Ahmed Ould Samba Faces the Authorities: A Political Trial that Divides Mauritania

Mauritanian justice has just taken another step in the Ahmed Ould Samba case. Last Thursday, the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court ordered the activist to stand trial before the Nouakchott West Correctional Court.

He is accused of "insulting and defaming the President of the Republic" as well as "intentionally violating privacy via an information system."

This decision brings to a close months of legal twists and turns, but reignites the debate on the limits of freedom of expression in the country.

A case with multiple twists and turns

. It all began in mid-January 2025, when the Special Unit for Combating Cybercrime arrested Ahmed Ould Samba. Placed in detention on January 16 by order of an investigating judge, he remained incarcerated for three and a half months. His legal team denounced from the outset an "arbitrary detention," pointing to "unjustified" delays in the proceedings, despite a case deemed "flagrant offense."

On February 10, the judge of the Sixth Court, which handles common law crimes, issued a mixed ruling: Ould Samba was committed for trial on charges of contempt and invasion of privacy, but escaped charges of "incitement to racism" and "undermining social cohesion."

The prosecution contested this partial decision and appealed to the Indictment Chamber, which upheld the committal on March 3. The public prosecutor persisted and took the case to the Supreme Court, without success: the highest court in the land upheld the committal to the lower criminal court.

Three months of detention and ignored appeals.

During his incarceration, the activist's lawyers made numerous public statements, denouncing the manipulation of the justice system. In public declarations, they asserted that the procedural delays were aimed at "prolonging an illegal punishment." The defense team also revealed that they had alerted the National Human Rights Commission and other bodies, to no avail, without receiving any response.

While the lower criminal court must now decide the case, it transcends the legal framework. For Ould Samba's supporters, this trial symbolizes a shrinking of democratic space, where criticism of the government is criminalized. Conversely, the authorities justify their firm stance by the need to protect "public order and the dignity of institutions."

As the country awaits the verdict, one question remains: will Mauritania be able to reconcile state security and fundamental rights, or will this trial mark an authoritarian turning point? The upcoming hearing in the criminal court promises to be closely watched far beyond national borders.