The European Court of Justice ("ECJ") some seven years late has gotten around to Édith Cresson. She has been found guilty of favoritism in office, and because Mdm. Cresson is such a delicate plant, the finding of guilt itself is deemed penalty enough.

SWEET JUSTICE
"No Tears" Justice Makes Guilt Easy And Fun!

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: CASE C-432/04
Article 213(2) EC – Article 126(2) EA –
Breach Of The Obligations Arising From
The Office Of Member Of The Commission –
Deprivation Of The Right To A Pension
July 11, 2006
Commission of the European Communities...applicant,
v
Édith Cresson...defendant,
supported by:
French Republic...intervener

149 The breach of the obligations arising from the office of a Member of the Commission calls, in principle, for the imposition of a penalty under Article 213(2) EC.

150 However, having regard to the circumstances of the case, the finding of breach constitutes, of itself, an appropriate penalty. [!]

151 It is therefore appropriate not to impose on Mrs Cresson a penalty in the form of a deprivation of her right to a pension or other benefits in its stead.

...

153 In the present case, since the Commission and Mrs Cresson have been unsuccessful in part, they should be ordered to bear their own costs. The French Republic, as intervener, is to bear its own costs.

Pity the French taxpayers! They had to pay the freight for Mdm. Cresson's mismanagement in French government and pensioning her off, and now again pay for a failed defense of her mismanagement and defalcation in the European Commission. Of course, as club members of the EU they must also pay a share of her big fat intacto EU pension.

FRENCH EX-PM GUILTY OF FAVOURITISM, BUT ESCAPES PENALTY

LUXEMBOURG July 12, 2006 (AFP) - The European Union's top court has found former French premier Edith Cresson guilty of favouritism when she was an EU official in the 1990s, but refused to cut her pension as a penalty.

The Luxembourg-based court's advocate general, Leendert Geelhoed, had recommended in February that "A pecuniary sanction is appropriate," specifically proposing that the court "deprive Mrs. Cresson of 50 percent of her pension rights as of the date of the court judgement."

One EU lawmaker, Richard Ashworth, immediately criticised the ruling, saying Cresson should not receive "a penny more from European taxpayers. This decision sends out the wrong signal. It says the European Union tolerates people who abuse their position and defraud European taxpayers."

It does give one that impression.

The European Commission, which took the case to the ECJ seeking to clear the air amid persistent criticism, welcomed the court's ruling -- and dismissed a barrage of questions about whether the ruling really puts the affair to bed.

While asserting its desire to be totally transparent over the issue, the commission spokesman had to be asked repeatedly before he would reveal the size of Cresson's monthly EU pension payments: roughly 20 percent of her 18,300 euros-per-month salary when she was in Brussels, or 3,660 euros.

Mdm. Cresson holds the distinctions of being the first female French prime minister and the shortest-lived PM of the Fifth Republic (May 15, 1991 – April 2, 1992). She accomplished little and is best remembered for being grotesquely impolitic.

In 1991, after being named premier by then-president Francois Mitterrand, she declared "one Englishman in four is a homosexual" and said "the Japanese live like ants... (whereas the French) want to live like human beings."

In her short tenure, strongly disliked and mistrusted by her own ministers, she achieved the impossible, uniting the whole of France in its loathing of her. Since France could not bear her, she was packed off as a delegate to the European Commission in 1995, where her mismanagement and cronyism helped sink the Santer Commission. Mdm. Cresson has since made a career of protesting her innocence. Her reaction to her recent conviction by the ECJ?

Now 72, Mrs Cresson complained to reporters yesterday that the judgment was "ambiguous" but added: "If there had been a serious breach then the court would have sanctioned me."

Why, yes, Édith, the court very well should have.

PFFT (What is this?): Wracked with guilt 0 | Rayonnement français 0