«The court has no right to draw conclusions from the defendant’s statements,” objected the lawyers of Fouad El Yazidi.
“The court is neutral. It has drawn no conclusions and is merely restating the defendant’s declarations. The court follows its own methodology. We will give the defense the opportunity to speak at the appropriate time,” retorted the presiding judge, Ali Torchi, in a firm tone.
This exchange in courtroom No. 8 of the Casablanca Court of Appeal reflects the escalating tension as the Naciri-Bioui trial progresses on this rainy day in March 2025. The individual presenting himself as a middleman in a real estate transaction has been called to the defendant’s stand. The criminal chamber questions Fouad El Yazidi regarding the sale conditions of two apartments in the coastal resort of Saïdia. He did not have a mandate to sell one of them and had failed to provide the buyer with a receipt for the down payment.
However, the defendant claimed to have a special mandate for the sale of the second apartment—a power of attorney granted to him by Saïd Naciri, the former parliamentarian and ex-president of Casablanca’s WAC football club, who is also facing charges in this trial.
During the March 14 hearing, the court confronted the defendant with statements recorded in the investigation reports of the National Brigade of Judicial Police (BNPJ). A certain Toufik Zentar claimed to have received 299,544 dirhams from the defendant as part of one of the real estate transactions—on behalf of the “true owner,” El Hadj Ahmed Ben Brahim, who is currently behind bars. Meanwhile, Fouad El Yazidi was identified as the buyer.
“This is fiction. Your role as a court is to uncover the truth, not to give credibility to fabrications aimed at manipulating justice and condemning us,” reacted Fouad El Yazidi in response to these accusations.
The public prosecutor had previously intervened to untangle fact from fiction in this case—a responsibility that falls under its mandate.
The defense counterattacked, objecting to one of the prosecutor’s questions:
“The scope of the charges is limited to criminal proceedings. The prosecution’s question has no connection to the charge of complicity in forgery.”
The presiding judge upheld the defense’s objection. However, the lawyers were soon faced with another challenge.
Saïd Naciri turned against his own representative.
“As a civil party, my client requests that the court interrogate the defendant. Saïd Naciri has suffered moral and financial harm. We have the right to take civil action following the criminal proceedings,” pleaded his lawyer Mr. M’Barek Meskini.
The defense objected, but to no avail. Judge Ali Torchi granted the civil party the right to question the defendant.
• “Do you confirm your statements made before the BNPJ?” asked the civil party.
• “Objection, Your Honor…” interrupted the defense.
• “Do you confirm your statements before the court?” Judge Ali Torchi insisted.
The five lawyers representing Saïd Naciri pressed on relentlessly, bombarding the young man standing at the defendant’s stand with questions. The presiding judge lost patience, stating that the civil party had exceeded its allocated number of questions.
• “It is a Friday, and we are in the middle of the holy month. Lying is not permissible. How many questions have you asked?” Judge Ali Torchi challenged the civil party.
His representative, Mr. M’Barek Meskini, smiled. The public burst into laughter.
Courtrooms are a real stage—a reflection of life itself.
F.F.
