Marine Le Pen Confirms She Will Run in 2027 Presidential Election Despite Legal Battle

PARIS—Marine Le Pen announced on Tuesday evening on TF1’s “8 p.m. News” program that she will run for the presidency next year, despite her conviction and the house arrest under electronic monitoring that came with it.“I want to exhaust every avenue of appeal in order to defend my innocence in this case,” she said.A French appeals court on July 7 upheld the embezzlement conviction of National Rally (RN) figurehead Le Pen while reducing the penalty that had threatened to bar her from next year’s presidential race, leaving open the prospect of a run in 2027.The Paris Court of Appeal sentenced Le Pen to three years in prison, one of them to be served under an electronic tag, and to 15 months of firm ineligibility. That marks a reduction from the sentence handed down on March 31, 2025, when a criminal court imposed a four-year prison term, a 100,000 euro ($114, 283) fine, and a five-year ban from public office with immediate effect.In principle, Le Pen can stand as a candidate in the 2027 presidential election. Le Pen has said that wearing a bracelet would make a campaign impossible, as it would restrict her movements.She based the decision on her choice to appeal to the Court of Cassation, which, she said, would suspend the effect of the sanction.“I had said I would not campaign while wearing an electronic monitoring bracelet. But since I have the possibility of appealing to the Court of Cassation … and since that appeal suspends the effects of the ruling, I will campaign without one,” she stated.She also retains 10 days to file an appeal with the Court of Cassation, France’s highest court. The court reviews the application of the law rather than the facts.Le Pen, 57, has long framed the case as politically motivated, calling her party the target of a witch hunt.She argued, however, that “two courts can make a mistake,” adding that “the rule of law itself recognizes this, since it precisely allows for an appeal to be filed before the Court of Cassation.”Le Pen maintained that she is innocent of the charges against her, insisting that the acts “cannot be classified as embezzlement of public funds.” In her view, the justice system is faulting her for having her political aides work on national rather than European politics, a reading of the law she considers mistaken.She also framed her presidential bid as a response to widespread decline, saying that “everywhere we look, things have collapsed.”She went on to describe the country’s predicament in these terms: “You see, the country is a bit like Gulliver’s syndrome. In other words, the country is a giant that is being held down by millions of little threads, which are all the harmful decisions that have been made by those who have been in power for the past thirty years or so.“So Jordan[Bardella] and I will come and cut these little threads to free the giant that is France and allow it to reclaim its place, but also, once again, to change the daily lives of the French people.”In a statement released after the ruling, the Court of Appeal justified its decision, holding “that the purpose of parliamentary assistants’ work had been clear from the outset, and that the definition and objective of their duties were clear and foreseeable.”It added that the European Parliament had done no more than clarify its regulations over time.“Political or party activist activities were therefore permitted only outside working hours and only insofar as they were compatible with the obligations arising from the employment contract,” the court found.Le Pen was convicted of “complicity in the embezzlement of public funds” carried out by the former National Front as a legal entity, the party she had led since succeeding her father as its president in 2011.The court found, however, that the Members of Parliament responsible for the embezzlement “did not personally enrich themselves,” that only some of the parliamentary assistants hired were involved, and that “only the national political party benefited from the misappropriated funds.”The judges also noted that the offenses caused losses exceeding 2.8 million euros gave the party an unfair advantage over its rivals, and were committed by elected officials “entrusted with serving the public interest and from whom complete integrity is expected.”The court justified the shorter period of ineligibility imposed on Le Pen by holding that it “considers that the enforcement of this sentence since March 31, 2025, has already remedied the harm to public integrity to an extent compatible with the fundamental guarantees afforded to citizens.”To rule otherwise, it added, “would undermine the principle of freedom to stand for election, an essential condition for the democratic expression of universal suffrage.”The judges made clear they did not intend their decision to bar Le Pen from the presidential race. Yet they left her to campaign, at least in part, wearing an electronic ankle monitor.Rodolphe Bosselut, Le Pen’s lawyer, said as he left the courtroom that the court’s decision was “a good start” and represented a partial victory.French President Emmanuel Macron, while on a visit to Damascus, declined to comment on the ruling against Le Pen when asked.“The president of the Republic does not comment on judicial decisions,” he said.Marine Tondelier, leader of the Greens, said: “In a normal world where the RN had even the slightest shred of morality, she would step down from running herself. Because you cannot decently stand for election after having been convicted in this way for misappropriating public funds, even if you remain eligible.”Clémentine Autain, a lawmaker from the left flank of Macron’s Ensemble coalition, struck a similar note.“Whilst the RN blames immigrants for all society’s ills and dreams of imposing ever-harsher penalties for petty crime, it is fleecing taxpayers,” she said.Fabien Roussel, head of the French Communist Party, said, “Such a conviction, regardless of how the sentence is adjusted, cannot allow someone to stand before the French people.”Wallerand de Saint-Just, a former RN treasurer who was convicted in the case, told The Epoch Times, “It’s a mixed decision.”Aside from Le Pen and her party, 10 other defendants had appealed after the initial trial. All were convicted again.“It goes against us on the legal merits, but the sentences have been significantly reduced, even though the court says essentially the same thing as the trial court about the seriousness of the offense,” Saint-Just said.“To me, that’s a sign the Court of Appeal is uncomfortable with its position from a strictly legal standpoint.”He maintained that the case was not about the misappropriation of public funds but rather an “administrative disagreement,” arguing that the rules were not clear.“Everyone could reasonably have believed that Parliament was fully aware of each parliamentary assistant’s situation. This should therefore have been resolved within Parliament itself,” he said.In a statement shared with The Epoch Times, the European Parliament’s Press Service said it “takes note of today’s judgment by the Paris Court of Appeal, which found the defendants guilty of misappropriation of funds.”The institution stressed that joining the case as a civil party was standard practice, taken “as it does in all similar cases” to protect public money. Its aim, it said, has “always been to safeguard European taxpayers’ money and the Parliament’s budget, in accordance with its mandate and rules of procedure.”Beyond that, the Parliament said it would “not comment on any other aspect of the trial, the judgment, or any potential appeal before the Court of Cassation” at this stage.