After pleading Ousman Sonko’s responsibility for each and every charge, the prosecutor went on to discuss sentencing.
| According to Swiss law: The sentence is to be assessed according to the culpability of the offender, which is to be determined on the basis of the severity of the violation or the endangerment of the legal interest concerned, the reprehensibility of the offender’s actions, the motives and aims of the offender, and the extent to which the offender was in a position to avoid the seriousness of the endangerment or damage, taking into account the internal and external circumstances. In addition, the offender’s previous life, personal circumstances and the impact of the sentence on the offender’s life must be taken into account (Art. 47 al. 2 SCC). |
The Prosecutor requested life imprisonment in view of the serious culpability of Ousman Sonko, who, according to the findings of the investigation, had participated in multiple serious counts of crimes against humanity.
In considering the aggravating circumstances applicable to the accused, the Prosecutor stated that, although some of them could have been applied (see box below), they did not de facto increase the statutory maximum sentence.
| Examples of aggravating circumstances mentioned by the Prosecutor: Behavior during the investigation “The accused’s conduct in the present proceedings was only superficially cooperative. While at the beginning of the proceedings he was willing to provide detailed information on general questions about the system and on questions about his career and performance, as the proceedings progressed he evaded specific questions, described them as hypothetical, made vague statements or refused to testify – as is his right. (…). His deliberately disruptive conduct during the investigation can no longer be assessed neutrally due to its scope, duration and intensity, but must be considered in a somewhat different light. Confession, insight, remorse “The accused continues to deny all charges and has not confessed. Furthermore, he has shown neither understanding nor remorse. Therefore, a reduction of the sentence is out of the question. The non-cooperation, the lack of remorse, the lack of understanding and the lack of confession therefore have a neutral effect on the sentence”. |
As for the mitigating circumstance related to the length of the trial, it should be rejected.
It follows from the above that, taking into account the defendant’s culpability for the crimes committed, life imprisonment is considered an appropriate overall sentence.
According to the Prosecutor, such a sentence should also be considered as justified in terms of international jurisprudence. Indeed, in December 2023, Bai Lowe, who was involved as a driver in various crimes against humanity, was sentenced to life imprisonment in Germany. Ousman Sonko’s participation in the crimes and his culpability must be weighed much more heavily in this case.
Finally, the OAG requested in particular that Ousman Sonko be expelled from Swiss territory for a maximum period of 15 years, that the Court decide on the distribution of the confiscated assets, that various objects seized in the course of the investigation be returned to Ousman Sonko or to the persons to whom they belong, and that the Court decide on the civil claims to be formulated by the plaintiffs.
Coming next: The closing arguments of the legal representative of the victim of the 2000 events.