The European Court of Human Rights has rejected an application made by a hate preacher to stay in France, after he claimed he was at risk of inhumane or degrading treatment should he be expelled to his home country Morocco.
Last year, France’s Interior Ministry requested the expulsion of Hassan Iquioussen, 59, for allegedly “inciting hate, discrimination and violence”, notably against women and the Jewish community.
Mr Iquioussen has lived in France since birth – though he does not hold French citizenship. With his Moroccan wife, he has five children and 16 grandchildren, all French nationals.
In a press release published on Thursday, the Strasbourg-based court said his application against France was inadmissible. One reason for this was that the country that sent him back to Morocco was Belgium, not France.
In August, Mr Iquioussen fled his home in northern France, near the Belgian border, after the Council of State — which acts as the supreme court for administrative justice in France — ruled the deportation order requested by the Interior Ministry was justified.
The following month, he lodged his appeal against France, where he had become a famous YouTube preacher, at the European court of human rights.
Belgium, which has a sizable Moroccan community, in December, ordered Mr Iquioussen to leave for Morocco. He departed on January 13.
The court argued that France had never ordered Mr Iquioussen’s expulsion to Belgium. It also found that he had not exhausted all legal remedies in France since an appeal “was still pending before the Paris Administrative Court.”
“The court pointed out that the French authorities had not taken any decision ordering the applicant’s removal to the Kingdom of Belgium. It was only after he had voluntarily left France for Belgium that the Aliens Office of the Kingdom of Belgium had ordered the applicant’s removal to Morocco,” read the statement.
The court said that Mr Iquioussen had alleged that his removal to Morocco would deprive him of a number of rights.
“Relying on Article 3 (prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment) of the Convention, the applicant alleged that his removal to Morocco had exposed him to a risk of treatment that would be contrary to that provision,” read the statement.
“He also raised complaints under Articles 6 (right to a fair hearing), 8 (right to respect for private and family life), 9 (right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion), 10 (right to freedom of expression) and 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the Convention.”
