Germaine Oct 26, 2018:

AllegroTrans, Qu’est-ce que tu veux dire, au juste? Qu’il ne vaut pas la peine d’offrir quoi que ce soit? ou de discuter des possibilités, notions ou concepts? Il me semble pourtant que les discussions objectives comme celle-ci (qui manquent cruellement, d’ailleurs, en général, sur le site) sont autrement plus pertinentes (et enrichissantes) que les commentaires défaitistes. Mais ce n’est que mon opinion... que je partage! :-)

AllegroTrans Oct 25, 2018:

The bottom line is - we simply don't know what kind of summons this is - it is pointless speculating

Germaine Oct 25, 2018:

Eliza - subpoena duces tecum Pour moi (et selon les sources consultées) le terme "assignation" a toujours la connotation “comparaître” quelque part (“en justice” ou “devant une juridiction contentieuse ou répressive” - TLFI) et il me semble qu’une “assignation à produire” - ...compel a witness to attend ((...)) to give evidence... (GDT) - comporte la même obligation, à moins qu’il faille donner à produce in court le même sens que “déposer au greffe”, ce dont je doute, surtout après la discussion sur le “showing”.

Germaine Oct 25, 2018:

About the HSI HSI’s workforce includes special agents, analysts, auditors and support staff. Its men and women are assigned to cities throughout the United States and to offices around the world... HSI has broad legal authority to enforce a diverse array of federal statutes... n HSI's first full year in existence, its criminal investigations increased in nearly every area to ICE's prior three-year average. Criminal arrests rose by almost 30 percent; indictments by nearly 18 percent; search warrants by almost 60 percent; seizures of illicit drugs by more than 40 percent; intellectual property rights seizures by 128 percent; and weapons and ammunition seizures by a staggering 762 percent.
https://www.ice.gov/hsi

Eliza Hall Oct 24, 2018:

Undercover agent Hi Cassandra, you're welcome. It doesn't say that the UCA issued the summons, rather that he or she "executed" it. That could mean that the appropriate person at the DHS issued it and then the UCA served it. Also, depending on how undercover the agent is and what their role is within the recipient of the summons (Time Warner), I suppose it's possible the UCA even received and responded to it (i.e. provided the requested information). I agree it's unclear in the text, but it definitely does not state that the UCA issued the summons.

As for courts, by definition a "DHS summons" is not issued by a court. It's issued by the DHS. Most summonses aren't from courts -- even when you file a lawsuit against someone and have the court clerk create a summons (the type that says "you have been sued and have 21 days to respond"), it's still you, the attorney, who serves it or hires a process server to do so. Unlike in France, US courts don't have an investigatory role, per se. The investigation is done, in litigation, by the parties; and federal agencies also have investigatory powers -- hence, the power to issue summonses.

Cassandra Delacote (asker) Oct 24, 2018:

Thank you Eliza, for your research. I am still thinking this one over. Do you believe that an undercover agent has that authority even if he is from the DHS? It does not clearly appear from the text that any court was involved

Eliza Hall Oct 23, 2018:

Assignation à produire One last comment :)

I've seen this as a translation into French of the US legal term "subpoena duces tecum." A subpoena duces tecum is a subpoena ordering the recipient to produce (i.e. provide) certain documents or categories of documents (for instance, "all bank statements of such and such person from X date to Y date"). It can, of course, include electronic documents and automatically produced records (e.g., computer records showing who was logged into a given computer, or who owns a certain URL, or whatever).

In other words a subpoena duces tecum is the Latin name for exactly the type of summons that Cassandra has asked about: a summons ordering the production of documents (as opposed to a summons ordering someone to appear in person and testify).

And the French term for that is une assignation à produire. See links.


http://gdt.oqlf.gouv.qc.ca/ficheOqlf.aspx?Id_Fiche=17022542 or

http://dictionnaire.sensagent.leparisien.fr/assignation à pr...

Eliza Hall Oct 23, 2018:

Germaine - "injonction" Hi Germaine, thanks for explaining that "une autorité administrative peut lancer des injonctions à ses administrés." Totally true but in this case, we're not talking about anyone's "administrés." This summons was issued by a US federal agency (the DHS) against a completely independent corporation in the entertainment industry. The DHS has nothing to do with the media or entertainment industries; it certainly doesn't administer or have authority over them.

I posted links along with my proposed translation below, to explain the type of summons discussed in the Asker's original text. The link to the Twitter document in my other comment has more on that.

In the US, federal agencies have a limited power to issue summonses as part of certain investigations, without there being any litigation underway or any court involved. And when litigation is underway, summonses and subpoenas can be issued by private parties, or rather their attorneys. Their purpose is investigative. In France such investigations would normally be undertaken by the court rather than by private parties, or as you said by an agency towards its own administrés. But that's not what the Asker's text is about.

Eliza Hall Oct 23, 2018:

Lancer could work but is incomplete The thing some commentators are missing is that we're not talking about a summons issued by a court. US federal agencies have a limited power to issue and serve (i.e., execute) summonses with zero oversight by a court and no litigation yet in process. I posted links about that in my proposed translation below. These summonses are indeed issued by agents (certain designated employees of the agency); for that reason, lancer could work here.

However, "executed" means not just issued, but officially and properly served (which creates an obligation on the recipient to respond, i.e., either do what the summons says or hire a lawyer to file a motion arguing that they shouldn't have to). In other words, when a summons is "executed," that means the process was not just begun (lancer) but completed (délivré, i.e. served).

Here's yet another link -- this is an example of Twitter refusing to comply with this type of summons (read paragraphs 6-9): https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3539853-Twitter-v-DH...

Germaine Oct 22, 2018:

Chris, Perso, je n’arrive pas à voir où "lancer" pourrait signifier "amorcer", en tout cas, dans ce contexte:

Lancer : Dire en s'engageant (de manière officielle). − [L'obj. désigne une déclaration officielle] Lancer une proclamation; lancer un avertissement, un ordre, une sommation, un ultimatum, un mandat (d'amener). − [L'obj. désigne une déclaration hostile] Prononcer, exprimer. Lancer des accusations contre qqn.

On est bien plus près de l’exécution entière que de la simple initiation.

AllegroTrans Oct 22, 2018:

Asker This comment will probably be removed under KudoZ rules, but I really fear that you may not have sufficient French native knowledge of law and legal procedure to translate terms like this. "Lancer", as proposed by you, means to start, commence or initiate. Whilst you have not given us more than one sentence of your text, I very much doubt whether an undercover agent of the DHS would commence any legal procedure. He/she would simply be the agent either serving papers or carrying out some form of enforcement action on behalf of the agency concerned.

Cassandra Delacote (asker) Oct 22, 2018:

thank you to all for these enlightening discussion and to David Henrion, for the explanation which is helpful. Based on all of this, I am thinking of translating the term "a lancé une injonction"

Germaine Oct 19, 2018:

(suite) Au sens technique qu’il a dans la procédure, le mot assignation (ou le terme assignation en justice) est une sommation à comparaître devant le tribunal pour être jugé, pour témoigner ou pour participer à un acte quelconque d’instruction... (4) Le Comité de normalisation de la terminologie française de la common law a retenu les termes assignation de témoin ("witness summons" ou "subpoena" en anglais) et assignation à témoigner ("subpoena ad testificandum")... (7) On ne peut dire [assignation d’un affidavit] ou [assignation de la défense]... Cet emploi incorrect s’explique par l’extension de sens que l’on donne au mot assignation dans certains termes... où assignation signifie injonction.
http://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tpv2guides/guides/juridi/in...

Germaine Oct 19, 2018:

Eliza, L’injonction n’émane pas exclusivement de l’autorité judiciaire... Une autorité administrative peut lancer des injonctions à ses administrés, lesquels sont tenus d’obtempérer à celles-ci les sommant de supprimer des irrégularités. « Si les importateurs ne donnent pas suite à l’injonction, l’Office organise, à leurs frais, le rappel et la confiscation du produit sans indemnisation. » « La personne titulaire du permis de port d’armes le conserve sur elle et le produit sur injonction des organes de la police ou des douanes. »
http://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tpv2guides/guides/juridi/in...

david henrion Oct 19, 2018:

Explication de mon raisonnement Selon moi un "agent secret" est en permanence sous "couverture", tandis qu'un "agent sous couverture/infiltré" peut être un membre des services de police infiltré dans un réseau. Un "agent secret" peut être infiltré lui aussi mais "agent secret" n'est pas la traduction de "undercover agent".

Germaine Oct 19, 2018:

Pour summons = "assignation/citation", la syntaxe est :
Délivrer, lancer, rédiger, signifier une assignation, et non [émettre].
http://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tpv2guides/guides/juridi/in...

Faute de complément à "summons", je crois aussi qu’on parle d’une injonction. Dans ce cas:
Le tribunal accorde, adresse, décerne, délivre, lance, octroie, prononce des injonctions, il n’en [émet] pas. Le tiers qui la reçoit doit déférer à l’injonction, se soumettre à l’injonction.
http://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tpv2guides/guides/juridi/in...

Pour "sommation", je suis perplexe : en tant que telle, c’est généralement un acte d’huissier. Par définition, "an order to provide information" serait une "interpellation":
Sommation faite à quelqu'un d'avoir à dire, à faire quelque chose.
http://www.larousse.fr/dictionnaires/francais/interpellation...

AMHA, "signifier" et "délivrer" s’emploient dans tous les cas - sauf l’interpellation, naturellement.

Cassandra Delacote (asker) Oct 19, 2018:

issuing an order to provide information

AllegroTrans Oct 19, 2018:

Insufficient information "Executed" a summons is vague - is he enforcing an order or serving somebody with papers?