George Anjay
Ten individuals have been convicted by a Paris court for their involvement in the systematic cyber-bullying of Brigitte Macron, the wife of French President Emmanuel Macron. The defendants faced accusations of propagating baseless claims concerning her gender and sexuality, alongside making disparaging remarks about the 24-year age difference between the presidential couple. The court handed down suspended prison sentences of up to eight months to most of the convicted, with one individual receiving immediate incarceration for failing to appear in court. In addition, some of the defendants have had their social media accounts suspended as part of the judicial repercussions. The presiding judge emphasized that the eight men and two women had demonstrably acted with the express intention of inflicting harm upon Brigitte Macron, disseminating online statements that were both degrading and insulting.
This ruling marks a significant moment in the legal battle against online harassment targeting public figures, particularly those in prominent political roles. The convicted individuals had engaged in a sustained campaign of misinformation, primarily centered on a conspiracy theory alleging that Brigitte Macron is a transgender woman. This theory, which has circulated persistently since President Macron’s initial election in 2017, gained traction through various online platforms and social media channels. The prosecution successfully argued that the defendants had not only spread these falsehoods but had done so with malicious intent, aiming to damage Brigitte Macron’s reputation and cause her significant distress.
Among those found guilty are Natacha Rey, who describes herself as an independent journalist, and Amandine Roy, an internet fortune-teller. These two individuals had previously been convicted of slander in 2024 for asserting that France’s First Lady had never actually existed. Their fabricated narrative claimed that her brother, Jean-Michel Trogneux, had undergone gender reassignment and subsequently adopted Brigitte Macron’s identity. While these individuals were later cleared on appeal, the appeals court’s reasoning that asserting someone had changed gender was not inherently an "attack on their honour" has itself become a point of contention. The Macrons are currently pursuing this matter further, taking the case to the high court of appeal, signaling their determination to challenge this legal interpretation.
Jean Ennochi, Brigitte Macron’s lawyer, articulated the significance of the verdict following its announcement. He stated, as reported by the AFP news agency, that "The most important things are the prevention courses and the suspension of some of the accounts" belonging to the perpetrators. This highlights a dual approach to addressing online abuse: punitive measures against the offenders and preventative strategies to curb future occurrences. The suspended sentences, combined with the account suspensions, aim to serve as a deterrent to others who might consider engaging in similar malicious online activities. The emphasis on prevention courses suggests a recognition of the psychological impact of cyber-bullying and a desire to educate offenders about the consequences of their actions.
The ruling in France is being viewed as a precursor to a more substantial legal confrontation anticipated in the United States. The Macrons have initiated a defamation lawsuit against Candace Owens, a prominent right-wing influencer, who has also been a vocal proponent of the conspiracy theories surrounding the First Lady’s gender. The lawsuit alleges that Owens "disregarded all credible evidence disproving her claim in favour of platforming known conspiracy theorists and proven defamers." This indicates a strategic approach by the Macrons to tackle the transnational nature of online disinformation campaigns.
Candace Owens has repeatedly amplified these unsubstantiated claims across her podcast and social media platforms. Notably, in March 2024, she declared her conviction that Mrs. Macron "is in fact a man," asserting she would stake her "entire professional reputation" on this belief. Her persistent dissemination of this theory, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, has drawn significant legal scrutiny. The Macrons’ legal team is likely to present a strong case demonstrating the deliberate and harmful nature of Owens’s public statements, emphasizing the role of influential figures in perpetuating damaging falsehoods.
The origins of the conspiracy theory linking Brigitte Macron to a transgender identity trace back to 2017, the year her husband first ascended to the presidency. This narrative, devoid of any factual basis, has been fueled by anonymous online sources and amplified by individuals seeking to undermine the French presidency. The age difference between the Macrons, Brigitte being in her mid-50s when Emmanuel was 29, has also been a frequent target of derogatory comments, further contributing to the hostile online environment. The couple first met when Brigitte was a teacher at her now-husband’s secondary school, a personal detail that has been twisted and weaponized by those spreading the conspiracy theories. They married in 2007, a union that has endured despite the relentless personal attacks.
The legal proceedings in Paris underscore the growing recognition of the severe impact of cyber-bullying and online defamation. The court’s decision to hold individuals accountable for their online actions sends a clear message that the digital space is not a lawless frontier. The imposition of suspended sentences and account suspensions, coupled with the potential for immediate detention, reflects the seriousness with which such offenses are now being treated. The legal battle is likely to continue, with the Macrons’ pursuit of justice in both France and the United States demonstrating a commitment to combating the spread of harmful misinformation and protecting individuals from the ravages of online harassment. The outcome of these cases could set important precedents for how cyber-bullying and defamation are addressed in the digital age, particularly when they target high-profile individuals and attempt to sow discord through fabricated narratives. The case also highlights the complex interplay between freedom of expression and the need to protect individuals from malicious attacks on their dignity and reputation. The legal system is increasingly being called upon to navigate these challenging boundaries in the digital realm.
Nana Banana
atisusanti
