The Constitutional Court protects an immigrant who was going to be returned to Morocco without the assistance of a lawyer

Two young Moroccan migrants in handcuffs arrive at the airport in Las Palmas (Gran Canaria) to be deported by the Police, in December 2020.Javier Bauluz

The Constitutional Court has upheld the appeal of a Moroccan immigrant who arrived in the Canary Islands in a small boat because he considers that fundamental rights were violated during his detention.

Mohammed was arrested in December 2020 to be returned to Morocco and was detained for almost 72 hours without a court-appointed lawyer.

The lawyer of an NGO, upon learning of her case, considered that it was an illegal detention and requested

(immediate bringing to justice so that a judge can review whether her detention was legal), but a court of instruction he was denied.

The Constitutional Court rules now that the rejection of

and that, therefore, the Moroccan's fundamental right to personal liberty was violated due to the lack of legal assistance.

The young man was finally released after requesting asylum and his return was not carried out.

The sentence no longer affects the situation of the plaintiff, but it has served for the court of guarantees to show its "high concern" for the frequent breach of the jurisprudence in matters of judicial control of deprivations of liberty.

More information

Interior hides the costs of the returns of Moroccans from the Canary Islands

Mohammed landed in Gran Canaria on November 15, 2020, in the midst of a crisis of boat arrivals, when the Arguineguín dock had become an open-air warehouse for more than 2,000 immigrants without the minimum hygienic conditions.

The young man was in police custody while he was identified and the order for his return was issued, and he was released.

So, that order could not be executed because Morocco still did not accept the return of its nationals.

Already released, on December 7, when the Moroccan went to the airport to go to the Peninsula with his family, he was arrested again by the police.

The purpose of the arrest, now yes, was to put him on a plane that would return to Morocco two days later.

The Moroccan, according to the police proceedings, expressly requested that his family be notified of the arrest and that they provide him with a court-appointed lawyer.

The agents contacted the Bar Association of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, but, according to the court, "there is no evidence" that any lawyer was assigned to him.

The appointment of a public defender was "imperative", according to the Constitutional Court, which indicates that the reasons why the Bar Association did not send anyone are not stated either.

The family, who stopped having news of Mohammed, then contacted the NGO Coordinadora de Barrios, which sent a lawyer to the airport police station.

On the morning of December 9, minutes before the plane in which he was supposed to be deported took off, the lawyer requested

for her client in the police court, which paralyzed her expulsion.

However, the judge, with the favorable opinion of the Prosecutor's Office, denied it, considering that the detention was legal without having heard the detainee.

In its ruling, the court concludes that the

since its rejection was based on "an argument diametrically opposed" to that established by the Constitution itself.

It also sentences that, as the lawyer denounced, the Moroccan's right to have legal assistance was violated.

After analyzing this case, the magistrates announce that they will inform the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) and the State Attorney General's Office regarding the actions of the court and the prosecution, in case they have incurred some type of responsibility.

After learning of the sentence, the NGO that promoted the appeal for amparo assures that the facts judged "reflect the need to take extreme precautions in the treatment that institutions and authorities give to migrants subject to return."

Respect for the constitutional guarantees of detained persons, he adds, constitutes one of the elementary foundations of the rule of law and the obligation to ensure that this guarantee materializes "inevitably falls on the police authority that guards the detainee."

Subscribe to continue reading

read without limits

Keep reading

I'm already a subscriber