الخطأ القضائي في التشريع المغربي و المقارن

الملخص EN

The Moroccan legislator has arranged responsibility for the judicial error in two cases: The first is the case in which he can resort to quarrels with judges stipulated in Article 391 of the Civil Procedure, and the second case in which the state is responsible for the judgments of its courts is the case organized by the review of judgments.

Contained in the criminal procedure.

And based on the fact that the judicial work is an act of an jurisprudential nature that carries with it the possibility of error in all stages of litigation, the Moroccan legislator has made the scope of responsibility narrow, so that its release leads to adverse consequences, as limiting the actions that require compensation in the civil and criminal article makes the scope of application of responsibility narrow The administration is narrow, and thus reflects the system of irresponsibility for the work of the judicial public service.

However, with the Constitution of the Kingdom of Morocco of 2011 stipulating that “everyone who has been affected by a judicial error has the right to obtain compensation to be borne by the state.” In addition to administrative work and extensively.

On the other hand, there are legislations that are more advanced than the Moroccan legislation in regulating the judicial error and responsibility for it, including the Algerian legislation that has encrypted the principle of the right to compensation for judicial error according to Article 47 of the Constitution issued on November 22, 1976, and issued a decree on April 25, 2010 defining the modalities.

And the terms of payment of compensation.

However, French legislation remains the leader in approving and arranging the state's responsibility to compensate the damages resulting from the faulty functioning of the judiciary facility in the two cases of serious error and denial of justice according to the law of July 5, 1972, as well as the introduction of a special system for compensation for pretrial detention within the framework of the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and that by approving the law No.

643-70 of July 17, 197.