The secretary general of the Elysée, Alexis Kohler, indicted for “illegal taking of interests” at the end of September, was for his « participation » as a senior civil servant between 2009 and 2016 in decisions relating to the Italian-Swiss shipowner MSC, run by his mother’s cousins, the Aponte family. In this rich investigation of more than fifty hearings and ten searches, Mr. Kohler was questioned on September 22 and 23, according to elements of which Agence France-Presse (AFP) became aware, Tuesday, November 29.
Mediapart revealed in May 2018 this conflict of interest situation. After a year of investigation at the PNF closed without follow-up, the Anticor association obtained in June 2020 the appointment of investigating judges. Judges Virginie Tilmont and Nicolas Aubertin accuse Emmanuel Macron’s right arm of having “participated” from 2009 to 2012, as administrator, in five deliberations of the bodies of STX France (today Chantiers de l’Atlantique) and three of the Grand Port maritime du Havre (GPMH), linked to MSC. Then between 2012 and 2016 in Bercy, under Pierre Moscovici then Emmanuel Macron, to have in particular “persisted (…) to issue opinions or give strategic orientations relating to » to cases involving MSC. A potential offense, because the mother of Alexis Kohler is a cousin of Rafaëla Aponte, wife of the founder Gianluigi Aponte. A family bond « simple » but to “fifth degree”, “distant”defended the person concerned before the judges.
Mr. Kohler also recognizes a ” sincere friendship “ between his wife and Rafaëla Aponte, with annual stays by Sylvie Kohler or their children from 2009 to 2013 but also in 2019, on MSC yachts, often with members of the Aponte clan. For judges, this “moral interest” may “compromising impartiality, independence or objectivity” by Alexis Kohler. Before the magistrates, the secretary general of the Elysée said from the outset that he had “never considered to be in a situation of conflict of interest”. But, paradoxically, he repeats having done everything, “from November 2008”to be away from the MSC folder.
He explains that he did not participate in any decision concerning this flagship client of STX, having warned of his family ties and asked to leave his mandate as administrator of STX, which his hierarchy would have refused, and having expressed the position of the state rather than his own on the board. Opposite, the magistrates remind him of the “constant case law” et ” very large “ concerning the illegal taking of interests. “It goes very very far”recently explained a financial magistrate to AFP. “The participation, would it be exclusive of any vote, in a deliberation on a matter in which one has an interest” may be enough, the judges note.
Untraceable archives
“In retrospect, it is true that it would have been simpler if I had not been appointed administrator to avoid any risk”, concedes Alexis Kohler. The magistrates then question the deportation “informal” of the MSC file praised by Alexis Kohler for his period at Pierre Moscovici’s office (2012-2014) then via ” a letter “ with Emmanuel Macron (2014-2016). It was not found of“writing or note from the State Participation Agency, the Treasury or the Ministry stating the family link with the Aponte family” or organizing this sidelining of the MSC file between 2010 and 2016. “I am not responsible for [leurs] archives »answers Alexis Kohler twice.
The judges are also surprised by at least twenty-eight emails going through his box between 2013 and 2016 concerning MSC, but also by the ignorance of three former Treasury officials, attached to Bercy, of these family ties or the deportation . The secretary general of the Elysée argues a role of ” station master “ organizing the minister’s agenda without “substantive intervention”.
Another disturbing fact, Mr. Kohler became financial director of the cruise branch of MSC between October 2016 and the 2017 presidential election won by Emmanuel Macron. Gold “nor the Public Service Ethics Commission in 2016”which will validate this pantouflage after a first refusal in 2014, “neither the High Authority for the Transparency of Public Life was aware of the exact nature of his links” with the Aponte family, assert the magistrates. For Alexis Kohler, it was however known even in the “companies concerned”. In 2019, he will again have the ” project “ to return to MSC.
An informal shift
After fifteen hours of interrogation, Alexis Kohler concedes a single “debate on the degree of formalism pursued throughout [sa] career “ to warn of his removal from the MSC files. “Shocked and indignant” What are they ” integrity “ that is ” questioned “he disputes everything “benefit” of this situation.
Placed under the status of assisted witness for “passive influence peddling”, Alexis Kohler was also questioned by the judges about his influence in various cases concerning MSC. At this stage, the latter consider that there is no “serious or concordant indications” as for a ” supported “ Par MSC “family stays” and the assignment of the CFO position against Mr. Kohler’s use of « son influence » in favor of the shipowner.
After the indictment, his lawyer, Eric Dezeuze, declared that his client “contested (…) any misdemeanor” and heard “demonstrate his innocence”. Emmanuel Macron judged him “completely legitimate” his maintenance at the Elysée. Asked by AFP, he did not wish to react and the Elysée affirmed “not being able to comment on an ongoing investigation”.
Lexicon
- Illegal taking of interest
Defined in article 432-12 of the penal code, the offense of illegal taking of interests is “the fact, by a person holding public authority or charged with a public service mission (…)to take, receive or retain, directly or indirectly, any interest whatsoever in a company or in an operation for which it is, at the time of the act, in whole or in part, responsible for ensuring the supervision, administration, liquidation or payment”.
Influence peddling is defined, in article 433-2, as “the fact, by anyone, of soliciting or accepting (…) offers, promises, donations, presents or benefits of any kind, for himself or for others, to abuse or have abused his real or supposed influence in order to obtain from an authority or a public administration distinctions, jobs, markets or any other favorable decision”. These two offenses are punishable by five years’ imprisonment and a fine of 500,000 euros.