#Following the publication of a press release from the “Solidarity #Committee with #Maati #Mounjib”, the #King’s prosecutor near the #Rabat court of first instance responds point by point to the allegations made in this document.
The #King’s prosecutor at the #Rabat court of first instance affirms in a press release, published this #Thursday, #December 31, that he has taken note of a press release from the “#Solidarity #Committee with #Maati #Mounjib”. #He recalls its content as follows:
#This document considers as abusive and infringing the provisions of the penal code, the arrest of #Maati #Mounjib on the pretext that it took place on #Tuesday, #December 29, 2020 at 3 p.m. inside a restaurant in #Rabat, while the mis involved was eating. The illegality of the arrest is also questioned because the accused was arrested by numerous plainclothes officers who arrived at the scene in two police cars.
#Regretting that such prejudices are advanced without any regard to legal provisions, the general prosecutor notes, moreover, that they obey neither common sense nor logic.
#In his press release, the public prosecutor questions the founding elements that led to the conclusion that the arrest is illegal and does not respect the penal code. #He therefore asks a series of questions: would the arrest be against the law because it took place at 3 p.m.? or because it took place on a #Tuesday? or because it took place in a restaurant in #Rabat? or because the person arrested was eating? or because this arrest was carried out by agents who were in civilian clothes? or because they arrived in two police cars?
The public prosecutor notes that the authors of the press release set themselves up as a court arrogating to themselves the duty of concluding that legal proceedings were illegal. #He also notes that these “judges” have their own reading grid making them believe that an arrest is only legal if it takes place at the home of the accused who must be arrested, according to this same grid, in flagrante delicto. #According to the same allegations, the end of the preliminary investigation in no way authorizes the public prosecutor’s office to compel the accused to appear before the investigating judge. #From this point of view, the general prosecutor’s office would just be empowered to request the opening of an investigation without the possibility of presenting the accused before the investigating judge.
The public prosecutor’s office claims to refrain from discussing such assertions having nothing to do with the sound application of the law, and declares to leave it to the judicial public to assess the relevance or not of the judicial decisions taken. . #He recalls in passing that only justice is empowered to decide on the legality of proceedings.
#Moreover, saying that it is attached to the strict application of legal provisions, the general prosecutor regrets such instrumentalisation aimed at harming national institutions. #He recalls that the places indicated for discussing legal proceedings are only judges’ offices and courtrooms.
#It was also recalled that the press releases of the public prosecutor’s office are published to enlighten national public opinion and ensure the citizen’s right to information when it comes to legal cases arousing the interest of the general public. and may give rise to the circulation of information. #By communicating, the general prosecutor’s office underlines that its objective is also to put an end to certain rumors, biased information and fake news.
“The press releases are not reports of investigation and investigation which serve as a basis for judgments,” recalls the same source. The public prosecutor stresses that his press releases do not constitute judicial decisions, it is just a means of informing the different categories of public opinion, thus using simple language and not the technical jargon found in minutes and other legal documents.
[ source link ]
#general #prosecutors #office #puts #point