Thread by @pegobry_en

So Marine Le Pen is sentenced to
- "Ineligbility" (unable to run for elected office) for 5 years with "provisory execution" (meaning the sentence must be served even during appeal--inexplicable, the judge only said "it appears necessary" to impose provisory execution)
- 100 000 euro fine
- 4 years imprisonment, with the first two years to be served under house arrest and the remainder suspended

Just pure banana republic stuff.

Why 2 years of house arrest? Is there a risk she might steal a car? The only plausible explanation is that it is to prevent her campaigning for whoever is the RN's candidate in the next elections.

To be clear, Marine Le Pen is not even accused of personally profiting from anything. The charge is that some of her aides in the European Parliament also worked for the party and not just on parliamentary work. This was a common practice for a long time and several other parties stand accused of doing the same, including Modem (a centrist party whose leader is currently prime minister of France) and LFI (biggest far-left party). The "embezzlement" charge is the idea that if parliamentary aides do non-parliamentary work their salary is being "embezzled"--everyone can make up their mind as to what this means.

They could have fined her for improper use of parliamentary funds. That would have been defensible. Ineligibility and house arrest are inexplicable except as pure politics.

Just to be clear, every day criminals who steal, rob, attack get suspended sentences from French judges.

Under French criminal law, judges can decide provisiory execution if there is a risk of repeat offense, which in this case is absurd. The judge said there was a risk of repeat offense, but did not explain why.

Marine Le Pen is set to be interviewed live tonight on France’s premier news program. Presumably this is when she will make any announcements concerning her party and her political future.

This is the judge who handed down the sentence

Watching the Le Pen interview
- Says it’s a political decision
- Will appeal
- "It should shock everyone who loves democracy and the rule of law"
- "Of course I am innocent and I want my innocence to be recognized"

- "I did not believe that judges would go this far into interfering in our democratic process"
- "Imagine that I am exonerated by an appeals court decision occurring after a Presidential election in which I was unable to run. What would happen to the President’s legitimacy?"

- "Jordan Bardella is a formidable asset for our movement. I hope we will not have to use this asset before it is time." In other words, she’s still running."

- "There are millions of French people who trust me. I want to tell them: I will still fight for you."

Asked if she would ask for a Presidential pardon: "Non. Non, non, non."

Noëlle Lenoire, former supreme court judge: "This decision has no legal basis. […] One day, judges will kill the Republic."

https://twitter.com/f_desouche/status/1906765348004638757

François Lenglet, centrist commentator: "Judges took into account the timing of the election to shoot down Marine Le Pen. They have a desire to oversee the life of the nation, while wrapping themselves in purity, basing their decisions in theory on the law, but in reality on opinions"

(Impressed by Lenglet here, didn’t think he had it in him. He is NOT a Le Pen fan, believe me.)

Outrage this morning as the text of the decision was sent to journalists before it was sent to Marine Le Pen’s lawyers, which is a very revealing violation of procedure.

Retired Socialist politician Julien Dray: "Let’s be honest, by this standard hundreds of French and European parliamentarians of every party would have been sentenced"

https://twitter.com/juliendray/status/1906964485136343377

Marine Tondelier, a famously not-very-bright Green politician, says the quiet part outloud: "It's normal for a judge to disagree with the RN. (...) It's democratic for them to not want the RN to get into power."

https://x.com/F_Desouche/status/1906980265249173920

Thinking back to Marine Le Pen's interview yesterday. She described the case as "an administrative disagreement" with the offices of the European Parliament. She stated that Members of the European Parliament have two kinds of staff, "parliamentary assistants" who must do parliamentary work and "local assistants" who can do all sorts of tasks. This is how it works in the French Parliament. Now to be clear I don't know if it's true and I don't think Ms Le Pen was correct there but it just highlights that the whole argument is about technicalities that don't justify prison sentences or multi-year inelibility sentences with provisory execution.

Also: I haven't read the text of the decision but I spoke to a lawyer who pointed out something to me. The charge against Ms Le Pen was "fictive employment", and under French law for something to count as "fictive employment" the said employees must be performing NO work while collecting a salary; nobody alleges that that's what happened; instead, they were doing different, non-parliamentary work, but they did work. This is why the judge said that Ms Le Pen engaged in "fictitious *contracts*" and, as best as I can tell, the concept of "ficticious contract" doesn't exist in French law and was invented by this judge.

Marine Le Pen is now speaking to her parliamentary group in the National Assembly: "Every single word of this decision is madness. I hope all lawyers will scrutinize the wording of this decision, which is madness; madness because the law has been twisted, madness because the judges don't hide that they want to affect the Presidential election. (...) But, who is the Sovereign, in our country? Is it the People, or is it trial judges? I seem to recall that it is the People." x.com/BFMTV/status/1…

"We will not submit. Peacefully, democratically, we will defend our rights--not only our rights, but the rights of our voters. And the first of those rights (...) is the right to vote freely. It is the first right in a democracy: to vote freely. If one is unable to vote freely, then one is no longer truly in a democracy. If it is political leaders or judges who decide who can run for office, and for whom the French people are allowed to vote, then we are no longer in a democracy. Therefore, we will fight." x.com/BFMTV/status/1…

"The system pulled out the nuclear bomb. And if the system used a weapon this powerful against us, evidently, it is because we are on the threshold of winning the elections. So we will not yield. Not only to defend ourselves, but to defend the French people, who have the right to vote for whoever they like, and to defend the Nation, because at this moment the Nation is teetering." x.com/BFMTV/status/1…

The PDF of the decision is out. It's 150 pages long, I'll read it if I have the time but I may not. In the meantime, observers have pointed out striking passages.

In one sentence the tribunal seems to say that the "embezzlement" is "particularly grave" because it was done "by a party that asserts its opposition to European institutions." This seems like an obviously political judgement.

The passage defending the "provisory execution" is particularly galling. It's also written in a very strange and circumlocutous style, which betrays the author's pained attempt to offer a legal justification for a decision already made on other grounds. The decision says in black and white that if Marine Le Pen, after having been found guilty of the charges, were to be elected President it would be an "irreparable offense against democratic public order".

Two points here.

The first is that this logic is nakedly anti-democratic. In a democracy it's up to the people to decide whether or not a legal sentence is disqualifying.

The second is that "public order" is a very longstanding notion in French law, with ample jurisprudence, and which is narrowly defined. There is no concept of "democratic public order." This is pure invention.

fdesouche.com/2025/04/01/aff…

The judges really do write in black and white that they think it would be bad if Marine Le Pen is a Presidential candidate and if Marine Le Pen were to be elected President. Just indefensible.

The more I think about it the more I am galled by this "democratic public order" thing. It's so transparent. Very thin veneer of legalese on a judgment which is just raw politics. Truly contemptible.

Today RN MP @SLRoyYonne (who happens to be my mother) spoke at the rostrum of the National Assembly in defense of democracy. Note the contemptuous sneer of the lady minister on the government benches.

"Be assured that neither I, nor any of our colleagues in the National Rally, will allow our freedoms to be robbed. I was originally scheduled to speak on a technical bill, but the recent news forces me to speak about my regret, and about my determination. I regret that judges have decided to rob four out of ten French people of their right to vote. (...) And I am determined that these French people, that all my compatriots, know that neither I, nor any of my colleagues of the National Rally, will ever give up. We will never stop defending them and protecting them from the ideologies that are rotting our country from the inside. We will fight to restore true democracy."

Maman, I am so incredibly proud to be your son. x.com/SLRoyYonne/sta…

Retired judge Hervé Lehman commentates the decision with great clarity and says basically everything I've said lol

"They had no obligation to decree provisory execution. (...) There is a deliberate and conscious choice."

"I don't see how there is a risk of repeat offense. Ms Le Pen (...) is no longer a Member of the European Parliament. (...) It's unserious to say there is a risk of repeat offense."

"The tribunal says 'If we don't decree provisory execution, Marine Le Pen can be a candidate, and could be elected, and it would be a breach of public order if someone who was sentenced by a trial judge were to be elected.' I think it's troubling. When Marine Le Pen says 'This is a decision that was taken specifically to prevent me from being elected President,' this is true. No one can deny this, it's written in black and white in the decision. The judges say: 'Marine Le Pen must not be elected President, because we are finding her guilty in this case.'"

x.com/Le_Figaro/stat…

In another interview, Mr Lehman points out the judges could have given her a *suspended* sentence of ineligibility. This would have still been a serious punishment but would not have prevented her from running.

In 24 hours:
- A petition in support of Marine Le Pen has received 300 000 signatures (in spite of the website crashing from visits)
- The National Rally has received 10 000 new members

https://x.com/Frontieresmedia/status/1907116488030364016

The RN have announced mass rallies all over France in support of democracy for this weekend.

Thinking about the time when police searched Marine Le Pen's home, she filmed them on her smartphone, a cop told her to hand over the phone, and she stuck it in her brassiere and dared him to take it.

https://x.com/vengefulzoomer/status/1907391590064136410