Morocco halves jail sentence of rights activist, week after acquitting another for ‘insulting institutions’

A Moroccan appeals court halved the sentence of rights activist Rida Benotmane, jailed for social media posts calling for rallies against “abuses by security forces”, his lawyer said Tuesday. 

“The sentence has been reduced to a year and a half in prison,” said lawyer Mohammed Ennouini, who demanded Benotmane be acquitted. 

Benotmane was arrested last September over Facebook and YouTube posts made in 2021, where he called for a “march against abuses by security forces”, according to Amnesty International. 

In November, a court in the North African country’s capital Rabat sentenced him to three years in prison, including for “insulting public officials in the exercise of their functions.”

Benotmane, born in 1976, argued in court that the comments “fall within the scope of freedom of expression and do not constitute an offense.”

Amnesty and the Moroccan Association for Human Rights (AMDH), of which he is a member, have demanded his immediate release. 

Several Moroccan activists have recently been sentenced for online comments critical of the authorities. 

Yassine Benchekroune was sentenced earlier in February to two years in prison for “insulting a constituted body and a constitutional institution,” according to local media. 

Saida El Alami, another activist, was also handed a three-year prison term for online comments causing “contempt of constitutional institutions” in September. Fatima Karim was in September also jailed for two years “undermining Islam” after having made satirical posts about the Coran on Facebook.

A second judicial decision pertaining to a Moroccan activist also surprised the public this week. 

Two case updates in a short span

The Court of First Instance in Essaouira acquitted a human rights and political activist facing “insulting organized bodies” charges last week.

The unnamed citizen posted mainly on the Hirak protests that took place in the Rif region, in northern Morocco, in which he expressed his sympathy for the social demands of the protesters. He also published posts expressing his rejection of normalization with Israel.

The citizen also published posts in which he criticized “the absurd government policy that the government of Saad Eddine El Othmani, and before him Abdelilah Benkirane, used to manage Moroccan affairs,” according to what he stated when he was heard by the police.

He had also published writings, some of which he later deleted after realizing that what he did was considered a mistake punishable by law, in which he demanded the freedom of political detainees who were arrested in connection with the rural movement, “because of their legitimate demands for health, education and a decent life.”

He stated when he was heard by the police that he meant by the “Makhzen regime” “the failed government that was headed by El Othmani and Benkirane before him, since they were the ones who caused the price increases and the lifting of subsidies on fuel, in addition to other problems that they bequeathed to the country.”

The citizen said “ he is not opposed to the monarchy,” and that his reference to the regime, rule, or policy “means the government, not His Majesty.”

The follower is a member of the Moroccan Association for Human Rights, and he was a former activist in the “February 20 Movement”, a member of the local office of the Justice and Development Party in Essaouira, and a former activist in the National Coordination of Unemployed Certificate Holders in Essaouira.

The accused, who was prosecuted in a state of release before the Court of First Instance in Essaouira, stated that what he wrote down “remains just personal opinions that were not intended to insult any particular party or institution.”

He also explained using the term “Ayasha,” which he used, means someone who exploits the expression “Long live the king,” intended to achieve personal goals.

Regarding his use of the word “sin,” as a reference to the former name of the first official television channel (ATM), he stated that it meant “a group of those who use the name of a journalist or media person without being qualified.”

When inquired by the prosecutor about the meaning of “dictatorial” and “autocratic,” the accused stated that he “does not distinguish between a dictatorial and tyrannical regime, and that he only hears that in the street and does not know the meaning of the two concepts, and that he uses them in his writings as slogans that were echoed in the street.”

Anyone who insults a member of the judiciary, public servants, or women and men of the public force while carrying out their duties or because of their performance, with words, signs, threats, sending or placing things, or by non-public writing or drawings, with the intent of prejudicing their honor, feelings, or the respect due to them, in accordance with the requirements stipulated in Article 263 of the Criminal Code.

The ruling body of the Court of First Instance in Essaouira, which examined this case, considered that some of the vocabulary and expressions used by the accused in some of his writings “are nothing more than political discourse circulated by some political organizations with a protest orientation in the Kingdom of Morocco for decades.”

The court considered that what the accused published “does not deviate from the framework of freedom of expression and opinion, which international human rights conventions have given a distinct position among the basic rights and freedoms granted to individuals and groups within societies, and which the Constitution of the Kingdom of Morocco has worked to protect.”

The court inferred Article 19 of the Constitution, which stipulates that “men and women shall enjoy, on an equal footing, the civil, political, economic, cultural and environmental rights contained in the Constitution, and in international conventions and covenants ratified by Morocco…”

They also inferred Article 25, which stipulates “freedom of thought, opinion and expression in all its forms.” And to guarantee “freedom of creativity, publishing and presentation in the fields of literature, art and scientific research.”

The court also relied on the provisions of Chapter 28 of the constitutional document, which stipulates that “everyone has the right to express and disseminate news, ideas and opinions freely and without restriction, except for what is expressly stipulated by the law.”

The court decided not to hold the accused accountable for the sake of the accused, and to acquit him, as it concluded that there was no evidence for a misdemeanor of insulting organized bodies against the accused, given the absence of its most important constituent elements, mainly represented in the “prejudice” element. the honor or feeling of a particular body or the breach of due respect for its authority.”

“The accused expressed his disagreement with political and administrative decisions only, he is not held responsible for them, and to declare his innocence, in accordance with the principle stipulated in Article 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which states that the basic principle in a person is innocence, and that criminal rulings are not based on suspicion and conjecture, but rather on certainty,” they concluded.