El Fórum Canario Saharaui se muestra disconforme ante la decisión sobre Ghali

The Canary Saharawi Forum has issued an official statement denouncing as a "judicial farce" the telematic appearance on June 1 as a result of two lawsuits filed against the leader of the Polisario Front, Brahim Ghali, in which he is accused of genocide, torture and crimes against humanity.

Brahim Ghali arrived in Spain last April for treatment for COVID-19 and was admitted to the San Pedro Hospital in Logroño. This has provoked a diplomatic crisis with Morocco, which has accused Spain of not respecting the spirit of good neighbourliness by not notifying the Alawi authorities of Ghali's presence. For its part, the Spanish government has explained that it took in the Polisario Front leader for "humanitarian reasons" and that it would not stand between justice and Ghali.

Since Ghali's appearance before the Spanish justice system, and after the latter did not establish precautionary measures against him, the Polisario Front leader took a plane chartered by Algeria to leave Spain definitively and to be hospitalised in the African country, where he received a visit from President Abdelmadjid Tebboune of Algiers.

Regarding the recent departure of Brahim Ghali from Spain, after his internment in the San Pedro Hospital in Logroño for treatment of Coronavirus, invited by the Spanish Government, especially by its Minister of Foreign Affairs, Arancha González Laya, this Canary Saharawi Forum states the following:

With regard to the telematic appearance of the aforementioned Ghali before the Spanish National Court, we can only express our most sincere reprobation of the actions and administration of justice in what was apparently a real judicial farce. In this sense, what was conveyed by the development of the facts on the day of the hearing was that the defendant Brahim Ghali - alleged violator of both human rights and women's rights, according to the complaints and accusations collected over the last few years - has been given a shameful red carpet so that he could evade his criminal responsibilities and, therefore, the government could get out of this indictment, The government was thus able to escape unscathed from the quagmire into which it had been plunged in recent weeks since Ghali's clandestine arrival in Spain, facilitated by the government itself and unexpectedly uncovered by the media, with the consequent erosion of the executive. That day, the attitude of our judicial representatives was professionally unsatisfactory. Starting with that of the judge, Santiago Pedraz, a well-known progressive (curiously, coincidentally or not), just like the Spanish executive, the defence lawyer and the majority of Polisario sympathisers in Spain. And finally the prosecutor, whose indolence in handling this case was professionally reprehensible.

All this is explained by the following. Obviously, it was to be expected that the illustrious Ghali would deny the allegations of torture, illegal detention and genocide in the Sahrawi camps in Tindouf (Algeria) that several victims brought against him in their complaints, and refused to respond to the accusations. Why didn't the investigating judge ask Brahim Ghali any questions, and why, given that Ghali refused to answer the prosecutor's questions, did the prosecutor not carry out a more exhaustive interrogation? In this sense, the prosecutor made only three or four very generic questions, asking very superficial questions such as "if he denied the facts" or "if he knew the victims", in other words, a whole pantomime of interrogation. Finally, if a rogatory commission had been sent from this case to Algeria a few years ago, which included a sheet of no less than 30 questions, how is it possible that the prosecutor did not use this battery of questions, or that they served as a guideline, to interrogate the defendant with greater professional zeal? Especially when there are forensic reports that point to Ghali, one directly as one of the torturers and four others as responsible for these events.

What emerges from all this is that either the judge and especially the prosecutor failed to learn their lesson, in a clear neglect of their duties, or, a much worse alternative, that they have looked the other way with a clear political purpose. The latter would undoubtedly cause us deep concern, as it would call into question the independence of our judicial system and the separation of powers in our democracy, and would also give it a deplorable image in the eyes of national and international public opinion. When politics and law come together, it is usually at the expense of the law.

The farce reaches its climax with the list of flights from Algeria that day, which leads us to a conclusion: if Judge Pedraz considered that precautionary measures were not necessary, and that he did not consider Ghali to escape, was the initiative of the plane chartered by Algeria, which had to be aborted in the middle of the crossing, not to rescue him? All this on the day of his declaration, shamelessly. Not even a single day's delay, at least. Ironically, and bearing in mind the recent inclination of our government for such a measure of grace, we should not rule out the possibility that the government might have pardoned Brahim Ghali had he been indicted. Regarding such a case, the government continues to hide and not to provide explanations, in particular in the light of the gravity of the case and its repercussions.

While awaiting the corresponding appeals against the judicial nonsense previously mentioned, we welcome the fact that sanity prevails in the courts of Logroño, since the head of the investigating court number 3 of Logroño, magistrate José Carlos Orga sees evidence that “the facts as presented contain clues which show the presumed existence of an offense of falsifying a public document”. In other words, an investigation is underway to establish whether Brahim Ghali entered Spain with false documentation last April, after a complaint filed by the trade union Manos Limpias ("Clean Hands") on May 21 was admitted. In this complaint, it is considered that Ghali may have committed an offence of false documentation "by registering with a false identity on his arrival in Spain".

Regarding Mr. Manuel Ollé, the defence lawyer hired by Mr. Brahim Ghali, we invite him to reflect on his mockery of the victims involved in these lawsuits, and on his defence against the odds of a man with far more shadows than lights (if he ever had any light at all). When a lawyer and university professor with a certain track record comes out with words like "we will immediately ask for the provisional dismissal of the case and, of course, because of the bad faith with which criminal law has been used for what it should never be used for, which is political purposes", he shows a lack of concern for the facts and a minimum of sensitivity towards the victims of human rights violations of the person he represents. Undoubtedly, it is Ollé himself who demonstrates a clear political intentionality in his use of this case, using a tone closer to that of a militant or activist than that of a legal professional.

Taking as an example the most recent lawsuit filed in the Spanish National Court by Fadel Breica for illegal detention, torture and against humanity committed in the refugee camps in Tindouf (Algeria); Mr. Ollé should perhaps be aware that, when he says that "the complainants, jumping on this unfair bandwagon of justice, relate facts lacking any minimal evidentiary support", the events described in Breica's complaint were not only denounced by organisations such as Human Rights Watch, through its deputy director for the Middle East and North Africa, Lama Fakih, but also by the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention,  7/2020, concerning El Fadel Breica" (A/HRC/WGAD/2020/7), details, among other conclusions over ten pages, that Mr. Breica "has been abducted, without being presented with an arrest warrant, without being informed of the reasons for his detention, and was not brought before a judge during the four months of his detention".

In other words, the fact that the Spanish justice system has not wanted to look any further (for the moment) into these cases does not mean that they have not occurred or that the aforementioned Brahim Ghali is not implicated. We have no doubt about this, given the knowledge we have of the Sahara issue in general and of the victims of the shady character called Brahim Ghali in particular. Finally, these statements by Mr. Ollé only highlight, once again, the obtuse and unconditional support - all for the cause, including human rights violations - that the Polisario Front traditionally enjoys in Spain, from various spheres (political, academic, etc.). Mr Ollé is undoubtedly one of the best examples of this.