How Is Kais Saied Using the Judiciary to Get Rid of His Opponents?

A Tunisian court has handed down lengthy prison sentences to several opposition figures, including Rached Ghannouchi, the leader of the dissolved parliament, in a case that has sparked widespread criticism and accusations of political repression.

The Court of First Instance sentenced Ghannouchi, 82, to 22 years in prison on February 5, in connection with the so-called “Instalingo” case, which involves allegations of money laundering and conspiracy against state security.

The court also sentenced former Foreign Minister Rafik Abdessalem to 34 years and Ghannouchi’s daughter, Soumaya, to 25 years. Several others received prison terms in the same case, which dates back to July 2021, when authorities raided the headquarters of Instalingo, a media and content production company.

Tunisian authorities accused Instalingo of running media campaigns against the government and engaging in illicit financial activities. However, families of the accused and rights groups say the charges are politically motivated, targeting critics of President Kais Saied.

Ennahda, the opposition party led by Ghannouchi, denied any wrongdoing and said Instalingo provided media and translation services, including for presidential election campaigns in 2019, but did not work for its candidate.

Unjust and unfair

Ghannouchi’s legal team condemned the ruling, calling it “unjust and politically driven.” In a statement issued on February 6, the defense said Ghannouchi would continue boycotting court proceedings, accusing the judiciary of being used as a tool for political retaliation.

The veteran politician has faced multiple legal cases since Saied’s consolidation of power in 2021, which opponents describe as an authoritarian crackdown on dissent. Tunisian authorities maintain that the judiciary operates independently.

The legal team for opposition leader Rached Ghannouchi has denounced the recent court rulings, calling them predetermined and politically motivated. The team claimed interrogation sessions and defense arguments were merely procedural formalities, prompting some lawyers to boycott the hearings, including the final arguments.

In a statement, the defense insisted that Ghannouchi was “completely innocent” of the charges against him, arguing that the court failed to present any evidence linking him to criminal activity. 

“All accusations are based on false allegations without proof, and other defendants in the case have denied any connection to him,” the statement read. “His conviction, despite this, is a blatant violation of the presumption of innocence and his fundamental rights.”

The defense also noted that the case originated from claims made by two individuals with a history of legal and disciplinary issues. Despite prior rulings against them, the court relied on their testimonies as the foundation for the prosecution.

Tunisia’s main opposition coalition, the National Salvation Front, swiftly condemned the verdicts, calling them an unjust attack on political activists and journalists. In a statement, the group expressed “deep outrage” over the sentences handed down by the Tunis Criminal Court, which convicted multiple bloggers, politicians, and security officials in the Instalingo case.

Tunisia’s opposition National Salvation Front has warned that the country’s judiciary is facing its darkest era following the dissolution of the High Judicial Council and sweeping dismissals of judges, which have left the courts operating under directives from the Justice Ministry.

In a statement, the opposition bloc decried the recent verdicts in the Instalingo case, noting that the cumulative prison sentences exceeded 760 years. “These rulings are a clear sign that Tunisia has entered a season of political trials, driven by a desire for revenge, with fabricated charges being used as a tool of repression,” the statement read.

The National Salvation Front also cautioned that the harsh sentences could mark a shift from mere retaliation against opponents to an unprecedented campaign of “political cleansing” orchestrated by the executive branch, which it accused of effectively controlling the judiciary.

Serious Repercussions

The recent convictions in Tunisia’s Instalingo case signal a deepening crackdown on political opposition, with lawyers and activists warning of severe consequences for democracy and judicial independence.

“This case reflects President Kais Saied’s determination to eliminate his opponents, extending beyond politicians to include employees and journalists,” said Mokhtar Jemai, a lawyer and human rights activist.

Jemai noted that charges related to endangering state security—used against opposition figures like Rached Ghannouchi and Rafik Abdessalem—were tactics previously employed by former leaders Habib Bourguiba and Zine El Abidine Ben Ali to silence dissent. “Today, Saied is using the same playbook against his main rival, Ennahda, which explains the severity of these sentences,” he told Al-Estiklal.

Highlighting the political nature of the case, Jemai pointed out that it originated from a testimony he described as fabricated, given by a sitting member of parliament. He also raised concerns about the judge who led the investigation, alleging irregularities and conflicts of interest. 

“The defense team called for these issues to be included in the case, which could have dismantled it entirely, but the judiciary refused,” he said.

Jemai warned that the case marks a grave threat to Tunisia’s democratic aspirations. “Saied has drained the political landscape and weaponized the judiciary to crush his opponents.”

“The legal system’s lack of independence is evident in the arrests, prosecutions, and dismissals of judges.”

“We are living in a state where there is no judicial security. Every dissident must now watch their words carefully, fearing they might be framed in a fabricated case,” he added. 

“Tunisia faces a serious threat from those who have seized control of the judiciary through intimidation and accusations of treason.”

Lawyer and political activist Abdelwahab Maatar echoed these concerns, calling the verdicts part of the “blatant injustice” faced by political detainees. “The Instalingo case does not warrant such harsh sentences. In fact, it should never have been brought to trial in the first place,” he said.

Opposition figure Hichem Ajbouni of the Democratic Current party dismissed the rulings as politically motivated. “All political verdicts are invalid unless fair trial guarantees are in place,” he stated.

“In today’s Tunisia, there is no independent judicial council,” Ajbouni added. “Saied issued a decree giving himself the power to dismiss judges at will, making it impossible to speak of an impartial judiciary.” Ajbouni argued that the primary goal of these rulings is to eliminate political rivals and instill fear among critics.

Political Provisions

Tunisia’s latest court rulings reflect an increasingly authoritarian political system, opposition figures warn, accusing President Kais Saied of dismantling democratic gains and weaponizing the judiciary to suppress dissent.

“These verdicts are a direct consequence of Tunisia’s current political reality, where the system is rooted in autocracy and dictatorship,” said Hamma Hammami, leader of the opposition Workers’ Party.

Speaking to Alhurra on February 7, Hammami described Saied’s rule as a “constitutional coup” that suppresses democracy, centralizes power, and silences opposition through intimidation and imprisonment. 

“This regime emerged as a backlash against the democratic achievements of the revolution, adopting an extreme right-wing populist approach that eliminates intermediary institutions under the pretext that they harm the people,” he said.

Hammami warned that Saied’s governance has revived Tunisia’s legacy of political imprisonment. “Saied claims to be the sole voice of the people, and as a result, prisons are once again filling up with opponents and critics, just as they did under Ben Ali,” he stated.

Saied, who rose to power following a landslide victory in the 2019 presidential election, dismantled Tunisia’s democratic framework on July 25, 2021, by dissolving the government, parliament, and several constitutional bodies. His move sparked widespread condemnation from opposition parties.

Hammami stressed that Tunisia’s human rights situation has severely deteriorated. “This regime has been systematically dismantling the democratic gains of the revolution, from scrapping the 2014 constitution in favor of absolute presidential rule to replacing independent institutions with ones that merely execute Saied’s directives,” he said. 

“The judiciary has been stripped of its independence and turned into a tool for eliminating political opponents.”

In a similar vein, Wissam Sghair, spokesperson for the Republican Party, dismissed claims that Tunisia is moving toward reconciliation. “Recent rulings debunk the illusion of political de-escalation. They prove that calls for a truce and moving forward are nothing more than empty slogans,” he told The New Arab on February 6.

Sghair argued that Tunisia’s judiciary operates under full control of the executive branch. “There is near-unanimous agreement among judicial bodies that the courts have lost their independence,” he said. 

“Justice has been reduced to a tool for persecuting opponents and crushing any independent voices. The country is sliding further into repression.”

He also dismissed speculation about possible political dialogue, saying, “Talk of negotiations was merely a test balloon. The reality is one of widespread frustration and growing concern on social media, confirming earlier warnings.”

Sghair further pointed to an upcoming trial set for March 4, 2025, concerning allegations of conspiracy against state security, where sentences could reach the death penalty. “This case affects every Tunisian. A nationwide campaign will be launched to demand a public trial. Authorities must not be allowed to manipulate this case behind closed doors.”