Credits: Georges Schneider / photonews.at — Federal Ministry for Europe, Integration and Foreign Affairs, CC BY 2.0.
Since May 13, 2026, an investigating judge at the Paris judicial court has been investigating Fabrice Leggeri. He is examining possible complicity in crimes against humanity and torture while Leggeri was heading Frontex. The former senior civil servant, now an RN member of the European Parliament, has not been the subject of any publicly disclosed indictment. The proceedings are intended to determine whether European border-control policy may have engaged his personal criminal liability.
An Open Investigation, Not an Indictment
On July 30 and 31, 2026, the Ceuta episode reignited the debate over the European Union’s external borders. It is, however, not part of the Fabrice Leggeri case. That case concerns alleged decisions and practices during his seven years at the helm of Frontex. It covers the period from January 2015 to April 2022.
The latest public judicial act dates back to May 13, 2026. That day, the investigation was officially launched at the Paris judicial court. The order initiating it had been issued nearly two months earlier. As of August 6, no hearing, indictment, or other subsequent decision has been publicly announced.
A judicial investigation is an inquiry led by an investigating judge. It is used to determine whether an offense was committed and to identify any possible perpetrators or accomplices. It is neither an indictment nor a referral to a court, much less a conviction. Fabrice Leggeri is presumed innocent.
Two Years of Proceedings Before A Judge Was Seized
On April 23, 2024, the Ligue des droits de l’Homme and Utopia 56 announced a civil-party complaint. It concerns complicity in crimes against humanity and torture. This procedure allows a person who considers themselves a victim to directly request that an investigating judge be appointed. Le Monde nevertheless reports the rejection of Utopia 56’s request to join as a civil party. That rejection does not call into question its role in filing the initial complaint.
The National Anti-Terrorism Prosecutor’s Office, which has jurisdiction in France for crimes against humanity, initially concluded that the filing was inadmissible. In November 2024, the senior investigating judge of the specialized division of the Paris judicial court then declined to open an investigation. The detailed reasons for that order have not been established by the public sources consulted.
The associations appealed. On March 18, 2026, the investigative chamber of the Paris Court of Appeal overturned that refusal. It held that there was reason to investigate the facts set out in the complaint. It therefore ordered them to be examined by a judge. It did not rule on whether they were true or on any possible guilt. The formal opening of the judicial investigation on May 13 carried out that decision.
What The Associations Accuse Fabrice Leggeri Of
The complaint targets the former executive director as a natural person. According to the LDH and Utopia 56, he is said to have encouraged or covered interceptions of boats by Greek and Libyan authorities. He is also said to have failed to oppose pushbacks. These practices, often called pushbacks, send people back across a border without individual review or effective access to an asylum claim.
The complainants also argue that Frontex provided logistical and financial support to the authorities concerned and concealed certain incidents. In the Central Mediterranean, they describe increasingly air-based surveillance. Boats are said to have been spotted in advance and then reported to the Libyan coast guard. According to them, a rescue operation under the responsibility of the Italian or Maltese authorities should have been triggered as a priority.
These claims are allegations submitted to the judge, not facts established by a court. The associations put forward their own figures. They count 16,272 dead or missing people in the Central Mediterranean between January 2015 and April 2022. They also cite 222 incidents involving 8,355 people between March 2020 and September 2021. The proceedings will in particular have to verify the sources of these data, the reality of the acts cited, and their possible connection to Fabrice Leggeri’s decisions.
What The Court Still Needs To Establish
The investigative chamber did not bring charges against the former head of Frontex. According to a judicial source cited by AFP, it said there was reason “to investigate the facts.” It thus asked the investigation to shed light on the facts and their criminal classification.
The judge’s work is expected to focus on several levels. First, it will be necessary to determine which incidents can be materially established and under what conditions they occurred. Next, their legal classification will have to be examined. Finally, the judge will need to determine what Fabrice Leggeri knew and what decisions he personally made. It will have to determine whether they can amount to criminally punishable aid or assistance.
The precise basis for the jurisdiction of French courts is not public in the available sources. It is also unknown whether the investigation was opened against unknown persons or specifically against Fabrice Leggeri. To assert either of these hypotheses would go beyond what has been made public.
In May, the MEP’s defense described the opening of the investigation as the “mechanical” consequence of the appellate ruling. It said it was waiting for the judicial investigation to develop before responding on the merits. At the time the complaint was filed in 2024, Fabrice Leggeri had already disputed the allegations and denounced a political move.
The OLAF Report Does Not Predetermine The Criminal Investigation
The Paris case concerns Fabrice Leggeri, not Frontex as a legal entity, according to the public elements of the file. That distinction is essential: the European agency has its own institutional responsibilities, but the French judge must determine any individual criminal liability.
Another point of confusion concerns the European Anti-Fraud Office. An OLAF report dated April 15, 2022, documented internal failings and the handling of serious incidents. It also addressed the issue of pushbacks. Fabrice Leggeri submitted his resignation at the end of that same month. That European administrative inquiry sheds light on the context, but its findings are neither automatic proof nor a ruling in the French criminal proceedings.
The case also has a political dimension. Fabrice Leggeri has been a member of the European Parliament for the National Rally since July 16, 2024. He sits notably on the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. In March, several RN officials denounced judicial overreach and portrayed the complaint as an attempt to criminalize border control. These positions fall within political debate; they do not settle the factual and legal questions entrusted to the judge.
Indictment, Dismissal, Or Trial: The Possible Next Steps
The investigating judge may request documents, hear witnesses, order expert reports, or delegate acts to investigators. The judge must investigate both incriminating and exculpatory evidence. The goal is therefore to identify both the elements that may support the suspicions and those that may rule them out.
Under Article 80-1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, an indictment requires “serious or corroborating indications.” Failing that, a person questioned may retain the status of assisted witness or merely remain under suspicion. None of these statuses is equivalent to a finding of guilt.
At the end of the investigation, the judge may issue an order of dismissal. That will happen if the judge considers the facts unproven or the evidence insufficient. If, on the contrary, the judge considers the evidence sufficient, they may order the case to be sent to a trial court. Between the opening of the investigation and any eventual conviction, several decisions still remain to be made. To date, the Fabrice Leggeri case is still at the fact-finding stage.