French ex-president Nicolas Sarkozy stripped of Legion of Honour medal
It comes in line with the rules of the Legion of Honour.
The conservative politician, who was president from 2007 to 2012, has been at the heart of a series of legal cases since leaving office.
He was found guilty of corruption and influence peddling by both a Paris court in 2021 and an appeals court in 2023 for trying to bribe a magistrate in exchange for information about a legal case in which he was implicated.
He was sentenced to wear an electronic monitoring bracelet for one year, a verdict upheld by France's highest court, the Court of Cassation, in December.
Earlier this year, Sarkozy stood trial over allegations he received millions of dollars from Libya for his successful presidential campaign in 2007.
He denies the claims.
Prosecutors requested a seven-year prison sentence.
The verdict is expected in September.
Sarkozy becomes the second former head of state to be stripped of the Legion of Honour – France's highest distinction – after Nazi collaborator Philippe Petain, who was convicted in 1945 for treason and conspiring with the enemy for his actions as leader of Vichy France from 1940-1944.
Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein was stripped of his Legion of Honour award in the wake of widespread sexual misconduct allegations against him in 2017.
Disgraced cyclist and former Tour de France star Lance Armstrong also had his French Legion of Honour award revoked.
Sarkozy retired from public life in 2017 though still plays an influential role in French conservative politics.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
40 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Suranne Jones details 'rambunctious' experience shadowing Keir Starmer for thriller role
Suranne Jones has opened up about her 'rambunctious' experience shadowing Keir Starmer for her new Netflix thriller and detailed one fiery moment in particular Suranne Jones has opened up about her 'rambunctious' experience shadowing Keir Starmer for her new Netflix thriller. The former Coronation Street actress, 46, is now starring as fictional Prime Minister Abigail Dalton in Hostage, and follows the events that unfold after her character attends a summit with the French president Vivienne Toussaint (Julie Delpy) and her husband is kidnapped. As part of her research for the role, Suranne took a trip to Downing Street and ventured into the House of Commons, where she managed to catch a heated moment with the real-life Prime Minister. Speaking on Wednesday's edition of This Morning, she told hosts Sian Welby and Craig Doyle: "I did go to the House of Commons. It was great because when we then built our set, I'd been in the actual place. We did see Keir Starmer having a...[debate] it was quite rambunctious." The actress noted her disbelief at watching it all take place in front of her as she added: "There was a lot of shouting in there. You don't believe it til you see it!" The UK has only seen two female Prime Ministers in its time, with the late Margaret Thatcher having served a leader of the Conservative party from 1979 until 1990. In October 2022, Liz Truss became the shortest-serving Prime Minister in the country's history having managed to survive just 50 days in office. Suranne noted the lack of females in such a role of power but approached the role with a 'fresh' perspective, which she believes was necessary when taking into account the current political climate. She said: "We haven't got a lot of women to look at, have we? But that's another great thing. What I did and women in power, I wanted Abigail to be a fresh set of eyes, and the political landscape as it is, we needed that as it is." However, Suranne, who has carved out a stellar career in drama since leaving her role as Karen McDonald on ITV's flagship soap more than two decades ago, recently admitted she wouldn't want to take on the top job at number 10 in real life, mainly because of the amount of 'baggage' her new alter-ego has to carry round. She said: "A woman, before she's even put on her very high, hurty shoes, she has a lot of baggage and a lot of things that she is carrying: the way she looks, the way she dresses, the way she's been educated. "All of those things. How she behaves with her family or her background, everything, before she starts to go out into the world and getting judged for it. "Obviously, I'm well known. People recognise me. I try to keep a private element to my life, but then I do want to show support of the charities I work for and all of that stuff, and the community theatre that I like to give elevation to, so I drew on a lot of that stuff. But I wouldn't want to be a prime minister." She continued: "The early name for the show was The Choice and I think that's the thing, the choice of wanting a job like that, the choice of your family or your country. "It blows my mind, I can't even imagine... obviously, I had to because I play the prime minister, so I did have to imagine. But these big, big choices, they're huge and so it's just making people think." The five-part political thriller witnesses Dalton being blackmailed following her husband's kidnapping whilst he's working overseas, with the captors threatening his murder unless she steps down from office.
Spectator
41 minutes ago
- Spectator
Closing hotels won't stop the migrant crisis
After yesterday's landmark decision on the Bell Hotel in Epping, the next question must be: where do we go from here? What is essential to understand is that yesterday's High Court judgement was what might be called an 'Al Capone reckoning'. One ultimate actor, the state, and by extension the government, has been humbled on a mere technicality. The Essex hotel was deemed in breach of contract for using its rooms to accommodate refugees, rather than paying guests. The state was not brought to heel on its ethically unsound and socially corrosive laws on immigration and re-settlement. That the Home Office sought to block Epping Forest council's application for an injunction is important. Campaigners and the public will still face an elite establishment – especially, despite yesterday's judgement, a judiciary – that has an intransigent and indulgent attitude to migrants, and a slavish, literal-minded adherence to human rights laws. The fundamentals of the migrant crisis, then, have not been resolved by the closure of the Bell Hotel. They will not be resolved by the closure of other hotels, either. Illegal migrants will still come to Britain, and they will still be housed. This crisis will end in the same way it was always going to: with changes in policy and attitudes. We have already witnessed the effectiveness of one stern response. That was the Rwanda scheme. Although the plan for its establishment was fraught with difficulties, when it did briefly come into law last April many illegal immigrants responded by taking flight to the Republic of Ireland, as complaints by the Dublin government at the time attested. This principle of deterrence must be re-visited. Keir Starmer's plan to 'smash the gangs' has not worked. A government that really wanted to stop illegal migration would consider more stringent measures, such as automatic deportation of illegal immigrants or those with criminal convictions languishing in our prisons. These policies would prove popular, but Starmer isn't going to enact them. One might imagine that only a Reform government would. The ultimate 'uncompassionate' policy is the unsayable one: stop picking up migrants from their boats in the first place. Return them to France, with or without the French government's cooperation. This would most likely contravene maritime law and cause legal challenges and a diplomatic fallout with our neighbours. Lurking behind so many of these preventative measures are not legal or political obstacles, but rather intangible ones, those which can't be revoked or reversed by diktat, legislation, court ruling or vote. In order for matters to change for good, attitudes need to change and lazy assumptions need to be dismantled. The first is the one parroted by those with no imagination, no will or just no wish: this is that there is 'no solution' to this fundamentally global problem. There is, as outlined above. It just takes determination and the willingness to risk the opprobrium of bien-pensants. Passive and defeatist mantras should have no place anywhere in political discourse. The second is to confront the idle axiom that British people today increasingly hate foreigners. This is mostly untrue. Rather, many are angry at the increasing number of immigrants and their decreasing quality. If there is ire directed against one group of people, it is the liberal elite and those who have favoured cheap labour in their factories and homes. It is imperative that the thought-terminating accusation of 'xenophobia' is ignored or rebutted. A third shibboleth contains other weedy platitudes: that migrants who force their way onto our shores are 'fleeing persecution' and 'are only seeking a better life'. That first bromide is refutable. Those who come by boat are arriving from France, a democracy where no-one is persecuted by the state for their beliefs or ethnicity. The second statement represents a worrying detachment from reality. Of course illegal immigrants are seeking a better life. We all want a better life. The ultimate mindset which demands the most patience and perseverance in overturning is the embedded belief and unspoken truism that 'compassion' is inherently good. Sometimes it manifestly isn't. Sometimes, voicing compassionate sentiment only improves the feeling of well-being among those who voice it. Immigration policies based on compassion have so far only served to increase feelings of resentment and anger among the native population. Yesterday's judgement about the Bell Hotel matters, but real change will only come when we upend the conceit that compassionate beliefs or saying nice things necessarily correlate with or result in positive outcomes. Only an unfashionable attitude and 'uncaring' policies will solve the migrant crisis.
Scottish Sun
an hour ago
- Scottish Sun
Disturbing world of ‘trash streamer' Jean Pormanove, 46, who died on camera after 10 days of torture & sleep deprivation
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) FROM being spat on to kicked in the stomach, "trash streamer" Jean Pormanove endured "absolute horror" during the final 10 days of his life. Jean - real name Raphael Graven - died aged 46 live on camera at his home in France after taking his grimly popular trash rituals too far. 6 Jean Pormanove - real name Raphael Graven - died aged 46 at his home in France Credit: YouTube 6 Horrifying videos showed him being tortured in the days leading up to his death Credit: YouTube 6 His death on Monday was reported to cops by viewers who had been watching Jean throughout the 10-day live-stream marathon Credit: YouTube After 10 days of reported torture, sleep deprivation and ingestion of toxic products - Jean allegedly died in his sleep on camera. His death on Monday was reported to cops by viewers who had been watching Jean throughout the 10-day live-stream marathon - but realised a sudden end to the challenge. The challenge is said to have included "extreme" physical violence, "sleep deprivation", and "the ingestion of toxic products", according to BFMTV. The death was confirmed by Owen Cenazandotti, a fellow streamer in a post on his Instagram. 'I ask you all to respect his memory and not share the video of his last breath in his sleep.' Streaming for lengthy periods of time was not uncommon for Jean and his partners - who do this for a living on a platform called Kick, with Jean mostly as the online punch-bag. He had grown his following to over 500,000 across social media and was known for taking part in extreme challenges online alongside his streamer pals Naruto and Safine. In his clips, they were seen throwing objects at him, pushing food into his mouth while he was tied up and shooting Jean with a paintball gun. Naruto and Safine were taken into custody in January 2025 on suspicion of violence against vulnerable people - before being released. French government minister Clara Chappaz said Jean was 'humiliated and mistreated' and what he endured during live streams was often an 'absolute horror". Kick, a live streaming video platform, was launched in 2022 and it has very lenient moderation policies, making it an attractive options for content creators. The murky world of trash streaming has been subject to controversy due to several incidents involving physical harm or death during live broadcasts. It is a type of live broadcast where the host engages in shocking, dangerous, humiliating, or otherwise controversial actions - often involving themselves or other people. The genre, which originated in Russia was actually banned on July 30, 2024, in Russia's State Duma due to public safety concerns and the negative societal impact. Another death involved with filmed humiliation culture is Valentina Grigoryeva who died of hypothermia after being locked outside in subzero temperatures in 2020. Valentina, who was pregnant at the time, would live stream with boyfriend Stas Reeflay. He would repeatedly pepper spray her as she lay screaming on the sofa, smash plates of food over her head and clamp his hands around Valentina's face, as seen in their videos. Reeflay, a Russian Youtuber, is facing 15 years in prison for the death of Valentina after he locked her outside in the freezing cold and then livestreamed her lying dead on the sofa. 6 Jean grew 500,000 followers across social media Credit: X 6 They were seen throwing objects at him, pushing food into his mouth while he was tied up and shooting Jean with a paintball gun Credit: YouTube 6 The lengthy stream was not uncommon for Jean and his streaming partners who do this for a living on a platform called Kick Credit: YouTube He was allegedly paid £800 by a subscriber to lock her outside his home near Moscow in subzero temperatures. The horror clip - far too disturbing to show - then features him pulling her near naked body back inside the flat and laying her on his sofa. Keeping the camera rolling with her body on show, the 30-year-old Russian then waits for the paramedics to arrive. He even keeps the camera on as medics enter and attempt to revive Valentina. 'Reality violence' was recently a subculture parodied by Black Mirror episode, Common People. The episode skewers our subscription-obsessed era by portraying a chilling reality-TV style nightmare where a woman's consciousness becomes pay-to-play and her desperate husband resorts to self-harm streams to keep her alive. Black Mirror's Common People confirms sick obsessions with streamed shame - proving that in the world of clicks, the more people suffer, the more we watch. The idea behind trash streaming - inviting a few friends over to get drunk, start a live broadcast and ask people for donations is so simple yet so horrific. But what is different about trash streams are the extent to which the dares are taken to - and the inevitable consequences that come with it. Over the years, trash streamers have experienced a concerning shift into a list of verbal and sexual assault cases. A trash stream in October 2020 featured blogger Andrei Burium - also known as Mellstroy - who invited a group of women to a party in Moscow. After offering a split in revenue, he asked them to take part in dares for exchange in revenue. In a chilling twist, Barium repeatedly slammed a 21-year-old woman's head against a table. His Youtube with a following of 500,000 was blocked however Burium continues to stream shocking content on his back-up channels and posts exclusive content on Telegram. Another sickening incident involves Ivan Pozharnikov, a trash streamer famous for mocking homeless people in exchange for donations from viewers. Valentin Ganichev was a homeless victim who allegedly took part in trash streaming with Ivan in return for food and a roof over his head. He was horrifically humiliated countless times as they pelted eggs over his head, chucked him in cold water and even buried him alive. On most of the streams, Ganichev was either drunk, or out of his mind on drugs which led viewers to believe he was being forced to participate in the dares - however he admitted to volunteering to officials. The demand for trash streaming has stemmed from COVID times which produced a lot of lonely viewers and 'streamer- boredom'- who wanted a sense of community. 'I was attracted by its real emotions,' said Anton, a 25-year-old security guard. Another fan of trash streams, nicknamed 'xbpm_music', claimed that the broadcasts have helped him 'pine less' for his homeland. 'It's fun for me to see typical Russian idiots,' he said. 'Sometimes I look at them and think: 'Damn, I really need to do something good, otherwise I'll become like them.' Motivation or what?' Psychologist Alena from Russia said: 'Getting pleasure from watching violence is a mental disorder'.
