DIDH denounces HRW's lack of "professionalism"

The Interministerial Department for Human Rights (DIDH) criticized the lack of “professionalism” and “objectivity” of the NGO Human Rights Watch in its report targeting Morocco. The DIDH notes several elements that support its thesis.

The Interministerial Delegation for Human Rights (DIDH) said in a statement that Human Rights Watch” (HRW) was conducting a “hostile campaign” against Morocco with this report published in July entitled “Handbook of repression techniques in Morocco”. .

“By acting in this way, this organization ignores the principles of professionalism, objectivity and impartiality, thus clearly displaying itself as an instrument in the hostile and systematic campaign against our country”, denounced the DIDH, in a statement.

On the other hand, “the civil reactions of denunciation are edifying”, adds the same source, which quotes the reaction of the Moroccan Association for the Rights of Victims (AMDV). The association denounced HRW’s bias in defending “the rapists by increasing contact with their families, their lawyers and the association that supports them” and which marginalizes the victims and without “taking the trouble to listen to them as well as their lawyers by considering them as being instrumentalized by the State”.

The association believes that the behavior shows bias and “represents a serious attack on (the) dignity (of the victims, editor’s note) and further aggravates their psychological, social and economic suffering”.

The Delegation also quotes the statement of the President of the National Press Council (CNP), Younes Moujahid, who notes that “anyone who reads this report will come to the conclusion that its authors sought by any means to compromise Morocco”,

The latter notes that “most of the authors of this type of report reside abroad, using their political positions to produce reports on human rights”, and according to him, that this type of organization has distant thanks to their sponsors, and “seek to achieve geo-strategic objectives and it is therefore a question of not treating the subject with credulity”.

The DIDH recalls that it had noted, in an open response published on January 24, 2022, that “instead of revealing the truth and verifying it before presenting it in an objective manner, the organization Human Rights Watch yielded at ease by engaging in a political campaign hostile to our country”.

“Today, it is clearer than ever that this report by the said organization reveals the falsity of a thesis supported under the veil of the defense of human rights which collapses on three levels, namely the speech, relations with justice and contempt for victims”.

On the speech, the DIDH had noted several terms used which have never been part of the jargon used by NGOs for the defense of Human Rights. The delegation cites in this regard the use of the following terms: “One way or another, they will get you”, “the symbolic assassinations”, “a judicial system under control”, “the interventionism of the Makhzen in justice”, “manipulations in the shadow of the Makhzen”, or even “intimidation” and “attacks against opponents”.

HRW’s discourse “is based on extremist political literature with slanderous intentions, a discourse specific to extremist movements but which remains absolutely foreign to the field of human rights, indicated the DIDH, adding that “any objective observer will not find a similar discourse in the literature of international organizations and institutions concerned with human rights”.

On the aspect of the defense of human rights, which should concentrate the efforts of HRW, it appears that it has only gone in one direction, that of the accused, ignoring the parties who must enjoy support, namely the victims of the serious crimes attributed to the defendants.

The DIDH deplores “the hostile attitude of the organization towards the victims of sexual assault which is not based on any standard or rule on the register of human rights”, and did not want to listen to the victims.

“After all this, what human rights mission remains for Human Rights Watch, what professionalism and what defense against violations can it still claim to ensure by misleading people? asks the Delegation.


Previous Post Next Post