Tunisia is experiencing an unprecedented phase of human rights violations, as the judiciary is being used to eliminate political opponents and restrict freedoms. In this context, a judicial decision was issued to refer 11 political opponents to the criminal chamber specializing in terrorism cases, in a move that reflects the subjugation of the judicial system and an attempt to imprison the largest number of political opponents in the country.
Allegations of Illegal Issuance of Passports to Foreigners
On Thursday, February 13, 2025, the Indictment Chamber specializing in terrorism cases at the Court of Appeal in Tunis decided to refer 11 defendants, including former Prime Minister Hammadi Jebali and former Minister of Justice Noureddine Bhiri, in addition to Moadh Ghannouchi, son of the leader of the Ennahdha Movement, and a number of foreigners, to the criminal chamber in charge of terrorism cases. This referral was made as part of investigations into suspicions of forging passports for foreigners wanted in terrorism cases.
The investigating judge had previously issued arrest warrants for Noureddine Bhiri and former security official Fathi Beldi with restrictions on the movement of Hammadi Jebali and three other defendants. The list of defendants also included Moadh Ghannouchi (outside the country) and a number of foreigners against whom similar arrest warrants were issued.
This case has sparked widespread controversy due to the contradictions in official statements and leaked documents, which revealed clear legal violations.
What do the official documents show?
The documents showed that the granting of Tunisian citizenship to two prominent individuals, the Egyptian Youssef Nada and the Syrian Ali Ghaleb Himmat, was done legally in 1981, during the rule of President Bourguiba, under the supervision of the competent authorities, without any relation to Bhiri. The documents included citizenship certificates and official certifications proving that the procedures were carried out in accordance with the law, as the documents confirmed that Youssef Nada obtained Tunisian citizenship on February 19, 1983, based on a certificate issued by the Ministry of Justice, while the decision to grant citizenship to Ali Ghaleb Himmat was issued on March 14, 1983, via an official document issued by the head of the Nationality Department at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Charges without clear evidence
Tunisian Interior Minister Taoufik Charfeddine made direct accusations against both Bhiri and Beldi regarding the granting of citizenship and passports illegally, but official documents revealed that the granting of citizenship was done in accordance with the legal procedures followed, and with the approval of official bodies.
Temporal discrepancies in the allegations
Documents show that Youssef Nada and Ali Ghaleb Himmat obtained Tunisian citizenship in the 1960s, before Bhiri held any government position, and that their passports were issued in the 1980s, which weakens the allegations about Bhiri’s interference in granting them during his term of office (2011-2013).
Lack of evidence regarding security suspicions
The Interior Minister claimed the existence of “terrorist suspicion and security concerns” without providing concrete evidence, which renders the accusations judicially unproven and raises questions about their credibility and political motives.
The role of official authorities in granting citizenship
Documents confirmed that citizenship was granted by an official decision from the late Tunisian President Habib Bourguiba, and that Tunisian consulates in Europe dealt with the matter in accordance with the established legal procedures, which undermines the allegations of Bhiri’s illegal interference.
Politicization of the case and its exploitation in internal conflicts
It appears that the case was used as a tool in the internal political conflict, as media campaigns and official statements were resorted to instead of providing legal evidence.
Legal violations in the file
Using terrorism cases to justify political trials
Including the names of foreigners in the list of defendants aims to create an artificial link between the opposition and terrorism.
There is no clear legal evidence proving the defendants’ involvement in any illegal activities in Tunisia.
Lack of legal basis for the trial
A. Violation of the principle of presumption of innocence
The law guarantees the right of the accused to be considered innocent until proven guilty.
Issuing prison orders without completing the investigations reveals a political influence in the case and not an independent legal process.
B. Insufficient evidence
Official documents prove that the granting of citizenship and passports was done in accordance with sound legal procedures and that the accused had no role in them.
The Public Prosecution did not provide any documents proving the involvement of the accused in legal violations.
Grave violations of the rights of defense and fair trial
A. Increasing pressure on judges
The political pressure exerted on judges has made the courts a tool for eliminating opponents.
Referring the case to the court specializing in terrorism cases reflects the authorities’ intention to issue harsh sentences without real evidence.
B. Depriving the accused of the right to defense
Preventing some of the accused from communicating with their lawyers.
Not allowing them to fully review the alleged evidence against them.
Recommendations of the Freedom for Tunisia Observatory for
The Freedom for Tunisia Observatory considers this case to be nothing more than a political trial aimed at detaining and imprisoning opposition leaders, in an attempt to restrict political activity and expression of opinion.
The Observatory also stresses that the evidence presented in this case is insufficient, which renders the charges against those concerned legally invalid and not based on any solid legal foundations.
The Observatory points out that these practices represent a flagrant violation of international law and human rights, as they contradict the basic principles of justice, and perpetuate the restriction of freedoms in the country. It calls for a broad action that includes several axes:
First, the Observatory calls on international bodies to follow up on the ongoing trials and monitor their commitment to fair legal standards, to ensure that they are not used as a means to suppress opposition voices.
It also calls for intensifying international efforts and pressure to immediately release political detainees, and to ensure a fair trial in line with the principles of international law and human rights.
In order to achieve justice, the Observatory urges the submission of complaints before the African Court on Human Rights, in addition to addressing international human rights organizations to support this case and condemn the legal violations that have occurred.
The Observatory stresses the importance of intensifying media efforts to expose these violations and raise local and international public opinion about the seriousness of these practices, with the aim of putting an end to political prosecutions and restoring a climate of freedoms in the country.
Documents used: Documents published in the Arabi21 website were relied upon
