Marine Le Pen and eight MEPs found guilty of embezzlement of public funds – L’Express

Marine Le Pen and eight MEPs found guilty of embezzlement

Ineligible right away, or not? The Paris court said on Monday, March 31, guilty of public funds on Monday, March 31, the nine MEPs of the RN, including Marine Le Pen, prosecuted in the case of European parliamentary assistants. The twelve assistants tried by their side were also declared guilty of concealment. The court estimated that the total damage was 2.9 million euros, by “taking charge by the European Parliament of people who actually worked for the” far -right party “.

Read also: Ineligibility of Marine Le Pen: “entrusting this responsibility to the judge is a mixture of dangerous genres”

President Bénédicte de Perthuis began reading her judgment around 10:20 am – Reading should last at least two hours. “It’s going to be a little long,” warned the president to start. “There is no will of the court to maintain a suspense but it will do as usual, by giving a certain number of explanations on the decision taken,” she continued. “We understood that the stake exceeded this single courtroom but the court will proceed as usual,” she added.

The penalty of ineligibility is expected because it is compulsory for the embezzlement of public funds (the offense accused of Marine Le Pen), but the provisional execution is much less.

A “system” within the RN

In front of Marine Le Pen, sitting in blue jacket at the forefront, in particular alongside the vice-president of the Louis Aliot party, the court quickly announced that the nine MEPs pursued were guilty of embezzlement of public funds, and the twelve assistants guilty of concealment.

Read also: Faced with the threat of ineligibility, Marine Le Pen’s strategy to make a diversion

They signed “fictitious contracts” and there was the existence of a “system” within the party, said the president of the court. “It was established that all these people actually worked for the party, that their deputy had not entrusted them with no task”, that they “went from a deputy to the other,” she detailed. “It was not a question of pooling the work of the assistants but rather of pooling the envelopes of the deputies,” she continued. “Whether things are clear: no one is tried to have done politics, it is not the subject. The question was whether the contracts received an execution or not,” said the magistrate.

lep-general-02