the defense seizes the Supreme Court after the inadmissibility of the appeals

Lat Diop's lawyers appealed to the Supreme Court after their requests were rejected as inadmissible by the Indictment Chamber of the Financial Judicial Pool. The defense of the former Minister of Sports filed their appeal before the high court in the hope of achieving an annulment of the procedure, but also of the release ordered from their client's bank accounts.

Lat Diop's lawyers remain positive and convinced that their client was arbitrarily kept in prison and that, according to the law, he should today benefit from automatic freedom, the argument of the Chamber of Deputies. accusation to reject the two requests is unfounded.

Indeed, the defense, which spoke in the columns of the newspaper Les Echos, kept its promise, to obtain the quashing of the decision of the Financial Indictment Chamber. She believes that if the Supreme Court agrees with them, this would mean that Lat Diop could benefit from automatic freedom away from prison. In addition, his bank accounts frozen until then will be released and he will be able to enjoy them normally.

Let us recall that Lat Diop's counsel had submitted two appeals to the Financial Indictment Chamber, one of which related to the exceeding of the time limits for police custody and the other to the release of their client's bank accounts, ordered by the president of the college of investigating judges of the Financial Judicial Pool. In their argument, the black dresses maintained that the hours of custody were far exceeded, around 17 hours. This constitutes sufficient grounds for annulment of the procedure.

Thus, the procedure being void, the indictment and the placement under arrest warrant also. As a result, Lat Diop should be released from prison while benefiting from statutory release. As for the bank accounts, the lawyers consider that they must be released in view of the nullity of the procedure but also of their client's denials. And if he cannot be totally liberated, let there at least be a cantonment.

Ruling on these appeals, the Indictment Chamber did not even examine the merits, because it considers that the lawyers filed their requests outside the stipulated deadlines. The latter retorted that it was “false” before going to the Supreme Court to resolve this problem.