Georges Fenech and arms dealers
In the Angolagate case, concerning a dark case of arms traffic to Angola, orchestrated by dealers Pierre Falcone and Arcadi Gaydamak, sentences were issued on October 27, 2009.
Georges Fenech was also seated on the defendants’ bench, indicted for receiving abused social goods. Fact is, he had received 100,000 Francs (i. e. 15,244 euros) from Pierre Falcone (via Company BRENCO France) for his union, which was since disbanded, APM – Association Professionnelle des Magistrats (Professional Magistrates’ Union). This amounted to half the yearly budget of the association.
The investigation exposed several oddities, such as one of Georges Fenech’s colleague in APM trying to erase any mention of Pierre Falcone from the APM files.
For his defence, Georges Fenech always claimed that he knew nothing about Pierre Falcone’s activities as an arms dealer. Strange ignorance … In the witness box, General Mouton, who had himself introduced Pierre Falcone to Georges Fenech, states that he mentioned to Georges Fenech that BRENCO was working in the field of weapons. At this time, several press articles had already been made public about Pierre Falcone, implicating him in arms sales to Angola.
G. Fenech’s allegations didn’t do much to convince the Penal Court of Paris (Tribunal de Grande Instance), as evidenced by these extracts of the judgement of October 27, 2009, highlighting an obvious lack of caution and discernment – a most regrettable flaw in an official and former magistrate who likes to castigate spiritual groups. G. Fenech is said to have demonstrated, at best, a dismaying naïvety : how could he avoid any common sense questions about this sum amounting to 50 subscriptions to a magazine of questionable interest ?
The courts relaxed G. Fenech for lack of evidence of a criminal intention, despite the Prosecutor’s requests of a suspended sentence of six months of prison and despite the intimate conviction of the judge, cleraly explained in bitter terms in the judgement :
After 17 years of professionnal experience, M. Fenech certainly realized that Company Brenco France was somewhat less active or notorious than other sponsors [ ] which deemed useful to support the Association professionnelle des magistrats [APM].
An expert in economical and financial crimes, the most simple arithmetics certainly made it clear to him that tha amount of 100.000 francs allocated[by Mr. Falcone] represented about half the yeraly bufget of his union (…) Even enthusiastix about a successful collection, how could he avoid any common sense questions about this sum amounting to 50 subscriptions to a magazine of questionable interest, coming from a company of which he said he knew almost nothing.
However it cannot be deduced (…) that what indicates, at least, an obvious lack of caution and discernment characterizes the intention constituting an offence of receiving stolen goods. For lack of objective elements providing evidence of the criminal intention and helping to forge a conviction which, although intimate, cannot be based on présumptions, however strong, G. Fenech must be relaxed.”
All this wouldn’t be so serious, if there wasn’t the memory of Angolan children dead or cripppled for the profits of the arms dealers. A subject about which Georges Fenech had not much to say.
But he ignores, maybe, that arms sold by arms dealers are meant to kill …
