Algiers Judicial Council Opens The File of Maj. Gen. Abdelghani Hamel
Algiers Judicial Council reopens, here on Wednesday, the file of the Major General Abdelghani Hamel, the former General Manager of National Security, with a number of his family members and former governors of the Republic, after accepting the appeal in cassation by the Supreme Court.
The Criminal Chamber of the Algerian Judicial Council had previously issued a decision convicting Abdelghani Hamel with 12 years in prison on charges related to corruption files, most notably money laundering, illegal enrichment, exploitation of influence, and obtaining real estate containers by illegal means.
The same court also ruled to confirm the conviction against the sons of Abdelghani Hamel, and the judge imposed a sentence of 8 years in prison for Amiar, 6 years for Chafik, 5 years for Mourad and two years, including a suspended year, for his daughter Chahinez.
The Supreme Court confirmed in its decision that the conviction of Abdelghani Hamel of the crimes of illicit enrichment and inciting public officials to exploit their actual and supposed influence to obtain undue benefits and money laundering was without justification and considered that it is deficient and such a decision cannot be adopted because it is contradictory, on the one hand, it reminds the judges in their reasoning that his income is other than his monthly salary, and then, on the other hand, it affirmed that he was unable to justify the significant increase that occurred on his financial liability, and justified the acceptance of the appeal because judgments and judicial decisions are not based on contradictory reasons, without carefully explaining the other incomes accurately and clearly.
It is not enough to rely on the external appearance without making it clear that the accused’s other income leads to a significant increase in the financial disclosure of the accused’s financial situation, in addition to the monthly income that represents what he gets from his work, and an explanation of how to obtain the illegal funds that led to the significant increase in financial disclosure compared to legitimate income, and it is not enough to enumerate the elements stipulated by law without clearly and accurately explaining them, and therefore the contested decision is deficient.