The Council of State approved the extradition of a 30-year-old Moroccan, who alleged member of ISIS and wanted by the Moroccan state for forming a criminal organization, etc.

In more detail, in July 2021 the 30-year-old was arrested in Thessaloniki following an Interpol international wanted notice issued in December 2017.

An arrest warrant has been issued against him by the Attorney General of Appeals of Morocco for the offenses “the establishment of a criminal organization with the purpose of preparing and committing terrorist acts, in the context of a collective action aimed at undermining public order, the collection and management of funds with the intention of being used in terrorist acts and the collection of funds with the purpose of carrying out terrorist acts».

For the acts attributed to him, a prison sentence of 30 years is provided for in Morocco.

The Council of Appeals of Thessaloniki and the Supreme Court were in favor of his extradition. According to the Supreme Court, no evidence shows the validity of his claims, and in particular, that his human rights are at stake in Morocco and that he will not have a fair trial.

Subsequently, the Minister of Justice (1.1.2023) signed the relevant decision for his extradition.

Following this, the wanted person appealed to the Supreme Court requesting the annulment of the controversial decision of the Minister of Justice, arguing, among other things, that he is only a member of ISIS in name, he has not committed the crimes attributed to him, he does not trust the Moroccan Justice and the phrase human rights does not exist in his homeland.

Finally, his Fourth Department Co (chairman, vice-chairman Ilias Mazos and rapporteur, parish priest Ioannis Papagiannis) rejected the request to cancel the contested ministerial decision.

And this, because the wanted person did not appear in person at the CoE, he did not have a Moroccan identity card or passport, he did not have a residence permit in Greece or a foreigner’s asylum seeker’s card and no notarial deed of power of attorney was presented to his lawyer, despite the relevant deadline given to last one.