Conflicting Testimonies and Opposing Faces in the “Saïdia Apartments” Session within the “Desert Escobar” Case
The financial crimes chamber at the Casablanca Court of Appeal turned its focus today on one of the key chapters of the “Desert Escobar” case, particularly regarding what is known as the “Saïdia Apartments.” The session brought together the defendants, Said Nasiri and Fouad El Yezidi, alongside the notary, Salima B.
During this session, the court heard testimony from witness Abd El Moulah A., who confirmed his presence to testify under oath, denying any personal enmity with the defendants. He clarified that he had traveled to the city of Saïdia with his wife and a now-deceased relative with the intention of purchasing an apartment.
The witness indicated that the apartment he chose was said to be owned by businessman Fouad El Yezidi. He added that he met with him in a café, accompanied by his wife, before the notary later joined them. According to his account, they agreed on the purchase, during which he paid an advance that he could not recall the amount of, before handing the remaining sum to El Yezidi and the notary, receiving the keys directly from El Yezidi. He entrusted the task of handing over the contract to the notary.
The witness confirmed that all procedures took place within the notary’s office, in the presence of his wife and two employees, denying any knowledge of a person named “Hajj Ibn Ibrahim.” He also noted that he owns properties in Fez, Meknes, and Al Hoceima, and works in agriculture and trade, dismissing any claims of psychological disturbances.
On his part, defendant Fouad El Yezidi denied owning the apartment during the confrontation, stating that his role was limited to facilitating the real estate transaction on behalf of Said Nasiri. He emphasized that the operation was overseen by a high-ranking security official who holds the position of head of the security district in Saïdia, asserting that he had no prior relationship with this individual.
El Yezidi explained that the witness had given him a check in the name of a personal contact due to his “good reputation” in the eastern region, indicating that the deal amounted to 9.6 million dirhams, and asserted his status as an investor rather than a real estate broker.
Despite these statements, the witness maintained his previous claims, affirming that it was Fouad El Yezidi who completed the transaction with him in the presence of the notary, and that he had never previously dealt with “Hajj Ibn Ibrahim.” These same details were shared earlier with the National Police Judicial Brigade.
Conversely, notary Salima B. vehemently denied everything stated by the witness, labeling his statements as “baseless.” She emphasized that she does not permit brokers to intervene in her office and that she had not received any financial amount for the sale of the apartment, adding that the simultaneous presence of both parties during the notarization is not a mandatory condition.
The session witnessed noticeable confusion from the witness during his questioning by the judge, as he retracted some details he had previously provided, especially concerning the transfer of funds and the receipt of keys, increasing the ambiguity surrounding this phase of the case, the developments of which continue to unfold.
