How far can a state go in punishing speech published online? That is the dilemma now unfolding in Niamey, where the legal profession and the authorities are locked in an increasingly bitter confrontation. Detained on a committal order two weeks ago, lawyer Abdourahamane Lirwana appeared on Tuesday, 6 October before the High Court of Niamey to answer the charges against him. When the hearings ended, the prosecution demanded a five-year prison sentence without suspension, along with a fine of five million CFA francs.
Online posts at the heart of the prosecution
The case stems from content the lawyer published on social networks. The authorities formally accuse Me Lirwana of “disseminating data likely to disturb public order,” an offence severely punished under Niger’s cybercrime legislation.
A hearing marked by procedural tension
The proceedings unfolded in a climate of extreme procedural strain. Twenty-four hours before the hearing opened, the team of lawyers defending the accused had taken the matter to the Court of State to request that the case be transferred elsewhere, arguing that the Niamey court did not offer the necessary guarantees of independence for a fair trial. The higher court dismissed the request and kept the case in Niamey.
A strategy of silence in a contested courtroom
Convinced that the rights of the defence were being blatantly trampled, Me Lirwana’s counsel made a firm decision: they refused outright to plead. Following their instructions, the accused remained completely silent when questioned by the presiding judge and the prosecutor.
That refusal to cooperate did not halt the session. Ignoring the absence of defence arguments, the court closed the proceedings and took the judgment under advisement. The final ruling, now eagerly awaited in legal circles and among civil society, will determine the lawyer’s fate in a context of strict control over public expression on digital platforms.