They emerge, anonymously, from their reserve.
Magistrates are surprised Tuesday in a column published in Marianne that no investigation has been opened following the revelation on March 17 of the massive use of consulting firms by the French government.
"These facts concern a whole system likely to call into question the highest authorities of the State: the ministers placed at the head of central administrations, authorizing officers of public funds who have committed expenditure in the name of the State, and according to public procurement procedures for which it is up to the courts to verify the regularity,” they say.
The Senate, dominated by the right-wing opposition, revealed on March 17, within the framework of a commission of inquiry initiated by the small group CRCE with a communist majority, that the contracts concluded by the State with the consulting firms like McKinsey had "more than doubled" between 2018 and 2021, reaching a record amount of more than one billion euros in 2021.
The senators also took legal action for "suspicion of false testimony" against a McKinsey executive who had claimed that his firm paid corporate tax (IS) in France, while the commission of inquiry noted that the French entities of McKinsey had not paid any IS for ten years.
Read alsoMcKinsey affair: expenses, taxes, link with Macron ... all the answers to the questions that arise
According to the magistrates, several points should therefore attract the eye of the legislator.
“The regularity of the contract award procedure with regard to the public procurement code and the offense of favouritism.
(…) Tax evasion, concerning the non-payment of tax by the consulting firm based in France with regard to its level of transfer.
(…) The reality of the services provided by the firm”, or even possible conflicts of interest with State actors.
"Justice cannot be complicit in these deviations"
“It would be abnormal if the prosecution did not initiate an investigation and investigations into what could be a real state scandal.
We dare to hope that this investigation, which will be incriminating and exculpatory, will take place in the short term, they continue.
The articles published on this subject by investigative journalists, in particular that of March 30 by
Le Canard enchaîné
on
the "incredible myopia
" of the French tax authorities, should in principle lead the public prosecutor, whether it is the Paris prosecutor's office or the PNF, to open a preliminary investigation, as it has recently done for other cases".
And to cite the Fillon affair in 2017, or more recently, the investigation entrusted to the Central Office for the Fight against Corruption and Financial and Tax Offenses (OCLCIFF) by the National Financial Prosecutor's Office (PNF) targeting the Communist candidate for the presidential Fabien Roussel, suspected of fictitious employment after Mediapart accused him of having been paid between 2009 and 2014 as a parliamentary assistant without having actually worked.
The risk according to these magistrates if no investigation was triggered: that justice be suspected of protecting or favoring such a politician.
“Justice cannot be complicit in these deviations, the survival of our rule of law is at stake if we do not want to become a banana republic.
We magistrates refuse to legitimize any inertia, refuse to let citizens believe that justice would protect a politician, and would be subject to a Keeper of the Seals during an election campaign,” they conclude.
Read also“It takes, this bullshit!”
: how the McKinsey controversy hits Macron's campaign
“If there is evidence of manipulation, let it go to the criminal”, Emmanuel Macron had launched on Sunday March 27 to those who reproach him for these numerous contracts.
The candidate president had considered in particular that the non-payment of the IS by McKinsey was explained by the tax rules in force.
