Custody Rights and Suspect Guarantees Before Judicial Police
Explanation
This presentation provides a simplified explanation of the legal rules governing the rights of the detainee and the guarantees of the suspect before the judicial police (la police judiciaire), emphasizing that this explanation is for clarification and study, and is not a substitute for the explicit legal texts. The judicial police acts as an assistant to the public prosecution (le ministère public) and under its supervision in investigating flagrant crimes (le flagrant délit) and non-flagrant crimes, and its procedures are subject to strict procedural controls under penalty of nullity (la nullité) and disciplinary and penal responsibility.
Regarding the deprivation of liberty, the judicial police is prohibited from detaining a suspect in its holding cells except by a decision from the public prosecution and within a time limit not exceeding forty-eight hours, extendable for a similar period only with the approval of the public prosecution. As for a flagrant crime that constitutes a felony, the detention period may be extended up to a maximum of four days by a reasoned written decision from the appellate public prosecutor after reviewing the file. The detention period is automatically deducted from any subsequent penalty or arrest. Immediately upon the expiration of the detention period, the public prosecution is precluded from taking any action against the detained person, and the law mandates transferring the detainee to another center not affiliated with the same unit and recording this in the report (le procès-verbal) before closing it, under penalty of nullity.
The legislator has enshrined for the suspect or the complained against, immediately upon their detention and before listening to their statements, a set of fundamental guarantees. The most important of these are their right to silence and the impermissibility of coercing them to speak under penalty of nullity of their statement, their right to contact a lawyer of their choice, a family member, an employer, or an acquaintance, and their right to the assistance of a lawyer (l'assistance d'un avocat) to meet with them in private and in complete confidentiality for a maximum of thirty minutes, and to attend their interrogation. If the lawyer does not attend, a two-hour grace period is granted to attend, and the investigation shall not commence in their absence except in a flagrant crime and when there is an extreme necessity explained in the report. They also have the right, if financially unable, to have the supervising judge appoint a lawyer for them through the delegate of the Bar Associations in Beirut or Tripoli.
The rights of the suspect also include promptness in listening to their statements, not administering an oath to them at all before starting to hear their statements, informing them of their capacity, the suspicions existing against them, and the supporting evidence without obligating the investigator to give them the legal description of the facts. They have the right to the assistance of a sworn translator if they do not speak Arabic well or belong to a country whose official language is not Arabic. They have the right to request a physical or psychological examination at the expense of the treasury by a forensic doctor appointed by the public prosecutor immediately upon submitting the request, to examine them without the presence of the judicial police and submit their report within a maximum of twenty-four hours.
The law obligates the judicial police to inform the suspect of all their rights, record their position, and obtain their signature on the report. The law mandates audio and video recording of the interrogation procedures, starting from the reading of the rights, and attaching the recordings to the report, under penalty of nullity of the interrogation, the report, and the subsequent procedures. The legislator also restricted the authority to search homes and persons in non-flagrant crimes by requiring prior permission from the public prosecution and observing the procedures, and established that a violation results exclusively in the nullity of the search procedure, without affecting the procedures independent of it.
The law protected these guarantees by imposing deterrent penalties on the violating investigator. The investigator is subject to imprisonment from three months to one year and a fine, in addition to a disciplinary penalty, and without the need for any prior permission when failing to observe these guarantees. The judicial police officer is prosecuted for the crime of deprivation of liberty punished by the Penal Code (Article 367) if they violate the rules of detention. They are punished by imprisonment and a fine if they breach the obligation of complete confidentiality and disclose the contents of the seized items or the secrets of the suspect.
Official legal articles
replace · 2020-10-22: Open the official text
amend · 2001-08-18: Open the official text
amend · 2001-08-18: Open the official text
replace · 2020-10-22: Open the official text
Think deeper
How does the penalty of nullity of the report and its subsequent procedures upon violating the suspect's guarantees relate to imposing a direct penal punishment on the investigator without prior permission, and why was the legislator keen to combine the procedural penalty with the personal punitive penalty?
Flashcards
What is the maximum duration for detaining a suspect in the holding cell of the judicial police, and how is it legally extended?
The duration shall not exceed forty-eight hours by a decision of the public prosecution, and it can be extended for a similar period only based on the approval of the public prosecution (Article 47).
What is the maximum limit for extending the detention of a suspect in a flagrant crime if it is a felony, and what are its conditions?
The detention is extended up to a maximum of four days by a reasoned written decision issued by the appellate public prosecutor after reviewing the file and verifying the justifications for the extension (Article 42).
What are the rules governing the suspect's meeting with their lawyer in the detention center?
The meeting takes place in a manner that ensures the confidentiality of the conversation for a maximum duration of thirty minutes. The date and time of its start and end are recorded in the report and signed by the lawyer and the suspect (Article 47).
What is the time limit granted by the law for the lawyer to attend before the start of the investigation, and when is it permissible to start in their absence?
Two hours are granted to attend (or 24 hours if the suspect requests time to appoint one). It is not permissible to start in their absence except in a flagrant crime and for an extreme necessity explained in detail in the report.
What is the consequence of the suspect exercising their right to silence before the judicial police?
This is noted in the report, and the judicial police has no right to coerce them to speak or interrogate them, under penalty of nullity of their statement.
What is the mandatory formal condition for documenting the interrogation, and what is the penalty for omitting it?
The interrogation must be audio and video recorded starting from the moment the rights are read, and the recordings are attached to the report, under penalty of nullity of the report and the subsequent procedures (Article 47).
What is the mandatory procedure regarding the detained person immediately upon the end of their legal detention period?
No action may be taken against them, and they must be transferred from the detention center to any other center not affiliated with the same unit, and this must be recorded in the report before closing it, under penalty of nullity.
What is the penal responsibility of the investigator if they fail to observe the fundamental guarantees of the suspect?
They are subject to imprisonment from three months to one year and a fine from two million to ten million Lebanese pounds without the need for any prior permission, in addition to a disciplinary penalty (Article 47).
Practice questions
What is the time limit specified for the forensic doctor to submit the physical or psychological examination report to the public prosecutor?
The law requires the forensic doctor to conduct the examination without the presence of the judicial police officer and submit their report to the public prosecutor within a period not exceeding twenty-four hours (Articles 42 and 47).
If the judicial police searches the home of a suspect in a non-flagrant crime without obtaining prior permission from the public prosecution, what is the legal consequence of this?
The law explicitly states that any search conducted contrary to the rules of prior permission is null, but the nullification is limited to the search procedure and does not extend to other procedures independent of it (Article 47).
When is the investigator legally permitted to commence the interrogation in the absence of the suspect's lawyer before the expiration of the time limit specified for them?
The investigation may not commence in the absence of the lawyer except in the case of a flagrant crime and when there is an extreme necessity justifying not waiting, provided that it is explained in detail in the report (Article 47).
Who are the persons entitled to view the content of the audio and video recording of the interrogation?
Taking into account the principle of the confidentiality of the investigation, the right to view the content of the recording belongs only to the judge supervising the investigation, the interrogated person and their counsel, and the plaintiff and their counsel (Article 47).
What is the legal ruling for the investigator administering an oath to the suspect or the complained against before starting to hear their statements before the judicial police?
The law prohibits administering an oath to the suspect before starting to listen to their statements, and this is considered one of their fundamental rights (Article 47).
What is the direct consequence for the judicial police officer if they violate the rules related to the detention of the suspect?
If the judicial police officer violates the rules related to the detention of the defendant or the suspect, they are subject to prosecution for the crime of deprivation of liberty punished by the Penal Code (Article 367), in addition to the disciplinary penalty (Article 48).
Case problems
In a flagrant theft crime (a misdemeanor requiring two years of imprisonment), the judicial police arrested a suspect. Immediately upon arriving at the investigation center, the suspect requested to be able to contact a lawyer and their family, as well as requested the assistance of a lawyer to help them and to be presented immediately to a forensic doctor due to suffering from physical and psychological pain. The head of the center refused their requests claiming the necessity to speed up the conclusion of the investigation, and commenced interrogating them without the presence of a lawyer and without giving them any time limit. They did not record their rights on the report, administered the legal oath to them to ensure their truthfulness, and settled for writing down the statements without audio and video recording.
Model answer
The behavior of the judicial police included a series of grave violations of the rules governing the rights of the detainee and the guarantees of the suspect.
First: Violating the obligation to inform of the rights and record them. The law obligates the investigator, before commencing the interrogation, to inform the suspect of their rights, record their position on benefiting from them, and obtain their signature, under penalty of nullity of the interrogation, the report, and the subsequent procedures (Articles 41 and 47).
Second: Depriving the suspect of their explicit right to contact a lawyer and a family member, and of their right to the assistance of a lawyer and granting them a two-hour time limit for their attendance or 24 hours to appoint one. It is not permissible to start the investigation in their absence except for an extreme necessity explained in detail in the report, which did not happen.
Third: Breaching the suspect's right to request being presented to a forensic doctor specialized in physical or psychological health, as the law obligates the public prosecutor to appoint a doctor immediately upon submitting the request at the expense of the treasury to examine them without the presence of the judicial police personnel.
Fourth: Violating the fundamental guarantees by administering an oath to the suspect. The law prohibits administering an oath to them before starting to hear their statements (Article 47).
Fifth: Not audio and video recording the interrogation. This is considered a substantial condition the violation of which results in the penalty of nullity of the report and the subsequent procedures (Article 47).
Sixth: The judicial police officer conducting the investigation is subject to a disciplinary penalty, and to the penalty of imprisonment from three months to one year and a fine from two million to ten million Lebanese pounds for violating these guarantees, and they are prosecuted without the need for any prior permission.
Self-grading rubric
In a non-flagrant crime, the public prosecution commissioned the judicial police to investigate. The investigator detained the suspect by a decision from the public prosecution for 48 hours, and then it was extended for an additional 48 hours with its approval. During the investigation, the suspect refrained from speaking and maintained complete silence, so the investigator coerced them by threat until they gave a detailed statement. During the detention period, the judicial police raided the suspect's home without prior permission from the public prosecution, seized secret documents, and later disclosed their contents. Upon the expiration of the extended detention period, the public prosecution kept the suspect detained in the same holding cell and continued to take procedures against them.
Model answer
The judicial police and the public prosecution committed substantial violations of the rules governing detention and investigation.
First: Nullity of the suspect's statement. The law explicitly states that if the suspect refrains from speaking or maintains silence, this shall be noted in the report, and it is not permissible to coerce them to speak or interrogate them under penalty of nullity of their statement (Article 47).
Second: Nullity of the search procedure. The law prohibits searching a home or a person without prior permission from the public prosecution, and establishes that the violation results in the nullity of the search, with the nullity remaining limited to the search procedure without extending to the procedures independent of it (Article 47).
Third: Breaching the confidentiality of the investigation and the seized items. The judicial police officer who disclosed the contents of the seized documents and secrets is punished by imprisonment from one month to one year and a fine from two hundred thousand to two million pounds, or by one of them (Article 42).
Fourth: Violating the rules of the expiration of detention. The law prohibits the public prosecution from taking any action after the expiration of the detention period specified at forty-eight hours and a similar extension, and imposes transferring the detainee to another center not affiliated with the same unit and recording this in the report under penalty of nullity (Article 47).
Fifth: Prosecuting the judicial police officer penally for the crime of deprivation of liberty punished by the Penal Code, in addition to the disciplinary penalty, for violating the rules related to detention (Article 48).