At the trial of FN parliamentary assistants, Marine Le Pen maintains that there was no “system” of embezzlement of public funds

She stomped around all afternoon in the dock. Marine Le Pen was questioned for the last time, Tuesday November 5, at the trial of parliamentary assistants of the National Front (which has since become the National Rally). The leader of the RN deputies was this time questioned on the charge of complicity in the embezzlement of European public funds as the former president of the far-right party. “I'm muddied in my chair”she told journalists just before her interrogation, confiding that she had “the feeling” to have encountered “a wall” during this month and a half of trial.

Despite this apparent discouragement, Marine Le Pen advanced towards the bar with determined steps in her black suit, a stack of files under her arm, as during her previous interrogation. The three-time candidate for the presidential election, experienced in political arenas, used her experience as a former lawyer to convince and attempt to dismantle the notion of “system” at the heart of the accusation. According to the investigating judges, the boss of the FN was “one of the main culprits” Why “system” of embezzlement of the envelopes of the parliamentary assistants of MEPs (21,000 euros per month). The objective, as recalled by Bénédicte de Perthuis, president of the 11th criminal chamber of the court, was to “reduce the FN’s payroll” in a “savings context”.

“Four parliamentary assistants, including one part-time, came from the party payroll and we are being told about a system! It’s unfair”opposed Marine Le Pen during her opening statement, using a very personal metaphor addressed to the magistrate: “When you are convinced that tomato equals cocaine, the entire shopping list is suspect.”

“I had the impression on many occasions that your opinion was already made up. And yet, I arrived here with the sincere wish to provide all the answers you were waiting for.”

Marine Le Pen

before the criminal court

For an hour and a half, Marine Le Pen provided her answers to what she had heard during the entire debates, which she attended assiduously since the end of September. Assuring her own pleading, she returned to the notion of “mutualization” parliamentary assistants, who sometimes passed from one MEP to another while working, according to the prosecution, for the party. “We have never had any remonstrance from Parliament, she observes. I have the impression that we judge yesterday with the vision we have today. At the time, the rules didn't exist or were much more flexible.”

What to say about the “centralized management” envelopes by accountants, supervised by the party and therefore its leader? “Centralization is in the culture of the FN”explains Marine Le Pen in a pirouette, arguing for the party's difficulty in finding “providers” : “The other clients say to themselves: 'He's the accountant or the printer of the FN'. In business, we don't really like people with political influence.” The defendant denies, however, having “never asked an MP to hire an assistant” especially. But she justifies her right of inspection or “veto” to promote the process of demonizing the party initiated through electoral success. And thus avoid finding yourself “forced to justify the denialist remarks of such a municipal councilor” became a parliamentary assistant.

Multiplying the spin, Marine Le Pen continues her demonstration with the question of “localisation” parliamentary assistants. The address of a certain number of them was at the party headquarters, in Saint-Cloud (Hauts-de-Seine). A sign, for the judges, that they were not practicing in the European Parliament. “In the National Assembly, the deputies have an office, no problem. But in the European Parliament, where are the deputies' offices? There are no deputies' offices!”supports Marine Le Pen, ensuring at the same time that the address indicated “was an administrative address”. As for the actual role of the assistants, the leader of the RN has deployed the same line of defense since the start of the trial.

“Parliamentary assistant is a status, it says nothing about the work required. It goes from the secretary to the speechwriter, from the lawyer to the graphic designer, from the bodyguard to the person who runs the office. (…) Me , I believe that we cannot prevent a parliamentary assistant from having a political function.”

Marine Le Pen

before the criminal court

During her first interrogation in mid-October, Marine Le Pen swore in any case that the parliamentary assistants she had hired as a European deputy had worked well for her, repeating that she had committed nothing illegal.“illegal”like the eight other former Frontist MEPs and twelve of their parliamentary assistants, tried alongside him for embezzlement of public funds and concealment of this crime.

After her long introductory remarks, last opportunity for her to try to “change the vision” of the court “in this folder”Marine Le Pen said she was ready to answer questions. Before questioning him, the president warned: “The only question that will interest us will be to determine whether the parliamentary assistants worked for the European deputies to whom they were attached or for the FN. And not to know where we should put their office.” The decision will be deliberated at the end of the debates, scheduled for the end of November. Marine Le Pen faces ten years in prison, a million euro fine and a sentence of ineligibility which could hamper her ambitions for the next presidential election in 2027.