Title: “The case of the spectacular escape of a traditional healer causes scandal in Burkina Faso”
Introduction :
On the night of Friday to Saturday, an extraordinary case shook Burkina Faso. A traditional healer, Amsetou Nikiema, made a spectacular escape with the help of soldiers. This remarkable escape took place while the healer was in police custody on charges of intentional assault and torture of an individual. This case generated a lively debate and controversy in the country. Let’s analyze the facts more closely.
The course of the escape:
Amsetou Nikiema had been arrested along with several other people. As they waited to be taken into custody, the courthouse was surrounded by armed soldiers, who demanded the release of the healer. Despite the opposition of the prison security guards, the soldiers finally managed to backtrack and get the healer out of the van. According to Attorney General Laurent Poda, the soldiers claimed to have acted on the orders of the Minister of Justice.
Reactions and consequences:
Anger and indignation quickly spread to the world of Burkinabè justice. Lawyers, court clerks and the Burkinabè human rights movement unanimously condemned the event. The magistrates even suspended their activities in all jurisdictions, demanding the return of the healer to detention. Faced with the seriousness of the facts and this new attack on the independence of justice, the prosecutor of Faso requested the opening of an investigation for escape, complicity in escape and discredit on a jurisdictional act.
Reactions from civil society:
Rasmane Zinaba, member of the National Coordination of the Balai Citoyen, strongly denounced the interference of the military in the functioning of justice. He denounces a current deleterious climate in Burkina Faso, endangering the rule of law and democratic principles.
Conclusion :
The escape of the traditional healer in Burkina Faso continues to arouse reactions and fuel controversy. This case highlights the tensions between the judiciary and the armed forces in the country, and raises questions about the preservation of the independence of the judiciary