Tunisian Man Sentenced to Death for Facebook Posts in Unprecedented Free Speech Case
A Tunisian court has handed down the country’s first death sentence for online speech, convicting a 51-year-old man for Facebook posts deemed critical of President Kais Saied in a case that has drawn international condemnation and raised alarm about the state of free expression in Tunisia. The ruling represents a dramatic escalation in the government’s crackdown on dissent and marks a troubling departure from Tunisia’s post-revolution democratic gains.
Saber Chouchen, a day labourer with limited formal education, was convicted on charges including attempting to overthrow the state, insulting the president, and spreading false information online. The Nabeul court determined that his social media posts incited violence and chaos, violating both Tunisia’s penal code and the controversial 2022 cybercrime law known as Decree 54. The sentence comes amid growing concerns about democratic backsliding in what was once considered the Arab Spring’s greatest success story.
Chouchen has been detained since January 2024, and according to his legal representation, he shared content copied from other pages primarily to highlight his difficult living conditions rather than to incite unrest. His lawyer described him as socially vulnerable and argued that the severe punishment was disproportionate to the alleged offenses. The case has become a flashpoint in the ongoing struggle between government authority and digital free speech rights across the African continent, a development being closely tracked by platforms like African News Desk.
The Legal Framework and Controversial Cybercrime Law
The legal basis for Chouchen’s conviction rests heavily on Decree 54, a 2022 cybercrime law that has been widely criticized by human rights organizations for its vague language and severe penalties for online expression. The law grants authorities broad powers to criminalize speech deemed to spread “false information” or “rumors,” with penalties ranging from imprisonment to the death penalty in cases where the speech is linked to national security concerns.
Since President Saied consolidated power in 2021 by dissolving parliament and ruling by decree, Tunisia has witnessed a steady erosion of press freedoms and digital rights. The government has increasingly used legal mechanisms to target journalists, activists, and ordinary citizens who express criticism of the administration. Chouchen’s case represents the most extreme application of these laws to date, signaling a new phase in the government’s approach to silencing dissent.
“The man, Saber Chouchen, was convicted of charges including attempting to overthrow the state, insulting the president, and spreading false information online. Judges stated that his posts incited violence and chaos, violating Tunisia’s penal code and the controversial 2022 cybercrime law, Decree 54.”
While Tunisia retains capital punishment in its legal framework, the country has maintained a de facto moratorium on executions since 1991. The imposition of a death sentence for online speech therefore represents a significant break with recent practice and has raised questions about whether the government intends to resume executions for the first time in over three decades. Legal experts note that the sentence appears designed to create a chilling effect that discourages other Tunisians from criticizing the government online.
The case highlights the tension between national security concerns and fundamental human rights in Tunisia’s evolving legal landscape. While governments worldwide grapple with regulating online content, the application of capital punishment for social media posts places Tunisia in a small group of countries employing the most extreme measures to control digital expression. The ruling has particularly alarmed free speech advocates given Tunisia’s historical role as a democratic model in the region.
International Reaction and Human Rights Concerns
The death sentence has triggered widespread condemnation from human rights organizations, free speech advocates, and international bodies monitoring Tunisia’s democratic transition. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and other groups have characterized the ruling as a severe violation of international human rights standards and have called for immediate intervention to overturn the conviction.
Critics argue that the case reflects a broader pattern of repression that has intensified since President Saied’s power grab in 2021. The government has systematically targeted political opponents, journalists, and civil society activists using legal mechanisms that undermine the independence of the judiciary and due process protections. Chouchen’s case is particularly concerning because it involves an ordinary citizen with limited resources rather than a prominent political figure, suggesting that the crackdown now extends to all levels of society.
“Chouchen, a day labourer with limited education, has been detained since January 2024. His lawyer described him as socially vulnerable, claiming he shared content copied from other pages to highlight his difficult living conditions, not to incite unrest.”
The sentencing comes at a time of economic hardship for many Tunisians, with rising inflation, unemployment, and social inequality creating fertile ground for public discontent. Against this backdrop, the government appears increasingly intolerant of criticism, particularly through social media platforms that have become vital spaces for public discourse and political organization. The case raises fundamental questions about whether citizens can safely express grievances about their living conditions and government performance without fear of extreme retaliation.
International human rights law strictly limits the application of the death penalty, generally restricting it to the “most serious crimes” typically involving intentional killing. The extension of capital punishment to speech-related offenses represents a significant deviation from these standards and could further isolate Tunisia from its international partners, including European nations that have provided crucial economic support during the country’s ongoing financial crisis.
Chouchen’s lawyer has already filed an appeal, and the outcome will be closely watched as a barometer of judicial independence in Tunisia and the country’s commitment to protecting fundamental freedoms. The appeal process will test whether Tunisian courts can resist political pressure and uphold international human rights obligations, even in cases involving criticism of the highest levels of government.
As Tunisia approaches the anniversary of its 2011 revolution that ousted longtime dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, the case serves as a stark reminder of how quickly democratic gains can be reversed. The country that once inspired the Arab Spring with its peaceful democratic transition now faces a critical juncture where the fundamental rights of expression and association hang in the balance. The international community, particularly Tunisia’s democratic partners, faces pressure to respond forcefully to what many see as a definitive break with the democratic principles that emerged from the revolution.
The future of free expression in Tunisia may well depend on the outcome of Chouchen’s appeal and whether the international community can effectively leverage diplomatic and economic relationships to defend the digital rights and fundamental freedoms that Tunisians fought so hard to secure. As this case demonstrates, the stakes for Tunisia’s democracy have never been higher, nor the threats to its hard-won freedoms more severe.
