In Mali, after several postponements, the trial against Amadou Aya Sanogo and his co-defendant resumed yesterday Thursday in Bamako. The author of the 2012 coup and his co-defendants are accused of the murder of 21 “red berets”, a body of the army that has been loyal to ousted President Amadou Toumani Touré. The judges announced adjournment of the trial, the decision of which is expected on March 15.
with our correspondent in Bamako,Kaourou Magassa
Courtroom number 1 in Bamako Appeal Court was crowded. Outside, dozens of anonymous people who could not find places were waiting for the end of the debate.
► also read : In Mali, the trial of General Sanogo was adjourned until March 11
Started in 2016 in a lawsuit that was moved to Sikasso, the legal soap opera of the “Sanogo affair”, future named after General Amadou Haya Sanogo keeps the malians in suspense. But last Thursday only the civilian parties were missing. The families of the victims accepted an amicable settlement last year, facilitating the defense of Cheick Oumar Konaré, the accused’s lawyer. “This alleviates the emotional burden, see the legal file,” he confided. The Memorandum of Understanding was signed before the opening of the hearing on Thursday between the civil parties and the government. These will benefit from financial compensation and for some public administration.
In addition, in 2019, Mali published a law on amnesty for a number of crimes committed during the crisis born of the independence uprising in 2012. Since then, defense lawyers have always requested acquittal in favor of this. law on national agreement. A political argument more than a legal one, it seems to be heard by the Attorney General, who demanded the abandonment of all prosecution against the accused.
“On Monday, we expect a verdict (such) that the court will note the eradication of public action and dismiss our clients, as we say in our jargon without sanction or cost,” assured Maître Mohamed Diop, defense attorney.
Trust is with the defendants, everything smiles after a hearing of more than two hours. Nine years after that, it is therefore up to the judges to act on the epilogue of this procedure by sentencing or acquitting the defendants.
.
