Skip links

48 Years in Prison for Mustafa Khidr: New Case Enshrines the Logic of “Selective Justice” in Terrorism Cases

On Tuesday, May 13, 2025, the Criminal Chamber specializing in terrorism cases at the Tunis Court of First Instance sentenced former army officer Mustafa Khidr in absentia to 48 years in prison and one of his sons to two years in prison in person. The court acquitted the remaining family members (wife, second son, and daughter).

Case Background:

The case stems from investigations opened against Khidr and several members of his family, who were accused of terrorist crimes after one of the sons obtained power of attorney to dispose of an inheritance. The charges were brought based on a phone call described as “ambiguous,” in the absence of documented evidence confirming the criminal nature of the incidents.
 
The investigating judge had previously decided to refer Khidr, in absentia, one of his sons who is in custody, and the rest of the family on bail, to the criminal chamber specializing in terrorism cases. However, recent deliberations revealed a lack of conclusive material evidence, with family members insisting on denial and describing the case as a “family dispute over the disposition of an inheritance.”

Lack of evidence and exaggerated accusations:

The Freedom for Tunisia Observatory believes that bringing terrorism charges based on family disputes or old documents falls below the minimum standards of a fair trial. It considers the judiciary’s reliance on weak or politically interpreted evidence to be a flagrant violation of the presumption of innocence and the rights of the defense. Furthermore, issuing a hefty sentence such as 48 years in prison without a trial in person reflects a political intent to settle scores with potential adversaries.

Repeated Prosecution despite previous imprisonment:

Mustafa Kheder left prison in January 2022 after completing a prison sentence of eight years and one month, in a case in which he was accused of possessing official documents and documents of unverified origin.
 
It is also worth noting that Khider is being referred to the Ariana Court of First Instance in an investigative case known as the “Ennahdha Movement’s Secret Apparatus” case, with no final ruling yet. The defense team for the martyrs Chokri Belaid and Mohamed Brahmi accused him of involvement in covering up the assassination. These accusations were denied by several parties, including Ennahdha, which asserted that Khidr is neither affiliated with the party nor a criminal.

Observatory’s Position:

The Freedom for Tunisia Observatory expresses its deep concern about the use of the judiciary to send political messages and restrict former opponents or individuals suspected of having links to parties that are in opposition to the authorities. It asserts that Mustafa Khidr did not have a real opportunity to defend himself in this case, as he was tried in absentia. Furthermore, the overall context and timing of the verdict reflect a desire to intimidate his family.
 
The Observatory reiterates its call to:
  • Put an end to politically motivated trials.
  • Respect fair trial guarantees, especially in terrorism cases.
  • Ensure the impartiality of the judiciary and its independence from political directives.
 
The Observatory stands ready to provide legal or human rights support to anyone proven to have been targeted based on their political affiliation or positions.
 
 

Share

More Posts

عربية
Français
Icon-x Facebook Instagram Tiktok Youtube

Call to Action

Website petition: Freedom for prisoners of conscience and activists in Tunisia!

Tunisia is no longer the Arab exception that inspired the world in 2011 with a heroic revolution that overthrew the rule of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, who ruled for nearly 23 years after seizing power on November 7, 1987, in a coup against Habib Bourguiba.

In a similar and perhaps more dangerous move, on the night of July 25, 2021, Tunisian President Kais Saied carried out a “constitutional coup” in accordance with his personal interpretation of Article 80 of the 2014 Revolutionary Constitution, announcing that he had taken a set of exceptional measures due to the “imminent danger” that threatens Tunisia without providing any details or reasons.

In accordance with these measures, Saied dismissed the government and the prime minister Hichem Mechichi who was present at the National Security Council that night at the Carthage Palace, and claimed that he had contacted the Speaker of Parliament Rached Ghannouchi (leader of the Ennahdha party) to consult with him in accordance with what is stipulated by the constitution, a claim which Ghannouchi denied since the call was general and did not include anything about exceptional measures or any consultation on the matter. The president suspended Parliament and later dissolved it in March 2022.

Not only did Saied seek to bypass his powers and the articles of the Constitution, which he swore to protect before the Assembly of the Representatives of the People, but he went on to dismiss and change the composition of the Supreme Judicial Council after redefining the judiciary it as a “function” rather than an independent authority. He further replaced members of the Supreme Electoral Commission in preparation for the referendum he held in order to vote on a constitution that he wrote himself after dismissing the proposals of the drafting committee he had himself appointed. Then legislative elections were held over two rounds, in which the participation rate did not exceed 8% of the total number of voters, with the Election Commission later announcing that it had reached 11%, which is the lowest participation rate in Tunisia and globally.

On February 11, President Saied’s regime launched a campaign of protests that has not stopped since, against political leaders, media figures, journalists, judges and senior officials and civil servants, for charges of “conspiring against the security of the state and committing an offensive act against the President of the Republic,” in addition to other charges that were referred to the military prosecution, leading one to wonder about the implication of the Tunisian army in the actions taken by Saied.

The arbitrary arrests were marred by several procedural violations amid criticism from prominent international organizations and observatories in the field of human rights. The standards of litigation and detention period and conditions were not respected. Prosecution and harassment sometimes extended to the detainees’ families, and no evidence, and in many cases, no charges against them were presented.

Moreover trade unions and political parties continue to be subjected to constant harassment and restrictions. Saied continues to target all “intermediary bodies” accusing them of “collaboration” or “treason”. Civil society associations have also been subjected to prosecution, arbitrary arrests and deprivation from representation, in a context of of increasing violence in society due to the authorities’ adoption of racist and discriminatory speeches and rhetoric inciting infighting and violating human dignity.

In light of the above, we, the undersigned, demand the following:

Call for the immediate release of all political detainees, immediately and unconditionally. We also urge the Tunisian authorities to recognize the national and the international human rights treaties they have ratified.
Call on the Tunisian authorities to stop dismantling the nascent democracy and put an end to unfair trials and prosecutions against political opponents of the regime and anyone who criticises it.
Call on all activists and observers to join the national movement for restoring democracy and ending authoritarian rule that has taken Tunisia back to despotism, injustice, and violations of rights and freedoms.