Trop de fric à droite, dans les deux sens

Au moment même où l’un croit qu’il sauve sa tête, l’autre apprend qu’il risque de la perdre. Nicolas Sarkozy est renvoyé en procès, avec 13 autres individus, pour avoir trop dépensé dans le cadre de l’ancienne présidentielle. Plus précisément, on lui reproche d’avoir dépassé la limite légale de 22,5 millions d’euros. D’un côté, il y avait la possibilité que l’on gagnait trop de fric ; de l’autre, il était question des sommes que l’on dépensait. Et, dans les deux situations, un certain adjectif réapparaissait constamment : “fictif”.

To put it bluntly, this man has a screw loose

Click here to see Nicolas Sarkozy raving on about his "passion de la France". I'm convinced that French people—who aren't idiots—are going to wake up massively to the insane egocentric behavior of the ex-president. Let me remind readers that this man is currently faced with a possible trial for the illegal financing of his last electoral campaign. In my native Australia, we used to have nice expressions (rarely understandable) for such a fellow (rarely for a famous polly):

• "He's all over the road like a mad woman's shit."

• "He's as mad as a cut snake."

It's fascinating to study Sarko's facial movements. They offer such a pile of explicit psychiatric indications that a simple untrained observer like me can detect the presence of clues to the man's mind.

Pebble in Sarkozy’s shoe

That’s the metaphor invented by Le Monde to designate the suggestion that Sarkozy should be brought to trial.

The magistrates handling the Sarkozy case are not obliged to respect any kind of time delay before deciding whether to bring him to trial, or whether to establish what is termed an “ordonnance de non-lieu” : a ruling that simply states the absence of grounds for pursuing the affair. With respect to the presidential primaries to be held in November, this decision could be announced either before or after that time.

The journalist of Le Monde used the verb “pollute” to designate the possible effects of the Sarkozy affair upon those primaries.

If Sarko is tried, how might it end?

The poor man (?) has just been told that he'll normally face a court trial. So, let's give him time to get himself organized for that ordeal. And above all, in the excellent time-honored French tradition, let us assume totally (I stress that adverb, seriously: totally) that Nicolas Sarkozy is indeed, for the moment, innocent. In other words, let us suppose that the man has been accused wrongly, unjustly... and that he will surely find ways of demonstrating, beyond any doubts whatsoever, that it was an error for people to drag him into a court of law. If events were to turn out in that way, then the case against Nicolas Sarkozy would be dropped, as it were. If I correctly understand French legal jargon (which is not necessarily the case), we would avoid saying that he was acquitted or shown to be innocent, because both those expressions might leave vague doubts suspended in the air above Sarkozy's head. The politically correct way of expressing such an outcome would consist of saying that it was decided by the parquet to abandon all pursuits against the man brought to trial.

If I make blunders in my understanding of French legal terminology, it would be nice if an educated reader were to put me on the right path.

Learning the facts of Sarkozy's future trial

I'm making an effort to master the facts of Nicolas Sarkozy's future trial... which could possibly take place next year. It seems to me that the very idea of trying a former president is enormous, which means that we should look gravely upon this future trial. It will be a most exceptional event. Besides, Sarkozy has been hoping to become the president of France for a second time. Instead of awaiting the results of a presidential election, he'll be awaiting the verdict of a court of law.

Sarkozy's lawyer is 60-year-old Thierry Herzog, who is a personal friend of the former president.

Already, this afternoon, Herzog has surprised observers by making erroneous statements. Up until now, Sarkozy has been subjected to a single legal operation, designated as an examination (mise en examen), which took place last February. The motive for his being examined was the illegal financing of an electoral campaign, and five facts were retained against Sarkozy. The examination was carried out by a body known as the parquet of Paris. The examination came to an end on August 30. The original motive and facts might have been totally replaced by new entities, but this was not entirely the case. In deciding that Sarkozy should be brought to trial, the parquet retained the same motive: namely the illegal financing of an electoral campaign. On the other hand, the parquet abandoned the first two facts, and only retained the last three :

1. Sarkozy had exceeded the ceiling of electoral expenses.
   
2. He had failed to respect the rules for establishing his campaign's accounting.
   
3. He had inserted, in the accounting, some elements that were deliberately understated.
   

Now, Herzog suggested today that the parquet, in moving from the examination to the present réquisitoire, had committed legal errors. Clearly, this is untrue, because no new elements whatsoever have been inserted. We have seen, above all, that the motive for sending Sarkozy to trial is strictly identical to the motive for examining him. So, it appears that Herzog was trying to pull the wool over our eyes when he suggested the existence of legal irregularities.

Copé reacts to an announced trial for Sarko

"This new element confirms my innocence in that affair,

wrongly designated as the Bygmalion Affair.

That affair concerns solely the campaign accounting of Nicolas Sarkozy."

What exactly did Jean-François Copé have in mind when he spoke of "this new element" ? I see no new elements thrown recently into what we designate, rightly or wrongly, as the Bygmalion affair. We simply learnt that the parquet has decided that Nicolas Sarkozy, deemed for the moment to be innocent, must face a court trial. And the motive for Sarkozy's being brought to face this future trial was the illegal financing of an electoral campaign. In other words, the trial is expected to determine whether or not Sarkozy did in fact finance illegally his electoral campaign. Now, that is not exactly what might be called a "new element" in this affair. It's merely the normal down-to-earth unfolding of ordinary French processes of law.