A court-martial in Algeria sentenced Mohamed Benhalima to death, a decision confirmed by Amnesty International and backed by lawyers from the La Red Jurídica collective in Spain. Benhalima had been deported from Spain about 50 days earlier after spending two weeks in solitary confinement at the Zapadores Detention Center in Valencia.
Initially the case seemed headed for a standard sentence of ten years, but the outcome was a death sentence in absentia. The judge ruled while Benhalima was not present to defend himself, a point stressed by his lawyer, Eduardo Gómez. In a prior interview from a foreign detention facility, Benhalima warned of the danger awaiting him in Algeria, saying he feared prison and torture and that he might be placed in a military prison where violence and even murder could occur.
Mohamed Benhalima, a former soldier and activist who fled Algeria for Spain in September 2019 after exposing governmental corruption, managed to continue speaking out against the army’s abuses from exile through digital platforms. He challenged those in power with the hope that his message would travel back to Algeria once he had a chance to return, a prospect that the Algerian president publicly addressed in Spain, vowing actions against dissidents who spoke from exile.
Despite being in danger, Benhalima’s asylum request was denied. He was subsequently arrested in Zaragoza and transferred to the Zapadores detention facility for immigration law violations. Lawyers from the Centre, the Legal Network, and the Spanish Refugee Assistance Commission (CEAR) began seeking renewed international protection due to the risk of retaliation if he returned to Algeria.
Eduardo Gómez notes that within less than a week Benhalima’s asylum claim was denied, and shortly thereafter a flight was arranged to deport him to Algeria. The deportation process drew criticism from associations like NO CIE, which argues that deportations usually involve notice and sea transport; in this case, the individual was deported by air without the attorney’s confirmation beforehand.
The government’s refusal to grant international protection cited Benhalima’s alleged affiliation with Hirak, a peaceful movement that mobilized Algerians across the streets. After the deportation, organizations supporting Benhalima pushed the case forward, pointing to past denunciations by dissidents who faced similar refusals and claimed mistreatment in Algeria, including allegations of torture in military prisons.
As described by his lawyer, the deportation reflects an administrative action rather than a criminal extradition. Benhalima was deported for immigration violations rather than for committing a crime. The Legal Network and allied support groups continue to examine possible complaints against the Immigration Brigade or the Home Office to clarify responsibility for the activist’s conviction and deportation.
Government Criticism
Benhalima’s deportation triggered widespread criticism from parliamentarians and human rights advocates. Members demanded written explanations from government ministers about their actions and potential accountability for the consequences faced by the activist. Esquerra Republicana representatives called for Interior Minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska to provide a formal response in writing. Organizations including Amnesty International, NO CIE, CEAR, and the World Organization Against Torture condemned the decision to deport.
In public commentary, critics highlighted the state’s role in condemning the activist to death after deportation, while calling for accountability and demanding a halt to similar actions. The discourse underscored the tension between immigration policies and human rights protections in high-profile cases involving political dissidents.
Some observers noted the political climate in which dissidents like Benhalima operate, emphasizing that peaceful activists advocating for democratic reform should not face harsh repression or life-threatening consequences. The discussion extended to concerns about how authorities handle cases of individuals who express dissent and the international obligations to protect those seeking asylum from persecution.
Democracy Activism
Benhalima, along with other Hirak supporters, took to the streets weekly to advocate for a civil and democratic state free from military dominance. He described arrests of fellow demonstrators who joined the protest movement and emphasized that the demand was simple yet powerful — a democratic government that respects civil liberties. He emphasized that many individuals who joined the demonstrations faced arrest for voicing opposition, and he noted that a significant number of people remained imprisoned for political reasons. The government described Hirak supporters as threats to the state integrity, a label that families and supporters contested. Benhalima reported constant visits by police and intelligence services at his family home, with inquiries about his whereabouts and assurances that returning would bring no protection. In his testimony, he described repeated harassment and arrests aimed at his relatives as a chilling reminder of the price of dissent.
In summary, this case highlights the precarious situation for democracy advocates in Algeria and the complex dynamics of asylum, deportation, and the legal challenges faced by activists who expose corruption and demand reform.