The grave revelations and allegations emerging from the so-called Bettencourt 'affair' include massive tax fraud, illegal party funding, ministerial conflicts of interest and influence peddling. But this week, despite the gravity of the case, its judicial outcome has been thrown into doubt by moves from a high-ranking prosecutor to remove an independent magistrate from continuing her investigation.
Judge Isabelle Prévost-Desprez has until now been in charge of investigating a complaint that socialite and celebrity photographer François-Marie Banier 'abused' the mental frailty of 88 year-old L'Oréal heiress Liliane Bettencourt to receive gifts worth one billion euros. She had been about to question Banier, Liliane Bettencourt and her wealth manager Patrice de Maistre, before deciding on grounds for charges to be brought in the coming weeks.
In an astonishing move, senior Versailles-based public prosecutor Philippe Ingall-Montagnier, who oversees the conduct of the investigations involving Liliane Bettencourt, announced this weekend he was opening a judicial enquiry into allegations that Prévost-Desprez had breached the sacrosanct rule of the secret of the investigation1, and that he would advise that the investigations be halted and removed from the court in Nanterre where they are currently based.
The background to what many observers, including the head of the main magistrate's union, see as a cynical political manoeuvre to halt Prévost-Desprez' highly-sensitive investigations is complex.
The complaint for 'abuse of weakness' was lodged in December 2007 by Liliane Bettencourt's daughter, and only child, 57 year-old Françoise Bettencourt-Meyers. Her legal action began an ugly mother-daughter feud - Liliane Bettencourt has insisted she willingly and knowingly handed the gifts to Banier - and ultimately opened the door on a series of staggering revelations that have shaken the French political and financial establishment.
Prévost-Desprez is based at the courthouse in Nanterre, a suburb west of Paris that has jurisdiction over the Bettencourt investigations, and she has led her enquiry in an atmosphere of open and astonishing conflict with Nanterre public prosecutor Philippe Courroye.
He is in charge of separate investigations into the evidence and allegations arising from the so-called 'butler tapes'. These include tax evasion, influence peddling and illegal political party funding, and notably allegations that Bettencourt's wealth manager was involved in preparing an illegal cash donation of 150,000 euros for French President Nicolas Sarkozy's 2007 election campaign manager and current Minister of Labour, Eric Woerth.
-------------------------
1: The rules governing the 'secrecy of the investigation' - 'le secret de l'instruction' in French - bound all legal parties involved in an investigation to secrecy regarding details of the investigation. In this particular case, judge Prévost-Desprez is accused by prosecutor Courroye of informing journalsits from the French daily Le Monde about details of the search she ordered of Liliane Bettencourt's home in Neuilly, on September1st. Le Monde had already begun legal action for previous alleged illegal breaching of privacy regarding its journalists' phone records, and has done so again over this latest accusation.
'Scandalous political stranglehold over the case'
Courroye was appointed prosecutor by Sarkozy shortly after he was elected, and against the advice of the French Magistrates' Superior Council (the CSM), which, under the French constitution, serves to guarantee the independence of the judiciary and is the only disciplinary authority by which magistrates may be judged and sanctioned. Importantly, Bettencourt's wealth manager, Patrice de Maistre, can be heard on the 'butler tapes' telling the L'Oréal matriarch that a former presidential advisor had firmly assured him that Courroye was sympathetic to their attempts to have the complaint against Banier thrown out.
The theoretical impartiality demanded of Courroye's key role in the Bettencourt investigations has been denounced as untenable by France's most senior public prosecutor, Jean-Louis Nadal, who last month recommended Ingall-Montagnier to hand the investigation into Woerth over to an independent magistrate.
Earlier this year, Mediapart published an exclusive interview with Claire Thibout, a former accountant to the Bettencourt household, in which she alleged numerous politicians, including Nicolas Sarkozy before his election as president, received envelopes of cash from Liliane Bettencourt and her late husband André. It was during that same interview that she also described how she was asked by Patrice de Maistre to prepare 150,000 euros in cash withdrawals destined for Eric Woerth, when he was Sarkozy's presidential election campaign fund manager.
Thibout's lawyer Antoine Gillot on Monday told Mediapart that the move to have Prévost-Desprez removed from her investigation was a "sad judicial farce" and a "scandalous" political manoeuvre to suppress the truth. His frank and angry reaction to the move by Versailles prosecutor Ingall-Montagnier is reproduced in full below.
--------------------------------
Mediapart: What is your reaction to the Versailles public prosecutor's initiative?
A.G.: "Just a few days ago I had once again denounced the scandalous stranglehold of the ruling political powers over this affair of state. I didn't realise just how true that was. We have, these past few days, reached a new degree of indignity. Until now, the [ruling] political powers, through the intermediary of their strong arm, the prosecutor Philippe Courroye, have targeted bothersome witnesses, and in particular my client Claire Thibout1 by trying to discredit, and even dirty her. Without any success, in fact, everyone having well understood that what she says is the truth."
"This time it has been decided to target Madame Isabelle Prévost-Desprez, the only independent magistrate involved in the affair, in charge of the 'abuse of weakness' [complaint] in this dossier."
Mediapart: Why do you think this has happened?
The aim is to try and discredit her in turn in order to better justify removing her from the case. I am not a fool to the sad judicial farce that is being put in place. It consists, using illegal means, in this case the telephone surveillance of journalists2, of placing in doubt the probity of Madame Isabelle Prévost-Desprez, and then of opening a judicial enquiry against her in name, with the only aim of immediately justifying, after a request, the transfer [to another jurisdiction] of the legal file. Demonstrably, the political powers do not want the 'abuse of weakness' affair to be judged by this independent magistrate precisely because she is independent.3 They want [the case] to be judged by a magistrate they would have arranged."
--------------------------
1: Claire Thibout, 52, was employed over aperiod of 13 years by L'Oréal heiress Liliane Bettencourt as an accountant. She worked for both the Bettencourt household and for Clymène, the company that manages the billionaire's wealth.
2: Isabelle Prévost-Desprez is accused by prosecutor Philippe Couroye of having revealed to journalists of the daily paper Le Monde details of the search she ordered of Liliane Bettencourt's home in Neuilly, on September1st, 2010. His accusation is based on detailed phone communications, only legally available to him if authorisation was first granted by the phone line rental payers, which in this case was never requested nor, therefore, granted.
3: Under French law, an investigating magistrate, who also holds the title of 'judge', is an independent figue answerable only to peers, ultimately to the CSM (see article text). A public prosecutor is dependent upon a heirarchy that ultimately reaches the Minister of Justice, and therefore is subject to political sanction. The distinction has become a crucial one in cases, like the Bettencourt affair and others that have threatened other governments before it under Left or Right governments, where the recognition of the right to independence of magistrates has been regularly tested by the ruling political powers.
'What is anyone afraid of? The truth?'
Mediapart: Is it your position that you are against a transfer to another jurisdiction of the investigation led by Madame Isabelle Prévost-Desprez into the complaint levelled against François-Marie Banier for 'abuse of weakness'?
A.G.: "Absolutely. It would be quite simply scandalous, at this advanced stage in the file, to move the case elsewhere. If a transfer would have been necessary, it should have happened at the beginning of the case and not almost three years after the complaint was filed by Madame Françoise Bettencourt-Meyers. We are being asked to believe that it is now urgent to proceed with a transfer because of the bad relations that exist between prosecutor Philippe Courroye and Madame Prévost-Desprez. But these were known from the beginning, and strictly nothing was done to avoid this difficulty."
"What's more, there is an attempt to blame them together, whereas since the beginning of this affair, it is Monsieur Courroye alone who has been placing obstacles in the path of Madame Prévost-Desprez, such as by refusing to provide her with the much talked about recordings made at Liliane Bettencourt's home, and not the reverse. In any case, the one and only real problem in this [investigation] is obviously not that of the transfer of the file but is quite uniquely that of the appointment of one or several independent magistrates, as was underlined without any ambiguity by Jean-Louis Nadal a few days ago."
"I also take note that the latter has never, at any moment, either evoked or thought necessary any kind of transfer."
Mediapart: What is your opinion about the role of the justice ministry in this affair?
A.G.: "Its deafening silence and its refusal to intervene so as to stop this masquerade indicates that it is at heart perfectly in agreement with what is being hatched. It is dismaying, as is dismaying the deplorable image that results for the judicial institutions of our country. I have on several occasions called upon Madame Michèle Alliot-Marie1 to assume her responsibilities in this affair so that, notably, for the respect of the secrecy of the investigation and the independence of justice. My appeals remained vain, and I fear that this will be the case again.
Mediapart: But hasn't Versailles prosecutor Philippe Ingall-Montagnier placed Monsieur Courroye and Madame Prévost-Desprez on an equal level by advising a transfer of all the separate investigations in the Bettencourt affair?
A.G.: "No. Firstly, it appears that the appeals court cannot [order the] transfer a preliminary investigation. And, in any case, if the objective is to change the prosecutor, it amounts to same thing, because, once again, the only reasonable initiative would be to appoint one or several independent magistrates. Another prosecutor would inevitably remain under political orders, which would change nothing in the current situation."
"Regarding the [investigation into] 'abuse of weakness', why today remove from the case a magistrate whose competence and independence is unanimously recognised, Aren't her qualities precisely those that guarantee proper justice? What is anyone afraid of? That the truth will emerge from this affair?"
---------------------------
1: Michèle Alliot-Marie is the French Minister of Justice.
'It would be comical if it weren't so serious'
Mediapart: The prosecuting services openly suspect Isabelle Prévost-Desprez of violating investigative secrecy.
A.G.: "That is absurd. There really are separate rules for the same thing. In this affair, the secrecy of the investigation has been scandalously violated, notably concerning my clients. It is the case for example with Claire Thibout, whose [police] statements were reproduced in fax copy extracts in a newspaper, what's more, in truncated form. When in this case the secrecy of the investigation was violated in a flagrant manner, not only no enquiry was opened, but neither the Nanterre prosecutor's office nor the chancery complained, and for good reason. And no voice was raised at the time to call for a transfer of the investigation."
"Concerning the criminal reproduction of Madame Thibout's statement, for which I naturally reserve the right to file an official complaint, I remind you that this clear violation of the secrecy of investigation could not in any way come from a lawyer, because lawyers do not have access to [statements taken during] preliminary investigations, nor from an independent magistrate because the investigation comes under the sole control of the prosecutor's office, which is placed hierarchically under the executive powers. So one can plainly see where these leaks could have come from, and who they benefited. And yet now, on the simple basis of suspicion, there is an attempt to put in question an independent magistrate, to use it as a pretext to justify a request for a transfer [of the investigations], I find that stupefying. It would even be comical if the events were not so serious."
Mediapart: There appears to be a state of total chaos at the courthouse in Nanterre. What is your advice for a way out of the situation?
A.G.: "It's not only the court in Nanterre that is in total chaos but the whole of the judicial institution, because of the current handling of this affair. Once again, there can no longer be any question today of transferring the investigation into [the complaint of] 'abuse of weakness', that makes no sense. I note that the attacks aimed at Madame Prévost-Desprez come, as if by accident, at the moment when she was preparing to question the most important protagonists in the case, François-Marie Banier, Patrice de Maistre and Liliane Bettencourt, then finishing her investigation."
"Respect must also be given to the honour and reputation of Madame Isabelle Prévost-Desprez, who is not allowed to express her views and who therefore cannot defend herself. This magistrate should be supported by Michèle Alliot-Marie, who is her minister in charge, instead of which the latter is without reaction in face of the campaign of denigration to which she [Prévost-Desprez] is unjustly the object. In order that the conditions for a proper administration of justice are brought together in this affair, it is necessary, once again, that one or several judges be appointed for all the other cases in the file that are the object of a preliminary investigation."
This report was compiled from Mediapart's extensive coverage of the Bettencourt affair, dated 25-26/10/2010.
English version: Graham Tearse