The choice of the Superior Council of the Magistracy to propose Hélène Davo at the head of the Corsican Court of Appeal is contested in an unprecedented way.
by
The union union of magistrates (USM), largely in the majority in the judiciary, went to war against the proposal for the appointment of Hélène Davo, the current justice councilor within the cabinet of the President of the Republic, at the post First president of the Bastia Court of Appeal. “It is a political appointment, while much more competent magistrates than it applied,” denounces Céline Parisot, president of the union who held her national council on Friday June 10.
M Me Davo spent most of his twenty-five years of magistrate career outside the courts. The USM criticizes him in particular for never having presided over the slightest court before being able to access the head of a court of appeal, certainly modest – she oversees only the judicial courts of Bastia and Ajaccio. In terms of experience in jurisdiction, it was the least well classified among the eleven candidates, according to the point.
Emmanuel Macron advisor since December 2019, she had the high hand on the appointment of prosecution magistrates in strategic positions and followed for the president the feedback on information in progress in sensitive files. It would also have happened that she was opposed to Eric Dupond-Moretti on certain decisions under the minister. She had been called to the Elysée after being a deputy director of the cabinet of Nicole Belloubet at the Ministry of Justice for two and a half years. Previously, she was in particular liaison magistrate in Madrid and has helped lower the tension between France and Spain in the judicial treatment of Basque terrorism.
unpublished question of the CSM
The controversies are not uncommon during the recasting of magistrates spent by ministerial offices or the central administration of the ministry. But this concerns appointments to the prosecution. The government has the hand on the choice of public prosecutors and general prosecutors. This makes it possible to suspect here and there of the appointments decided on political criteria, even if a consistent opinion of the Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM) has been systematically required for a dozen years.
The case is different here. It is a magistrate function of the seat. M Davo should therefore not this appointment to the Minister of Justice, the Prime Minister or the President of the Republic who would have wished to reward it. It is the CSM, a constitutional body responsible for ensuring the independence of the judicial authority thanks to its power to appoint the high magistrates of the siege, which is the author. Legally, the appointment decree is well signed by the President of the Republic, but it is linked by the choice of CSM.
You have 44.23% of this article to read. The continuation is reserved for subscribers.