TUNISIA: ARBITRARY DETENTION OF TUNISIAN POLITICIAN AND LAWYER ABIR MOUSSI

The International League Against Arbitrary Detention urges the Government of Tunisia to take all the necessary actions to implement the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention Opinion No. 61/2024 concerning Abir Moussi, asking the Government of Tunisia to immediately and unconditionally release Ms. Moussi and to accord her an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations in accordance with international law. 

Read the full WGAD Opinion concerning Abir Moussi (Tunisia): Opinion No. 61/2024.

TUNISIAN POLITICIAN AND LAWYER ARBITRARILY DETAINED IN 3 DIFFERENT INSTANCES 

Abir Moussi is a Tunisian national, born on 15 March 1975. She is a Tunisian politician and lawyer at the Tunis Bar, and President of the Free Destourian Party. 

On October 5, 2023, an investigating judge issued a detention warrant against her for a period of six months as a result of her challenging the Presidential Decrees of September 21st 2023. She was also issued a six-month detention warrant on February 1, 2024, after she criticized the Independent Higher Authority for Elections, as well as another detention warrant on February 21, 2024, for criticizing the same authority’s impartiality. 

Despite the Working Group transmitting the allegations to the Government of Tunisia, it chose not to respond.

HELD WITHOUT BEING INFORMED OF THE CHARGES AND WITH NO LEGAL BASIS

Regarding Ms. Moussi’s first arrest, the source claimed that she was not informed of the reasons for her arrest at the time it took place. The Government did not contest this allegation. The Working Group concluded that this violated article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 9(2) of the Covenant, which require that any person arrested be promptly informed of the reasons for their arrest.

Furthermore, the Working Group accepted the source’s allegations that Ms. Moussi’s detention was made without legal basis, as no offense had been committed and that the charges against her appeared politically motivated, as part of a scheme to criminalize political opinions. The Government did not provide any factual or legal justification for her detention. The Working Group found that her pre-trial detention was not based on an individualized assessment of risk and that the authorities did not consider alternative measures, in violation of article 9(3) of the Covenant.

With regards to Ms. Moussi’s profession, the Working Group recalled that she should have benefited from certain safeguards as a lawyer such as the notification of the Bar association after her arrest. It concluded that the failure to comply with this procedure in Ms. Moussi's case underlined the arbitrary nature of her detention.

Therefore, the Working Group concluded that Ms. Moussi’s arrest and detention were arbitrary under Category I as it violated article 9 of the Covenant and articles 3 and 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

DENIED HER RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF OPINION AND EXPRESSION, AND THE RIGHT TO TAKE PART IN PUBLIC AFFAIRS 

According to the source, Ms. Moussi’s second and third arrests raised concerns about the use of criminal proceedings to suppress political opposition. The source alleged that the charges against her were fabricated to prevent her from running in the 2024 presidential election, thereby depriving her of her right to participate in the political affairs of her country. Additionally, her detention aimed to silence her criticism of the Government, in violation of her freedom of expression. Despite having the opportunity, the Government did not contest these allegations.

The Working Group found that the charges lacked any factual or legal basis and were instead linked to Ms. Moussi’s legitimate exercise of her political rights, particularly her criticism of the electoral process. The Working Group emphasized that freedom of expression is protected under article 19 of the Covenant and article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, while the right to participate in political life is safeguarded by article 25 of the Covenant and article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Since the Government failed to justify the charges, the Working Group concluded that Ms. Moussi’s detention was arbitrary under Category II, as it resulted directly from the exercise of her fundamental rights.

UNABLE TO CONFIDENTIALLY COMMUNICATE WITH HER LAWYER 

The second and third detentions involved the denial of Ms. Moussi's right to a fair trial, specifically her inability to meet privately with her lawyer. The source alleged that the meeting room for visits was equipped with hidden cameras and microphones, violating the confidentiality of her communications with her attorney, a fundamental aspect of the right to a fair trial. The Working Group shared that it was concerned that the lack of confidentiality in these communications compromised her defense, as it is critical for an accused person to be able to discuss their case with their lawyer without fear of surveillance. As a result, it concluded that the denial of effective legal representation violated Ms. Moussi's rights under article 14(3)(b) of the Covenant and other international standards. 

Consequently, the Working Group found that Ms. Moussi's detention had been arbitrary under Category III due to the serious violation of her right to a fair trial.

DEPRIVED OF HER LIBERTY ON DISCRIMINATORY POLITICAL GROUNDS 

Regarding Ms. Moussi's second and third arrests, the source claimed that they were arbitrary as she was discriminated against due to her political beliefs. The Working Group emphasized that when detention results from the active exercise of civil and political rights, there is a strong presumption that such detention also violates international law due to discrimination. In the absence of any counter arguments from the Government, the Working Group concluded that Ms. Moussi's detention was discriminatory, violating her right to non-discrimination and equality before the law under articles 2 and 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 2(1) and 26 of the Covenant. 

Thus, the WGAD found her detention to be arbitrary under Category V.

CONCLUSION OF THE UN WORKING GROUP AGAINST ARBITRARY DETENTION

In light of the foregoing, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention considered that the detention of Ms. Moussi was arbitrary and fell under categories I, II, III, and V because the deprivation of liberty of Ms. Moussi was in contravention of articles 2, 3, 7, 9, 19, and 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 2, 9, 14, 19, 25, and 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 

The Working Group recommended that the Government of Tunisia take the necessary measures to promptly rectify the situation of Ms. Moussi and bring it into compliance with the applicable international standards. The Working Group considered that, given all the circumstances of the case, the appropriate remedy would be to release her immediately and grant her the right to obtain reparation, including compensation, in accordance with international law.

The Working Group also urged the Government to ensure the conduct of a thorough and independent investigation into the circumstances of her deprivation of liberty.