Listen to the article
A Tunisian appeals court issued harsh sentences against prominent political figures and former state officials in a case related to conspiracy against state security. According to the official Tunis Afrique Presse agency, the sentences ranged from three to 35 years in prison, with Rached Ghannouchi, leader of the Ennahda Movement, among those convicted. The case, known as “Conspiracy Against State Security 2,” involves 21 defendants and represents the second phase of ongoing state security proceedings.
The court’s decision comes amid ongoing tensions between Tunisian authorities and the Islamist-oriented Ennahda Movement. Sources close to the judiciary confirmed that the sentences were handed down recently, though authorities have not disclosed specific details about each individual’s punishment. The case underscores the government’s continued efforts to address what it describes as threats to national stability.
Political Tensions and State Security Concerns
Tunisian political activist Sohaib Al-Mazriki emphasized that the Ennahda Movement has systematically attempted to obstruct reform efforts pursued by the Tunisian state. According to Al-Mazriki, the movement employs tactics based on misinformation, creating artificial crises, and undermining internal stability. These actions, he stated in comments reported by local media, form part of a broader strategy designed to disrupt public confidence in state institutions.
Al-Mazriki pointed to what he described as organized incitement through social media platforms, particularly from pages managed outside Tunisia. These networks allegedly work systematically to inflame public sentiment and sow division within Tunisian society. The activist suggested that such activities aim to reposition the Ennahda Movement within the political landscape and restore influence it has lost in recent years.
Allegations of Political Manipulation
Political analysts have weighed in on the broader implications of the conspiracy against state security case. University professor and analyst Manal Waslati argued that understanding the disruption Tunisia has experienced since 2011 requires examining Ennahda’s behavior through the lens of what she called “political spoils” rather than genuine institutional engagement in state building.
According to Waslati, the movement treated the state both before and after the 2011 revolution as an object to be captured rather than as a sovereign framework to be managed through public service principles. She noted that Ennahda utilized victimhood narratives before 2011, then shifted to revolutionary and electoral legitimacy rhetoric afterward as symbolic and political resources to facilitate positioning within governing institutions.
The analyst further indicated that this approach transforms institutional stability into a bargaining chip rather than a public good. When influence within state structures becomes an end in itself, political practice tends to exploit tensions and deepen polarization as tools for managing power balances. This creates an environment conducive to institutional chaos and fragmented public decision-making, according to Waslati.
Impact on Tunisia’s Reform Trajectory
The conspiracy against state security verdicts highlight ongoing debates about Tunisia’s political direction and the role of Islamist movements in the country’s governance. Critics argue that certain political actors prioritize organizational interests over national cohesion, while supporters of Ennahda have historically maintained that the movement faces political persecution.
Waslati emphasized that spreading chaos need not always be direct or declared. Instead, it can manifest through more complex practices such as feeding conflicts within institutions, encouraging polarization in the public sphere, and disrupting the formation of stable consensus. These dynamics make the state less capable of implementing coherent public policies, she explained.
Meanwhile, observers note that the sentences handed down by the appeals court represent part of broader judicial proceedings that have targeted opposition figures and former officials. The government maintains these cases address genuine security threats, while critics question whether prosecutions serve primarily political purposes rather than legal justice.
The verdicts in the conspiracy against state security case are likely subject to further legal appeals, though authorities have not confirmed whether defendants will pursue additional judicial remedies. The broader political implications remain uncertain as Tunisia continues navigating tensions between different political factions and competing visions for the country’s future direction.
