Commission d'enquête parlementaire : L'ancien Directeur des Domaines livre ses vérités sur le dossier Kharafi et la Corniche Ouest
During his hearing before the Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry tasked with examining land management and the public maritime domain (DPM), the former Director of State Property, Abdou Gning, provided clarification on two sensitive cases: the plot of land initially allocated to the Kharafi Group for a hotel project and the occupation of the Corniche Ouest. In the first case, discussions with the members of parliament focused in particular on the conditions for the resale of a plot of land allocated to the investor, as well as the revenues of over 20 billion CFA francs mentioned during the hearing.
Kharafi Group : an administrative certificate at the heart of the questions
According to Abdou Gning, the Senegalese government initially granted the Kharafi Group a plot of land for the construction of a hotel complex that would also include villas. The group began developing the land before obtaining a certificate from the government confirming that more than 60% of the area had been developed. The former Director of State Lands explained that, in accordance with Law No. 94-64 and the terms of the deed of transfer, the resale of land allocated for commercial or industrial use is contingent upon the development of at least 60% of the area. He stated that the Kharafi Group proceeded with the resale of the land based on this certificate.
When questioned by a member of parliament about the checks carried out by the ad hoc committee, Abdou Gning confirmed that its members had visited the site, even though he himself had been unable to participate due to unforeseen circumstances. He then indicated that, according to the information he had received, the actual development did not meet the required threshold. The resale, therefore, appeared to have been based on an administrative certificate that did not comply with the conditions stipulated in the deed of transfer and its implementing decree.
Parliamentarians also raised concerns about the subdivision and resale of the land for over 20 billion CFA francs, questioning whether the initial purpose of the transfer had been misused to the detriment of the state. Regarding the fate of these revenues, Abdou Gning explained that discussions had taken place within the committee, of which he was a member, concerning the possibility of returning a portion of the collected funds to the state. However, he stated that he was unable to confirm whether this restitution had ultimately been made.
Corniche Ouest: Administrative contradictions called into question
The former Director of State Property also addressed the irregularities observed in the management of land allocations along the Corniche Ouest. Of the 81 allocations identified, the members of parliament noted that more than half appeared to present administrative irregularities. According to Abdou Gning, the management of the public maritime domain remains particularly complex. He specifically highlighted the absence, since 1976, of an implementing decree for the State Property Code, a situation which, in his view, complicates the regulation of coastal land use.
In principle, the administration issues a temporary and revocable occupancy permit (AOT), which limits authorized installations to light and removable structures. However, on the Corniche Ouest, he explained, several beneficiaries are constructing permanent buildings before initiating the necessary procedures for rezoning, registration, or obtaining a lease. The former official primarily described inconsistencies within the administration itself.
During the committee's work, its members reportedly discovered the case of an occupant with a Temporary Occupation Permit (AOT) requiring the use of removable structures, but who simultaneously benefited from a permit for permanent construction issued by the same administration. According to Abdou Gning, these administrative contradictions contributed to the confusion and fostered the abuses observed along the coastline.
Commentaires (8)
- On comprend pourquoi une certaine presse boycotte les auditions. Parce que c'est le contraire de leurs lignes éditoriales qui y est révélé.
- On comprend pourquoi le régime de Macky et ses proches étaient obligés de recourir à la plus féroce des dictature, y compris les meurtres. Parce que ils avaient beaucoup trop de crimes à cacher.
Quand est ce que ca changera ???
Participer à la Discussion
Règles de la communauté
💡 Astuce : Utilisez des emojis depuis votre téléphone ou le module emoji ci-dessous. Cliquez sur GIF pour ajouter un GIF animé. Collez un lien X/Twitter, TikTok ou Instagram pour l'afficher automatiquement.
Se connecter
Commentez avec votre profil, votre photo, et soyez averti des réponses.