Abstract: The focus of this article is on the special tribunal, a special judicial body established in the French colony of Martinique in 1803. It was created to carry out criminal repression against black slaves accused of poisoning, arson, stealing boats and pirogues to escape. The main purpose of the study is to determine the legal basis for the organization of a special tribunal in Martinique and to identify its features in relation to the special tribunals that existed in the metropolis from 1801 and 1802. The question of the correlation of these tribunals in the colony and in the metropolis seems to be little studied in historiography. The subject of research in the work is the evolution of the special tribunal during the period of French rule on the island – from the establishment of the court to the loss of control over Martinique by the French in 1809. To work on the topic, documentary materials from the National Archives of overseas France, published legislative acts and acts of ministers of the Napoleonic era, acts of the island administration from the "Code of Martinique" were involved. The study used the method of concrete historical analysis, comparative legal analysis of legal documents and structural and functional analysis of judicial bodies. As a result of the study, it can be concluded that the competence of the Martinique Special Tribunal has changed towards its expansion over three stages in 1803-1809. From an organ of repression exclusively for slaves, it gradually turned into an extraordinary court for slaves and for free people of color, and then for any vagabonds without a place of residence and recognition. Dangerous crimes of a state nature began to belong to his jurisdiction. The comparison of the tribunal with the special tribunals established in the metropolis in 1801 and 1802 does not confirm the full borrowing of judicial law from the metropolis in the organization of the colonial court and testifies in favor of the originality of colonial justice. However, similar features in the composition of these bodies and in the order of judicial procedure allow us to speak about general trends in the development of judicial systems throughout the French Empire, in the metropolis and in the colonies, expressed in the creation of bodies of emergency justice, alternative to courts of general jurisdiction.

Abstract: The proposed article is devoted to the history of two reforms of military justice in Switzerland – 1799 and 1800. It describes a chronologically small but very important stage of the transition to a new military-judicial organization associated with foreign interference in the affairs of the country. The purpose of the study is to present the main changes in the military justice of Switzerland and the degree of influence on them of the French institutions of the late XVIII century. The object of study here is the military-judicial law of the Helvetic Republic, reflected in the laws of July 27, 1799 and November 24, 1800. The subject of the study is the process of reforming military justice in Switzerland at the reception of the norms of French law. When working on the materials of the topic, the comparative historical research method, contextual analysis of legal documents and structural and functional analysis of judicial and legal institutions of the two countries were applied.   
As a result, the study showed that the reforms created a new system of military justice, which was connected only with the military organization and did not depend on the cantonal affiliation of military personnel. The reform of 1799 differed from the reorganization of 1800 by the greater radicalism and democracy of the institutions created, which corresponded to the political aspirations of various ruling groups that succeeded each other in the Helvetic Republic leadership. Nevertheless, both reforms were oriented towards the assimilation of the French experience of the military judicial system of the era of the Great Revolution. The borrowing of foreign military-judicial law in Helvetia was not limited to the complete copying of foreign norms, Swiss legislators were able to show a certain originality in their adoption. The main difference of the Swiss military judicial organization was the introduction of a three-tier system of military courts and the preservation of the institution of disciplinary councils, which in the French Republic by the end of the XVIII century already ceased to exist.

Abstract: This article contains material on the history of the Permanent Councils of Revision – bodies of military justice in France of the late XVIII – early XIX centuries, which is examined in the Russian historiography for the first time, as well as poorly studied in the French historiography. Leaning on the legislative acts and works of the French lawyers of that time, analysis is conducted on the procedure for the formation of the councils of revision, and determination of their judicial competence. The article also raises the question on correlation of the concepts of “revision” and “cassation” in French military justice of the end of revolutionary and post-revolutionary eras. Consideration of the provisions of French jurisprudence of the early XIX century allows concluding that the concept of “revision” could also include cassation of court judgments. Comparison of the permanent councils of revision, which carried out the functions of cassation of court decisions, with the Cassation Tribunal (in the imperial time – the Court of Cassation) did not allow to equate these bodies, which were created separately for military and civilian justice. Having a different procedure for the formation of bench of judges, the permanent councils of revision were granted the limited authority to conduct cassation and were not of equal importance to the Court of Cassation.

Abstract: This article questions the opinion established in modern French historiography on implementation of life sentence as a criminal punishment under the rule of Napoleon Bonaparte (in accordance with the Criminal Code of 1810). Leaning on examination of legislative, policy drafting, and court materials, the author traces the evolution of the system of criminal penalties associated with incarceration. and determines the role of life sentence therein – since the adoption of first criminal laws in the era Great Revolution until the revision Napoleonic Criminal Code in 1832, and the court of Peers under Louis-Philippe I. The acquires materials demonstrate that after long absence of the  Consulate and Early Empire in the time of Revolution,  life sentence was envisaged by the Criminal Code of 1810 as an alternative measure to penal servitude for life or deportation (for criminals of senior age), rather than an separate type of criminal punishment. Reference to the practice of the court of Peers during the Restoration and the July Monarchy suggests that life sentence became a separate type of criminal punishment only with the advent of verdict passed by Peers with regards to 1830 case of former ministers. This sentence was based on the combination of legislative and court functions in actions of the Chamber of Peers as higher justice authority, and thus was of constitutive nature. The conclusion is made that the implementation of life sentence in French criminal law should be attributed to the time of the July Monarchy rather than the ruling of Napoleon Bonaparte.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the changes in legal regime of detention of the foreign prisoners of war in France during the ruling period of Napoleon I. The work examines the normative positions pertaining to places of dislocation, organization of work and daily life of the prisoners of war, their financial support administration and police supervision over them, as well as punishments for violation of order and discipline. Legal regulation was exercised on general imperial level alongside separate departments, which causes a question about the interaction of the imperial law with the local law. The article compares the imperial regulations with the acts of prefect of M. de Miramont existing in the Eure department in 1813 – 1814. The relevance of this topic is substantiate by the insufficient study in science of the relation of administrations of various departments towards the dislocated within them prisoners of war and peculiarities of legal regulation of their detention. The conclusion is made that that legal regime of detention of the foreign prisoners of war in France during the late Napoleonic era, to a significant extent is defined not by the general imperial regulations but the local stipulations. Acts of the prefecture issued in the Eure department, testify to the extensive freedom of lawmaking of a prefect in this field. Particularly, the acts of 1814 significantly expanded the authority of the local civil administration pertaining to the depot of prisoners of war within the department’s territory and enhanced its impact upon the military structure in the late ruling period of Napoleon I.