A graduate of the National School of Magistracy, it was in Douai, Chartres, and Crรฉteil that Judge Halphen built his career, culminating in the vice-presidency of the Nanterre Court. Seven years of working on one of the most significant politico-financial scandals of recent years, the Paris HLM scandal, brought him to the forefront of the French media landscape.
Removed from the case in 2001, he left the judiciary to dedicate himself to writing, with works such as “Seven Years of Solitude,” “Mitterrand, Shadow and Light,” and “Cursed Kisses.”
Eric Halphen will be in Nice today to present his new book, “The Ball of the Outraged,” a collection of 44 substantive proposals to improve everything that can be improved in justice, and also to participate in a conference debate with Eric de Montgolfier about “Judicial Reforms.” This conference debate is organized by Jean Christophe Picard, a candidate in the upcoming municipal election in Nice under the banner of the Radical Left Party.
If you wish to meet Eric Halphen, you will need to go to the FNAC forum in Nice starting at 5:30 PM, and if you want to ask him some questions, it will be at the Splendid Hotel (BD Victor Hugo – Nice) starting at 8:00 PM.
Eric Halphen agreed to participate in a virtual interview with Nice Premiรจre while waiting for the real meeting tomorrow.
Learn more about Eric Halphen [here](https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Halphen).
Nice Premiรจre: Mr. Eric Halphen, what initial advice would you give to the judiciary in France today?
Eric Halphen: The “judicial power,” mentioned by Montesquieu as being an essential component of our democracy, was replaced in our constitution by the notion of “judicial authority,” which was already a downgrade. Now, we only talk about the “public service of justice.” This shows that our justice system is no longer regarded as it should be. Thus, it is urgent to restore its image by modernizing it (redrawing the judicial map, unifying the judicial, administrative, and financial justices), making it more responsible (increased independence of sitting judges, ensured by a renovated High Council of the Judiciary, should correspond to more effective accountability for those who do not work as they should), and making it more accessible and open to the outside world.
NP: Clearstream and Outreau, your opinion on these two cases?
EH: Outreau, rather than focusing solely on the investigating judge, showed that the safeguards provided throughout the judicial chain did not work. In my book, “The Ball of the Outraged,” I, therefore, focused on finding solutions, from the beginning of this chain (police custody) to the end (the assizes and prison). But I also find that politicians were quick to seize the opportunity to stigmatize a judiciary that, in recent years, they have accused of being too independent.
Clearstream is primarily about corruption, which I regret is only mentioned during pre-election periods to find weapons against political opponents or “friends,” and not at other times to really fight this scourge (notably by finally improving international judicial cooperation). But Clearstream is also about the use of state services for individual purposes at the highest level.
