Europe

The court is simply applying French law. It is not going against democracy. Le pen and her party broke the law and attacked democracy.

The judges didn't invent and apply their own stuff, they applied the same law yhat appllies to everyone and punished le pen and het party within the boundaries of the law.

There is a law saying that for corrupted politicians a temporary election ban is a possible sentence. This women and her accomplice stole 4 millions Euro, that's a lot of money. Not allowing her to be elected for 5 year sounds like a way to protect taxpayer money for money. It's also not unique to politicians, French law can also ban someone from managing a company (Executive who stole money, or ignore regulation leading to serious accidents). What's the alternative a longer jail sentence meaning she'll actually go to jail ? (and campaigning from jail sounds like a great way to miss an election). if I steal 4 millions, I'd get jail-time not just an election ban.

Moreover, Le Pen, and a lot of right wingers, are the one who pushed law for harsher punishment and appeal not postponing the sentence so they're getting a taste of their own medecine.

Finally, While a dozen of Rassemblement National politicians are banned for election, the party isn't banned. It's not the first not the last time that a politicians who could have run for president ends-up found guilty of stealing taxpayer money leading to not being able to run for election. There is a long range between a serious potential candidate and a president. if the RN doesn't play too much Game of Throne to get the candidate position, they may even come in a stronger position for 2027 election

You're arguing for a democracy without a Justice system?

An independent Justice system is fundamental to a working, healthy democracy.

Just look around to where and how Justice system is weakened by political parties and it's always developing into autocracy and oppression.

such a decision should only be made by the people

This is completely wrong, the courts are one of the pillars of democracy, and their job is to interpret the law, including laws that are supposed to protect democracy.
It is exactly the failure of doing that, that allowed Trump to become president, even after he tried to take power forcefully, and is now threatening democracy in USA.

What the courts did in Romania and in France is the right thing to do, when fundamental rules of democracy are broken.

She is banned for 5 years, so she will still have a chance, and of course her party still has a chance. It's simply wrong to claim that her breaking the rules of democracy personally, should not have consequences for her eligibility.

The rule of law is not against democracy, it is the other way round: courts protect people and democracy from unlawful actions. In democracies (with all four pillars of power intact), no politician and no criminal stands above the law, even if those play their usual "victim" role, when caught.

If politicians do not want to be convicted by court, they should not break the law. Seems to be a simple rule to follow.

The decision of the court has been taken following laws established by the Parliament. The punishment for convicted crimes and felonies are not pulled out of thin-air by a judge doing whatever he feels like.

If LFI feels that ‘ineligibility’ is not a suitable punishment (and indeed it is subject to some controversy, as it can indeed in theory be used to surpress political opponents), they should push to change the law. I don’t recall if RN+LFI have an actual majority but they should be close enough that they could push to amend existing legislation if they want to, rather than slander judges or question the independence of justice (which again, if they want to improve that they can also suggest legislative changes).

What's stopping me from illegally winning the election then? Where do you draw the line ? Isn't the additional money here already an unfair advantage compared to your opponents ? Let's not act like the extra money was not used to further the party goals elsewhere. There is no such thing as "a fair debate of opinion" and whatever bullshit. They break the law, they get caught, they pay for it. And they where happy to vote this very law 10 years ago. Do not generalize the left with your opinion, I disagree with LFI completely here.

Marine Le Pen isn't the first prominent French politician to be disqualified from public office. Since it stopped being automatic, it has already affected big names such as like her father, Nicolas Sarkozy, Jacques Chirac, Charles Pasqua, and Bernard Tapie.

This isn't exclusive to right-wing politicians; the disqualification penalty has been imposed by French justice on several dozens of elected officials and public representatives since 1992. It was in 1992 that the concept was introduced into French law. It was even applied automatically for a series of offences until a reform in 2010. Since then, it's a standalone penalty that must be decided on by a judge. It can last up to 5 years for an offence and 10 years for a crime. Here is a small selection of well-known male and female politicians who have been sentenced to this penalty (listed alphabetically).

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/sarkozy-tapie-le-pen-famous-cases-of-ineligibility-in-france/ar-AA1C01vk