(Adnkronos) – Next July 7, the Paris Court of Appeal will have to rule on the case of parliamentary assistants of the former Front National (now Rassemblement National) in the European Parliament, a judicial appointment that will have important consequences for Marine Le Pen’s political future. The former RN president was found guilty of misappropriation of public funds in relation to fictitious positions of European parliamentary assistants and sentenced on March 31, 2025, in the first instance by the Paris court to four years in prison (two to be served with an electronic bracelet and two suspended), a fine of 100,000 Euros, and five years of ineligibility with immediate effect.
While awaiting the decision of the appellate judges, Le Pen stated on Lci that she is not afraid. “Whatever happens, I won’t be dead. Whatever happens, I will continue to fight for my ideas.” However, less than a year remains until the first round of the presidential elections, on April 18, 2027, and while the hypotheses regarding the conclusion of the judicial proceedings against her are varied, the consequences are especially diverse. The hypothesis of acquittal – considered unlikely by many – would be an immediate relief for the RN group leader in the National Assembly, who would become eligible again and be freed from the burden of a criminal conviction. Conversely, a conviction of more than two years of ineligibility (partially served) would jeopardize her candidacy for the Élysée. Confirming the decision of the lower court, the public prosecutor’s office requests confirmation of five years even on appeal. Unless this is reduced to a maximum of two years, Le Pen cannot hope to run in the presidential elections.
Another element to consider is a conviction for a period of detention to be served with an electronic bracelet. If the Court of Appeal accepts the prosecutor’s request and orders one year of detention, a sentence to be served under house arrest, the deputy for Pas-de-Calais would give up entering the race.
“It’s not possible” to campaign with an electronic bracelet, Le Pen reiterated on Wednesday. “If I can run, I will run, provided I can campaign,” she declared, explaining that “when you are a presidential candidate, you must be completely free to move” and that this is not possible if you wear an electronic bracelet. “If the goal is to allow me to run, but in reality prevent me from campaigning in complete freedom, you understand that this will not be possible,” she added. A six-month sentence, however, would open a more uncertain debate within the Rassemblement National. With sentence reductions, Marine Le Pen could hope to regain full freedom of movement as early as the beginning of October, about six months before the presidential elections.
Another unknown concerns the appeal to the Court of Cassation. Marine Le Pen has already warned that she will not await a potential decision from the Court of Cassation before deciding on her candidacy. The Supreme Court judges have indicated that, should they be seized of the case, their decision would arrive by early January. For Le Pen, this timeline would be too long to effectively start her electoral campaign, even if her conviction were overturned by the Court of Cassation.
The most complex case regarding the appellate decision on July 7, however, remains that of the provisional execution, or immediate application, of the two-year ban from public office. Because on paper, this scenario could allow her to run: if the provisional execution order issued in the first instance – and fiercely contested by the RN – were confirmed, and the ineligibility sentence were reduced to two years, it would conclude on April 1, 2027, shortly before the first round of elections.
Marine Le Pen’s interest would therefore be to have her conviction become definitive and be served as quickly as possible. She could also waive the appeal to the Court of Cassation, because an appeal would suspend her sentence and thus prolong the already tight deadlines: although on July 7 – with the suspension – Le Pen would become eligible again, she would risk losing eligibility again in January if her appeal were rejected by the Court of Cassation, right in the middle of the presidential campaign.
The difficulties do not end here, because the prosecution can also appeal to the Court of Cassation, which in turn would suspend the judgment. Marine Le Pen might then have to wait for the expiration of the ten-day period granted to the parties to know whether the situation will be resolved or not. Finally, there is a legal dispute regarding the effects of an execution order issued in the first instance but not confirmed on appeal. Some legal experts, based on rare Court of Cassation rulings in other cases, believe that such an order may continue to have effect. According to this interpretation, an appeal to the Court of Cassation by Marine Le Pen or the prosecution would no longer suspend the judgment.
The final decision would therefore rest with the Constitutional Court, the only body competent to validate candidacies for presidential elections. Several of its members have already confidentially indicated that they have clarified one point: eligibility is assessed on election day. In other words, it does not matter if a candidate is not eligible at the time of collecting or submitting the 500 signatures in their support, as long as they are eligible for the first round.
