The Official Gazette of April 10, 2026, reveals yet another—and by no means the least significant—instance in the series of violations committed by Kais Saïed against the independence of the Tunisian judiciary.
Following the shameful sentencing of Anas Hmaidi, president of the Tunisian Magistrates’ Association, to one year in prison, Kais Saïed issued Decree No. 47/2026 on April 8, 2026. Particularly telling: this decree was not even published in the section reserved for the Office of the President of the Republic, but rather in that of the Ministry of Justice. It concerns the appointment of judicial auditors who have obtained their graduation certificate from the Higher Institute of the Judiciary.
Once again, Kais Saïed is showing complete disregard for principles and standards, including those he himself has imposed.
The appointment of new judges must, however, be carried out in accordance with the 2022 Constitution, which was drafted and enacted by Kais Saïed himself. In line with Article 117, Article 120 of this Constitution provides:
“Judges are appointed by decree of the President of the Republic, upon the recommendation of the competent High Council of the Judiciary.”
In this case, the High Council of the Judiciary has jurisdiction. These rules are also set forth in Articles 14 and 15 of Decree-Law No. 11-2022 regarding the creation of the Provisional High Council of the Judiciary—another decree issued by Kais Saïed, widely condemned by international bodies, notably by the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights. In its Judgment No. 16-2021, the Court ordered the Tunisian State to annul this decree-law, which it deemed contrary to the independence of the judiciary.
But even this text—which, however, falls short of the minimum threshold required to guarantee the independence of the judiciary—has been violated by its own author. Kais Saïed proceeded with these appointments without the involvement of the relevant High Council, which is effectively paralyzed. In fact, the High Council of the Judiciary is effectively frozen, as Kais Saïed has refrained from appointing the members necessary to reach the quorum required for deliberation.
Moreover, the Minister of Justice declared, before the Assembly of the People’s “Representatives,” with a self-assured nonchalance, that the existence of this institution had no impact on the functioning of the justice system.
In light of this systematic dismantling of state institutions, the CRLDHT highlights Kais Saïed’s blatant disregard for the standards he himself established, as well as the serious violation of the principle of judicial independence and the independence of judges. It also emphasizes the illegality of these appointments, which are tainted from the outset, since they occur ab initio within the professional careers of these new magistrates outside any regular framework. In this context, it appears that this manifest illegality is likely to be raised as a preliminary issue before the relevant courts, while any attempt to trivialize this situation would contribute to the lasting establishment of institutional anarchy and further undermine the independence of the judiciary.
