VZCZCXRO8731
RR RUEHTRO
DE RUEHRB #0411/01 1291540
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 081540Z MAY 08
FM AMEMBASSY RABAT
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 8528
INFO RUEHAS/AMEMBASSY ALGIERS 4764
RUEHLB/AMEMBASSY BEIRUT 0549
RUEHEG/AMEMBASSY CAIRO 2351
RUEHDM/AMEMBASSY DAMASCUS 0717
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 3590
RUEHMD/AMEMBASSY MADRID 5961
RUEHNK/AMEMBASSY NOUAKCHOTT 3733
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 5013
RUEHTRO/AMEMBASSY TRIPOLI 0300
RUEHTU/AMEMBASSY TUNIS 9602
RUEHCL/AMCONSUL CASABLANCA 4055

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 RABAT 000411 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR NEA/PI, NEA/PPD, NEA/MAG AND DRL/NESCA 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/08/2018 
TAGS: PHUM KPAO SCUL OIIP KIRC PGOV MO
SUBJECT: MOROCCAN GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO AL-MASSAE VERDICT 
DEMARCHE 
 
REF: A. STATE 35264 
     ¶B. RABAT 0283 
     ¶C. RABAT 0021 
 
Classified By: Ambassador Thomas T. Riley for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). 
 
¶1.  (C) Summary: In response to Ref A demarche, the 
Government of Morocco (GOM) has formally asserted that the 
libel case against al-Massae was a private law suit to which 
the GOM was not a party, and in which the GOM did not 
interfere.  Although Minister of Communications Naciri told 
the DCM that he personally found the fine &excessive,8 his 
response was walked back in a defensive formal written 
response provided to us subsequently.  On the press code, 
Naciri stressed that it had not been shelved, but journalists 
were not helping him by unethical reporting and attacks 
against the Government that were sometimes &mean, dishonest 
and gratuitous.8  A Justice Ministry official said the 
assignment of the case to a judge responsible for previous 
heavy judgments against journalists was routine, as this 
particular judge was the judiciary,s specialist in press 
libel cases.  Most of our contacts inside and outside the 
press community have expressed little sympathy for Al-Massae 
and its director Rachid Niny, arguing that the newspaper can 
afford to pay the fine (which the newspaper denies), and 
noting the Niny himself sued for libel, demanding five 
million dirhams.  The case remains on appeal as the Mission 
continues to highlight the larger press freedom and judicial 
independence issues.  End summary. 
 
------------------------------------------- 
Communications Minister: We,re Not Involved 
But Fine &Clearly Excessive8 
------------------------------------------- 
 
¶2.  (SBU) DCM delivered Ref A demarche on the Al-Massae libel 
verdict (Ref B) to Moroccan Minister of Communications Khaled 
Naciri on April 10.  IO attended as notetaker.  The DCM 
stressed that the case raised concerns about the Government 
of Morocco,s (GOM,s) commitment to press freedom and 
judicial independence.  The DCM observed that Naciri, as a 
long-time activist, shared the USG,s interest in human 
rights.  Expressing particular concern over the verdict in 
the Al-Massae libel case, the DCM noted that the verdict did 
not bring credit to Morocco and tarnished Morocco,s image as 
a regional leader on press freedoms. 
 
¶3.  (SBU) The DCM stressed that USG concern over this case 
should not be construed as implying support for Al-Massae or 
its political or editorial stance; our concern was for the 
broader principles of freedom of the press.  The USG did not 
view this as an isolated incident, but as one in a series of 
judicial attacks against independent media in Morocco.  He 
noted that the USG had undertaken substantial efforts to 
promote professional journalism and freedom of expression in 
Morocco, including by providing training and maintaining a 
constant dialogue with the media community.  In this regard, 
we had also long encouraged the GOM to promulgate a new press 
code that decriminalized libel.  The DCM stated that the USG 
hoped the GOM would renew its efforts on this front. 
 
¶4.  (C) Naciri responded that the GOM had made a 
&fundamental choice to consolidate democracy,8 including 
freedom of expression.  King Mohammed VI was personally very 
committed to this.  He observed that the Moroccan press 
enjoyed substantial freedom of expression.  He noted that 
neither Al-Massae nor any other newspaper had been sued by 
the Government or by its ministries for defamation, even 
though Al-Massae and other newspapers attacked the Government 
daily in a manner that was &mean, dishonest and 
gratuitous.8 
 
¶5.  (C) The Al-Massae case was a civil libel case in which 
the GOM was not involved, Naciri stated.  He offered 
assurances that the GOM had provided no instructions to the 
presiding judge in the case.  He agreed that the fine in the 
verdict was &clearly excessive,8 opining that it 
represented a case of the judiciary acting in solidarity with 
its own.  (Note: the plaintiffs in the case were deputy 
 
RABAT 00000411  002 OF 003 
 
 
prosecutors.  End note.) 
 
¶6.  (C) Naciri reported that a revised press code had not 
been shelved, but the situation was &very delicate8 and 
&frankly the journalists are not helping.8  Conservatives 
in the government with substantial influence pointed to 
examples of ethical lapses in opposing liberalization.  He 
asked the DCM to pass a message to the journalist community 
to &be reasonable.8  There was no question of &attacking 
their liberties,8 but they needed to help facilitate a new 
press code by behaving more responsibly.  Reiterating what he 
had said in a previous meeting with Ambassador Riley (Ref C), 
Naciri stated that the GOM had no intention of applying 
prison sentences to journalists charged under the press code. 
 
¶7.  (SBU) In a subsequent written response, the Ministry of 
Communications took a more defensive posture.  The non-paper 
emphasized that the suit was a civil case and that the 
resulting verdict was not a &fine8 but civil damages.  The 
non-paper stated that most libel suits against journalists 
were civil cases brought by private individuals, who were 
exercising &the natural right in civilized and democratic 
societies to seek damages.8  The non-paper observed that the 
GOM refrained from suing newspapers for libel in spite of the 
regular publication of false, defamatory and injurious news. 
The non-paper argued that a revised press code need not 
include the decriminalization of libel, &which does not 
exist in any democratic country.8 
 
---------------------------------- 
MFA: Presiding Judge is Specialist 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶8.  (C) Since receiving Ref A, the Ambassador has sought a 
meeting with the Minister of Justice to deliver the demarche. 
 As the Minister has been uncharacteristically unavailable, 
PolCouns met with Ministry of Justice (MOJ) Secretary General 
Mohammed Ledidi (Deputy Secretary equivalent) on May 6. 
Ledidi said that all of the recent media cases that resulted 
in seemingly excessive fines were heard by the same judge 
because &he is our specialist on journalism cases.8  When 
pressed further, he mentioned that most legal systems had 
judges who specialized in specific technical fields.  Ledidi 
added that the case was not closed and that the verdict could 
be modified on appeal, saying, &If there was a mistake in 
judgment, it will be corrected by a higher court.  The system 
works.8  Noting the common incidence of libel in the nascent 
Moroccan independent press, Ledidi calmly but categorically 
denied any &premeditation8 or fixing in the Al-Massae or 
previous media trials. 
 
¶9.  (C) Ledidi responded to a question about the excessive 
size of recent media fines by asking how anyone could 
effectively judge the cost of damages to a person,s 
reputation.  He emphasized that he was not personally 
defending the amounts, but wondering what scale the USG was 
using to determine &disproportionate.8  Ledidi explained 
that the plaintiffs in the Al-Massae case suffered real 
damage, even though they were local prosecutors.  They were 
harassed, subjected to stone throwing, threats and at least 
one eventually had to leave the town of Ksar El Kebir 
permanently.  Under Moroccan law, libel fines are not based 
on a defendant,s ability to pay, but on a subjective 
accounting of the damage caused by the libelous action, much 
like medical malpractice suits in the U.S., Ledidi stated. 
 
------------------ 
Other Developments 
------------------ 
 
¶10.  (SBU) While Al-Massae and Niny have appealed the verdict 
against them, two of the plaintiffs have also appealed the 
size of the fine, claiming that the fine was insufficient 
when compared with the damage to their reputations.  A 
contact in the MFA claimed that Al-Massae,s profits are more 
than sufficient to cover the fine and survive.  Al-Massae 
Editor-in-Chief Touafiq Bouachrine hotly contested this 
claim, stating that Al-Massae and its sister French-language 
daily Le Soir would have to shut down if forced to pay the 
 
RABAT 00000411  003 OF 003 
 
 
fine. 
 
¶11.  (SBU) Meanwhile, the Director General of Eco Medias 
Group, which owns two newspapers and a radio station, told us 
that Niny had recently sued one of his newspapers for libel 
for calling Niny a &humorist8 in an article.  (Note: Before 
launching Al-Massae, Niny was best known as a satirical 
columnist.  End note.)  Niny asked for damages of MAD five 
million; the case was dismissed.  This senior journalist 
noted sardonically that, if Niny,s reputation was worth MAD 
five million, surely the plaintiffs in the case against him 
could argue their reputations were worth MAD 1.5 million 
each.  This same journalist noted that his company quietly 
settles millions of dirhams in libel suits every year; 
journalists inevitably make mistakes, he said, and sometimes 
they have to pay the price. 
 
------- 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶12.  (C) Following initial protests against the size of the 
fine, this case has been quietly dropped by local and 
international defenders of press freedom; it is never 
mentioned by our press contacts unless we raise it first.  In 
stark contrast, the imprisonment of journalist Mustapha 
Hormatallah ) who is serving an eight-month prison sentence 
for having published a confidential military document and 
(reportedly) refusing to reveal the name of his source ) has 
become a cause celebre both locally and internationally. 
There have been numerous local demonstrations in his support, 
substantial press coverage of his recent hunger strike, and 
he has been the focus of publicity campaigns by international 
human rights organizations.  (Note: Morocco,s treatment of 
the Hormatallah case appears analogous to the imprisonment of 
Judith Miller for contempt-of-court following her refusal to 
disclose her sources.  Hormatallah has alleged no physical 
mistreatment, and was freed on bail for several months while 
his case was heard on appeal. The handling of this case thus 
can be interpreted as representing a significant advance for 
human rights in Morocco.  End note.) 
 
¶13.  (C) The Moroccan press continues to print on a daily 
basis articles that expand the boundaries of press freedom, 
including on security-related issues of great local 
sensitivity.  One weekly, for example, recently published a 
detailed article on the workings of a major domestic security 
agency, featuring on its front cover a satellite photo of its 
headquarters.  At the same time, scurrilous cases of libel 
and problems with journalistic ethics abound in the rapidly 
evolving media environment.  On balance, the overall 
trend-line of press freedom is positive, this case 
notwithstanding.  Nonetheless, the Mission will continue to 
seek opportunities to push for press freedom and judicial 
independence.  End comment. 
 
 
***************************************** 
Visit Embassy Rabat's Classified Website; 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/nea/rabat 
***************************************** 
 
Riley