Intersection Association for Rights and Freedoms is following the latest developments in the case known in the media as the “Conspiracy Against State Security” case, particularly following the scheduling of a hearing before the Court of Cassation on Thursday, 3 September 2026, marking a new stage in the judicial process characterized by repeated serious violations of fair trial guarantees and infringements of the rights of the defense. The hearing was scheduled on an urgent basis, before the end of the judicial recess, and referred to a summer chamber. Furthermore, the defence lawyers and families were only informed of the hearing date three days before it was held, potentially limiting their ability to adequately prepare for the hearing and effectively exercise the right to defence.

The case dates back to the arrest of several male and female political figures in February 2023, with periods of pre-trial detention exceeding the legally prescribed limits. The case has also been marked by a lack of transparency in its handling and has come to exemplify the prosecution of political figures in Tunisia, particularly amid reported political interference and the absence of adequate fair trial guarantees.

The proceedings have also been accompanied by a number of restrictive measures, including a ban on media coverage of the case, which limited media reporting and public scrutiny of the judicial proceedings.

The decision to try the detained defendants remotely also undermined their rights of defense. Shortly before the trial began in March 2025, it was decided that the detained defendants would not be brought to the courtroom and would instead appear via videoconference, despite the objections of the defence lawyers, who insisted on their clients’ right to be physically present before the court.

The procedural shortcomings did not end there. The first-instance hearings were conducted within a relatively short timeframe given the scale and complexity of the case, culminating on 18 April 2025 in convictions against 37 defendants, with prison sentences ranging from four to 66 years.

Among the sentences handed down were 18 years each against Ghazi Chaouachi, Issam Chebbi, Jawher Ben Mbarek, Ridha Belhaj, and Chaima Issa; 48 years against Khayam Turki; 43 years against Noureddine Bhiri; and 13 years against Abdelhamid Jelassi. Other defendants received varying sentences.

These judgments were handed down after only three hearings, amid restrictions on the attendance of journalists and observers. This is particularly concerning given the severity of the sentences imposed and the fact that the case relied on criminal and counter-terrorism legislation.

Some media outlets also played a role in covering the case and its proceedings. In certain instances, however, their coverage went beyond reporting to approach the issuance of prejudicial judgments, contributing to the public condemnation of the detained political figures before the judicial process had been completed and the courts had rendered their decisions.

During the appeal stage, the violations that had characterised the proceedings at first instance did not subside; rather, concerns regarding infringements of the rights of the defence persisted. The defense lawyers were informed of the date of the first hearing only 48 hours in advance, leading to its postponement following the lawyers’ objections.

At the second hearing, the detained defendants and their lawyers insisted on their right to appear in person before the court. Nevertheless, the court continued to conduct the proceedings remotely. At the third and final hearing, the court rejected the defence’s request to postpone consideration of the case and to allow all defendants to be physically present. This was accompanied by legal proceedings against several lawyers who were members of the defense team. 

On 28 November 2025, the Court of Appeal handed down its judgments against 34 defendants, with prison sentences ranging from five to 45 years. The court increased the sentences of several political figures, including Chaima Issa, Ridha Belhaj, Issam Chebbi, Ghazi Chaouachi, and Jawhar Ben Mbarek, from 18 to 20 years. By contrast, the sentence imposed on lawyer Ayachi Hammami was reduced from eight to five years, while that of Ahmed Nejib Chebbi was reduced from 18 to 12 years, before becoming subject to subsequent proceedings related to its enforcement.

The court also acquitted three defendants: Lazher Akremi, Nourreddine Boutar, and Hattab Ben Slama.

Intersection Association for Rights and Freedoms considers that the continuation of these proceedings before the Court of Cassation cannot obscure the accumulated violations and irregularities that have characterised the case, nor place the judgments beyond judicial and human rights scrutiny. A fair trial cannot be measured solely by the issuance of judgments, but rather by the extent to which fair trial guarantees are respected throughout all stages of the proceedings, including judicial independence, public hearings, the defendant’s right to be present, the right to prepare a defence and communicate with counsel, and respect for the presumption of innocence.

Accordingly, it reiterates the need to bring an end to a judicial process marked by numerous legal and procedural violations throughout its various stages, and to prevent the justice system from becoming a means of punishing political opposition. It calls on the Tunisian State to assume its responsibility to uphold the rule of law, restore respect for fair trial guarantees, and ensure the effective protection of the rights of the defence.

The Association also renews its full solidarity with the detained individuals and their families, and reaffirms its support for them in the face of the violations and irregularities surrounding this case, as well as its commitment to their right to a fair trial and the full enjoyment of all their rights without discrimination.