[ad_1]
The manager is him. Emmanuel Macron proclaimed it in front of his supporters gathered Tuesday evening: "The one who trusted Alexandre Benalla is me. The one who knew and validated the order, the punishment of my subordinates, it's me and nobody else. " Almost a week after the revelation of the violent intervention and out of everything cadre of his collaborator the 1 er May, the head of the state intends to take everything on him. "If they want a leader, he is in front of you, they come to get him", he launched Tuesday night. Wednesday, from Bagneres-de-Bigorres (Hautes-Pyrenees), the President said: "I said everything. Look at people, do they talk about that? […] I said what I had to say. " Still, crucial questions remain unanswered
Why did not you ask that justice be seized?
In the affair that has paralyzed the Elysée for a week, this is the weak point that Emmanuel Macron can not justify. As provided by Article 40 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, "all constituted authority" is obliged to inform the court when it acquires knowledge of the commission of a crime or offense. Admittedly, non-compliance with this article does not constitute a criminal offense but may be the subject of an administrative penalty. But which hierarchical authority can sanction the President of the Republic on this ground? Any. And in this case, Emmanuel Macron now warns that there will be no "fuse." So that, in his eyes, there was no reason to prevent the justice of the behavior of his close collaborator.
The argument of the Elysee on this point was detailed by the chief of staff of the president, Patrick Strzoda, before the commission of inquiry in the National Assembly. He explains that it was the context of violence during the demonstration of 1 and May that prompted him not to go to court. He also pointed out that the General Inspectorate of the National Police, which had received the video as early as 3 May, had not opened an investigation. So no need to go to court. But its director, Marie-France Monéger-Guyomarc'h, told the commission of inquiry that the officer who had viewed the footage thought then that it was a police officer, and that the blows were n ' so were not illegitimate
Why did Benalla continue to be responsible for your private trips?
Emmanuel Macron chose a strong term, Tuesday evening, to qualify the behavior of his mission leader on 1 and May. A "treason". The immediate decision, taken by his chief of staff and tacitly validated by Macron who did not object, consists of two parts: the suspension for two weeks and a "demotion". Contradicting the statements of the spokesman of the Elysee, who had raised a suspension of salary,
Patrick Strzoda revealed Wednesday before the senators that, finally, Alexander Benalla had touched "his full salary" for the month of May, his sanction applying to his holidays: "These fifteen days will be the subject of a deduction on the rights to leave."
According to statements by Patrick Strzoda before the parliamentary commission of inquiry, part of Benalla's missions was withdrawn from May 22: he is removed from the organization of official travel of the President of the Republic. After the end of his suspension, the official is officially confined to the Elysee Palace and the only organization of private travel of the presidential couple. He nevertheless appears outside several times: for the ceremony of entry to the Pantheon of Simone Veil, for July 14 and for the descent of the Champs-Elysees of the French football team victorious. A presence each time explained by the exceptional nature of the situations. More troubling, the man who "betrayed" has continued to follow Macron in his private outings. At Giverny, end of June, "Mr. Benalla was in his role " when he accompanied the President of the Republic and his wife, responded, lapidary, the director of cabinet. Without explaining why he was kept in this position
Why ask for a weapon if he was not responsible for your safety?
To deflate the importance of the role that would have had Alexander Benalla, Patrick Strzoda assured Tuesday that he was in charge of coordinating "services that contribute to the official travel of the President of the Republic." And so it was not his job to ensure the safety of the President. An affirmation confirmed Wednesday morning, before the same commission, by Lionel Lavergne, head of the Security Group of the Presidency of the Republic (GSPR). However, Patrick Strzoda asked, at the beginning of the mandate, the Paris police chief to issue him a license to carry a weapon for his duties. An approach that comes after two recent refusals from the Ministry of the Interior. A first request was made in January 2017 during the campaign. Then on June 21, 2017, this time with the services of Gerard Collomb, Minister of the Interior.
Benalla "had again appealed to my services so that his request could be re-examined, request to which my cabinet had not taken action, considering that the legal conditions were not met", explained Gerard Collomb before MPs. To justify this refusal, Frédéric Aureal, head of the Protection Service (SDLP) said Wednesday in the Senate: "I was extremely unfavorable to the fact that a non-police person, a private person, could be armed, while a protective device composed of seasoned professionals can be present. "
Hence the new request via another procedure, more rare, near the police headquarters.
Interviewed also, the Paris police chief, Michel Delpuech, explained under oath that the request was transmitted to him "by the Elysee Palace in the context of the security-related functions exercised by Mr. Benalla. " Moreover, the prefect of police of Paris recognizes "a point of weakness." In the ministerial decree, which specifies "the services to which the agent must belong", the case of a chargé de mission, assistant to the chief of staff of the President of the Republic, was not planned . But since it was the Elysee who "relayed" with him this request, the prefect "assumes" adding that there had been no "pressure". And insists that this port of arms was "related to his office with the Head of State." Therefore, what function can justify the use of a firearm, if not safety?
Faced with this obvious contradiction, Patrick Strzoda was indeed obliged to open a breach. The high official assures, this time in front of the senators, that it considered useful for the "private displacements, that there is in the entourage of the president of the Republic a person who has a port of arms" . However, even in these cases, the head of state is always accompanied by GSPR elite policemen.
Why not shed light on the mission leaders in your office?
Alexandre Benalla was part of a phantom cabinet: his appointment as chargé d'mission did not appear in the Journal Officiel, his name was not included in the organization charts. A lawful but opaque practice, and used in other ministries today, as under previous mandates. The parliamentary commission of inquiry established that a "dozen" representatives worked in Emmanuel Macron's cabinet. At least that's what Strzoda told the MEPs. On the other hand, details are lacking as to whether Benalla was being treated favorably over his colleagues hired with the same status. On the salary in particular. The chief of staff categorically refused to indicate the amount that Benalla was receiving. He vigorously denied the sum of 10,000 euros mentioned in the press, but did not go further, invoking the separation of powers and stating: "I do not wish, in the mandate entrusted to me by the President of the Republic to come and answer your questions, answer. " Since then, the Elysee has specified that the salary of Alexander Benalla was 7 000 euros gross.
On the other benefits that benefited Benalla , the cabinet director is not much more prolix, if not to dispute the term "advantage". In addition to the housing allocated, the project manager had a vehicle, a Renault Talisman, usually reserved for senior departmental hierarchy. Official motive: "His car was a service car to carry out his mission, which brought him very often on the ground to prepare the movements of the President of the Republic, and who was integrated into the procession, from where the special equipment installed by the garage of the Elysee. " Has it kept after demotion? Strzoda did not say so
Why was Benalla the only official in charge of a company apartment?
When the newspaper Le Monde reveals for the first time that Alexander Benalla has been installed since July 9 in a staff apartment at the Branly quay, the Elysee Palace remains silent. It will be necessary to wait for the information of the Express, which evokes an amount of 180 000 euros of work for the creation of a duplex of 200 square meters destined to Benalla, so that the entourage of the head of the State dares the amount of the invoice for the creation of a duplex. Without more precision. Before the deputies of the commission of inquiry of the National Assembly, Patrick Strozda evokes for the first time the case in the case, in a funny way. He vigorously denies that Benalla has settled in a 200 square meter duplex. No one understands whether it belies the size of the apartment or the installation of the project manager of Macron. Later in his hearing, he will justify the attribution of such an apartment (none of the ten officials of the Elysée will benefit from this advantage) by the permanent availability that the mission of "coordination of the different security services " involved in presidential trips. But what about since the sanction and especially the change of scope of the missions of the close collaborator of Macron? Since May 4, Benalla is officially in charge only of the organization of the events held inside the Palace, and private trips of the couple Macron. In other words, this permanent availability is no longer appropriate. The day before, at LCI, Benjamin Griveaux, spokesman for the government, had said that Alexander Benalla had made this request for a staff housing in March. Without knowing when it was granted to him and by whom. Before or after the sanction? More compromising, Griveaux had made it clear that Benalla had occupied an apartment of 80 square meters in July, which strongly denied Strzoda the next day, in front of the deputies.
,
,
[ad_2]
Source link
