In an event that shocked Tunisia and the international community, a Nabeul court on October 1, 2025, handed a death sentence to Saber Ben Chouchane, a 51-year-old Tunisian day labourer, over Facebook posts deemed insulting to President Kais Saied.
- In an event that shocked Tunisia and the international community, a Nabeul court on October 1, 2025, handed a death...
- His conviction, rooted in nonviolent expression, marks the first known death sentence for speech in Tunisia’s modern history.
- According to court records, his crime was a series of Facebook posts criticising Saied’s government and calling for protests over...
- His brother, Jamal Chouchane, told reporters that the family was relieved but still traumatised, while Bouthelja confirmed his client had...
Keep reading for the full breakdown on death sentence — everything you need to know is covered below.
His conviction, rooted in nonviolent expression, marks the first known death sentence for speech in Tunisia’s modern history. But after a week of global outrage, President Saied issued a pardon, setting Ben Chouchane free on October 7.
Rights groups hailed the pardon as a relief but warned it doesn’t erase the deepening crisis over free speech and digital repression in Tunisia, once celebrated as the Arab Spring’s democratic success story.
Facebook posts that led to a death sentence
Ben Chouchane’s ordeal began in January 2024, when he was arrested on his way to a medical appointment. According to court records, his crime was a series of Facebook posts criticising Saied’s government and calling for protests over rising unemployment and inflation.
Authorities accused him of violating Decree-Law 54 on Cybercrime, which criminalises “spreading false news” online, and Articles 67 and 72 of the Penal Code, which cover “insults to the president” and “attempts to change the form of government.” The Nabeul court imposed the harshest penalty available: death.
Human Rights Watch called the sentence an unprecedented assault on freedom of expression. The Paris-based rights group CRLDHT said the ruling “sets a serious precedent” and proves Tunisia has reached “unprecedented human rights violations.”
Global backlash forces a presidential reversal
Public outrage was swift. Social media users flooded X with messages demanding Ben Chouchane’s release.
Within days, the Tunisian president intervened. On October 7, Saied signed a presidential pardon, allowing Ben Chouchane to return home to his family in Nabeul. His brother, Jamal Chouchane, told reporters that the family was relieved but still traumatised, while Bouthelja confirmed his client had withdrawn an appeal to speed up the pardon process.
Human Rights Watch’s Bassam Khawaja noted that the death sentence was so extreme and embarrassing for Tunisia’s judiciary that it forced an immediate reversal. Yet, he cautioned that the pardon does not erase the chilling message sent to citizens who speak their minds.
Tunisia’s shrinking space for free expression
Since President Kais Saied’s 2021 power grab, which dissolved parliament and granted him rule by decree, Tunisia’s democratic gains have rapidly eroded. Decree 54, enacted in 2022, has become the main tool for suppressing dissent, leading to dozens of arrests of journalists, activists, and ordinary social media users.
According to Amnesty International, more than 70 Tunisians have been prosecuted under the law since 2022, and at least 40 remain detained for online speech. Freedom House now classifies Tunisia as ‘partly free’, with internet users facing heavy surveillance and censorship.
Though Tunisia has observed a moratorium on executions since 1991, courts continue to issue death sentences, 12 in 2024 alone, pushing the total number on death row to nearly 150.
The Ben Chouchane case has become a litmus test for Tunisia’s fragile democracy. While the presidential pardon diffused immediate outrage, the broader issue of judicial independence and free speech remains unresolved.
In a country where 78 percent of citizens use social media, Tunisia’s battle over words has become a battle over democracy itself.