Should the prosecutor prosecute a complaint?

The public prosecutor may dismiss a complaint for various reasons:

• The reported facts do not constitute a offense (i.e. the prosecutor considers that the facts reported by the complainant do not violate the law)
• The offender is not identified for lack of evidence to find him
• The complainant has withdrew his complaint or was compensated by the perpetrator at the request of the public prosecutor
• The perpetrator complied with the law at the request of the public prosecutor
• The harm caused by the offense is not very significant and the prosecutor considers that the case is not serious enough to follow up.

The filing without follow-up is not a final decision.

The public prosecutor may reconsider his decision at any time and decide to prosecute (for example, if the police find new evidence or identify the perpetrator). But the prosecutor can no longer prosecute if the facts are prescribed or if the perpetrator has died.

The complainant may challenge the public prosecutor's decision to dismiss the complaint in order to ensure that the facts of which he considers himself a victim are followed up. The challenge must be made before the expiry of the criminal limitation period.

The challenge of a filing without follow-up is done by sending a letter to the attorney general of the court of appeal.

Mail may be deposited against receipt or sent by letter or by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt.

The Attorney General may order the public prosecutor to institute proceedings.

It can also reject the request for the same reason as the public prosecutor. If he considers the appeal unfounded, he shall inform the complainant.

When the complainant wants to have the alleged perpetrator summoned for trial, he or she may enter directly the court using one of the following 3 procedures:

• Complaint with civil party to the investigating judge
• Direct Quote if the perpetrator is identified
• Claim for damages for loss suffered.