Yves MAYAUD - Professor (université Paris 2 Panthéon-Assas)
Adeline GOUTTENOIRE - Professor (université de Bordeaux)
Édouard VERNY - Professor (université de Rennes I)
Michel ALLAIX - Magistrate & President of the TGI Aix-en-Provence
Jacques BUISSON - Professor & Adviser in the Court of cassation
Guillaume DRAGO - Professor (université Paris 2 Panthéon-Assas)
Following one decade of continuous reforms of the juvenile offenders penal law and while a global recast of the matter is considered, it appears important to question the superior principles governing it. Despite its original crystallization, starting in 2002, through the original mechanism of fundamental principle recognized by Republic Law, and its protection by some international tools, the autonomy of the juvenile justice is still currently questionable. On the substantial side, juvenile justice is based on principles, recognized as superior, of answer's adaptation to the educational and moral restoring of the juvenile and sentence mitigation, which appear nearly absolute. On the other hand discernment has not benefited from an explicit consecration of its paramount status. It is even challenged by the age arbitrary criteria despite the fact that this condition is a cardinal preliminary for penal responsibility determination. On the procedural side, notwithstanding their supra-legislative guarantee, specialized jurisdictions so as requirement for appropriate procedures, regularly inflected, seems dedicated to relativity. Constitutional Council, both matter constituent and guarantor, has been very often invited to determine unreachable limits and to protect the unalterable core. Based on this core' identification and assessment, this work intend to demonstrate that malleability of the form principles of juvenile offender penal law allows by-pass of background principles immutability, governing this one.