Prescription of the criminal action for defamation

Facts

In a divorce trial, the defendant accused Y. of being her husband's mistress. Y. then filed a complaint against the defendant for defamation. The investigating judge referred the defendant to the Petty Offences Tribunal, but on appeal, the Indictment Division annulled this order and referred the case back to the investigating judge, instructing him to suspend the criminal proceedings until the divorce trial was decided. After more than two years, the investigating judge dismissed the case due to prescription. The complainant Y. appealed against this decision.

Considerations

The SCC Criminal Cassation Court rejected the appeal. It considered that the prescription of the criminal action was indeed acquired, unless a mandatory legal provision temporarily prevented the prosecution, in which case the prescription would be suspended. However, in this case, the suspension of the criminal proceedings ordered by the Indictment Division did not stem from such a legal provision, but from a court decision. In this case, the Court held that prescription could not be suspended, as this would unduly prolong the deadlines to the detriment of the accused.

The Court also examined…