COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE CONTINUES REVIEW OF REPORT OF MOROCCO

13 October 2003

The Committee against Torture continued its consideration this afternoon of the third periodic report of Morocco on how that country implements the provisions of the Convention against Torture.
The delegation, led by Omar Hilale, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Morocco to the United Nations Office at Geneva, responding to questions put by Committee members upon presentation of the report on Wednesday morning, said among other things that overcrowding in prisons was a matter of concern for the Moroccan authorities as well as for non-governmental organizations. Efforts were being made to remedy this, such as through alternative sanctions or the reintegration of minors in their families. The minors’ category referred to youngsters underneath the age of 20, and separate detention premises existed for them.
Concerning the events that occurred in Laayoune in September 1999, the delegation indicated that all those who had been arrested had benefited from a royal pardon in November 2001. As for the events that took place in Smara, 16 persons had been prosecuted and 13 had been sentenced, but many had benefited from a pardon or a reduction of the sentences.
Morocco, as one of the 134 States parties to the Convention against Torture, must submit periodic reports to the Committee on efforts to prevent torture and related ill treatment.
The Committee's conclusions and recommendations on the report of Morocco will be issued on 20 November in the afternoon.
The Committee will reconvene at 3 p.m. on Friday, 14 November, to continue its examination of the initial report of Latvia.
Discussion
The Moroccan delegation, responding to questions put by Committee members upon presentation of the Moroccan report on Wednesday morning, said among other things, that the interactive dialogue between Morocco and the Committee proved the strategic choice of the country to establish a state of law and to combat torture. It was an irrevocable will of the Moroccan authorities. However, the delegation’s answers had to be put in the specific Moroccan context, which was the difficulties faced from an economical point of view, the efforts made for the establishment of a state of law and democracy, and the combat against terrorism. The struggle would be lengthy and the country relied on the Committee’s cooperation in this regard.
The delegation said that a section of the next report would be devoted to follow-up to the comments, concerns and recommendations of the Committee. Regarding the definition of torture, Morocco was committed to amend its current legislation and harmonize it with international norms. Furthermore, as for the future recognition of articles 20, 21 and 22 of the Convention, the delegation said that Morocco was holding a study to envisage the possibility of lifting those reservations and accede to the Optional Protocol as well as to other international instruments.
The delegation indicated that the new Migration Law stipulated that no foreigner could be expelled to a country where he could be exposed to a human right violation, especially torture. Concerning training on human rights, the delegation said that Morocco had established a cooperation programme with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to put specific training programmes in place regarding human rights information. Specific training was also provided according to the various Conventions ratified by Morocco, such as the Convention against Torture. These programmes were supported by various non-governmental organizations such as Amnesty International. Moreover, as Morocco had been chosen to be the focal point for the implementation of the Istanbul Protocol, a plan of action had been developed for the rehabilitation of victims. This plan had received the support of several non-governmental organizations and benefited from public funds.
Regarding concerns expressed about detention conditions, the delegation underlined the fact that the “minors” category referred to youngsters underneath the age of 20, and that separate detention premises existed for them. No minor could be subjected to disciplinary measures. The delegation recognized that the overcrowding in prisons was a matter of concern for the Moroccan authorities as well as for non-governmental organizations. Efforts were being made to remedy this, such as through alternative sanctions or the reintegration of minors in their families. A large number of royal pardons and of sanction reductions had also helped to tackle the problem. Furthermore, the construction of more than 15 prisons and detention centres for minors was underway.
Regarding violence in prisons, and particularly sexual violence against children, the delegation took as an example of Morocco’s commitment to tackle that problem the fact that the country had been chosen as the focal point for an international workshop on child exploitation. Morocco was currently adopting a number of measures to combat violence in prisons and places of detention.
On a question regarding trafficking of human beings, the delegation said there had been a strengthening of legislation in this area. The adoption of new laws on migration, she said, made sentences heavier for offenders of such acts. Morocco had been among the first countries to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of Migrant Workers and their Families and had developed a policy on the rights of migrants, she said, and very recently, on 9 November 2003, his Majesty Mohammed VI had provided directives on border monitoring.
Concerning the events that occurred in Laayoune in September 1999, the delegation indicated that all those who had been arrested had benefited from a royal pardon in November 2001. As for the events that took place in Smara, 16 persons had been prosecuted and 13 had been sentenced, but many had benefited from a pardon or a reduction of the sentence.
With regard to forced or involuntary disappearances, the delegation recalled Morocco’s cooperation with the Working Group on forced or involuntary disappearances. The total number of cases received from the Working Group was 249; 133 cases had been clarified up to now, with 95 persons who had been found alive. Several cases had not been clarified because of the fact that many of the allegations dated back to the 1970s which made it difficult to conduct investigations. Furthermore, there were discrepancies between the French, Spanish, Arabic and English versions of the names, the delegation added.
Concerning disciplinary measures against police officers, the delegation noted that the Moroccan Government had pronounced more than 50 disciplinary measures against those charged with abuses. The measures ranged from prosecutions, warnings, suspensions and forced retirements. Several dismissals and convictions had ensued as a result.
Concerning the issue of whether Moroccan legislation provided special circumstances that could exonerate from criminal responsibility someone who had committed a crime of torture, the delegation said that if a military superior gave an order to commit acts of torture, he was the only one who would be sentenced and not the person who had obeyed. The delegation also gave further details about the “Diwan Al Madhalim”, which was an arbitration body, and about the procedure for the registration of complaints.
The delegation recalled that Morocco had been the target of an attack in August 1994 in Marrakech and that the case had been elucidated within a very short time while respecting all the rules of procedure. After the attacks of 11 September 2002, several developments had pushed the Government to file an anti-terrorist bill to allow for ad hoc legislation. Several non-governmental organizations and associations were opposed to this project. However, they had taken part in its revision by the Parliament with an aim of specifying and safeguarding the rights and guarantees.
In answer to a question relating to possible abuses by police forces against the perpetrators of the attacks of May 16, the delegate indicated that the law was promulgated afterwards and was not retroactive. Moreover, an investigation of the Supreme Court was underway to make sure that all the procedural guarantees were respected.
The delegation gave further details concerning the arbitration body in charge of the complaints for arbitrary detention and forced disappearances. This authority was not in charge of investigating offences but was a platform of expression. Concerning the appeal possibilities, the delegation indicated that the inconvenience of arbitration was that there was no possibility of appeal. However, victims could always bring their case to justice. The delegation indicated that the arbitration body had nearly achieved its work, and had compensated 4,500 persons up to now. The King had just agreed to introduce a body called “Equity and Reconciliation”. It was now a question of rehabilitation and compensation.