Mauritanian authorities have arrested former senator Mohamed Ould Gadda, now heading the anti‑corruption NGO “Transparence Totale,” in a move that has drawn criticism from parliamentarians and opposition figures over due‑process guarantees and the treatment of whistleblowers. The case comes against the backdrop of ongoing tension between anti‑corruption initiatives and security practices in the country.
According to Cridem, security personnel detained Ould Gadda late at night after plain‑clothes officers entered his home without presenting a judicial warrant. His organization describes the operation as an arbitrary arrest that infringes basic rights and links it directly to his recent activities flagging suspected corruption in the financing of a police laboratory project.
The report notes that several members of parliament issued a joint statement condemning the measure, arguing that it reflects a situation in which individuals denouncing the misuse of public funds face pressure while those suspected of embezzlement are not held to account. They call for Ould Gadda’s immediate release and insist on respect for his legal protections, warning that the incident sends a negative signal to citizens and international partners regarding the state of public freedoms in Mauritania.
The opposition party Tewassoul is also reported to have expressed concern, stressing that the arrest occurred only hours after Ould Gadda announced his intention to transmit documents on the police laboratory case to the public prosecutor. The party argues that such a démarche should have led to institutional protection and a serious inquiry into the financial file, rather than detention, and it calls for his release and for an investigation whose findings would be disclosed to the public.
The episode underscores the sensitivity of high‑profile corruption dossiers in Mauritania, where legal frameworks on transparency coexist with broad security and prosecutorial powers. It also highlights the role of parliament and opposition parties in shaping the political response when civil‑society actors face legal action linked to their advocacy.
