The trial for insider trading Lagardère SCA and Daimler AG and seven executives of Airbus and EADS was adjourned on Friday after a morning of discussions to serve a central question of procedure.
The president of the 11th Chamber of the Paris Correctional Court, Benedicta of Perthuis, created a stir by accepting the submission to the Supreme Court on two priority issues of constitutionality (QPC) presented by counsel for defendants and deciding an adjournment pending the response of the high court.
The Supreme Court is the only one authorized to transmit a QPC in criminal matters to the Constitutional Council. It must rule within three months.
The court spoke after three hours of deliberation and intense procedural morning during which defense lawyers have attacked the validity even debates.
Justice accuses the defendants of improperly enriching themselves by selling their shares when they had access to privileged information, accurate and confidential nature to lower during the EADS shares
Problem:. their lawyers, the question of their guilt has already been decided by the disciplinary committee of the Financial Markets Authority (AMF) which has exonerated in late 2009 .
“The question is, what is the authority of a judgment (AMF), excluding liability of those who are now warned when they appear for the same , in the courts, “summarized Jean-Yves Le Borgne, lawyer John Leahy, Airbus commercial director present.
With his colleagues, the lawyer defended before the Criminal Court of the European principle” non bis in idem “in which no one shall be tried or punished twice for the same offense.
This question was found in March in a similar case by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which condemned the Italian government for pursuing a person twice for the same offense of fraudulent communication on capital automaker Fiat.
But in France, the Council of State and the Supreme Court has always validated the legality of allowing dual administrative and criminal conviction
-. ‘Denial of Justice’ –
On Friday, the court already chaired by Ms. Perthuis sentenced three people to heavy fines for insider trading in securities of the industrial group Pechiney in 2003.
The president rejected the argument of double jeopardy, while acknowledging that ” the French system of punishment for market abuse should be made to evolve to coordinate criminal and administrative prosecution of market abuse. “
At the hearing, Mr. Le Borgne and counsel for Daimler AG Aurelien Hamelle, presented two QPC to see if they challenge the system was in line with the Constitution.
For me Hamelle, double jeopardy is in the state “a miscarriage of justice.” “I’m not saying that the criminal has no place in stock exchange matters, I’m just saying to choose, depending on the nature of business, between the AMF and the criminal,” he has argued.
Me Le Borgne considers him it violates the principle of “equality of citizens before the law” and the obligation to impose sentences “strictly necessary” in the declaration of Rights attached to the Constitution.
In its judgment, the Court considered in particular that the ECHR judgment condemning Italy was “likely to cause a change in circumstance of law” .
In his submissions, the prosecution had previously held that there was no justification for the transmission of QPC.
Of those returned, in addition to Mr. Leahy, include former co-chair of , Forgeard.
The other accused persons are former number two of EADS, Jean-Paul Gut, and CFO of the time Andreas Sperl, and three top executives of its subsidiary Airbus Alain Flourens, Erik Pillet and Olivier Andriès.
No comments:
Post a Comment