CAT/C/66/D/845/2017 family applied for asylum with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Rabat. They are still awaiting a response. 2.2 On 22 June 2017, the Embassy of Turkey in Morocco informed the State party of the issue of a warrant for the complainant’s arrest on the charge of belonging to an armed terrorist organization, namely, the Hizmet movement 1 deemed responsible for the attempted coup d’état in Turkey on 15 July 2016, and requested his extradition. On 28 July 2017, the complainant was arrested by the Moroccan police. On 29 July 2017, he appeared before the Tetouan public prosecutor, who informed him of the reasons for his arrest, referred the case to the Court of Cassation, which is responsible for ruling on extradition requests, and issued an order for his detention in Salé prison. 2.3 On 13 September 2017, the complainant appeared before the Moroccan Court of Cassation, assisted by his lawyer, and contested the request for his extradition to his country of origin. He invoked the political nature of the request, citing the lack of evidence in the file held by the Turkish judiciary, specifically with regard to his membership of the Hizmet movement, which is classified as a terrorist organization by the Government of Turkey. He also invoked the danger to which he would be exposed in Turkey, given the general human rights situation prevailing there, particularly after the attempted coup d’état on 15 July 2016 which was followed by a massive wave of arrests, trials and convictions. The complainant also submitted a document attesting to the asylum request that he had submitted to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Rabat. 2.4 On 19 September 2017, the Court of Cassation issued an opinion favourable to the complainant’s extradition to Turkey. The Court ruled: (a) that the offence of which the complainant was charged fell under ordinary law and did not constitute a political offence; (b) that the Hizmet movement should be considered a terrorist organization since the law applicable in Turkey classified it as such; (c) that the Court could rule only on the lawfulness of the extradition procedure and the recognition, or otherwise, of offences of the kind imputed to the complainant in the Moroccan Criminal Code; and (d) that the international protection procedure was of a categorically different nature to the extradition procedure. The complaint 3.1 The complainant maintains that, if he was returned to Turkey, he would be at risk of being subjected to torture by the Turkish authorities, in violation of his rights under article 3 of the Convention. 3.2 The complainant recounts that, on 20 July 2016, in the aftermath of the attempted coup d’état on 15 July 2016, Turkey imposed a state of emergency throughout the country and that since then judges, journalists, lawyers and academics have been victims of arbitrary violations and suppression of their fundamental freedoms. 2 The political situation in Turkey since the attempted coup precludes any possibility of guaranteeing that the procedural norms of a legal State will be respected and that an extradition will be carried out in accordance with international standards. The complaint notes that, in a resolution of 25 April 2017, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe expressed deep concern about the human rights situation in Turkey and noted that, eight months after the attempted coup, the situation had “deteriorated” and measures had gone “far beyond” what was “necessary and proportionate”.3 The Parliamentary Assembly also noted: that widescale purges had been conducted in the public administration; 4 that large numbers of persons had been arrested and were being kept in custody awaiting indictment; 5 that numerous civil servants had been dismissed; and that the measures taken against them, 1 2 3 4 5 2 Also known as the Gülen movement or Gülen brotherhood. European Democratic Lawyers and European Judges for Democracy and Liberty, “Le glas de la démocratie ne cesse de sonner en Turquie” [“The death knell continues to ring for democracy in Turkey”], joint press release, 25 March 2017. Council of Europe, Parliamentary Assembly, “The functioning of democratic institutions in Turkey” [resolution 2156 (2017)], para. 7. Ibid., para. 14. Ibid., para. 16. GE.19-10568

Select target paragraph3