The Federal Supreme Court rejected the appeal of a company owner and a workers supervisor against a sentence of three months in prison and the payment of a blood money equal to two hundred thousand dirhams to the heirs of a worker who died of electrocution on the job site.
The court affirmed that the failure of the defendants to provide safety means for the deceased victim and the existence of a malfunction in the connection of electricity wires is a mistake and the resulting death of the victim.
In the details, the Public Prosecution referred two persons to trial, the first owner of a company, and the second official and supervisor of workers at the company, as they directed them to have caused their mistake in the death of a worker as a result of negligence and lack of prejudice to the imposition of their profession and violate the laws, regulations and instructions, where they did not provide security means The necessary safety during work and improper installation of electrical wires, which resulted in the shock of the victim, which led to his death, demanded to punish them.
The testimony of the witnesses and the technical report proved that the death of the worker was due to electric shock, that the company did not provide the means of security and safety and the absence of a dashboard and that the electrical connections were not connected properly.
The first instance court ordered each of them to be imprisoned for three months, obliging each of them to pay a fine of 2,000 dirhams, obliging them to pay the blood of the deceased victim equal to two hundred dirhams between them, to explain to each of them the performance of legal expiation for the deceased, obliging them to pay the prescribed judicial fees. .
The Court of Appeal upheld the first verdict, and the two convicts did not accept this jurisdiction and we challenged it before the Federal Supreme Court, while the Public Prosecution submitted a memorandum requesting the rejection of the appeals.
The defendants' defense said that "the death occurred because of the victim's fault because he tried to turn on the electric fan with his hands wet with water without wearing gloves, which led to shock and death."
The Federal Supreme Court rejected this argument, stating that the collection of an understanding of the reality in the case and the assessment of evidence and weighting between them and the adoption of what it deems likely, and extracting the truth therein, and assessing the error required for the responsibility of the perpetrator alone or participant in the crime of manslaughter, Substantive issues decided by the trial court without comment as long as its judgment is prudent and based on admissible evidence and its fixed origin in papers.
The weight of witness statements and their appreciation of the right of the trial court gives him the status that it sees and appreciates the appreciation that reassured him and the court can rely on the statements of witnesses of evidence.
The causal link between the fault of the accused and the damage was to be found whenever the fault of the accused was related to the cause of the accident so that the incident was not conceivable otherwise, and the criminal conduct of manslaughter as the material pillar could be an activity. The perpetrator refrains from acting as a failure of the employer to provide security and safety for his workers as required by the Labor Law and the ministerial decisions implementing him when this act is linked to the causal association.
She pointed to the availability of all legal elements of the crime of manslaughter, which was condemned by the defendants, as a maintenance engineer attributed to the Federal Electricity and Water Authority incident to the failure to follow the correct method of connecting the electricity wires and the lack of security and safety tools according to what he said in the minutes of the Public Prosecution, as workers reported The victim at the time of the death of the Public Prosecutor stated that the first defendant, the owner of the company and the second defendant, the labor official, did not provide security and safety tools (gloves, shoes, helmet and belt) and received only clothing from the company since they started working in the company. N that the accused had committed a mistake not to follow the correct way to work and the lack of signboards and the lack of security and safety tools .. ".