Rachid Ghribi Laroussi
Cases- Location of case in SG report
- 2019-071-901
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- 2019
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 31.791702
Longitude: -7.09261999999999
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- Morocco
- From Region
- Type of record
- Named individual
- Gender
- Male
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- No
- Was the victim a minor?
- No
- Type of rights defended
- Civil/political rights
- Was the victim a civil servant or member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- No
- Reported trigger of reprisal
The detention of Mr. Rachid Ghribi Laroussi was found arbitrary by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in 2015 (A/HRC/WGAD/2015/34, para. 29, 31).
- Engagement with UN body
- UN Special Procedures: thematic
- Dates of engagement
- 2015
- Type of attempted engagement
- UN raised case of person/organization
- Dates of mentioned reprisals
- August 2016: 30 April 2019
- Reprisal information
According to information received, Mr. Laroussi’s family sent the 2015 Opinion of the Working Group to the Ministry of Justice and to the National Human Rights Council (Conseil National des Droits de l’Homme – CNDH), following which, in August 2016, Mr. Laroussi was transferred from Tangiers, where his family lives, to a prison in Fes (approximately 300km away). He was placed in solitary confinement and prevented from continuing his legal studies. It is reported that Mr. Laroussi keeps a copy of the Opinion in Arabic in his cell and that his insistence in requesting his release has played a part in the decisions to transfer him. 72. On 8 April 2019, Mr. Laroussi reportedly started a hunger strike to call the attention of the authorities to the Working Group’s Opinion and, as a result, was put in solitary confinement without light for four days. On 16 April 2019, the local branch of the CNDH visited Mr. Laroussi and on 30 April 2019 he was transferred again, without any prior notice or explanation, to Meknes Toulal II prison and detained in solitary confinement with restricted visits and calls.
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Deterioration in detention conditions
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- No
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- No
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- No
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- No
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- No
- How many times has the case been followed up in subsequent SG reports?
- 0