Will evidence ‘disappear’ to cover up the Tunisian president’s crime?

I am not sure about the credibility of the photo of former Tunisian Prime Minister Hichem Mechichi that appears to confirm that he was assaulted in the presidential Carthage Palace in order to force him to resign. If it was true, it makes President Kais Saied a third-class militia member rather than a head of state.

Britain’s Middle East Eye reported that Mechichi was beaten by Egyptian and UAE intelligence officers in the palace. Again, if true, this destroys Saied’s legitimacy as well as his eligibility as a Tunisian citizen, having allowed foreigners to attack a fellow Tunisian.

The prime minister’s acceptance of the president’s dismissal order — after being at the centre of the dispute between parliament and the presidency — was made too quickly. Moreover, he did not appear in public at a time when rumours of his arrest were circulated widely. Perhaps the authorities thought about arresting him but realised that his sudden absence might prompt his family to announce that he was abducted. Mechichi was thus placed under house arrest with the aim of containing the expected reaction of his family, but did the physical assault really happen?

It is absurd to accept that the head of a government would resign or accept his dismissal easily unless he has been subjected to enormous pressure. The Mubarak regime in Egypt exerted pressure on Field Marshal Muhammad Abdel Halim Abu Ghazaleh after deciding to dismiss him, due to his immense popularity within the ranks of the armed forces. Amin Nimr, Secretary-General of the General Intelligence Service, was “negotiating” with Abu Ghazaleh in the Republican Palace, while Mubarak was in the next room. Despite his influence and power, Abu Ghazaleh acquiesced under the threat of arrest. He was appointed to the non-existent role of “aide to the President of the Republic”.

The Tunisian prime minister is neither a militant nor a fighter. He is a government employee who may stand firm under pressure at first but will bend eventually, especially when faced with all of the persuasive tools at the interrogator’s disposal in such matters. He didn’t need to be assaulted, as MEE reported. That can only be described as recklessness and stupidity.

The reaction to the MEE report suggests that the assault did take place. The so-called “electronic committees” immediately went about trying to discredit Middle East Eye on social media, quoting Mechichi’s “denial” in the process. If he denied being attacked and welcome being dismissed, why did he not say so in public? His reluctance to appear in public — forced or otherwise — suggests that he has visible injuries which would confirm the assault.

READ: Signs that Tunisia heading to authoritarianism, academics warn

The credibility of Middle East Eye is not in question. It is significant that the attempts to discredit the website came from Cairo and Abu Dhabi. Moreover, MEE clearly has sources within the Carthage Palace. If its critics are confident in their evidence that the report about the assault isn’t true, then they should challenge it in the High Court in London.

The Speaker of Parliament in Tunis, Sheikh Rached Ghannouchi, was awarded damages by a British judge while he was in exile and subject to an attack by the media, including a campaign launched by the Saudi newspaper Al-Sharq Al-Awsat. The libel laws in Britain are strong, so if MEE is inaccurate, it should be challenged, but I doubt if that will happen.

If Kais Saied’s coup succeeds, he knows that he will not be in power forever. He knows that he is not the first choice of those who have paid for the coup to happen and that being the frontman does not mean that he will be the leader. He also knows that he will die one day and be answerable for his actions in a higher court, where evidence and witnesses cannot be eliminated in order to cover up a crime.

This article first appeared in Arabic in Arabi21 on 2 August 2021

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.