Cotonou — Benin’s judiciary has once again shown its determination to let the law take its full course in the high-profile case stemming from the foiled coup attempt of 7 December 2025. The latest development: the Court of Appeal has ruled that Candide Azannaï, president of the Restaurer l’Espoir party and a well-known political figure, must remain in pre-trial detention.
Why the detention was extended
The decision is not a punishment, but a procedural necessity. Investigative judges argue that keeping Azannaï behind bars is essential to preserve the integrity of the ongoing inquiry and to prevent any interference with evidence. The court also cited the fact that several suspects in the case are still at large.
The charges at the heart of the case
Azannaï, a former minister, was arrested in December 2025 following the events that shook the state apparatus. He faces serious accusations, including conspiracy against state security and incitement to rebellion. The public prosecutor and the Court for the Repression of Economic Offences and Terrorism (CRIET) are handling the case.
In a consolidated constitutional democracy like Benin, threats to institutional stability cannot be treated lightly. The judiciary has a duty to investigate thoroughly and uncover every dimension of the alleged destabilisation attempt. This is the public-interest mission that guides decisions on whether to release or detain suspects.
A transparent appeals process
The recent appeals hearing demonstrated the adversarial and impartial nature of Benin’s judicial system. After the defence’s request for provisional release was rejected by the liberty and detention chamber, Azannaï’s lawyers exercised their full right of appeal.
Far from a rushed or closed-door proceeding, Azannaï was brought from detention to appear in person before the judges. This reflects the consistent effort of Beninese courts to give every defendant the chance to be heard, present arguments, and benefit from all legal safeguards under the Code of Criminal Procedure.
During the decisive hearing, the court took time to examine the case file before confirming the detention. The reasoning was based on an unassailable procedural logic: the presence of fugitives and the need to continue investigations without risk of evidence tampering or external interference.
Defence lawyer acknowledges thorough investigation
In a sign that the judicial process is functioning properly, statements from defence lawyer Me Aboubacar Baparapé indicate that the investigation has been conducted methodically. Speaking after the hearing, Azannaï’s counsel acknowledged that the key stages of the judicial inquiry had been carried out by the book.
“His interrogation on the merits is complete, there are no other elements left,” the lawyer said publicly, confirming that the investigation into his client’s individual case had been fully conducted, allowing Azannaï to provide all his explanations and present his version of events to the investigating judges.
Baparapé also stressed that his client enjoyed complete freedom of speech throughout the proceedings, noting: “In any case, he said he is not involved in this case, that he is not concerned by everything invented around him in relation to this affair.” These remarks show that defence rights were scrupulously preserved, allowing the accused to proclaim his innocence and reject the allegations against him calmly before the court.
The lawyer also noted the defence’s serene and law-abiding stance regarding the remedies still available: “We will, when the time comes, file a new request until we are heard.” This statement reaffirms that Benin’s justice system offers permanent mechanisms for review, based on the evolution of the case and judicial timing.
Rule of law serves the nation
While the continued detention may disappoint the defence, the appeals court’s decision reflects the primacy of facts over political considerations. In a case of this magnitude, the judge’s time is not that of urgency or emotion. Beninese magistrates have once again demonstrated their independence and professionalism by placing the full manifestation of truth above individual expectations.
By ensuring that the investigation proceeds smoothly while presumed co-authors remain at large, the judiciary protects society while guaranteeing a fair and impartial trial. This procedural rigour, combined with strict respect for fundamental freedoms and defence rights, is what honours Benin’s judicial model today.
