RECENTLY, STRIKING SIMULTANEOUS CRIMINAL REFORM PROJECTS ARE TAKING PLACE IN BELGIUM, THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY, AND FRANCE. SINCE 1944, THE BELGIAN CRIMINAL CODE IN 1867 HAS EXPERIENCED A SERIES OF REFORMS IN RESPONSE TO NEW IDEAS (E.G, ON CIVIL LIBERTIES) AND NEW LEGAL PROBLEMS (E.G., THE STUDENT REVOLT OF 1968). IT IS REGRETTED THAT THE PROJECTS PLACE SO LITTLE EMPHASIS ON A COMMON EUROPEAN SPACE OF JURISDICTION OR AN INTEREUROPEAN/INTERNATIONAL CRIME CONTROL PROGRAM. CONCERNING 'FAULT' AND 'RESPONSIBILITY,' WEST GERMANY HAS ADOPTED THE PRINCIPLE THAT THE OFFENDER'S FAULT CONSTITUTES THE BASIS FOR ASSEMBLING PUNISHMENT, WHILE FRANCE HAS ENTIRELY ELIMINATED THE CONCEPT THAT OFFENDERS 'RESPONSIBLE' FOR THEIR ACTS AND SPEAKS INSTEAD OF THEIR BEING 'PUNISHABLE.' FOLLOWING THE WEST GERMAN EXAMPLE, THE BELGIAN REFORM PROJECT TENDS TOWARD THE ABOLITION OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT WHILE IN FRANCE THE DECISION WILL BE LEFT UP TO PARLIAMENT. NEITHER THE BELGIAN NOR THE FRENCH PROJECTS SHOW A CLEAR DIRECTION WITH RESPECT TO IMPRISONMENT. THE FRENCH AND BELGIAN REFORMS RIGHTLY REJECT THE STRICT WEST GERMAN DIVISION BETWEEN CRIMINAL OFFENSES AND MERE FAULT AGAINST NECESSARY SOCIAL REGULATIONS. IT IS ARGUED THAT A MORE FLEXIBLE SYSTEM WHICH MAKES POSSIBLE THE TREATMENT OF A SINGLE OFFENSE UNDER EITHER SET OF LAWS DEPENDING ON THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE OFFENSE IS NECESSARY. THE ARTICLE INCLUDES BIBLIOGRAPHICAL FOOTNOTES. --IN FRENCH. (SAJ)