The wait will have been long, but in the end, the Adji Sarr–Ousmane Sonko case will be decided by the Senegalese justice. The Dean of the investigating judges, Oumar Maham Diallo, issued on January 17, an order for referral to the criminal chambers, against Ousmane Sonko and Ndèye Khady Ndiaye, for rape and death threats. This, on the basis of “articles 320 and 320 bis and following, of the Penal Code and law 2020-05 of January 10, 2020”. Ousmane Sonko and his advisers did everything to avoid this referral to the Criminal Chamber. They have repeatedly multiplied the procedures to, if not prevent, at least delay the fateful march towards the trial. But it was difficult, to read the indictment of the public prosecutor, for Justice to do otherwise than refer the parties to trial. Ousmane Sonko actually multiplied the manoeuvresnot to answer questions about the accusation of rape.
It is noted in particular that, questioned by the investigating magistrate, Ousmane Sonko disputed the facts of which he is accused while acknowledging his attendance at the Sweet Beauté salon for massages. Following a question from the investigating judge asking him if he would have had even consented to sexual relations with Adji Sarr, he replied that he would not accept, “infamous questions that violate his privacy”. Subsequently, when asked whether he consented to taking samples to compare his DNA to the sperm taken from Adji Sarr‘s vagina, « He replied that he would never give a drop of his blood or his body for any sampling ». In addition to this, Ousmane Sonko never wanted to provide clarification on any point of the magistrates. He even went so far as to say, according to the minutes, that he would not answer any questions from the prosecution, « Since a prosecution that is plotting does not deserve to be answered. »
Different from the accused, Adji Sarr seemed totally cooperative with the instructors. This enabled the prosecutor to declare in his recital: “That in this case, Adji Sarr has constantly maintained, both at the preliminary investigation and before the investigating judge, to have been raped 5 times by Ousmane Sonko. Apart from the first case of rape of which she could not remember the date, for the other times she made with precision the exact dates and the time, the circumstances, the manner and the details of the rapes of which she was the victim of on the part of Ousmane Sonko; whereas despite the precision and, of course, the refusal, the consistency of Adji Sarr‘s statements, Ousmane Sonko limits himself to adopting an eloquent silence on questions related to the circumstances of the rapes; that the silence adopted by the defendant only gives credit to the accusations of the victim.” The indictment of the prosecutor will add « that the fact of refusing to answer the questions related to the circumstances of the rapes reflects on the part of the accused, a lack of arguments to put forward in the face of the consistency and precision of the statements of the civilian party”.
And of course, the refusal to do the DNA test returns, in the minds of the judges, against the accused. The prosecutor analyses it as “an admission of guilt. It is obvious that the accused refused such an examination since he knew in advance that the concordance of the two DNA would confirm the statements of the victim, on at least the existence of a sexual relationship on the night of February 2, 2021 . »
Better still, with regard to the basis of the argument of the leader of the Pastef party, who wanted to bring the case onto political grounds, the magistrates replied that « the thesis of the conspiracy put forward by the accused to put himself out of cause, lacks relevance since he spoke of everything except what happened inside the Sweet Beauté institute. However, the facts of which he is accused took place inside the place and not the conduct of the investigation, and even less the neutrality of its actors. That this classic system of defence, characteristic of the accused or defendants in need of solid arguments, is analysed in a vain attempt to counter-fire in order to divert the procedure on questions unrelated to the facts subject of proceedings that this approach is ineffective. »
And during the trial, Ousmane Sonko will have by his side Mrs. Ndèye Khady Ndiaye, the owner of the salon, who has been charged with complicity in rape and incitement to debauchery and the dissemination of images contrary to morality.
By Mohamed GUEYE / mgueye@lequotidien.sn
- Translation by Ndey T. SOSSEH
