Agreement to Postpone Criminal Proceedings for Legal Entities -A Study in Light of Law 25/14 Containing the Code of Criminal Procedure

The Deferred Prosecution Agreement for Legal Persons -A Study in Light of Law No 25/14 Amending the Code of Criminal Procedure- اتفاقية ارجاء المتابعة الجزائية للشخص المعنوي -دراسة على ضوء القانون 14/25 المتضمن قانون االجراءات الجزائية- BENABID Sihem* University of Farhat Abbas -Setif 1- Laboratory for Applying New Technologies to Law [email protected] Date of Submission 02-04-2026 Date of Final Acceptance 18-07-2026 Date of Publication September 2026 Abstract : The Algerian legislator has kept pace with modern criminal policy by introducing a provision for the postponement of criminal proceedings against legal persons under Law 25/14. This provision allows the Public Prosecutor to suspend criminal proceedings against a legal persons if it fulfills the obligations stipulated therein. This measure balances, on the one hand, the requirements of deterrence and crime prevention by recovering embezzled funds and paying all amounts owed to the public treasury, and on the other hand, it protects the economy by ensuring the continuity and financial stability of the legal persons without resorting to the application of traditional penalties. Despite the importance of this measure in strengthening criminal justice, its novelty means that evaluating its effectiveness depends on the availability of implementation mechanisms and the cooperation of legal persons involved in corruption, economic, and financial crimes . Keywords: Postponement of criminal proceedings ; Legal persons; Public Prosecutor; Penalties . ملخص: لقد واكب المشرع الجزائري السياسة الجنائية الحديثة باستحداثه التفاقية ارجاء المتابعة الجزائية للشخص المعنوي بموجب القانون 14/25، فاالتفاقية تسمح لوكيل الجمهورية بوقف المتابعة الجزائية للشخص المعنوي إذا نفذ االلتزامات الواردة فيها، فهذا االجراء يوازن من جهة بين متطلبات الردع ومكافحة الجريمة باسترجاعه االموال المهربة ودفع كامل المبالغ المستحقة للخزينة العمومية، ومن جهة أخرى يحمي االقتصاد من خالل ضمان استمرارية الشخص المعنوي واستقراره المالي دون اللجوء الى تطبيق العقوبات التقليدية. ورغم اهمية هذا االجراء في تعزيز العدالة الجنائية اال ان حداثته تجعل تقييم فعاليته مرهون بتوفير آليات تطبيقه وتجاوب الأشخاص المعنوية المتورطة في جرائم الفساد والجرائم االقتصادية والمالية. الكلمات المفتاحية: ارجاء المتابعة الجزائية؛ الشخص المعنوي ؛ وكيل الجمهورية؛ العقوبات. * Corresponding Author: BENABID Siham

Modern criminal policy has witnessed significant developments in addressing economic and financial crimes, particularly those committed by legal persons. This has led to the need to explore alternative or complementary mechanisms to traditional criminal prosecution. Among these is the Convention on the Deferral of Criminal Proceedings for Legal Persons, a new mechanism aimed at suspending or postponing public prosecution for a specific period until its conditions are met, without issuing a verdict of conviction or acquittal. The importance of this study stems from the significance of this procedure and its role in achieving criminal justice with flexibility, without always resorting to traditional punishment. This procedure is contingent upon the fulfillment of the obligations stipulated in the Convention; otherwise, public prosecution will proceed against the legal persons. The purpose of this procedure is to achieve the public interest by recovering public funds, compensating for damages incurred, and achieving advantages that surpass those offered by traditional punishment. It is also a crucial mechanism for combating serious crimes that may threaten national security, such as corruption and financial crimes. This study aims to highlight this newly introduced procedure under Law 25/141, which includes the Code of Criminal Procedure, by defining its concept, conditions and procedures for its application, in addition to addressing the obligations that fall on the legal persons benefiting from the procedure of postponing criminal proceedings. Based on the foregoing, we pose the following problem: What is the agreement to postpone criminal proceedings against legal persons, and how effective is it in achieving the objectives of deterrent criminal policy? The following sub-questions stem from this problem: • What is the legal basis for an agreement to postpone criminal prosecution for a legal persons? • What are the limits of the Public Prosecutor's authority in concluding such an agreement ? • What are the effects of applying an agreement to postpone criminal prosecution for a legal persons? To answer these questions, we adopted a descriptive-analytical approach, which we deemed appropriate for analyzing the legal provisions contained in Law 25/14 concerning agreements to postpone criminal prosecution for legal persons. We addressed the topic in two sections:

Before addressing the regulations governing the conclusion of an agreement to postpone criminal prosecution for legal persons, we have chosen to first define the agreement, its characteristics, scope, and application. A) Definition of an Agreement to Postpone Criminal Prosecution for Legal Persons This is an agreement included in the judicial investigation phase between the Public Prosecutor and the legal persons concerning offenses related to economic and financial crimes. This agreement allows the legal persons to be bound by three types of obligations: paying a financial penalty for the benefit of the public interest, adhering to a program for compliance with the laws, and compensating for the damages resulting from the violation. Full implementation of these obligations leads to the dismissal of the public prosecution2.

It is noteworthy that this definition clarifies the parties to the agreement and the obligations incumbent upon the legal persons concerned . The agreement is also defined as an innovative procedural mechanism. This agreement constitutes a settlement mechanism that allows for the efficient and rapid handling of proceedings initiated against legal persons. This alternative to prosecution applies to legal persons accused of committing acts of corruption, tax evasion, money laundering, and any related crime3. The French legislature has designated the agreement to postpone criminal proceedings against a legal persons as the Judicial Agreement in the Public Interest (CJIP), under the law of December 9, 20164, concerning transparency, the fight against corruption, and the modernization of economic life, known as "Sapin II." This law stipulates its inclusion in Article 41-1-2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is thus a contractual procedure concluded between the public prosecutor's office and legal persons involved in specific crimes related to integrity and money laundering. The agreement typically imposes three types of obligations on the legal persons: payment of a "public interest" fine, implementation of a compliance program under the supervision of the French Anti- Corruption Agency (AFA), and compensation for damages suffered by any victims. The French criminal justice system has adopted this procedure as a highly strategic tool in the field of justice. This procedure is not intended merely to fill the state coffers quickly and efficiently. In fact, ensuring a certain and rapid benefit to the state, rather than procedures with uncertain results, is a limited and immediate objective, and therefore closer to a tactic, a tactic already present in other consensual procedures known in the French criminal justice system5. B) Characteristics of an agreement to postpone criminal proceedings against a legal persons

cooperation in the investigation, mitigates the damage to the company's reputation9. Obtaining evidence in economic and financial matters is extremely difficult, making prosecution even more challenging. Even with sufficient evidence, proving acts of corruption is not easy, as these acts are not only clandestine but also often occur abroad, requiring a degree of international cooperation between prosecution authorities. However, in practice, this cooperation is not always easy10. 4- The Consensual Nature of the Agreement: The agreement enshrined the shift away from the repressive model adopted by the legislative authority. The agreement relies on the consent of the legal persons concerned, thus confirming its consensual nature, which differs from the traditional concept of criminal justice as a form of imposed justice. The legal persons involved in acts falling within the scope of the agreement has the right to choose between settlement and legal proceedings. Both parties benefit from this mechanism based on mutual concessions11. C- Scope of Application of the Agreement on Deferring Criminal Proceedings for Legal Persons The agreement on deferring criminal prosecution for legal persons is considered an alternative procedure, created to achieve specific objectives. Therefore, it is important to define its scope of application in terms of identifying the parties to the agreement, the crimes covered by the agreement, and finally, its geographical scope .

However, local authorities and their groups are permitted to bear criminal liability when the crime is committed within the framework of activities that may be subject to a public service delegation agreement . Public economic enterprises, mixed-capital enterprises, and private enterprises providing public services are also subject to criminal liability; however, public enterprises of a service and commercial nature (EPICs) remain a matter of debate, given that these persons are governed by private law in their dealings with private parties.16 -Comprehensiveness of the agreement: The comprehensiveness of the agreement is highlighted by its targeting of a wide range of companies, such as well-known global banks, smaller companies, multinational corporations, and small and medium-sized enterprises, which expands the scope of the agreement17.

- Corruption crimes, excluding bribery, which are included in Law 06-01, concerning the prevention and combating of corruption, as amended and supplemented. The legislator's purpose in excluding bribery from the agreement is likely due to the fact that it is considered one of the most serious corruption crimes because it is not merely a financial crime but is based on the principle of trading in public office. While economic crimes are deterred by financial compensation, bribery has a serious ethical dimension, namely the exploitation of public office for personal gain. - Offenses stipulated in the laws governing foreign exchange and the movement of capital to and from abroad, as outlined in Order No. 10-03 dated August 26, 2010 (corresponding to Ramadan 16, 1431 AH), amending and supplementing Order No. 96-22 dated Safar 23, 1417 AH (corresponding to July 9, 1996), concerning the suppression of violations of legislation and regulations related to foreign exchange and the movement of capital to and from abroad. - Crimes stipulated in the law against smuggling, as outlined in Order No. 05/06 dated Rajab 18,

in accordance with the rules on mutual international assistance in criminal matters. In this context, the determination of the amount of the fine for the public interest can be discussed with foreign prosecution authorities to allow for the assessment of all fines and penalties paid by the legal persons. If compliance with the compliance programme is considered, it is preferable to designate only one monitoring body. This measure is then implemented under the supervision of the Public Prosecutor's Office, which informs the foreign prosecution authorities as appropriate25 .

prosecution of a legal persons In this axis, we will attempt to address the regulations for concluding agreements to postpone criminal prosecution of a legal persons, by presenting the conditions for concluding them, the most important obligations incumbent upon the legal persons benefiting from the agreement, and finally we will discuss the effects of applying or not applying the agreement. A) Conditions for Applying the Agreement to Postpone Criminal Proceedings of Legal Persons: Article 105 of Law 25/14 outlines the conditions for applying the agreement to postpone criminal proceedings of legal persons, which we will summarize as follows26: 1-High probability of the legal persons 's conviction: If the preliminary investigation gathers evidence that strongly suggests the legal persons guilt should it be prosecuted.

The amount of the fine considers the damage incurred by the public treasury and the undue benefits obtained from the crime or the revenue generated by the contract. Article 107 of Law 25/14 permits the payment of the fine according to a schedule determined by the Public Prosecutor, which may not exceed four years in any case29. 1-1- Determining the financial benefit: The financial benefit to the legal persons from the execution of the contract affected by corruption offenses is determined, and the profit is calculated based on the revenue generated by the contested contract, after deducting expenses directly related to the project. Deductions may only be made from the revenue of those expenses directly related to the contract under consideration30. Therefore, the legal persons is required to submit cost accounting data and any forecasting documents related to the signed contracts. These documents allow for an assessment of the profits that were expected from the project in question. These documents should also allow for an assessment of any non-financial benefits that may have accrued to the company through recorded misconduct, or in light of the market share gained, even if the contract in question was accountingly unprofitable or generated low profits31. According to Article 41-1-2 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure, the fine must be proportionate to the seriousness of the offense. The public benefit fine includes both a restitution of illicit gains and a punitive aspect, calculated according to the application of several criteria outlined below: • Restitution of illicit gains: The public benefit fine must be at least equal to the amount of the illicit gain identified. • Punitive aspect: Public prosecutors assess the seriousness of the offense, taking into account aggravating and mitigating factors, and specifically considering the following criteria: - The legal persons that has previously been convicted of corruption offenses, - The company's conduct after becoming aware of the wrongdoing, - The implementation of an effective compliance program, - The implementation of corrective measures and organizational changes, - The use of the legal persons resources to conceal corruption-related offenses, - Voluntary disclosure and cooperation with investigating authorities—this last point is crucial for the judge in approving the convention, as it reflects the idea that even after an illegal act has been committed and harm has occurred, a positive impact can still be achieved through voluntary disclosure and full cooperation32 This concept leads us to assign a relatively innovative role to the judge, who is required to assess the appropriateness of the punishment by considering the interests at risk and evaluating the consequences of applying the criminal penalty. Therefore, the judge must verify the validity of resorting to the procedure, as well as the integrity of the proceedings, the conformity of the fine amount to the limits stipulated by law, and the proportionality of the prescribed measures to the benefits derived from the violations. This means that the public prosecutor assesses, according to their conscience and based on the

seriousness of the crime, the character of the perpetrator, and the disruption it caused to public order, whether to initiate legal proceedings or implement an alternative to prosecution33 . 2- Payment of compensation to the affected public party if it is concerned by the agreement34: The affected party is not considered a party to the agreement. Article 107 limits it to public legal persons and excludes private legal persons, as the aim is to protect public funds from financial crimes and corruption offenses . On the other hand, the legal persons fulfillment of the obligations stipulated in the agreement precludes public prosecution, but it leaves open the door for civil action for compensation for individuals not compensated under the agreement who suffered harm due to proven violations.

of Law 25/14. This agreement stipulates the postponement of criminal proceedings against the persons in exchange for the return of funds, assets, and proceeds disposed of or transferred outside the national territory, or their equivalent value, and the full payment of amounts due to the Public Treasury and to the public parties harmed by the crimes attributed to it39. The process of concluding an agreement involves several procedures to achieve its effects, which we summarize below40: 1-Parties to the Agreement: The agreement is concluded with the legal representative of the legal persons, who must not be personally involved in committing the crimes attributed to the legal persons as a perpetrator, accomplice, or instigator, and the competent Public Prosecutor .

In case the agreement is not ratified by the President, or is withdrawn from, or is not implemented in part or in whole (failure to pay the fine, failure to comply with the compliance program), the Public Prosecutor informs his legal representative of the suspension of the implementation of the agreement44 , and the commencement of criminal proceedings. In this case, the content of the statements made by his legal representative may not be used against him before the investigating or judicial authority unless the Public Prosecution was aware of them in advance. The judicial authority must also consider in its judgment the obligations that were partially implemented by the legal persons before the suspension of the implementation of the agreement, as indicated in Article 113 of Law 25/1445.

The agreement to postpone criminal prosecution of legal persons represents a modern trend in contemporary criminal policy, balancing the requirements of deterrence with the protection of the economy. This prompted the Algerian legislator to keep pace with positive legislation by amending the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure under Law 25/14. Undoubtedly, this step is important and necessary, aiming to achieve objectives that traditional punishment sometimes fails to attain. However, evaluating its effectiveness depends on providing mechanisms for its practical implementation and on the cooperation of legal persons involved in economic and financial crimes with this measure. At the end of this study, we arrived at the following conclusions: - The agreement is considered an important mechanism for combating corruption and financial crimes, based on the principle of negotiation between the Public Prosecutor's Office and the legal persons concerned. - The agreement seeks to enshrine the principles of criminal justice by achieving general and specific deterrence through the imposition of financial and legal obligations that prevent the recurrence of the crime. The aim of this procedure is to achieve the objectives of criminal justice, even if unconventional procedures are used in judicial proceedings. - The agreement is characterized by its speed and flexibility in settling cases compared to traditional criminal prosecution procedures. - The agreement suspends criminal proceedings, rather than terminating or dismissing them. The matter is contingent upon the legal persons fulfilling its conditions and obligations; otherwise, criminal proceedings will be initiated against it. This characteristic is considered one of the guarantees for achieving criminal justice. This procedure serves a dual interest of the parties to the agreement: recovering stolen state funds and compensating the public treasury, and allowing the legal persons in question to settle its situation without conviction, thus minimizing potential economic and financial losses. Despite its importance, some of its procedures are complex, particularly in transnational crimes. Recommendations: - We suggest expediting the issuance of regulatory texts to clarify the mechanisms for implementing the Convention, particularly regarding procedures that are currently ambiguous, such as how to prepare compliance programs, the criteria for ratifying the Convention, and the circumstances under which the proposed Convention may be negotiated. - Establishing judicial oversight mechanisms that align with the specific nature of this procedure.

- To enhance the transparency of this procedure and evaluate its effectiveness, we recommend the continuous publication of agreements deferred prosecution and their outcomes at the level of the High Authority for Transparency, Prevention and Combating of Corruption. - Establishing clear legal safeguards for the implementation of the Convention to prevent it from becoming a mechanism for impunity for implicated persons. - Drawing upon the experiences of countries that have already implemented this procedure, particularly the British and French legislation. Citations:

18 French Anti-Corruption Agency, Judicial Agreement in the Public Interest, 2023. https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/fr/convention-judiciaire-dinteret-public (consulted on 22/02/2026) 19 Law No. 24/06, dated 19 Shawwal 1445 (corresponding to April 18, 2024), amends and supplements Decree No. 66/156, dated 18 Safar 1386 (corresponding to June 8, 1966), containing the amended and supplemented Penal Code, Official Gazette of the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria No. 30, issued on April 30, 2024.

42As for French law, in addition to the aforementioned procedures, it mandates publication a press release must also be published on the French Anti-Corruption Agency website, together with the order approving the CJIP. French Anti-Corruption Agency , CJIP : The French DPA https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/en/convention-judiciaire-dinteret-public (consulted on 01/04/2026).

Official Gazette of the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria No. 14, issued on March 08, 2006 • Law No. 24/06, dated 19 Shawwal 1445 (corresponding to April 18, 2024), amends and supplements Decree No. 66/156, dated 18 Safar 1386 (corresponding to June 8, 1966), amended and supplemented Penal Code, Official Gazette of the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria No. 30, issued on April 30, 2024 • Law No. 25/14 dated 9 Safar 1447 corresponding to 3 August 2025, amending the Code of Criminal Procedure, Official Gazette of the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria, No. 54, issued on 13 August 2025. • the Sapin II Act corresponds to Law No. 2016-1691 of December 9, 2016, on transparency, the fight against corruption, and the modernization of economic life, Official Journal of the French Republic (JORF) No. 0287 of December 10, 2016. E - Websites : • Ministry of Justice, Judicial agreements in the public interest, 25/03/2026. (consulted on 1/04/2026) https://www.justice.gouv.fr/documentation/ressources/conventions-judiciaires-dinteret-public • Transparency International France, The public interest judicial settlement (CJIP), January 2023, (consulted on 08/03/2026) https://transparency-france.org/2023/02/08/note-de-position-la-convention-judiciaire-dinteret- public-cjip/ • French Anti-Corruption Agency, Judicial Agreement in the Public Interest(consulted on 22/02/2026). https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/fr/convention-judiciaire-dinteret-public, • French Anti-Corruption Agency , CJIP : The French DPA (consulted on 01/04/2026). https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/en/convention-judiciaire-dinteret- public • French national Financial prosecutor’s office, guidelines on the implementation of judicial public interest agreement , 2019. (consulted on 01/02/2026) https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/files/2019- 09/EN_Lignes_directrices_CJIP_revAFA%20Final%20%28002%29.pdf