A recent controversy has erupted, shaking the foundations of what many assumed was a solid alliance. At the heart of the debate lies a leaked letter from Juan Branco, essayist and lawyer for activist Kemi Seba, addressed to Ousmane Sonko, then-Prime Minister of the Republic of Senegal. The correspondence, dated February 4, 2025, outlines five critical demands that raise serious legal and ethical concerns.
Judicial interference and sovereignty concerns
Branco’s first request revolves around a Spanish judge’s commission rogatoire concerning his alleged abduction in Mauritania. He subtly urges Sonko to influence Senegalese judicial authorities to expedite cooperation, while insinuating French interference in the case. Such pressure on an ongoing legal matter not only challenges Senegal’s judicial independence but also risks undermining the integrity of international legal cooperation.
Demands for classified intelligence documents
The letter’s second point demands access to classified intelligence documents from Senegal’s former regime, allegedly linked to French secret services. Branco claims these files are crucial to countering what he describes as a coordinated smear campaign in France, which has led to disciplinary and criminal proceedings against him. He references a 2023 kompromat attempt involving Senegalese agents, coinciding with a critical hearing in Dakar. Such a request, however, would constitute a clear violation of Senegal’s penal code, including breaches of national defense secrecy (Articles 61 and following of the Senegalese Penal Code) and professional confidentiality (Article 371).
Controversial calls for state intervention in international justice
Branco’s third demand targets the French-CPI case regarding alleged crimes against humanity involving Macky Sall, Senegal’s former president. He implores Sonko to take direct action, particularly financial, in this matter. Such interference would not only violate legal frameworks but also expose both Branco and Sonko to severe judicial repercussions. Requesting classified intelligence files without a judge’s mandate or using public funds to finance private international litigation risks charges of embezzlement and state secret misappropriation. Moreover, bypassing official judicial channels (such as a commission rogatoire) in favor of a politically motivated arrangement undermines the credibility of international justice and transforms a quest for accountability into a series of potential criminal offenses.
Unconventional requests for diplomatic and academic positions
In his fourth point, Branco recalls a 2024 request to represent Senegal at the United Nations in New York, citing his loyalty to the new government’s sovereignist and panafricanist agenda. After discovering another diplomat had been appointed, he pivots to demanding Senegalese citizenship—a request Sonko could facilitate through presidential prerogatives. This naturalization would allow Branco to practice law in Senegal and teach at the Cheikh Anta Diop University (UCAD) in Dakar. Such interventions circumvent legal and institutional norms, raising questions about conflicts of interest and potential geopolitical interference due to his French nationality. This shift marks a departure from their once-idealistic alliance, with Branco now framing his past sacrifices (detention, abduction) as leverage for political and administrative favors.
Financial transparency and legal risks
The final section of the letter addresses financial matters. Branco discloses receiving €15,000 in fees between 2023 and 2025, including a €2,000 reimbursement from Senegalese lawyer Maître Bamba Cissé for a trip to Dakar. He argues this amount is insufficient to cover his expenses, including legal fees in France, detention-related costs, and the work performed under a “representation mandate” allegedly assigned by Sonko’s camp. The opacity of these transactions—lacking formal contracts or adherence to public procurement laws—raises serious concerns. If these funds originated from public sources, the arrangement could constitute embezzlement, while the absence of financial transparency suggests potential violations of capital flow regulations and professional conduct rules. What began as an ideological partnership now appears to have devolved into a transactional relationship, with Branco leveraging his activism as a bargaining chip for compensation.