Senegal supporters refuse appeal after AFCON final jail sentences

Eighteen Senegalese supporters jailed after the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations final have refused to appeal their sentences, claiming they were judged without understanding the case against them.

The group, arrested in Morocco in connection with the final, received prison terms ranging from three months to one year.

However, in a move described by their lawyer as deliberate, they have chosen not to pursue a second judicial review.

Instead, they argue that the process itself was fundamentally flawed.

According to their defence counsel, Patrick Kabou, the decision not to appeal does not signal acceptance of the ruling.

Rather, it is a protest against what they see as serious breaches of their rights during the proceedings.

The controversy surrounding the case has shifted from the courtroom to the political arena, with claims that the defendants were denied adequate linguistic support and legal representation at key stages of the investigation.

Kabou said his clients only fully understood the accusations during a hearing on 12 February, when translations in Wolof were provided by Senegal’s Vice-Consul.

He maintains that during earlier interrogations before investigators and the Public Prosecutor, the supporters had neither legal counsel nor access to an interpreter in Wolof — the only language they speak fluently.

The situation, he argues, remained problematic during a subsequent hearing on 19 February.

Although a sworn translator was present, proceedings were conducted mainly in Arabic, which the defendants do not understand.

The lawyer says this left them unable to follow the arguments or effectively defend themselves.

“My clients believe this trial is not theirs because their rights have not been respected.”

He added: “Appealing this decision is tantamount to endorsing the blatant lack of a fair trial.”

In light of these concerns, the supporters have instructed their lawyer to focus on informing the public rather than lodging an appeal.

They describe themselves as “hostages” awaiting release by their “captors,” and reject what they see as the legitimacy of the verdict.

The case has intensified debate over due process and the rights of foreign nationals facing trial abroad, as the 18 men seek to challenge their convictions outside the traditional judicial framework.