A working meeting between Justice and Customs representatives took place at Antaninarenina. Magistrates and customs officials gathered to compare practices and streamline the processing of customs violations, secure procedures, and strengthen public action against complex fraud cases. Combating customs fraud requires better coordination between Customs and Justice services. With this in mind, Malagasy Customs and the Court of First Instance of Antananarivo held a workshop on September 9 in the Customs meeting room at Antaninarenina. The main objective was to consolidate existing collaboration between the two institutions while improving the handling of customs violation cases. Participants shared experiences, identified difficulties in their respective missions, and identified common solutions. Beyond technical aspects, the stakes are high. Better coordination between Customs and Justice should make fraud prevention more effective, better secure state revenues, and protect citizens and national resources. Operational rapprochement The Justice delegation included the president of the Court of First Instance of Antananarivo, vice-presidents, the Republic's prosecutor, deputy prosecutors, and sitting magistrates. Malagasy Customs was represented by its director general, Antoine Randrianjafy, accompanied by directors, service heads, and representatives from Ivato-Airport and Mamory customs offices. In his opening address, the Customs DG recalled that "Customs and Justice intervene at different but complementary stages of the same chain of responsibility." The Republic's prosecutor also emphasized this complementarity, noting that better coordination between the two institutions could only benefit their services and, above all, the national interest. Organized by the Legal Affairs and Anti-Fraud Directorate (DAJLF), this workshop marks a new step in operational rapprochement between Customs and Justice. The solutions identified during discussions should now serve as the basis for implementing better-coordinated working methods with a dual objective: strengthen fraud prevention and improve public revenue mobilization. Participants agreed that this meeting was only a first step to be continued.