Aïssatou Sophie Gladima trial: The High Court lifts the electronic bracelet and postpones the case until after the judicial recess.

The trial of former Minister of Mines and Geology, Aïssatou Sophie Gladima, opened this Tuesday before the High Court of Justice, sitting at the Supreme Court under the presidency of First President Mouhamadou Mansour Mbaye.

Even before the referral ruling was read, the defense requested two motions: the referral of the case and the removal of the electronic bracelet imposed on the former minister.

Speaking on behalf of the court , François Sarr recalled that he had contacted the First President of the Supreme Court on July 13, 2026, in order to obtain the removal of the electronic bracelet.

According to him, the judicial supervision measure is no longer justified, now that the investigation is complete. "The investigation procedure is finished. There are no longer any issues with the gathering of evidence. This measure is no longer justified, either for the information or for establishing the truth," he argued, specifying that a medical report included in the file establishes that his client is having difficulty tolerating the electronic bracelet.

The lawyer also requested a postponement of the case to allow the new counsel, including the firm Guèye Ndiaye & Associates and El Hadj Diouf, to review the file. "An accomplice cannot be tried before the principal offenders," he argued. His colleagues on the defense team concurred.

Attorney Michel Simel Basse argued that it is legally problematic to try someone accused of complicity while the alleged main perpetrators, Ibrahima Issa and Alassane Diallo, are still the subject of separate proceedings before the 3rd investigating chamber of the Dakar High Court. He noted that they had benefited from a dismissal order, which the public prosecutor's office has appealed.

The same argument was developed by Mr. Diouf, who questioned, "How can someone be tried for complicity when the co-perpetrators have not yet definitively decided their fate? And if the dismissal is confirmed, how can the conviction of the accomplice be justified?"

For him, the requested referral is not dilatory and responds to a requirement of good administration of justice, the accomplice legally borrowing the criminality of the principal perpetrator.

Procedural arguments raised

Relying on Article 37, Maitre Antoine Mbengue asked the court to rule on the release of the bracelet if it decided to refer the case.  

For his part, lawyer Baboucar Cissé contested the regularity of several procedural acts. He pointed out that his client, placed under a detention order on May 21, 2025, had agreed to wear an electronic bracelet upon her release from prison on July 7, 2025, with house arrest limited to the regions of Dakar and Mbour.   And that this measure could not exceed one year.

He also considered the committal order premature, as the prosecutions targeted offences for which the alleged co-perpetrators had been granted a dismissal pending review of the prosecution's appeal.

The lawyer also denounced irregularities in the summons of the parties, including the lack of indication of the exact location of the hearing and the fact that only one defense lawyer received the notification.

In the same vein, Maitre Papa Leyti Ndiaye, former president of the bar association, Maitre Benoît Sarr and Thiakane André felt that the justice system was taking the risk of making a mistake by judging the alleged accomplice before the fate of the main perpetrators had been definitively decided.

The public prosecutor's office defers to the wisdom of the court.

In his observations, Attorney General Jean-Louis Paul Toupane said he was in favor of a postponement motivated by the arrival of new lawyers, while rejecting the idea of subordinating this procedure to another judicial body.

"We cannot be at the mercy of another jurisdiction," he said, specifying that a referral could not be justified by waiting for a decision in another proceeding.

Regarding the request to lift the electronic bracelet, the public prosecutor's office deferred to the wisdom of the court.

Only Ibrahima Issa appeared at the hearing. Alassane Diallo did not appear.

In rendering its decision, the court relied on the provisions of Article 138 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which limits the duration of placement under electronic bracelet, to order the lifting of this measure.

The court also postponed the examination of the case until after the judicial holidays, specifying that a new summons order will be issued to the parties.