Deep Dive: Gabès Court of First Instance rejects suspension of Tunisian Chemical Group polluting units

The Gabès Court of First Instance issued a judgment on February 26, 2026, rejecting a summary application for the suspension of polluting units operated by the Tunisian Chemical Group. This court functions as a first-level judicial body in Tunisia's legal system, handling initial civil and administrative cases under the authority granted by the Tunisian Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure, which allows for summary proceedings to prevent imminent harm. Precedents in environmental litigation in Tunisia often involve tensions between economic activities and public health claims, though specific prior cases on chemical pollution suspensions are not detailed here. The Tunisian Chemical Group, a key industrial player in the phosphate and chemical sector, continues its operations in Gabès, a coastal city known for its industrial facilities. FTDES, representing civil society interests, pursued this legal action to halt pollution, highlighting ongoing disputes over industrial emissions in the region. The rejection maintains the status quo for the company's activities, potentially setting a procedural benchmark for future urgent environmental injunctions in Tunisian courts. From a governance perspective, this ruling underscores the judiciary's role in balancing industrial productivity against environmental and health protections within Tunisia's post-2011 constitutional framework, which emphasizes rights to a healthy environment under Article 45. Stakeholders include local residents affected by pollution, the chemical group reliant on uninterrupted production, and advocacy groups like FTDES pushing for accountability. The decision defers substantive review, prolonging exposure for communities while preserving economic contributions from the industry. Looking ahead, this outcome may prompt appeals to higher courts, such as the Court of Appeal, influencing the trajectory of environmental enforcement in Tunisia. It reflects institutional processes where courts assess evidence of immediate harm in summary applications, often requiring stronger proof for suspensions. Broader implications involve public trust in judicial handling of pollution cases amid economic pressures from state-owned enterprises.