt recently9. According to the court decision,the expenses incurred for such lost bets arenot in principle deductible, unless Mr. Xsuccessfully demonstrates exceptionalcircumstances such as having been repeatedlyand continuously engaged in gambling as his“business” rather than mere entertainment.

In principle, therefore, on the assumption thatthe bet and the travel expenses are minutecompared to the amount of Mr. X’s prize,nearly half of the gained prize (approx. 5 millioneuros) will be the taxable income, whichfollows that approx. 40% thereof (approx. 2million euros) will be levied and payable asincome tax in Japan.

Note that since certain income tax has alreadybeen levied and deducted from the prizeoutside Japan, which qualifies as “non-Japaneseincome tax”, it may be deducted from theincome tax declared and payable in Japanwithin a certain limit.

b – Will the Qualification of InvesteeAffect Mr. X’s Tax Position?

Under the tax laws of Japan, residents of Japanbear the obligation to pay income tax at themoment of procuring income. Transfer to thirdparties or transformation of the prize into anyother form of property (whether real estate orstocks or otherwise) thereafter will not affectthis obligation.

c – Prize and Inheritance Tax

I) Principle

Under the Inheritance Tax Act (Law No. 73 of1950) of Japan, the inheritance tax rate is veryhigh, leading up to 50% of the value of theestate exceeding JPY 300 million. The base forcalculating the amount of inheritance tax willbe as follows:

(Taxable Value of the Estate) – (JPY 50 million +(Number of Legal Successors) X (JPY 10 million)

To put it simply, assuming that the taxable valueof Mr. X’s assets (the calculation method ofwhich is complicated and thus omitted here)upon his death amounts to JPY 1,000 millionand that Mr. X leaves his wife and his son whenhe passes away, the basis for calculation of theinheritance tax would be JPY 1,000 million –(JPY 50 million + 2?JPY 10 million) = JPY 930million, in which case the amount of tax payablewould be JPY 930 million?50% - JPY 47 million= JPY 418 million!

II) Exceptions

To avoid it legitimately, both Mr. X and hissuccessor(s) must be non-resident(s) of Japanfor a period of consecutive five years precedingMr. X’s death and the inherited assets need tobe located outside the territory of Japan10. Forexample, shares in a non-Japanese companyand deposit in a bank account opened outsideJapan are typically regarded as assets outsidethe territory of Japan.

In the present case, if Mr. X retains the prize ina bank account in Hong Kong, for example, orinvests in a non-Japanese company which heowns and then he resides permanently outsideJapan and his son also continues to be a non-resident of Japan throughout the period of fiveyears preceding his father’s death, inheritancetax will not be imposed on the prize (or theassets deriving there from), at least by theJapanese tax authorities.

Being a “resident”, on the other hand, is asensitive notion difficult to define. Courtprecedent dictates that objective criteria shallbe used to determine whether or not a person is a resident of Japan. In fact, majorshareholders (mostly owners and/or founders)

macao


of Japanese listed companies attempt to makethe best of this scheme to circumvent donationtax and/or inheritance tax when shares are tobe transferred to their descendants. Beforethe recent amendment to the tax laws of Japan(introducing, as a condition for exemption, the“five years” threshold discussed earlier), therewas a famous case precedent of the SupremeCourt where the criteria for qualifying the“resident” of Japan was disputed11.

Motoyasu HIROSEUrdu & Itoga Tokyo, Japan

[email protected]

1 Article 762, Paragraph 2 of the Civil Code2 Under the laws of Japan, a person at or above the age of 20 is

in principle competent (Articles 4 and 5 of the Civil Code).3 Article 424 of the Civil Code4 Articles 185 and 186 of the Penal Code5 Article 3 of the Penal Code6 Article 19, Paragraph 1, Item 3 of the Penal Code7 This is qualified by analogy to the prize gained by way of

exceptionally legalised gambling in Japan (i.e. horse racing) (34-1(2) of the Basic Circular to the Income Tax Act (Law No. 33of 1965)).

8 Separately from the “income tax”, unless Mr. X removes hisresidential enrolment in Japan immediately after procurementof the prize and substantially bases his life outside the territoryof Japan as of the benchmark date, the “residence tax” (“juminzei” in Japanese, approx. 10% of the taxable income) may alsobe imposed on Mr. X.

9 From 2007 to 2009, Mr. P (Japanese citizen, a companyemployee), exhaustively and mechanically analyzed theplausible results of certain horse races and accordinglypurchased a huge number of betting slips (amounting toapprox. JPY 2,870 million in total) over the years on a

continuous and regular basis. Mr. P consequently gainedapprox. JPY 3,010 million in total. The tax authorities of Japanconsidered that the purchase price of the slips not generatingthe gains (for horses losing the race) would not be deductibleand accordingly imposed an income tax of approx. JPY 700million (plus back taxes) on Mr. P (due to his failure to declareand pay the income tax, this case led to criminal courtproceedings). Here, the underlying issue before determiningthe scope of the deductible expenses was whether the gainswhich Mr. P procured on horse races were to be qualified as“temporary income” or “sundry income”. In principle, thegains on horse races are a typical example of “temporaryincome” under the administrative circular of the Japanese taxauthorities because the act of purchasing the betting slips is bynature one-shot, incidental and entertaining under normalcircumstances, and the tax authorities appear to have followedthis approach. Mr. P argued to the contrary. If this is qualifiedas “temporary income”, it generally follows that the purchaseprice of the betting slips for lost races will not be deductible.The court, considering the particularities of this case, in thatthe frequency and the volume of Mr. P’s purchase of the bettingslips as well as his elaborate and systematic analysis of theplausible results of the horse races had been exceptional, ruledthat his behaviors in these horse races would amount to“investment business” rather than mere entertainment andaccordingly that his gains were “sundry income”, not“temporary income”. On that basis, the court affirmed that thepurchase price of the betting slips for lost races could bededucted from the gains in calculating the taxable income.(Judgment of Osaka District Court dated May 23, 2013).

10 Article 1-3 of the Inheritance Tax Act 11 Mr. R, president and major shareholder of Company Y (listed

company in Japan), transferred his shares in Company Y toCompany T (Dutch company) and acquired equity inCompany T. Mr. R donated his equity in Company T to Mr. Q(his son) residing in Hong Kong. At that time (according tothen the criteria prescribed in the former tax laws andregulations), donation tax was not imposable when theassignee resides outside the territory of Japan and thedonated assets were also located outside Japan (the “fiveyears” threshold requirements did not exist) and accordinglyMr. Q assumed that no donation tax would be imposed onthis donation from his father. However, the tax authorities ofJapan considered that Mr. Q’s residence was in Japan, not inHong Kong, and accordingly charged back taxes against Mr. Qon the grounds of failure to declare an income of approx. JPY160 billion. Mr. Q filed a suit against the Japanese governmentseeking revocation of this taxation. Mr. Q’s claims wererejected in the first and second instances, which wassurprisingly overturned by the Supreme Court andconsequently Mr. Q’s claims were admitted. The major issuein court was the criteria for determining Mr. Q’s place ofresidence. The lower courts ruled that Mr. Q’s residence hadbeen in Japan on such various grounds as the purpose of hismovement to Hong Kong, the location of major a portion ofhis personal resources, furniture and other staff for daily life,the nature of Mr. Q’s residence in Hong Kong, Mr. Q’sprofessional responsibility in both jurisdictions and Mr. Q’somission of administrative formalities to change his addressto Hong Kong, without regard to the fact that Mr. Q hadphysically stayed in Hong Kong for more than twice as long atime as in Japan during the taxation period, while the SupremeCourt ruled, on the contrary, that the basis on which Mr. Qwould be taxed from an objective perspective shall be as hisplace of residence and thus that Mr. Q had been a resident ofHong Kong (Judgment of Supreme Court dated 18 February,2011). This judgment shocked the tax authorities of Japan andtriggered subsequent amendments to the tax law of Japan,thereafter resulting in stricter conditions for evadingimposition of donation and/or inheritance tax laws of Japan.

macao

Cong

rès

de l’

UIA

- 3

1 oc

tobr

e ›

4 no

vem

bre

2013



L’affaire du Tramway de Jérusalem

Je vous avoue que j’ai été choqué par l’article publié dansle dernier numéro du Juriste International sous la plumedu Professeur Éric David qui n’est pas, à maconnaissance, membre de l’UIA.

Celui-ci fait le commentaire d’un arrêt rendu le 22 mars2013 par la Cour d’appel de Versailles portant surl’affaire intitulée « du tramway de Jérusalem ».

Il s’agit, certes, d’une affaire judiciaire mais avec des à-côtés politiques puisqu’il s’agissait de l’appel lancé parl’Association France Palestine Solidarité (AFPS) et l’OLPcontre un jugement du Tribunal de Nanterre.

Les Groupes voulaient faire annuler un contrat deconcession conclu par deux sociétés françaises: Alstomet Véolia avec l’État d’Israël.

Il est assez curieux de lire que l’auteur reproche auxparties requérantes de ne pas avoir invoqué lesrésolutions du Conseil de sécurité qui « exigentinlassablement qu’Israël se retire des territoirespalestiniens occupés… ».

Le caractère criminel de l’établissement des colonies depeuplement, caractère criminel qui résulte de textes quiincriminent le « transfert illégal ».

Il ajoute que l’établissement d’une colonie depeuplement par la Puissance occupante en territoireoccupé est érigé explicitement en crime de guerre.

Il convient d’observer que l’auteur se base ainsi sur desdécisions qui sont avant tout des décisions politiques etnon juridictionnelles pour critiquer un arrêt de la Courde Versailles et que les parties palestiniennes n’ontmême pas invoqué ces fondements.

Puis, l’auteur se félicite que l’on ait reconnu la qualité desujet de droit à l’OLP.

Si cet article était un simple commentaire juridique, iln’appellerait évidemment de ma part aucune réserve.Mais tel n’est pas le cas.

Par exemple, le Professeur regrette que la Cour ne parlepas de « l’occupation » mais du fait que Alstom, Véoliasoient des tiers au contrat.

Le Professeur fait ensuite des développements sur laConvention de Genève tout en reconnaissant que cesdéveloppements n’ont rien à voir avec l’arrêt rendu parla Cour d’appel de Versailles.

Par contre, lorsque le Professeur David, à la fin de sonarticle, revient sur le fait que la Cour d’appel aurait dû

rappeler le caractère criminel de l’établissement descolonies de peuplement et sur l’obligation absolued’Israël d’y mettre fin, il est à mes yeux indiscutable quel’on n’est plus dans le droit, mais dans la politique.

Autant j’accepte toute critique pouvant paraître dans leJuriste International touchant à la justice française, autantlorsque la critique est manifestement fondée en partiesur des raisons politiques, cela me paraît plus difficile àadmettre.

Je pense, en tout état de cause, qu’il aurait dû êtrementionné que cette critique n’engageait pas l’UIAmême si un encart figure dans la page de garde.

Je suis, d’ailleurs, personnellement hésitant sur l’utilité defaire paraître des articles qui n’émanent pas demembres de l’UIA, sauf lorsqu’il s’agit de personnescomme Madame Shirin Ebadi dont la notoriétés’impose évidemment à nous et relève le niveau denotre journal.

Bernard CAHENPrésident d’honneur de l’UIA

Cayol, Cahen & associésParis, France

[email protected]

Réponse du Professeur Eric David

Un courrier des lecteurs adressé au Juriste Internationalcritique très agressivement mon commentaire de l’arrêtrendu, le 22 mars 2013, par la Cour d’appel de Versaillesdans l’aff. du Tramway de Jérusalem. C’est parce que leJuriste international m’a très aimablement prié de réagir àcette critique que j’apporte ici quelques éléments deréponse sinon je m’en serais abstenu tant il est évidentque ce lecteur et moi ne parlons pas la même langue.

En substance, l’auteur – B. Cahen – de ce courriersemble regretter (ce n’est pas toujours très clair)

▪ que je me sois référé aux résolutions du Conseil desécurité qui, depuis 1967, exigent qu’Israël se retiredes territoires occupés;

▪ que j’aie évoqué le caractère criminel des coloniesisraéliennes de peuplement;

▪ que ce commentaire soit, dès lors, plus politique quejuridique.

B. Cahen ne conteste cependant pas la réalité deséléments de droit que j’évoque: c’est un point positif, sij’avais fait des erreurs, on n’aurait pas manqué de lerelever. En gros, B. Cahen déplore que j’invoque dessources – les résolutions du Conseil de sécurité – decaractère politique et qu’en me fondant sur elles et sur

la criminalité des colonies de peuplement, je ne suis« plus dans le droit, mais dans la politique ».

Certes, les résolutions du Conseil de sécurité sontpolitiques et en critiquant un arrêt d’appel, je prendsmoi-même une position politique car je critique lagestion judiciaire de la cité. Est-ce à dire que lesrésolutions du Conseil de sécurité n’ont pas de portéejuridique et que mon commentaire critique n’est pasjuridique? On peut évidemment le dire tout comme onpeut dire qu’un chat n’est pas un chat, mais nierl’évidence n’est pas faire preuve de bon sens:

▪ Dire que les résolutions du Conseil de sécurité n’ontpas de portée juridique parce qu’elles émanent d’unorgane politique revient à dire que la loi n’a pas nonplus de portée juridique puisque l’organe législatif quil’adopte – le parlement – est par essence un organepolitique; pour rappel, l’art. 25 de la Charte des NUdispose:

« Les Membres de l’Organisation conviennentd’accepter et d’appliquer les décisions du Conseil desécurité conformément à la présente Charte. »

La Charte des NU est un traité mais peut-être que B.Cahen estime que ce n’est pas du droit… C’est, entout cas, son droit de le penser mais je ne connais pasde juriste digne de ce nom qui dira la même chose oualors, je le répète, on ne parle pas la même langue.

▪ Dire qu’il n’est pas juridique d’évoquer le caractèrecriminel des colonies de peuplement établies enterritoire occupé par une Puissance occupante alorsque j’ai cité cinq articles de conventionsinternationales l’affirmant (4e Convention de Genève– CG – de 1949, art. 49 et 147; 1er Protocoleadditionnel aux CG de 1949, art. 85, § 4, a; Statut de laCPI, art. 8, § 2, b, viii; projet CDI de code des crimescontre la paix et la sécurité de l’humanité, art. 20, c, i)revient à dire qu’il n’est pas juridique de citer destextes de droit… Mais pourquoi pas? B. Cahenconnaît certainement le titre du tableau de Magrittereprésentant une pipe…

Last but not least, B. Cahen regrette que le Juristeinternational publie « des articles qui n’émanent pas demembres de l’UIA ». Il ne m’appartient, évidemment, pasde dire si le Juriste international doit se doter d’unpolitburo chargé de sélectionner des articles selonl’appartenance de l’auteur à l’institution. Le lecteurjugera.

Eric DAVIDProfesseur émérite de droit international,

Université libre de BruxellesBruxelles, [email protected]

Tribune Libre ❱ Opinion ❱ Tribuna Libre


Juriste International:politique éditoriale

L’objectif du Juriste International est d’offrir un forum dedébats et d’informations sur des sujets qui intéressent lesjuristes en exercice dans le monde entier.Le Juriste International n’esquivera pas les questionsdélicates ou controversées. Une publication qui ne viserait quedes sujets faciles et sans risques ou qui ne publierait que desarticles exprimant des opinions unanimes ou majoritaires nevaudrait pas la peine d’être lue.Les opinions exprimées dans le Juriste International nereflètent que celles de leurs auteurs. La publication dans leJuriste International n’implique ni que l’UIA ni que le JuristeInternational partagent ou soutiennent ces opinions.La publication ou la dissémination de matériel publicitaire oupromotionnel par le Juriste International n’indique en aucuncas l’approbation des produits, services, personnes ou organi -sations par l’UIA ou par le Juriste International.

Juriste International:política editorial

El objetivo de Juriste International es el de ofrecer un fórumde debate e información sobre temas que interesan a losjuristas en ejercicio en el mundo entero.Juriste International no eludirá las cuestiones delicadas ocontrovertidas. No valdría la pena leer una publicación quetrate únicamente sobre temas fáciles y sin riesgo, o quepublique tan sólo artículos que expresen opiniones unánimeso mayoritarias.Las opiniones expresadas en Juriste International son sólo elreflejo del punto de vista de sus autores. Su publicación enJuriste International no implica que la UIA o JuristeInternational comparta o apoye dichas opiniones.La publicación o distribución de material publicitario opromocional en Juriste International no indica en ningúncaso la aprobación de los productos, servicios, personas uorganizaciones por parte de la UIA o de Juriste International.

Juriste International :editorial policy

The aim of Juriste International is to offer a forumfor discussion and information on issues of interest topractising lawyers throu ghout the world.Juriste International will not avoid difficult orcontroversial issues. A journal which covered only thesafe or easy issues, or which only published articlesexpressing the consensus view or the opinions of themajority, would not be worth reading.The views expressed in articles in Juriste Internationalare the views of the authors. Publication in JuristeInternational does not imply that either the UIA orJuriste International shares or supports those views.Publication or dissemination of advertising orpromotional material does not indicate endorsement orsupport of any product, service, person or organisationby the UIA or Juriste International.

JURISTE INTERNATIONAL

PUBLICATION DE L'UIA / UIA PUBLICATION / PUBLICACIÓN DE LA UIA25, rue du Jour

75001 PARIS (France)Tel. +33 1 44 88 55 66Fax. + 33 1 44 88 55 77

E-mail : [email protected] Web: www.uianet.org

EQUIPE DE REDACTION / EDITORIAL TEAM / EQUIPO DE REDACCIÓN

Bénédicte QUERENET-HAHN,Rédacteur en Chef / Chief Editor / Redactor Jefe

Jerome ROTH,Rédacteurs en Chef Adjoint / Deputy Chief Editors / Redactors Jefe Adjunto

Bernard GRELON,Rédacteur en Chef Adjoint / Deputy Chief Editor / Redactor Jefe Adjunto

Nicole VAN CROMBRUGGHE,Rédacteur en Chef Adjoint / Deputy Chief Editor / Redactor Jefe Adjunto

Directeurs de rubriques / Section Directors / Directores de sección

Actualités de l'UIA / UIA News / Novedades de la UIASimona MATTA

Droits de l'Homme et de la Défense / Human Rights and Defence of the Defence / Derechos Humanos y de la Defensa

Stéphane BONIFASSI ❱ Carlos FATÁS MOSQUERA ❱ Martin PRADEL

La Profession d'Avocat / The Legal Profession / La AbogacíaFranco VILLA

Pratique du Droit / Legal Practice / Ejercicio de la AbogacíaNicole VAN CROMBRUGGHE ❱ Gavin LLEWELLYN

Secrétaire de Rédaction / Editorial Assistant / Secretaria de RedacciónMarie-Pierre RICHARD

RÉGIE PUBLICITAIRE / ADVERTISING SALES AGENCY/ AGENCIA DE MEDIOS

SEEPP - Régis LAURENT7, rue du Général Clergerie - 75116 Paris - France - Tél.: +33 1 47 27 50 05

MAQUETTE ET EDITION / DESIGN AND EDITIONS / MAQUETA Y EDICION

APPS FRANCE - [email protected]

Tirage - Distribution / Circulation - Distribution / Tirada - Distribución3000 exemplaires / copies / ejemplares

Crédit photos / Photos credit / Crédito fotos❱ ©MasterLu-Fotolia: couve ❱ ©fannyes-Fotolia: 1 ❱ ©KarSol-shutterstock: 2

❱ ©Luciano Mortula-shutterstock: 2, 10 ❱ ©nito-shutterstock: 10 ❱ ©Turkey tourist office: 11❱ ©Dennis van de Water: 13 ❱ ©Fotolia-drummond79: 14 ❱ ©Greater Houston Convention and Visitors Bureau: 15

❱ ©Celso Diniz-Fotolia: 16 ❱ ©David Sutherland: 17 ❱ ©gekaskr-Fotolia: 34 ❱ ©Yuryz - Dreamstime: 34 ❱ ©FIDH-Erhan Arik: 41 ❱ ©Anna Bogush-shutterstock: 48 ❱ ©fazon-Fotolia ❱ ©kemal Taner-shutterstock: 62

❱ ©Toniflap-shutterstock: 62

j

Documents

Juriste international - 2013-4