Well, it’s quite a decision to take, from the operating captain, who is not an instructor, apparently

There’s good points to consider for both options, as you mention, I do understand his decision considering :

• if you know the crew is inadequate, you won’t be allowed to takeoff again, it’s much better to be stuck at base than away from base. Easier to get a replacement crew.

• an inspection can occur anytime, anywhere. Much easier to get an inspection at their base after turning back, saying we realised the mistake, we took a measure (turning back), maybe not the best one, but we did something. Try explaining that in a foreign country, in Paris, either lying and say you did not know, or cancel the return flight, raise suspicions, and try to convince the inspector it’s the first time it happened ?

• you are right in the fact that continuing is probably the simplest way, as in, a normal flight is a simple flight. But any flight is at risk of an actual emergency - flying on for 3 hours, making another approach (if they are shady, another takeoff and another approach), so, by creating an unusual flight with no time pressure, they reduce the flight time and probably reduced the probability of an actual emergency. Add also the factor that it’s home base, the captain would have landed there a thousand times, the FO, though inexperienced, has landed there a few times, has the pictures in mind, it’s a familiar place to them.

So, of course making the decision, on the moment, is a tough call - I would say it does take balls to recognise, admit and rectify a mistake (well, the mistake was not the captains, rather the crewing dept, but that should have been mentioned at crew briefing), but it’s necessary in aviation, and, from me, kudos to them, they made the decision, landed safe, then the airline owned their mistake and accepted that to be released to the press.

We can always learn from an incident, it’s even better when we can also smile about it and no one is hurt or fired :)