The conviction of Nicolas Sarkozy illustrates the concept of separation of powers, which further ignites a polarized debate
En France, a former President of the Republic can sleep in prison. By sentencing him to five years of imprisonment for criminal conspiracy in the case of Libyan financing of his 2007 presidential campaign, the Paris criminal court has written a page of history: Nicolas Sarkozy, reduced to the status of an “almost” ordinary litigant, should be the first ex- President of the Republic to be imprisoned.
An explosion. But also the illustration in the spirit and letter of the separation of powers (executive, legislative, judicial). Theory decreed at the end of the 18th centurye century by Montesquieu, Baron de La Brède, in the name of a simple principle: So that power cannot be abused, power must stop power by the arrangement of things. “
Fracture
In an already polarized public debate, the prescriptions of the Girondin thinker could find only a weak echo. The sentence draws a new dividing line. On the one hand, the proponents of constitutional orthodoxy, like Arthur Delaporte, spokesperson for the Socialist Party in the National Assembly, who sees it as “a triumph of justice”. When others see it as yet another excess of a “Republic of judges”. Geoffroy Didier, vice-president of the Les Républicains party, denounces “a fault of the judicial authority which harms the cause of justice”.
“This is clearly a cathartic moment in our history,” notes Ludovic Renard, political scientist at Sciences Po Bordeaux. Of course, this will generate exploitation in a landscape where opinions replace judicial truth. What does she say? You cannot finance a campaign by using financing rules other than those provided for by law. “
In the LR galaxy, we stand together behind the former President. For his political camp, he remains a figure who counts. Consulting it has become a necessary step for emerging politicians. Sébastien Lecornu, the new Prime Minister sacrificed to the rite a few days ago. The party barons nevertheless showed cautious support. Bruno Retailleau, the Minister of the Interior hopes that he will be able to “make his innocence prevail” on appeal. Laurent Wauquiez salutes “the statesman who gave so much for France”.
Presumption of innocence
At the Rassemblement National, we do not come to the aid of the condemned, preferring to make the link with the conviction of Marine Le Pen. Last April, the same court sentenced her to five years of ineligibility with provisional execution. Which deprives her, at this stage, of a presidential destiny. On X (ex-Twitter), it indicates: Beyond the person of former President Nicolas Sarkozy, the negation of the double degree of jurisdiction through the generalization of provisional execution by certain courts represents a great danger with regard to the main principles of our law, first and foremost the presumption of innocence. “
The orchestration of this debate risks fueling the democratic fatigue which is affecting the country
Radically different tone on the left, which denounces the questioning of justice: “The demand for honesty and respect for the law is not reserved for the people, explains on X, Manuel Bompard, the coordinator of LFI, it also applies to the powerful despite their power and their media relays. “The reactions also come from civil society. Anti-corruption associations welcome “a historic decision”. The (moderate) Magistrates’ Union believes that ’”we are not discussing the status of a President, we are discussing a man who has committed an offense for which he was found guilty and against whom a sanction”.
Process
Without prejudging the future, the debate over the coming days will crystallize around the fate of Nicolas Sarkozy and the power of judges. “The orchestration of this debate risk of fueling the democratic fatigue which is affecting the country– discredit of politics for some, of justice for others, in a society which struggles to find itself common, adds Ludovic Renard. But we must also see that this decision comes as an extension of a process initiated in the 1990s with the Rocard laws of clarification and moralization of the financing of political life. After an era that resembled the Wild West, they have since been significantly strengthened, which says a lot about the sensitivity of public opinion on the question of the probity of their elected officials. Thirty years is not a lot and it’s a lot. At the time, who would have thought that a former President could be sentenced to prison? Person. Today it is possible. “
