Main Edition
US
FR
October 1, 2024 - 1:00pm
Few things in politics are certain. Yet for populist leaders, facing criminal charges seems to be one such certainty. On Monday, Marine Le Pen became the latest in a long line of Right-wing leaders to appear in court, and despite the soaring popularity of her National Rally party, a guilty verdict could quash her hopes of winning the French presidency in 2027.
Le Pen is accused of orchestrating the misuse of EU funds by the National Rally’s European Parliament group for party-political purposes from 2004 to 2016. Other defendants include her father, former party leader Jean-Marie Le Pen; those convicted could face hefty fines and up to 10 years in jail. Arriving at court, Le Pen promised “extremely serious and extremely solid arguments” to prove that “we have not violated any political or regulatory rules of the European Parliament”.
The possibility of Le Pen being barred from running for public office for five years echoes the legal threat faced by other populist firebrands in recent months. In the US, Donald Trump has been the target of significant lawfare; Italy’s Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini faces a potential ban from public office for blocking a migrant boat; Donald Tusk’s centrist government in Poland has tried to prosecute various members of the previous Right-wing regime; and German AfD leader Björn Höcke has been convicted for his use of Nazi slogans.
As in other legal dramas featuring populist leaders, though, the case against Le Pen appears difficult to prove. It revolves around allegedly party-political work done by EU parliamentary assistants whose job is, Le Pen argued in her defence, “political by definition”. Yet France’s pro-EU Democratic Movement (MoDem) party was found guilty of similar offences earlier this year; according to the lawyer who represented MoDem, it is “difficult to draw a line between work done for the MEP and work done for the party”. Moreover, the lawyer described how “compared to the case involving MoDem, which is very pro-Europe, the atmosphere of the RN one will be different since they are Eurosceptics.”
Unsurprisingly, the MoDem case did not generate anything like the publicity or media speculation raised by the Le Pen trial. Yet in previous trials of populists — notably that of former Czech prime minister and opposition leader Andrej Babiš, who was acquitted of EU fraud earlier this year and is now flying high in the polls — an apparent assumption of guilt among mainstream media severely backfired following a “not guilty” verdict. Le Pen herself is unlikely to face a serious dip in popularity as a result of the trial. With the story of “persecution” already being told by National Rally such a potent populist message, it’s understandable that Le Pen plans “to be in court on as many days as possible”.
For politicians such as Le Pen, Babiš, Trump or Salvini, being in the dock burnishes an anti-establishment image. All that would change, though, if Le Pen is found guilty and barred from public office. Such a political earthquake would shake the entire EU. The next two months, then, will be a vital test of the ability of a progressive establishment to fairly judge populist politicians.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeVoters can see through this lawfare garbage. Guilty or not guilty verdict will make RN more popular than ever. Interesting how the response to populists is so similar across the west – demonize them, attack them in the regime media, accuse them of being threats to democracy, weaponize the law to neuter them. Populists aren’t going away.
I find it entirely plausible Le Pen is guilty. But also implausible that a huge percentage of pro EU/establishment politicians are not guilty of the same offences.
Therefore it is lawfare, unreasonable and further proof of the need to destroy the EU political structure.
So the alleged offences occured between 2004 and 2016. And this is only being looked at now, 20 years after this supposedly happened ? If this is serious, why has it taken so long to prosecute ?
Still, there’s got to be a good statistical chance she’s guilty given the record of top French politicians. After all, Chirac, Sarkozy, Christine Lagarde, Edouard Balladur to name just a few were all found guilty. Though curiously never actually punished.
I’m sure there are parts of the French legal system that do work. But its record at the top end doesn’t give you much confidence.
It’s almost as if it’s politically motivated, coming as it does only after she becomes a genuine threat politically.
A bit like those allegations about Trump in a department store that resurfaced 20 years after the alleged incident, just as he was challenging once more for office.
Most mysterious.
It is not at all clear to me that a conviction would have the career ending consequence the writer suggested. In the USA, at least, no one really believes that the charges against Trump had anything to do with the law but everything to do with politics. These law suits are acts of political desperation.
The previous right- wing government of Poland was not a regime – it’s the propaganda the EU and Tusk spread, along with the likes of Ms. Holland.
I agree with you re EU.
But PiS government was not right wing.
It was socially conservative but quite to the left on support for families etc.
I guess similar to LePen but obviously not supportive of Putin.
Looks like the French version of the lawfare against Donald Trump.
What I am seeing, unfortunately, is the decline of our civilization. We conquered, succeeded, and now we’re failing, with immigrants following us like ducklings. We capitalized, found success, but others surpassed us by opening up new ways of thinking, outpacing our own intelligence. Now we’re engaged in “lawfare” against ourselves, no longer targeting those pesky minorities or women. Do you see the pattern?
Now, we’re using the law as our last weapon against each other, while our enemies watch and wait for us to collapse from within. I just watched Julian Assange’s first interview or public appearance, and it was clear how broken he felt, realizing the law was never meant to be “just” but was always about keeping the public in check. One must ask, who are we protecting? or what are we protecting since it is obvious the law itself is a weapon? It is very difficult question to ask oneself.
Voting them in when you can, is the best revenge. It was what made me a Reform voter.
Me too.
Me too.
Lock up your political opponents.
When Russia or Venezuela or China do it it’s autocracy, but when we do it it’s defending democracy!!!!