Table ronde CERCRID Le consentement en matière sexuelle. Regards croisés pénal et civil - 10/02/2026

Value of the Information & Strength of the Argument

The value of the information is high, as it provides a detailed and nuanced analysis of a recent legal reform from multiple perspectives. The speakers, all legal experts, offer both theoretical and practical insights, referencing specific legal texts, European directives, and comparative examples. The argumentation is solid, with each speaker building on the previous one to construct a comprehensive picture. They acknowledge complexities, such as the limitations of the German model and the unresolved issue of penetration with objects, demonstrating intellectual rigor. The discussion is well-structured, moving from context to comparative law to the objectives of the reform, and the speakers support their claims with references to legal sources and scholarly work.

Scientific Rigor, Source Quality, Title Accuracy

The scientific rigor is evident in the careful citation of legal instruments (Istanbul Convention, EU Directive, German Criminal Code), judicial decisions (ECtHR rulings), and scholarly work (e.g., Catherine Le Maguer). The sources are appropriate for the topic and are used to support the analysis. The title accurately reflects the content, which is a roundtable on sexual consent from criminal and civil law perspectives. The discussion is well-organized and stays on topic, with each speaker contributing to a coherent analysis. The quality of sources is high, though the format is a debate rather than a peer-reviewed article, which slightly limits the depth of citation. Overall, the title and content are well-aligned.

The title accurately reflects the content, which is a roundtable discussion on sexual consent from criminal and civil law perspectives.

8/10

The roundtable features three legal scholars specializing in criminal and civil law, providing a rigorous analysis of the legal reform. The discussion is grounded in legal texts, European conventions, and comparative law, though it is a debate rather than a peer-reviewed publication.

Markers derived by PSI from the transcript: the creator did not define chapters.

• 00:00Introduction by the moderator, outlining the structure of the roundtable.
• 02:00First speaker begins discussing the European context, including the Istanbul Convention and EU Directive.
• 10:00Discussion of the European Court of Human Rights rulings against France in 2025.
• 20:00Comparative analysis of German law, focusing on the right to sexual self-determination and the 2016 reform.
• 30:00Critiques of the German model, including issues like tonic immobility and stealthing.
• 40:00Discussion of the objectives of the French reform, including the expressive and pedagogical functions of criminal law.
• 50:00Second speaker (Xavier Pin) analyzes the specific changes to the legal definition of rape and sexual assault.
• 1:00:00Discussion of the burden of proof and the shift in focus to the perpetrator's actions to ensure consent.
• 1:10:00Addressing the inclusion of oral acts in the definition of rape and the unresolved issue of penetration with objects.
• 1:20:00Discussion of the temporal application of the law and the circular from the criminal affairs directorate.

• Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (Istanbul Convention) — Referenced as the key European instrument requiring consent-based definitions of rape.
• Directive (EU) 2024/1385 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2024 on combating violence against women and domestic violence — Mentioned in the context of the EU's attempt to include consent in the definition of rape, which was ultimately excluded.
• German Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch), Section 177 — Referenced in the comparative analysis of German law on sexual assault.
• ECtHR judgments against France (April 24, 2025 and September 4, 2025) — Cited as the reason for the French reform, as the Court found France's legal framework inadequate.

• Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (Istanbul Convention) — The speakers' analysis aligns with the convention's requirement for consent-based definitions.
• ECtHR judgments against France — The reform is consistent with the Court's findings that France's legal framework was insufficient.

• Critiques of the German model — The speakers note that despite the 2016 reform, German law still fails to address certain situations like tonic immobility and stealthing, indicating that consent-based definitions are not a complete solution.