King’s Prosecutor at the Rabat Court of First Instance: Allegations Reported by a Foreign News Agency Regarding a Hunger Strike by Senegalese Detainees Are Completely Unfounded
The King’s Prosecutor at the Rabat Court of First Instance has denied the allegations contained in a report published by a foreign news agency concerning an alleged hunger strike by Senegalese detainees following acts of hooliganism that occurred during the Africa Cup of Nations final. He stated that these allegations are completely unfounded and that the information relayed by the detainees’ defense is false and aimed at influencing the course of the case.
In a statement, the King’s Prosecutor indicated that the report, which claimed, according to the defense of the individuals concerned, that the hunger strike was a reaction to delays in the handling of the case as well as the absence of an interpreter during their questioning, contains several inaccuracies.
In this regard, the Public Prosecutor’s Office informs public opinion that the allegation of a hunger strike by the Senegalese detainees is incorrect, as the individuals concerned are receiving meals normally and regularly from the detention facility. This demonstrates that the information reported by their defense is false and intended to influence the course of the proceedings.
Regarding the adjournment of the case to the hearing scheduled for 12 February 2026, the same source specified that the case was first listed at the hearing held on 22 January 2026 and was postponed to the hearing of 29 January 2026 following the defendants’ request for additional time to prepare their defense.
After the case was listed at the 29 January 2026 hearing, it was postponed once again after the defendants insisted on being assisted by their lawyer. The court then adjourned the examination of the case to the hearing of 5 February 2026, which was attended by a lawyer representing them, registered with the Paris Bar, without being accompanied by a lawyer holding a correspondence office in Morocco.
The case was subsequently postponed to the hearing of 12 February 2026 following the unanimous insistence of all defendants to be assisted by their defense and their request to the court to grant them additional time for this purpose, which proves that the adjournment of the case took place at their request.
Furthermore, the aforementioned lawyer communicated directly with the Senegalese detainees in French and informed them of the new hearing date, in accordance with the request they had submitted.
As for the presence of an interpreter during the hearings, the statement notes that the court sessions were held in the presence of a sworn interpreter appointed by the court to translate all exchanges during the hearings into French, a language understood and spoken by all the detainees concerned without exception. This demonstrates that the allegations made by the defense in this regard are false.
Concerning the claim that the interrogation reports of the individuals concerned were drawn up by judicial police officers without the assistance of an interpreter, the same source recalls that Article 21 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not require the use of an interpreter if the officer responsible for drafting the interrogation report is proficient in the language spoken by the person being questioned.
In this respect, the interrogation reports drawn up for all the aforementioned detainees clearly state that the content of each interrogation report was read and translated to the person concerned in accordance with the provisions of the law, the same source concludes.
Editorial team/le7tv
