
Le Pen ruling unleashes wave of hypocrisy on populist right
In a democracy, the rule of law is not an option, but the very condition of its existence: Impartial, unyielding and blind to power.
But this ideal is increasingly under siege. Not from anarchists or revolutionaries, but from the self-proclaimed defenders of law and order, namely far-right parties in Europe and beyond. France's Marine Le Pen — convicted last week in a national court for embezzling over €4 million in European Parliament funds — is a case in point.
The verdict against the leader of the French National Rally was unambiguous: Le Pen and her party systematically diverted money intended for parliamentary assistants to pay for National Rally staff in France, audaciously flouting European Union regulations.
Her response was not contrition, but indignation. 'Incroyable,' Le Pen fumed, storming out of the courtroom while decrying the ruling as 'unbelievable.' Facing a five-year ban from public office, Le Pen, currently the front-runner to become France's next president, now joins a chorus of populist leaders who cry persecution when the law they so loudly exalt holds them accountable.
The evidence against Le Pen is overwhelming, the product of a meticulous, years-long investigation by the European Anti-Fraud Office. Prosecutors laid bare a scheme of fake contracts, falsified time sheets and bank records that traced the misappropriated funds across several years. Aides testified that their work bore no relation to EU parliamentary duties, their salaries merely a conduit for party coffers.
Le Pen's defense, thin as it was, rested on claims of political targeting — a plea the court dismissed. This was not a vendetta but justice, impartial and resolute. The National Rally must now repay the funds, a financial blow matched only by the political cost: With Le Pen sidelined, the 2027 presidential race is thrown into chaos, her party's future uncertain.
Yet Le Pen and her allies have turned their guns on the judiciary itself, following a script rehearsed across the globe. U.S. President Donald Trump, humiliated by his 2020 election defeat and charged with multiple crimes, has repeatedly branded America's courts as 'rigged' and his administration is constantly seeking to test the limits of the judicial system.
In Brazil, former President Jair Bolsonaro faces scrutiny over his family's finances, has denounced judges as 'activists' and threatened to defy their rulings. He will also stand trial for allegedly plotting a military coup to stay in power. Back in Europe, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has methodically dismantled judicial independence, cloaking this self-serving maneuver as reform.
The pattern is stark: Law is sacrosanct until it bites, and history offers a grim echo of this hypocrisy. In the Italy of Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini, the 1926 'exceptional laws' stripped judges of autonomy, turning courts into tools of state power. Dissenters were purged, replaced by loyalists who rubber-stamped the will of 'Il Duce.'
In Nazi Germany, the People's Court bypassed all semblance of due process, delivering summary judgments that propped up Hitler's regime and criminalized opposition. The erosion of judicial independence was the first step toward tyranny; once the courts bent to the ruler's political whim, no checks remained on executive excess.
Today's far-right parties have not yet plunged to these depths — although Trump is laying the foundations to defy the courts — but their rhetoric treads dangerously close. When Le Pen assails the French judiciary as a tool of shadowy elites, she channels a dangerous precedent, one that ends not in democracy, but despotism.
Her supporters, of course, see it differently. They cry witch hunt, pointing to a broader mistrust in institutions that has festered amid economic stagnation and cultural unease. Already less than half of the French public trusts their judiciary according to some estimates, a dangerous trend fueled by perceptions of elitism and inefficiency.
Le Pen's base, primed to see conspiracy in every setback, views her conviction as proof of a biased establishment. But the evidence says otherwise as France's judiciary has a robust record of holding the powerful to account, irrespective of ideology.
Former President Jacques Chirac, whose career spanned the left and right of the political spectrum, was convicted in 2011 for misusing public funds. Conservative hero Nicolas Sarkozy, another former head of the Elysee, faced judgment in 2021 for illegal campaign financing. Francois Fillon, once prime minister under Sarkozy, was sentenced in 2020 for a fake jobs scandal not unlike Le Pen's.
Moreover, Le Pen has enjoyed every safeguard of due process and retains the right to appeal, which she says she will pursue. No credible evidence suggests that political interference tainted the trial. The claim of victimhood is a tactic to rally a base that prefers outrage to accountability — but at a cost.
When legal consequences are recast as persecution, the judiciary ceases to be a pillar of stability and becomes a culture war battleground. Trust crumbles and with it, the foundation of democratic order. The 2023 French riots sparked by a police shooting already exposed the fragility of society's faith in institutions. Populist assaults on the courts threaten to widen that fracture into a chasm.
Le Pen's ban risks galvanizing her followers, who see her as a martyr, even as it emboldens her rivals. This is the paradox of populist justice: Accountability breeds resentment, not reckoning. Yet the greater danger lies in the precedent. From Washington to Budapest, far-right group's selective embrace of the law undermines the very order they claim to uphold. Le Pen's saga is not just a French story — it is a test for the West, where populist tides continue to swell.
The rule of law is not a weapon to be wielded against foes nor a convenience to be discarded when it stings. It is a shield that protects us all. Politicize it and we risk everything.
Le Pen's downfall proves that no one, however loud or popular, stands above judgment. But it also acts as a warning that when trust in the law collapses, so does the democracy it sustains, inviting chaos. The question is, are we willing to pay that price?
Thomas O. Falk is a London-based political commentator and journalist.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Yomiuri Shimbun
13 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Hiroshima's New Method Over Peace Ceremony Attendees to Be Tested; City Hopes to Avoid Past Criticisms on 80th Anniversary
Yomiuri Shimbun file photo People line up to offer prayers in front of the Cenotaph for the Victims of the Atomic Bomb at Peace Memorial Park in Naka Ward, Hiroshima, on Aug. 6, 2024. HIROSHIMA — The Hiroshima city government has changed its method of gathering foreign attendees for its annual peace memorial ceremony following criticisms over which countries are invited. However, whether the new method will be effective remains uncertain amid the complex international situation. For the 80th anniversary of the atomic bombings this year, the city has sent letters — not invitations — to all countries and regions with which Japan has diplomatic ties or channels, informing them about the Aug.6 ceremony. Letter, not invitation 'We hope that the decision to attend is based on the understanding of 'the Spirit of Hiroshima,' [which is the idea of working] toward the abolition of nuclear weapons and lasting world peace,' Hiroshima Mayor Kazumi Matsui said at a press conference in April when the change was announced. The letters were sent to 196 countries and regions, as well as Delegation of the European Union to Japan, on May 23. The recipients were categorized into three groups: countries and regions with embassies or representative divisions in Japan; countries with no embassies but with permanent missions to the United Nations; and other countries and regions wishing to attend. Russia, Ukraine, Israel and Palestine are a part of the first group. Taiwan, which was not invited in previous years because Japan does not recognize it as a country, was included in the third group. Until last year, invitations had been sent, in principle, to all countries recognized by the Japanese government and to countries that have not signed or joined the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Last year, the city sent invitations to 166 countries. In previous years, the invitations were addressed to the heads of state or ambassadors of each country. This year, the letters did not specify the recipients and only expressed the thoughts of the atomic bomb survivors and the purpose of the event. 'Best possible way' The ceremony was first held in 1947 as Peace Festival, and the city began inviting countries to the event in 1998. Following nuclear tests conducted by India and Pakistan in May 1998, invitations were sent to the seven nuclear-armed countries, including those two nations. For the 60th anniversary in 2005, invitations were sent to countries other than nuclear-armed nations. Since 2006, all countries approved by the Japanese government were invited. However, in 2022, the city decided not to invite Russia — due to its aggression against Ukraine — and Belarus, which supports Russia. Hiroshima sought the Foreign Ministry's opinion and was told that '[inviting Russia and Belarus] is inappropriate as it could lead to misunderstandings about Japan's stance,' according to documents obtained by The Yomiuri Shimbun through a public records request to the city. As the ministry's position was unchanged in 2023 and 2024, and the city did not invite the two nations for three consecutive years. Last year's ceremony drew criticism, as the city invited Israel, which has been attacking Gaza since October 2023. Unlike Russia, whose diplomats in Japan were asked to leave by the Japanese government, Israeli diplomats remain in Japan. A city official claimed that the city's policy 'made sense' under the circumstances, but residents criticized the move as being a double standard. The backlash prompted Hiroshima to make the change. 'We must avoid what happened last year on the 80th anniversary,' a city official said. 'We chose the best possible way.' Each country's decision Given that it will be up to each country on whether to attend, ambassadors from warring areas may gather for the ceremony. At the April press conference, Matsui said the letter did 'not focus on whether they were warring parties but on how to convey our message.' At last year's Nagasaki Peace Memorial Ceremony on Aug. 9, ambassadors from the Group of Seven countries, except Japan, and others boycotted the ceremony to protest against Israel's exclusion from the invitation list. Some twists and turns may be expected depending on which countries decide to attend the ceremony this year. Mixed feedback Atomic bomb survivor Toshiyuki Mimaki, 83, who represents Japan Confederation of A- and H-Bomb Sufferers Organizations (Nihon Hidankyo), which received last year's Nobel Peace Prize, praised the city's decision as a good solution to avoiding criticism over which countries are asked to attend. 'I hope countries and regions with different ideologies and beliefs gather to reflect on what occurred 80 years ago,' Mimaki said. On the other hand, Takashi Hiraoka, 97, who was the mayor of Hiroshima between 1991-99, said the decision 'lacks initiative.' 'Recipients might be confused about whether Hiroshima wants them to come,' Hiraoka said. '[The change] has made it difficult to convey the city's true intentions, as well as its seriousness, to other countries.'


Yomiuri Shimbun
15 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Five Nations and EU Urge Trump Not to Impose New Airplane Tariffs
Reuters A picture taken through a telescope shows a silhouette of an aircraft against the sun during a partial solar eclipse in the settlement of Kojori outside Tbilisi, Georgia October 25, 2022. WASHINGTON, June 10 (Reuters) – Five nations and the European Union, as well as airlines and aerospace firms worldwide, urged the Trump administration not to impose new national security tariffs on imported commercial planes and parts, documents released on Tuesday showed. Airlines and planemakers have been lobbying President Donald Trump to restore the tariff-free regime under the 1979 Civil Aircraft Agreement that has yielded an annual trade surplus of $75 billion for the U.S. industry. The documents made public by the U.S. Commerce Department bared concerns over the fallout of possible new tariffs expressed by companies as well as nations such as Canada, China, Japan, Mexico and Switzerland, besides the European Union. 'As reliable trading partners, the European Union and United States should strengthen their trade regarding aircraft and aircraft parts, rather than hinder it by imposing trade restrictions,' the EU wrote. It would consider its options 'to ensure a level playing field,' it added. Trump has already imposed tariffs of 10% on nearly all airplane and parts imports. 'No country or region should attempt to support the development of its domestic aircraft manufacturing industry by suppressing foreign competitors,' the Chinese government wrote. Separately, U.S. planemaker Boeing BA.N cited a recent trade deal unveiled in May with Britain that ensures tariff-free treatment for airplanes and parts. 'The United States should ensure duty-free treatment for commercial aircraft and their parts in any negotiated trade agreement, similar to its efforts with the United Kingdom,' Boeing told the Commerce Department in a filing. Mexico said in 2024 it exported $1.45 billion in aircraft parts, just a tenth of the total, to the United States. The EU said it took U.S. exports of aircraft worth roughly $12 billion, while exporting about $8 billion of aircraft to the U.S. In early May, the Commerce Department launched a 'Section 232' national security investigation into imports of commercial aircraft, jet engines and parts that could form the basis for even higher tariffs on such imports. Last week, Delta Air LinesDAL.N and major trade groups warned of tariffs' impact on ticket prices, aviation safety and supply chains. 'Current U.S. tariffs on aviation are putting domestic production of commercial aircraft at risk,' Airbus Americas CEO Robin Hayes said in a filing. 'It is not realistic or sensible today to create a 100% domestic supply chain in any country.' Boeing said it had been increasing U.S. content in its airplanes over the last decade and its newest airplanes, the 737 MAX 10 and 777X, would have 'more than 88% domestically-sourced content.' The United Auto Workers union, which represents 10,000 aerospace workers, said it supports tariffs and domestic production quotas, adding that U.S. aerospace employment has fallen to 510,000 in 2024 from 850,000 in 1990. 'To safeguard the entire aerospace supply chain across the commercial and defense sectors, comprehensive tariffs and production quotas on several products are needed,' it said. JetBlue Airways JBLU.O opposed new tariffs, however, saying, 'Trade policy should reinforce, not destabilize, the proven systems that keep our aircraft flying safely and affordably.'


Japan Today
a day ago
- Japan Today
U.S. intel chief Gabbard denounces 'warmongers' after Hiroshima visit
US intelligence chief Tulsi Gabbard warned Tuesday after a trip to Hiroshima that "warmongers" were pushing the world to the brink of nuclear war, in an extraordinary, if veiled, pitch for diplomacy. Gabbard did not specify her concerns, but Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly brandished the specter of nuclear war as he cautions Europe and the United States against support for Ukraine. Gabbard, a former congresswoman who has faced criticism in the past for her views on Russia, posted a video of grisly footage from the world's first nuclear attack and of her staring reflectively at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial. On August 6, 1945, the United States obliterated Hiroshima, killing 140,000 in the explosion and by the end of the year from the uranium bomb's effects. Three days later, a U.S. plane dropped a plutonium bomb on Nagasaki, leaving around 74,000 people dead by the end of the year. Japan surrendered on August 15. "This one bomb that caused so much destruction in Hiroshima was tiny compared to today's nuclear bombs," Gabbard said. "A single nuclear weapon today could kill millions in just minutes. "As we stand here today closer to the brink of nuclear annihilation than ever before, political elites and warmongers are carelessly fomenting fear and tensions between nuclear powers," she said. "Perhaps it's because they are confident that they will have access to nuclear shelters for themselves and for their families that regular people won't have access to." Taking a tone more customary for a politician or activist than the director of national intelligence, Gabbard said: "So it's up to us, the people, to speak up and demand an end to this madness." Gabbard's remarks come as aides to President Donald Trump voice growing frustration with Putin, who has refused U.S.-led, Ukraine-backed calls for a temporary ceasefire. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, whom Gabbard criticized before the two entered President Donald Trump's cabinet, has warned that the United States could walk away from diplomacy over the Ukraine conflict if there are no positive signs. Gabbard, a former Democrat, faced a heated confirmation hearing but ultimately prevailed after Democrats and some Republicans questioned her past statements, including some supportive of Russian positions. She has said that the European Union and Washington should have listened to Russian security concerns about Ukraine joining NATO. Gabbard's visit to Hiroshima comes ahead of the 80th anniversary of the world's only atomic bombings. The United States has never apologized for the attacks. © 2025 AFP