FRANCE Law and Practice Contributed by: Sophie Scemla, Didier G Martin, Diane Paillot de Montabert and Calypso Korkikian, Gide Loyrette Nouel
response strategies. Businesses must integrate compliance, ESG, and ethical governance into their crisis management approach to mitigate legal and reputational risks. 2.3 Government Role There is no specific government entity responsi- ble for co-ordinating crisis management. As a matter of fact, depending on the level of the crisis as well as the topic, different governmen- tal bodies such as dedicated ministers, public agencies or even local territorial administrations may intervene to solve the crisis and implement remediation measures (for instance, French National Financial Prosecutor’s Office (PNF), DGCCRF, tax authorities, competition authori- ties, and environmental authorities). 2.4 Independent Oversight Crisis management in France is overseen by independent bodies ensuring corporate compli- ance, transparency, and risk mitigation. For instance, the Agence Française Anticorrup- tion (AFA) monitors anti-corruption compliance under the Sapin II Law, assessing compliance with the requirements of the Law and of the AFA in terms of corruption prevention, internal controls and whistle-blower protections. The Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF) super- vises financial market compliance, ensuring listed companies disclose crisis-related risks. The Haute Autorité pour la Transparence de la Vie Publique (HATVP) monitors conflicts of interest and governance integrity. The Autorité de Contrôle Prudentiel et de Résolution (ACPR) ensures banks and insurers implement crisis response measures to maintain financial stabil- ity. The Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés (CNIL) oversees data protection compliance, integrating cybersecurity into crisis
management. Typically, in case of cyber-attacks, the victim entity would have to report the situa- tion to the CNIL which would be entirely part of the crisis management. These bodies conduct audits, enforce report- ing obligations, and impose sanctions for non- compliance. Companies must align crisis pre- paredness with regulatory standards, submit risk reports, and implement corrective actions when required. This oversight strengthens corporate accountability and reinforces best practices in Transparency is a key aspect of corporate com- pliance in France, particularly in crisis manage- ment. Some companies are subject to mandato- ry public reporting to ensure regulatory oversight and stakeholder accountability. For instance, the Grenelle II and NRE Laws require large companies to disclose ESG risks and integrate stakeholders in some decision- making processes, integrating compliance and crisis preparedness into corporate strategies. The Duty of Vigilance Law (2017) mandates vigilance plans identifying human rights, envi- ronmental, and governance risks, including cri- sis management protocols. Sapin II Law and its 2022 amendments require companies to estab- lish secure whistle-blower reporting channels, reinforcing transparency in crisis detection and response. governance and risk management. 2.5 Transparency Requirements In financial, environmental, and governance crises, listed companies must disclose mate- rial risks and mitigation strategies in regulatory filings. Non-compliance can lead to sanctions from the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF and ACPR). Executives directors are responsible for ensuring crisis-related transparency, demon-
59
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook