There is still no ‘truth’ regarding the Fakir case

The tragic incident that led to the death of Abderrahim Fakir has aroused widespread and justified public interest, but has also been exploited for political ends by those who accuse and those who defend the police without waiting for the results of the necessary forensic examinations. An initial finding comes from the pre-autopsy bone CT scan carried out yesterday, which indicated that one of the possible causes of death is airway obstruction due to a haemorrhage in the lungs, whilst a fracture appears to have been ruled out. These are preliminary findings, but naturally we expect clarification – if not definitive, then at least more precise – from the autopsy that has been ordered. Once the cause of death has been established, it will be necessary to determine whether this is linked to the manner in which the arrest was handled and whether any avoidable errors were made during this operation; and, last but not least, who committed these errors, because it is worth remembering once again that any criminal liability is personal.

The investigation is still a long way from completion, which makes the haste with which positions have been taken, demonstrations organised and, in short, the attempt to impose a pre-established political ‘truth’ over one based on a thorough examination of the facts, particularly questionable. Of course, this is not to deny the right of political parties and administrative authorities to intervene and comment, in accordance with their own convictions, on an event that has aroused such interest. All that is being asked for is respect for the time required for the investigations, and a minimum of caution in passing premature judgements whilst key elements of the case have yet to be established. Moreover, the propaganda value of these judgements – which are as emphatic as they are premature – is also questionable; whilst they may satisfy those who are already staunch supporters of certain political positions, they are likely to generate more scepticism than consensus amongst those who are not.