Paper Short Abstract:

This paper explores the daily practices of Beninese prosecutors when deciding whether to indict suspected criminals and shows how those embodying the ‘punitive arm’ of the state balance repressive agendas with notions of fairness, social peace, and humanitarianism.

Paper Abstract:

Over the last few years, the Republic of Benin has been sliding down democratic rankings. International observers highlight, amongst other things, the severity of the most recent criminal law reforms – leading to the steady growth of the prison population for the last five years. Reports also point to the biased nature of judicial institutions and increased lack of trust from the Beninese population. Building on an ethnographic study of a special criminal court, this paper explores the daily practices of prosecutors when deciding whether to indict suspected criminals and shows how those embodying the ‘punitive arm’ of the state balance repressive agendas with notions of fairness, social peace, and humanitarianism. It shows how they consider the severity of the accusations, the weight of the evidence, the potential sentence and the wider social consequences of taking a case to trial. At the theoretical level, this contribution combines insights from sociolegal studies and from the anthropology of the state. It reflects on the practices, and the agency of public servants faced with ‘repressive turns’ and shows how they sometimes fight for humanitarian values ‘from within’, using the legal tools at their disposal. Reflecting on discretion and on the place of care in the prosecutorial office will also help unpack the professional ethos of Beninese prosecutors, in a context where both ordinary citizens and legal professionals are consistently describing them as biased and ‘under orders’.