Chad – 6 French Nationals Sentenced to 8 Years

The strange saga of French “humanitarian” group Zoe’s Ark began in October 2007 when 6 French aid workers were arrested in Chad for kidnapping. On December 26 the six aid workers were convicted and sentenced to 8 years prison and hard labour. Following the ruling, French President Sarkozy personally flew to Chad to meet President Deby and to negotiate the conditional release of the aid workers. To have been a fly on the wall for that bilateral discussion: what did Sarkozy promise to secure their release?

The Franco-Chadian relationship is a rocky one – many citizens of Chad resent the presence of French peacekeepers in their country and the ongoing influence of the former colonial power. On January 30 2008, a Paris court upheld the conviction in Chad (less the hard labour) to the protest of families and friends of the convicted aid workers. The reaction of relatives and friends is not surprising, but what were they expecting? No matter what President Sarkozy promised, the government of Chad acted in good faith by allowing the workers to serve out their time in France.

If the Paris court overruled the conviction, it would be viewed as direct interference in the affairs of a sovereign state. Now I am often suspicious when governments apply the sovereignty argument (Read: Government of Sudan) but in this case anything less than a full conviction in France – then France would be communicating that its citizens are above the law. A position not dissimilar to America’s rejection of the ICC in the Hague. Let’s be honest even the least informed travellers + workers know that when abroad, your country’s jurisdiction ends and you are subject to your adopted country’s laws. Of course there are exceptions and blatant disregard of judicial processes – but not in this case.


The French aid workers were convicted for “complicity in the illegal residence of foreign minors in France.” Zoe’s Ark claimed they were “rescuing” 103 infant refugees residing in Eastern Chad after fleeing Darfur. They claimed they were ‘saving’ (I really dislike the arrogance of it all!) these children by bringing them back to France for urgent care and attention.

But then the facts emerged. The infant refugees turned out to be healthy Chadians with at least one living parent. The French embassy in Chad has reported that Zoe’s Ark had a history of ‘audacious’ humanitarian projects, particularly what appeared to be clandestine adoption arrangements with families back in France. Afterall, not every Westerner has the money and influence of Madonna when it comes to adopting children from African countries.

The defence team invoked the scapegoat argument: aid worker’s rights sacrificed in the interests of French foreign policy. Nonsense. These accusations are unfounded. Several of the accused made self-righteous claims their extra-legal actions were justified because of the urgency of the situation (see sub-text above!). They incorrectly believed they could play God in the lives of others, and quite conveniently, satisfy the desires of 103 French families circumventing the French adoption queue.

If only development were that simple: remove all the troubled children from the ills of the world and transport them to a ‘safer’ country. Why haven’t development practitioners thought of this brilliant idea?

Aid workers employed by Zoe’s Ark fail to realize their actions were colonialism in disguise: sweeping in to a country where they had no legitimate business, exporting infants back to France in order to subsume African identities to the “superior” French culture.