Droit comparé

 

Exam : 2 à 3 questions

 

Comparaison des systèmes juridiques => but de résoudre les problèmes de l’humanité (ex : divorce)

18^ème siècle => comparaison des systèmes politiques

19^ème siècle => comparaison droits modernes (avec l’arrivé des codifications)

Quelle est la meilleure méthode pour comparer les systèmes de droit ?

Deux méthodes :

ð Méthode juridique

ð Méthode culturelle

Il existe une comparaison des droits nationaux ainsi que des droits internationaux.    

Exemple : réchauffement climatique

Les méthodes de comparaison sont fonctionnelles. Historiquement, Aristote a fait la comparaison des constitutions (lois canoniques et coutumières), Montesquieu des systèmes politiques. Comparaison de communication à partir du 20^ème siècle. 

La subdivision des comparaisons s’est faite en plusieurs catégories : systèmes qui posent sur les religions, lois non écrites etc… les plus connus sont ceux des systèmes « Civil law » et « Common law ».

La France et l’Allemagne sont ceux qui ont eu le plus d’influence sur les autres systèmes des pays pour le « Civil law ». Pour la « Common law », le RU et les USA.

Cette différence reste parfois théorique entre les systèmes juridiques. En Common law, le système de standardisation => la procédure est standardisée.

The standard for action is called WRIT.

En Civil law, le système trouve ses racines du droit romain, c’est une sorte d’unification de substance, en tant que fonctionnement. L’application de la mise en exécution des lois en civil law est strictement contrôlée par l’Etat. La différence entre droit romain et le droit civil c’est les juristes. En droit romain, les juges ne sont pas forcément des juristes. En droit civil, les juristes ont appris la loi, ils ont le « sens » d’un juriste.

C’est une tradition qui vient également du droit canonique.

Les juristes sont présents pour la constatation d’affaires, et les juges rendent la décision.

Civil law judges need to understand the content, the structure of a law. They’re more active in the jurisdiction.

On the 19^th century there had two important codifications: the Code Napoléon (its characteristic is abstract, simple and clear, il est applicable à toutes les situations qui tombent dans le champ d’application) and the German civil code (a professional code).

The main influence are civil and roman law.

On the 19^th century the codification was obvious in the French and German law. There is a codification also in the Common law.

Some states such as California have also civil courts. And, almost every state of the USA has adapted commercial courts.

The aim between the two systems is different. In the civil law codification, they tried to englobe everything.

There is also a focus on the text in the common law system.

At the civil law system judges also interpret the law. What they do usually is identifying the legal law which is mad the legislator and interpretating it for once. Some people criticise the civil law thinking they’re like “machines” and they’re not creating.

British judges are generally very intellectual.

En France le législateur est au-dessus des juges.  

In the Common law system, it Is the form of action which makes the difference. For example, when there is a formal action which is based on common law and an action based on equity. In both legal systems there are appeal courts. There are two main subdivisions. In France: Cour de cassation and Cour d’appel.

In the common law systems, the judges are individual. They don’t need to go to law schools to become judges. There is a difference between UK and USA. In the USA there is an election to become a judge.

in the civil law systems, there are evidence.

In the common law systems, there are pretrials where both parties change their rules.

The judges are neutral, they are really passive. They don’t necessarily have a lawyer background.

In the civil law system, the judges are very active, they give feedback. In order to do that the judges need to know about law, they have a law background, and they are not neutral.

In the UK there are the barristers and the solicitors. The solicitors take the evidence and give it to barristers. The barristers take all the materials and know the proceedings, they know how to present all of them to court. They’re the only ones who can go to high courts. They don’t need to pursue a legal career.

In the civil law system, we need to graduate from a law school to become a lawyer. There is a state exam to become a lawyer.

In common law system, you must give something in return to what you are giving. There is an exchange of consideration.

In the civil law system, there is no need to get something in return.

Islam comes from the word “salaam” which means peaceful. Prophet Muhammad (saw) is the one who influences the most in the world. The 2^nd one is Newton, the 3^rd is Jesus and the 4^th Buddha.

Les questions de Gabriel (Cebrail) au prophète (saw) :

1)     Islam

2)     Iman

3)     Ihsan (Ibadet)

Idea of Sufism => we don’t care about paradise or hell, all we care about is loving Allah, and  not bothering him.

The prophet (saw) left Medina for Makkah. He created everything around the Kaaba to refer it as the “heart” of everything. He knew that the Arabs would think that they’re the best. So when he was fighting against the people of Makkah he used a “ruki” (a person having a different background form an Arabic one).

Medinah means “medeniyet” (civilization) and “city”.

(Oppenheimer created the atomic bomb, he was responsible for the atomic bomb in Japan.)

Symbole vient de “Symbalon”.

« Sym » means together

« balon » means thrown

Oneness of Allah (ra) => Rahman (ou Celal) et Rahim

 

 

                                                              Kemal (parfait) => prophètes

“Dunya” means the least level in Arabic.

 

 

 

 

 

Qu’est-ce que « Legal culture » ? (culture juridique)

Les idéologies ont changé au cours de l’histoire. Les règles changent aussi. La culture juridique est conservée ave la mise ne exécution des règles juridiques. L’attitude générale de public envers les règles juridiques. Dans cette approche il y a une culture juridique externe et une culture juridique interne.

Interne => consiste de tout ce qui fait partie de la mise en œuvre du système judiciaire, des règles juridiques.

La façon d’interpréter les règles juridiques est très importante.

Externe => ceux qui mettent en pratique les règles juridiques (ex : police)

The legal culture and the law always reflect to the need of the society.

Since the common law system is judge made law, judges are being more flexible. They have the possibility to have a different opinion as long as they justify them to the public.

In Japan, it is seen as something bad to be sued, or to go to court. Because of that, they have very few institutions and very few lawyers. Before 1996, it was even difficult to find a lawyer. Lawyers are generally very expensive. Japanese legal system is discouraging litigation.

Japan took the German codification, but their mentality is very different from it.

In 2016, in 141 countries the death penalty has been abolished. It is still there in 71 countries. It became a legal culture a society cannot kill someone.

Before the 20’s the Turkish codification was based on the Islamic rules. Now the rules are totally different divorce, marriage etc…

  

(DEMANDER)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

 

The reason of the globalisation after the cold war it is because of economic and political system have become less than one. It is not because of the interaction of the people. And the train has become a single market (especially for rich countries).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Le droit comparé des droits d l’Homme : 78% Etats ont des droits de l’homme.

Il existe plusieurs traités internationaux qui concernent les droits de l’Homme. Ces Etats partagent plus ou moins la même langue, alors qu’on voit, en ce qui concerne l’interprétation qu’il y a des divergences, des différentes cultures juridiques. Il a toujours des divergences même entre des droits qui sont très similaires.

Il y a également la question de l’universalité des droits de l’Homme. En réalité, à l’échelle internationale, les droits civils et politiques sont observés ou respectés par les instances internationales.

On verra la question de l’universalité des droits de l’homme.

Il existe plusieurs interprétations concernant les mêmes sujets.