Can we still trust justice? And if not, since political leaders also escape the goodwill of their fellow citizens, which branch can we cling to so that our society finds the means to remain coherent? The trial of Marine Le Pen is only at the stage of requisitions and already the ideological reading is sweeping away everything in its path, provoking an avalanche of bad faith among both her supporters and her adversaries.
It is impossible to blame the prosecution for claiming ineligibility since it is the legislator, now quick through weakness to follow opinion in the slightest of its deviations, who wanted it that way; it is legitimate to question the “provisional execution” of a sentence, against which there is no possible appeal on the criminal level (only on the civil level, and the question has never arisen for an elected official).
The ideological reading to the detriment of the reality of the facts: in Crépol, a year after the murder of Thomas, the time is still for the investigation, not for justice. But a comparable mechanism has already been put in place, which leads to wanting to impose one’s truth according to the battles one is waging, whatever the investigations undertaken by the gendarmes for the two investigating judges. We are not legally wrong because we are in the political minority, any more than we are legally right because we are in the political majority. It was one of the masters of L’Express, Raymond Aron, who said it: “Objectivity does not mean impartiality but universality.”