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 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/20/business/international/imf-chief-Lagarde-testifies-again-about-role-in-payout.html

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

Version 0 Version 1
I.M.F. Chief Testifies Again About Role in Payout I.M.F. Chief Testifies Again About Role in Payout
(about 20 hours later)
PARIS — Christine Lagarde, the International Monetary Fund chief, was appearing before a French court in a closed session on Wednesday to explain her role in a murky affair involving a government payout to a prominent businessman while she was finance minister of France.PARIS — Christine Lagarde, the International Monetary Fund chief, was appearing before a French court in a closed session on Wednesday to explain her role in a murky affair involving a government payout to a prominent businessman while she was finance minister of France.
Ms. Lagarde served under former President Nicolas Sarkozy from 2007 until she took the top spot at the I.M.F. in 2011. Investigators are inquiring about her role in 2008 in an arbitration proceeding the state entered with Bernard Tapie, the onetime owner of the Adidas sportswear empire and the Olympique de Marseille soccer club.Ms. Lagarde served under former President Nicolas Sarkozy from 2007 until she took the top spot at the I.M.F. in 2011. Investigators are inquiring about her role in 2008 in an arbitration proceeding the state entered with Bernard Tapie, the onetime owner of the Adidas sportswear empire and the Olympique de Marseille soccer club.
Mr. Tapie was ultimately awarded more than 400 million euros, or $557 million at current exchange rates, in a commercial dispute with a state-owned bank that he claimed had defrauded him in the early 1990s by selling his Adidas stake for less than it was worth.Mr. Tapie was ultimately awarded more than 400 million euros, or $557 million at current exchange rates, in a commercial dispute with a state-owned bank that he claimed had defrauded him in the early 1990s by selling his Adidas stake for less than it was worth.
Ms. Lagarde is not facing charges in the “affaire Tapie.” Last May the court assigned her the status of “assisted witness,” meaning that investigators believe she has information that might be of importance in the inquiry, but that she is not currently suspected of wrongdoing. She has maintained her innocence from the start of the investigation.Ms. Lagarde is not facing charges in the “affaire Tapie.” Last May the court assigned her the status of “assisted witness,” meaning that investigators believe she has information that might be of importance in the inquiry, but that she is not currently suspected of wrongdoing. She has maintained her innocence from the start of the investigation.
The hearing Wednesday, Ms. Lagarde’s third appearance in the case, was at the Court of Justice of the Republic in Paris, which has the authority to prosecute crimes committed by ministers while in office. It began in the morning and continued into the afternoon, with no public word from Ms. Lagarde or her lawyers. The hearing Wednesday, Ms. Lagarde’s third appearance in the case, was at the Court of Justice of the Republic in Paris, which has the authority to prosecute crimes committed by ministers while in office.
The questioning wrapped up Wednesday evening.
Agence France-Presse cited Ms. Lagarde as saying as she left the court that the hearing had “allowed me to confirm my previous statements in a serene and courteous atmosphere,” and she reiterated her insistence that she had “always acted in the interest of the state in conformity with the law.”
Yves Repiquet, Ms. Lagarde’s lawyer, was not immediately available to comment, his assistant said. The International Monetary Fund did not respond to a request for comment.
The investigators were cross-examining Ms. Lagarde in the presence of her former chief of staff, Stéphane Richard, who is now the chief executive of Orange. Mr. Richard, along with Mr. Tapie and several others involved in the arbitration, is facing possible charges of organized fraud in the case. Mr. Richard has denied wrongdoing.The investigators were cross-examining Ms. Lagarde in the presence of her former chief of staff, Stéphane Richard, who is now the chief executive of Orange. Mr. Richard, along with Mr. Tapie and several others involved in the arbitration, is facing possible charges of organized fraud in the case. Mr. Richard has denied wrongdoing.
Mr. Richard’s job may in some measure depend on the outcome of the investigation. His tenure as chief executive of Orange is up for review by the board next week. The state, which holds a 27 percent stake in the company, formerly known as France Télécom, has previously expressed confidence in Mr. Richard.Mr. Richard’s job may in some measure depend on the outcome of the investigation. His tenure as chief executive of Orange is up for review by the board next week. The state, which holds a 27 percent stake in the company, formerly known as France Télécom, has previously expressed confidence in Mr. Richard.
In the case under investigation, Mr. Tapie, whose colorful career has included a term as a minister under President François Mitterrand in the 1980s and jail time for soccer match-fixing in the 1990s, had been seeking damages from the government in a long-running dispute with a former state-owned bank, Crédit Lyonnais.In the case under investigation, Mr. Tapie, whose colorful career has included a term as a minister under President François Mitterrand in the 1980s and jail time for soccer match-fixing in the 1990s, had been seeking damages from the government in a long-running dispute with a former state-owned bank, Crédit Lyonnais.
The case was originally brought by Socialist deputies in Parliament. They accused Mr. Sarkozy’s government of having given special treatment to Mr. Tapie, a career Socialist until he switched his allegiance to Mr. Sarkozy’s center-right Union for a Popular Movement party in 2007.The case was originally brought by Socialist deputies in Parliament. They accused Mr. Sarkozy’s government of having given special treatment to Mr. Tapie, a career Socialist until he switched his allegiance to Mr. Sarkozy’s center-right Union for a Popular Movement party in 2007.
In addition to trying to understand how the government’s decision to seek arbitrage was made in the Crédit Lyonnais dispute, the investigators hope to learn why the result of the arbitration was not challenged by Mr. Sarkozy’s government, despite the discovery of apparent anomalies in the process.In addition to trying to understand how the government’s decision to seek arbitrage was made in the Crédit Lyonnais dispute, the investigators hope to learn why the result of the arbitration was not challenged by Mr. Sarkozy’s government, despite the discovery of apparent anomalies in the process.