On October 12, 2026, Riadh Ben Fadhel appeared once again in custody before the criminal chamber specializing in financial corruption cases at the Tunis Court of First Instance in the case known as the “confiscated assets” case. This hearing followed the adjournment ordered on September 28. To date, no decision on the merits of the case nor any order for his release has been made public.

Riadh Ben Fadhel, general coordinator of the Al-Qotb Party and an entrepreneur, has been in custody since November 2023. Other defendants in the same case are appearing in court as free men. This fact alone raises a simple question: Why keep a man in prison for nearly three years when he could be summoned, questioned, and tried while free—in a case where the events took place long ago, the operations are well-documented, and the other key figures are accessible to the courts?

Riadh Ben Fadhel was not arrested because he was a fugitive. He was taken into custody at Tunis-Carthage Airport upon his return from abroad on November 14, 2023. After being taken into police custody, he was remanded in custody on November 24, 2023, as part of an investigation into the acquisition of confiscated property and suspected money laundering.

But this case is neither new nor impossible to investigate without imprisonment. According to his defense, the acquisitions in question were made through auctions and official calls for bids. The contracts and documents pertaining to these transactions had already been submitted during previous investigations. This obviously does not exempt the courts from verifying every transaction, every price, and every responsibility. But it makes the continuation of such a lengthy detention all the more incomprehensible.

The prosecution must prove, for each defendant, a specific act: fraud, an undue advantage, money laundering, or knowing participation in a crime. Collective guilt cannot be inferred solely from the fact that assets were confiscated or that the case involves numerous defendants. The court must examine the requests for proposals, contracts, appraisals, terms of sale, and the role of the government agencies that organized the sales. This is the normal course of a trial. This process does not require that Riadh Ben Fadhel remain in custody.

Since February 2026, hearings and postponements have followed one after another: February, March, April, May, June, September, and then October. Requests for release have been denied. Yet each postponement prolongs a detention that has already lost any exceptional nature. Pretrial detention is not a punishment. It cannot be used to anticipate a conviction, to compensate for delays in the investigation, or to keep a defendant out of public life.

Another, separate case, in fact, illustrates the absurdity of this situation. In May 2024, Riadh Ben Fadhel was sentenced to four years and six months in prison in a customs and banking case. In April 2025, the Court of Appeals overturned that ruling and dismissed the charges after his financial situation was resolved. However, he remained in prison due to the case involving the confiscated assets.

Nearly three years of deprivation of liberty, without a final judgment in this case: this is no longer a precautionary measure. It is a sentence imposed in advance on a man who is still presumed innocent.

In the current Tunisian context, it is impossible to ignore the political dimension of this case. Riadh Ben Fadhel is a leader of an opposition party known for his critical views. This places an additional burden on the justice system: to demonstrate, through its actions, that the prosecution is based exclusively on facts, specific evidence, and respect for the rights of the defense—and not on a desire to neutralize an opponent.

The fight against corruption is necessary. But it cannot be credible when it is accompanied by indefinite detention, repeated postponements, and a presumption of innocence reduced to a meaningless phrase.

We demand the immediate release of Riadh Ben Fadhel and that his trial proceed while he remains free. All necessary measures can be taken to ensure his appearance in court. There is no justification for him to remain in prison.

We also demand that cases involving confiscated property be adjudicated within a reasonable time frame, with full respect for the rights of the defense, including an adversarial review of each transaction and a strictly individual determination of liability.

Freedom is not a favor granted to the accused. It is the rule. Pretrial detention must remain the exception. For Riadh Ben Fadhel, this exception has lasted far too long.

Freedom for Riadh Ben Fadhel.