top of page
Search

The hypocrisy behind Le Pen’s disqualification – by James Tidmarsh for the Spectator – 01.04.25

James Tidmarsh is an international lawyer based in Paris. His law firm specialises in complex international commercial litigation and arbitration.


Every single political group, every single national delegation, has violated the same rule that Ms. Le Pen did – the employment of staff to work on non-EP related affairs.’ That was the reaction of Connor Allen, a former Parliamentary Assistant in the European Parliament, following Marine Le Pen’s disqualification from the French presidential race.


Allen is no fringe partisan. He’s worked for multiple MEPs across the aisle and was recently named in Politico’s ‘Power 40 – Brussels Class of 2023.’ His comment lifts the lid on something Brussels insiders have always known: that the rule Le Pen has been convicted under isn’t just bureaucratic – it’s universally ignored.


Let’s be clear: this isn’t a corruption scandal in the traditional sense. Le Pen hasn’t been accused of enriching herself. The court found that some €474,000 (around £400,000) in EU funds paid to parliamentary assistants had been used for party-related activity in France. Not a penny was taken for personal use. The funds were used by the party – as they are, apparently routinely, by many other political groups in the European Parliament. And yet, Le Pen has been found guilty of ‘détournement d’argent public’ – misappropriation of public funds – and declared ineligible to run for office.


The rule she has been convicted under is not just obscure. It is deliberately, institutionally hypocritical. Assistants in the European Parliament are formally considered employees of the institution, not of the MEP they serve. They are, in theory, barred from working on national party matters, campaigns, or press work not directly tied to the Parliament. But in practice, this restriction appears to be a joke. Everyone does it. Parliamentary assistants across political groups help with national party communications, media briefings, campaign coordination and speechwriting. It’s how politics functions in Brussels.


What makes Le Pen’s conviction so egregious is not that the rule was broken – it’s that it only seems to be enforced when politically useful. No one seriously believes that MEPs are running pristine operations in which their assistants never lift a finger for the party. If this rule were applied rigorously and evenly, presumably half the parliament would be on trial. But only one candidate – the leading contender in the French presidential race – has been dragged into court, convicted, and barred from standing.

 

The Anglo-American model couldn’t be more different. In Britain or the United States, it is perfectly normal – even expected – for political aides to assist their elected official with political work. That includes speechwriting, party liaison, communications, strategy, and re-election planning. As long as public funds aren’t used for personal gain, no one blinks. The idea that employing an aide to help with political messaging could constitute a criminal offence would be laughable. In Brussels, it’s now grounds for political annihilation – provided you’re the right target.


Le Pen’s real offence isn’t legal – it’s political. She is being punished not because she did something no one else has done, but because she’s currently in the lead in the polls to win the French presidential election. This is lawfare – the deployment of selective rules and administrative norms to achieve what opponents cannot at the ballot box.


Democracy in France, and in Europe, should be deeply alarmed. When vague institutional codes are weaponised to remove leading candidates from the race, the legitimacy crisis doesn’t belong to the candidate. It belongs to the system.



For this article in pdf, please click here:



Marine le Pen

Comments

bottom of page