For the final day of his interrogation, the contrast with previous hearings could not be more cruel for the former head of state, who was sentenced to five years in prison for conspiracy in the first instance.
The former champion of the right seemed to have mastered the questions from the civil parties and the prosecution last week.
But things turned sour five minutes after the opening of the hearing on Tuesday: Me Philippe Bouchez El Ghozi, lawyer for Claude Guéant, stood up and engaged in two tense hours of response to the former president, who had said he was “surprised” by what the file had revealed about Mr. Guéant’s account.
“Extremely violent accusations about (his) probity,” which caused “deep bruising” for Claude Guéant, according to Me Bouchez El Ghozi, who presents a written attestation intended to clarify his points.
“If, as it is likely, it is implied that personal interest is financial interest, I want to affirm that I have never in my life received or solicited money from anyone. To imply is serious,” writes the 81-year-old former prefect.
In addition to his secret meeting with the brother-in-law of dictator Muammar Gaddafi, Abdallah Senoussi, Claude Guéant is also accused of accepting a luxury watch and then 500,000 euros from intermediary Alexandre Djouhri, without declaring this sum to the tax authorities.
“Why are you reasoning by hypothesis for Claude Guéant, implying that he could have benefited from Libyan money?” asks Me Bouchez El Ghozi, calmly but unwaveringly: “Reasoning by hypothesis would be acceptable for Claude Guéant but not for you?” The lack of proof of Libyan financing of his campaign is a key argument of Nicolas Sarkozy.
Like last week, the former president praises the “remarkable work” of his former general secretary at the Elysee Palace. But he expresses his anger at “elements that have emerged in the file that could not have come from his work.”
“Indigestible”
There is something that Me Bouchez El Ghozi struggles to understand: how is it that someone whom Nicolas Sarkozy described as an “honest man” a year ago in the first instance trial is suddenly not one today?
“The pressure of power can be so great that some may, at one time or another, lose it,” speculates the most famous defendant in France. Then, a little further, he says coldly: “Maybe it took me some time to digest it. Sometimes I found certain things a bit indigestible. Indigestible, that’s the word. And yet I am very calm.”
The lawyer goes on the attack, not letting go, while Nicolas Sarkozy, unusually nervous, gets annoyed. “Sorry, but you are not my lawyer,” he says. “No. I am Claude Guéant’s,” retorts Me Bouchez El Ghozi before whispering: “Sour minds might consider that these statements could constitute a new defense strategy facilitated by the medically imposed absence of Claude Guéant.”
“I said what I had to say, not as a strategy, but out of conviction,” replies Nicolas Sarkozy. Even if, he admits, his conviction may have influenced his journey: “The conspiracy, well, that’s too much for me.”
In the first instance trial, it was this offense that led to his conviction: he was accused of allowing Mr. Guéant and another close associate, Brice Hortefeux, to negotiate the financing of his presidential campaign with Abdallah Senoussi at the end of 2005.
These secret meetings, where a “corrupt pact” may have been forged, were held with this man convicted by the French justice for masterminding the UTA DC-10 bombing (170 dead) and who may have sought clemency or amnesty in exchange for secret funds.
Nicolas Sarkozy says he understands “that there may have been a lot of sadness, regrets, bitterness” in Claude Guéant. “But when I returned to the (Santé prison), do you think I had grand feelings towards my friends who had met Senoussi?” he grinds.
