France Awaits the Verdict of Marine Le Pen’s Embezzlement Trial
Marine Le Pen, a three-time French presidential candidate, attends her trial in Paris on September 30, 2024 (Reuters).
By Sabrina Warner ‘28
Since the resignation of French Prime Minister Michel Bernier on December 5, 2024 following a vote of no confidence, questions have swirled around the future of French leadership. Far-right politicians have also called for the replacement of President Emmanuel Macron, who has vowed to remain in office. The government collapse and Macron’s dismal approval ratings reveal a lack of French support for the centrists, a situation that three-time presidential candidate Marine Le Pen would normally take advantage of. However, uncertainties surround her own political future as the verdict of her embezzlement trial, set to be announced March 31, 2025, could disqualify her from holding office.
Starting on September 30 and concluding on November 27, the trial centered on charges against Le Pen and 26 other far-right National Rally (RN) members of embezzling European Parliament funds. According to the EU, these actions totaled nearly 6.8 million euros in damages between 2009 and 2017. Prosecutors requested a €300,000 fine, a five year prison sentence, and a five year ban on running for office for Le Pen. This ban would become effective immediately after a guilty conviction—even during an appeal—and would jeopardize her candidacy for the 2027 presidential election.
The EU Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) first conducted investigations in 2014 and 2015 after then-president of the European Parliament, German Social Democrat Martin Schultz, reported a possible embezzlement of funds. The case then moved under French jurisdiction in 2017, when Paris prosecutors pressed preliminary breaches of trust against Le Pen and ordered her to stand trial for using EU funds to pay National Rally party members.
In the first round of investigations, OLAF concluded that at least two cases could constitute fraud. Investigators discovered that Le Pen hired her father’s bodyguard and her former sister in law, Catherine Griset, as parliamentary assistants. The bodyguard received two separate three month contracts in 2009 and 2011. The first occurred while he still worked for Jean-Marie Le Pen, Marine’s father, in France, calling into question his ability to fulfill parliamentary duties. In the second case, he received €7,237 per month after taxes, nearly €5,000 above the average French salary and considerably greater than what most European parliamentary assistants earn. Griset received a total of almost €300,000 in salaries and expenses from 2011-2015 despite having appeared only 12 hours in the Brussels parliament from September 2014 to August 2015.
However, Le Pen switched from employing family connections to hiring RN members more broadly, likely after an email from party treasurer Wallerand de Saint-Just in 2014. He wrote in June that “In the years to come…we will get by only if we accumulate savings thanks to the European Parliament and get additional transfers.” For years, the National Rally faced financial difficulties and struggled to maintain party operations. In 2014, the party held over 9.4 million euros in debt and was close to bankruptcy. They lacked funds largely due to their failure to win seats in the French parliament, as French parties receive most of their funding through government subsidies based on proportional popularity. The EU assistant fund may have appeared as an easy solution to funding problems.
Prosecutors in the recent trial unearthed text messages that suggest the assistants served as funding sources rather than true aids. Four months into his position as a parliamentary assistant in 2015, current French deputy Julien Odoul texted, “Marine, would it be possible for me to come to Strasbourg to meet the MEP to whom I am attached?” and requested to be taught “how a session at the European Parliament works.” Other assistants could not describe their day to day work and had few to no recorded texts, emails, or phone calls with their MEPs. Even MEPs shared their concerns, with one noting that “what Marine is asking of us is equivalent to fictitious jobs, we’re going to get fired.”
In response to these accusations, Le Pen has maintained that EU funds were used legitimately. She asserted that the EU gives broad authority to MEPs over their assistants and has no role in determining how they should be employed. She insisted that as aids to MEPs, assistants can meet with voters, attend party events, define strategy with other party officials, and promote their views on a national level to benefit their party, not just the European Parliament. Le Pen has also adopted some of Donald Trump’s rhetoric, reframing the case as a “political trial” with the intent to sabotage the party and “deprive the French people of the ability to vote for whom they wish.”
However, the judge appears unconvinced, and fears have grown within the National Rally camp that Le Pen will be barred from running in 2027. In the event of a ban, the leader of the RN, Jordan Bardella, will likely replace her as the presidential nominee. However, the trial seems to have had minimal impact on voter preferences. As of September 12, Le Pen led the polls for the 2027 presidential election with 35% support, with the next candidate, Edouard Philippe, falling behind at 27%. She has gained even more ground as of December 11, but in the event of her ineligibility, public support for Bardella as president decreases to only an 8% advantage over the next candidate. Overall, the French hold their breath as the future of their government remains unclear.