VERDICT IN QADHAFI DEFAMATION CASES PUTS GOM IN

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 RABAT 000587 SIPDIS STATE FOR DRL/NESCA, NEA/PPD, NEA/MAG AND NEA/PI LONDON, PARIS AND DUBAI FOR MEDIA HUBS E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/09/2019 TAGS: PHUM PREL KDEM KPAO EAID KMPI LY MO SUBJECT: VERDICT IN QADHAFI DEFAMATION CASES PUTS GOM IN BIND RABAT 00000587 001.4 OF 002 Classified By: CDA Robert P. Jackson for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). -------------- Summary -------------- ¶1. (C) On June 27, a Casablanca court found three Moroccan newspapers guilty of "publicly harming" Libyan leader Muamar Qadhafi and "injuring his dignity," levying whopping fines. Newspaper editorialists and the press union have condemned the decision, accusing the Moroccan Government of complicity with Qadhafi in stifling freedom of speech. A senior MFA official denied any Government of Morocco (GOM) interference in the case, and stated that the GOM would not pursue libel cases against newspapers, even when warranted. He acknowledged that the Libyan Government had exerted pressure on the GOM. He expressed frustration with the lax ethics of the newspapers involved, as well as with the fact that the GOM was being criticized by the Libyans for an overly free media, and by press watchdogs and the local media for insufficient press freedom. End Summary. -------------- The Case -------------- ¶2. (U) The case stems from critical articles and editorials published by three independent dailies -) "Al-Massae," "Al-Jarida Al-Aoula," and "Al-Ahdath Al-Maghrebiya" )- in 2008 and early 2009 about Qadhafi and his counterparts in Mauritania, Algeria and Tunisia. Defense lawyers for the newspapers argued that the complaint against the three newspapers was not in accordance with Moroccan law, which bars media from harming the reputation of heads of state and foreign ministers. The defense argued that Qadhafi was not a head of state, as his official title is "Guide of the Revolution." The defense lawyers walked out of the courtroom in protest when the judge rejected this argument. The court found the three newspapers guilty, fining them each MAD one million (about USD 125,000). The court also ordered the directors of the three newspapers, as well as two journalists, to pay damages of MAD 10,000 (about USD 1,250) each. -------------- Widespread Condemnation of Judgment -------------- ¶3. (U) The Committee for the Protection of Journalists issued a press release on June 29, condemning the decision. "We are dismayed that Morocco's judiciary has chosen to punish journalists who express views that do not conform to those of the political leadership," said Mohamed Abdel Dayem, CPJ program coordinator for the Middle East and North Africa. "This ruling should be overturned on appeal. The exorbitant amount in damages indicates that the courts are being used again to settle political scores with critical journalists and to put critical publications out of business." This was echoed by Younes M'jahed, President of the Moroccan Press Union (SNPM),who stated that "the heavy fines inflicted on national press organs constitute a real catastrophe and are unacceptable." ¶4. (U) Moroccan newspaper editorial pages have also been (unusually) unanimous in their condemnation of the decision. Khalil Hachemi Idrissi, Director of independent daily Aujourd'hui le Maroc and President of the Moroccan Federation of Publishers, wrote in a June 29 editorial, "The condemnation by Qadhafi, through the Moroccan justice, of three Moroccan dailies is a way for him to export into our country his anti-democratic, freedom-killing model. The height (of injustice) is that the Moroccan State let it happened. What,s more, it facilitated the situation for him, as an accomplice to the sinful judgment ..." Abdelmounaim Dilami, Director of Eco Medias Group, wrote in business-oriented daily L'Economiste, "(This) willingness to cause the disappearance of the press by imposing damages, pushing it to (financial) ruin, is a crime against Moroccan society as a whole." -------------- MFA: Between a Rock and a Hard Place -------------- ¶5. (C) In a July 8 meeting with MFA Communications Director Karim Medrak, IO Ranz informally raised USG concern about the verdict, which contributed to a growing sense of Moroccan backsliding in the area of press freedom. Medrak (please RABAT 00000587 002.4 OF 002 protect) categorically denied that any branch of the GOM -- he mentioned specifically the Foreign, Interior and Justice Ministries -- had interfered in any way in the verdict. That said, he candidly acknowledged that the GOM had come under substantial pressure from the Libyan Government, which refused to believe that the GOM could not simply convoke the offending newspapers and order them to stop their criticism of Qadhafi. Indeed, when the MFA told the Libyans that the Moroccan press did not operate that way, that the papers were free to write what they wanted, the Libyans responded that no Arab press was free from government control, and interpreted this as indicating that the GOM endorsed the articles in question. ¶6. (C) Medrak, who recently returned from eight years at the Moroccan Mission to the UN in New York and who has often expressed his strong support for the U.S. and its values, stated his personal belief that the verdict was wrong. However, he lambasted the very loose ethical standards of many Moroccan newspapers. He cited in particular "Al-Massae," which a week earlier had published an article about single female Moroccan ambassadors posted abroad, all but calling them prostitutes. Several of the ambassadors who were named in the article wanted to sue "Al-Massae" for libel, but the MFA ordered them to stand down. Medrak held this up as an example of the GOM's strategic decision to ignore libelous behavior in the Moroccan press. The Libyan Government, however, had every right to sue under Moroccan law, and the GOM was in no position to interfere. ¶7. (C) Medrak indicated that the GOM could not afford to anger Libya by speaking out against the verdict. He mentioned that, one week before the verdict, the Libyan Government had banned foreigners from playing on the Libyan national soccer team. Ninety percent of the foreigners on the team, Medrak stated, were Moroccan; their contracts were not renewed, and they had to return home. When asked if the GOM had interpreted this as a signal, Medrak replied,"We don't know." He concluded that he hoped this issue would be favorably resolved in the appeals process. -------------- Comment -------------- ¶8. (C) At the heart of Morocco,s gradual democratic reform process has been its extension of de facto freedom of the press. This case appears to have been handled differently from previous libel cases, which were all given to a single Rabat judge, who the GOM asserts has expertise in libel law. If it stands on appeal, it would be an egregious impingement on press freedom and freedom of expression. This incident also seems to underscore the continued fear that Qadhafi inspires, even if he has ceased resorting to more blunt and brutal methods of persuasion. We will continue to monitor the case through the appeals process. Should it not be favorably resolved in response to domestic pressure, we will raise it with the GOM again in a more formal way. End Comment. ¶9. (U) Tripoli - minimize considered. ***************************************** Visit Embassy Rabat's Classified Website; http://www.intelink.sgov.gov/wiki/Portal:Moro cco ***************************************** Jackson