After an incident between a defense lawyer and an assessor, the lawyers of the accused filed a motion to recuse the latter. Due to the lack of a decision from the Court of Appeal on the matter, the defense also requested a referral.
Special correspondent in Aix-en-Provence
Tension in the trial of the alleged leaders of the DZ Mafia has reached its peak. Just three days before the theoretical end of this hearing, which aims to determine the perpetrators of the double murder of Farid Tir and Mohamed Bendjaghlouli near Marseille in August 2019, the trial was temporarily suspended after another incident between the defense and the president of the assize court of Bouches-du-Rhône.
This Thursday, a witness who was supposed to testify suddenly fell ill, with a medical certificate to support it. This certificate quickly sparked controversy. The defense requested a copy of it but was denied by the president, who wanted to display it on a screen. This disagreement quickly escalated between the defense and the president. Lawyer for one of the accused, Ms. Emmanuelle Franck criticized a “lack of respect for the adversarial process”. An assessor commented, “You’re not going to cry anyway?”
“A shame, this court”
This remark triggered strong reactions from the defense. “Every day, this court is a shame,” said Mr. Karim Morand-Lahouazi. “You are ruining the trial,” accused Ms. Christine d’Arrigo. After a new suspension of the hearing, Mr. Vincent Péonard, representing the bar council whose presence was requested by the defense, denounced the “unacceptable behavior” of this assessor.
After another adjournment and a lunch break, the defense officially asked for the recusal of the assessor. “This remark exceeds what is tolerated for a magistrate and represents a breach of impartiality,” said Mr. Raphaël Chiche’s statement after the hearing. The hearing was suspended until 5 p.m., to allow the First President of the Court of Appeal to rule and for the attorney general to give an opinion.
Risk of trial suspension
If this request is accepted, it could have a real impact on the conduct of the debates, with the deliberation theoretically scheduled for Friday. “As there is no substitute assessor planned, [it would be] the end,” added Mr. Raphaël Chiche. “There would be no more trial. We do not want this trial to be cancelled but we want it to be conducted properly.”
Since the opening of the trial, incidents have been numerous and tensions recurrent between the president of the assize court and the defense.
Suspension until Thursday
When the hearing resumed after a four-hour suspension, the president indicated that the decision to recuse the assessor had not been subject to a stay of execution, meaning that the First President of the Court of Appeal would decide on this later. In the absence of an immediate decision, the debates were set to continue.
However, the defense immediately requested the trial to be adjourned in light of this situation. “We can no longer continue this trial under these conditions,” said Me Cécile Miceli, one of the defense lawyers. “Even the microphones are fed up,” joked Me Julien Blot after they caused feedback. “Trust is broken,” concluded Me Chiche at the bar.
The prosecutor did not hide her annoyance as the trial had a considerable delay. “This adjournment request is simply aimed at bypassing the legal code with the code of criminal procedure, with the sole purpose, as has been the case since the beginning of this trial, of obstructing these debates,” she accused. The hearing was adjourned until Thursday morning while the court deliberated on this adjournment request.
