Chawki Tbib

Summary:

Chaouki Tbib, a Tunisian lawyer and former dean of the National Tunisian Order of Lawyers, has been subjected to judicial harassment for more than six years. This began with placing him under house arrest, followed by preventing him from traveling based on administrative and judicial decisions that he considers unjust, in connection with a number of files and charges brought against him. This culminated in the issuance of a detention warrant against him on April 14, 2026. On May 21, 2026, the First Criminal Chamber of the Economic and Financial Judicial Pole issued a judgment sentencing him to ten years in prison, including seven years for the crime of forgery and three years for the crime of possessing and using a forged document.

Personal Information:

Name: Chaouki Tbib

Occupation: Lawyer, former dean of the National Tunisian Order of Lawyers, and former President of the National Anti-Corruption Body.

Nationality: Tunisian.

Governorate: Tunis.

Charges: Charges under Articles 172, 173, 176, and 177 of the Penal Code, for the crimes of forgery by a public official and possession and use of a forged document. These charges relate to the exploitation of a public official’s position to gain undue benefits for himself and others with the intention of harming the administration. They also concern violating the regulations applicable to these operations in order to achieve the benefit and cause the aforementioned harm, as well as unlawfully disposing of public funds and movable property by a public official who had them in his possession by virtue of his position.

Incidents of Violation:

Attorney Chaouki Tbib is a Tunisian lawyer, former dean of the National Tunisian Order of Lawyers, and former President of the National Anti-Corruption Body.

On May 12, 2020, he learned that a complaint had been filed against him by a member of the “Free Bloggers” group, in his capacity as President of the National Anti-Corruption Body in 2017. The complaint stated that a report prepared by an international management and auditing company revealed irregularities in the body’s financial, administrative, and logistical management.

On August 6, 2021, the public prosecution opened an investigation into the matter. During this period, the Regional Bar Branch was not informed of any scheduled date to hear him, nor did the concerned party receive any summons to appear or submit his responses.

On August 20, 2021, Chaouki Tbib was dismissed from his position as President of the National Anti-Corruption Body by a decision of the then-Prime Minister, Elyes Fakhfakh. On the same day, according to a post on his personal page, a decision was also issued placing him under house arrest, without providing him with an official copy of the decision. He was informed of it at night, at 12:20 AM, and it was to remain in force until the end of the state of emergency on December 31, 2021.

On August 26, 2021, Chaouki Tbib challenged the house arrest decision before the Administrative Court. The measure was later lifted in October of the same year.

These judicial files remained unresolved for years. In his media statements, Chaouki Tbib considered them a form of judicial harassment and attempts to target him morally, and even fiscally, through the accumulation of charges against him.

On January 8, 2024, while he was heading to Tunis-Carthage Airport to travel and participate in an Arab defense team formed by the Palestinian Bar Association to plead in favor of the Palestinian cause before the International Criminal Court, he was informed by airport security that the public prosecution in Tunisia did not allow him to leave Tunisian territory and requested that he head to the Economic and Financial Judicial Pole.

Upon inquiry, it became clear that the travel ban was due to his alleged failure to attend a previous interrogation session, despite the fact that he had not received any official summons. This procedure surprised the defense team and the president of the Regional Bar Branch, particularly because the special procedures applicable to lawyers had not been respected. These procedures require notifying the Regional Bar Branch, summoning the lawyer, and legally informing the concerned person, in addition to enabling him to exercise his right to defense.

The investigating judge at the Economic and Financial Judicial Pole of the Court of First Instance in Tunis set a first date to hear him on January 12, 2024. The session was then postponed to January 19, 2024, before being postponed for a third time.

In light of the continuation of these prosecutions, Chaouki Tbib announced an open sit-in at the Lawyer’s House and a hunger strike starting on April 30, 2024, under the slogan “Hunger rather than submission,” in protest against what he considered judicial harassment. He suspended the hunger strike on May 2, 2024, while continuing the sit-in until May 14, 2024. He justified this decision by the need to devote himself to his professional duties as a defense lawyer. In media statements, he said that he took this decision in light of recent events, including arrests of politicians and human rights defenders in Tunisia, which required him to focus on defense tasks, including attending hearings, participating in defense team meetings, and visiting prisons.

On June 25, 2025, the Indictment Chamber specialized in financial corruption cases at the Tunis Court of Appeal decided to refer him to the First Criminal Chamber of the Economic and Financial Judicial Pole at the Court of First Instance in Tunis, for the crimes of forgery by a public official and possession and use of a forged document, pursuant to Articles 172, 173, 176, and 177 of the Penal Code.

The former dean considered that the file was merely a material error that had been legally characterized as forgery. The matter concerned a report sent in 2020 by the National Anti-Corruption Body to the Assembly of the Representatives of the People and to the public prosecution, relating to a company for which a former government official had served as agent while holding public office, in explicit violation of the law and the Constitution, according to him.

The updates made to the data of the company “Vivan” in the National Register of Enterprises led to the issuance of a new extract containing information different from that included in the extract dated May 22, 2020. This became one of the elements relied upon in the prosecution file.

On June 27, 2025, an appeal in cassation was filed against the decision of the Indictment Chamber.

On April 6, 2026, a hearing was held before the First Criminal Chamber of the Court of First Instance of Tunis 1 in case No. 1/55525, concerning the charges of “forgery by a public official and possession and use of a forged document” in what is known as the “forgery” case attributed to Chaouki Tbib. The court decided to postpone consideration of the case to the hearing of April 27, 2026.

On April 10, 2026, the former dean received a summons to appear before the investigating judge of the twenty-fifth office at the Economic and Financial Judicial Pole in investigative case No. 25/1860, known in the media as the “restaurant tickets” case. In this case, he is being prosecuted under Articles 95 and 96 of the Penal Code. The interrogation session in the case was postponed to April 21, 2026.

In this context, Attorney Tbib affirmed that he was facing a series of prosecutions and procedures that were not isolated from the context in which he carried out his duties as President of the National Anti-Corruption Body, during which sensitive files relating to abuse of influence and conflicts of interest were opened.

On Tuesday, April 14, the first investigating judge at the Economic and Financial Judicial Pole issued a detention warrant against him, while postponing his interrogation to a later date.

On April 21, 2026, the defense team boycotted the interrogation session in investigative case No. 25/1860, and no new date has yet been set.

During the hearing of May 11, 2026, in case No. 1/55525, Chaouki Tbib was brought from prison. The defense team requested a postponement of the case, arguing that he had not been brought to the previous hearing because he was detained in connection with another case. However, the court rejected the request and considered the file ready for judgment.

On May 21, 2026, the First Criminal Chamber of the Economic and Financial Judicial Pole issued a judgment sentencing him to ten years in prison, including seven years for the crime of forgery and three years for the crime of possessing and using a forged document.

It should be noted that Chaouki Tbib stated in a post published on April 10, 2026, that the latest investigative file constituted the fifth file opened against him, not including other complaints filed against him.

Human Rights Violations:

Chaouki Tbib has been facing a series of continuous violations for more than four years, affecting several fundamental rights in clear breach of national and international legal guarantees.

He was placed under house arrest pursuant to an administrative decision, without being provided with a copy of the decision or a statement of its reasons. This reflects the arbitrary nature of the measure and constitutes a violation of the right to liberty and security of person.

His right to movement has also been repeatedly violated, whether through house arrest or through preventing him from traveling. This prevented him from practicing his profession and participating in international missions, including joining a delegation of lawyers to plead in favor of the Palestinian cause before the International Court in The Hague. These measures caused him both material and moral harm.

Article 30 of the Tunisian Constitution of 2022 guarantees freedom of movement. Article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights also stipulates that “Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.” Any restrictions must be legal, necessary, and proportionate, which was not the case here. General Comment No. 27 of the Human Rights Committee also affirms that any restrictions must be precisely defined and must not grant absolute discretionary powers to the executive authorities.

Article 55 of the Tunisian Constitution of 2022 further provides that rights may not be restricted except by law and for a legitimate necessity, and that such restrictions must be proportionate and must not affect the essence of the right. However, house arrest, as an administrative decision, lacks these guarantees, especially in the absence of effective judicial oversight, which contradicts the principle of the rule of law.

The judicial proceedings were also marred by procedural violations, including the failure to inform him of the proceedings and the failure to issue official summonses. This affected the rights of the defense and the guarantees of a fair trial, as enshrined in both the Constitution and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Article 33 of the Tunisian Constitution of 2022 guarantees the presumption of innocence, while Article 35 guarantees the rights of the defense. Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights also guarantees every individual the right to a fair and public trial, the right to be informed of the charges against them, and the right to prepare their defense.

The special procedures related to the legal profession were also not respected. Article 46 of the decree regulating the legal profession requires that the Regional Bar Branch be informed when one of its members is being prosecuted. The failure to do so constitutes a breach of the independence of the legal profession. This principle is further reinforced by the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, which emphasize the need to enable lawyers to perform their duties without harassment or improper interference.

These violations continued through restrictive decisions, such as preventing him from traveling without a clear legal basis, on the grounds that he had failed to attend an interrogation session to which he had not been legally summoned. This renders the procedures contrary to the principle of procedural legality. In addition, the excessive length of the proceedings violates the principle of adjudication within a reasonable time, a principle established under Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The restrictions imposed on his personal liberty also continued through the issuance of a detention warrant against him on April 14, 2026, while postponing his interrogation to a later date. This raises questions about the extent to which the guarantees related to the right to liberty and security of person, as well as the principle that pre-trial detention must remain exceptional, were respected. These guarantees are protected under Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Issues related to the rights of the defense were also raised during the trial stages, including the defense team’s boycott of the interrogation session on April 21, 2026, and the court’s refusal to postpone consideration of the case during the hearing of May 11, 2026, despite the defense’s request. This may affect the guarantees of a fair trial and the right to prepare a defense, as protected under Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

In addition, a first-instance judgment was issued on May 21, 2026, sentencing him to ten years in prison, at the end of judicial proceedings that, according to the defense, were marred by a series of procedural violations related to the rights of the defense and the guarantees of a fair trial.

In this context, these practices as a whole may be considered a form of judicial harassment aimed at exhausting him morally through prolonged prosecutions and charges whose seriousness he contests. These include his referral to the financial corruption chamber on the basis of what was considered a material error in a report, which was legally characterized as forgery, even though its content related to exposing a conflict of interest involving a former government official.