Moroccan journalist Rachid Niny regains his freedom, patiently extracting it from between the fangs of isolation, oppression and the silence of a prison cell, in which he was held alone, without books, pens or windows to the outside world. How difficult it was for the writer to part with his papers. Yet the body that has not tasted sunlight nor felt the rain in a whole year shielded itself with freedom that no one can take away, after it withdrew under the shade of an imagination that cannot be restrained. What did the writer lose and what did his jailors gain? If prison could brainwash, there would be in the world no poets, writers or journalists, and many rulers would not need sleeping pills before going to bed – for in narrow cells ideas flourish and fear dies, and outside of them prevails another terror of unparalleled power, as the word comes to have a greater impact than any destructive weapon ever discovered by man. The story was more like a scam, as journalist Rachid Niny had imagined that he had the freedom to voice bold opinions of opposition that never ceased to criticize behaviors opposed to the values of citizenship and to the ambition of building a state of rights and laws. He would shoot his arrows at those in influential positions, believing that he would help shatter the wall of silence, and it never crossed his mind that a bounty would be placed on his head, for spreading an infection that has ached big heads in every direction. He is a journalist of the new generation, who never heard Hassan II say that the greatest danger any regime could be exposed to is a conspiracy of silence. At the time, the late king no longer trusted even his own pillow. It dawned on him one day that everyone was discussing the crisis the country was going through except for him, as he used to consult deceiving reports that made him measure the pulse of the street on the basis of satellite dishes on roofs. He is a journalist who never witnessed the reasons for the imposition of the shocking idea by which the aides to the head of the regime surrendered to the wisdom of the three monkeys who do not see, do not hear and do not speak. Yet he was bolder in capturing the image, as he turned it into a daily appointment, during which one would hear the sighs of the deprived and the cries of the oppressed, and which would herald the way to a better tomorrow. What a dreamer he was. Perhaps he imagined that writing would give him wings to fly with to where his thirst for truth lay. Thus the warning he received was harsh and painful – warning that writing too required a license, i.e. the law of truce-like writing that allows for all views. Yet the media that shapes trends and impacts public opinion is not characterized by being truce-like or stiff – because this would breed stagnation and deterioration, instead of participation, progress and interaction with events. In a case such as this, it is out of the question for it to end merely by the journalist having been jailed an entire year, or having regained the right that had been taken away from him to reengage in dialogue with his audience. Indeed, just as the problems of jailing him on purely media-related charges were addressed within the framework of dealing with them under the articles of criminal law from the first day of his prosecution, reaching a decision on them has taken on worryingly arbitrary features, not just when it comes to those working in the media, but also when it comes to the future of the moral and procedural contracts that are decisive for the arguments generated in this context. Journalists are not above the law, but the law in turn exists to protect them from all forms of abuse and from the political exploitation of a branch of government that should be above everyone. And if it is true that such fears do not feature prominently in the record of trials which members of the media are exposed to in democratic countries, without arousing sensitivities in any way, apart from abiding by the spirit of the law, it is also true that such trials are not held d because of an opinion or a stance having been expressed within the framework of the clarity that characterizes the relationship between the different branches of government. Indeed, the independence of the judiciary does not pose a problem, and neither do verdicts that are legally and morally justified. The trial was held and condemnation took place, but the prison that has worn the body down to the bone was no more than a glimmer. The body may get tired, but the soul does not. The jail cell may be narrow, but the spirit is not stifled. The journalist leaves his underground cell and enters the prisons of crises of consciences towards which rush those who have set up scaffolds to murder the true and sincere word. Who would have imagined that a prisoner of conscience named Abderrahmane Youssoufi once tasted the bitterness of prison and exile, and then returned to become Prime Minister in different times? He was a journalist par excellence, alongside his companion Faqih Basri, like that flame whose brightness never waned, opposition figure Mehdi Ben Barka. Who would have imagined that an activist from the “Chabiba Islamia”, hunted down by the intelligence and oppression apparatus, named Abdelilah Benkirane would become Prime Minister in Morocco? What is certain is that Rachid Niny wants to remain a journalist, and smearing his criminal record will be of no use to strip him of this title, which adheres to his soul. Let us reread our history – it is made up of a series of trials of opinion that do not negate the ideas. And it is a great shame that such blunders would happen at a time when nearly everyone has come to believe that the years when bullets flew have gone, never to return.
