HIBAPRESS – A. Muhayawi
The Initial Criminal Chamber in charge of financial crimes at the Court of Appeal in Fez decided, this Tuesday afternoon, to postpone the consideration of the case of the criminal network related to the management of the municipal detention center in the city of Oujda, until March 24th, in order to complete the procedural measures and begin discussing the substance of the case.
The postponement decision comes to enable the prison administration services to bring all the detained defendants to the courtroom, as well as to grant an additional deadline for some of the defendants who were unable to appoint a defense to assist them during the trial, guaranteeing the conditions for a fair trial and the rights of defense. The Public Prosecution is pursuing 19 defendants in this case, including public officials, on serious charges related to embezzlement and squandering of public and private funds placed in their hands by virtue of their positions, the destruction of official documents and bonds, in addition to bribery and forgery in official documents and their use, with participation in these actions, each according to what is attributed to him. The case exploded after a security operation carried out by elements of the Regional Brigade of the Judicial Police in the city of Fez, in coordination with the services of the General Directorate for the Monitoring of National Territory, which resulted in the dismantling of a network suspected of being involved in exploiting the municipal detention center in Oujda as a cover for smuggling seized cars and motorcycles, after tampering with their technical data or dismantling them and selling them in scrap markets. According to the data circulated during the investigation phase, 17 people were arrested in the framework of this operation, including four public officials, while the search operations revealed the seizure of ten cars and 17 motorcycles, in addition to 38 dismantled car bodies, and significant quantities of spare parts and electronic equipment suspected of their source. Twelve suspects were placed under custodial detention, while others were subjected to judicial investigation procedures under the supervision of the competent Public Prosecution, in order to determine individual responsibilities and uncover all the potential extensions of this network. This case brings back to the forefront the problem of managing public facilities related to the seizure of property, and the challenges it poses related to governance and oversight, pending what the upcoming trial sessions will reveal of official data and clarifications.
