Repatriation of Moroccan minors: The judge decides to prosecute Mateos and Deu

The case of the 55 unaccompanied minors deported in an improper manner from Sebta to Morocco experienced a new episode this week. The judge of the Court of Instruction No. 2 of Sebta finally agreed to continue the trial incriminating Salvadora Mateos, the former government delegate and Mabel Deu, the first vice-president of the local executive.

According to the magistrate’s order sent to the parties on Friday, the former delegate ” completely ignored the established procedure, taking advantage of the availability which the Moroccan authorities have exceptionally shown to welcome » the minors who arrived irregularly in Spain across the Tarajal border during the May 2021 episode.

As a result, the president of the number 2 instruction court of Sebta will pursue the case involving the two officials of the government of the enclave who followed, to expel the minors concerned, an abbreviated and non-compliant procedure thus constituting a presumed offense of continuous prevarication.

The same source affirms that the former delegate was administratively competent when it comes to the procedures to be followed relating to the repatriation of unaccompanied migrant children, which makes the procedure chosen by Mateos and Deu not in accordance with the ” mandatory individualized resolution in accordance with national and international law for the protection of the rights of minors“.

In addition, Spanish media reported, while relying on information disclosed by authorities, that Salvadora Mateos and Mabel Deu agreed among themselves to proceed with the expulsion of these minors for whom they were responsible and have “failed in their obligation” by choosing not to respect the provisions of the law and the policy of returning illegal aliens to their country when making this decision in August 2021.

The judge thus gave the public prosecutor and the prosecution team a period of 10 days to file an indictment to request the opening of an oral trial or the dismissal of the case, without prejudice to the possibility of request any additional procedure they deem necessary to present it.

It should be recalled that the act of Mateos and Deu has already been condemned at first and second instance by the contentious-administrative courts as a “flagrant and gross violation of clear and relevant regulations” and an “arbitrary decision” which does not respect not the rights of repatriated minor migrants.

Previous Post Next Post