Pôle "cold cases" takes over investigations in the Robert Boulin case, three judges appointed

Nanterre – 30.06.2026: The investigation into the cause of death of former minister Robert Boulin is being reopened. The presidency of the Nanterre court announced on June 29 that three examining judges of the Pôle national des crimes sériels et non élucidés (PCSNE) have been assigned to the file and can continue it without delay. This implements a request from the Nanterre public prosecutor’s office dated June 26, 2026.

The case dates back to October 30, 1979. Boulin, then Minister of Labour under President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, was found dead in a pond in the Rambouillet forest. Official investigations at the time concluded that he had taken his own life. Relatives and close associates repeatedly disputed this and have for decades called for the examination of a possible political assassination. The controversy shaped several stages of the proceedings and regularly sparked public debate about the investigative methods of the time.

Already in April 2026 the file was transferred by the investigating judge in Versailles to the PCSNE; the appeals chamber in Versailles confirmed the procedural steps on April 28, 2026. With the now formal assignment in Nanterre the dossier gains access to specialised resources for cold cases, including forensic re-evaluations, structured witness work and interdisciplinary analyses. The court points to the pole’s mandate to methodically consolidate complex, long-standing cases.

According to the information provided, the reopened investigations focus on serious offences, including deprivation of liberty resulting in death as well as possible murder. Concrete investigative leads have not been made public. The background includes new motions and the family’s ongoing demand for a full reassessment of the circumstances, including the original evidence handling and the plausibility of competing scenarios.

Cold-case units often work with updated DNA and material analyses, digital reconstructions and systematic file review. In historical cases, time remains a limiting factor: witnesses recall less or are no longer available, evidence ages or is only partly usable. The justice system’s step is therefore also aimed at systematically exhausting the remaining traces.

Politically and institutionally, the decision signals that even cases with potentially high public interest will be re-examined when procedural prerequisites are met. How long the new instruction will last and whether it will lead to charges remains open. The court leadership emphasised the confidentiality of the ongoing investigations; further information will be released only when there are procedure-relevant developments.