The trial of around 40 Tunisian opposition figures, accused of national security offences, has been launched and labeled politically motivated by their defenders. Key defendants face severe charges while their lawyers criticize the judicial process as unfair and absurd. The case highlights growing concerns over government repression and the status of democracy in Tunisia since President Kais Saied’s power consolidation.
On Tuesday, a mass trial commenced in Tunisia involving approximately 40 prominent opposition figures facing national security charges. Critics, including family members and legal representatives, condemned the trial as politically motivated, asserting that the accused include activists, lawyers, and media personalities who have openly opposed President Kais Saied.
The allegations against these defendants include “plotting against the state security” and “belonging to a terrorist group,” risking severe penalties, potentially even capital punishment. Demonstrators in the courtroom demanded justice, alleging that the judiciary operates under government influence.
Defence lawyer Abdelaziz Essid criticized the proceedings as “absurd,” echoed by Human Rights Watch describing it as a “mockery of a trial”. The hearing was postponed to allow the court to assess defence requests, which included having detained defendants present physically.
Key figures implicated are Jawhar Ben Mbarek, Ennahdha leader Abdelhamid Jelassi, and Issam Chebbi, among others. Dalila Msaddek, a lawyer for the defence, expressed concerns about potential predetermined sentencing and characterized the case as hollow due to its reliance on false testimonies.
Defendants allegedly engaged with foreign diplomats, with several being arrested in February 2023 as President Saied labeled them “terrorists.” Some remain at large awaiting trial while others have expatriated. Since his election in 2019, Saied has drawn criticism for consolidating power and undermining democratic freedoms.
Defence counsel reported restricted access to crucial case documentation, with Essid emphasizing the need to conclude the “madness.” In correspondence from prison, Ben Mbarek labeled the trial a form of “judicial harassment” aimed at silencing dissenting voices.
Advocates characterized the legal proceedings as an orchestrated government attack against opposition figures, with comments from Ahmed Nejib Chebbi asserting that opposing the government is a right, not a crime. President Saied, in response to public concerns, distanced himself from judicial actions, maintaining he does not interfere.
Additional critics of Saied’s regime have been charged under various laws, prompting the United Nations to urge the end of arbitrary arrests of dissenters. In contrast, Tunisia’s foreign ministry expressed disbelief at the UN’s statements, defending the country’s actions as justified.
The ongoing mass trial of Tunisian opposition figures, characterized as politically motivated by critics, exemplifies the broader concerns regarding judicial independence and political repression in Tunisia. With charges that could lead to severe sentences and a backdrop of diminished democratic freedoms, the trial underlines the contentious relationship between the government and its opponents. Observers are keenly watching the developments, as both national and international stakeholders call for fairness and accountability in the judicial process.
Original Source: www.al-monitor.com
