after 18 years of proceedings, the attorney general requests the release of elected official Franck Proust

Many believed him to be dead judicially and politically, but he is still alive and fighting like a lion this Monday afternoon in the so-called SENIM criminal case. This mixed economy company of which he was president in the mid-2000s is at the heart of the investigations and the thorny legal problem which is occupying the judges of the Montpellier Court of Appeal, this Monday July 1 from 2 p.m. If the case is judged in Hérault it is because the Court of Cassation “overturned” the judgment of the Nîmes Court of Appeal of April 14, 2022 which sentenced Mr. Proust to 12 months in prison, suspended, 15 000 euros fine and five years of ineligibility, an additional sanction synonymous with the end of the reign for the Nîmes councilor sanctioned for “influence peddling”. With the promoter Jean-Luc Colonna d’Istria, they decided to appeal to the Court of Cassation… And the highest French court considered that the Nîmes Court of Appeal pronounced an irregular conviction by taking as a date to characterize the crime of influence peddling at the end of 2001 and the beginning of 2002… The problem: these dates do not appear on the councilor’s referral to the courts. The Nîmes Court of Appeal therefore took up, according to the Court of Cassation, facts and dates for which it should not have ruled to bind the corruption pact that the Gard elected official has always vigorously denied . A crucial legal clarification on the possible sanction of the current president of the Nîmes agglomeration.

Moreover, this Monday, July 1, the first question from the president of the Montpellier Court of Appeal is focused on this date and whether Mr. Colonna and Mr. Proust agree to be judged for the facts of 2001 and 2002 which are not not in initial prevention. The two defendants categorically refuse… “ Mr. Proust is said to have benefited from a rental lease for a permanent office dated November 1, 2001, which would be the counterpart of the supposed influence peddling. », estimates the advocate general who draws conclusions from the start of the trial: “ These are constituent elements of the offence outside of prevention, you must enter into the process of acquittal “, believes the representative of the public prosecutor’s office, although the case on the merits continues and is being debated in public hearing today.

The affair began in 2006

A case that began with denunciations in 2006 by the former director of SENIM who revealed to the judicial authority anomalies in public procurement, particularly around the work on the “Triangle de la Gare de Nîmes” and transfers of land from SENIM to the developer Colonna. It was the regional audit office that then informed the Nîmes prosecutor in February 2008… In March of this year, a judicial investigation was opened and the investigating judges followed one another, sometimes with very long periods of dead calm in the procedure.

The courts have been judging since 2001

Franck Proust and the promoter Colonna, but also other defendants, appeared before the Nîmes criminal court in July 2021. The first instance court annulled the investigative and information acts by taking the “delay” as a legal pretext. reasonable” of the procedure which had been exceeded. A deadline which will be made reasonable by the Nîmes Court of Appeal in April 2022 and which sentences Franck Proust to 12 months suspended sentence, a 15,000 euro fine and five years of ineligibility as an additional penalty for this offense of trafficking in influence. It is this decision of the Nîmes court which was denounced by the elected official and then overturned by the Court of Cassation.

“This case has shattered my life”

The Montpellier judges are therefore examining this criminal case from Gard, which is returning from cassation, on Monday 1 July. From the outset, the president of the Agglomeration reiterates his absolute innocence. “I have only respected the decisions of the Nîmes municipal council, unanimously, I should point out,” Franck Proust tackles. ” At no time did I make a positive gesture for Mr. Colonna. ». « Whether or not we did Mr. Colonna a favor, I say no. This case has ruined my life, my career, my parents, my children for a rent of 146.90 euros. “, continues the elected Proust. ” I did not know that Mr. Colonna was the 30% owner of this 25 m² premises and the rents were paid at the right price. “, the mayor defends himself.

The president of the Montpellier criminal appeal court then discusses the political situation at the time and a conflict on the right between two men, Mr. Proust on one side and Mr. Lachaud on the other. Mr. Lachaud speaks a lot with innuendo, he doesn’t say it’s illegal, he says it’s not usual », estimates the president of the court of appeal who mentions “ a shadow theater “, in the political Landerneau of the Nîmes right.

« He changed labels 10 times and he doesn’t have much backbone, Mr. Lachaud », Charges Franck Proust against his former friend from the Nîmes right. “ Yes, there were adversities within the right, but where is the pact of corruption mentioned and denounced by some, there is none, I have been the victim of unfounded rumors for 20 years “, says the combative elected official in response to the magistrate’s questions…

“Mr. Proust, you have been alerted that the three brewers want to sign directly with you and you are signing with an intermediary who claims to be a title holder but is not. This is not serious from the outside, you could have warned the municipal council.”summarizes the president. “There was a note to alert you, continues the magistrate who resumes the procedure and wonders… “You sign with the developer Colonna when you can sell directly and Mr. Colonna immediately makes a profit of 200,000 euros. plus 60,000 euros over 30 years. This raises a question though.continues the president who poses hard-hitting questions in the face of Franck Proust who still denies the slightest illegal nature in this matter.

The trial continues this Monday afternoon…