Title: The trial of Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz in Mauritania: A surprising return from the former president’s lawyers
Introduction:
The trial of the former Mauritanian president, Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz, prosecuted for illicit enrichment, experienced an unexpected twist with the return of his defense collective to the court. After withdrawing from the hearing two weeks ago, the former head of state’s lawyers finally decided to return to their seats in order to continue their defense strategy. This decision was allowed by the court which accepted their request to call new witnesses in the case. However, this situation raises questions about its impact on the progress of the trial.
An unexpected turn of events:
The return of Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz’s lawyers to the trial was received with surprise. By arguing for the need to call new witnesses, the lawyers obtained the agreement of the court. According to Taleb Kyar, a member of the former president’s defense team, this decision is crucial for their strategy: “Having these witnesses appear is essential for our client and central to our defense approach.” Despite the fact that lawyers have already been appointed to resume the trial, the initial lawyers insisted on their role as defenders of the former head of state.
Potential consequences on the progress of the trial:
The return of Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz’s lawyers raises questions about the progress of the trial. The civil party’s lawyers believe that this decision is a poor application of the law and that it risks disrupting the progress of the hearing. Indeed, the civil party’s pleadings have already ended, and some believe that hearing new witnesses at this stage is no longer appropriate. The civil party’s lawyers notably requested the seizure of all the property of the former president which did not appear on his 2010 asset declaration, as well as financial compensation for the damage suffered by certain institutions and companies.
Conclusion:
The return of Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz’s lawyers to the trial represents an unexpected turnaround. The court’s decision to accept their request to call new witnesses raises questions about the impact on the trial. While the civil party’s pleadings have already ended, some believe that hearing new witnesses at this stage is no longer appropriate. It remains to be seen how this situation will influence the outcome of the trial and whether it will have an impact on public perception of the former president.