53. In his reply, the representative stated that detentions without trial
were strictly regulated by the Code of Criminal Procedure and other pretrial
rules. In cases of detention following a sentence or judicial decision
subsequently found to have been erroneous, compensation was normally granted.
Action for compensation could only be taken under article 70 of the Code of
Obligations and Contracts. A remedy was available against any official who
had committed an act of deliberate abuse. Under Act Ho. 6790, which was in
the process of promulgation, the judicial police had to inform the family of
an arrest without delay and to submit a daily list of persons in custody to
the public prosecutor's office or to the Court of Appeal. In all cases, the
attorney of the court of first instance and the judicial authorities
responsible for monitoring custody had to inform the family if the judicial
police had not done so. Any extension of a period of custody had to be
requested in due form from a prosecutor's office and carried out by order of
an examining magistrate; that order was open to appeal. The defence lawyer
had the right to attend the interrogation before the prosecutor and the
accused person had the right to request a medical examination.
54. Replying to further questions, the representative stated that Mrs. Oufkir
and her children had been freed and that no administrative measures had been
taken to restrict her freedom of movement. The question of the army officers
in detention was in the process of settlement. The distinction between abuse
and error rested on the question of intent. The Moroccan Criminal Code, the
Code of Criminal Procedure and the Code of Obligations and Contracts contained
provisions relative to compensation and redress.
55. The duration of police custody was in principle 24 hours, extendable to a
maximum of 48 hours. In cases involving the security of the State the police
might hold a person in custody for 95 hours; that period was extendable only a
single time. The period of remand in custody was two months, which could be
extended five times to an overall maximum detention in custody of one year.
Law Ho. 6790 provided that in the case of minor offences police statements
would be conclusive, but that in the case of criminal offences police
statements would form only part of the body of evidence in court proceedings.
No secret detention centres existed under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of
Justice: Derb Moulay Cherif was a police station in Casablanca and the
Villa Mokris was currently the headquarters of the Moroccan Eed Crescent in
Rabat. Morocco did not recognize political offences; when criminal offences
were committed, whether or not they were politically motivated, their
perpetrators were charged under the ordinary law. Imprisonment for debt could
occur only after a series of other measures had been taken, such as a seizure
of assets in the case of debt to the State. The principle of the presumption
of innocence was fully respected in Morocco.
56. Morocco followed the European procedures relating to the availability of
remedies and also provided various guarantees which did not exist in the penal
procedures of a number of other States. The authorities had been informed of
a number of requests for files on persons from Western Sahara who had
disappeared and were examining all those cases with the greatest care. A
number of disappearances dated back to a period when Morocco did not
administer Western Sahara, There were also problems with regard to
identification, names and spelling, since the nomadic people in question were
often only identified by tribe.
-12-