L’aveu, reine des preuves ? L’aveu dans la procédure pénale

Abstract

Among collective representations, confession remains “the queen of evidence”. Derived from the legal rules of evidence under the inquisitorial system established in France in the thirteenth century, confession inserts rationality in the truth-finding process and serves as substitute for the previous system of proof based on “the judgement of God”. But nowadays, confession as evidence is complex and relative. In France, the law recognizes and protects the right to not self-incriminate when facing charges. As such, it recognizes the right to remain silent, not to tell the truth and even to lie. Dominated by the principle of full freedom of proof, criminal procedure limits the value of confession, considered a piece of evidence among others, not only in recognizing the right not to self-incriminate but in establishing that a court is never bound by a confession. However, to be valid this act of will must be free and informed. Evidence gathering must observe strict rules requiring the presence of a lawyer. Legal consequences may even arise from it, bearing on sentencing in some proceedings. The legal status of the repentants is its most successful outcome when confession takes the form of a judicial revelation. Despite these restrictions, confession still remains considered as bulwark against miscarriages of justice and is often tempting to the investigator, the prosecutor and the judge, the same way it can be used as defense strategy.