TUNIS: The plight of Tunisian attorney Mohamed Abbou has been in the spotlight for several weeks now, with US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher being quoted earlier this month as saying Washington was “very concerned” about Abbou’s imprisonment.

The attorney received a three-and-a-half year sentence last month (April 29) for having made statements deemed likely to disturb public order – this after he criticized Tunisian President Zine El-Abidine Ben Ali’s invitation to Israel’s Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, to attend the world summit on the information society (WSIS). The conference is scheduled to take place in Tunisia’s capital – Tunis – in November. Abbou placed his critique on the ‘Tunisnews’ website, which is censored in Tunisia.

The attorney also posted an article in which he compared prison conditions in the North African country to those at Abu Ghraib in Iraq. This jail became the focus of international attention in April last year because of the abusive treatment a number of its inmates received at the hands of occupying American forces.

Abbou’s sentence shook public opinion in Tunisia, and was greeted with particular alarm by the country’s legal community which staged a round-the-clock sit-in over the trial. This demonstration was held at the Tunisian bar association’s premises, opposite the Palace of Justice.

Hearings in the case got under way on April 28, with large numbers of police and a few international observers in attendance. Police laid siege to the Palace of Justice, closing its gates to Tunisian observers and violently evicted those managed to slip inside anyway.

Abbou’s attorney, Raouf Ayadi, says the trial was marred by numerous procedural flaws, such as the merging of the case about alleged incitement to public disorder with an assault charge filed by a ruling party official, apparently to discredit Abbou. He also pointed to the judges’ refusal to allow several defence requests, including a plea for the hearing to be postponed so that the dossier for the assault charge could be examined.

In addition, defence witnesses were refused permission to appear, says Ayadi. The presiding judges made no effort to disguise the fact the trial was a “settling of political accounts that the regime often inflicts on dissidents,” he notes. This is the same Tunisia that prides itself on having liberalized the internet and on promoting the information society.

Huge placards advertising the WSIS greet arrivals at Tunisian airports. In every speech given at commemorations or on public holidays Ben Ali mentions this United Nations event, on one occasion describing it as “the international community’s vote of confidence in Tunisia’s clear-sighted policies”.

But, “In Tunisia, they’re more likely to liberalize guns than words,” says Khelil Ezzaouia, leader of the Tunisian League for Human Rights (LTDH). Activists allege that the country’s affairs are organised simply to create the appearance of democracy and respect for the rule of law, to ensure that Tunisia receives support from developed nations. In part, this is achieved through manipulation of advertising revenues.

Of the 300 newspapers published in Tunisia, only two are opposition party publications: Al Mawkif and Attariq al Jadid. However, these papers are not allowed to advertise or solicit public support. The broadcast media are, almost without exception, state-run. —Dawn/IPS News Service