BENIN: ARBITRARY DETENTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDER AND ACTIVIST FRÉDÉRIC JOËL AÏVO

The International League Against Arbitrary Detention urges the Government of Benin, to take all the necessary actions to implement the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention Opinion No. 21/2024 concerning Frédéric Joël Aïvo, asking the Government of Benin to immediately and unconditionally release Frédéric Joël Aïvo and to accord him an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations in accordance with international law.

Read the full WGAD Opinion concerning Frédéric Joël Aïvo (Benin):  Opinion No. 21/2021.

ARRESTED FOLLOWING THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS

Frédéric Joël Aïvo is a law professor, human rights defender and activist in Benin. He was a member of various constitutional commissions under several presidents in Benin. In 2009, he also co-founded the Beninese Association of Constitutional Law, serving as its president until 2020. He opposed the revision of the Constitutional of December 1990 in 2016. Mr Aïvo also opposed the law of 7 November 2019, which required presidential candidates to obtain at least 10% sponsorship from mayors and deputies, a disposition considered too favourable to the majoritarian party. This law was ultimately adopted but was later called to be repealed by the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights.

In 2020, Mr Aïvo co-founded the Front for the Restoration of Democracy, reuniting the opposition political parties for the 2021 presidential elections, in which Mr Aïvo ran as a candidate against President Talon. Following the election of Mr Talon, a wave of arrests and repression targeted the regime's political opponents. Mr Aïvo was arrested on 15 April 2021, four days after the elections, while he was driving to the university.

The government of Benin was given the possibility to answer these allegations, which it did not.

ARRESTED WITHOUT A WARRANT AND SUBJECTED TO PRETRIAL DETENTION

Considering the absence of a response from the Government of Benin, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention deemed credible the allegations of the source, who claims that Mr Aïvo was arrested without a warrant or equivalent document. Moreover, the Working Group noted that there was no indication that the arrest took place in a flagrante delicto situation. For these reasons, the Working Group concluded that the Government of Benin acted in violation of article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 9(1) and (2) of the Covenant.

According to the source, the day after the arrest, Mr Aïvo appeared before the Special Prosecutor of the Court for the Suppression of Economic Crimes and Terrorism, which ordered Mr Aïvo to be placed in pretrial detention. He was not heard before the Court trial chamber until 15 July 2021, three months later. Considering the absence of a response from the government to these accusations and the failure to demonstrate the dangerousness or flight risk of Mr Aïvo through an individualized evaluation, the Working Group found the detention of Mr Aïvo a violation of article 9(3) of the Covenant.

For the aforementioned reasons, the Working Group concluded that the detention of Mr Aïvo was arbitrary in accordance with Category I.

DETAINED FOR OPPOSING THE GOVERNMENT

The Working Group claimed to have taken into consideration the alleged degradation of the democratic situation in Benin and the allegation of the source, who states that Mr Aïvo co-founded the Front for the Restoration of Democracy, which nominated him as candidate for the presidential election. Likewise, the Working Group noted that Mr Aïvo was reportedly arrested after his call for a peaceful boycott of the presidential election, echoing the widespread protests that had erupted in the country after President Talon's decision to extend his mandate beyond 6 April 2021.

Considering these elements, the Working Group concluded that the detention of Mr Aïvo resulted from the exercise of his rights to freedom of expression, freedom of association, peaceful assembly, and the exercise of his right to take part in the public affairs of his country.

The violation of these rights, enshrined in articles 19, 20 and 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 19, 21, 22, and 25 of the Covenant, renders the detention of Mr Aïvo arbitrary under category II.

MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS OF THE RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL

The Working Group noted that the Court for the Suppression of Economic Crimes and Terrorism is an exceptional jurisdiction under the authority of the Supreme Council of the Magistrature of Benin, which itself is under the direct control of the President of the Republic, an allegation that the government did not refute. Given that Mr Aïvo was accused of "money laundering" and "conspiracy against the security of the State", the Working Group determined that he was denied his right to have his case heard by an impartial and independent tribunal, in violation of article 14 of the Covenant, and article 10 of the International Declaration of Human Rights. 

This conclusion was further reinforced by the severity of the sentence: ten years imprisonment and a 45 million francs CFA fine. The Working Group considered this condemnation excessive, especially resulting from a trial lasting only fourteen hours. 

Furthermore, the source affirmed that Mr Aïvo's lawyers faced pressures and threats from the director of the Economic and Financial Brigade, that they had only two days to examine the case files, and that their visits were subject to restrictions. Given the government's failure to respond, the Working Group concluded that the authorities had violated the principle of equality of arms and the right of Mr Aïvo to adequate time and facilities necessary to the preparation of his defence, as guaranteed by article 14 (3)(b) of the Covenant.

For these reasons, the Working Group considered the detention of Mr Aïvo arbitrary under category III.

DETAINED FOR HIS POLITICAL OPINIONS

Considering the communication of the source regarding Mr Aïvo's activism against the constitutional reforms, his advocacy in favour of democracy and human rights, and his criticism against the government of President Talon, the Working Group considered the detention of Mr Aïvo discriminatory. The Working Group concluded that the government of Benin targeted him for his political opinions, in violation of articles 2 and 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 2(1) and 26 of the Covenant.

Consequently, the detention of Mr Aïvo was deemed arbitrary under article V. 

CONCLUSIONS OF THE UN WORKING GROUP AGAINST ARBITRARY DETENTION 

The Working Group expressed its concern regarding the allegation of the detention of Mr Aïvo in inhumane, cruel, and degrading conditions. From 16 April 2021 to 9 June 2021, Mr Aïvo was detained with 38 other people in former public toilets, where he was infected with COVID-19. He had not been transferred to a less crowded cell until 9 June 2021. Moreover, he was reportedly only allowed to see his family for just a few minutes while being tied to a barrier at the entrance of the prison, in plain sight, for almost two years. Considering these allegations made by the source and the lack of response from the government, the Working Group reminded the government of Benin of its obligation to ensure that all persons deprived of their liberty are treated humanely and with respect for the dignity inherent to the human condition, as enshrined in article 10(1) of the Covenant.

In light of the foregoing, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention considered that the detention of Frédéric Joël Aïvo was arbitrary and fell under categories I, II, III and V because his deprivation of liberty was in contravention of articles 2, 3, 7, 9, 10, 11, 19, 20 and 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 2, 9, 14, 19, 21, 22, 25 and 26 of the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights.

The Working Group recommended that the Government of Benin take the steps necessary to remedy the situation of Frédéric Joël Aïvo without delay and bring it into conformity with the relevant international norms. The Working Group considered that, taking into account all circumstances of the case, the appropriate remedy would be to release him immediately and accord him an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations, in accordance with international law.