CAT/C/58/D/682/2015 He was interviewed and, at 10 a.m. on 31 October 2014, was brought to the public prosecutor’s office, where he was questioned by the Deputy Crown Prosecutor of the Court of First Instance in Kenitra, who took the following procedural measures: confirmed his identity; informed him of why he had been brought to the public prosecutor’s office; read the international search and arrest warrant issued by the Riyadh office of INTERPOL; and recorded his response to the extradition request, which he did not contest. 4.3 At the end of the hearing, the Deputy Crown Prosecutor ordered his detention pending extradition in the civilian prison in Salé until the commencement of judicial extradition proceedings before the Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, which is the competent authority in such cases. 4.4 In response to a formal request from the Advocate-General asking the Court of Cassation to rule in favour of extradition, and once all relevant procedural steps had been taken, the case was scheduled to be heard on 17 December 2014. At the hearing, Mr. Alhaj Ali appeared under arrest and assisted by his lawyer. After the Advocate-General had made a formal request for extradition, Mr. Alhaj Ali stated that he refused to be handed over to the requesting Saudi authorities. The Court adjourned the proceedings and reserved its decision until a hearing on 31 December 2014. 4.5 At that hearing, the Court of Cassation delivered judgment No. 1699/3, in which it issued a favourable opinion on the handing over of Mr. Alhaj Ali to the Saudi judicial authorities on the grounds that: the extradition request satisfied procedural requirements; the offence in question — breach of trust — was punishable under the law of the requesting State and was not subject to a statute of limitations under the sharia law applicable in Saudi Arabia; the offence was also punishable under Moroccan law, pursuant to articles 547 and 549 of the Criminal Code, which provides for a punishment of between 1 and 5 years’ imprisonment; Mr. Alhaj Ali was not a political refugee; the decision of the Twelfth Criminal Chamber of the Court of First Instance in Damascus, dated 31 March 2009, did not mention the facts of the case or include any evidence that breach of trust, which was the subject of the decision, was the offence referred to in the extradition request considered by the Court of Cassation; Mr. Alhaj Ali was not a Moroccan national; and the offence was not political in nature. 4.6 Consequently, the extradition request by the Saudi authorities was considered admissible and was upheld on the merits. 4.7 The State party notes that Mr. Alhaj Ali has never mentioned to the Moroccan authorities that handing him over to the Saudi authorities would put him at risk of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. 4.8 The State party adds that, during the extradition proceedings, Mr. Alhaj Ali was afforded all the relevant legal safeguards provided for under Moroccan law. In this connection, the record of Mr. Alhaj Ali’s hearing before the Deputy Crown Prosecutor of the Court of First Instance in Kenitra on 31 October 2014 disproves the allegations he has submitted to the Committee, because after being notified of the international arrest warrant against him, Mr. Alhaj Ali replied that he did not contest the handover. His statement was spontaneous and unforced. Similarly, when he appeared before the Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation for the hearing of 17 December 2014, at which he was assisted by his lawyer, Mr. Alhaj Ali did not express any fear of being tortured if he were to be handed over, but merely raised the issue of the case being time-barred and stated that he had already been tried for the same acts in the Syrian Arab Republic. 4.9 The State party adds that Moroccan law contains provisions that protect extradited persons from the risk of torture. Article 721 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for instance, establishes that extradition must be systematically ruled out when there are substantial 6 GE.16-15793