The job of chief public prosecutor is to implement the criminal justice policy set by the administration, while adjusting it to the specific context of their local jurisdictions. The job has grown in importance and independence with the expansion of diversion and the establishment of alternative modes of prosecution (guilty pleas, victim-offender mediation, or compounding fines). This broader range of alternatives for case disposition has given prosecutors increased power in determining penal tracks for cases. This study shows, however, that the professional identity of public prosecutors is defined by constant tension between an ethic of independence and of responsibility shared with sitting judges and an ethic of submissiveness and loyalty to their hierarchy and to the Ministry. This reduction in their independence through some hierarchical and managerial constraints has required chief prosecutors to rely on their sensitivity to collective norms and values in defining the parameters for their independence. This study focused on chief public prosecutors to the exclusion of deputy or first-deputy prosecutors. Data were collected through indepth interviews with 25 prosecutors active in 2003. They were chosen to represent the variety of professional situations related to jurisdictional size, seniority, and hierarchical position. The sample included four women and seven men nearing retirement, thus providing a retrospective on the evolution of the profession. 15 notes