Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy will on Monday face trial at a Paris court over accusations of accepting illegal campaign funds from late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi during his 2007 election campaign.
The charges stemmed from a decade-long investigation into claims that Sarkozy accepted €50m from Gaddafi in exchange for helping restore Libya’s international reputation.
Gaddafi faced international isolation after Lybia was blamed for the bombing of a Pan Am passenger jet in 1988 killing 270, as well as the UTA Flight 772 in 1989 which killed hundreds of passengers.
The Libyan leader visited Paris in December 2007, in a bid to get support, but France backed the UN-sanctioned military action that helped oust Gaddafi in 2011, leading to his eventual execution by rebels.
Sarkozy, 69, denied receiving any funds or cutting deals with the Lybian dictator, dismissing the allegations as a conspiracy.
If found guilty, the former French president faces up to 10 years in prison.
The former right-wing president, who was in power for one term, between 2007 and 2012, has faced numerous legal battles since leaving power.
On December 18, France’s Court of Cassation upheld the decision of a lower court which sentenced him to one year imprisonment for corruption.
Sarkozy was found guilty by both a Paris court in 2021 and an appeal court in 2023 for trying to bribe a magistrate in exchange for information about a case he was implicated in.
The latest trial, involving 12 more co-defendants, will last until April 10. Among those charged are Sarkozy’s former aides, Claude Gueant and Eric Woerth.
Prosecutors allege the deal began in 2005 during Sarkozy’s meeting with Gaddafi in Tripoli.
According to them, key evidence includes a disputed document published in 2012 suggesting a financing agreement.
Ziad Takieddine, a businessman central to the case, initially claimed to have delivered cash from Gaddafi to Sarkozy but retracted his statement in 2020.
Sarkozy’s defense team argues there is no proof of the alleged financing while criticising the case as being speculative.