This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/29/world/europe/fillon-france-embezzlement-scandal.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
François Fillon, Ex-Presidential Hopeful in France, Is Convicted of Embezzlement François Fillon, Ex-Presidential Hopeful in France, Is Convicted of Embezzlement
(about 2 hours later)
PARIS — François Fillon, a former French former prime minister, was found guilty on Monday of embezzling public funds in a scandal involving a no-show job for his wife that crippled his front-runner status in the 2017 presidential race and led to a broader resentment of France’s political elite. PARIS — François Fillon, a former French prime minister, was found guilty on Monday of embezzling public funds and sentenced to prison time in a scandal involving a no-show job for his wife that crippled his front-runner status in the 2017 presidential race and led to a broader resentment of France’s political elite.
Mr. Fillon, 66, who was prime minister from 2007 to 2012, was accused of paying his wife hundreds of thousands of euros from the public payroll for little or no work as his aide, over different periods between 1998 and 2013, when he served as a representative in the lower house of the French Parliament. Mr. Fillon, 66, who was prime minister from 2007 to 2012, was accused mainly of paying his wife hundreds of thousands of euros from the public payroll for little or no work as his aide when he served as a representative in the lower house of the French Parliament.
Mr. Fillon’s wife, Penelope Fillon, 64, was found guilty of complicity in the embezzlement. No sentencing details were announced. The case against Mr. Fillon, who was widely seen as the favorite in the 2017 presidential race, threw the election into turmoil and opened a path to victory for President Emmanuel Macron, who at the time was a centrist outsider with little political experience.
Reports of Ms. Fillon’s no-show job first emerged in the satirical newspaper Le Canard Enchaîné in late January 2017, a few months before the first round of voting, and they were swiftly followed by an official investigation. The accusations were especially damaging for Mr. Fillon, a stern fiscal and social conservative who ran on an image of probity and austerity, calling for economic sacrifices and vowing to slash thousands of civil service jobs. Mr. Fillon was sentenced by a court in Paris to a five-year prison term, with three years suspended, and was ordered to pay a fine of 375,000 euros, or nearly $423,000. The court also barred him from holding public office for 10 years. Mr. Fillon’s wife, Penelope Fillon, 64, was found guilty of complicity and received a three-year suspended prison term and a fine of €375,000.
Mr. Fillon angrily denied wrongdoing, lashed out against the news media and pressed on as the candidate for the right-wing conservative Républicains party. He had been widely seen as the favorite in the race, ahead of Marine Le Pen, the far-right candidate, and Emmanuel Macron, then a relatively untested centrist outsider. Marc Joulaud, who replaced Mr. Fillon as the representative for the rural Sarthe region of northwestern France from 2002 to 2005 — when Mr. Fillon had other roles in government — and who also hired Ms. Fillon as an aide, was found guilty and sentenced to a three-year suspended prison term and a fine of €20,000.
But his campaign was badly damaged and Mr. Fillon failed to qualify for the second round of the elections, in which Mr. Macron defeated Ms. Le Pen. Mr. Fillon has since retired from politics and is working in finance. The court also ordered the Fillons and Mr. Joulaud to reimburse more than €1 million in total to the National Assembly, the lower house of the French Parliament, which joined the trial as a civil plaintiff and estimated that it had been defrauded of that amount.
Mr. Fillon’s lawyers argued at the trial, held from late February to early March, that while there may have been few written traces of Ms. Fillon’s activities as a parliamentary aide, she had been her husband’s eyes and ears in his home constituency, the Sarthe region of northwestern France. The case against Mr. Fillon tapped into broader resentment of France’s elite political class, its cozy financial arrangements and its reluctance to enact strict ethical standards. Hiring close family members as parliamentary aides was not illegal at the time — and Mr. Fillon was not the only one to do so — but the practice was banned later in 2017.
Prosecutors countered that little of what Ms. Fillon did could be defined as the usual work of a parliamentary aide — like working on legislation or drafting policy memos — and argued that Mr. Fillon had paid his wife for a “fictitious” job. Nathalie Gavarino, the presiding judge in the case, said as she read the court’s ruling that Mr. Fillon had let his “personal interest” in enriching himself prevail over the “common good” and that he had eroded the trust that citizens have in the political system by hiring his wife for a job that had “no consistency” and that met “no need.”
The case against Mr. Fillon tapped into broader resentment against France’s elite political class, its cozy financial arrangements and its reluctance to enact strict ethical standards. Hiring close family members as parliamentary aides was not illegal — and Mr. Fillon was not the only one to do so — but the practice was banned later in 2017. Mr. and Ms. Fillon, wearing face masks, left the courtroom without commenting. But lawyers for the couple said that they planned to appeal the verdict, meaning that the sentences and penalties will not go into effect immediately.
Antonin Lévy, a lawyer for Mr. Fillon, told reporters outside the courtroom that the ruling was “unfair” and that a new trial was “all the more necessary” because the investigation and prosecution of Mr. Fillon had been carried out in “scandalous” conditions.
Mr. Fillon was also accused of paying his two eldest children for fictitious work as parliamentary aides when he was a senator and of helping his wife get a no-show job between 2012 and 2013 at a political magazine owned by a wealthy friend, where she did little beyond a handful of short literary reviews. Mr. Fillon and his wife were found guilty on most charges in both cases on Monday.
Reports of Ms. Fillon’s no-show job first emerged in the satirical newspaper Le Canard Enchaîné in late January 2017, a few months before the first round of voting in the presidential election, and they were swiftly followed by an official investigation. The accusations were especially damaging for Mr. Fillon, a stern fiscal and social conservative who ran on an image of probity and austerity, calling for economic sacrifices and vowing to slash thousands of civil service jobs.
Mr. Fillon angrily denied any wrongdoing after the accusations emerged, lashed out against the news media and pressed on as the candidate for the right-wing conservative Républicains party. He had been widely seen as the favorite in the race, ahead of Marine Le Pen, the far-right candidate, and Mr. Macron, then a relatively untested outsider.
But his campaign was badly damaged and Mr. Fillon failed to qualify for the second round of the elections, paving the way for Mr. Macron to defeat Ms. Le Pen. Mr. Fillon has since retired from politics and is working at an asset management company.
Mr. Fillon’s lawyers argued at the trial, held from late February to early March, that while there may have been few written traces of Ms. Fillon’s activities as a parliamentary aide, she had been her husband’s eyes and ears in his home constituency, meeting residents, opening mail and writing reports on local issues. They also argued that the judicial branch had no right to interfere in the way Mr. Fillon, as a member of the legislative branch, had hired his wife.
“This is an extremely harsh ruling that was handed down,” Pierre Cornut-Gentille, a lawyer for Ms. Fillon, told reporters outside the courtroom. “For us this is a breach of the separation of powers.”
Prosecutors countered that little of what Ms. Fillon did met the usual job description of a parliamentary aide — like working on legislation or drafting policy memos — and argued that Mr. Fillon had paid his wife inflated salaries for a “fictitious” job, with little concrete evidence of actual work.
Mr. Fillon’s lawyers sought to reopen his trial last week after Éliane Houlette, formerly France’s top financial prosecutor, told lawmakers that she had been put under intense “pressure” by her superiors while she was handling the case.Mr. Fillon’s lawyers sought to reopen his trial last week after Éliane Houlette, formerly France’s top financial prosecutor, told lawmakers that she had been put under intense “pressure” by her superiors while she was handling the case.
Ms. Houlette told the lawmakers during a hearing this month that supervision of the case was heavy handed, with incessant requests for updates on the proceedings and pressure to upgrade the status of the investigation to a more formal one. Ms. Houlette later said that the “pressure” was “purely of a procedural order” and had no bearing on the merits of the case against Mr. Fillon. She denied that the executive branch, then led by President François Hollande, a Socialist, had interfered in her work.Ms. Houlette told the lawmakers during a hearing this month that supervision of the case was heavy handed, with incessant requests for updates on the proceedings and pressure to upgrade the status of the investigation to a more formal one. Ms. Houlette later said that the “pressure” was “purely of a procedural order” and had no bearing on the merits of the case against Mr. Fillon. She denied that the executive branch, then led by President François Hollande, a Socialist, had interfered in her work.
But some of Mr. Fillon’s allies, who remained bitterly convinced that the case was politically motivated, have jumped on Ms. Houlette’s statements as proof that their candidate was unfairly knocked out of the race. But some of Mr. Fillon’s allies, who remained bitterly convinced that the case against him was politically motivated, have jumped on Ms. Houlette’s statements as proof that their candidate was unfairly knocked out of the race.
Mr. Macron has ordered a top judicial oversight body to review the actions of the financial prosecutor’s office during the investigation, to see if it was able to act “without pressure” and to “to erase all doubt about the independence and impartially of the justice system in this case.” “What is most shocking in this affair is what happened for the French,” Valérie Boyer, a right-wing lawmaker and staunch ally of Mr. Fillon’s, told the news channel LCI on Monday, adding that Mr. Fillon had been unfairly “persecuted” because of his political leaning. “The presidential debate was stolen,” she said.
Mr. Macron has ordered a top judicial oversight body to review the actions of the financial prosecutor’s office during the investigation, to see if it was able to act “without pressure” and “to erase all doubt about the independence and impartially of the justice system in this case.”