Ousmane Sonko’s lawyers have approached public authorities to submit conditions which, if accepted, would allow Ousmane Sonko to appear before the Criminal Chamber, and thus avoid a trial in absentia. Up to yesterday evening, Lawyer Ousseynou Ngom, who presented these wishes, had to face a formal refusal from the Keeper of the Seals.

 In the midst of speculation as to the presence of Ousmane Sonko tomorrow at the Dakar Court, to respond to the accusation of repeated rapes and death threats against Adji Raby Sarr, the defense of the accused negotiates to avoid as much as possible judgment in absentia. It has indeed been explained at length through the media, the harmful consequences of a judgment before the Criminal Chambers, in the absence of the main accused. We heard the leader of the Pastef party last Friday, on the Walf TV channel, when he tried to put the said consequences into perspective, declaring that « absence does not mean guilt”, going so far as to claim that the presence of his alleged accomplice Ndèye Khady Ndiaye ruled out this hypothesis.

If this catharsis could work with his little educated mass of faithful, Ousmane Sonko’s lawyers have not allowed themselves be lulled by this kind of argument. The proof, one of them, Lawyer Ousseynou Ngom, sought to negotiate for his client to appear tomorrow at the bar of the Criminal Chambers.

The lawyer contacted certain public authorities, to present to them what was considered to be the conditions for the chief “Patriot” to agree to face Miss Adji Sarr tomorrow.

Ousmane Sonko told his lawyer that he was ready to be present on Tuesday morning at 9.30 a.m. in the courtroom of the Tribunal, if the authorities agreed to let him choose his route freely, and lifted the siege off his home.  Moreover, his supporters should not be barred from entering the trial room. Once in the courtroom, Ousmane should be allowed to make a statement and refuse to answer any questions.

Seized for this request, the Minister of Justice, Keeper of the Seals, opposed with inadmissibility. Ismaïla Madior Fall explained to Ousmane Sonko’s consul that the state does not negotiate with litigants. Once the conditions for a smooth trial are established, it is up to all parties to appear. If one of the parties, in particular the accused, defaults and does not appear on the day of the hearing, the State will assess and the law will apply according to regular procedures.

Beyond this very formal response, it seems to emerge that the political authorities do not believe the word of Ousmane Sonko. Ismaïla Madior Fall and his colleagues would seem to fear that if left to Ousmane Sonko to freely choose his route, the leader of the Pastef party would not necessarily choose the straightest and shortest route. He would then be free to want to treat himself to a walkabout at little cost, passing by Ucad, Tilène and Sandaga markets, and to mobilize all onlookers. Moreover, the risk of this walkabout would be that his vehicle would not arrive in Court on time, perhaps forcing by this manoeuvre, the judges to postpone the trial, which would be, they fear, the wish of the accused.

It should be remembered that in the event of non-appearance, the law provides that the defendant’s lawyers cannot defend him in his absence. And if found guilty, he could face the heaviest sentence. Not to mention that he would automatically be removed from the electoral lists. Moreover, deprived of the right of appeal, the convict in absentia could only oppose his judgment. But for this opposition to be admissible, he must first give himself up as a prisoner.

By Mohamed GUEYE / mgueye@lequotidien.sn

  • Translation by Ndey T. SOSSEH