In N’Djamena, a legal battle is unfolding as a man faces prosecution for allegedly selling the same parcel of land to multiple buyers, while also facing allegations of issuing death threats. The courtroom drama centers on charges of fraud and unlawful property seizure.
Proceedings expose complex property dispute
The case came before the N’Djamena Court of First Instance in a marathon four-hour hearing. Prosecutors allege the defendant collected payments ranging between 52 million and 99.5 million West African CFA francs from several buyers for a single property.
Heated exchanges highlight conflicting claims
During the proceedings, a sharp clash erupted between the defense team and the plaintiffs’ legal representatives. The plaintiffs are demanding full reimbursement of payments made by their clients, along with additional compensation for damages.
The defense argued that their client was unlawfully detained for over three months by intelligence services before being formally charged. They maintained that the land in question rightfully belongs to their client, who acts as a representative for his brothers, and claimed the property is not subject to any dispute. They further alleged that an uncle manipulated other family members into staking claims on the land after their brother’s passing, prompting buyers to seek refunds.
The plaintiffs’ lawyers characterized the defendant’s actions as clear fraud, though the defense vehemently denied this, asserting that no property was transferred dishonestly. They pointed to specific articles of the Chadian penal code (213 and 214), arguing they do not apply in this situation. The prosecution, however, pushed for a conviction, emphasizing that collecting large sums from multiple parties constitutes a criminal offense, and sought a 500,000 West African CFA franc fine.
With both sides vigorously pressing their cases, the judges have retired to deliberate. The defendant remains in custody at the Klessoum detention facility while awaiting the court’s decision. Notably, this is the second consecutive hearing on the same case after a previous session on June 1st also ended without a verdict.