The Observatory Affair.

References: “Le Crapouillot”, No. 20 New Series, March–April 1972; No. 59 New Series, Summer 1981; No. 2 Special Issue, June 1994.

Reported by Y. Langard

Mitterrand’s version

On the night of October 15–16, 1959, François Mitterrand, senator and former Minister of the Interior and Justice under the Fourth Republic, filed a complaint with the police: he claimed to have been the victim of an assassination attempt.

He recounted that at around midnight, after leaving the Lipp brasserie on Boulevard Saint-Germain, he was driving back to his home at 4 Rue Guynemer, near the Luxembourg Gardens, in his blue Peugeot 404 (*). A Renault Dauphine allegedly followed him. Worried—given the climate of terrorism related to the Algerian War—he changed his route. Upon reaching the Senate building, instead of turning right toward his home, he turned left onto Boulevard Saint-Michel. But since the suspicious car continued to follow him, he finally turned right onto Rue Auguste-Comte, abandoned his vehicle, and jumped over the hedge surrounding the Observatory gardens—just in time to avoid a burst of machine-gun fire: seven bullets were fired at his car by his pursuers.

Investigating magistrate Braunschweig opened an investigation “against X” for attempted murder and entrusted the case to Commissioner Clot, head of the criminal brigade of the judicial police; Clot conducted intensive investigations for several days.

(*) Possibly a typographical error. The 404 didn’t exist at the time, I believe. I think it was a “403”. According to this source, the 404 was “symbolically launched at the start of the 1960s.”
http://www.caradisiac.com/php/collection/voitures_legende/francaises/peugeot_404.php

September 6, 2005. It was indeed a 403:

Mitterrand’s vehicle after the “attempted attack” (photo from a news agency)

My note: The metal rods indicate bullet impacts and trajectories. They are located at driver’s seat level; there are six of them. Since a Sten submachine gun has a 20-round magazine, if we assume the shooter emptied it, this would explain the shattered windows. As Mitterrand supposedly jumped out of his car, it must have crashed into something, hence the bodywork damage. However, as Bernard D., who sent me this photo, points out: why is the steering column completely bent, given that the driver supposedly exited the vehicle at the moment of impact? Below, excerpts from Pesquet’s book.

The scandal breaks

Six days later, on October 22, 1959, the right-wing weekly Rivarol asserted that Mitterrand wasn’t a victim of an assassination attempt, but the organizer of a fake attempt against himself, carried out with an accomplice: former Poujadist (right-wing) deputy Robert Pesquet, who lost the 1968 elections.

Pesquet’s version

That same day, Pesquet appeared before the judge. He said that Mitterrand, whom he met on Wednesday, October 7 at the Palais de Justice, offered to “pull him out of mediocrity” if he agreed to perform certain “dangerous missions” for him. This offer was repeated on October 14 and confirmed on October 15, when Pesquet was tasked with staging a fake assassination attempt against Mitterrand, in order to restore Mitterrand’s popularity, which had waned since De Gaulle came to power. All details of the operation—times, routes—were arranged that day by both men, Pesquet claimed. He revealed that the following car, a Dauphine, was driven by him, while the machine gun was handled by Abel Dahuron, his gamekeeper. Both waited, as planned, until Mitterrand was hidden among the bushes of the gardens before firing at his empty car.

Mitterrand’s second version

He filed two complaints: one for attempted murder, one for defamation. According to him, Pesquet, whom he barely knew, “misled” him by “revealing” that a real assassination attempt was planned against him by opponents supporting French Algeria; Pesquet was supposed to carry it out, but preferred to warn his future victim so as to spare him, suggesting instead a botched attempt. Mitterrand accepted this proposal out of fear that other “friends” of Pesquet would kill him if Pesquet informed them he refused.

The judge’s reaction

The judge indicted Pesquet and Dahuron for illegal possession of military weapons, as they lacked permits; moreover, they fired in public. He also indicted an accomplice, André Péquignot, who supplied the machine gun (a “souvenir” from the Resistance) without knowing its purpose. Finally, because this former Minister of Justice led police and judiciary down a false trail when filing his complaint after the alleged attack—by not mentioning Pesquet or his ties to him—the judge wished to indict Mitterrand for contempt of court. But Mitterrand was a senator, thus enjoying parliamentary immunity. The judge then requested the Senate to lift Mitterrand’s immunity; this happened on November 25, 1959, by a vote of 175 to 27. Thus, besides Mitterrand, there were four defendants.

Aftermath

Apart from a minor incident in which Pesquet was briefly imprisoned for another crime and went on a hunger strike, the Observatory Affair dragged on for seven more years.

At year-end 1965, De Gaulle ran for re-election. Two staunch political rivals opposed him: Mitterrand and Tixier-Vignancour, far-right candidate and former lawyer of Pesquet. Yet the fake Observatory attack wasn’t even mentioned by Gaullists, who likely feared that Mitterrand, former Justice Minister, also possessed files against them (especially concerning Michel Debré and the bazooka attack in Algiers in January 1957, where Debré was accused of being one of the instigators).

De Gaulle re-elected in January 1966, an amnesty law was passed in June, as often happens after presidential elections. Among other things, it cleared Pesquet and Dahuron of illegal weapon possession. For the first time in history, it also applied to contempt of court: Mitterrand was thus absolved, and it became forbidden to even mention his indictment. This “gift” from De Gaulle to his fiercest opponent seems to confirm that Gaullists feared Mitterrand might reveal his own “files.”

Epilogue

August 8, 1966, two months after the amnesty, Judge Sablayrolle, successor to Braunschweig, issued two rulings regarding Pesquet and Dahuron: dismissal on grounds of illegal weapon possession (purely formal, since amnesty applied), but no charges for attempted murder. This officially recognized that the attack was staged.

That same day, Judge Alain Simon, noting that the events dated back over three years, had to acknowledge statute of limitations and dismissed charges of contempt of court against Mitterrand—again, purely formal, since the offense had already been amnestied.

Nevertheless, Mitterrand appealed against the dismissal of charges against Pesquet, which implied his complicity with his “assassin.” Essentially, he preferred to send two innocent men to trial rather than admit he’d misled police and judiciary.

But on November 28, the Paris Court of Appeal ruled against him; he was rejected and ordered to pay costs. He persisted, appealed to the Court of Cassation... then quietly withdrew his appeal; the Court acknowledged this withdrawal and also ordered him to pay costs on May 30, 1967. The affair was now closed for everyone. Pesquet went into exile in Spain, then Switzerland. Mitterrand could continue politics and preach moral lessons to his opponents...

Back to News Back to Guide Back to Home Page

Number of views of this page since September 29, 2005:

Back to Pentagate