{"id":153834,"date":"2025-12-19T12:01:32","date_gmt":"2025-12-19T11:01:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/?p=153834"},"modified":"2026-01-12T17:50:05","modified_gmt":"2026-01-12T16:50:05","slug":"lafarge-on-trial-part-6-what-the-french-prosecution-is-asking-and-what-the-united-states-obtained","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/153834-lafarge-on-trial-part-6-what-the-french-prosecution-is-asking-and-what-the-united-states-obtained.html","title":{"rendered":"Lafarge on Trial \u2013 Part 6: What the French prosecution is asking and what the United States obtained"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In partnership with Justice Info, international law professor Sharon Weill and 11 students at Sciences Po Paris have provided weekly coverage of the Lafarge trial taking place in the French capital. The trial ends on December 19.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

\r\n\t
COURTROOM DIARY BY THE Capstone Course<\/span><\/strong>
\nSciences Po Paris<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

\u0627\u0644\u0645\u0642\u0627\u0644 \u0645\u062a\u0648\u0641\u0631 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u0644\u063a\u0629 \u0627\u0644\u0639\u0631\u0628\u064a\u0629<\/strong><\/a> \/ This article is also available in Arabic<\/a> on the Syrian Justice and Accountability Centre (SJAC) website.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n

It was the final week of the Lafarge trial<\/a>. The public benches in the courtroom remained full. The first day of week six marked the closing phase of the proceedings. It started with the National Anti-Terrorism Prosecutor\u2019s Office (PNAT) final requisitions, during which the alleged offences were set out and the requested penalties for each defendant were presented. The first charge against Lafarge and the individual defendants is financing of terrorism and the second concerns the customs offence of violating international financial sanctions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The prosecution accused Lafarge and 8 individuals of financing three terrorist groups in Syria \u2013 Jabhat al-Nusra, Ahrar al-Sham, and Daesh \u2013 during a time in which these organizations were committing serious crimes, including executions, which were openly known. The prosecutor explained that the offence of financing terrorism does not require the funds to be allocated to a specific terrorist operation and it may be committed either directly or indirectly. The motive of financing is irrelevant, and adherence to a jihadist or extremist ideology is not a required element of the offence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The funds transferred by Lafarge and the individual accused contributed to maintaining the operational capabilities of Daesh. \u201cOne can easily imagine what 5 million euros represented in Syria at the time: the purchase of around 4,000 Kalashnikov rifles, or the payment of salaries for approximately 3,000 to 3,600 fighters for an entire year,\u201d the prosecutor told the court. They emphasized that \u201cto spread its poison, terrorism does not necessarily require large amounts of money. The Paris attacks [in 2015], for example, were carried out with a budget of only 108,000 euros.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

4,694,696 euros: an \u201cunprecedented and vertiginous\u201d level<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

This case, heard by an experienced presiding judge, forms part of the long-standing expertise developed by the 16th<\/sup> Chamber of Paris Criminal Court in terrorism cases since 2015, as shown in a study, Terror on Trial, to be published in March 2026<\/a>. All terrorism-related cases are centralized in Paris: offenses of up to 10 years imprisonment are heard before the 16th<\/sup> chamber, and its judges have been able to build continuous judicial expertise. Recent data published by the tribunal highlights the large scale of terrorism-related cases:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Assize
Assize Court in terrorism cases: Number of trials and number of hearing days per year<\/em><\/em>. Source: The Tribunal of Paris, Annual report, 2024.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"Criminal
Criminal Court (the 16th<\/sup> chamber, in blue) and Juvenile Court (in red): Number of cases and number of hearing days).<\/em><\/em> Source: The Tribunal of Paris, Annual report, 2024.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Although the French Criminal Code has continuously evolved to include more and more criminal offences adapted to the changing modes of international terrorism \u2013 such as new offences concerning  apology for terrorism or financial support of terrorism and recruitment \u2013, almost all prosecutions involve the long-standing offence of \u201cassociation of wrongdoing in relation to a terrorist enterprise\u201d, known by its acronym in French AMT. In April 2016, in the aftermath of the 2015 terrorist attacks, there was a radical change in the prosecution policy. From the perspective of the authorities, the existing ceiling of up to ten years\u2019 imprisonment for joining a jihadist terrorist group did not adequately match the gravity of the behavior. As a result, it was decided to prosecute AMT as a felony, with penalties of up to twenty or thirty years\u2019 imprisonment, and the cases were transferred to the Assize court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Terrorism-financing cases are relatively rare, with only a limited number of convictions each year: 13 in 2025 and 21 in 2024. By way of comparison, recent convictions typically involved only a few thousand euros per defendant, and even the largest cases handled by the French National Anti-Terrorism Prosecutor\u2019s Office rarely exceeded a few hundred thousand euros, considered exceptional.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The sums involved in the Lafarge case go far beyond anything previously seen: 4,694,696 euros in total. \u201cThey are unprecedented and vertiginous, particularly as they reflect a systemic approach adopted by Lafarge, which came to treat terrorist organizations as ordinary business partners,\u201d said the Prosecutor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The U.S. 2022 plea bargain<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In 2022 Lafarge pleaded guilty in a parallel criminal procedure that took place in the U.S., in Brooklyn\u2019s federal court. A cooperation between the French investigating judges and the US prosecution authorities was established. In the U.S. Lafarge admitted key facts that also underpin the French proceedings. In a 2022 press conference the U.S<\/a>. Assistant Attorney General stated: \u201cThe defendants routed nearly six million dollars in illicit payments to two of the world\u2019s most notorious terrorist organizations \u2013 ISIS and al-Nusrah Front in Syria \u2013 at a time those groups were brutalizing innocent civilians in Syria and actively plotting to harm Americans. There is simply no justification for a multi-national corporation authorizing payments to designated terrorist organizations.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As part of the plea agreement, Lafarge agreed not to make any public statements contradicting its acceptance of responsibility, and undertook not to dispute the established facts in any judicial proceedings, including those before foreign courts. The company acknowledged having supported ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra Front and agreed to pay the U.S. government a total of $778 million, of which $687 million in forfeiture and $90.78 million in criminal fines. The agreement also imposed mandatory reporting obligations and monitoring to prevent any recurrence of such practices. Finally, the plea agreement explicitly stated that Holcim, a Swiss cement company that merged with Lafarge in 2015, had no knowledge of that conduct.<\/p>\n\n\n\t

\r\n\t\t
FIND THIS ARTICLE INTERESTING?<\/div>\r\n\t\t
\r\n\t\t\tSign up now for our (free) newsletter<\/a> to make sure you don't miss out on other publications of this type. \t\t<\/div>\r\n\t<\/div>\r\n\t\n\n\n

A range of penalties<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The prosecutor\u2019s demands heard this week in Paris stand in sharp contrast to the U.S. proceedings. In France, individuals face up to ten years\u2019 imprisonment and a \u20ac225,000 fine for financing terrorism, while corporate entities are liable to fines of up to \u20ac1,125,000, together with ancillary penalties including dissolution or prohibitions on business activities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Prosecutor sought differentiated penalties reflecting the respective roles of the accused:<\/p>\n\n\n\n