No disciplinary action will be taken against the magistrate who ordered the expulsion of a lawyer from Nice during a hearing in March in Aix-en-Provence, an incident which had caused a stir in the profession, said the Department of Justice in the Senate. “After having taken cognizance of the entire file, the unfolding of the facts and the behavior of all the protagonists, and taking into account the appeasement of the situation, the Prime Minister decided not to take disciplinary action”, the ministry wrote in its response, on September 9, to a written question from Senator Jean Hingray on March 25.
Victim of this expulsion, Me Paul Sollacaro, son of the president of Ajaccio Antoine Sollacaro, assassinated in 2012 in Corsica, denounced this decision Monday evening, believing that “we would not do better if we wanted a war between lawyers and magistrates” .
This hearing incident took place on March 11, during the trial of 11 defendants in a drug trafficking case, after Mr. Sollacaro requested the disjunction of his client’s case, positive for Covid-19. This request had been rejected by the president of the correctional court of Aix-en-Provence, Marc Rivet, who had also objected to the defendant appearing before the court.
The request deemed “inadmissible” by the Superior Council of the Judiciary
After lively exchanges between the lawyer and the magistrate, the latter had Mr Sollacaro evacuated by the police. In solidarity, all the other lawyers present had deserted the room. Speaking of a “serious hearing incident”, the first president of the Aix-en-Provence Court of Appeal had recognized that ordering the eviction of a lawyer was “a rare and extreme decision, just like it was the behavior of the lawyer concerned ”, who would have“ uttered invectives and virulent personal attacks ”at the address of the presiding judge.
Jean Castex had entered the General Inspectorate of Justice a few days later. It is on the basis of this report that the Prime Minister decided not to take any sanction. Me Sollacaro had personally lodged a complaint for “aggravated violence”, but his request was deemed “inadmissible” at the beginning of June by the Superior Council of the Magistracy, according to which “only the litigant concerned by the legal proceedings” can complain about the behavior of the judge. ‘a magistrate in the exercise of his functions.