Recent leaks of a letter have ignited intense debate across political and legal circles in Senegal. Written by Juan Branco, a prominent lawyer and essayist known for defending activist Kemi Seba, the document was addressed to Ousmane Sonko, then Prime Minister of the Republic of Senegal. The correspondence, dated February 4, 2025, outlines five key demands that reveal a web of legal ambiguities and political tensions.
Demands involving judicial and intelligence cooperation
Branco’s first appeal centers on a judicial matter: a Spanish judge’s rogatory commission related to his alleged abduction in Mauritania. He subtly pressures Sonko to influence Senegalese judicial authorities to facilitate cooperation, going so far as to question the sovereignty of the Senegalese state by suggesting French interference in the case’s handling.
His second demand targets intelligence documents from Senegal’s former regime, particularly those linked to French secret services. Branco claims he is the target of a coordinated smear campaign in France, fueled by disinformation and procedural harassment. He cites a 2023 incident involving a Kompromat trap—orchestrated, he alleges, with the involvement of a Senegalese agent—just before a critical hearing in Senegal. Requesting access to classified intelligence files raises serious legal red flags, including violations of national defense secrecy (Articles 61 and following of the Senegalese Penal Code) and professional confidentiality (Article 371), as well as the unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
Alleged pressure on Sonko over international justice
Branco’s third request concerns the Franco-ICC case involving allegations of crimes against humanity against former President Macky Sall. He urges Sonko to take direct action, particularly in financial terms. Such interference not only risks severe judicial and political repercussions for both men but also constitutes a blatant breach of legal protocols. Requesting classified intelligence reports outside of a judge’s formal request is tantamount to inciting violations of national defense secrecy and professional confidentiality—offenses punishable under Senegalese law. Branco further implies that accessing these documents would qualify as the concealment of state secrets. Additionally, his suggestion to fund private litigation in France for crimes against humanity—without Senegal as a civil party—raises concerns over potential embezzlement of public funds or misuse of political party resources, especially if channeled through the PASTEF party. This approach bypasses established judicial channels in favor of informal agreements, undermining international legal credibility and transforming a pursuit of justice into a series of potential criminal violations.
Controversial requests for nationality and diplomatic position
Branco also revisits a long-standing ambition: to represent Senegal at the United Nations in New York. He asserts that his appointment would have carried symbolic weight, aligning with the sovereignist and pan-Africanist stance of the new administration. However, upon learning of another diplomat’s selection, Branco pivots to a new demand—obtaining Senegalese citizenship through presidential prerogative. This would allow him to practice law in Senegal and teach at the University Cheikh Anta Diop (UCAD) in Dakar. Such requests expose systemic attempts to circumvent legal and institutional norms, raising concerns over conflicts of interest and geopolitical meddling due to his French nationality. More broadly, this shift underscores a transformation in Branco’s relationship with Sonko: once framed as a moral alliance rooted in shared activism, it now appears transactional, with Branco leveraging his past sacrifices (detention, abduction) to demand political and financial concessions.
Financial transparency and legal risks
Branco’s final point addresses financial compensation. He reveals receiving €15,000 in fees between 2023 and 2025, including €2,000 reimbursed by his Senegalese colleague, Maître Bamba Cissé, for travel to Dakar. He claims these funds covered operational costs (flights, travel) and administrative expenses (interns, collaborators) related to his “representation mandate” for Sonko’s camp. Branco argues these amounts are insufficient given the extensive time, legal battles in France, and personal ordeals he has endured. This disclosure highlights opaque financial dealings that pose significant legal and ethical risks. The lack of a formal, public contract with the Senegalese state raises serious questions: if these funds originated from public sources, the transaction could be construed as embezzlement, bypassing public procurement laws and the State’s judicial agent. The opacity of these financial flows further flirts with violations of billing and capital flow traceability regulations. For both men, this financial accounting marks a pragmatic shift: having failed to secure political appointments (UN, UCAD), Branco now frames his activism as a billable service, converting an ideological alliance into a purely transactional and mercenary dynamic.
