Part of the family of Samuel Paty, a professor assassinated in October 2020 in an Islamist attack, criticized Thursday the “avoidance maneuvers” of the Secretary of State to Prime Minister Marlène Schiappa on the management of the Marianne Fund. “She tries to clear her responsibility, she does not answer questions. This fund was created following the assassination of Samuel Paty, the name of Samuel Paty is widely used in the alleged work of the fund, these funds have been misappropriated, it is purely and simply despicable”, declared on Radio Classique their lawyer, Me Virginie Le Roy.
Two judicial and parliamentary inquiries
According to her, Marlène Schiappa got on the defensive but without providing “any answer”: “It’s not worthy of the subject, not worthy of a minister”, again struck Me Le Roy. Launched on April 20, 2021 by Marlène Schiappa, then Minister Delegate for Citizenship, after the shock caused by the assassination of Samuel Paty, this fund was initially endowed with 2.5 million euros. It aimed to finance associations promoting the values of the Republic to fight against “separatism” and radical Islam on social networks.
Three years after its creation, it is at the heart of two investigations, judicial and parliamentary, and criticized by the family of Samuel Paty. Marlène Schiappa, Secretary of State to the Prime Minister, in charge of the Social and Solidarity Economy and Associative Life, was heard on Wednesday on the subject by a Senate inquiry committee. The Senate should also give the green light to the creation of a commission of inquiry into the assassination of Samuel Paty on October 16, 2020 at the end of his college in Conflans-Sainte-Honorine (Yvelines) by a young radical Islamist . The Conference of Senate Presidents enacted the principle on Wednesday before a plenary vote expected on Thursday.
“It is a relief but also the ardent desire that questions be answered”, commented Me Le Roy. This commission of inquiry is requested by part of the Paty family who wish to establish “the flaws” which allowed the assassination of the teacher. The lawyer mentioned “dysfunctions at all levels, concerning both the Ministry of National Education and that of the Interior. A general failure, with dramatic consequences”. According to her, Samuel Paty had been “ostracized within his establishment”, “treated like the pariah” by certain officials of the National Education and “he was told that he had done his job badly”.