Luc Rouban: "Le Pen's sentence reinforces the National Rally's discourse"

After French justice has reduced Marine Le Pen's sentence in the case of embezzlement of European funds, the leader of the National Rally (RN) has announced that she will run again in the presidential elections, which will be held in April 2027. Luc Rouban, director of the National Centre for Scientific Research at the Centre for Political Research of Sciences Po, analyzes in conversation with ARA the consequences of the ruling for the far-right party.The Court of Appeal insists on the need to respect "the elector's freedom of choice". Can we speak of a judicial system that, in the face of political and media pressure from the Le Pen affair, adjusts its doctrine on the ineligibility of convicted political officials?

— The court has taken into account that the justice system is highly criticized in France for its alleged political bias, a criticism that even comes from the Ministry of Justice itself. For this reason, it seeks to clearly separate the legal register from the political register: on the legal level, the court has unambiguously confirmed the conviction. What it does is avoid being trapped in the accusation of judicializing politics - or, conversely, politicizing justice - while at the same time setting rules that must be applied to politicians.

This decision comes after the RN has built a narrative of "judicial harassment". Will the party seek to erase the conviction itself from public debate, presenting "eligibility" as a form of political rehabilitation?

— Yes, because deep down this is a positive argument for them: Le Pen can present herself as the candidate who fights against the system and who, despite obstacles, continues her path in the service of the people and voters. Le Pen positions herself as legitimate. She knows they have acted against the law, but on the scale of seriousness of the judicial cases affecting French politicians, hers is not among the most serious. This reinforces and confirms what they have always said: that they are outside a system that prevents them from making the voice of the French people heard.

Does this type of highly publicized trial strengthen or weaken French citizens' trust in the judicial system?

— Justice is the public service that the French trust the least: only 47%, compared to 70% who trust the police. It is heavily criticized for being perceived as politicized and biased, a criticism mainly made by the right and the far-right. The electronic bracelet that Le Pen will have to wear is perceived by some of the electorate as a sign of a kind of persecution against the RN. Now, when we ask the French if an elected official who has committed an offense should be judged by judges or by voters, the majority respond that judges should decide: the French have a strong respect for the rule of law: in this case, for the majority of the population, justice has done its job.

This case concerns European Parliament funds diverted at national level. Are there parallels with other European cases of parties convicted for fraudulent use of public funds and an exemplary or, on the contrary, trivializing effect?

— Yes, there are parallels: it's a kind of structural functioning of some political parties. But there is no trivialization; on the contrary, these practices are increasingly sanctioned and increasingly studied and observed by public opinion. Political staff are increasingly controlled. Orbán, for example, ended up losing the elections and is still being judged for his political immorality. For a long time, there was much greater tolerance towards politicians; this is no longer the case.

Jordan Bardella has appeared as the favorite in polls for months. Now that Le Pen is regaining leadership of the candidacy, how will the RN have to manage the frustration or expectation that this may generate among those who were betting on a Bardella candidacy?

— Current polls are falling into a vacuum. Politically, Bardella is more like an authoritarian liberalism profile, similar to that of Édouard Philippe [right-wing candidate for the presidential elections and mayor of Le Havre], and therefore has more direct competition than Le Pen, who has a much more marked and differentiated profile. Bardella has no experience; on the other hand, it would be easier for him to beat Mélenchon. But Le Pen is more "social", closer to the working classes —for example on the issue of pensions— than Philippe.

And how can he justify his decision to public opinion?

— Le Pen will be able to say: "They have done everything possible to prevent me from running and I have done so anyway, I owe myself to the voters and the country". In any case, even if she had not run, the sentence would have been favorable to her.

Would the RN's voting intention have changed if Bardella had run?

— Not at all. The far-right is France's largest electorate and has no clear preference according to the candidate. What matters now is not to spoil a historic opportunity, because it is the first time they have a real potential to win a presidential election. They have almost won the game.