Following the press conference of Seydou Kane's lawyers, Me Dior Diagne provided major legal clarifications this Tuesday, May 5, 2026. The lawyer focused on deconstructing preconceived ideas, particularly around the supposed termination of the contract and the role of the Senegalese Rural Electrification Agency (ASER).

From the outset, Ms. Dior Diagne was categorical: "There is no termination of the AEE Power contract by the State of Senegal. It is legally impossible." According to her, AEE Power Senegal has never had a direct contractual relationship with the State. "You cannot terminate a contract to which you are not a party," she stated definitively, thus reframing a debate that she considers biased from the start.

ASER at the heart of the system

Addressing attempts to exonerate ASER, lawyer Dior Diagne strongly disagrees. She argues that the agency cannot be considered a peripheral player. "ASER is the driving force behind this entire process," she asserts. As the body responsible for rural electrification policy, it oversees and monitors the implementation of projects. "Everything is done under its authority. It cannot claim to have clean hands," the lawyer insists, noting that the agency has already publicly criticized certain actors.

A "joint venture" rather than subcontracting

On a technical level, the defense clarifies that the alleged breach of contract did not originate with the State, but with the foreign company AEE Power OPCI. A crucial point was raised: according to the Senegalese Public Procurement Code, subcontracting cannot exceed 40% of the contract. However, AEE Power Senegal was responsible for carrying out 60% of the work. "We are no longer dealing with subcontracting, but rather with joint contracting," explains Mr. Boubacar Koïta's associate. This distinction redefines the rights of the parties, particularly in the event of a breach of contract.

A detriment to public funds and the population

According to the lawyers, the issue goes beyond the private interests of AEE Power Senegal. The project involved electrifying localities in five regions of the country (Kaffrine, Kolda, Saint-Louis, Tambacounda, and Kédougou). "The real question is what will happen to the public funds and the people who were supposed to benefit from this project," the defense insists.

Accusations of forgery: an offensive line of defense

Faced with accusations of "forgery and use of forged documents," the lawyers denounce the incoherent arguments. They emphasize that the contract benefited from a tax exemption: "How can registration fees be claimed for a tax-exempt project?" Furthermore, they assert that they have never received any tangible proof of the allegedly falsified receipts, despite their repeated appeals to the courts.

For Ms. Dior Diagne and her colleagues, these accusations are merely a pretext to justify the exclusion of the Senegalese party and to seize control of the financial resources. "If there were truly any falsehoods, the courts would have already ruled," the lawyer pointed out, reiterating her confidence in the rigor of the Senegalese courts.