Guest of BFMTV, Eric Zemmour Me Olivier Pardo’s lawyer confirmed the filing of a complaint against the magazine Closer after a front page dedicated to the latter, announcing him as a future dad.
“Closer magazine has just published, against all the rules of journalistic ethics, an article seriously undermining the privacy and image rights of Mr. Éric Zemmour and Mrs. Sarah Knafo”, write in a press release Me Olivier Pardo and Laurence Dauxin-Nedelec, lawyers for the putative presidential candidate, as well as Me Simon Olivennes, counsel for Ms. Knafo. “Our customers take legal action immediately,” they add. Me Pardo told AFP that he would file “a summons for violation of privacy on Monday or Tuesday”.
“No matter what happens, always and everywhere, I will jealously, fiercely defend my privacy and that of my loved ones. Public life, yes. Voyeurism, no. Sorry for the perverts,” Mr. Zemmour said in a tweet. On the set of BFMTV, Me Olivier Pardo, lawyer for Eric Zemmour, had already announced that the latter was going to file a complaint against the magazine Closer after the publication of a front page claiming that the polemicist was going to “be a dad” in the coming months, his adviser Sarah Knafo being pregnant with him. “I’m going to slap them in the wallet because that’s where it hurts,” he explained. “It is an ignominious A (…) which abjectly violates privacy without any interest, without any truth”, he added. “It’s their private life, I’m not going to fall into the trap yes it’s true, yes it’s false. I’m not going to condone anything disgusting,” he added.
Read also: Sarah Knafo, the one who whispers in Zemmour’s ear
Thursday, Ms. Knafo’s lawyer had assigned “Closer” in summary proceedings to urgently obtain the banning of this number, information revealed by the “Point”. But this request was deemed inadmissible by the court, which considered that Ms. Knafo had presented “no objective evidence relating to the article and its content” allowing “to establish the publication in the magazine Closer to be published on 26 November 2021 of an article which would undermine the respect due to the privacy of the plaintiff’s private life”, with the exception of an SMS warning her of the publication of this number, according to the judgment consulted by AFP .