Public-affairs criminal law

Defence of elected officials and local authorities: 01 84 60 92 47

The Bruguière firm assists and defends local elected officials, mayors, EPCI presidents, directors of local authorities, and public officialsfacing criminal proceedings in the exercise of their functions. A criminal lawyer in Paris, Mr. Charles Bruguière intervenes throughout the national territory to provide specialised criminal defence to public actors under investigation.

The criminal indictment of an elected official requires specialised criminal defence, from the preliminary investigation stage through to judgment. The firm intervenes at each phase of the procedure to secure the official's position and build an appropriate defence strategy.

Criminal liability of local elected officials

Local elected officials (mayors, deputies, EPCI presidents, municipal, departmental, or regional councillors) may incur personal criminal liability in the exercise of their functions. This liability applies personally, independently of the local authority they represent.

Offences against public integrity

Illegal taking of interest (Article 432-12 of the Criminal Code)

Illegal taking of interest sanctions an elected official or public agent who takes any interest in a business or operation they are responsible for supervising, administering, or liquidating. The offence may be established even in the absence of personal enrichment, as soon as a direct or indirect interest exists.

Defence consists in demonstrating the absence of a link between the functions exercised and the operation concerned, or in establishing the absence of personal interest.

Offence of favouritism (Article 432-14 of the Criminal Code)

The offence of favouritism targets breaches of public procurement rules. It sanctions the act of procuring, or attempting to procure, an unjustified advantage for another through an act contrary to public procurement provisions. The most frequent cases concern the absence of competitive bidding, fragmented contracts, or the irregular award of public service delegations.

Defence relies on analysis of the award procedures and on contesting the criminal qualification of the facts.

Misappropriation of public funds (Article 432-15 of the Criminal Code)

Misappropriation of public funds sanctions the use of property, monies, or values belonging to a public entity for personal purposes or for a use not consistent with their intended destination. Prosecutions may target the use of municipal staff, official vehicles, or public funds for expenditure unrelated to the general interest.

Defence relies on demonstrating the link with the exercise of the mandate or on the existence of a use compliant with the applicable rules.

Passive corruption and influence peddling

Passive corruption targets an elected official who accepts benefits (sums of money, gifts, services) in exchange for a decision, an act, or an abstention within their functions. Influence peddling sanctions an elected official who abuses their real or supposed influence.

These offences require sharp technical defence, particularly on the proof of the corruption pact and on the characterisation of fraudulent intent.

Non-intentional offences

Local elected officials regularly face prosecution for offences of imprudence following accidents occurring in public facilities, during events organised by the municipality, or on municipal worksites. These offences may lead to convictions for involuntary manslaughter, involuntary injuries, or endangerment of others.

Article 121-3 of the Criminal Code provides for an attenuated liability regime for elected officials: their liability can only be engaged in case of a characterised fault(a manifestly deliberate breach of a safety obligation) or a deliberate fault. This partial protection does not relieve them of the need for a rigorous defence.

Common situations:

• Accident in a municipal building (fall, collapse)
• Injuries on a sports field or in a municipal sports facility
• Failure to maintain public facilities
• Accident during a municipal event

Defence relies on analysis of the applicable regulatory obligations, of the delegations of authority in force, and of the chains of responsibility within the local authority, in order to contest the characterisation of fault.

Other offences in the exercise of functions

Elected officials may also be prosecuted for ordinary offences committed in the exercise of their functions: moral harassment of local government staff, discrimination in recruitment or human-resources management, violence, forgery and use of forgery (falsification of administrative documents, complaisant certificates).

These offences require a defence adapted to the context of the local public service and to the relationships between officials and staff. The defence aims to demonstrate the absence of criminal intent or the legitimacy of the conduct complained of.

Offences related to elective functions

Electoral offences (electoral fraud, irregular campaign financing, exceeding the cap on electoral expenditure) fall under a specific dispute regime requiring expertise in criminal electoral law. The Bruguière firm defends elected officials prosecuted for breaches of campaign financing rules or attacks on the sincerity of the ballot.

Criminal liability of local authorities

Under Article 121-2 of the Criminal Code, local authorities (municipalities, departments, regions, EPCIs) may incur criminal liability as legal entities for offences committed on their behalf by their organs or representatives.

This liability has a major limit: local authorities cannot be held criminally liable for offences committed in the exercise of activities capable of being delegated through public service delegation agreements (administrative policing activities, decisions involving public authority).

Conditions for criminal liability

For a local authority's criminal liability to be engaged, three conditions must be met:

• The offence must have been committed on behalf of the legal entity
• The offence must have been committed by an organ or representative of the authority
• The activity must not fall within the exercise of public authority

Most frequent offences

Local authorities are mainly prosecuted for:

• Environmental offences (pollution, sanitation, harm to natural environments)
• Urban-planning offences (constructions without permits, breaches of the local urban plan)
• Offences relating to the safety of public facilities (ERP, accessibility)
• Labour Code offences (undeclared work, hygiene and safety)

The Bruguière firm notably raises the inadmissibility of prosecutions where the offence falls within a public-authority activity, and assists local authorities in setting up criminal compliance and prevention procedures.

The firm's intervention

Assistance in police custody and preliminary investigation

The Bruguière firm intervenes from the police custody stage to assist elected officials and public agents. This immediate assistance secures the first elements of the procedure, advises on defence strategy, and prevents statements that could aggravate the criminal position.

Defence at the investigation and trial stages

The firm defends elected officials and local authorities throughout the criminal procedure: requests for investigative acts (hearings, expert reports), challenges to the legal qualification of the facts, pleadings before the criminal court, exercise of remedies (appeal, cassation).

Preventive advice and criminal compliance

Beyond criminal defence, the Bruguière firm assists local authorities and elected officials in setting up prevention and criminal compliance measures:

• Auditing public procurement procedures
• Implementing delegations of authority and signature
• Training elected officials and staff on criminal risks
• Drafting codes of ethics and conflict-of-interest prevention

Related areas: business criminal law · general criminal law · police custody.