Former Presidential Protocol Director Sentenced to Five Years in Prison and Fine for Illicit Enrichment

A heavy sentence was handed down yesterday by the Bir Mourad Raïs criminal court, near Algiers, to the former Director-General of Protocol at the Presidency of the Republic, Mohamed Bouakkaz, after being found guilty of “abuse of power” and “illicit enrichment.”

As he entered the courtroom yesterday late in the morning, he did not expect to be sentenced to 5 years in prison, along with a fine of 600,000 DA and a payment of 1 million dinars in compensation to the public treasury.

Upon hearing the decision, he stared at the judge for several long minutes before asking, “Did you say 5 years in prison?” The judge replied, “Yes, you are sentenced to 5 years in prison, and you have 10 days to appeal.” Bouakkaz exclaimed, “Why? Why? I didn’t do anything…” before collapsing into the arms of one of his lawyers.

In the courtroom, many members of his family, frightened, stood up, ignoring the police’s calls for calm. Sobs and cries shattered the silence as Bouakkaz stood up, repeatedly shouting: “I didn’t do anything. Why?” before collapsing again on the floor.

His sobs echoed through the room, while his wife cried uncontrollably, and his mother, visibly worried, tried to make her way through the crowd to see him. The emotion and tension were palpable, and Bouakkaz’s lawyers, visibly distraught, were unable to calm their client or express their “disappointment.”

For nearly ten minutes, Bouakkaz’s loud, heartbreaking sobs, interspersed with “My God, why?” evoked deep emotion among those present. Bouakkaz left the courtroom in a state of shock. It was clear that he did not expect such a sentence.

During his trial on April 9, he categorically denied all the charges against him, highlighting his “irreproachable career” and his “successful professional path.”

His defense team, composed of lawyers Mes Allegue, Chama, and Behabyles, focused primarily on the “numerous violations of procedure during the preliminary investigation and throughout the inquiry,” as well as the “list of assets” that formed the basis of the accusations. “Is it reasonable to prosecute someone for illicit enrichment without determining with precision the origin and value of their wealth?” the defense lawyer questioned.

He reminded the court that the accused had held the position of Director-General of Protocol at the Presidency of the Republic from 2020 until June 2024 and then posed the question: “How can he be prosecuted for assets he possessed, such as a residence of less than 80 square meters, an old car, and the shell of an unfinished building in the Kharrouba area in Boudouaou, purchased between 2007 and 2018?”

He also pointed out that “the only amount mentioned in the case file is ten million dinars, equivalent to one billion centimes. An amount that is half the monthly salary of a football player.”

For the defense, Mohamed Bouakkaz “held a sensitive, high-level position for which he earned a monthly salary of 350,000 DA, excluding bonuses, and received annual allowances in foreign currency ranging from 20,000 to 40,000 euros for his foreign missions. You can calculate what he earned over five years and convert it into the national currency.”

“All the vetting investigations in favor of Bouakkaz”

Regarding the assets mentioned in the case file, the defense referred to “mistakes.” “These are not luxurious villas and buildings in posh areas of the capital, but rather a three-room residence in the Sebala neighborhood on the outskirts of Algiers, purchased like many other agents and officials in Algiers as part of the social welfare program, financed by the National Housing Fund (CNL) and the FNPOS,” the lawyers emphasized, adding, “He paid for it over a period of 10 years in installments, totaling 1.6 million dinars.”

This residence was listed three times in the case file, under different addresses: El Haouche, Sebala, and Draria. However, Bouakkaz’s residence is located in one of the houses in the Sebala neighborhood in the commune of Draria. Among the documents seized, there was a deed of ownership for an apartment in Fouka, belonging to the accused’s sister-in-law, but this asset was recorded as belonging to Bouakkaz.

The lawyers also explained that Bouakkaz had “sold” his first house to “buy another one in a more suitable location, with a larger area and new neighbors.” They rejected the idea of “accumulating assets all at once” and explained that he had rather “taken out mortgage loans from banks to finance his new home. He also had to sell his car and his wife’s jewelry to pay certain installments. All documents proving these transactions are in the file.”

Moreover, the defense questioned the “logic” of grouping his wife’s financial assets, who benefited from a donation contract from her mother, residing in the UK, for a property that was originally the family residence where the 70-year-old mother was born. They also clarified that the last asset acquired by Bouakkaz “was a free market housing unit (LPL) in the Chevalley area of Algiers, for which he paid half the cost, with the other half being covered by his wife’s loan from her parents and siblings.”

According to the defense, Bouakkaz is accused of having received valuable watches as gifts, which he allegedly sold. “However, these watches do not physically exist, and we do not know who gave them to him or who bought them from Bouakkaz,” the lawyers stated.

Regarding Merzak Rouijali, the man at the origin of the case and a friend of the accused, the lawyers reminded the court that this witness, absent from the hearing, “retracted all his statements before the judge,” before mentioning the cases for which he had been judged, convicted, and imprisoned. “After his release from prison, he miraculously became the personal driver and confidant of the head of the administrative district of Chéraga, and a year later, he found himself the owner of two dental clinics, without anyone questioning the origin of his wealth.”

The defense concluded by stating that Mohamed Bouakkaz “is a senior state official, who held sensitive positions throughout his 23 years of service. He has been the subject of numerous administrative and security investigations by the competent authorities, and all conclusions have been in his favor.” They added that “the proceedings against him in this case cast doubt on the work of all the agencies that had previously investigated him,” before declaring his innocence and calling for his acquittal.

However, the prosecutor merely read, without looking up, in a few seconds, her request: “A maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, along with a fine of one million dinars,” while the representative of the public treasury demanded 5 million dinars in compensation.