07 Feb 2022; MEMO: The Head of Tunisia's Supreme Judicial Council, Youssef Bouzakher, confirmed that the country's President, Kais Saied, did not announce the dissolution of the Council, but rather said that it had become something in the past.
This came in a statement to the Mosaique FM radio, as he indicated that there is no legitimate legal or constitutional mechanism that would allow the President to dissolve the Supreme Judicial Council.
Judge Bouzakher considered that, during his visit to the headquarters of the Ministry of Interior, Saied incited citizens against the Supreme Judicial Council and against judges, in general, after he called them to demonstrate today to dissolve the Council.
Youssef Bouzakher stressed that he will defend the existence of the Supreme Judicial Council by all legal means.
In a statement reported by Anadolu Agency, Bouzakher said that the Council will continue "to carry out its tasks, and there is no legal, constitutional or even realistic legality to dissolve the Council at this particular time."
He added: "President of the Republic, Kais Saied, spoke about the Council from the headquarters of the Ministry of the Interior, with its symbolic implications, and asked the Council to consider itself from the past."
He continued: "We consider ourselves to exist in the present and in the future until the election of the Supreme Judicial Council in accordance with the provisions of the constitution and the provisions of the law regulating the council."
Bouzakher clarified that "the decrees taken by the Presidency of the Republic during this period aim to restore the normal functioning of the state's institutions, in connection with the imminent danger that was declared on 25 July, and neither the judiciary nor the Supreme Judicial Council reported to be among the dangers announced at that time."
He continued: "Therefore, we consider that the decision to dissolve our Council, which was not taken even with regard to the imminent danger that has been announced in relation to the Parliament, is illegal, because the latter itself has not been dissolved, so what about the Supreme Judicial Council, where the danger it was in was not announced? There is no legality, legitimacy or constitutionality to dissolve it."
Saied appeared to Tunisians in the early hours of Sunday morning from the Ministry of Interior, and announced that he had decided to dissolve the Supreme Judicial Council, considering that the Council had become from the past, in a step that incites fear about the independence of the judiciary.
The Supreme Judicial Council is a Tunisian constitutional institution, approved by the 2014 constitution. It guarantees within its powers the proper functioning and the independence of the judiciary, in accordance with the provisions of the constitution and the approved international treaties. The first elections for the council were held on 23 October, 2016.
The controversy between the judges and the President began since Minister of Justice, Leila Jaffal announced, last October, the preparation of a bill related to the Supreme Judicial Council at the request of Saied, which angered many judges.
Kais Saied's speeches, over the previous period, included interference in the field of the judiciary, as he usually indicates that the judiciary is "the judiciary is affiliated to the state," and that it is "independent and there is no authority over it except the law," and "there is no way to purify the country except through a just judiciary" and "judges are above all suspicions," and that "an independent judiciary is better than a thousand constitutions."
Recently, Saied criticised what he called the delay of the judiciary in issuing rulings in cases of corruption and terrorism, saying that there is corruption and that he is determined to reform the judiciary.
Each time, judicial bodies issue statements denouncing any interference in the judiciary, stressing the need not to prejudice the judicial authority and the constitutional structure.
Earlier, President Saied decided to stop all privileges and grants granted to members of the Supreme Judicial Council, which angered the judges at that time.
