Tenerife Court Clears Two in Deadly Migrant Journey Case

A court in Santa Cruz de Tenerife has cleared two people who were accused of organizing a deadly migrant journey. The court announced its decision this Wednesday, stating there wasn't enough evidence to prove their guilt. This case shows how difficult it can be to prosecute human trafficking crimes along the Atlantic route to the Canary Islands.

The journey at the heart of this case started on May 30, 2024. A small, unstable fishing boat, known as a cayuco, left Nouakchott, Mauritania, heading for the Canary Islands. At least 71 people were on board. Conditions during the trip were extremely harsh, with very little water, food, or fuel, and no proper safety equipment for traveling across the ocean.

The journey lasted almost twenty days. Many people on board died from dehydration, starvation, or extreme cold. Survivors said that up to eighty people might have been thrown into the sea. However, because these bodies couldn't be found, the court case focused on the deaths of four migrants. Three of these individuals were found dead on the boat when it was helped by the oil tanker Philipp Oldendorff. Later, the cruise ship Insignia Master rescued the remaining survivors. A fourth person died in hospital after reaching Tenerife.

The public prosecutor had asked for a sentence of 21 years and one month in prison for each of the accused. They were charged with helping illegal immigration in a serious way, causing the deaths of four people through severe negligence, and injuring five others. The prosecution argued that the defendants had helped organize the trip and were in charge of the boat.

However, the court decided it couldn't be proven with the necessary certainty for a criminal case who was actually steering the boat, or if the defendants were involved in organizing or commanding the journey. Because of this, the court found there wasn't enough evidence to convict them, upholding their right to be presumed innocent.

A key reason for the court's decision was how it weighed the evidence. Statements from several migrants, recorded during the investigation, couldn't be heard properly during the trial because of bad audio quality. This meant the court couldn't fully accept them as reliable evidence. Also, the photos used for identification weren't clear enough, making it hard to see faces or where people were sitting. While the police report showed a thorough investigation, it wasn't enough on its own to secure a conviction without other evidence presented correctly and openly during the trial.