المصادر: قامت جمعية تقاطع من اجل الحقوق والحريات بتوثيق هذه الحالة بعد التواصل مع ضحية الانتهاك.

Summary:

Hood Baazaoui, a Tunisian citizen, finds himself being referred to the criminal chambers after he posted a video in which he criticized the cost of living, the rising prices of fuel, and the scarcity of basic food.

Personal Information: 

Name: Houd Baazaoui

Occupation: Physical education teacher above rank

Nationality: Tunisian

Case: Diffusing false news with the aim of violating the rights of others and harming public security as per Article 24 of Decree 54 of 2022.

Committing a heinous act against the president of the Republic as stipulated in Article 67 of the Penal Code

Incidents of Violation:

Houd Baazaoui is a Tunisian citizen who posted a video on his Facebook account criticizing the cost of living, the rising prices of food items and fuel, and the scarcity of basic food in his region. In addition, the video included criticism of the tax system, which, according to him, is unjust. He also accused the state of impoverishing farmers and citizens and burdening them with unfair taxes, directing the blame and responsibility to the president of the Republic, whom he considers the authority responsible for the country. Furthermore, in the video, the victim expressed regret about having voted for the current president in the 2019 presidential elections.

Following the publication of the video by the victim of the violation, the authorities opened an investigation against him. On 30th November, the public prosecutor issued an order for his detention for 48 hours. Later, it was decided to drop the charge of committing a heinous act against the president of the Republic, referring him only under Article 24 of Decree No.54. However, the public prosecution appealed the decision to close the investigation, which was accepted; as a result the victim of the violation was charged with committing a heinous act and spreading false news with the aim of violating the rights of others, as well as harming public security.

Human Rights Violations:

Referring citizens to the judiciary and threatening them with imprisonment is a serious violation of human rights and a blatant attack on freedom of opinion and expression. The arrest of citizen Houd Baazaoui, investigation, and presentation to the judiciary is considered a violation of his right to freedom of expression guaranteed by the Tunisian constitution in its Article Thirty-Seven, which states “freedom of opinion, thought, expression, media and publication is guaranteed,” and protected by regional and international conventions and charters.

Moreover, the use of Decree No. 54 in all cases of opinion and categorizing them as rumors and false news only reflects the authorities’ real intention to employ this provision to violate rights and freedoms and suppress citizens, especially since the victim of the violation posted a video in which he denounced the deteriorating economic conditions in his region and complained about the loss of scarcity of basic materials. Subsequently, he found himself threatened with unjust prison sentences.

Decree No. 54, issued on September 13, 2022, particularly Article 24, includes severe penalties that could reach five years in prison and a fine. These penalties are doubled if the case involves a public official posing a threat to freedom of expression, which constitutes a violation of Tunisia’s international obligations in this field.

Especially since this process has become a favored weapon in the hands of the authority, targeting anyone who dares to criticize the situation, complain, or express their opinion on public issues freely. Additionally, the use of a charge of committing a heinous act against the president of the Republic, as stipulated in Article 67 of the Penal Code, has become a tool to intimidate citizens and undermine their freedom. Such repressive provisions exist only in political systems that adopt tyranny and aim at eliminating and suppressing the plurality of opinions using imprisonment and intimidation and intimidation, as the pre-revolutionary regime did to silence all critical voices.

Sources: 

Intersection Association for Rights and Freedoms documented this case after communicating with the victim of the violation.