For Marine Le Pen, the trial of the assistants was ultimately trying, from “serenity” to requisitions

POLITICS – The last kilometers of the marathon. The trial of Marine Le Pen and the 24 other defendants tried since September 30 in the case of assistants to MEPs from the National Front (now RN) is entering its last week. The defense has the floor until the end of the hearing scheduled for Wednesday, November 27.

The prosecutors requested ineligibility sentences against all the defendants and asked that they be accompanied by provisional execution – that is to say that it applies immediately even in the event of 'call. Which could seriously hamper Marine Le Pen's ambitions for the 2027 presidential election.

To defend the leader of the far-right party, her lawyers should take up the arguments raised from stage to stage by the Lepenists who denounce a procedure ” policy “ to put their candidate out of the game. Pleadings which will contrast with the optimism displayed by the first accused, at the start of the hearing. What happened during these seven weeks?

Le Pen’s “serenity” at the start of the trial

Return at the beginning of October. The three-time candidate for the presidential election speaks willingly, smiling, in front of the cameras at the Paris court to say her “ serenity » in the face of the reproaches made to him. At the heart of this complex affair, possible embezzlement of European funds between 2004 and 2016 for more than 4 million euros, according to Parliament. Paid by the EU, many assistants would in reality have worked solely or partly for the FN, allowing substantial salary savings for the party.

« I approach this trial with great serenity. We have a lot of arguments to develop to defend what appears to me to be the parliamentary freedom which is at issue in this affair.she explains in particular to the journalists present on site, certain of not having “violated no political rule and no regulatory rule in any way of the European Parliament. »

Also at the helm, the president of the RN group in the Assembly puts on a very political defense, insisting on her differences of views with Brussels concerning the role of parliamentary assistants. “Managing a political party is complicated, I hope to convey that to you during these two months”she says in particular for her first hours at the helm, before multiplying long demonstrations to “explain how a political movement works”addressing the court or the civil party.

No “questioning”, notes the prosecutor

The exchanges become tense hour after hour. On October 16, when Marine Le Pen had been at the helm for three days, questioned for each suspicious contract she had concluded, she became annoyed: “ Sorry, but there is a legal problem! There's zero evidence, zero evidence. » A form of combativeness which has difficulty hiding the vagueness of its answers to many precise questions.

Concrete example with the case of Guillaume L'Hullier, an assistant paid according to the accusation on the European envelope of Marine Le Pen, while he was in reality chief of staff of her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen. Asked about the fact that he was practicing “Showall”son « domicile » at the time, the leader of the RN replied, outraged: “Where do I put my parliamentary assistants? In the garden, in a hut? » All this, forgetting to specify that Montretout was above all his father's residence, where the offices of his collaborators were located.

An invariable defense, without expression of regret, which was able to justify the heaviness of the prosecution's indictment: speaking on November 13, the prosecutor thus justified his decisions by evoking the risk of recidivism on the part of ” of a party already condemned “, Who “ only renounced this system in the face of a complaint from the European Parliament ”, and who “ does not question itself. »

A forgotten law?

Even harsher for the head of the RN deputies: here she is caught with these requisitions by a law almost ten years old. Serene, Marine Le Pen gave the impression of being able to escape in the extremes to a measure adopted under François Hollande, which makes ineligibility sentences automatic in the event of conviction for embezzlement. This is not the case.

The former head of the RN is effectively tried as president of the party at the time, for embezzlement of public funds from January 16, 2011 to December 31, 2016. However, the text in question, nicknamed “Sapin 2 law” entered in force on December 11, 2016. Twenty days later, the member for Pas-de-Calais is therefore concerned. And cannot hide behind the non-retroactivity of the law.

The only glimmer of hope for her: that the court ultimately decides, “ by a specially motivated decision”not to sentence her to a penalty of ineligibility or that he does not pronounce a provisional execution. In this case, the political future of the three-time presidential candidate, darkened since the requisitions, could become clearer for a time. The judgment is expected in spring 2025, with an inevitable hard blow. It remains to be seen how much.

Also see on HuffPost: