| 28 December 2011 | 2 Comments
 
 

Martyrs’ family members have grown impatient in recent days with the trial meant to bring those responsible for the deaths of their loved ones to justice. The proceedings, which have become known as the Thala and Kasserine Martyrs’ Case, aim at revealing those who gave the order to open fire on protesters during initial demonstrations associated with the Tunisian Revolution.

A feeling of discontent has been prevalent amongst the aggrieved family members, who’ve perceived the case’s developments as a travesty of the transitional justice process. Fakhri Bouzidi, brother of Raouf Bouzidi who was killed in Kasserine January 9, 2011, described his frustration that not all parties with alleged criminal
involvement in the case are being held to the same level of accountability.  “There is nothing that indicates that transitional justice is at work,” Bouzidi asserted

Moncef Ladjimi, current general director of security units, and Moncef Trifa, head of presidential security, both enjoy a state of freedom in spite of their association with the events surrounding the deaths of the martyrs of Kasserine and Thala. This incongruity has been a source of deep frustration for martyrs’ families and prosecution lawyers.

Bouzidi recalled the blatant conflict of interest represented in the courtroom during the hearing of Moncef Trifa. “One of the defendants, Moncef Trifa, is free, and the witness brought to testify against Trifa works for him. There is no way he is going to testify against his boss,” Bouzidi stated.

The case concerns the events of January 7-9, 2011, that occurred in Kasserine and Thala. In solidarity with the protests that had previously broken out in Sidi Bouzid, approximately 20 people participated in a small demonstration in Thala on January 2. The protestors’ demands primarily addressed local unemployment and the high cost of living. 300 policemen were subsequently deployed to supervise the protest. The demonstrations expanded on January 3, and it was reported that 250 protestors set fire to tires and attacked the RCD (the party associated with Ben Ali’s regime) office.

The demonstrations continued to gain momentum in the region, spreading to Kasserine city, where another protest emerged in support of the public unrest in Sidi Bouzid. On January 7, demonstrators set fire to government buildings and police stations. Policemen used live ammunition on January 8 to disperse the protestors, resulting in the deaths of six people in Thala and three in Kasserine.

On January 9, a funeral was held for Mohamed Amin Mabrki, 17, killed the previous day in Kasserine. More than 500 people gathered to show solidarity with those who had lost their lives in the protests. The police intervened with the use of tear gas and live ammunition, killing 35 people. That night the military was deployed to restore order to the situation.

Colonel Moncef Ladjimi attended the proceedings of this third session, while skipping the two previous sessions. Ladjimi stated during his hearing that he went to Thala on January 10, 2011 under an order from Jalal Boudrigua to replace Brigadier Youssef Abdul Aziz after the massacre of January 8. Ladjimi claimed to have given orders for the collection of the officers’ firearms, and urged security personnel to exercise self-restraint. He categorically denied the charges attributed to him and blamed the killing of the demonstrators during the clashes in Thala on Lieutenant Bashir Bettibi.

“Moncef Ladjimi is involved in the investigation of the Kasserine massacre, and yet he is a free man. This drives me to highly question the legitimacy of the course that transitional justice is taking,” said Majdi Kharli, one of the lawyers of the prosecution. He also voiced his concern over Moncef Trifa’s promotion as the new head of presidential security, adding that, “A person who is linked to these events, should not be released let alone get a promotion.”

The nine defendants present at the trial included former Interior Minister Rafik Haj Kassem, former head of presidential security Ali Seriate, and various senior executives of the Ministry of the Interior.

Haj Kassem also denied his involvement in issuing the order to open fire on the protestors. The ousted President Ben Ali will be tried in absentia for his alleged involvement in the case.

The proceedings for this case were initiated on November 28, and the second hearing took place on December 12. The trial was initially conducted in Kasserine’s court, but was later transferred to a Kef’s military court. Civilians are not normally allowed to attend military court proceedings; however, a law was passed on September 16, 2011, to permit looser attendance regulations.

Tensions between demonstrators, frustrated with the proceedings during the trail, and police led to clashes yesterday evening in Thala.

 


Comments (2)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Afif says:

    An article that can summarize the following will be helpful to the reader so that one can judge whether the “frustrations” of the victims and their families are justified, and if the legal system is actually sound for this democracy:

    1. The legal basis for the exercise of jurisdiction by a Military Court;
    2. What is the standard of proof required, and who has to carry that burden, or is it “guilt by association?”
    3. Are the defendants entitled to reasonable bail or are they subject to indefinite detention at the discretion of the judge, depending on which direction the wind blows?
    4. Does the defendant have the right not to incriminate himself by refusing to testify. Will that be held against him?
    5. Will the determination of guilt or innocence be determined by a judge or a panel of judges or a jury?
    6. If the population of the town where the trial is held is so inflamed, will the defendant receive a fair trial, or can he request a change of venue to a more distant town or Wilaya?
    7. What are the rules of evidence concerning “hearsay,” or do we convict people based on the statement of someone who is not testifying in court;
    8. Does the defendant have the right through his attorney to cross examine these witnesses? Who does the questioning anyhow??
    9. Was the defendant pressured by the government or its investigator to make incriminating statements, and if so, can they be used against him.
    10. How is this trial in terms its procedure and evidentiary rules different from that used in the older regime under which innocent people were convicted. (Sorry! Tortured first).
    11. By objective standards who is receiving a fair trial, Manning in the U.S. or these Tunisian defendants?
    12. Does this Tunisia trial set a precedent for future trials? or is it an attempt to appease the public and the victims and move on?
    13. Final question: Am I in dreamland and they are going to lynch these rascals anyhow??

Leave a feed back