Latest Updates on the Legal Case in Fes

In a significant development regarding allegations of blackmail and threats of imprisonment during the 2021 electoral campaign, the public prosecutor's office at the Court of Appeal in Fes has disclosed new details. This announcement comes in light of the controversy following a press conference organized by a lawyer from the Fes Bar Association. The prosecutor's office clarified that it has been actively engaging with the complaint since its submission, countering rumors that no investigation was initiated. A timeline of actions taken in response to the allegations has been provided to shed light on the matter.

According to the statement, on June 23, 2025, the individual in question, who was then an inmate at the local prison of Ras El-Ma, filed a complaint through his legal counsel against several individuals. The complaint claimed that he had been subjected to blackmail and threats of imprisonment during the electoral campaign of 2021. Following this, the prosecutor's office opened an investigation into the allegations. A deputy public prosecutor even visited the prison to hear the complainant's account and allow him to elaborate on his claims.

However, the efforts to gather testimony from the complainant were unsuccessful. During the first visit on August 8, 2025, he expressed that he was too fatigued to provide any statements. In the second visit on August 11, 2025, he again refused to comment, citing a need to recover and await consultation with his lawyer. By the third visit on August 17, 2025, he declared he would not provide any statements due to entering a hunger strike.

The prosecutor's office noted that the complainant's unwillingness to make any statements, combined with a lack of sufficient details and evidence backing his claims, hindered the continuation of the investigation. Consequently, on August 29, 2025, the prosecutor's office temporarily archived the complaint, stating that a notification of this decision was sent to him, although he refused to acknowledge receipt.

This archival decision was not made lightheartedly; it stemmed from the inability to complete the investigation elements, particularly due to the complainant's lack of cooperation in providing necessary statements or additional data. The case was thrust back into the spotlight on July 14, 2026, when the complainant's defense team requested the prosecutor's office to reopen the case.

Upon reviewing this request, the prosecutor's office found no new evidence that would justify re-opening the investigation or provide supporting materials for the original claims, despite previous opportunities given to the complainant to present additional information. Consequently, the decision to maintain the archived status of the case was upheld, and the complainant was informed accordingly.

After a press conference held by the complainant's defense team, the prosecutor's office became aware of additional details related to the case that were not included in the original complaint. The public prosecutor confirmed that, in accordance with the powers granted by law, the office intends to continue the investigation and take necessary legal actions based on the results of this ongoing inquiry.

This recent turn of events temporarily concludes the debate that followed the press conference, as the prosecutor's office has clarified the steps that preceded the archival decision. It emphasized that the initial failure to complete the investigation was primarily due to the complainant's lack of additional statements or evidence, while the new information that has emerged now opens the door for further investigation based on what legal proceedings may reveal.

As the case awaits the outcomes of new investigations, it remains subject to judicial processes and the subsequent results, and it is vital to refrain from predicting the conclusions that the public prosecutor or the competent judicial authorities may reach.

As reported by hibazoom.com.