In a pivotal legal decision on Friday, February 7, Monaco’s Supreme Court ruled that it was incompetent to judge the legality of the Prince’s decision to dismiss Claude Palmero, the former administrator of the Princely Family’s assets, Monaco-Matin reports. Palmero, who was ousted from the Prince’s Palace in June 2023, had challenged his dismissal, seeking to clear his name and contest the decision that he believes was unjust.
Palmero’s legal battle began in July 2023, when he took his case to the highest court in the Principality, seeking a review of his revocation ad nutum (immediate dismissal without formalities). However, the Court, led by President Stéphane Braconnier, concluded that the case did not fall within its jurisdiction. The Court emphasised that the position of Administrator of the Crown Property requires “full trust,” and that the Prince’s actions, in this case, were based on a loss of trust rather than any punitive motive.
The Court’s decision aligns with a longstanding principle in Monaco’s legal system that the acts of the Sovereign Prince are not subject to judicial review. In the words of Me Cyril Bonan, the Prince’s lawyer, the dismissal was considered an “act of government,” not an administrative action, and therefore not open to appeal. Furthermore, Palmero’s claim for compensation—amounting to a minimum of 1 million euros—was also rejected, and he was ordered to pay the legal costs.
This decision has sparked sharp reactions from Palmero’s legal team. Pierre-Olivier Sur, Palmero’s lawyer, criticised the ruling, describing it as a reflection of the “obsolete and distorted” notion of the inviolability of Monaco’s monarch. Sur invoked Article 88 of Monaco’s Constitution, which states that justice “belongs to the Prince” and is delegated to the courts. He accused the Monegasque judicial system of either submitting to the will of the Sovereign or failing to maintain its independence. Sur also labeled the ruling as an example of “bad faith”, asserting that Monaco’s courts had disregarded Palmero’s fundamental rights.
Not deterred by the Court’s decision, Palmero’s legal team is now preparing to take the case to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg. Sur sees the upcoming challenge as potentially historic, with the case potentially shedding light on what he argues is the violation of fundamental rights by the Monegasque State in favour of its monarch. He framed the ECHR case as an opportunity to expose Monaco as a “State that violates fundamental rights” by protecting its monarch’s actions from legal scrutiny.
For his part, Me Bonan defended the ruling, insisting that Palmero’s repeated legal actions were without merit and a misuse of judicial processes. He maintained that the decision reflected the independence of Monaco’s legal system, which operates under the rule of law and not under the influence of any individual or institution.
