The French National Financial Prosecutor’s Office (Parquet National Financier – PNF) has announced that the preliminary investigation opened against Patrick Pouyanné, CEO of TotalEnergies, has been dropped.
The latter was accused by Greenpeace, Anticor and the association La Sphinx of having abused his position as a member of the board of directors of the École Polytechnique to promote the establishment of a research center dedicated to the decarbonization of energies.
The PNF justifies its decision on the grounds that there is insufficient evidence to establish the offences of illegal taking of interest, favoritism, complicity and concealment of these offences.
Background and reactions
From the moment it was announced, the project for a 10,000 m² research center, which was to accommodate around 400 people, aroused contrasting reactions within Polytechnique.
Some students and professors voiced their opposition, denouncing the growing influence of the private sector on the public institution.
In March 2020, a demonstration was organized to protest against the establishment of the center on campus, perceived as interference by the private sector in the institution’s affairs.
In June 2020, the École Polytechnique decided to move the project away from the heart of the campus to the innovation business park managed by the Établissement public d’aménagement (EPA) Paris-Saclay.
However, in January 2022, TotalEnergies definitively abandoned the project.
Analysis of Pouyanné’s speech
The PNF points out that Patrick Pouyanné ‘s contribution to the Polytechnique Board of Directors meeting in April 2020 was limited to providing information on the project.
The CEO of TotalEnergies is speaking as an executive of the company and not as a director of the school, which, according to the PNF, does not constitute an illegal taking of interest.
What’s more, the investigations revealed that he withdrew immediately after his intervention, taking no part in the subsequent stages of the decision-making process.
Consequences for the parties involved
The complainant associations, disappointed by the closure of the investigation, believe that the PNF’s decision weakens the fight against conflicts of interest in public institutions.
They plan to file a civil suit to obtain the appointment of an independent investigating judge.
This case has rekindled the debate on the influence of the private sector in public institutions, particularly in the field of research and higher education.
