Laurent Gbagbo suffers a defeat at the Court of Justice of the EU

(BRUSSELS2 to Luxembourg) The Court of Justice of the EU on Tuesday (April 23) dismissed the appeals of the former President of Côte d'Ivoire, Laurent Gbagbo, and some of his relatives (*) against the European sanctions put in place after the failed elections of autumn 2010. The victory of Alassane Ouattara in the elections of November 28, 2010 had not been recognized by Laurent Gbagbo and his followers. And a new cycle of violence had begun. The European Union had then decided to take its own sanctions (freeze of assets and ban on visas) against the former Ivorian president and several of his relatives.

The judges meeting in the Grand Chamber - one of the most solemn formations of the Court - considered that the arguments of the plaintiffs, in particular the non-respect of procedural deadlines and force majeure were not accepted. They thus ratified the decision of the court of first instance of July 13, 2011 declaring their appeals inadmissible even if they corrected an “error of law”. On the other hand, they did not follow the conclusions of Advocate General Cruz Villalón, who recommended that the Court annul the orders of the General Court and refer these cases back to it for it to rule on the admissibility of the actions, considering that 'he should have had' a greater awareness of the constitutional principles at stake, and in particular of the principle of the right of defense ».

The time limit for appeal is imperative

Does the publication of a notice constitute individual communication? That was basically the first question the judges had to answer.

We know that the "sanctions" decision on the Ivory Coast provides " the possibility of communication by publication of a notice in cases where the address of the person concerned is not known to the Council ". A notice had thus been published in the Official Journal, respectively on January 18 and April 7. And the judges do not intend to question this palliative procedure. " Such notices are likely to allow the persons concerned to identify the remedy available to them to challenge their inclusion on the lists in question as well as the expiry date of the appeal period. recalls the Court referring to a previous judgment, in the Bamba case (judgment of 15 November 2012, C-417/11 P).

The error of the court was to consider that the period began on the date of publication in the OJ of the sanction decision and not of the information notice. But in reality it amounts to the same thing. "Even if the General Court erred in law by ruling that the time limits for appeals began to run from the dates of publication of the disputed acts, these time limits had expired on 7 July 2011, the date on which the appeals were lodged", notes the Court.

No force majeure

The Court also rejects the argument of the plaintiffs and their associates who considered that the situation of conflict which reigned in Côte d'Ivoire prevented them from receiving notification of the sanction. The judges believe that it cannot be argued, " generally ", the situation of armed conflict to prevent time limits from running. It's necessary " present (some) elements making it possible to understand in what way, and during which precise period, the general situation of this conflict and the personal circumstances invoked prevented them from bringing their appeals in due time. » What the plaintiffs did not do. The very purpose of a time limit for appeal is to " to safeguard legal certainty by avoiding the indefinite questioning of Union acts resulting in legal effects “recalls the Court. And this must therefore be interpreted strictly.

The Court thus did not respond directly to the argument presented by the Council's lawyers, who considered that there was no case of force majeure. Because " the post-electoral crisis in Côte d'Ivoire and the violence associated with this crisis were allegedly caused by the refusal of Mr. Gbagbo and his associates to cede power to the elected president. These circumstances are therefore not unrelated to the applicants”. NB: the commonly accepted definition of force majeure is “ realization of an event foreign to the person who wishes to take advantage of it”.

(*) Had appealed: Pascal N'Guessan (former Prime Minister), Alcide Djédjé (close adviser), Katinan Justin Koné (former Minister Delegate for the Budget and Participation) and Akissi Daniele Boni-Claverie (former Minister for Women, Family and Children).

Download thejudgment C-478/11 and others