Tunisia court sentences lawyer critical of president to two years in prison
Dhamani's lawyers withdrew from the trial after the judge refused to adjourn the session on Monday, claiming Dhamani was being tried twice for the same act.
The court sentenced Dhamani for statements criticising practices against refugees and migrants from sub-Saharan Africa.
Lawyer Bassem Trifi said the verdict was 'a grave injustice'.
'What's happening is a farce. Sonia is being tried twice for the same statement,' said lawyer Sami Ben Ghazi, another lawyer for Dhamani.
Dhamani was arrested last year after making comments during a television appearance that questioned the government's stance on undocumented African refugees and migrants in Tunisia.
The case was brought under the nation's controversial cybercrime law, Decree 54, which has been widely condemned by international and local rights groups.
Most opposition leaders, some journalists, and critics of Saied have been imprisoned since Saied seized control of most powers, dissolved the elected parliament, and began ruling by decree in 2021 – moves the opposition has described as a coup.
Saied rejects the charges and says his actions are legal and aimed at ending years of chaos and rampant corruption.
Human rights groups and activists say Saied has turned Tunisia into an open-air prison and is using the judiciary and police to target his political opponents.
Saied rejects these accusations, saying he will not be a dictator and seeks to hold everyone accountable equally, regardless of their position or name.
Earlier this year, the country carried out a mass trial in which dozens of defendants were handed jail terms of up to 66 years. Critics denounced the trial as politically motivated and baseless.
The defendants faced charges including 'conspiracy against state security' and 'belonging to a terrorist group', according to their lawyers.
Among those targeted were figures from what was once the biggest party, Ennahda, such as the leader and former Speaker of Parliament Rached Ghannouchi, former Prime Minister Hichem Mechichi, and former Minister of Justice Noureddine Bhiri.
Tunisia had been celebrated as perhaps the only democratic success of the 2011 'Arab Spring' revolutions, with strong political engagement among its public and civil society members, who frequently took to the airwaves and streets to make their voices heard.
The years that followed the revolution, which overthrew long-time autocrat Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, saw the growth of a healthy political system with numerous elections declared free and fair by international observers.
But a weak economy and the strengthening of anti-democratic forces led to a pushback, capped off by Saied's dismissal of the government and dissolution of parliament.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
a day ago
- Al Jazeera
Migrants in US detention lose appeal against deportation to South Sudan
Eight migrants in United States custody have lost a last-ditch attempt to avoid deportation to South Sudan, a country facing ongoing criticism for human rights abuses. On Friday, Judge Brian Murphy of Boston denied the eleventh-hour appeal, which has been the subject of a flurry of legal activity throughout the day. The appeal argued that repeated efforts under President Donald Trump to deport the men to South Sudan was 'impermissibly punitive'. It pointed out that the US Constitution bars 'cruel and unusual punishment'. In the past, the US Department of State has accused South Sudan of 'extrajudicial killings, forced disappearances, torture and cases of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment'. It advises no American citizen to travel there due to an ongoing armed conflict. But the US Supreme Court has twice ruled that the Trump administration could indeed deport the men to countries outside of their homelands. Its latest decision was issued on Thursday. The US Department of Justice indicated that the eight men were set to be flown to South Sudan by 7pm US Eastern Time (23:00 GMT) on Friday. They hailed from countries like Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Sudan and Vietnam. The last-ditch appeal was filed on Thursday night, shortly after the Supreme Court rendered its decision. Initially, the case was assigned to US District Judge Randolph Moss in Washington, DC, who signalled he was sympathetic to the deportees' request. He briefly ordered the deportation to be paused until 4:30pm Eastern Time (20:30 GMT), but ultimately, he decided to transfer the case back to Murphy, the judge whose decisions helped precipitate the Supreme Court's rulings. Murphy had previously issued injunctions against the deportations to South Sudan, leading to successful appeals from the Trump administration. The eight men, meanwhile, had been held at a military base in Djibouti while the courts decided their fate. Before he transferred the case back to Murphy, however, Judge Moss said it was possible the deportees could prove their case that the Trump administration intended to subject them to abuse. 'It seems to me almost self-evident that the United States government cannot take human beings and send them to circumstances in which their physical wellbeing is at risk simply either to punish them or send a signal to others,' Moss said during the hearing. Lawyers for the Trump administration, meanwhile, argued that the deportation's continued delay would strain relations with countries willing to accept migrants from other countries. Murphy, who denied Friday's request, had previously ruled in favour of the deportees, issuing an injunction against their removal to South Sudan and saying they had a right to contest the deportation based on fears for their safety. The Supreme Court first lifted the injunction on June 23 and clarified its ruling again on Thursday, giving a subtle rebuke to Judge Murphy. The Trump administration has been pushing for rapid removals as part of its campaign of mass deportation, one of President Trump's signature priorities. Opponents have accused the administration of steamrolling the human rights of undocumented people in order to achieve its aims, including the right to due process under the law. But the Trump administration has framed undocumented migration as an 'invasion' that constitutes a national security crisis, and it argued that its strong-armed efforts are needed to expel criminals. The eight migrants slated to be sent to South Sudan, it said, were 'barbaric, violent criminal illegal aliens'. It added that they had been found guilty of crimes, including first-degree murder, robbery and sexual assault. 'These sickos will be in South Sudan by Independence Day,' Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a news release on Thursday.
Al Jazeera
a day ago
- Al Jazeera
UN rights council rejects Eritrea's bid to end human rights investigation
The United Nations Human Rights Council has rejected Eritrea's attempt to shut down an independent investigation into alleged rights abuses, in a move hailed as vital to preventing impunity. Eritrea's rare bid to scrap the mandate of the UN special rapporteur on its human rights record was defeated on Friday, with only four votes in favour, 25 against, and 18 abstentions. The move by Eritrea surprised some observers and marked one of the few times a state under active investigation tried to end such scrutiny through a formal vote. Human Rights Watch welcomed the outcome, calling it 'an important message that the international community is not fooled by Eritrea's efforts to distract from, and discredit, independent human rights reporting on the country's dire rights record.' Eritrea's motion argued that alleged rights violations were not systemic and blamed 'capacity constraints' common to other developing nations. But European states responded with a counter-resolution to extend the mandate for another year, which passed with ease. In his latest report in June, Mohamed Abdelsalam Babiker, the UN-appointed special rapporteur and a Sudanese human rights lawyer, said Eritrea had shown 'no meaningful progress' on accountability. He referenced the 2016 UN inquiry that found 'systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations … committed in Eritrea under the authority of the Government … may constitute crimes against humanity.' In the 2016 report, the UN's Commission of Inquiry (COI) for Eritrea said the government of President Isaias Afwerki had committed heinous crimes since independence a quarter-century ago, including the 'enslavement' of 400,000 people. Many of those abuses are allegedly linked to a harsh national service programme in the secretive Horn of Africa state, which for many is almost impossible to escape and which the COI compared to lifetime enslavement. Ending investigation would enable 'impunity' DefendDefenders, a pan-African human rights organisation, said Babiker's role remained vital for victims and the wider Eritrean diaspora. 'The expert plays an indispensable role, not only for the victims and survivors of Eritrea's abuses, but also for the Eritrean diaspora,' the group said in a statement. The EU warned that terminating the mandate would enable 'impunity and repression to deepen in silence.' Eritrea's representative, Habtom Zerai Ghirmai, lashed out at the decision, accusing the EU of displaying a 'neo-colonial saviour mentality complex'. He added, 'The continued extension of the Special Rapporteur's mandate is an affront to reason and justice.' Iran, Sudan and Russia – all under their own UN investigations – supported Eritrea's motion. China also backed the move, arguing that such mandates were a misuse of international resources.
Al Jazeera
a day ago
- Al Jazeera
Will police brutality end in Kenya as protests reignite?
A year after a deadly crackdown, Kenya's streets are alive with protests again, this time after a blogger died in police custody and officers shot a demonstrator at close range. As outrage grows, so do calls for accountability. Why does police brutality persist in Kenya, and how do officers continue to evade justice?
