A Syrian soldier run over by a tank.
A Jordanian pilot burned alive in a cage.
An American journalist beheaded, his head resting on his back.
On December 16, 2015, these three terrible pictures illustrating the abuses of the Islamic State (IS) appeared in a message posted on Twitter by Marine Le Pen's account, accompanied by the following comment:
"Daesh, that's it"
.
Read also: Does Marine Le Pen have the right to broadcast images of beheading on Twitter?
Five years after this tweet, the president of the National Rally (RN) appears on Wednesday February 10 before the court of Nanterre.
She will be judged alongside Gilbert Collard, now MEP, who wrote on December 16, 2015 on Twitter and Facebook:
"Bourdin compares the FN to Daesh: the weight of words and the shock of the sores!"
to accompany the photo of a man on the ground, face disfigured, skull sunk, hands tied behind his back.
The two defendants incur three years in prison and a 75,000 euros fine for "disseminating a message of a violent nature likely to seriously undermine human dignity, likely to be seen by a minor" under article 227- 24 of the Criminal Code.
The trial has already been postponed twice: the first time, in October 2019, at the request of the defense and then a second time, in June 2020, due to the health crisis linked to the coronavirus pandemic.
"Incendiary of public debate"
In December 2015, the tweets of Marine Le Pen and Gilbert Collard had sparked a real controversy.
“
Monstrous photos.
Ms. Le Pen: incendiary of public debate, political and moral misconduct, non-respect for victims ... ”
Prime Minister Manuel Valls reacted on Twitter.
The Nanterre prosecutor's office had for its part opened preliminary investigations after a report from the Ministry of the Interior.
The main stakeholders had stressed that they had acted in this way to denounce the rapprochement made according to them by the journalist Jean-Jacques Bourdin between the Islamic State and the National Rally.
But faced with the outcry as well as the indignation of the family of James Foley, the hostage appearing beheaded in the third photo posted by Marine Le Pen, the latter's tweet had been deleted.
Read also: Under pressure, Marine Le Pen withdraws the photo of the execution of James Foley
The judicial process then took its course.
The parliamentary immunities of Gilbert Collard and Marine Le Pen had been lifted, then the latter had been indicted, elected from Gard in January 2018 and elected from Pas-de-Calais in March 2018. Marine Le Pen had then declared to
Le Figaro
:
“I am therefore worried about fighting terrorism.
It's the world upside down!".
The two deputies had also refused to submit to a psychiatric expertise.
"Censorship of freedom of expression"
On the eve of the trial, which promises to be very followed by the media, Gilbert Collard
"is in a combative state of mind
,
"
said his lawyer, Me Jean-Marc Descoubes.
"He finds this referral to correctional which is in reality an instrumentalisation of justice by political power implausible"
.
Without talking about a
"political trial"
, Me David Dassa-Le Deist, advising Marine Le Pen, confides that the latter
"may have the feeling of a relative persecution".
To read also: Photos of abuses by Daesh on Twitter: Marine Le Pen sent back to correctional
The two lawyers, who will
“naturally”
and
“vigorously”
plead
the acquittal, insist on the importance of the
“context”
in which the incriminated messages were published.
“Jean-Jacques Bourdin makes a comparison between the FN and Daesh: my client is not on the set to react, so she responds on Twitter, within the framework of the freedom of expression available to her!
These images, more than words, denounced with incredible force the crimes [of ISIS] and therefore the indecency of this comparison,
”comments Me Dassa-Le Deist.
"If the court pronounced a conviction, it would be a really serious attack on the freedom of expression"
, insists Mr. Descoubes.
"An unprecedented attack"
, adds his colleague,
"because until now, article 227-24 has never been used to limit the freedom of expression of a political figure.
The prosecution has used an eminently laudable text on the endangering of minors to make it a means of censoring freedom of expression ”
.
