The text, to be examined by the Senate on Tuesday, October 21, proposes two major revisions to this offense concerning misconduct by elected officials. While the first, namely the decriminalization of public-public conflicts of interest, is widely agreed upon, the second, a wording change with major consequences, risks weakening the judicial response.
“Sword of Damocles,” “legal guillotine,” “offense of a Stalinist nature”… Few offenses are as disliked as “illegal taking of interest.” This article of the penal code sanctions elected officials and civil servants who have participated in a public decision in which they also hold another interest—regardless of whether they profited from the decision or whether it caused harm to their community. This offense addresses a dual challenge: by forcing interested decision-makers to recuse themselves, it preserves citizens’ trust in public decision-making and prevents breaches of integrity. Deemed too complex and a source of uncertainty for elected officials, this offense has undergone regular revisions since the late 2000s.
On Tuesday, October 21, the Senate will examine a new version of this offense, as part of the second reading of the proposed law “aiming to encourage, facilitate, and secure the exercise of the local elected official’s mandate.” The adoption of this text is being demanded by associations of elected officials ahead of the municipal elections in March 2026.