Juan Branco’s leaked letter to Ousmane Sonko exposes Senegal’s political fractures

A confidential letter from Juan Branco to Prime Minister Ousmane Sonko has brought to light deep-seated divisions within Senegal’s political sphere. In the missive, Branco cautions that private legal actions filed in France for crimes against humanity—where the Senegalese state is not a plaintiff—pose a serious threat of misappropriation of public funds or misuse of political assets. By bypassing established judicial mechanisms such as letters rogatory and instead depending on a private accord built on political ties, this method compromises the integrity of international legal processes. What was initially framed as a quest for justice has deteriorated into a series of possible criminal offenses that may ultimately harm those involved.

Turning to his personal ambitions, Branco reminds the Prime Minister of a prior request from May 2024 to serve as Senegal’s representative at the United Nations in New York. He contends that such a role would have carried significant symbolic and political resonance, fitting the ‘sovereignist and pan-Africanist’ orientation of the new government. Branco claims he would have faithfully conveyed the President’s message despite his French citizenship. Learning through media that another diplomat had been chosen, he shifts to a fresh demand: acquisition of Senegalese nationality through exceptional presidential decree. This naturalisation would enable him to join the Senegalese Bar Association and lecture at Cheikh Anta Diop University (UCAD) in Dakar. The letter exposes Branco’s endeavor to bypass republican and professional norms, as he asks the Prime Minister for a discretionary grant of citizenship and direct intervention to secure his positions at the Bar and university. Such moves violate principles of legal equality and institutional autonomy, much like his earlier bid to represent Senegal at the UN, which risked conflict of interest and geopolitical meddling due to his French nationality. Beyond these rule-breaking attempts, this part of the letter reveals a fundamental change in his rapport with Sonko: Branco, viewing himself as a moral creditor because of his past sacrifices (including imprisonment and abduction), attempts to barter his activism for political and symbolic posts. Noting with resentment that he has been excluded from diplomatic circles by a government now bound by state realities and keen to preserve its sovereignist image, Branco transforms their relationship from a militant partnership into a covert transactional one, where administrative and financial favors fill the gap left by political disillusionment.

Regarding financial matters, Branco provides a breakdown of the money he has received. He reports that from 2023 to 2025, he obtained a total of 15,000 euros in fees and expenses, which includes 2,000 euros in allowances disbursed by his Senegalese counterpart, Maître Bamba Cissé, during a visit to Dakar. According to Branco, these funds covered material costs such as plane tickets and travel, as well as office expenses for interns and collaborators linked to the ‘representation mandate’ assigned by Sonko’s faction. He concludes by stating that these amounts are far from adequate compensation for the time he invested, the expenses incurred from his abduction and detention, and the legal cases he faces in France. This segment of the letter reveals an opaque and informal financial management practice that exposes both individuals to serious criminal and ethical liabilities. By acknowledging receipt of 15,000 euros in fees and allowances through unofficial channels—specifically via a transfer from his Senegalese colleague Maître Bamba Cissé for carrying out a ‘representation mandate’ from Sonko’s camp—Branco underscores the total lack of a public, legal contractual arrangement with the Senegalese state. If these funds are determined to be of public origin, this informal transaction, conducted outside formal public procurement rules and the State Judicial Office, legally equates to misappropriation of public funds. The financial lack of transparency also borders on non-compliance with invoicing regulations and capital flow traceability. As for their relationship, this material reckoning signifies a pragmatic shift: the lawyer, having seen his aspirations for political appointments (UN, UCAD) dashed in the previous section, now presents an invoice for his activism, highlighting his physical sacrifices (abduction, detention) to demand monetary compensation. What was once portrayed as a disinterested ideological alliance has thus evolved into a purely transactional and mercantilist power dynamic.