|
|
|
In-Depth:
Justice for a Lawless World? Rights and reconciliation in a new era of international law
|
 Download this in-depth report
Part I 6.36 MB
Part II 2.40 MB
- Professor Noam Chomsky
- ICC Chief Prosecutor Moreno Ocampo
- Samantha Power, Professor of Practice in Human Rights Policy
- Juan Mendez ,President of the International Center for Transitional Justice
- Justice Geoffrey Robertson Q.C.
- Dr Fanie du Toit, Programme Director for Educating for Reconciliation at the Institute for Justice and Reconciliation in South Africa
- Abdullah An-Na`im, Ph.D, Charles Howard Candler Professor of Law at Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
- Augustin Nkusi, the Director of the Legal Support Unit, National Service of Gacaca Jurisdictions, Rwanda
- Benjamin Gumpert, counsel representing Justin Mugenzi, who is currently on trial at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
- Hanny Megally, Director, Middle East and North Africa Program, International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
- Paul van Zyl, Country Programme Director at the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
- Johnston Busingye, Secretary General of the Ministry of Justice in Rwanda
- Dennis McNamara (Special Adviser on Internal Displacement to the UN’s Emergency Relief Co-ordinator and Director of the OCHA Inter-agency Internal Displacement Division) on the rule of law
IRIN welcomes feedback. Send your messages to feedback. |
|
MOROCCO: History will keep its secrets
|
Deceased Moroccan King, Hassan II. Numerous crimes during his reign have being or are waiting to be investigated by the Morocco’s Equity and Reconciliation Commission (Instance Equite et Reconciliation – IER). | | While great steps have been taken by Morocco’s Equity and Reconciliation Commission (Instance Equite et Reconciliation - IER) to expose many of the crimes committed during the reign of King Hassan II, there still remain some hidden in the shadows of history.
Most notable is the case of the opposition politician, Mehdi Ben Barka, who mysteriously disappeared in Paris in 1965 – a case that is currently being investigated by the French authorities. However, the Ben Barka case is just one of the IER’s many files which remain open. Others include 66 ‘disappearances’: among them notable figures – both trade union activists- Abdelhak Rouissi, whose grave has just been discovered; and Houcine Manouzi who was kidnapped in 1972.
Other cases waiting to be investigated include the mass graves of strikers massacred in 1981, and the harshly suppressed uprisings of 1958 and 1959 in Rif, a region in the north of Morocco that rebelled against the Alaouite Dynasty’s rule.
Since it was established in 2004 by King Mohammed VI – son and heir to Hassan II – the IER has operated with a restricted remit. The commission’s brief is to expose human rights abuses, however, it is not able to identify and prosecute offenders. The commission is focusing its investigations on the period between 1956 (the date of Moroccan independence), and 1999 (the year in which Hassan II died) – the period known as the “years of lead” during which time the worst acts of violence were committed.
Morocco has opened up to the outside world in recent years, with greater freedom of speech for the people and the press. Some of the country’s old guard have been dismissed, including the former vizier of Hassan II, and issues such as the Royal Family and the armed forces are more openly discussed. Part of this new openness for Morocco also means that Mohammed VI is now under pressure to expose the darker secrets of his country’s past, including the use of torture.
By establishing the IER, Mohammed VI hopes to erase his father’s legacy without upsetting the foundations of the monarchy. The IER therefore must reconcile two contradictory issues: how to appease the people (who want to know the full truth about the crimes committed and those involved) without implicating his father, Hassan II.
By limiting the remit of the commission, the state hopes to dispell any idea that the commission represents victor’s justice. Comprising a president (and former political prisoner), and 16 members of different political views, the commission had a strictly consultative role. It was authorised to give an audience to victims, to make various enquiries and finally to draw up recommendations.
The IER investigated and ruled on 16,861 individual cases, awarding compensation to 9,280 of these. The commission also determined the total death toll during this period to be 592. Despite disputes regarding this figure, the IER deserves credit for taking a number of bold steps. It firmly established the state’s role in perperating abuses and demanded a public apology. However, it will not be the king who apologises, but rather the head of state. If Mohammed VI were to apologise for crimes committed during his father’s reign, he would put his own legitimacy as heir to the Alaouite throne at risk.
The commission also emphasised the importance of constitutional reform. Changes to the constitution would enable the eradication of impunity and the guarantee of human rights. Reforms recommended include the separation of powers and the prioritisation of individual rights in domestic law. The IER also recommended the eventual establishing of an independent judicial system, and called for greater transparency in the security forces. Impunity was rife in the services that relied on verbal communications, making accountability almost impossible.
Endorsing these recommendations, the king asked the Consultative Council on Human Rights – presided over by the same Driss Benzekri who had directed the IER – to ensure that action was taken. Benzekri himself is a former dissident who experienced torture. But to what extent is it possible to implement the recommentations?
Transparency in the security forces is an important issue to a country like Morocco, a country where the security services have been accused of torturing Islamic militants following the Casbalanca bombings of 2003, in which 33 civilians died.
The Parti Justice et Developpement (Justice and Development Party - PJD), a moderate political party and the favourite contender to win the country’s elections in 2007, has profited from the political rift created by the IER. The PJD is demanding a review of the investigations following the 16 May (2003) bombings, during which many of its supporters were imprisoned.
Implicit in this demand is criticism of the unfair way in which the PJD believes the cases were tried, although the party is reluctant to jeopardise its political future by taking an official stand on the matter. On the other hand, Jamaa Al Adl Wal Ihssane – a radical yet very popular Islamic group whose name means ‘ justice and charity’ – has been quick to reject entirely the IER’s approach. The reaction of this group is hardly surprising given its regular and frank admissions of reservation about the current government.
At an international level, the work of the IER has been perceived by commentators both as a glass half-empty, and a glass half-full. However, the establishment of such a commission is unprecedented in the Middle East and North Africa. It is the first time that an Arab country has decided to examine its past and to invite victims to give their testimonies, an initiative that has been commended by South Africa, one of the pioneers of the notion transitional justice. The activities of the IER have certainly received worldwide attention – and Morocco cannot waste such an opportunity to improve its image, which was until recently that of an “exporter of terrorists”.
The stakes for Morocco are also geopolitical. By contrast, neighbouring Algeria - the major economic force in the region (due to its hydrocarbon riches) and a major political rival over the Sahara - is making no headway with its own reconciliation process. Unlike Morocco, Algeria has chosen not to examine its past, but instead has drawn a line under it, criminalising public discussion about the decade-long conflict.
The Algerian government has granted an amnesty to guerrillas who lay down their weapons and has promised to compensate to the relatives of those who disappeared. However, it does not go so far as to seek the truth about what happened during the war years. The fate of the disappeared, the use of torture, the role of the army and of Islamic militants - all are questions that have not been publicly addressed in Algeria. In Morocco, they have. But even given all of these efforts, is Morocco really reconciled with its past?
This report was written by Nadia Lamlili for IRIN
[ENDS]
|
|
|
|
|