Vincent Brengarth, lawyer for the Anticor anti-corruption association, denounced a “cataclysm” this Friday on franceinfo, after the cancellation by the Paris administrative court of the approval decree granted by Matignon to the organization.
“It is truly a cataclysm that is befalling both Anticor and, more generally, everyone”judge Me Vincent Brengarth, lawyer for the Anticor anti-corruption association, Friday June 23 on franceinfo, after the cancellation by the Paris administrative court of the approval decree granted by Matignon to the organization.
>> Justice cancels the anti-corruption approval of the Anticor association
Franceinfo: What is your reaction after this cancellation of Anticor’s approval?
Mr. Vincent Brengarth: It is truly a cataclysm that falls both on Anticor and, more generally, on everyone. We expected the court to find that all the conditions were met. Except that in reality, he limits himself to noting that there was an awkwardness of drafting in the decree which was given by the government, and that he draws the consequence from it that it would be a question of an error of law which could result in the cancellation of Anticor’s approval. So we have the feeling that there was no debate on what was more important, namely, were the conditions met yes, or not?
This procedure was launched directly by former dissident members of the association, what do you think of that?
In any association, there are always people who disagree with the decisions that are made by the board of directors. But there, the administrative court recognized the admissibility to act of a former member of Anticor who is attacking a decision which allows the association to fight against breaches of probity. This is completely unprecedented because it is an approval that is positive, so it is difficult to see how he would come to make any grievance to this applicant. But instead of dismissing the appeal out of hand, as it could have done, the administrative tribunal seems to give credence to the arguments of this dissident and above all, to recognize in him an interest in acting which has not no place to be.
Do you think this decision is political?
One wonders if the government is really trying to fight corruption. If he was seeking to fight corruption, not only would he not have included his drafting errors in the decree, but even more, he would have participated more in the hearing. During the hearing held before the administrative court, the Prime Minister’s services were not present or represented. They did not even speak, even though they are the ones who [en tant que rédacteurs de l’arrêté attaqué] were on defense.
Today, everyone is perfectly aware of the fact that it weighs an extremely unfavorable context for individual and collective freedoms and for freedom of association, and everyone is well aware, on the side of our rulers, that the Anticor association embarrasses, because it comes out of cases with implicated cases at the highest level of the state.