Fact

On 10 November four protected witnesses testified. That is testimony

Permanent link https://ceutafacts.org/en/fichas/testigos-protegidos-20261110/

On 10 November four protected witnesses testified at the Audiencia Nacional. EFE, citing people present, writes that they said Moroccan officers gave them directions to enter Ceuta; one said he did not want to cross, that he was thrown into the sea and that the Civil Guard rescued him. EFE also writes that they mentioned a Moroccan police officer and a soldier who crossed into Ceuta and stayed in a hostel, and that another said messages about regularisation motivated him. El Español writes that they identified “more than a dozen” commanders before Judge María Tardón. Telemadrid, with Servimedia, writes that they testified before Judge Santiago Pedraz, as a substitute. These are attributed testimonies. No order has been published.

• EFE, 10 November, citing people present: four protected witnesses of Maghrebi origin “told National Court judge María Tardón this Tuesday that Moroccan officers gave them directions at the border to enter Ceuta, and one of them said that he had no intention of crossing into Spain, but that they threw him into the sea and the Civil Guard rescued him.” That is the account EFE attributes to those sources. It is not a proven fact.
• EFE, the same sources: “the witnesses mentioned that a Moroccan police officer and a soldier crossed into Ceuta during the mass entry and stayed in a hostel,” and another “explained that what motivated him to cross the border were the messages he read on social media about the regularisation driven by the Government of Pedro Sánchez.” That is attributed testimony. It is not a conclusion of this archive about that regularisation.
• Telemadrid, 10 November, 16:23, with Servimedia and judicial sources: the four “testified as protected witnesses before Judge Santiago Pedraz, who is standing in for a few days in the Ceuta case for Judge María Tardón, who is on leave.” One “said that the officers pushed him into the sea so that he would enter Spanish territory that way, because he was unsure whether to cross the border by swimming or on foot.” That is Telemadrid’s version. It is not merged with EFE’s, which speaks of throwing into the sea someone who did not want to cross and of a Civil Guard rescue, and it does not choose between Tardón and Pedraz.
• El Español, 11 November: “yesterday they identified before National Court judge María Tardón more than a dozen police commanders” who allowed the entry and, in some cases, pushed them towards the water. “More than a dozen” is El Español’s alone. The outlet writes that the judge took the statement and that they had previously appeared before CENIF investigators. Several quotations in the piece (“Get in now!”, batches of about 400 people, bodies on the Moroccan coast, sale of floats) are what El Español attributes to what was said to the CENIF or in the identification. They are testimonies. They are not a judgment. The “about 100,000” in that standfirst are not merged with other entry figures in the archive.
• EFE writes that the testimony “reinforces the conclusions” of a police report. That is EFE’s assessment. This archive does not adopt it. The same piece says two CENIF members were due to testify on Thursday. They are not the three police commanders that El Faro, with EFE, places on 12 November on another card.
• These statements do not replace those of 26 and 28 October or the identification of Mohamed El Oualidi and Abdel Fattah El Sayed El Radi that El Español attributed on 5 November to a police report. El Español writes that the identifications of 10 November are in addition to those two.