Source: United Nations – Geneva
The Committee on Enforced Disappearances today concluded its consideration of the initial report of Morocco, with Committee Experts commending the State on its transitional justice process, while raising questions on recent cases of disappeared migrants and criminal investigations into cases of enforced disappearances.
Matar Diop, Committee Vice Chair and Country Rapporteur for Morocco, said the transitional justice process in Morocco was a unique experience, which allowed the State to revisit its past. This commendable initiative had achieved tangible results.
Juan Pablo Alban Alencastro, Committee Rapporteur and Country Rapporteur for Morocco, said worrying information had been received about an event in 2022 regarding migrants who left Morocco trying to reach the Spanish coast and disappeared, and two other recent cases. Had the State party begun investigations into these events? Had they carried out search operations? Had relatives of the victims been able to participate in those search processes?
Mr. Alban Alencastro also asked if there had there been any criminal prosecutions resulting from the transitional justice process? How was it ensured that victims could be involved in these search activities and receive updates, as part of the right to truth? The Committee would welcome information on efforts taken to excavate mass graves. What measures were taken to ensure criminal investigations into the disappearances which took place between 1956 and 1999?
Regarding the cases of migrants, the delegation said autopsies of 23 victims had been carried out and it was found that one had died of asphyxiation. The individuals had clustered together, and some managed to get out while others did not, and they died. There were also hearings with those involved in the operation. Criminal operators had been seeking to push 2,000 people through the crossing point and had used forceful means to try and push them through. Security forces had sought to respond properly to what was happening.
The delegation said the Equity and Reconciliation Commission had dealt with 25,000 cases and treated them all on an equal footing. Wherever a death had occurred, the family was notified. Thirteen regions had benefited from the community reparations programmes. Authorities had been requested to carry out the exhumation of remains in burial sites. After exhumations were carried out, bone analysis was conducted to try to find out who the individuals were. This was one of the key tasks of the Equity and Reconciliation Commission. It was clear that many violations had occurred between 1956 and 1999. The remains of victims found in these mass graves showed excessive use of force was used against them. Notifying relatives was critical and the State also sought to provide updates through the media.
Introducing the report, Abdellatif Ouahbi, Minister of Justice of Morocco and head of the delegation, said Morocco was one of the first contributors to the compilation of the Convention and one of the first States to sign it. The Equity and Reconciliation Commission adopted the concept of enforced disappearance, as outlined in the Convention. The Commission was able to fulfil its mission within five years and was able to expand its competence to include all types of violations, including enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention and torture, among others. Over 27,000 victims or their families received around $212 million in compensation, more than 20,000 people gained health coverage, and 13 regions were covered by the communal reparations programme and received more than $16 million.
In concluding remarks, Mr. Ouahbi said Morocco had come a long way and aspired to the best rule of law. The State had paid more than 200 million dollars in compensation to ensure human dignity. Mr. Ouahbi thanked the Committee members for their comments and advice. When the Committee next reviewed Morocco, it was hoped that Morocco’s new Penal Code would be completely adopted. The Minister thanked the delegation and civil society for their support.
Olivier De Frouville, Committee Chair, in his concluding remarks, said the dialogue had been an important first step to pursue cooperation. The Committee would draw up concluding observations which would pay particular attention to the developing situation in the country and the issues raised in the constructive dialogue. The State party could count on the Committee’s support in its efforts to implement the Convention.
The delegation of Morocco consisted of representatives of the House of Representatives; the Chamber of Advisors; the Interministerial Delegation for Human Rights; the Ministry of Justice; the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, African Cooperation and Moroccans living abroad; the Ministry of Health and Social Protection; the General Delegation to Penitentiary, Administration and Reintegration; the Presidency of the Public Ministry; the General Directorate of National Security; and the Permanent Mission of Morocco to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will issue its concluding observations on the report of Morrocco at the end of its twenty-seventh session, which concludes on 4 October. Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, while webcasts of the public meetings can be found here. The programme of work of the Committee’s twenty-seventh session and other documents related to the session can be found here.
The Committee will next meet in public this afternoon, Wednesday 25 September, at 3 p.m. to begin its consideration of the initial report of Norway (CED/NOR/1).
Report
The Committee has before it the initial report of Morocco (CED/MAR/1).
Presentation of Report
ABDELLATIF OUAHBI, Minister of Justice of Morocco and head of the delegation, said Morocco was one of the first contributors to the compilation of the Convention and one of the first States to sign it. It had also supported its international engagement, becoming a member of the Global Initiative for the Convention, which led to a joint action plan to advance universal ratification and implementation. Morocco was also one of the first States to establish the national mechanism for implementation, reporting, and follow-up, which contributed to the enhancement of interaction with the United Nations human rights mechanisms.
During the reporting period, Morocco became a party to the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, the first Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. Morocco also welcomed the visit of the Working Group on Enforced Disappearances in 2009, which was the first visit to a State in the region. The country then hosted the one hundred and eighth session of the Working Group in 2016 and facilitated its successful conduct.
Morocco had turned the protection and promotion of human rights into the foundation of the modern State, emphasising the transitional justice workshop to achieve national reconciliation. In Morocco, there was a limited number of enforced disappearances; most of the victims remained alive and were able to contribute to revealing the truth and participating in the transitional justice process. Victims also benefited from various measures and procedures aimed at redressing and rehabilitating damages.
The Equity and Reconciliation Commission adopted the concept of enforced disappearance, as outlined in the Convention. The files of the persons whose fate was unknown, relating to death during social events, were the most significant files processed. The Commission adopted the criteria for compensation and reparation, and the principle of not enforcing time limits for cases submitted after the legal period.
Detention centres were known to civil society organizations and the press. The Commission was able to fulfil its mission within five years (September 1999 to November 2005), which included completing investigations, preparing arbitration decisions, holding public hearings, and the issuance of a final report. The Commission was able to expand its competence to include all types of violations, including enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention and torture, among others. The concept of the victim was also expanded. Over 27,000 victims or their families received around $212 million in compensation, more than 20,000 people gained health coverage, and 13 regions were covered by the communal reparations programme and received more than $16 million. In addition, the Commission adopted regional development programmes and launched a programme to rehabilitate detention centres and preserve the memory associated with them.
The positive dynamics led to the adoption of a new Constitution in 2011, which enabled the prohibition of enforced disappearance, torture and other gross human rights violations. Morocco also engaged in a comprehensive reform of the justice system through the adoption of the Code of Military Justice and through the establishment of an independent judicial power and institutional mechanisms. The State issued laws relating to the Supreme Council of the Judicial Power. Mr. Ouahbi assured the Committee of Morocco’s close cooperation during the dialogue. The State was helping with the organisation of the first world conference on enforced disappearances in January 2025.
Questions by Committee Experts
MATAR DIOP, Committee Vice Chair and Country Rapporteur for Morocco, said the large delegation from Morocco testified to the extent to which the State valued human rights and human dignity. It also demonstrated the State’s determination to effectively implement the provisions of the Convention. Morocco had ratified the Convention in May 2013. Since its ratification, no national court had been seized of a case of enforced disappearance, within the meaning of the definition set out in the Convention. However, this did not mean there were no issues to discuss. The Committee hoped to have a constructive dialogue which would allow them to revisit the past.
The Equity and Reconciliation Commission aimed to address the weight of the past. Could Morocco provide clarification on articles 31 and 32 of the Convention regarding individual and inter-State communications?
The National Human Rights Council was a fully independent national constitutional institution in the exercise of its mandate to promote and protect human rights and prevent possible violations of human rights. The members were selected to represent the different regions of the country, Moroccans living abroad, young people, persons with disabilities and children. The Committee recognised that the process was commendable. Who appointed the members and how was their independence guaranteed? Did these members have a mandate and what were the terms?
Which administrative or judicial authority managed the database on missing persons? Did this information overlap with other databases, such as the registers of persons deprived of their liberty, and were these databases accessible to all interested persons? The State party had indicated that a revision of the Criminal Code was underway, which included a definition of enforced disappearances, in line with the Convention, which provided for penalties proportionate to the gravity of the offences committed. Had the bill moved out of the drafting stage? Was it before Parliament for consideration? Why had it taken so long – 15 years – to adopt this document? Was the definition of enforced disappearance as defined in the draft Criminal Code the final version? Nothing was specified about the nature of the offence. Was it ensured that enforced disappearance was a crime, not an offence?
On the issue of criminal responsibility, how did Morocco reconcile two texts regarding responsibility of enforced disappearance, with the provisions of article 6.2 of the Convention, which stated that “No order or instruction issued by a public authority, civil, military or otherwise, may be invoked to justify a crime of enforced disappearance”?
JUAN PABLO ALBAN ALENCASTRO, Committee Rapporteur and Country Rapporteur for Morocco, said the Committee would appreciate an explanation on whether there were specific provisions under domestic law that addressed the issue of the application of the statute of limitations to enforced disappearance cases, in line with the Convention? Could the State explain whether other remedies aside from compensation were available for victims, aside from civil claims?
How were domestic law provisions applicable to cases of enforced disappearance, given that enforced disappearance had not been expressly defined as an offence in national law? What prosecutions were in place for this crime under national law? What existing legal and administrative measures were in place as vehicles for conducting a preliminary inquiry or investigation to establish the facts? Given that enforced disappearance had not been expressly defined as an offence in national law, could the Committee clarify whether military courts were competent to investigate or prosecute persons accused of committing crimes of abduction and unlawful detention?
How was it ensured in practice that all reported cases of enforced disappearance were investigated? What measures were taken to ensure that a search was immediately initiated when the authorities become aware of a case of enforced disappearance? Was there a mechanism in place to exclude from investigations into alleged cases of enforced disappearance, any State officials who were suspected of having committed the offence? Did national law establish that a State official suspected of involvement in an offence of enforced disappearance should be suspended from duty? The Committee would welcome information on the status of the investigations and search efforts concerning the events of 1956–1999, and the disappearance of Sahrawi victims in Western Sahara? Could the State party provide specific examples on how victims’ family members were protected from reprisals?
Worrying information had been received about an event in 2022 regarding migrants who left Morocco trying to reach the Spanish coast and disappeared, and two other recent cases. Had the State party begun investigations into these events? Had they carried out search operations? Had relatives of the victims been able to participate in those search processes?
Given that enforced disappearance was not established as an offence in the Criminal Code, what measures had been adopted to ensure that it was included as an extraditable crime in all treaties? Were there any potential obstacles to extradition under national legislation, or extradition treaties or agreements with third countries with regard specifically to enforced disappearance? The Government had stated that it had not received any requests to provide assistance to victims. Had measures been planned at the domestic level?
When dealing with deceased persons, were there measures to ensure reciprocal action for exhumation and the return of remains? This was very relevant considering that according to information received, at least in cases involving the disappearance of Sahrawi victims in Western Sahara, there had been explicit requests for assistance which may not have been responded to positively.
A Committee Expert thanked Morocco for their input in working on the general comment on enforced disappearance and migration. The general comment was adopted in 2023; how was the State following up its recommendations? The Committee had received information that people were still missing from Sudan and Chad. What were the findings in this regard?
Another Expert welcomed the sizable delegation of Morocco which indicated the importance they attached to the Convention. Had the guiding principles adopted by the Committee been broadly disseminated within the bodies responsible for searching for disappeared persons? Could there be dual incrimination for enforced disappearances, with a view to extradition?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the reform of the Penal Code was a long-term process. The Equity and Reconciliation Commission had produced recommendations which aimed to reform the Criminal Code. Following a national dialogue, a partial bill was created which was submitted to Parliament. The amendments included the criminalisation of enforced disappearance. The new parliament aimed to comprehensively reform the Criminal Code, which was why the partial bill was withdrawn. The draft revision now had legal definitions and had raised enforced disappearance to a crime, which was punishable with up to life imprisonment. Penalties were increased according to aggravated circumstances.
The Criminal Code stated that enforced disappearance was a crime against humanity, in line with the Convention. There were 90 bilateral agreements in the areas of extradition and the transfer of convicted criminals. Since the adoption of the 2011 Constitution, Morocco had not responded to any request from a bilateral partner which would entail a risk to the extradited person. However, the State did respond positively in cases of criminal proceedings where there were no such risks.
Morocco continued to participate in the individual communication mechanisms of the United Nations. The National Human Rights Council was a pluralist and constitutional body which played a key role in the promotion of human rights in the country. It had been awarded A status. Eight members of the body were selected from civil society organizations.
Morocco left no stone unturned to ensure that international human rights instruments were made well known, including their related protocols. This included the Convention and the Committees’ concluding observations, which were published on various channels, including the Gazette of Morocco, which was freely available to anyone in the country. Texts of treaties and conventions to which Morocco was a party were also published online, as were studies in key human rights areas.
Training was provided to law enforcement officials on human rights and human rights instruments. This was a key part of continuous and ongoing training as well as basic training for law officials.
Morocco had shared several observations and comments on the topic of migration and enforced disappearance. The general comment on this issue was disseminated to all relevant bodies and was part of the training for those who worked in these entities.
Morocco had duly criminalised enforced disappearance. The Constitution prohibited enforced disappearance because it was a violation of international humanitarian law and international human rights law. Legislation had been strengthened to properly cover the crime of enforced disappearance, including human trafficking and torture. Anyone who had born witness to enforced disappearance was obliged to report what they had witnessed.
Tools were in place for reparation, remedy and compensation, which were made available to all victims. Criminal proceedings could also be pursued before the courts. Regarding the cases of migrants who disappeared in 2022, investigations included the identification of those who disappeared. Steps were taken to involve diplomatic missions to identify remains and bodies. Relatives were involved in these investigations. Photos were taken and evidence was gathered and sent to laboratories, including fingerprints. For the 23 bodies which could not be identified, seven had been able to be identified through conferring with the families. Investigations were ongoing on the other cases.
Morocco had an electronic database system, which contained all search notices, including those issued by the judicial police, and those involving other people who had disappeared. The database was extensive and contained all necessary information on disappeared persons and fugitives. When no trace of a disappeared person could be found, accelerated measures were applied, and relatives were contacted.
Morocco was undergoing a unique experience on transitional justice, and the Equity and Reconciliation Commission had achieved a lot in five years. Civil society was needed as a key partner.
In 1991, after the body was established, it launched a unique initiative, calling for all detention centres under the dictatorship to be closed. Thanks to this action, 511 persons who had been forcibly disappeared were liberated. These people served as the living memory of a clandestine system which was not properly documented. It also helped the State to understand the fate of others who were disappeared. Fifty-five different graves had been uncovered due to ramped up activity, supported by the authorities. Hearings had been held across the country, where victims of violations were interviewed. They spoke directly and frankly about what they had experienced.
For the past few years, Parliament had called for a full reform of the judiciary. Morocco had worked on adopting the rules of fair trial. A special institute worked on forensic and legal medicine, which helped in cases such as rape, or other matters like inheritance. DNA was the only way to effectively determine the identity of a person.
Questions by Committee Experts
MATAR DIOP, Committee Vice Chair and Country Rapporteur for Morocco, said the transitional justice process in Morocco was a unique experience, and the existence of the body allowed the State to revisit its past. This commendable initiative had achieved tangible results. What had happened to the searches carried out as part of the transitional justice process? Did the State party intend to prosecute the perpetrators of the crimes of enforced disappearances if they knew who they were? If not, did they intend to find them? To pay historic debt, it was important to bring perpetrators to justice.
Did the State intend to recognise the competence of the Committee so it could receive individual victim complaints or communications? What was the central body which managed the database? Exoneration for carrying out enforced disappearance, due to acting in hierarchical order, was outlined in the State party’s Constitution, although the Convention did not allow for this.
JUAN PABLO ALBAN ALENCASTRO, Committee Rapporteur and Country Rapporteur for Morocco, asked what necessary conditions needed to be met so Morocco could recognise the competency of the Committee to receive individual communications? Morocco stated that enforced disappearance was criminalised within the Constitution. Was article 23 of the Constitution directly applicable in criminal proceedings? How far had enforced disappearance been criminalised as a stand-alone crime, as well as a crime against humanity? Today, the delegation had said that a statute of limitations started as of when the situation of a disappeared person was determined. Could clarification on this be provided? What had been the outcomes of the search efforts deployed in relation to the almost 70 migrants who had disappeared? Had the State been able to bring the perpetrators to justice? How did the authorities decide whether a case was one of enforced disappearance? How were active extradition proceedings handled?
An Expert asked if Morocco received a request for extradition for a Moroccan, where there was an enforced disappearance in a different country, and this was denied because of nationality, on what basis would they be judged?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said eight members of the Equity and Reconciliation Commission were victims of flagrant human rights violations. The Chair regularly gathered victims of human rights violations. A symposium in 2001 brought together civil society and political parties. All victims received a document containing details, including name, date of release, and where they were held, as applicable. The State made it clear to the victim that the Moroccan State took responsibility as the perpetrator of those acts. The State had a national strategy to ensure the non-recurrence of these atrocities. It was clear that the judiciary needed to be independent and just.
Irrespective of the duration of the enforced disappearance, it was considered to be a crime. Extradition occurred in the legal phase and the administrative phase. It was up to the judiciary to weigh in on the issue of a dual penalty. There was constant monitoring and oversight of individuals in custody on a daily basis. There was no definition of enforced disappearance as provided for in the Convention. Morocco would take steps to align the definition with the Convention.
Regarding the cases of migrants, autopsies of 23 victims had been carried out and it was found that one had died of asphyxiation. The individuals had clustered together, and some managed to get out while others did not and they died. There were also hearings with those involved in the operation. Criminal operators had been seeking to push 2,000 people through the crossing point and had used forceful means to try and push them through. Security forces had sought to respond properly to what was happening. There was no statute of limitations applied to cases of enforced disappearances.
Morocco believed that meetings like this would help the State further develop its human rights approach. It was hoped Morocco would be the gold standard when it came to human rights. The State had duly acknowledged what had happened and had accepted the blame. It was important these events never happened again. The State was determined to ensure non-repetition and non-recurrence. To achieve this, society needed to understand what their rights were.
The State had major problems on the issue of illegal migrants; 50,000 residents’ permits had been issued to respond to this crisis. Female illegal migrants had access to healthcare in hospitals, irrespective of their illegal status. Addressing the criminal gangs involved in illegal migration was a major challenge for the State. The State needed to protect the rights of these migrants, some of whom had no identity documents. Morocco was dealing with a mass wave of illegal migrants of which they knew very little about. Some of these people, such as Sudanese migrants, could not go home in the current circumstances. Morocco was close to Europe and many migrants were aiming to reach Europe as their final destination.
Often security forces were attacked in the discharge of their duties. Democracy was the only way to ensure there was no repetition of the crimes of the past. The State was aware of amendments to legislation which needed to be made, and these conversations were happening. The State wanted to further develop the country and ensure full respect for all peoples, including Palestinian people.
This year, more than 200 trafficking networks had been dismantled and over 48,000 persons involved in illegal migration had been stopped. In coordination with the International Organization on Migration, voluntary returns were organised. The State did not use collective extradition and was working on a draft bill on migration.
Questions by Committee Experts
MATAR DIOP, Committee Vice Chair and Country Rapporteur for Morocco, said article 16 of the Convention contained the principle of “non-refoulment.” What measures was the State party taking to always guarantee strict adherence to the principles of non-refoulment? Could a decision authorising the return or expulsion of an individual be appealed? What was the procedure for lodging an appeal? Who approved appeals? Which mechanisms ensured each case was reviewed individually before any expulsion or extradition took place?
Was the risk of enforced disappearance taken into account when considering the expulsion of a foreign national? Which authority took the decision to expel an individual? How was this notified to the concerned parties? What timeframe did the individual have to lodge an appeal? Were they informed of their right to an appeal? If one appealed the extradition order, was the expulsion order immediately suspended? How was it ensured that all persons deprived of their liberty were guaranteed their rights from the outset of detention, including the right to contact their lawyer and receive visits? Whatever the place of deprivation of liberty, it was vital that the person was able to receive information concerning their case. This was vital to prevent secret detentions.
What sanctions were in place for those who violated rules and norms in places of detention? Where did things currently stand with regard to the project to implement an electronic custody register, to allow for one single central database? Could an irregular migrant in the country be held in custody prior to their return?
JUAN PABLO ALBAN ALENCASTRO, Committee Rapporteur and Country Rapporteur for Morocco, said the Committee had noted that under domestic law, a person affected by a crime could institute a civil action. How did the national legislation define a victim? How had the definition of a victim been amended in national legislation to ensure it conformed with the Convention? Was a victim of enforced disappearance obliged to initiate criminal proceedings of any kind? How was it guaranteed in practice that cases of enforced disappearances were duly investigated? When a person was disappeared, what measures were taken to ensure a search was immediately initiated and that authorities were made aware of their disappearance?
Had there been any criminal prosecutions resulting from the transitional justice process? How was it ensured that victims could be involved in these search activities and receive updates, as part of the right to truth? The Committee acknowledged the State party’s efforts in regard to the Equity and Reconciliation Commission. Could further information be provided on measures to facilitate access to archives? What steps were taken to preserve these archives? Who was responsible for their maintenance and integrity?
The Committee would welcome information on efforts taken to excavate mass graves. What measures were taken to ensure criminal investigations into the disappearances which took place between 1956 and 1999? Was there a mechanism for launching an immediate search at a local level whenever disappearances were reported? What mechanisms were in place to guarantee effective collaboration between the authorities involved in the search for and investigations on disappeared persons?
The Committee took note of reparations documented by the Equity and Reconciliation Commission, which were welcomed. What criteria were used to establish the amount of compensation to be paid to each victim? Could victims lodge their own claims for reparation? How were reparation rules applied to Sahrawi victims in Western Sahara? The Committee had received information that there were housing projects built on places of burial. What was being done to preserve these areas? What institutional reforms had been adopted to ensure that democracy and the rule of law could flourish? What was being done to try and investigate the death of a disappeared person, despite a death certificate?
The Committee acknowledged the information provided by the State on all the different crimes committed against children. In Fez, allegedly the babies of teenage unmarried mothers were taken away from them and trafficked by gangs. Civil society organizations had reported that there were thousands of unaccompanied migrant children who had disappeared after landing in Europe, with many being Moroccan. Could the delegation comment on this? How many times had DNA been used in cases of enforced disappearances? How was the principle of non-refoulment respected in extradition proceedings? How was the right of a detainee to communicate with their family guaranteed? How could a foreign detainee communicate with the consular authority of their country? How was the right of communication guaranteed for detainees?
An Expert asked how the State conducted a proper risk assessment, when considering sending someone back to their country? The Committee had received information of people being returned from Morocco despite facing risks in their own country.
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said Morocco was duty bound to protect citizens and everyone in the land. The State always respected the decisions of the Committee against Torture and would never extradite anyone who was at threat of torture. On the specific decisions mentioned, Morocco had respected the decisions of the Committee against Torture. The State was responsible and accountable for acts prior to 1999. The State did not recruit children, and the abduction of any child was a crime. If Morocco allowed the abduction of 6,000 children to take place under their noses, were they really a functioning State? To claim 6,000 children had been abducted in Morocco was shocking. Nothing prevented anyone detained in Morocco from receiving visitors. Nobody was held in secret detention. Morocco did not engage in reprisals and did not discriminate against anyone.
The Equity and Reconciliation Commission asked what violations had occurred, rather than pushing for proof. The Commission had learned from the past and worked with national human rights associations. It was important to make a distinction between compensation and reparations. Women received a 20 per cent bonus on top of any compensation paid to a man. A larger sum of compensation was also paid to a person who had been held in a secret detention facility. The State worked with psychologists and psychiatrists to help those affected reintegrate into society. When all detainees were released by the King, one detainee passed away after being released. The children of those who had died were reintegrated into society by the State. Enforced disappearance was not subject to the statute of limitations; the State was seeking to close all cases of enforced disappearance.
Moroccan law prohibited any form of secret detention. Detainees were guaranteed contact with their families and legal representation. Foreigners could contact their consular representatives. From 2019 to 2023, there were over 16,000 visits to places of detention. Any person detained had the right to contact a lawyer. Any person who considered themselves to be a victim could contact the relevant authorities. The concept of victim also included public benefit organizations or organizations working to combat violence against women.
Regarding the disappearance of children, there was a search procedure which aimed to find disappeared children. The kefala of a child could not be given to a person who had been convicted of a crime relating to morality. There were many reform workshops which had taken place. The number of forensic doctors had been increased from 13 to 260. Since adopting genetic digital prints, the State had created a database to collect all the information. Fingerprints and DNA prints from the scene of the crime, or from those accused were collected. This allowed a biological link to the victim to be established.
Morocco had seen huge progress regarding enacting laws and establishing legal systems with a comprehensive, eco-systemic approach. The State aimed to ensure human rights were a basis and a real doctrine. There was no discrimination within Morocco, and the country was open to the world. The State did not forget the importance of institutional reform, with regards to the moving of supervision to the Public Prosecutor.
The State had independent mechanisms which were not subject to any other authority. A programme of action had been implemented for continuous training of police, as well as rehabilitation for any kind of detention. The national commission to combat torture could access all records, as well as the register of persons deprived of liberty.
Questions by Committee Experts
MATAR DIOP, Committee Vice Chair and Country Rapporteur for Morocco, said it was important to get a proper grasp of the refoulment procedure. Which administrative authority took the decision on expulsion? How was the decision notified to the interested party? Did the interested party have a clear timeframe to which they could lodge an appeal against this decision? Where did the State stand in the reparation and rehabilitation process for victims? Did the National Human Rights Council intend to reopen the compensation files?
The Committee had heard reports that former detention centres had fallen entirely into ruin. What was the current status of the community reparation programme? Mr. Diop thanked the delegation for their willingness to respond to the Committee’s questions.
JUAN PABLO ALBAN ALENCASTRO, Committee Rapporteur and Country Rapporteur for Morocco, said he had never mentioned 6,000 children; perhaps there was a mistranslation. Thousands of children had come to Europe, according to sources, with many being Moroccan. What was the State doing to prevent the disappearance of children? If the State could explain why these statements were false, this would be highly appreciated. Had the issue of criminal responsibility been sidelined since the State was striving for lasting reconciliation? Had people who had been indicated as possible violators of human rights been removed from their jobs? Who was a victim according to the law and Moroccan jurisprudence? Could tangible examples be provided of how Morocco accommodated the gender perspective, and the needs of women and children who were close to a disappeared person?
A Committee Expert asked if persons who were detained had the right to communicate with those stipulated under their rights, including legal representation? Could persons held incommunicado still communicate? Were discovered remains returned to relatives in a dignified manner? What role did the Public Prosecutor play in the search for disappeared persons?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the Equity and Reconciliation Commission had dealt with 25,000 cases and treated them all on an equal footing. Wherever a death had occurred, the family was notified. Morocco continued to provide assistance to marginalised communities. Thirteen regions had benefited from the community reparations programmes. Authorities had been requested to carry out exhumation of remains in burial sites. After exhumations were carried out, bone analysis was conducted, to understand who the individuals were. This was one of the key tasks of the Equity and Reconciliation Commission.
It was clear that there were many violations which occurred between 1956 and 1999. Remains of victims found in these mass graves showed excessive use of force was used against them. Notifying relatives was critical and the State also sought to provide updates through the media. A funeral had been held in Casablanca for 840 people who had been disappeared. Their remains were transported in trucks and reburied with more dignity.
Enforced return related to migration. Significant work was done on voluntary repatriation. Everyone had the right to repeal a refoulment procedure before the court. This was considered an urgent procedure. The law stipulated the need to find alternatives, including a country of origin or a third country which could receive the person. A foreigner who was pregnant or a minor could not be subject to refoulment. There were guarantees of protection from ill treatment. Any person affected by a crime could request the protection of their rights, be it civil or criminal. The person could also receive legal assistance upon request. There were rules and conditions for custody. As for the Criminal Code, the reform had led to additional guarantees, especially with regard to confessions before judiciary police, which were now considered null and void. If a decision was claimed to be illegal, it could be appealed, and action needed to be taken within 24 hours.
Morocco received everybody without discrimination. In Morocco, laws addressed every citizen, never a particular community. The law relating to prisons applied to all detainees, whether they were Moroccan or foreigners. There was also a law which enhanced the independence of the judiciary and the Public Prosecutor’s Office. There was a draft civil law which led to a community discussion amongst the people of Morocco. Every generation in Morocco had more freedom compared to the previous generation. The State was always seeking to improve and achieve more.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office was in charge of search and investigation. Judges from the Office supervised these processes. Morocco’s national legislation was fully in line with article 6 of the Convention.
Closing Remarks
ABDELLATIF OUAHBI, Minister of Justice of Morocco and head of the delegation, said there needed to be a link between reparation and the person who was subject to harm. Decisions and rulings had been handed down and victims had been compensated, because the State was responsible for protecting individuals. Morocco had compensated the families of two Norwegians who were killed by terrorist attacks in Morocco. Morocco had a committee which held meetings with counterparts in Europe, asking to provide lists of children, and investigations had been carried out. Most of the children were foreign children, but some were Moroccan who had been released abroad. Morocco had come a long way and aspired to the best rule of law. The State had paid more than 200 million dollars in compensation to ensure human dignity. Mr. Ouahbi thanked the Committee members for their comments and advice. When the Committee next reviewed Morocco, it was hoped that the new Penal Code would be completely adopted. The Minister thanked the delegation and civil society for their support.
OLIVIER DE FROUVILLE, Committee Chair, said the dialogue had been an important first step to pursue cooperation. The Committee would draw up concluding observations which would pay particular attention to the developing situation in the country and the issues raised in the constructive dialogue. The State party could count on the Committee’s support in its efforts to implement the Convention.
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
CED24.008E
MIL OSI United Nations News –