“Making me the group’s HR director is a crazy idea,” defends Marine Le Pen

Questioned about complicity in the misappropriation of public funds for the benefit of her party, the former president of the National Rally denied having personally overseen the assignment of her former parliamentary assistants.

The interrogation of Marine Le Pen continues at the Paris court. Tuesday, the exchanges were sometimes electric between the former president of the National Rally and the president of the 11^e criminal chamber of the court, Bénédicte de Perthuis, on the subject of letters supposed to prove the role played by the former MEP in the system of alleged embezzlement of Europe's money for the benefit of her far-right party. What about this email where Wallerand de Saint-Just seemed to be perfectly aware that the requests of his boss – in this case, that the RN parliamentarians are satisfied with a single parliamentary assistant and leave the rest of their envelope of public money at the disposal of the party – could be illegal? “ “What Marine [Le Pen] asking us is equivalent to signing up for fictitious jobs”had written the former frontist treasurer. “ Irony! », according to Marine Le Pen, in front of the court, denouncing, again and again, a justice which has “ already done » son opinion…

Also read

“You see evidence everywhere”

Same tone this Wednesday. As since the start of the trial, Marine Le Pen, who was a lawyer, defends herself step by step. The presidential candidate sighs with each approximation of the court, taking the floor volley over each name and each date. But now the court projects a picture made in FN, from an email signed Charles Van Houtte, the former kingpin of the alleged system, responsible for managing the envelopes of elected officials. The document does not really support the defense of the accused of the day: addressed to Catherine Griset, her ex-collaborator, dated September 2014, the email wonders what to do with two party executives, Julien Odoul, current deputy, and Walleyrand of Saint-Just. “ I should still add two names: Julien Odoul (3,200 net) and Walleyrand (sic) (6,000 net), but on WHO? “, we can read there. The president asks who made the decision to confirm so-and-so as assistant and their assignment within the former RN delegation. “ I am unable to tell you. But anyway you see evidence everywhere », tries Marine Le Pen, at the helm, hands clasped behind her back.

Also read

Was the former boss of the RN making the decisions and personally ensuring that the party made savings at the expense of Brussels? The question is at the heart of this trial, for which she risks ineligibility and her party very heavy fines. During the MoDem trial – for similar facts – François Bayrou was acquitted because the 11^e correctional chamber had failed to formally demonstrate its “ personal involvement » in the diversions.

Marine Le Pen defends herself: “The idea of ​​making me the one who chooses and imposes the assistants, of making me the HR director of the group, is a crazy idea. Sorry, but MEPs are not three-year-olds who are told “go to bed”, “go to the corner”. »

Except that the frontist file contains factual elements that could suggest the opposite. Precisely, the magistrate draws an email from the same Charles Van Houtte, addressed to Wallerand de Saint-Just, regarding the same contract: « I just had Marine, she confirmed to me that your contract is with Philippe Loiseau (former RN MEP). » From there to say that it was really on her on whom the fate of the parliamentary assistants depended? Response from the person concerned, who minimizes her role: “ So, I didn't remember that at all. But if you tell me that the leader of the movement that I was discusses with one or the other, it is obvious (…) There is no basis or legal consequence for that ». A simple ” validation system ”, she will also say.

But Bénédicte de Perthuis insists and recalls the statements of certain defendants before the investigating judge. Thus, according to these testimonies, some of the executives had alerted Marine Le Pen to the risk represented by the hiring of the very visible Wallerand de Saint-Just as a simple parliamentary assistant. As if, in the case of the treasurer, a known frontist figure, the risk of attracting the attention of the European Parliament or the courts had been too great… The hiring had not taken place: “ I have no memory of that, responds again Marine Le Pen. Furthermore, I don't see anything questionable or objectionable in changing one's mind! »

Patrick Maisonneuve, the lawyer for the European Parliament, gives his interpretation: “ Perhaps this was a way for you to keep Wallerand de Saint-Just as treasurer but to pay him, under the guise, if I dare say, of a parliamentary assistant? » Marine Le Pen responds: “ I'm shocked. In a criminal trial, we are content with elements that are or are not in the investigation. There, you make up stories. I see this as proof of the weakness of the case. On the part of the prosecution, let me clarify! » A few laughs erupt in the room, including his own, tinged with a dose of worry. Before giving way to very real pessimism: “ Here, justice casts nets and then looks what it finds. It's called trawling! I am always confronted with the same emails, ten or fifteen out of the 15,000 entered, that I have been served over and over for weeks! I see a lack of loyalty there when I risk ten years in prison and a million euros fine. I remind you that I have given my whole life to politics. » But Bénédicte de Perthuis intervenes: “ We are in parallel worlds. Madame Le Pen, this is not politics, repeating something over and over does not make it the truth… » The pleadings of the civil parties are expected next Tuesday, followed, the next day, by the prosecution's requisitions.