Murder of the muezzin of Pire: Shocking videos that betray the accused, heavy sentences requested

The criminal chamber of the Thiès High Court was, on Monday, June 8, 2026, the scene of a particularly anticipated hearing devoted to the case of the murder of Bassirou Mbaye, muezzin of the village of Ndièye, in the commune of Pire.

Nearly four years after the events of October 4, 2022, the eleven defendants present in court took turns giving their accounts. The twelfth defendant, A. Ndiaye, died in custody on September 14, 2023, from an illness.

A case that arose from the construction of a mosque

According to the elements of the investigation recalled at the hearing, Bassirou Mbaye, known by the nickname "Bass", was a mason renowned for having participated voluntarily in the construction of several mosques in the commune of Pire.

He had agreed to build the mosque in the village of Ndièye free of charge, with the promise of serving as muezzin there. However, according to the gendarmerie's investigation, tensions quickly arose with the village imam, who did not want him to officiate at the mosque.

The investigation indicates that Bassirou Mbaye had been subjected to repeated acts of intimidation. On several occasions, the electricity was allegedly cut off during the call to prayer in an attempt to destabilize him. The imam then accused him of stealing a window intended for the mosque before banning him from the place of worship.

To avoid escalation, Serigne Aliou Konté had then given him a plot of land so that he could build another mosque there, near his daara “Al Azar”.

"An organized punitive expedition"

This initiative had sparked opposition from some residents, including the imam and the village chief, who did not want to see two mosques coexisting in the locality.

After several unsuccessful attempts to stop the construction work with the police, a meeting was reportedly held the day before the tragedy at the home of the village chief.

The following day, according to investigators, a first group went to the construction site where Bassirou Mbaye, his sons, and other workers were employed. After an initial altercation, the assailants returned in greater numbers, armed with machetes, sticks, and hammers.

The investigation attributes an active role in the attack to Imam M. Wade, claiming that he struck blows and ordered the assailants to attack the victim. Bassirou Mbaye ultimately succumbed to his injuries.

Following this, village chief MT Dièye, Imam M. Wade, S. Dièye, P. Dièye, SD. Dièye, B. Dièye, C. Bâ, A. Wade, I. Wade, N. Dièye, A. Dièye and A. Ndiaye were arrested and then placed under arrest warrant for association of criminals, murder, various actions which caused damage to persons and property, obstruction of the exercise of worship and illegal possession of weapons.

One of the accused, A. Ndiaye, died in detention on September 14, 2023, as a result of an illness.

The accused deny the charges.

In the dock, the eleven defendants present essentially denied the charges against them, each giving their own version of events.

The first to be questioned, S. Dièye, denied any involvement in the murder of Bassirou Mbaye or the destruction of the mosque under construction. He explained that he had only gone to the site to ask him to respond to the summons from the village chief.

SD. Dièye categorically rejected the accusations, stating that he had no involvement whatsoever in the matter. According to him, he was outside the village, at ICS, at the time of the events. This was corroborated by a witness.

B. Dièye stated that he was working in his field when he learned of the death of his namesake, Bassirou Mbaye. Upon his return, he was told that Bassirou Mbaye had been killed in a fight.

P. Dièye admitted to going to the scene, but only after the fight had ended. He explained that he found damage at the construction site and was in possession of a small pipe, but denied having participated in the violence.

Considered one of the main defendants, the village imam, Mr. Wade, admitted to being present at the construction site. According to him, he was accompanying other residents to ask Bassirou Mbaye to suspend work until administrative authorization was obtained. He denied possessing a weapon or participating in any aggression.

C. Bâ claimed he was in the fields at the time of the incident and only learned of the tragedy upon his return. However, videos shown in court clearly depict him at the scene. Despite this footage, he continued to deny his presence.

A. Wade admitted to being present at the construction site. He explained that he went to the security post after hearing shouts that the imam had been killed. He said he had no weapon and had not participated in any fight. However, videos shown outside the chamber depict him holding a stick.

I. Wade acknowledged being present at the scene. The footage shown depicts him on the structure, participating in its demolition, a hammer in his hand. He explained that he found the tool on the construction site and denied hitting anyone.

The defendant, N. Dièye, admitted that he was at the scene with a machete. However, he claimed that he had not come to fight but to try to ease tensions.

A. Dièye admitted that all the co-defendants were present at the construction site. He stated that they had come to ask Bassirou Mbaye to suspend the work. He also admitted to possessing a hammer, but claimed that he had only used it to defend himself against an attack by one of the victim's sons.

Over 80 years old, the village chief of Ndièye, MT Dièye, denied any involvement in the events. He stated that he was not present at the scene and had not participated in any fight, given his advanced age.

The victim's sons are accusing the defendants.

The testimonies of the civil parties were particularly damning. B. Mbaye, the deceased's son, stated that all the defendants were present and armed with machetes when they arrived at the construction site. According to him, the imam was the first to arrive and had concealed a knife in his clothing before calling for backup. He also stated that he saw a man named A. Faye strike his younger brother with a machete before being injured himself while intervening.

His brother, A. Mbaye, confirmed that the accused had attacked their father while he was building his mosque. "I don't know who delivered the fatal blows, but they were all there," he said.

Witness E. Ndiaye, for his part, claimed to have been injured by a machete blow struck by the imam while he was trying to rescue Bassirou Mbaye.

The plaintiff demands justice

For Mr. Mbodj, the family's lawyer, the facts are perfectly clear. According to him, the accused formed a veritable criminal organization with the aim of preventing Bassirou Mbaye from building his mosque.

He argued that the collective violence led to the muezzin's death. Mr. Mbodj therefore asked the criminal court to find all the defendants guilty, with the exception of SD. Dièye.

The civil party also requested that the accused be ordered to pay 150 million CFA francs in damages to the family.

Ten years in prison requested by the prosecution

In his closing argument, the public prosecutor recalled having met several times with the imam and some of the defendants to ease tensions before the tragedy. He indicated that the landowner had confirmed having transferred the plot to Bassirou Mbaye. According to the prosecution, the video footage, witness statements, and evidence gathered during the investigation clearly demonstrate that the accused colluded before carrying out the attack.

Believing that only SD. Dièye's presence at his workplace at ICS creates serious doubt, the prosecutor requested his acquittal.

However, he requested that the other ten defendants be sentenced to ten years in prison for criminal association, murder, various actions causing damage to persons and property, obstruction of religious worship and illegal possession of weapons.

The defense is pleading for acquittal.

Defense lawyers Ayi and Sène argued that the dispute was primarily related to a land issue and not to the construction of a mosque.

They disputed the existence of a criminal association and reiterated that criminal responsibility is individual, arguing that there was no evidence to identify the perpetrator of the fatal blows.

In the alternative, they requested that the facts be reclassified as voluntary assault and battery resulting in death without intent to kill.

After several hours of deliberation, the criminal court adjourned the case for deliberation. The verdict is expected on July 6, 2026.