The allegations must, of course, be taken seriously. A former colleague has made allegations against Philippe Brun on several counts, including harassment and physical violence. The Socialist Party states that it was informed on the evening of 15 September of allegations “which may constitute a criminal offence” and justifies its decision on the grounds of its commitment to upholding high standards. Philippe Brun, for his part, denies the allegations, describes them as slanderous accusations and has announced his intention to take legal action. At this stage, therefore, these are disputed allegations and not facts established in a court of law. (Socialist Party)
Politically, however, the timing inevitably raises questions. According to *Le Monde*, the dispute with this former colleague had been known to certain Socialist Party officials for several weeks, and two internal investigations had been launched as early as July. Yet it was precisely on the eve of the validation of candidacies that the new allegations were brought to the attention of the leadership and that events began to unfold rapidly. Philippe Brun also claims that he was not given a chance to be heard before the decision was taken. (Le Monde.fr)
This is what troubles me. Not that a party should take seriously the account of a woman claiming to have suffered abuse: that is, of course, its duty. But the fact that a candidate can be removed from a political contest within a matter of hours, before the allegations have had a chance to be examined in a fair hearing, at the very least warrants scrutiny of the procedure.
And these concerns are not limited to Philippe Brun. Jérôme Guedj, despite being his rival in this primary, asked during the meeting whether such a radical decision would have been taken if the allegations had concerned Olivier Faure, Ségolène Royal or himself. The leadership replied that it would. The suspension was ultimately adopted almost unanimously. (Le Monde.fr)
So, who was out to get Philippe Brun? Perhaps no one. Perhaps we are simply witnessing the catastrophic collision between a serious allegation, the principle of political precaution and the worst possible timing. But Philippe Brun himself puts forward another hypothesis: that the case has been ‘exploited’ to ‘politically destroy’ him. For the time being, there is no evidence to support this theory as fact. (LCP)
One rather intriguing political fact remains: in perhaps seeking to prevent the Brun affair from tainting the primary, the Socialist Party has just created a Brun affair.
For there are now two questions, and both will need to be answered. What really happened between Philippe Brun and his former colleague? That is a matter for the relevant investigations and legal proceedings. And why has this affair led to such a sudden political ousting, precisely at the moment when his candidacy was due to be confirmed?
Philippe Brun may well have been unknown to part of the general public until then. Within forty-eight hours, his name is everywhere. And when a politician is forced out of the game in such extraordinary circumstances, a rather human reaction sets in: people start wanting to know what it was about him that was so troubling.
This is probably the worst consequence of this affair for those who wanted to put the matter to rest quickly: they have just made Philippe Brun far more interesting.
