CAT/C/53/D/321/2007 3.2 The State party expelled the complainants without giving them the opportunity to appear before a court or to be assisted by a lawyer. Moreover, the police records contain no mention of any statements made by them. Nor was Moroccan law complied with: according to article 24 of Act No. 2-03 on the entry and residence of foreign nationals in Morocco and illegal emigration and immigration, an expulsion order must not be carried out until 48 hours have elapsed since the person in question has been notified. The law also provides that in the 48 hours following notification, the person concerned may lodge a request for annulment with the presiding judge of the administrative court in a public hearing and that the applicant may request the assistance of an interpreter and a lawyer for that purpose. In this case, the complainants received no notification at all, and none of the aforementioned rules of procedure were followed. The State party’s observations on admissibility 4.1 In a note verbale dated 13 August 2007, the State party challenges the admissibility of the complaint. The State party argues, in the first place, that the communication is unfounded, since no expulsion order was issued in respect of the complainants. Government authorities and the public prosecutor’s office did issue an expulsion order under Act No. 2-03 on 23 December 2006 in respect of 230 sub-Saharan immigrants in an irregular situation, but the complainants were not among those named in that order. In the wake of the media campaign that followed this operation, the General Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation met with the Chief of Mission of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Rabat. A press release was issued after the meeting, on 10 January 2007, which contained a categorical denial of the charge that any persons holding documents attesting to their application for asylum or refugee status were expelled and a rebuttal of all reports of ill-treatment of those expelled in December 2006. 4.2 The State party asserts that the operation was conducted strictly in accordance with legal procedure and that it has never expelled foreigners who are in the country legally or who hold refugee status. Some of the persons subject to the order of 23 December 2006 were in possession of false asylum applications supplied by traffickers. 4.3 In the second place, the State party maintains that domestic remedies have not been exhausted, inasmuch as no complaint has ever been lodged with the Moroccan courts concerning the events discussed in this communication. Complainants’ comments on the State party’s observations 5.1 By letter of 17 October 2007, the complainants’ counsel reaffirms that they were, in fact, among the persons subject to the expulsion order. He goes on to state that it is often the case that refugees who are duly recognized by UNHCR do not hold a Moroccan residence permit, which is needed in order to work and to “exist” administratively in the country. This permit, which is issued by the Office of Refugees and Stateless Persons of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation, had not been granted to the complainants. It is therefore possible that these persons were not regarded as belonging to the category of documented applicants for asylum or refugee status to which the press release of 10 January 2007 referred. 5.2 With regard to the exhaustion of domestic remedies, counsel reiterates the arguments put forward earlier. He recalls that the complainants were expelled before they could approach the administrative or judicial authorities. They were forced to enter Algerian territory and had therefore already left Moroccan territory, although they did return to it when the Algerian soldiers threatened to shoot at them if they did not retrace their steps. GE.15-00382 5