Sihem Bensedrine

Summary of the violation

Since 2021, Sihem Bensedrine, a human rights defender and former president of the Truth and Dignity Commission, has faced continuous prosecutions and judicial proceedings in connection with her work at the head of the Commission. These have included a travel ban, house arrest, and her arrest and imprisonment, before her release in February 2025 with the travel ban maintained. The judicial proceedings against her continued during 2025 and 2026 and have involved multiple investigation files and criminal cases. On 25 June 2026, two first-instance judgments were handed down against her, sentencing her to a combined total of 25 years in prison in two cases related to the Commission's work; the defence team has appealed both. According to the defence team, these prosecutions raise concerns that she is being targeted because of her role in the transitional justice process, while the measures taken, her conditions of detention and the treatment she reported having been subjected to while receiving medical care raise issues relating to fair trial guarantees, liberty and human dignity.

Personal information

Name: Sihem Bensedrine.

Age: 76 years.

Status: Former president of the Truth and Dignity Commission.

Nationality: Tunisian.

Governorate: Tunis.

Charges: The charges set out in the documentation include alleged irregularities in five arbitration files, namely the file concerning Slim Zarrouk, the file concerning Imed Trabelsi, the file concerning Lazhar Asta, the file concerning the Banque Franco-Tunisienne (BFT), and the file concerning Slim Chiboub; in addition to a charge relating to the handling of the archives and equipment of the Truth and Dignity Commission, and proceedings before the Tax Evasion Investigation and Combating Brigade. According to the information received, the charges relate to Articles 82, 83, 84, 87, 91, 96, 98, 99, 172, 175, 176 and 177 of the Penal Code.

Events of the violation

Since March 2021, Sihem Bensedrine has been summoned six times to be heard as a witness by judicial police officers of the Central Brigade for Financial Crimes of the National Guard in El Aouina. Other members of the Truth and Dignity Commission were also heard by the same brigade.

On 20 February 2023, the Public Prosecutor at the Tunis Court of First Instance decided to open six investigation files and assigned them to three investigating judges at the Economic and Financial Judicial Pole. Bensedrine faces accusations of corruption and of falsifying the final report of the Truth and Dignity Commission, based on a complaint filed by a former member of the Commission. According to the information received, the accusations relate mainly to the suspected falsification of the final report, in particular with regard to the Banque Franco-Tunisienne file. The defence team, for its part, maintains that the final report was approved in accordance with the legal procedures, and that the amendments made to it were technical corrections that did not affect its content.

On 2 March 2023, the investigating judge of the Sixth Office at the Economic and Financial Judicial Pole issued a decision banning her from travelling.

From 5 to 8 February 2024, Bensedrine underwent an interrogation session lasting more than 40 hours before the investigating judge of Office 15, who decided to leave her at liberty. However, the Public Prosecution appealed the decision and requested that a committal order (detention warrant) be issued. On 28 February 2024, the Indictment Chamber of the Tunis Court of Appeal upheld the decision to leave her at liberty.

On 4 March 2024, the investigating judge of the Sixth Office decided to place her under house arrest until 27 March 2024.

On 24 July 2024, she received a summons to appear on 1 August 2024 before the investigating judge at the Economic and Financial Judicial Pole. During the hearing, the investigating judge decided to issue a committal order against her, and she was placed in the Manouba women's prison.

On 14 January 2025, Sihem Bensedrine began a hunger strike in protest against her imprisonment, the delays in her investigation and the rejection of her request for release. The strike led to a serious deterioration in her health, requiring her transfer to the intensive care unit of La Rabta Hospital. According to her testimony, while receiving treatment she was subjected to degrading treatment in the form of having her legs restrained. On 30 January 2025, she suspended her hunger strike.

On 19 February 2025, the Indictment Chamber of the Tunis Court of Appeal decided to release her while maintaining the travel ban, given that she was being held in connection with this case alone.

The judicial proceedings against her continued after her release: she attended investigation and trial hearings during 2025 and 2026, and the cases related to the work of the Truth and Dignity Commission saw postponements and new summonses.

On 5 January 2026, the Criminal Chamber specialized in financial corruption cases at the Tunis Court of First Instance examined cases related to the work of the Truth and Dignity Commission and decided to postpone the hearing to 19 February 2026. On 19 February 2026, it was decided to postpone the examination of the Banque Franco-Tunisienne and Slim Chiboub cases to 16 March 2026; they were then postponed again to 16 April 2026. On 16 April 2026, the examination of the two cases was postponed to 18 May 2026, and then to 18 June 2026.

According to the defence team, two investigation cases were pending against her before the Economic and Financial Judicial Pole: the first before Office 26, namely investigation case No. 1574 concerning the arbitration decision relating to Slim Zarrouk, in which an interrogation session was scheduled for 21 April 2026 before the interrogation was postponed to a later date yet to be set; and the second before Office 38, namely investigation case No. 1575 concerning the arbitration decision relating to Imed Trabelsi, in which no date for interrogation had been set as of the date this documentation was prepared.

On 24 April 2026, she was summoned in three additional criminal cases related to her work at the head of the Truth and Dignity Commission.

On 1 June 2026, the first hearings of her trial began in two cases related to her work at the Commission, before the hearing was postponed. On 18 June 2026, it was decided to postpone the examination of the two cases to 25 June 2026.

On 25 June 2026, the Tunis Court of First Instance handed down two judgments in the two cases, sentencing Sihem Bensedrine to a combined total of 25 years in prison. In the Banque Franco-Tunisienne case, the court sentenced Bensedrine to 20 years in prison, former Minister of State Property Mabrouk Korchid to 5 years, Abdelmajid Bouden to 6 years, and Khaled Krichi, president of the Arbitration and Reconciliation Committee of the Truth and Dignity Commission, to 5 years, together with a fine of 16,985,003 dinars for each of them. In the Slim Chiboub case, the court sentenced Sihem Bensedrine, Khaled Krichi, Mabrouk Korchid and Slim Chiboub each to 5 years in prison, together with a fine of 1,776,170 dinars for each of them and the joint and several repayment of the same amount.

The defence team appealed both judgments, and, as of the date this documentation was prepared, no date had been set for them to be heard before the Tunis Court of Appeal.

A hearing was also scheduled for 21 September 2026 before the Criminal Chamber specialized in financial corruption cases at the Tunis Court of First Instance, in a case concerning the arbitration decision relating to Lazhar Asta, it being noted that the beneficiary of the arbitration decision died while in detention. At the hearing of 21 September 2026, it was decided to postpone the examination of the case to 1 October 2026; it was then postponed again to 22 October 2026.

Three cases are pending before the Court of Cassation, concerning appeals against decisions of the Indictment Chamber referring Sihem Bensedrine to the Criminal Chamber and bringing a number of charges against her, including a criminal cassation case concerning the handling of the archives and equipment of the Truth and Dignity Commission.

In a separate matter, the defence team states that the Public Prosecution at the Economic and Financial Judicial Pole authorized the opening of proceedings against Sihem Bensedrine on the basis of a denunciation by a blogger, and tasked the Tax Evasion Investigation and Combating Brigade with investigating the matter. The brigade summoned and questioned her, and then left her at liberty, pending the completion of its inquiries and the referral of the file to the Public Prosecution for a decision.

The defence team considers that the multiplicity of prosecutions and the ongoing proceedings against Sihem Bensedrine since the end of the Truth and Dignity Commission's work form part of a systematic campaign of harassment targeting her because of her role in the transitional justice process, aimed at casting doubt on the Commission's final report and its outcomes.

Human rights violations

The ongoing prosecutions and judicial proceedings against Sihem Bensedrine raise serious issues relating to fair trial guarantees and the right of defence, the right to liberty and security of person, freedom of movement, and the right to humane treatment and respect for dignity and physical integrity in detention. Assessing these issues requires considering the proceedings as a whole, their timing, their duration and their actual effects, while bearing in mind that the defence team considers that the multiplicity of prosecutions directly linked to Bensedrine's work at the head of the Truth and Dignity Commission constitutes a systematic campaign of harassment targeting her role in the transitional justice process. Article 33 of the 2022 Constitution of the Republic of Tunisia guarantees the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial affording the guarantees of defence at all stages of prosecution and trial, while Article 124 guarantees the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time, equality before the courts, the right of access to justice and of defence, and the public nature of hearings unless the law provides otherwise. Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights likewise enshrines the right to a fair trial before a competent, independent and impartial tribunal, and requires guarantees of defence and a public trial. In this context, the multiplicity of files and the parallel proceedings before different investigation offices and judicial bodies, and the resulting prolongation of the prosecutions over time, raise the question of respect for the reasonable-time requirement and of ensuring that the person concerned is able to exercise her right of defence effectively. The multiplicity of cases does not, in and of itself, constitute sufficient evidence of judicial harassment; however, the fact that a number of the files are linked to the Commission's work, according to the information received and the position of the defence team, calls for a serious examination of whether procedural guarantees have been respected and whether judicial proceedings have been used in a manner that infringes her rights.

The right to liberty and security of person requires that deprivation of liberty not be arbitrary, that it have a legal basis, and that it be subject to the prescribed judicial safeguards. Article 35 of the Constitution guarantees that no person may be arrested or detained except when caught in the act or pursuant to a judicial decision, and Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantees protection against arbitrary arrest or detention. Accordingly, the issuing of a committal order against Bensedrine, and the measures restricting her liberty that preceded it, require that these guarantees be respected throughout the duration of the measure, including the need for a clear legal basis and legitimate grounds for the continuation of the restrictions imposed on her. Article 30 of the Constitution also guarantees the freedom to choose one's place of residence, to move within the country and to leave it; consequently, the travel ban and house arrest constitute restrictions on freedom of movement and must meet the requirements of legality, necessity and proportionality set out in Article 55 of the Constitution, which requires that restrictions on rights and freedoms be established by law, linked to legitimate aims and proportionate to them, and that they not affect the essence of rights and freedoms.

Sihem Bensedrine's statement that her legs were restrained while she was receiving treatment in the intensive care unit raises the question of respect for her dignity and physical integrity in detention, particularly in light of the deterioration in her health that required her transfer to hospital. Article 25 of the Constitution provides for the protection of human dignity and physical integrity and prohibits mental and physical torture, while Article 36 guarantees every detainee the right to humane treatment that preserves their dignity. Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights prohibits torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and Article 10 requires that all persons deprived of their liberty be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person. Rules 47 and 48 of the Nelson Mandela Rules set out the conditions for the use of instruments of restraint, prohibit instruments that are inherently degrading or painful, and require that other instruments be used only where authorized by law, when necessary, by the least intrusive means and only for the time required. Accordingly, the restraining of her legs while she was receiving treatment, according to her statement, raises concerns regarding respect for these standards and requires verification of the circumstances in which the restraints were used, their necessity, their duration and their proportionality to any legitimate purpose.

The nature of the charges, which are directly linked to the work of the Truth and Dignity Commission, raises the issue of protecting the independence and effectiveness of the transitional justice process, without this meaning that members of the Commission are exempt from judicial accountability for separate criminal acts where the legal conditions are met. Organic Law No. 53 of 2013 on establishing and organizing transitional justice provided, in its Article 16, for the creation of the Truth and Dignity Commission as an independent body with legal personality and financial and administrative autonomy, and the transitional justice law assigned to this process functions that include uncovering the truth about violations, accountability and prosecution, reparation, and the preservation of collective memory. In this framework, prosecutions relating to the Commission's work must be conducted in accordance with fair trial guarantees, while respecting the Commission's independence and its legal mandate, and ensuring that judicial proceedings are not used as a means of retaliation against work related to transitional justice or of influencing its outcomes.

On the basis of all the information, the case of Sihem Bensedrine raises serious concerns regarding respect for fair trial guarantees and the right of defence, the right to liberty and security of person, freedom of movement, and the right to humane treatment and respect for dignity and physical integrity in detention, as well as the public nature of the trial. These concerns take on particular importance in light of the continuing prosecutions and the multiplicity of files, the handing down of first-instance prison sentences that have been appealed, the restrictions imposed on freedom of movement, the treatment Bensedrine reported having been subjected to while receiving medical care, and the reported exclusion of the public and the press from some hearings.