Wednesday 28 September
Discover our newsletter offer
The Mediapart application
Discover our application for mobile & tablet
The findings of the French prosecutor do not show evidence that Lagarde "obstructed law" in Tapie case. Theyr are an unwarranted and ill reasoned questioning of the decisions made by the Minister of Economy and Finance, and its predecessors. The arbitration agreement was perfectly legal, and was approved by a decision of the Tribunal of commerce which has become final. The arbitration agreement was concluded by CDR , which is a commercial company, and not a public establishment, and it related to an international arbitration, to which even public establishment can consent. The arbitration was perfectly regular, and was perfectly motivated in law and in fact. The parties had waived recourse, which was perfectly legal, and in such case a possibility of recourse is exceptional. It was perfectly normal that such a move not be attempted.
Furthermore it should be noted that the questioning of the legality of a decision of a minister is not of the jurisdiction of the penal courts , but of the administrative courts. The penal sanctions relating to "abuse of authority" relate to actions of persons which are part of the public authorities which obstruct the actions of the administration to enforce the law. They are of course not applicable to actions by the administration to enforce the law. The prosecutor, who alleges violations of fundamental administrative law, should be reminded of the essential principle of administrative law, that of the separation of powers with the duality of jurisdictions, judicial (which includes penal) courts and administrative courts. The prosecutor violates this essential principle , an act which in French law could be characterized as "forfeiture" (tantamount to treason)
Post a comment is restricted to subscribers.