During her first speech at the trial of the RN parliamentary assistants, Marine Le Pen adopted a 100% political defense. A look back at his statements of October 2, before the resumption of the trial this Monday.
While the trial of the RN parliamentary assistants resumes this Monday, October 7, including the interrogation of former MEP Fernand Le Rachinel, Marine Le Penpresident of the RN until 2021, as well as 9 people elected to the European Parliament, 12 parliamentary assistants and 4 party collaborators are still on trial by the Paris criminal court for embezzlement of public funds and complicity in embezzlement of public funds. They are accused of having, between 2004 and 2016, used funds allocated by the European Parliament to MEPs from the far-right party to finance the operation of the RN. The damage is estimated at nearly 7 million euros. On Wednesday October 2, Marine Le Pen made her first statement to “give some context”.
The day before, Marine Le Pen revealed her defense strategy in front of several journalists during a session suspension: “The challenge is to explain how a MEP works. The magistrates do not understand the entire political functioning. A certain number of arguments were not raised during the MoDem trial and we are going to do it here,” she warned. If the former parliamentary assistants of the MoDem had defended themselves at the time by claiming to have worked for their European deputies, the position of the RN will be radically different. The boss of RN deputies in the National Assembly invokes the freedom to employ assistants for political activities: “It’s parliamentary freedom. A parliamentary assistant has a political role,” she says.
“The leadership of the European Parliament is not neutral”
On Wednesday October 2, Marine Le Pen remained faithful to the line announced at the opening of the trial. A position to which a touch of provocation was added when speaking on the stand. In addition to the prosecution for “complicity and concealment of embezzlement of public funds”, the National Rally is also required to explain the period of prevention, in other words: that during which the facts occurred. However, this period could be extended. Enough to annoy Marine Le Pen quite a bit: “Today we are being told that it will perhaps be five years before or five years after!”, she is surprised. There are “a lot of preconceived ideas which have been created by the civil party (the European Parliament)”, she accuses, “we have tried to put us into a tunnel from which we cannot come out”.
This is also the moment chosen by the MP to begin a rather provocative argument in an attempt to defend herself, highlighting the generosity, according to her, of the administration and possible political inclinations against the National Rally: “The leadership of the European Parliament is not neutral, it is political (…) It would be unfortunate not to admit that we are the bugbear of the European Parliament,” she declares. She also insinuates that deputies (those of the RN), who are opposed to “this construction”, namely that of the European Parliament, “it’s something that is disturbing”. Who ? What ? The main interested party did not give further details. She also singles out the European Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, which would have “driven its ideas to Parliament, which pushed them into the judicial investigation”, she estimated during the hearing.
“We are assisted by assistants who play politics”
This defense strategy oscillating between the image of the martyr and the challenge of institutions, as if the National Rally were attracting the wrath of an administration voluntarily putting spokes in its wheels, may however appear relatively risky for Marine Le Pen. For her, it is not a question of categorically contesting the accusation, but of relying on a political defense. “What are parliamentary assistants for? To play politics. To be more numerous next time. The political activity of the MP is inseparable from his mandate,” she says.
However, the legislation is clear: at European level, a parliamentary assistant is required to work directly for his or her MP. “It must always be about assistance to the MP in the exercise of his mandate”, specified the Director General of Finance of the European Parliament, Didier Klethi. Precisely, several elements allowing to confirm the initial instruction given by the party leadership concerning the recruitment of parliamentary assistants and for what purposes were obtained, in particular meeting minutes or even the declarations of several former MEPs. As a reminder, according to the accusations, during a meeting on June 4, 2014, an order was given to each of the 24 RN MEPs to recruit a parliamentary assistant responsible for supporting him and to leave all other parliamentary assistants who could be recruited to disposition of the party. The said instruction is reported by Nicolas Franchinard, a former parliamentary assistant to three former elected officials of the RN who testified to Médiapartand is mentioned by elected officials.
This is for example the case of Aymeric Chauprade who testified to Médiapart and Complément d’investigation in 2017 before retracting and questioning his statements.Warnings from certain MEPs against the illegal nature of this organization, comparable to a system of fictitious jobs, were sent to Marine Le Pen’s office and the treasurer according to emails consulted by Médiapart. Which seemed, according to these same emails, aware of the fraudulent aspect of the system. Marine Le Pen will try to defend herself on this subject during the hearing on October 14.
Evidence which does not prevent Marine Le Pen from maintaining a certain touch of humor at the helm: “We are not civil servants. We are elected by the people and we are assisted by assistants who are involved in politics”, she declared during the hearing on October 2. A strategy, risky, certainly, but which remains fully supported by the member for Pas-de-Calais.