Explainer-How France's Le Pen ended up fighting in court to save her presidential hopes

PARIS, July 2 - French far-right leader Marine Le Pen awaits a crucial appeal ruling in Paris next week that will determine whether she can run in the 2027 presidential election, after being barred from public office over a conviction for misusing EU funds.

Here's how the longtime leader of the far-right National Rally (RN) arrived at this point:

WHAT WAS THE 'FAKE JOBS' SCHEME AT THE HEART OF THE CASE?

Le Pen was accused of using European Parliament funds intended to finance the costs of parliamentary assistants to pay employees working for her political party.

French investigative news website Mediapart in 2013 reported that Le Pen had hired two high-ranking members of her party, known then as the National Front (FN), as parliamentary assistants. Investigators later discovered these hires were not isolated cases but part of a wider system of "fake jobs".

EU lawmakers are allocated funds to cover expenses, including salaries for parliamentary assistants, but are not allowed to use them for party activities.

In 2023, after a seven-year investigation, Le Pen was ordered to stand trial alongside more than two dozen other defendants over the alleged misuse of EU funds - charges she and her party contested.

HOW DID THE COURT RULE IN 2025?

In March 2025, a Paris court ruled that Le Pen had been "at the heart" of a scheme to misappropriate more than 4 million euros ($4.56 million) of EU funds.

She received a five-year ban from standing for elected office, effective immediately, a four-year prison sentence - two of which were suspended, and the other two to be served in home detention - and a €100,000 fine.

The court also fined the RN €2 million ($2.16 million), half of which was suspended.

Alongside Le Pen, eight other former EU lawmakers and 12 parliamentary assistants were convicted over the misuse of funds.

The verdict was a catastrophic setback for Le Pen, one of the most prominent figures of the European far right and a frontrunner in polls for France's 2027 contest. She appealed the ruling.

WHAT WAS LE PEN'S DEFENCE AT THE APPEAL?

Le Pen and her allies described the case as a political witch-hunt.

During the first trial, Le Pen went on the offensive, arguing the money had been used legitimately and that prosecutors had applied an overly narrow definition of what a parliamentary assistant does.

That strategy failed. Presiding judge Benedicte de Perthuis said the lack of remorse by Le Pen and other defendants was among the reasons that prompted the court to ban them from running for office with immediate effect.

During her appeal, Le Pen struck a less belligerent tone.

"If any offence was committed, I want the court to understand that we had absolutely no sense of doing anything wrong whatsoever," she told the court. However, the core of her defence's strategy remained unchanged as she denied the charges and contested the idea of a scheme.

Prosecutors maintained their request for a five-year ban on running for public office and a four-year jail term, asking that three be suspended and only one served in home detention.

WHAT ARE THE POSSIBLE OUTCOMES OF THE JULY 7 RULING?

The appeal court could overturn Le Pen's conviction, leaving her free to run for president next year. Legal experts say that outcome appears unlikely given the court's findings at first instance.

The court may uphold Le Pen's conviction. If it confirms the five-year ban requested by prosecutors, it will rule her out of the presidential race, paving the way for Jordan Bardella, the 30-year-old party chief, to take Le Pen's place as RN candidate.

The court may uphold the conviction but soften the sentence. If the ban from public office were lifted or shortened to two years or less, the door could be opened to a fourth presidential bid for Le Pen, given the ban started in March 2025.

If the conviction and hefty sentence are upheld, Le Pen could appeal to France's highest court, the Cour de Cassation. She has previously said she would not be a presidential candidate if she has to wait any longer for a final ruling. REUTERS