OPINION: Le Pen is adopting the ‘Donald Trump defence’ at her embezzlement trial

Marine Le Pen was briefly a lawyer before she entered the family business and became a politician, writes John Lichfield. At her trial in Paris for stealing up to €7 million of public money, she is said by colleagues to have reverted enthusiastically to her old career.

Much of Marine Le Pen’s line of defence is not aimed at the court. It is aimed at public opinion. She is not defending herself so much as attacking the European Union and its alleged political and legal accomplices in France. They are, she says, trying to destroy her because her far-right, anti-European party is their principal “bête noire”.
Like Donald Trump in his various trials, Marine Le Pen has also attacked the court outside the court-room. Last weekend, she accused the lead judge, the President of the Eleventh Chamber of the Tribunal Correctionnel de Paris, Bénédicte de Perthuis, of “showing signs of being biased”.
That comment was aimed at public opinion but also at the court. Suggesting that the judges are biased may seem to be a poor way of getting them on your side. That is not the point.
Le Pen does not expect to be acquitted. She knows that she is likely to be given a suspended jail sentence. She knows that her supporters won’t care.
She knows that she and her party will be ordered to pay millions of euros in fines and damages. She cares about that but the bankruptcy of the party is no longer a threat. The RN’s success in the June-July parliamentary election has made it flush with public money.
Advertisement
What she does care about – desperately – is the third part of the court’s possible sentence in the New Year. The court has the power to ban Marine Le Pen from holding public office for up to a decade.
The Rassemblement National is already planning a series of appeals which could last for years. That would delay fines or suspended sentences imposed on Le Pen but it would not necessarily delay a ban from public office. Such a ban could, at the court’s discretion, apply during an appeal.
In other words, it is possible that Marine Le Pen will be barred from running for President of the Republic for the fourth time in 2027 – when the polls suggest that she would have a chance of winning. She might also have to resign her parliamentary seat in the north of France and lose her position as president of the RN parliamentary party.
What terrible news that would be for her loyal and faithful, and ambitious, de facto deputy and nominal party President, Jordan Bardella.
The whole of Le Pen’s court strategy is, it seems to me, focused on this part of her possible sentence. She is accusing the prosecution of being political and accusing the court of being biased in the hope that the judges will not dare to end her political career.
Advertisement
It is a risky strategy. French judges are not under anyone’s political control. They may be tempted to prove their independence of all political considerations, including her unsubtle allegations, by banning her.
Any suggestion that this is a political trial is nonsense. Officials of the very pro-European Mouvement Democate (MoDem), part of President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist alliance, were convicted a year ago on identical charges of employing fictitious European Parliament assistants.
The party’s leader, François Bayrou, was acquitted on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence that he knew what his party was doing. In Marine Le Pen’s case, the prosecution has presented written evidence that she DID know.
The trial still has six weeks to go. Much may yet happen. But it is likely that the judges in the trial of Marine Le Pen will face in January the most explosive decision faced by any French court in recent times.
Ending the political career of a presidential front-runner is a big, big step. Would it be more “political” for the judges to ban Le Pen or to spare her?
It is likely that Marine Le Pen will lose her case. It is also possible that she will win on the issue that she most cares about. Sorry about that, Jordan.

#John Lichfield
#Opinion
#Politics
#Marine Le Pen
#Crime

Comments

Join the conversation in our comments section below. Share your own views and experience and if you have a question or suggestion for our journalists then email us at [email protected].
Please keep comments civil, constructive and on topic – and make sure to read our terms of use before getting involved.

Please log in here to leave a comment.

See Also

And yet her line of defence has little to do with the law. It is entirely political – a variant of the Donald J. Trump Defence.
To summarise her testimony to the court this week: “They are out to get me. This is all about the system, the deep state, trying to destroy me, as the champion of ordinary people. I did nothing wrong.”
“If I did, it was because the rules were always changing. In any case, everyone was doing it. Why pick on me?”
Le Pen is accused of conspiring to embezzle millions of euros of European tax-payers’ money between 2006 and 2016. Like her father before her, she allegedly saw the European Parliament’s generous allowance for members’ staff as the way to keep their ramshackle and loss-making party from going bankrupt.
They – and a score of other Rassemblement National (ex Front National) officials – are accused of claiming EU money to pay European Parliament “assistants” who never or rarely went to Brussels or Strasbourg. They included Marine Le Pen’s chief of staff in Paris and Jean-Marie Le Pen’s bodyguard.
According to the European parliament’s security pass records, Catherine Griset, Le Pen’s friend and chief of staff, “beeped” her presence for a total of 12 hours in the ten months between October 2014 and August 2015.
The trial lasts until November 27th. Judgement is not expected until January.
Even if she is found guilty, Le Pen’s supporters point out, there is no suggestion that she took public money for personal gain. This is true. And yet the rise of the Le Pens’ political party in the last half century has coincided with a substantial rise in their wealth. Propping up the family business was arguably about more than politics.
Much of Marine Le Pen’s line of defence is not aimed at the court. It is aimed at public opinion. She is not defending herself so much as attacking the European Union and its alleged political and legal accomplices in France. They are, she says, trying to destroy her because her far-right, anti-European party is their principal “bête noire”.
Like Donald Trump in his various trials, Marine Le Pen has also attacked the court outside the court-room. Last weekend, she accused the lead judge, the President of the Eleventh Chamber of the Tribunal Correctionnel de Paris, Bénédicte de Perthuis, of “showing signs of being biased”.
That comment was aimed at public opinion but also at the court. Suggesting that the judges are biased may seem to be a poor way of getting them on your side. That is not the point.
Le Pen does not expect to be acquitted. She knows that she is likely to be given a suspended jail sentence. She knows that her supporters won’t care.
She knows that she and her party will be ordered to pay millions of euros in fines and damages. She cares about that but the bankruptcy of the party is no longer a threat. The RN’s success in the June-July parliamentary election has made it flush with public money.
What she does care about – desperately – is the third part of the court’s possible sentence in the New Year. The court has the power to ban Marine Le Pen from holding public office for up to a decade.
The Rassemblement National is already planning a series of appeals which could last for years. That would delay fines or suspended sentences imposed on Le Pen but it would not necessarily delay a ban from public office. Such a ban could, at the court’s discretion, apply during an appeal.
In other words, it is possible that Marine Le Pen will be barred from running for President of the Republic for the fourth time in 2027 – when the polls suggest that she would have a chance of winning. She might also have to resign her parliamentary seat in the north of France and lose her position as president of the RN parliamentary party.
What terrible news that would be for her loyal and faithful, and ambitious, de facto deputy and nominal party President, Jordan Bardella.
The whole of Le Pen’s court strategy is, it seems to me, focused on this part of her possible sentence. She is accusing the prosecution of being political and accusing the court of being biased in the hope that the judges will not dare to end her political career.
It is a risky strategy. French judges are not under anyone’s political control. They may be tempted to prove their independence of all political considerations, including her unsubtle allegations, by banning her.
Any suggestion that this is a political trial is nonsense. Officials of the very pro-European Mouvement Democate (MoDem), part of President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist alliance, were convicted a year ago on identical charges of employing fictitious European Parliament assistants.
The party’s leader, François Bayrou, was acquitted on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence that he knew what his party was doing. In Marine Le Pen’s case, the prosecution has presented written evidence that she DID know.
The trial still has six weeks to go. Much may yet happen. But it is likely that the judges in the trial of Marine Le Pen will face in January the most explosive decision faced by any French court in recent times.
Ending the political career of a presidential front-runner is a big, big step. Would it be more “political” for the judges to ban Le Pen or to spare her?
It is likely that Marine Le Pen will lose her case. It is also possible that she will win on the issue that she most cares about. Sorry about that, Jordan.

Trending now