CAT/C/68/D/817/2017 4.6 On 21 May 2014, in follow-up to the report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, 7 the Crown Prosecutor General decided to reopen the case and request that an investigation be carried out by the investigating judge. The latter summoned the complainant in July 2014, but he refused to appear before the judge without counsel. 4.7 On 31 July 2014, the complainant was interviewed in the presence of his counsel and a certified interpreter. On 17 September 2014, the Crown Prosecutor General requested that a new medical examination be conducted and, on 19 September 2014, the investigating judge ordered that it be carried out by five doctors. The results of this new examination led to the conclusion that the allegations were unfounded and that signs of alleged torture or illtreatment are difficult to find when a long period of time has elapsed since the alleged acts took place. On 20 October 2015, the investigating judge ordered a dismissal and decided to reclassify the case. 4.8 With regard to the complainant’s application for review, the State party indicates that, after the complainant was prosecuted for participation in an association formed or an agreement reached for the purpose of preparing or committing acts of terrorism or acts that could disrupt public order, he was sentenced at first instance to 15 years’ imprisonment, after which the sentence was reduced on appeal to 12 years’ imprisonment. On 19 April 2014, the complainant’s application for review was denied by the Court of Cassation. 4.9 With regard to the conditions of detention, the State party indicates that the complainant was transferred on 10 October 2016 to the Tiflet 2 local prison, a newly constructed facility that meets proper standards of detention and is intended for persons convicted in various cases or serving sentences of various kinds. He enjoys all his rights in accordance with international standards concerning detention and national legal and regulatory requirements, in particular those under Act No. 23/98. The complainant’s transfer was carried out in the usual manner and in accordance with the regulations in force. In this context, the complainant was able to inform his sister of his transfer as soon as he arrived at the Tiflet 2 prison. 4.10 With regard to the complainant’s current conditions of detention, his incarceration cannot in any way be considered “solitary confinement”. In fact, he is being held in a wellventilated, well-lit single-person cell with proper sanitary conditions. Since 1 April 2017, other inmates have been placed in his section of the prison, with the result that he is not alone when he goes outdoors for exercise. 4.11 It should be noted that the complainant has always refused to comply with the rules in force and has constantly encouraged other inmates to break the rules. He has proclaimed himself to be the defender and spokesperson of the other inmates, presents himself as their leader and has enlisted some of the more acquiescent inmates to serve him. He was the main instigator of the Salé 2 prison riot in May 2016. 4.12 What is more, the complainant continually provokes, insults and threatens prison officials. Like all other inmates in Moroccan prisons, the complainant is visited by his family members, relatives and counsel each time they come to the prison. In addition, as his family lives far away and is unable to visit him regularly, the prison administration allows him longer visits so that he can enjoy his family. 4.13 Like all other prisoners, the complainant is given meals that are prepared by an external company and meet nutritional requirements in terms of diversity, quantity, calories and preparation. His visitors can bring him food if they wish. 4.14 In terms of medical care, the complainant continues to be closely monitored by the prison doctors. His allegations of medical negligence are unfounded and are simply intended to mislead public opinion and portray him as a victim. In addition, he receives necessary medical assistance at the prison infirmary or at the hospital, and is given the medication prescribed for him, as shown by his medical record. Since his imprisonment on 30 March 2017, he has had 128 medical examinations at the facility, 10 examinations in different specialist areas at the hospital, 15 dental examinations and 12 visits to a 7 GE.20-00011 A/HRC/25/60/Add.2. 5