It sent letters of reply to recipients who never wrote to it, carefully avoiding answering the main person concerned, who is the Head of Government of the Kingdom of Morocco. A personality whose address is known to all.

The Head of Government's request was, however, very simple: seeing evidence of the allegations made by an AI report against Morocco in an alleged spying case, which is related to a Moroccan journalist.

The firmness of the Moroccan authorities in the face of Amnesty International's delaying tactics did not surprise anyone. Morocco has the right to demand an appropriate response. This firmness was underlined by all Moroccan news outlets.

The Moroccan media have confronted Amnesty International’s actions and denounced the procrastination of this NGO with obscures intentions in this particular case. At this stage, no journalist, analyst or observer is able to explain the reasons behind Amnesty’s refusal to respond to the Head of Government. This is all the more surprising since Amnesty is used to Lucky Luck reactions. It shoots faster than its shadow.

The reasons for this state of astonishment in the Moroccan media are obvious.

Morocco is based on a rule of law, which is responsible and sovereign and does not spy on its citizens. The texts governing this activity, which falls within the sovereign domain of a State, are clear on this subject. The Moroccan legislation stipulates that any citizen in conflict with the law falls under the jurisdiction of the justice system and not the low-level espionage.

Second, the bad faith of AI's convoluted approach is evident. If not, why does it avoid responding to the Head of Government? Why do its leaders order, from their London offices where they have received the request of the head of government, to underlings installed in Tunis to respond to the Head of Government of a sovereign country, instead of doing so themselves if they actually had evidence in their possession?

For Morocco, the answers to these questions are obvious. Amnesty International has no evidence to support its allegations and its maneuver has nothing to do with the protection of human rights.

Amnesty has long enjoyed the Moroccan hospitality. It has always acted as it pleased thanks to the benevolence of a sovereign and responsible state. The doors of Moroccan human rights institutions have always been open to it.

Despite this hospitality and kindness, the methods used by Amnesty in this case are opaque and far from helping to shed light on this imbroglio, which has been widely publicized to hide a reality that is not very bright for Amnesty.

The Moroccan journalist involved in these accusations seems to have been instrumentalized in this case. He probably ignores the ins and outs of it. Again, legitimate questions must be asked and only Amnesty can provide the answers. How did the phone of a Moroccan journalist living in Casablanca land at Amnesty premises? Does this NGO have the technical skills necessary to analyze a phone and detect spyware? Amnesty claims that the software in question is owned by an Israeli company. Associating the words espionage and Israel in an Arab context, as is the case in Morocco, is part of a strategy to sow doubt in the minds.

Morocco has loudly announced that it is still awaiting Amnesty’s response and evidence backing the accusations against the Kingdom.

It also demands that this response be provided by the accusing bodies within Amnesty. The whole world has heard these repeated calls by Morocco.

Amnesty continues to turn a deaf ear. It must certainly have a reason for doing so, and that reason could only be the lack of evidence for its baseless allegations.