Summary:

On 11 June 2026, several participants in a peaceful protest organized by the National Union of Unemployed Graduates, in partnership with the National Association of Unemployed Higher Education Graduates, near Kasbah Square were subjected to a series of alleged human rights violations while exercising their right to peaceful assembly. The protest called for the implementation of Law No. 18 of 2025, which concerns the recruitment of unemployed higher-education graduates into the public sector.

The reported violations included preventing protesters from reaching the demonstration site, surrounding and containing them, using force to disperse the gathering, physically and verbally assaulting several participants, arresting and questioning some protesters, and preventing documentation of police conduct by confiscating mobile phones and deleting photographs and videos documenting the events.

Status of victims: Participants in the protest organized by the National Union of Unemployed Graduates in partnership with the National Association of Unemployed Higher Education Graduates.

Governorates represented: Several governorates, including Sidi Bouzid, Kairouan, Sfax, and Bizerte.

Nature of the Alleged Violations:

-Obstruction of the right to peaceful assembly and protest.

-Physical assaults affecting bodily integrity.

-Exposure to degrading treatment.

-Arrest and detention based on participation in a peaceful protest.

-Questioning in connection with participation in the demonstration.

-Prevention of documenting police interventions.

-Confiscation of mobile phones and deletion of their contents.

-Attempts to influence the statements of detainees during questioning.

Violation incidents:

On 11 June 2026, unemployed graduates affiliated with the National Union of Unemployed Graduates and the National Association of Unemployed Higher Education Graduates organized a peaceful protest near Kasbah Square after completing the legally required prior notification procedures. They sought implementation of Law No. 18 of 2025, which provides exceptional measures for recruiting long-term unemployed university graduates into the public administration and public sector, and called for the issuance of the implementing regulations necessary to enforce the law.

According to documented testimonies, protesters found all access routes to Kasbah Square blocked upon arrival. A heavy security presence and barricades prevented them from reaching the designated protest location. Several participants also reported receiving informal phone calls before the demonstration urging them not to attend, while information circulated indicating that no protests would be permitted around the Kasbah, despite the absence of any publicly announced official decision prohibiting the gathering. Participants stated that they attempted to inform security officials that the protest had been organized in accordance with the applicable legal notification procedures. However, they reportedly received no clear legal justification for being denied access to the protest site. Some participants were also asked to present an official “permit” authorizing the demonstration, despite their assertion that Tunisian law governing public assemblies requires only prior notification rather than prior authorization. According to the testimonies, security forces surrounded protesters, prevented them from advancing, and subsequently used force to push them away and disperse the gathering. This reportedly caused crowding and resulted in several individuals falling to the ground. Some participants reported being violently pushed, grabbed by the neck or shoulders, and dragged. Several women reported being slapped. These incidents allegedly caused injuries of varying severity, and some participants underwent medical examinations due to breathing difficulties and pain affecting the neck, chest, ribs, and limbs.

Witnesses also described degrading treatment, including insulting and humiliating remarks directed at protesters, alongside what they characterized as disproportionate use of force given the peaceful nature of the demonstration.

The testimonies further indicate that participants were prevented from documenting the events. Security personnel allegedly attempted to seize mobile phones, confiscated some devices, and deleted photographs and videos documenting the police intervention before returning certain devices several hours later.

Several protesters were reportedly arrested and taken to different police stations, where they were questioned about their participation in the demonstration and their demands for implementation of Law No. 18 of 2025. According to their accounts, they were not clearly informed of the reasons for their detention or the legal procedures being taken against them. Some also stated that investigators attempted to influence their statements and shape their accounts of the events.

The documented testimonies consistently maintain that the demonstration remained peaceful throughout, that participants engaged in no acts of violence or vandalism, and that their objective was solely to convey their demands regarding the right to work to the Presidency of the Government and the Presidency of the Republic and to call for the implementation of the commitments made regarding Law No. 18 of 2025.

Human Rights Violations:

The documented facts reveal a series of violations affecting the fundamental rights and freedoms of the participants during the exercise of their right to peaceful protest in pursuit of their economic and social rights. 

These violations raise serious concerns regarding the extent to which the authorities have complied with their constitutional and international obligations to protect the rights to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression, and to ensure the safety of individuals participating in peaceful demonstrations.

Preventing participants from accessing the site of the protest, despite their compliance with the prior notification requirements, and surrounding them and preventing them from assembling, constitutes an interference with the exercise of the right to peaceful assembly. This right is guaranteed under Article 37 of the 2022 Constitution of the Republic of Tunisia, Article 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and Article 11 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The Human Rights Committee further affirmed, in its General Comment No. 37, that States’ obligations extend beyond refraining from unlawful interference with peaceful assemblies to include taking the necessary measures to facilitate such assemblies and protect their participants. It also emphasized that any restrictions on this right must be prescribed by law, pursue a legitimate aim recognized under the ICCPR, and be necessary and proportionate.

The request that participants produce a “permit” to organize the protest, despite their assertion that they had fulfilled the prior notification requirements, also raises concerns that restrictions were imposed without a publicly established legal basis. Such a practice may undermine the essence of the right to peaceful assembly by effectively transforming a notification regime into a system requiring prior authorization.

The documented facts further indicate that force was used to disperse peaceful protesters, resulting in physical assaults and injuries of varying severity. Such conduct interferes with the rights to bodily integrity, human dignity, and protection from cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, rights guaranteed under Articles 3 and 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Articles 7 and 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Articles 4 and 5 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, as well as Articles 23 and 25 of the 2022 Constitution of the Republic of Tunisia. The Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials likewise provide that force may be used only when strictly necessary, must be proportionate to the legitimate objective pursued, and must minimize injury and harm to the greatest extent possible.

The use of mocking and degrading remarks directed at several participants, in addition to the documented physical assaults, may also amount to degrading treatment, contrary to the authorities’ obligation to respect and protect human dignity in the course of law enforcement operations.

The arrest, detention, and questioning of several participants solely on account of their participation in a peaceful protest raise serious concerns regarding respect for the right to liberty and security of person, guaranteed under Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 6 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and Article 35 of the 2022 Constitution of the Republic of Tunisia. Testimonies indicating that some detainees were not informed of the reasons for their detention and that attempts were made to influence their statements during the investigation also raise concerns regarding compliance with the fundamental guarantees of a fair trial and the rights of the defense, particularly those set out in Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The prevention of the documentation of police interventions, the confiscation of mobile phones, and the deletion of photographs and video recordings documenting the events constitute an interference with the exercise of the right to freedom of expression, including the right to seek, receive, and impart information, as guaranteed under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and Article 37 of the 2022 Constitution of the Republic of Tunisia. The Human Rights Committee also affirmed, in its General Comment No. 34, that the protection of freedom of expression encompasses the right to gather and disseminate information relating to matters of public interest, including documenting the conduct of public officials while carrying out their duties in public spaces.

The documented facts demonstrate that the authorities’ overall response to this protest was characterized by a security-oriented approach toward a peaceful assembly whose purpose was to call for the implementation of an existing law and the realization of the right to work. Such practices are liable to produce a chilling effect, discouraging individuals from exercising their rights to peaceful assembly and to express their economic and social demands. This is incompatible with the State’s obligation to ensure an enabling environment in which all persons can exercise their fundamental rights and freedoms without fear of violence, intimidation, or reprisals for the legitimate exercise of those rights.