top of page
fnlogo.png

Republic of Congo President’s Relatives Appeal French Convictions in Public Funds Embezzlement Case

  • May 27
  • 3 min read

Relatives of Republic of Congo President Denis Sassou-Nguesso are challenging a ruling handed down by a Paris court last week after being convicted on charges linked to money laundering and breach of trust involving embezzled public money, according to the family’s lawyer.


Republic of Congo President’s Relatives Appeal French Convictions in Public Funds Embezzlement Case

The case centers on an alleged corruption operation involving Propharma, a company controlled by members of the president’s family. Court findings stated that in 2013, the Congolese government awarded Propharma public contracts worth 2.3 million euros (approximately $2.7 million) intended specifically for the procurement of essential medicines.


The medicines, however, were never purchased.


Instead, according to the court’s ruling, members of the family diverted 1.4 million euros ($1.6 million) in cash. Investigators found that approximately 610,000 euros was then routed through a private shell company and used to help finance the acquisition of a property in France valued at 960,000 euros ($1.12 million).


The Paris Criminal Court concluded that the scheme amounted to “laundering the proceeds of a breach of trust.” The president’s niece, Emilienne Inès Mouebara Nguesso, and her husband, Habib Landry Gantsui, were both convicted and handed two-year suspended prison sentences. In addition, each was ordered to pay a fine of 50,000 euros (around $54,000).


The court also ordered the seizure of the couple’s French property, valued at 880,000 euros ($1.02 million), along with the forfeiture of 39,040 euros ($45,475) in confiscated cash. Their son, Alpha Gantsui, was likewise found guilty on related charges and received a one-year suspended sentence as well as a fine of 5,000 euros ($5,824).


Jean-Philippe Sportouch, a notary who had been prosecuted alongside the family members, was acquitted after the court determined there was insufficient evidence to support the accusations against him. Prosecutors had alleged that Sportouch proposed the legal arrangement used to conceal the real estate purchase and carried out the transaction without properly verifying where the funds originated.


Chanez Mensous, Advocacy and Litigation Manager for illicit financial flows at the French anti-corruption organization Sherpa, described the ruling as significant but incomplete. Speaking to OCCRP, Mensous said that while Nguesso’s conviction represented “an important step in the long trajectory of cases involving ill-gotten gains,” it still amounted to only a partial success.


"The real impact of which will depend on the outcome of the appeal,” Mensous said. She further characterized the court’s decision as “somewhat ambiguous” because it “falls significantly short of the demands made by the National Financial Prosecutor’s Office.”


Cyprus Company Formation

Mensous also criticized the court for failing to hold intermediaries accountable, calling that issue “a central element of the assessment made at this stage, and which can be re-examined during the appeal proceedings.”


Sébastien Journé, the lawyer representing the family, confirmed that an appeal had been filed and portrayed the ruling as a setback for France’s National Financial Prosecutor’s Office. He described the verdict as a “slap in the face” to prosecutors.


Journé stressed that the court dismissed what he described as the most serious allegations against his clients, including corruption, embezzlement of public funds, and accusations tied to organized crime. According to him, by rejecting those principal charges, the court effectively undermined prosecutors’ efforts to classify the assets in question as “ill-gotten gains.”


Addressing the remaining conviction for what he called the “alleged money laundering of breach of trust,” Journé argued that the charge lacked legal merit. He pointed out that the Congolese company responsible for transferring the disputed funds to the French real estate entity had never filed a complaint. He also maintained that the transfers had a valid “economic rationale,” insisting that no embezzlement had actually occurred.

By fLEXI tEAM


Comments


bottom of page