Bilel Mejri

Bilel Mejri was born in Tunisia on 7 January 1992 and arrived in Italy in 2015 after applying for a residence permit to study. He was detained at Sassari Bancali Prison while awaiting trial as part of a complex Italian counterterrorism investigation named ‘Taliban’. He had already been placed in pre-trial detention, first in prison and then under house arrest in the provinces of Pisa and Varese for drug trafficking, based on evidence gathered in the course of this same investigation. He was one of several Tunisian nationals living in Italy who were accused of belonging to a terrorist association linked to ISIS. His name primarily surfaced through his social connections and online activity, rather than any direct involvement in violent actions.

Investigators alleged that Mejri had ties to Ansar al-Sharia and had attended or discussed a public rally led by the group’s leader, Abu Ayad. However, Mejri clarified that he had never attended the event, having merely watched it on television. As with the others, his supposed radicalisation was inferred from social media posts showing empathy for friends who had become foreign fighters in Syria.

He maintained a close friendship with Wael Labidi and Khaled Zeddini, two Tunisians who left Italy to join ISIS. Together with Afli and Ben Saad, he expressed sorrow for their deaths and later discussed concerns over police surveillance. However, his recorded conversations did not reveal any extremist ideology; instead, they revolved around everyday matters, jokes, and concerns about being unjustly targeted.

The ROS investigation involved extensive social media analysis and the interception of communications. Mejri was monitored as part of the same network as Afli and Ben Saad. The authorities interpreted his friendship with known fighters and his online ‘likes’ as signs of radical affinity. Yet no material evidence of operational or logistical terrorism emerged.

The court rejected the accusations, ruling that Mejri’s actions were not criminal. The supposed ‘association’ was based on friendship rather than ideology, and his statements did not demonstrate adherence to jihadist principles. Like the others, he was acquitted because ‘the facts do not exist’, which restores his full legal innocence.