The Council of State gives reason to the CSA against Mathieu Gallet

The Council of State rejected Friday the appeal formulated by the former CEO of Radio France Mathieu Gallet, who wanted to cancel his revocation decided by the CSA in January.

Mathieu Gallet refused to resign from Radio France. The Superior council of the audio-visual one had dismissed the leader of his functions following his condemnation on January 15 for having favored two consulting companies when he chaired the National institute of audio-visual (Ina) between 2010 and 2014. After this sentence of one year in prison suspended and 20,000 euros fine, pronounced by the Tribunal de Grande Instance of Creteil on January 15, Mathieu Gallet had appealed and refused to resign from Radio France.

But the Minister of Culture, Françoise Nyssen, had judged "unacceptable" its maintenance and called the concerned and the CSA to "draw the consequences" of the judgment.

After his dismissal, which was a first for the CSA, the lawyers had accused the regulator of having yielded to a pressure of the State. The CSA for its part ensured that it took into account only the "general interest" and the "good functioning" of Radio France, which requires "dense, trusting and permanent" relations between its CEO and the State.

For the Council of State, the CSA did not fail in its duty of impartiality. These arguments were repeated before the Council of State at a public hearing held on Friday, 7 December. The Council of State has followed the conclusions of its public rapporteur by giving reason to the CSA on all points raised.

According to a statement released Friday, he said "that the decision of the CSA can not be regarded as undermining" the presumption of innocence of Mathieu Gallet. Similarly, the Council of State held that the CSA had not failed in its duty of impartiality in considering that keeping Mathieu Gallet at his post would harm the smooth running of Radio France and its relations with the State.

The appeal of Mathieu Gallet, had he succeeded, would not have allowed him anyway to be reinstated. On the other hand, he could have hoped to receive substantial compensation (around 250,000 euros) to compensate for the premature termination of his mandate.