Anti-Corruption Groups Challenge Defense in Libyan Funding Appeal Trial

Lawyers for anti-corruption organizations presented closing arguments on the second day of plaintiffs' presentations in an appeal trial over alleged Libyan funding of a 2007 presidential election campaign. The organizations Sherpa, Anticor and Transparency International jointly challenged the defense's position for the first time at the appeal stage.

One of the groups had followed the case for 13 years. On Wednesday, May 6, the defendant attended the session in Paris as lawyers for Anticor and Transparency International delivered their arguments. The defendant had missed the presentation by Sherpa's lawyer the previous day.

Sherpa's lawyer Vincent Brengarth set out five lines of argument. He emphasized the historical significance of the case due to the defendant's high profile and what he described as an almost perfect chain of corruption involving former public officials, corruption agents and bankers.

The lawyer challenged the defense's assertion that the case lacked substance and that surprising elements were merely coincidences. " The presentation concluded with reference to two recent statements submitted by a former senior official. The lawyer described these statements as a real turning point in which a collective defense was crumbling for the first time.

The three anti-corruption groups had not previously joined together at the appeal trial. Their lawyers strongly challenged the claims put forward by the defense during the two days of plaintiffs' closing arguments. The case centers on allegations of foreign funding for the 2007 presidential election campaign. Proceedings are taking place in a Paris court.