After the pleadings of the lawyers of the European Parliament, this Wednesday, the floor is given to the prosecution during the trial of the parliamentary assistants of the RN.
As a reminder, since September 30 and until November 27, the Paris criminal court has tried 25 people, including Marine Le Pen and Louis Aliot, and the FN (now the RN) for suspicion of embezzlement of European public funds allegedly committed between September 1, 2009 and February 14, 2016 for an amount of 6.8 million euros.
The prosecutor intends to dismantle the Le Pen “system” before making his requisitions which are particularly awaited since, in this trial, the party executives risk up to 10 years of imprisonment and a fine of 150,000 euros for acts committed between 2009 and 2013, or even 1 million euros for those committed after 2013. They also risk an additional penalty of ineligibility limited to 5 years but which could be increased to 10 years, some exercising a public elective mandate at the time of the facts. These latter sentences could be carried out as soon as this trial is deliberated. If they were sentenced to ineligibility sentences, Marine le Pen and Louis Aliot could see their political destiny considerably thwarted.
“Save money on party expenses”
“Why did the FN put this system in place?, asks prosecutor Louise Neyton. To save money on the party's expenses with the help of the European Parliament, while the party was in an extremely financial situation. tense.”
The prosecutor dwells on the question of evidence
“So what type of proof is sought? We seek to know whether work was actually provided, whether writings such as notes or summaries were written, and for whose benefit?”
“But the notes have not been found. We are told: I moved, it was perishable material, it was not kept…”, he laments, emphasizing that these arguments are false . “We see that those involved have conservation capabilities!”
11h44.
In the dock, Marine Le Pen takes notes. She often expresses her incomprehension by raising her eyebrows or her disagreements by blowing or shaking her head negatively, reports Valérie de Senneville, senior reporter for Les Échos.
11:35 a.m.
Nicolas Barret: “To know whether the parliamentary assistant works for his MP or for a third party, two elements are discriminatory: does he respond to directives from his employer? Is the content of his work linked to the exercise of his mandate?”
Speech by Nicolas Barret, the second prosecutor
He criticized the selfish use of European public funds by the RN in the context of parliamentary assistant contracts. “We don’t ask ourselves the question of legitimacy. We burn, consume for ourselves,” he said.
11h07.
Louise Neyton continues: “Assuming the right to dispose of public funds in complete discretion and without control, as Bruno Gollnisch did, amounts to considering that the law does not apply and to claiming privileged treatment.”
11:03 a.m.
“The absolute freedom of the deputy is the freedom of speech, thought, and expression, absolutely not the freedom to use public funds,” insists the prosecutor
She returns to the possibility of choosing an activist as a parliamentary assistant
The prosecutor specifies that there is “total freedom of choice” for the parliamentary assistant. However, there is not “total freedom over the tasks carried out”, she continued, stressing that there must be “a direct link between the activity and the mandate of assistant.”
“The task of the parliamentary assistant (PA) must be in accordance with the mission of AP. The parliamentary assistant is at the service of assistance directly linked to the mandate. And he knows it. He must assist the deputy in the “opportunity for the exercise of his mandate.”
According to her, this justifies the legitimacy of the control of the purpose of expenditure by the European Parliament, since they are “public funds”.
The prosecution emphasizes the “unprecedented nature” of the case as well as the “contempt of its authors”
“The affair is unprecedented in its scale, its duration, the systematic nature of the organization and the contempt of its perpetrators. These facts and this behavior have caused a serious and lasting attack on the rules of the game. democratic,” continued the prosecutor.
“We are not here because of persistence”
The hearing began around 9:45 a.m. with an introduction from prosecutor Louise Neyton: “We are not here because of persistence and on allegations, but at the end of a judicial investigation carried out by four investigating judges, with investigations against and against the defendants, during which the defendants had the opportunity to express themselves, a procedure at the end of which the investigating judges considered that there were sufficient charges and referred the matter to the court to state the law.”
Marine Le Pen is present at the Paris judicial court on this day of requisitions
“I think that the prosecution will try to defend the cause that it initiated 10 years ago to justify its procedure which appeared more than shaky during the last month and a half,” she said according to Franceinfo.
#ProcesRN : Marine Le Pen arrived at the court on this day of requisitions: “I think that the prosecution will try to defend the cause that it initiated 10 years ago to justify its procedure which appeared more than shaky during the last month and half » @franceinfo pic.twitter.com/c1VLoArNT9
— Caroline Motte (@carolinemotte)
Related News :