انتصار كبير لسودانيات في محكمة الاستئناف الفرنسية العليا ضد بولا - نجاة

[مجدي مسعد حنفي]

الف مبروك ياخالد
وان شاءالله دايماً منصور
في الحق

[خالد الحاج]

حذفت المداخلة بناء علي رغبة الأصدقاء والإكتفاء بنشر حكم المحكمة وعدم الدخول في أي حوارات.

[align=left]Notification of public prosecution abroad
SUMMONDS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF PARIS

At the request of:
Madame Nagat; Mohamed Ali (spouse of AHMED BASHIR) born the15/06/53 in Omdurman, of Sudanese nationality, married, translator, address: 10 avenue Charles de Gaulle 78230 LE PECQ.
Monsieur Abdalla AHMED BASHIR born the 01/01/50 in Khartoum (Sudan) of Sudanese nationality, artist, painter, translator (former university professor) married, address 10 avenue Charles de Gaulle 78230 LE PECQ.
Advocate of the Paris bar: address
pigeon hole
Both designate my office as their correspondence address; I undersign the member of partnership appointed by the high court of Paris sitting in Paris and having residence there in the court house. Office of the criminal court process server.
The present document to:
Monsieur Khalid
I serve the present document to anyone as described in the attached document.
List of documents to provide
You will be tried by the criminal court. If you are found guilty the court may hold you liable to a criminal sanction. After the hearing you should appear before the office for enforcement of criminal sanctions to obtain personalised explanation of the decision rendered.
To allow the start of the enforcement of the decision.
Bring the following documents which serve as identification
o ID (your ID card, passport, immigration documents or renewal application)

o Proof of residence

 Electricity bill, rent receipt, telephone bill.
 If you are being hosted - confirmation document from your host.
Copy of your ID and rent receipt of your host.

o Means of payment (cheque book or bank card)

o Driving licence

o Employment contract, if you pursue a professional activity in this case:

 Employer certificate specifying your working hours
 Three latest pay slips.

o Training contract

 certificate from your training organisation specifying your hours

o Government support statements, if you are unemployed or if you are receiving income support.

 Exemption of tax notice.

o Other proof of income

With regard to the jurisdiction of the court
According to article 382 of the Code of Criminal Proceedings the court of the place of the offence has jurisdiction.
This has been acknowledged on the internet by the bailiff residing in Paris. The present criminal court therefore has jurisdiction.
The Facts
Mr AAB and his wife Mrs NMA are creators and managers of a website about Sudan “sudanforall”. As it shows in supporting document number 1 of the bailiff’s report dated 14 May 2008 page 2.
Sudanforall (sudan-forall.org) is the website of a society that the claimants created with a French/Sudanese friend Mr Hassan MUSA... It was registered under the laws of 1901 with the public office of Saint-Germain en-Laye in January 2006.
The discussion forum of the website united students, intellectuals, teachers, active supporters from Sudanese civil society, writers, musicians, artists... who represent the majority of the regional populations and political movements of Sudan. Even though the website was created less than three years ago it has already become the centre for political controversies, arts...
The magazine “Respect” published on the website is widely read in Sudan and used as a reference by several researchers. Approximately 60 writers, academics, lawyers, human rights activists and artists... Both Sudanese and foreigners participated since its first issue in November 2005 and until the last issue in March 2008.
They are targets of insult and defamation led by the manager and owner of a website focused on Sudan who is based in Holland, Mr KE since December 2007.
In fact, it was not until the 11th March 2008 that they were aware of the attack. He rarely visited the website. This was not the first attempt by the manager to damage the reputation of the website.
Through several defamatory accusations Mr KE owner and manager of the website sudan...
 Claims that the plaintiffs have stolen money for Sudanese refugees in France, forcing them to look for protection in other countries. He said in the first place that the money belonging to a society which he named... To then say it is the French branch of a Sudanese organisation for Human rights when in fact as shown in the bank statements, the association does not receive any aids from either the French State or nongovernmental organisations

 Claims that the claimants created the website sudanforall for the purpose of receiving funds from nongovernmental organisations which went into their own pocket.

 Claims that the claimant lied about the real expenses of the website which was to take away the donations from the members of the forum.

 Draws caricatures made up of a number of sketches to say that he lives in a ménage a trios (with their friend, co founder of the society), saying that the woman is disloyal to her naive husband. The drawings talks of extreme vulgarity. He sometimes used personal photos of the plaintiffs which he takes from their profiles in the forum and uses them in his sketches.

 Makes several other insults and lies about them.

It should be noted that Mr AAB asked to be called Abdalla Bola. (See supporting document 11).
II. Arguments
A) On Public Defamation
Defamation is defined under Article 29 of the Act of 29 July 1881 as “any allegation or imputation, which carries out an attack on the honour or the respect of the person or body to whom it has been attributed”. The main elements of this offence are:
-a precise allegation is made
-the determined person, even if they are not expressly named, can be clearly identified
-attacks their honour or their respect
-the nature of the defamation is public
The defamation bears an attack on the integrity and the respectability of a person, by implying precisely:
In this particular case, the affidavit made out by a bailiff on the 9th April 2008 established the libellous remarks described very precisely in the following extracts:
Document No.5 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 9 on 11, the two last paragraphs. Item No.118. Posted on the 23rd February 2008, 3:22 PM by Khalid Elhaj.
Document No.6 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 10 on 15 Item No.145. Posted on the 3rd March 2008 at 5:56 PM, by Khalid Elhaj.
Document No.7 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 8 on 12 Item No.162. Posted on the 11th March 2008 at 2:39 PM, by Khalid Elhaj.
Document No.7 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 10 on 12 Item No.164. Posted on the 11th March 2008 at 4:02 PM , by Khalid Elhaj.
Document No.8 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 4/12, last line and page 5/12. Item No.168. Posted on the 13th March 2008 at 10:41 PM, by Khalid Elhaj.
Document No.10 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 10 on 16. Item No. 204. Posted on the 23rd March 2008 at 9:05 AM, by Khalid Elhaj.
In the framework of this violation, the guilty intention will always be presumed according to an unbroken line of precedents (Case. Crim. 29 Nov 2004: Bull. crim. No.382), the author of the defamation has an obligation of producing evidence of good faith (Case. crim. 9 Dec. 1997: Dr Pénal 1998).
In matters of defamation, bad faith is presumed. (Trib. inst., Puteaux, 28th September 1999 Gaz. Pal., Rec. 2000, jur p.22)
An official report was established on the 9 April 2008 by Master Yann JEZEQUEL, bailiff.
He points out in his official report:
“There is an older incident of which you can know the distressing details, in telephoning of the veterans of Paris. They acted by naming an organisation for the help of refugees, of which Nagad and Bola, pushed by Nagat, seized for themselves under the pretext of organisation and institutionalism…etc. Then, they stole all that was in this organisation, which, of course, was damaging, and consequently; the refugees were roaming in the neighbouring countries searching for new asylum.
They (Abdalla Bola, Nagat Mohamed Ali and Hassan Musa), my friend, have a history with a smell perceptible to some kilometres. Their smell is certainly not a product of Yves Saint Laurent.”
Document No.5 of the bailiff’s affidavit, page 9 on 11, the last two paragraphs. Item No.118. Posted on the 23rd February 2008, 3:22 PM by Khalid Elhaj.
These remarks contain clearly, from the author, the imputation of doing precisely what causes significant prejudice to the Claimants and carries direct damage to their honour and their respect and since that time it has been non-prescribed.
These remarks demonstrate well the will of Mr El Hassan to tarnish the image of the Claimants.
The bailiff has also noted:
CARTOON
Left speech bubble: “For her, he represents the ego, but it will all be done in a temporary way which looks like an orgasm at the moment of climax, in a Baritone voice [This phrase is deliberately ambiguous].
In the centre: The photo of Hassan Musa on a drawn body that shows his buttocks marked with lipstick.
Right speech bubble: “It’s a style which goes well with the goals of our democratic Forum [the Democratic Forum and this website sudan-forall.org]”
Document No.6 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 10 on 15 Item No.145. Posted on the 3rd March 2008 at 5:56 PM, by Khalid Elhaj.
These remarks clearly contain on the part of their author the imputation of doing precisely what causes significant prejudice to the Claimants and carries direct damage to their honour and their respect and since that time it has been non-prescribed.
These remarks demonstrate well the will of Mr El Hassan to tarnish the image of the Claimants.
Always in the Official report of the 8th April:
CARTOON
Nagad [Nagat] Anonymous International, for the broadcasting of the deception and lies.
The best time for receiving my calls is at 7:00 AM.
Our motto is: We treat our hangover without raw tripe.
[In Sudanese tradition, eating raw tripe in the morning is considered a remedy for hangovers. It is a very serious imputation for a Sudanese woman]
Document No.7 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 3 on 12 Item No.155. Posted on the 7th March 2008 at 9:24 AM by Khalid Elhaj
These remarks clearly contain on the part of their author the imputation of doing precisely what causes significant prejudice to the Claimants and carries direct damage to their honour and their respect and since that time it has been non-prescribed.
These remarks demonstrate well the will of Mr El Hassan to tarnish the image of the Claimants.
Always in the Official report of the 9th April 2008
IMAGE
Devil’s Speech Bubble: “Oh Bula. Is it true? Nagad? [Nagat] My brother, it’s this naivety which made me fall into this trap.”
The transcription N.G.O is and English acronym for Non Governmental Organisation.
Document No.7 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 8 on 12 Item No.162. Posted on the 11th March 2008 at 2:39 PM, by Khalid Elhaj.
These remarks clearly contain on the part of their author the imputation of doing precisely what causes significant prejudice to the Claimants and carries direct damage to their honour and their respect and since that time it has been non-prescribed.
These remarks demonstrate well the will of Mr El Hassan to tarnish the image of the Claimants.
Indeed, a female drunkard in Sudanese society is very badly regarded and lesser respected.
Always in the Official Report of the 9th April 2008,
“I will take my time to come back onto the subject of the organisation, because there are many things to say and to remark.
But staying with this question:
The greatly learned Hassan Musa has asked, by writing, in an item titled “reflection on the support of the site”, the support of the members (of the Forum).
How much does the site cost yearly?
What are the amounts that you have received from members?
At my knowledge the costs are limited in this field and do not exceed the 15 dollars annually. Then, coming to the housing, which has not gone past 60 US dollars a year. As for the graphic design and the work technique, they are assured by some volunteers.
Therefore the annual cost is 75 dollars.
Nagat Mohamed Ali, I am a liar, make me be quiet by showing me your documents. Publish the sums of money you have received and say how you have spent them, honourable woman.
Document No.7 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 10 on 12 Item No.164. Posted on the 11th March 2008 at 4:02 PM , by Khalid Elhaj.
These remarks clearly contain on the part of their author the imputation of doing precisely (accusation of theft of the contributions from the members of the Claimant’s association) what causes significant prejudice to the Claimants and carries direct damage to their honour and their respect and since that time it has been non-prescribed.
In effect, like the display of the lifted notes of the association, the Claimants receive none of the aid of the Non Governmental Organisations.
These remarks demonstrate well the will of Mr El Hassan to tarnish the image of the Claimants.
Always in the Official Report of the 9th April 2008,
CARTOON
I will come back, Bola, on the subject of the organisation. I am patient and I have all my time devoted to you. I hope God allows you good health so they don’t say tomorrow that Khalid El Haj killed them.
High Right: Photos of Bola and Nagat Mohamed Ali.
The Transcription: N.G.O is the English acronym for Non Governmental Organisation.
Comment in Arabic: Memory of History and of Justice.
Document No.8 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 4/12, last line and page 5/12. Item No.168. Posted on the 13th March 2008 at 10:41 PM, by Khalid Elhaj.
These remarks clearly contain on the part of their author the imputation of doing precisely (accusation of links with non Governmental Organisations to fund their association) what causes significant prejudice to the Claimants and carries direct damage to their honour and their respect and since that time it has been non-prescribed.
These remarks demonstrate well the will of Mr El Hassan to tarnish the image of the Claimants.
Always in the Official report of the 9th April 2008,
To begin, I would like to rephrase the questions that remain unanswered:
Quotation:
The learned Hassan Musa has asked, by writing, in an item titled “Reflection on the support of the site”, the support of the members.
How much does the site cost yearly?
What are the amounts that you have received from members?
At my knowledge the costs are limited in this field and do not exceed the 15 dollars annually. Then, there is the housing, which has not gone past 60 US dollars a year. As for the graphic design and the work technique, some volunteers assure them.
Therefore, the annual cost is 75 dollars.
The thieves work in the general interest.
Document No.9 of the Bailiff's affidavit, Page 2/16. Item No.185. Posted on the 16th March 2008 at 2:10 PM by Khalid Elhaj.
The word "Honourable" addressed at a woman has aim of achieving the opposite effect, when used in Sudanese society; moreover, in all the societies in Muslim culture, it has a particular connotation: a lack of chastity.
These remarks clearly contain on the part of their author the imputation of doing precisely (accusation of theft of the member's contributions to the Claimant's society) what causes significant prejudice to the Claimants and carries direct damage to their honour and their respect and since that time it has been non-prescribed.
These remarks demonstrate well the will of Mr El Hassan to tarnish the image of the Claimants.
Always in the Official report of the 9th April 2008,
The thieves work in the general interest.
To begin, I would like to rephrase the questions that remain unanswered:
The greatly learned Hassan Musa has asked, by writing, in an item titled “reflection on the support of the site”, the support of the members (of the Forum).
How much does the site cost yearly?
What are the amounts that you have received from members?
At my knowledge the costs are limited in this field and do not exceed the 15 dollars annually. Then, coming to the housing, which has not gone past 60 US dollars a year. As for the graphic design and the work technique, they are assured by some volunteers.
Therefore the annual cost is 75 dollars.
Nagat Mohamed Ali, I am a liar, make me be quiet by showing me your documents. Publish the sums of money you have received and say how you have spent them, honourable woman.
Document No.10 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 10 on 16. Item No. 204. Posted on the 23rd March 2008 at 9:05 AM, by Khalid Elhaj.
Mr Khalid Elhaj says in extract that appears on this page: Regarding the graphic design (…), the volunteers assure them.
These remarks clearly contain on the part of their author the imputation of doing precisely (accusation of theft of members' contributions from the Claimants' site) what causes significant prejudice to the Claimants and carries direct damage to their honour and their respect and since that time, it has been non-prescribed.
These remarks demonstrate well the will of Mr El Hassan to tarnish the image of the Claimants.
Always in the Official report of the 9th April 2008,
"Mohamed Elmekki Ibrahim, Dr Bola and "the only eye of Oum Salih"."
Author: Khalid Elhaj
Number of posts: 230. No. of versions: 10,727.
[In reading the subject, one understands that Mr Elhaj references an article written by the Sudanese poet Mohamed Elmekki Ibrahim, published in a daily Sudanese newspaper and titled "Abdalla Bola the Sudanese giant". One understands, as well, that he uses the Sudanese proverb "the only eye of Oum Salih" to say that Mr Ahmed Bashir, known as Bola, can only speak on one subject, that is the question of Sudanese identity].
It is about the title of subject No.9 on the list of subjects addressed on the forum of the site sudaniyat.org http://sudanyat.org/vb/forum, which pulled the translated extracts here. This title is at the top of all the pages of items 2 to 10 of the Bailiff's affidavit.
Item No.1 of the Bailiff's affidavit, page 4 on 5.
Abdalla Ahmed Bashir (Abdalla Bola) is a writer and celebrated painter from Sudan. In reference to the article to the article Abdalla Bulla, a Sudanese Giant, Mr Khalid Elhaj means to say that he is not a giant; simply that he is a thief.
One post he dedicated to his allegations. He mocks the importance that Abdalla Bola gives to the question of Sudanese identity. Yet, it is a question that links to the ethnic conflicts and wars, which have devastated and still devastate Sudan. In 1984, Mr Ahmed Bashir argued in a doctorate thesis about Surbonne concerning the question of cultural identity in Africa, using the case of Sudanese identity as an example.
In the official report on the 9thApril 2008, the bailiff notes:
"Nagat Mohamed Ali is a woman who shows maliciousness and stench."
A subtitle that figures on post No.188.
Posted on the 21 March 2008 at 6:15 PM by Khalid Elhaj Item No.9 of the Bailiff's affidavit, page 5/16.
All the remarks are extremely serious.
The offence of defamation is characterised in all these extracts, which suggests that Mr El Hassan acting in defamatory way towards the Claimants. The claimants have been accused of:
- Steeling money that was intended for Sudanese refugees in France, forcing the refugees to search for refuge in other countries.
- Creating their association (Sudan for All) to be funded by Non Governmental Organisations, and that the money is taken by them.
- Lying about the expenses of their site so that they could pick up donations from members of the forum.
- The defendant has also drawn, in caricatures, a number of sketches to suggest that he lives in a threesome (with their friend, co founder of the society), also suggesting that the woman is disloyal to her naive husband.
The arrangements of the Act of the 29th July 1881, which forecast and restrict defamation, do not only protect the persons under their moral consideration, but also in their professional consideration. (Crim. 2nd March 1978, Bull Crim. No.82)
Public Defamation is punishable (12,000 euros fine and 6 months imprisonment, or one of the two penalties) when it is carried out, notably, by visual communication (Articles 23 and 32 of the Act of 1881), the same applies if it is done under a dubious form or if it aims at a person not expressly nominated, from the time that was identified and was possible to terminate it's use.
Public defamation is an intentional offence.
The defamatory remarks were made on these dates: 23rd February 2008, 3rd March 2008, 11th March 2008, 13th March 2008, 21st March 2008.
This why the Claimants registered a complaint against X for defamation, an offence under Articles 29 Paragraph 1 and 32 Paragraph 1 of the Act of the 29th July 1881, and Articles 93-3 paragraph 2 of the Act of the 29 July 1982 and is made up of civil parties.
The prejudice that results from the mentioned defamations against the Claimants is serious because the material is moral.
They are willing to settle as civil parties and base a claim for compensation on the prejudices suffered.
Because of these prejudices, the compensation should not be considered less than €5000.
IV. Costs of procedure
The terms of Article 543 of the Penal Procedure Code:
"Applicable in front of a Police tribunal are Articles 475-1 to 486 and 749 to 762 concerning the costs of justice and expenses, the restitution of the items placed under the hand of justice and the from of judgements.
Notwithstanding, the dispositions of Article 480-1 are only applicable for fines in the 5th class."
Mr Khalid Elhassan is liable to pay a sum of €3000 under Article 475-1 of the Penal Procedure Code.
ON THESE GROUNDS
To say and establish that Mr Khalid Elhassan is liable for the offence of public defamation under Articles 29 paragraph 1 and 32 paragraph 1 of the Act of the 29th July 1881, 93-3 paragraph 2 of Act of the 29th July 1982;
To state which law, on the penal penalty,
On the summons of the public minister:
On the civil interests;
To declare Mrs Nagat Mohamed Ali (ép. Ahmed Bashir) and Mr Abdalla Ahmed Bashir acceptable and well founded in their claim;
In compensation, for the prejudice they have suffered, to sentence Mr Khalid Elhassan to pay the Claimants the sum of 5000 Euros with interest calculated on the day a decision has been reached.
For Mr Khalid to face summons to stop the disputed passages identified by
Document No.5 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 9 on 11, the two last paragraphs. Item No.118. Posted on the 23rd February 2008, 3:22 PM by Khalid Elhaj.
Document No.6 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 10 on 15 Item No.145. Posted on the 3rd March 2008 at 5:56 PM, by Khalid Elhaj.
Document No.7 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 8 on 12 Item No.162. Posted on the 11th March 2008 at 2:39 PM, by Khalid Elhaj.
Document No.7 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 10 on 12 Item No.164. Posted on the 11th March 2008 at 4:02 PM , by Khalid Elhaj.
Document No.8 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 4/12, last line and page 5/12. Item No.168. Posted on the 13th March 2008 at 10:41 PM, by Khalid Elhaj.
Document No.10 of the Bailiff’s affidavit, page 10 on 16. Item No. 204. Posted on the 23rd March 2008 at 9:05 AM, by Khalid Elhaj.
Posted on the 21st March 2008 at 6:15 PM by Khalid Elhaj Item No. 9 of the Bailiff's affidavit, page 5/16.
Of the Bailiff's affidavit on the 9th April 2008, and under obligation of 200 Euros per day after a decision has been reached.
To put in place a publication, for the duration of one month after the decision has been made, on the internet site sudanyat.org:
To say, that this publication must be placed at the top of the reception page of the website www.sudanyat.org, on the outside of every promotional insert and without any added mention of anything else, in a wide frame and a third party in the height of the "screen page", in size 14 bold and the font "Times New Roman", the title must be copied in bold letters and in size 14.
For the condemned to pay them the sum of 3000 Euros under Article 475-1 of the Penal Procedure Code as well as the legal expenses.
To order the temporary enforcement, of the decision when it is reached, notwithstanding all the modes of appeal.
TO BE CONFIRMED.
LIST OF ITEMS attached to the Tribunal Case:
Official Report of the 9th April 2008 and the French translation
Official Report of the 14th May 2008 and the French translation
Receipts
Gifts to members of the forum
Bank statements of the association[/align]

[خالد الحاج]

حذفت المداخلة بناء علي رغبة الأصدقاء والإكتفاء بنشر حكم المحكمة وعدم الدخول في أي حوارات.

[align=left]Conclusions of the Defence: Summary

Pleas to the Court

I) On the nullity of the Summons:

Article 390-1 of the Code of Penal Procedure.

The second paragraph of this article itemizes the elements that must be aimed at the summons.
These elements notably depend on:

- The facts by which to sue
- The piece of law that seals these facts
- The Court used, the place, the date and the time of the audience

First Point: the Facts by which to Sue

The summons of the Claimants leads to confusion of a kind that means it is impossible for the Defendant to use his rights.
Effectively, the Claimants have listed the precise facts at the beginning of the act and the same list in the section "by these motives".
But in the body of the act, the other facts, which are not joined to this list, are added:

- Item No.7, Post No.155 (Page 8 and 9 of the Summons)
- Item No.9, Post No.185 (Page 12 of the Summons)
- Item No.1, Post No.230 (Page 13 and 14 of the Summons)
- Item No.9, Post No.188 (Page 14 of the Summons)

The facts integral to the alleged offence must be aimed clearly. However the confusion of the facts in the Summons is unjustified and against Article 390-1 para. 2.

Second Point: the texts cited

The summons aims at Articles 23 and 32 of the Act of 29th July 1881 but it is not precise in its content: which prohibits defamation and provides the penalties.
Article 23 of this Act prohibits defamation.
It is Article 29 of the same act that criminalises defamation.
In addition, the Claimants made a legal error when they mentioned the penalty of 6 months imprisonment (page 15 of the Summons).
This is not mentioned in the text that lays out the penalty.
Article 32 para. 2 of the Act of 29th July 1881 makes no provision for a fine of €12,000.
The missing of a legal basis is illustrated here, and the mention of imprisonment does not exist.
Elsewhere, for the costs of procedure, the Claimants cite Article 543 of the Code of Penal Procedure. This is applicable for procedures in front of the Police Tribunals.

This Summons does not carry out the necessary measures provided by Article 390-1 of the Code of Penal Procedure, therefore it must be considered void.
II) On the delay

Article 65 of the Act of 1881 makes provision for prescription of three months starting from the date of publication.
The prescription is broken by every act of proceedings.
For Item 5, Post 118. This was posted on 23rd February 2008.
The action concerning this item is prescribed since 23rd May 2008.
Yet the direct summons was introduced on 2nd June 2008, that is after 23rd May.
Therefore, it cannot be invoked by the Claiments.

Facts and Procedures

A description of the background of the Claimants and of the Defendant is given.

III) On the incompatibility with French Jurisdiction:

For French jurisdictions to be compatible, it must constitute an infraction that has been committed in France. This defined by Article 113-2 of the Penal Code.
It states the offence must have a connection with France.
In this case the Defendant is Dutch and resides in the Netherlands.
The site on which the facts were published was in Arabic not in French.
The facts concern Sudan.
The only link with France is that Claimants live there.
This element is not sufficient; therefore, the French authorities are not compatible with this infraction.

IV) On the absence of Public Defamation

Definition of defamation under Article 29 of the 1881 Act is provided here.
The key to defamation is to do something that in personal precise and harmful.
Defamation is only punishable if it is against a victim who can be well named or can be well identified.
Finally, it must affect the honour or reputation of the victim.
The affect of honour is considered objectively by the court. The opinion of the victim is irrelevant. (cases are cited supporting this)
As a result the French authorities will value the affect of honour and consideration by French standards and not foreign standards, in this case Sudanese standards.

A law exists, that states that it is legitimate to criticise considerations of public activity (political, commercial, etc).
Irony and comedy are also able to soften the character of defamation. (Cases are cited to support these points)
The Claimants have assumed that the remarks are defamatory.

Regarding Item No.6, Post No.145:

The first phrase, in the cartoon of a donkey, is ambiguous. It does not set out to affect, precisely, the honour or consideration of the parties.
The second photo is of Hassan Musa. He is a third party in this case and the defamations must concern the Claimants, not third parties.

The final speech bubble: This cartoon does not past legitimate criticism and nothing defamatory is mentioned about the Claimants.

This post cannot be considered to coinstitute the offence of defamation.

Regarding Item No.7, Post No. 162:

This cartoon contains no precise indication of anything that could affect the honour of the Claimants.
No woman in the picture is drunk. Drunkenness is not considered to affect the someone's honour and result in defamation.
Therefore, this cartoon does not constitute defamation.

Regarding Item No.7, Post No.164

This item contains an allegation of theft. However it simply asking questions of the organization.
Therefore, this is not defamation.

Regarding Item No.8, Post No.168

This is the cartoon with photos of the Claimants and the inscription NGO.
The claimants do not explain why this is defamatory or how it damages their honour.
The collection of funds from NGOs is not defamatory.
Therefore, this is not defamation.Regarding Item No.10, Post No.204

In this item, Mr. El-Hassan asks questions concerning the misappropriation of funds of the organization but he does not accuse the Claimants.
Therefore, this is not defamation.
Regarding Item No.7, Post No.155

This post does not mention, amongst the facts, anything that constitutes defamation at the start or end of the act. No precise defamation is mentioned here.

This cartoon does not go past the limits of defamation, it takes into consideration public matters, such as the collection of funds for Sudanese refugees.

The expression "we treat our hangover with raw guts" does not qualify the Claimants to be drunkards.
It is a reproach and a criticism not mentioning anything that does precise harm to the Claimants.

Therefore, this is not defamatory.

Regarding Item No.9, Post No.185

The Defendant does not accuse the Claimants of the precise defamation of theft, he asks the questions and demands the evidence.Therefore, this is not defamation.

Regarding Item No.1

The article is titled "Abdallah Bola, a Sudanese Giant". Criticising a person and saying he only speaks on one subject is not defamatory. It does not affect the honour or reputation of that person. Therefore, this remark should not be considered defamatory.

Regarding Item No.9, Post No.188

This item describes Nagat Mohamed Ali as bad and states that she has a stench.
Defamation must precisely affect the honour of the victim. However to call someone bad is not considered a precise attack on the honour of the Claimants.
Therefore, this is not defamation.

On the list of facts attributed to the Claimants:

List of the claims by Mrs. Nagat Mohamed Ali and Mr. Abdalla Ahmed Bashir.

As already stated the Defendant does not accuse the Claiments of theft of funds. He asked for the information and documents concerning the use of funds.

To be financed by a NGO is not considered to affect the honour or reputation of the Claimants.

The Defendant does not accuse the parties of hijacking funds.

Finally, the accusation that they were living in a threesome: The Claimants were not mentioned in the extract at any time. Therefore, none of the facts and evidence that the Claimants use is precise and harmful enough to constitute the offence of public defamation.

V) On the good faith of the Defendant

Defamation is in principle an intentional offence. The defendant must be aware that they are affecting the honour and reputation of others.
Article 35 of the 1881 Act, states that there will be a presumption of bad faith in defamation.

However, the Defendant can prove good faith if they can show a legitimate aim, a serious investigation, caution with their expression or an absence of animosity.

Regarding legitimate aim:

The defendant was a member of the site, who participated in debates. His viewpoints contradicted those of the Claimants. It was the Claimants who would not accept his views and the declared the Defendants membership void.

As a result the Defendant created another site on which he could express his views and criticism towards the Claimants. His aim was simply to make sure the funds were destined for Sudanese refugees.
His aim was, therefore, completely legitimate.

Regarding the serious investigation:

Irony and comedic purposes lesson defamation.
There exists, elsewhere, a law where it is legal to criticise a public activity. (Case cited)
The cartoons raised by the Claimants are not of a defamatory nature. It is legitimate to criticise public activities. Moreover, the cartoons had the aim of being comic and ironic.
The Defendant believes in free speech, legitimate criticism and humour.
On the site, the other members published the most serious cartoons. The Claimants did not remove them. The Defendant had no objection to these publications, permitted by the site administrators.
It was considered part of the debate and was, therefore, a serious enquiry.

On the caution of expression

The cartoons and publications are not in anyway shocking towards the Claimants, they were all done respectably
The most serious is the allegation that Mrs. Nagat was bad.
It does not exceed the limits of criticism or humour. The defendant was therefore cautious in his expressions.

On the absence of animosity

Animosity consists of aggressive behaviour. The actions of the Defendant did not have the aim of harming the honour or reputation of the Claimants. He only made his publications for humourous purposes and to ask for information. In the context of the debate, there were conflicting views. Therefore, the Defendant was acting without animosity.

From this, we can see that the good faith of Mr. El-Hassan is well characterised.

By these Motives

It is asked of the Court:

- To state the Summons to be void
- To say the dictated facts
- To say that the French Jurisdictions are incompatible
- To discharge Mr. El-Hassan of Public Defamation
- To condemn the Claimants to pay him €3000 under Article 475-1 of the Code of Penal Procedure, as well as legal costs[/align]

[mime]

مبروك يا خال

واصل الكفاح
فالحق يعلو وإن تأخر

[أبوبكر عباس]

تحياتي للجميع،،
في البداية داير أقول:
من حق الأخ خالد طرح ما يشاء من أسئلة بخصوص كيفية إدارة "المنظمة السودانية لحقوق الإنسان فرع باريس" بصفتة الشخصية و ارجو أن لا يكون منتدي سودانيات طرف في هذه القضية....
الشئ التاني الطرف الاخر (الاخت نجاة) بمنتدي سودان فور ال بتقول في كلام مختلف بخصوص الحكم الصادر....
و عشان مسالة الحكم تكون واضحة بالنسبة لنا:
أرجو من الاخ خالد أو اي عضو من سودانيات متمكن من اللغة الفرنسية أن يقوم بترجمة الأحكام الصادره بخصوص هذه القضية من المحاكم الفرنسية (حكم فبراير و اكتوبر).

[خالد الحاج]

حذفت المداخلة بناء علي رغبة الأصدقاء والإكتفاء بنشر حكم المحكمة وعدم الدخول في أي حوارات.

[Ali agab]

الاستاذ خالد الحاج

تحية واحترام

اشكرك علي التفهم،

لا انكر تعاطفي بل حبي الشديد لعبد الله بولا ونجاة، وطالما انك تتفهم ذلك بانه لا يؤثر علي ما نتخذه

من مواقف ،فانني اقول لك مناصحا، في امر" انتصار سودانيات" يجب ان تسعي للخوض في ذلك

بطريقة لا تجعلها معركة موقع سودانيات ضد نجاة وبولا، هذا من حيث المبدا واظنك لاتختلف معي

في ذلك. المسالة الثانية هي انني مازلت اطالبك ممارسة قدر من الهدوء وضبط النفس، فانا لا

اتصور ان معركتك هي تحطيم صورة نجاة وبولا في ضمير العالمين، فانت تطرح اسئلة متعلقة

بالعمل العام، والعمل العام مكان مشروع لاي نوع من الاسئلة .

ان الطريقة التي تقوم بها نتشر موقفك عبر هذا الاعلام الواسع للرسائل اري ان فيه bite of

too much، كل ما اريد ان اقوله هو المطالبة بان نرتقي الي مستوي مشروعية الاسئلة في

العمل العام، ومن هو المطالب بالاجابة عليها، هذه امور موضوعية يمكن الخوض فيها بكل هدوء.

اما مسالة نشر ماكتبته انا في سودانفوراول هنا فلا مانع لدي، واما بخصوص امر الايميل المتعلق

بالفصل من الحزب الشيوعي فانا لم اعني سوي الاختصار والمفيد، لان ذلك الامر لم

يكن يعنيني في شيء.

لك مني خالص الامنيات

[Ali agab]

النص اعلاه هو ما كتبته في بوست الاستاذة نجاة محمد علي في موقع سودان فوراول، انقله علي حسب طلب الاستاذ خالد الحاج.

الاستاذة نجاة

تحية واحترام

لقد تلقيت عدة رسائل من الاستاذ خالد الحاج، عن طريق الايميل مرسلة الي كل عضوية سودانيان والي عدد كبير جدا من الاشخاص تخطرهم بانه قد كسب دعواه ضد بولا ونجاة، وان محكمة الاستئناف قد ايدت حقه في الادعاءات التي نشرها، هذا اضافة الي رسالة بريدية ارسلت هذا الصباح تخطر الكافة بانه قد تم فصله من الحزب الشيوعي عبر الهاتف.

ما يهم في هذا الامر هو ان الرسالة قد ذكرت الاتي :

( في فبراير الماضي أصدرت محكمة باريس الابتدائية قرارها في صالحي في القضية المرفوعة من عبد الله بولا ونجاة محمد علي ضد خالد الحاج وسودانيات. وأمنت المحكمة في حيثيات قرارها علي أن المدعيين كانوا يشغلون "عمل عام" وبالتالي فهم غير محصنون ضد التساؤلات فيما يتعلق بتفاصيل عملهم هذا. وأن هذه التساؤلات المطروحة من جانبنا لا تدخل في باب "التشهير" ).

حيث يشير الي ان حيثيات الحكم قد امنت علي حقه في الادعاءات التي نشرها، والحيثيات المنشورة هنا لا تشير الي ذلك وانما تتحدث عما يعرف في لغة القانون" بشطب العريضة شكلا" وهو يختلف عن "شطب الدعوي" لان شطب الدعوي يكون بعد الفصل في القضية من حيث الموضوع والوصول الي قرار نهائي حولها، اما شطب العريضة شكلا لاينفذ الي موضوع الدعوي باي حال ومن حق المدعي ان يقوم بقيد دعوي جديدة، لان ذلك الشطب يعتبر قانونا ليس مُنهٍ للخصومة.

القول بان المحكمة قد امنت في حيثياتها علي ذلك الحديث مقروء مع ما اوردته الاستاذة نجاة في الحيثيات اعلاه يجعل ما اورده الاستاذ خالد الحاج ليس صحيحا وفيه خلط ، لايهمني ان كان مقصودا او غير، لكن المهم اهو اعلان الرغبة في التحرش.

حيث جاء في الرسالة الاتي: ( بعد صدور القرار تحركت جموع من الأصدقاء المشتركين ... كان دافعهم الأساسي وهدفهم "إيقاف الأمر عند ذلك الحد وأن أترك بولا نجاة في حالهم " ... وكان بعض هؤلاء مدفوعون من قبل بولا ونجاة للتدخل في الأمر ، لم يقولوها لي صراحة ولكن الأمر لم يكن يحتاج إلي فطنة لمعرفته ).

ان ارسال رسائل تحتوي علي هذه الاستنتاجات، اري ان فيها قدر عال من التحرش وهو ما استنكره واذا كان للاستاذ خالد الحاج قضية يريد ان يقنع الكافة بعدالتها عليه ان يبتعد عن هذا الاسلوب، الذي لن يقلل من قدر نجاة وبولا اواحترام الناس لهما بقدر ما يضعف حجته.

كما ارجو من خالد الحاج ان يعتبرني ضمن اولئك المتصلين علي الملا حين ادعوه الان الي تبين الجوانب الايجابية في الاتصالات التي يقول انه قد تلقاها، والتفكير في مضمونها، دون ان يجهد نفسه في الاستنتاج بان نجاة وبولا هم من طالبوهم بذلك، هذا دونما حرج عليه في الاستمرار في رفع اسئلته والاستمرار في طرحها، ملتزما بالكف عن شخصنة الامر الي هذه الدرجة من التحرش، وبذلك يجدني اول من يقف معه في حقه في طرح اسئلته مهما كانت حدتها.

التحية للاستاذ عبد الله بولا ونجاة، واقول لهما...

تظللان دائما في علوكما الشاهق، محفوفان وزهرتيكما اليانعتين، بالحب والاحترام

علي عجب

[احمد سالم]

هذا ما قالته السيدة نجاة محمد على فى منبرها (فوراول) و يبدو ان الكرة الان فى ملعب خالد الحاج


ـ إن هذه العبارة التي وردت في موقع سودانيات على لسان خالد الحاج:

"أصدرت محكمة الاستئناف العليا قرارها الأخير..
وقد أمنت المحكمة علي حقي وحق سودانيات فيما طرحناه من أسئلة بخصوص المنظمة السودانية لحقوق الإنسان فرع باريس."

لا تمت للحقيقة بأي صلة، وأن منطوق الحكم الذي أمامكم لا يتضمنها مطلقاً. علاوةً على ذلك، أنه لم ترد في نص الحكم عبارة "المنظمة السودانية لحقوق الإنسان فرع باريس" نهائياً، فالمحكمة لم تنظر أساساً في موضوع الدعوى، وإنما نظرت إليها من ناحية إجرائية، لا غير. كما أن محكمة الاستئناف بباريس لا تُسمى "محكمة الاستئناف العليا"، وإن محكمة الاستئناف لا تتخذ عدة قرارات حتى يكون لها قرار أول وقرار أخير. وإذا ما كان هناك قرار أخير، فإنه لا يعود لمحكمة الاستئناف، وإنما لمحكمة النقض إذا ما قرر الشاكي ذلك.
كما أن هذه القضية مرفوعة ضد خالد الحاج، الذي يشير إليه نص الحكم بعبارة "المُدّعَى عليه"، وليس ضد موضع سودانيات. وبالتالي، فإن عبارات مثل "محامي سودانيات" و"القضية المرفوعة ضد سودانيات" لا أساس لها من الصحة.

إن هذه العبارة التي وردت أيضاً من خالد الحاج:

"في فبراير الماضي أصدرت محكمة باريس الابتدائية قرارها في صالحي في القضية المرفوعة من عبد الله بولا ونجاة محمد علي ضد خالد الحاج وسودانيات."

لا تمت للحقيقة بأي صلة. فكما أشرتُ من قبل، أن المحكمة نظرت في الدعوى من ناحية إجرائية ولم تنظر في موضوعها. وقد رفضت المحكمة في قرارها الذي أمامكم طلبه بالتعويض عن أتعابه، في عبارة واضحة تجدونها في الحكم الذي أمامكم (السطرين الأخيرين من الصفحة الخامسة): "تعلن المحكمة عدم مقبولية طلب خالد الحاج بموجب المادة 475-1 من قانون الإجراء الجنائي"، كما أشارت المحكمة أيضاً في حكمها إلى أن التعويض عن الأتعاب "لا يمكن منحه لأي شخص آخر سوى الجهة الشاكية"، بموجب نفس المادة.

أيضاً، هذه العبارة التي كتبها خالد الحاج لم ترد مطلقاً في نص الحكم الذي أمامكم:

"وأمنت المحكمة في حيثيات قرارها علي أن المدعيين كانوا يشغلون "عمل عام" وبالتالي فهم غير محصنون ضد التساؤلات فيما يتعلق بتفاصيل عملهم هذا. وأن هذه التساؤلات المطروحة من جانبنا لا تدخل في باب "التشهير" ."

إن هذه العبارة ليست سوى محض اختراعٍ منه.


نجاة

[خالد الحاج]

حذفت المداخلة بناء علي رغبة الأصدقاء والإكتفاء بنشر حكم المحكمة وعدم الدخول في أي حوارات.

[Ali agab]

كانت المداخلة التي انزلتها اعلاه قد اشرت واستندت فيها الي فحوي منطوق الحكم حسب ما اوردته استاذة نجاة محمد علي بالنص ادناه.

ضد التلفيق والكذب: صورة الحكم الصادر في 3 فبراير 2009 من المحكمة الابتدائية الكبرى بباريس في القضية التي رفعناها، عبد الله بولا وشخصي، ضد خالد الحاج

بالإطلاع على نص الحكم الذي صدر في 3 فبراير، والذي أيدته محكمة الاستئناف بباريس في 14 أكتوبر 2009، يشير منطوق الحكم بوضوح إلى:

ـ أن المحكمة رأت أن عريضة الدعوى تحتوي على خلل إجرائي يجعلها لا تستوفي الشرط القانوني الذي يسمح بإجازتها (الشرط الذي تنص عليه المادة 53 من القانون الصادر في 29 يوليو 1881)وبإحالتها للنظر في الموضوع (فحوى الشكوى). هذه المشكلة الإجرائية تتعلق، كما ينص منطوق الحكم الذي أمامكم صورته الآن، بخلل في تسلسل الوقائع في عريضة الدعوى، في تقدير المحكمة؛

ـ لهذا السبب، لم تنظر المحكمة في الموضوع. وعليه، فإن أي ادعاء بأن القضاء حكم ببطلان مضمون الدعوى، هو ادعاء كاذب ومحض افتراء. وأن ادعاء أي جهة بأنها كسبت هذه القضية، هو أيضاً محض افتراء.
علماً بأن القضاء ينظر في مثل هذه القضية على مرحلتين: النظر من ناحية إجرائية (أو شكلية)، ثم النظر في الموضوع إذا ما أجيزت عريضة الدعوى من الناحية الإجرائية. ولا ينظر القضاء في الموضوع إذا ما وجد خللاً إجرائياً.

[فتحي مسعد حنفي]

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة Ali agab

الاستاذ خالد الحاج

تحية واحترام

اشكرك علي التفهم،

لا انكر تعاطفي بل حبي الشديد لعبد الله بولا ونجاة، وطالما انك تتفهم ذلك بانه لا يؤثر علي ما نتخذه

من مواقف ،فانني اقول لك مناصحا، في امر" انتصار سودانيات" يجب ان تسعي للخوض في ذلك

بطريقة لا تجعلها معركة موقع سودانيات ضد نجاة وبولا، هذا من حيث المبدا واظنك لاتختلف معي

في ذلك. المسالة الثانية هي انني مازلت اطالبك ممارسة قدر من الهدوء وضبط النفس، فانا لا

اتصور ان معركتك هي تحطيم صورة نجاة وبولا في ضمير العالمين، فانت تطرح اسئلة متعلقة

بالعمل العام، والعمل العام مكان مشروع لاي نوع من الاسئلة .

ان الطريقة التي تقوم بها نتشر موقفك عبر هذا الاعلام الواسع للرسائل اري ان فيه bite of

too much، كل ما اريد ان اقوله هو المطالبة بان نرتقي الي مستوي مشروعية الاسئلة في

العمل العام، ومن هو المطالب بالاجابة عليها، هذه امور موضوعية يمكن الخوض فيها بكل هدوء.

اما مسالة نشر ماكتبته انا في سودانفوراول هنا فلا مانع لدي، واما بخصوص امر الايميل المتعلق

بالفصل من الحزب الشيوعي فانا لم اعني سوي الاختصار والمفيد، لان ذلك الامر لم

يكن يعنيني في شيء.

لك مني خالص الامنيات

الأخ علي رجب
اسمح لي أولا أن أشكرك علي شحاعتك وردك الموضوعي الخالي من التشنج أو الغضب رغم اعترافك المشروع بتعاطفك مع الأستاذ عبدالله بولا والسيدة حرمه..
ولكن ياسيدي هل تسمح لي بسؤالك ان كنت بنفس هذه الموضوعية قدنصحت من تتعاطف معهما بضبط النفس وعدم شن الهجوم علي خالد في سودان فور أول وتجنيد بعض الأقلام للهجوم نيابة عنهم وأنا شخصيا أتداخل معك الآن لأني أحد الذين تعرضوا للهجوم .
عموما صدقني لو كانت الأمور تؤخذ بهذه الموضوعية والهدوء لما تفاقمت الأمور حتي وصلت الي المحاكم ناهيك عن التراشق بالاساءات المتبادلة والكيراكيتيرات الخارجة عن الأدب في بعض الأحيان..
أنت قلتها بنفسك ان من حق أي شخص أن يوجه الأسئلة لأي منظمة خاصة ان كان تعمل تحت مظلة جهة معينة.وهل أجرم خالد حينما وجه أسألته تلك وهل بدأ توجيه هذه الأسئلة في سودانيات بعد أن تفاقمت الأمور وشنت عليه حربا شعواء في سودان فور أول..ماذا كنت تتوقع منهأن يصمت أم يقول جملته الشهيرة: الشكية لي ألله
عموما ما حصل قد حصل وأنت قد قلت رأيك بوضوح لخالد.فان كان لديك دلال علي الطرف الثاني فأتمني أن توجه لهم النصح أيضا ولا داعي لمزيد من التناحر..
مرة أخري لك شكري وتقديري ودمت..

[Ali agab]

الاستاذ فتحي

تحية واحترام

اشكرك اولا علي سعة الصدر، كما انني اثمن موقفك من ضرورة ان ينحصر الامر في اطار

الاسئلة التي يدور حولها هذا الجدال برمته، ربما كان الامر كما قلت قد علته سحابة الحدة التي اعطته

بعدا شخصيا، طغي علي القضية نفسها، لذا اشكرك علي تفهم مقصدي في ان ينحصر الامر في

اطار اعادة الامور الي نصابها، لا ان نطلب من احد ان يترك مبتغاه المشروع، لكن نطالب الجميع

بان يتحاكموا في الهواء الطلق علي اسس الحوار، هذا هو السبيل الوحيد الذي يليق بالطرفين.

اعدك بان لا ادخر جهدا ولا شجاعة في مناصحة كل الاطراف.

مع فائق الشكر والتقدير

[Ali agab]

الاستاذ خالد الحاج

تحية واحترام

هذه تحية احترمها واقدرها، وارجو ان يكون حدثي بان الاوان قد حان لان تسير الامور في الاتجاه

الذي يجعل الاسئلة تستريح علي طاولة الاحترام المتبادل صحيحا.

لك مني خالص الود

[فتحي مسعد حنفي]

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة Ali agab

الاستاذ خالد الحاج

تحية واحترام

هذه تحية احترمها واقدرها، وارجو ان يكون حدثي بان الاوان قد حان لان تسير الامور في الاتجاه

الذي يجعل الاسئلة تستريح علي طاولة الاحترام المتبادل صحيحا.

لك مني خالص الود

وهذ اثبات آخر علي انك انسان محترم علي الرغم من هذا الاحترام لمسته في مخاطبة خالد لك فأنا أعرف ان هذا الشايقي لا يجامل أحدا اعتباطا..
أرجو أن نتوصل الي نهاية مقبولة ترضي جميع الأطراف فما بيننا ليس قطيع من الأبقار سطا عليه أحدنا من الآخر..ولا تار نطلب الثأر فيه.بل خلاف ما كان له أن يتشعب ويصل الي هذه المرحلة..
تسلم يا أخي