At the Dakar criminal court, the case initially appeared to be a simple land dispute: a plot of land on public property, some bricks, a well, a water tank. But very quickly, on January 22, 2026, the proceedings took on a different dimension. The hearing was marked by a standoff between the Ouakam municipality, which was demanding the restoration of urban order, and an occupier who claimed to have been legally settled there for nearly 15 years.

The mayor of Ouakam, Abdou Aziz Guèye, is being prosecuted along with municipal employees for the destruction of property belonging to others and for complicity. The defendants, who appeared in court as free men, all denied the charges against them.

The plaintiff, Maguette Thiam, claims to have occupied the premises since 2009. At the time, he says, the area was just a vacant lot. He settled there, organized his business, and claims to pay 30,000 FCFA per month to the former mayor, Samba Bathily, who had an occupancy permit.

The new municipal team, for its part, sees primarily a site to be cleared. Opposite is the construction site of the future headquarters of US Ouakam, the neighborhood's iconic club. Authorization from the Ministry of Urban Planning was mentioned at the hearing.

The plaintiff, Maguette Thiam, stated: “Abdou Aziz asked me to leave the premises. I refused. He wasn't the one who had allocated the space to me. He summoned me to his office. I asked him to grant me a grace period or another location,” he explained. Two days later, according to him, individuals came and vandalized his property. The plaintiff is claiming 11 million CFA francs in damages. “I am the breadwinner for my family. Because of them, I can't even afford a cup of coffee,” the plaintiff declared.

The defendant Alpha Ba, presented as a collaborator of US Ouakam, denied any connection with the town hall: "I do not work for the town hall. I have never been to the site. I have not destroyed anything," he contested.

In turn, Malick Guissé, a municipal agent, stated that he was not in the group that was moving the belongings of the civil party.

The road maintenance worker, Adama Ndiaye, admits to having been on site. He describes the order as not administrative, but hierarchical: "It was our head of the road maintenance department who asked us to go see him. We had moved the bricks, which were dry," he recounted. The judge reminds him of the destruction of the well and the freshly cast bricks. Ndiaye retorts: "I'm a road maintenance worker. It was our supervisor who asked us to go."

The mayor takes responsibility…

As for the mayor, Abdou Aziz Guèye, he is not trying to defer to his staff. He is asserting his authority. "On several occasions, I asked him to leave the premises," he insisted, raising his voice. The mayor reiterated the building permit related to US Ouakam. "As mayor, it was I who sent them there to move the bricks," he stated. The mayor said he had seen a document mentioning the permit being granted by his predecessor, but no receipt for payment.

He also stated: "I admit that I never gave him any paperwork to leave the premises. And I don't know if the municipal services issued a written notice." He concluded: "I'm the one who sent those municipal agents since I am the legal entity."

Called as a witness, the bricklayer who was making the bricks that day accuses the defendants: "They were all on the scene and they are among those who destroyed the property," he explains.

The prosecutor's office reminds the Republic

In his remarks, the public prosecutor reiterated the principles of the rule of law. "Senegal is a Republic that adheres to established norms, and no one has the right to take the law into their own hands," the prosecutor declared. He condemned these elected officials, "surrounded by thugs," who were convinced they could do whatever they wanted. According to the prosecution, Maguette Thiam's occupation was covered by an occupancy permit obtained under the previous administration, and therefore legally operated. The new administration could certainly evict her, but only through proper channels. However, the prosecutor emphasized, no document was provided to justify a formal eviction. It was during this operation that the property was destroyed. According to the prosecutor, the culprits are beyond dispute. The perpetrators have been identified, and the mayor is being prosecuted for complicity as the instigator, the one who initiated the action.

The prosecutor requested a 3-month suspended sentence and a fine of 200,000 FCFA.

Defense attorney Ibrahima Mbengue took the opposite view. According to him, the focus was less on the truth than on symbolism. Why portray the mayor as an instigator? "He can only be considered civilly liable," he stated. He called for respect for municipal authority: "He is the guarantor of public order and security, the chief magistrate of his municipality," Mbengue reminded the court. Above all, he contested the very idea of an eviction. For the lawyer, it was simply a matter of clearing public space.

Regarding the lack of a written document, the lawyer downplays its significance: the summons can be verbal, or even made over a loudspeaker. "Why would it need to be in writing?" he insists, pointing out that Maguette Thiam went to the mayor's office and heard the request verbally.

In the end, Mr. Mbengue described it as a political battle played out in court. The lawyer argued for acquittal based on reasonable doubt.

The case is adjourned for deliberation until February 12, 2026.