Although he withdrew his defamation complaint against Amélie Oudéa-Castéra, the former Minister of Sports and the Olympic Games, Noël Le Graët was very present in people’s minds. Tuesday, the Court of Justice of the Republic of Paris looked into the case opposing the former president of the French Football Federation (FFF) to the former strong woman of French sport, following remarks made by the latter in 2023, after a damning investigation by the General Inspectorate of Education, Sport and Research (IGESR).
In their report, the inspectors considered what “given his behavior towards women, his public declarations and the failures of the governance of the FFF, Mr. Le Graët no longer (had) the legitimacy necessary to administer and represent French football”. This resulted in a report to the prosecutor from the IGESR and a defamation complaint against the now ex-minister from Le Graët.
“Wasted time” for justice
Almost two years later, the former boss of French football is, according to his lawyer, “in a process of appeasement”. “Following the dismissal (the investigation into moral and sexual harassment, editor’s note) from which he benefited, he made the choice to withdraw », pleads Me Bourg, specifying that his client is absent from the hearing “for health reasons”. “He now wants to devote himself to his health problems, his family and his business,” continues the lawyer.
If the withdrawal reported on November 19 necessarily interrupts the defamation proceedings, it is not to the taste of the Attorney General of the Court of Cassation, Rémy Heitz, who quickly sends cards to the former boss of the FFF. “It’s time wasted by the magistrates, by the Court. This, in addition to the inconvenience for Amélie Oudéa-Castéra, during a procedure which lasted eighteen months”, he points out, specifying that he was unable, “due to a form of automaticity “, that “require the dismissal (of the former minister) so that the debate can be held. »
And to send a strong attack to Noël Le Graët – “A defamation trial is sometimes a trial that we make on ourselves” -, also specifying that if the procedure against the former president of the FFF was the subject of a classification without further action, it is “due to insufficiently characterized offenses and not in the absence of offenses”.
“If he had appeared, he would have scored an own goal”
The ex-minister’s lawyer drives the point home by pointing out an “impression of instrumentalization of justice”, while his client had only “reproduced with accuracy the report of an investigation carried out in complete independence”. “Mr Le Graët dared to present himself as a victim of a cabal, a victimizing and shocking posture. » Me Nicolas Brault believes that “Noël Le Graët made a wise and prudent decision by avoiding having to discuss his comments and behavior at the hearing, and a fortiori appearing cited by the prosecution and having to testify under oath . »
“If he had appeared, he would have scored an own goal,” he continues. We understand well that he preferred to spare himself and his family a public hearing during which the said discrepancies in language and behavior would inevitably have been publicly detailed, unacceptable for the president of the most important sports federation in France, delegatee of a public service mission. This withdrawal is the admission that her complaint was a communication artifice, devoid of any basis and shocking, both for those who had the courage to testify and for a minister who knew how to manage this crisis. »
Le Graët gets what he deserves
Pugnacious as usual, Oudéa-Castéra, wearing a beige jacket, insisted on speaking before the court. Even if it means offending Noël Le Graët’s lawyer by referring to the merits of the case. “The conclusions of the IGESR report were clear and documented,” she assumes. The president of the FFF had lost all legitimacy to remain at the head of the Federation. »
“Let Noël Le Graët try today to rewrite history or to confuse the issue, by using the pretext of the dismissal decided by the prosecution to claim before the media that, in this affair, “everything was false”, do not be fooled no one, she asserts again. And especially not the French who were sometimes direct witnesses to some of his off-road incidents. »
And the former Minister of Sports concluded: “His resignation protected the general interest of French football, which is the most important. »
