With the “buzz” in the latest Human Rights Watch report calmed down, let’s try to give an objective reading of the data contained in the report issued on July 28; Let’s see, according to the poet, when “the fanfare dust clears”, “there is a horse in the report or a donkey”.
Aiming at the king and his entourage.
The publication of the report on July 28, 2022, coinciding with the celebrations of the Kingdom on the 30th of the same month, the 33rd anniversary of the accession to the throne of the King of Morocco, may be directed at the king himself and his entourage, and may be just a coincidence that the authors of the report have not thought at all. However, the “digital data” included in the report makes anyone who consults it doubt its accuracy, since these data are like any suspicious matter that almost says “take me”.
The word of the king was mentioned 33 times in the report, the word of the palace was mentioned 44 times and the word Mohammed VI was repeated 17 times, while Abdellatif Hammouchi, director general of the National Security Directorate and director general of the Directorate of National Territory Surveillance, was renamed 11 times, followed by Mohamed Mounir Al Majidi, director The King’s Private Deed, 10 times.
The mention of the name of the king, in its various expressions, as well as the name of officials close to him, in these numbers is intended to link everything that the organization does not see with the eye of satisfaction with the person of the king. .Suggest/deceive the king to adopt the various rulings issued by the judiciary; Just because the judges formulate their rulings by referring to the phrase “in the name of His Majesty”, so it is correct to ask: “If the king adopts all the rulings issued by the judiciary, what does it mean to launch a judicial reform? Workshops?”
The same shuffling of cards occurs when the report speaks of the “opponents”, since it considers them opponents of the king and the monarchy, and when it accuses the media of being loyal to Makhzen, it defines Makhzen as “the network of power holders linked to the king and his associates, through loyalty and nepotism”. In short, what our ancestors used to say: “If the meaning appears, there is no point in repetition.”
Consensual Relationships: Abortion and Preventive Prison
It was said that sometimes the tree hides the forest; But it also happens, for some, that a few twigs are enough for the forest to become a “windswept desert”.
The “Human Rights Watch” report stops at cases that suffered from consensual relationships, or from an abortion (Al-Raissouni and Al-Mansouri), and triumphs over them; But it takes it out of its general national context.
In Morocco, for those who do not know, abortion and consensual relations continue to be social taboos among conservative actors, and the “right to abortion” is a debate that has not been resolved conclusively even in the United States, whose Court The Constitutional Court recently retracted one of its most outstanding guarantees.
In Morocco, for those who do not know, official reports are presented that do not hesitate to demand the adoption of the international benchmark and the expansion of the scope of individual freedoms; But it faces a high barrier built by currents pertaining to references shared by several of those cited in the Human Rights Watch report. The authors of the report should look at the number of people behind bars today in Morocco, in the context of these reasons. In defense of the rights of all of them (from the perspective of the international human rights authority), the institutions and official reports do not tire of pleading and pushing the wheel of change, not in the face of the State or the king; Rather, it is primarily against partisan political actors and conservative groups.
The same applies to the pretrial detention dilemma. Do your problems only concern Raissouni and Radi?
Pretrial detention cases amounted to 46 percent of the total number of inmates in penal institutions in Morocco, or 40,000 detainees out of 96,000. Thus, similar issues cannot be addressed by selecting cases to use in the service of a particular narrative; Rather, it is addressed in its entirety to have an impact on the system. All national actors in Morocco tirelessly demand the rationalization of preventive detention.
The organization speaks about the seriousness of sexual harassment and assaults and addresses the cases of Bouachrine, Suleiman Raissouni and Omar Radi; But he did not bother to monitor the smear campaign against the whistleblowers in the Bouachrine and Radi case, and the whistleblower in the Raissouni case.
The communication with one of the complainants, according to a “report” by Human Rights Watch, was not initiated by the organization; Rather, it is the person in question who took the initiative to contact the organization. As for the rest, the organization saw no need to even listen to them.
It follows from the organization’s discourse on the non-arrest of the complainant in the Raissouni case against the background of his confession of his homosexuality, a veiled incitement against him, because he believes that his freedom was intended to fulfill a specific agenda; While legal scholars may consider this step, not being arrested, a true entry to defend the LGBT community.
I am the original and the illusion after me
The report claims that the Moroccan press ended with Ahmed Reda Benchemsi leaving the field and joining Human Rights Watch, as communication director in the Middle East and North Africa department, and he is one of the report’s authors. In fact, to publish it publicly? Isn’t this a serious violation of the supposed objectivity of an international organization? Rather, what is worse is that excerpts from Benchemsi’s personal blog report are quoted.
flip the facts
The organization claims that the closure of the newspaper “Akhbar Al Youm Al Maghribia” was due to the cessation of support provided by the authorities to various media outlets. This was not said even by the officials of this newspaper, some of whom affirmed that stopping it and not closing it, as the organization affirms, was a decision of its owner, wondering about the mysterious destiny of the support that the newspaper received in certain years.
It seems that every time the organization spins a spin, it comes back and reverses its spin. So we heard fanfare and did not see our flour.