The Moorish Wanderer

Believe in Something and Dare Everything

Apparently my very early commitment to vote No on the upcoming constitutional referendum was interpreted by many readers -and friends- as symptomatic of a hard-headed, bitter radical, disconnected from the basic realities of Moroccan politics. I might be. But that does not prevent me from presenting my readers with a more or less formalized version of my own thoughts on what a constitutional reform can achieve, does it?

Morocco has got to be bold in its reforms. It would be a shame to end up in September with an upgrade version of the 1996 constitution (L’Economiste newspaper dared a “Maroc 2.0” headline, while a “Maroc 1.1 Beta” sounds more accurate). Apparently, there’s a member of the Royal Cabinet acting as a liaison with political parties, NGOs, other parts of the civil society. I would very much like Mr Moatassim to have a look at what I, as an enthusiastic and responsible citizen, want to see in this draft constitution:

This regionalisation idea was interesting. Why not push it further? The Commission’s primary findings were at best blurry, if not wilfully vague about the ways and means to implement such decentralization as specified in the King’s speech, January 2010. Why not put together a fully-devolved, full-federalized government? The Sahrawi people would welcome it, the Rif region has already a fierce regional identity that would flourish under a regional autonomy. I posted a year ago my own vision of what decentralisation would look like in a federal setting, and I think it can work, as a way to break up the Makhzen‘s grip on local matters. Regional bodies with attributions and a range of autonomy pretty close to the Länder prerogatives: local finances (with federal taxes and subsidies), regional police forces, regional parliaments and governments. And the symbol presiding over this federal aggregate, the unifying symbol, might I add, would be the Head of State, the King of Morocco.

The Azziman commission, on the other hand, has been very coy in its proposals; let us take a leaf on local finances to make the point: “Sans alourdir significativement la pression fiscale nationale, de nouvelles taxes régionales, adaptées aux spécificités de chaque région, pourront être prévues, […]” (p.18) obviously, the local or regional taxes are not going to be, in the committee members’ mind, a significant transfer of fiscal levy from central to regional bodies, as indeed the next paragraph explicitly shows: “Pour toute recette fiscale ou parafiscale, la détermination et le contrôle de l’assiette, la liquidation et le recouvrement seront confiés contractuellement aux services spécialisés de l’Etat, contre une juste rémunération des charges qui en résultent. […]Le partage à parts égales entre l’Etat et les conseils régionaux du produit des droits d’enregistrement et de la taxe spéciale annuelle sur les véhicules automobiles.” As it is, the present project -soon to be implemented with the upcoming constitutional reform, is no more than an upgraded version of the 1997 government bill: strategic decisions and government budget allocation still remain within the gift of central ministerial government. Central authority retains control over spending and legislation. This upgrade version of the 1997 local government act does not rise up to expectations. Federalism, it seems, was not the flavour of the year among the venerable members of the committee. Judging from this timid, half-backed, sitting-on-the-fence kind of proposals, and keeping in mind that many of these scholars and high-flying commis d’Etats also sit on the Constitutional Reform panel, I think it is safe to predict that they will come up with equally half-backed, indecisive and ultimately, superficial stitches to the constitution.

What would I propose then? Instead of just lining up a few sentences on what a regional body might do or might not, it would be vanguard-like to engrave federalism in the constitution; Basically, to admit it as the official and intangible -within the said constitution- political regime I would like to see take place in Morocco: a fully-fledged federal monarchy, multicultural and unified through the Royal Crown.

Why not a national CoA?

Obviously, a few things are likely to be radically altered: as the 1996 constitution shows, the national motto is “God, Fatherland and the King“. I personally have nothing against it (though I have some thoughts of my own on a more consensual, or shall we say religious-neutral one) but there is a great deal of confusion when one looks at the national Coat of Arms, which happens to be that of the Alaouite royal family as well. These might be trifling symbols, but it speaks a lot about the historical confusion between a dynasty that ruled parts of Morocco since the 17th century, and the state of Morocco that pre-existed even the Muslim conquerors. I would advise for the existing national Coat of Arms to be reverted as a Royal symbol (very much like the Royal Standard) while the Constitution delineate explicitly the coat of arms’ parts (in that Heraldic esoterica description).

On more down-to-earth matters, the new constitution, under a federalist setting, should explicitly specify the attribution of each governing body: the regional and federal legislative and executive branches, as well as the ‘liaison’ federal departments that brings institutions together.

I. Regional bodies

1. Parliament: retains all regional symbols of autonomy, i.e. the privilege of tax levy and spending, the control over regional police force and other civil service department (regional hospitals, primary, high schools and professional schools), and  a certain control over the regional government as well as (but indirectly) the federal government as well. Elections are organized within each region (with the voting system left to each regional legislation) and the elected government gets their parliament’s confidence on a either an individual or coalition-based manifesto to be carried out during the legislative session.

2. Governments: in order to ensure citizen control over local and federal bureaucracy, the legislative branch has a great deal of controlling powers over the local and federal governments. On the other hand, these bodies function just like a regular government: regional ministries with regional civil services. The cabinet is headed by a minister-president, who acts as a prime minister to the region (contrary to the federal Prime Minister, they enjoy only a primus inter pares status).

3. Regional Courts: The regional courts are an independent body whose members are appointed by a joint recommendation from the federal supreme court and the regional government, and confirmed by the regional parliament. They cannot be impeached or unseated unless the regional parliament introduces a special request to the federal supreme court or on the initiative of the latter.

4. ‘Free Cities’: large cities, i.e. with more than 750.000 denizens can constitute themselves into free cities, with even larger autonomy in levying taxes and implementing local legislation. A free city elects its own board, headed by a mayor, who is independent from the region, even if the city is a regional capital.

II. Federal Bodies

1. Federal Parliament: a bicameral house, with no hierarchy whatsoever (in the sense that there is no order or precedence as in ‘upper house’ versus ‘lower house’). The first chamber -called so because of its nationwide representation- has a fixed number of seats (9 per region, plus a seat for each ‘free city’ with a population over 1 million) whose elections coincide with the general election (for the federal government) The first chamber is elected on a federal level so as to provide the federal government with an immediate majority, as well as a counter-balance to the regional interests that are represented in the second chamber. The regional representatives’ seats per region are commensurate to each one’s population (with a ratio of 1 representative to every 50,000 citizens, a total number of about 400 indirectly elected regional delegates). Both houses vote their confidence on the newly elected government at a majority of 50% plus one vote (upon confirmation of the inner cabinet).

Parliament House, Rabat. What about a larger, more powerful federal body?

The same prerogatives apply to the federal government: they retain control of federal finances (including the federal body overseeing federal taxes and funding), federal police force (with regional deputation/federalization prerogatives whenever necessary) and federal departments, including national hospitals, university centres and research facilities, and nationwide infrastructures. Upon election results, both houses vote, in a joint session, their confidence in the new government (the Primer Minister as the leader of the party, or coalition party the majority of seats and/or votes, depending on the current voting system). Both houses can, when lacking vote majority, retract their confidence, thus compelling the Prime Minister to dissolve their government and federal parliament, calling for anticipated elections.

The Federal parliament has a power to organize public and private auditions of every government official, whether regional or federal, whenever the competent committee sees it fit. This subpoena prerogative can be limited only through a supreme court ruling.

2. Federal Government: officially “His/Her Majesty’s government, by the Will of the People” has the triple legitimacy to preside over Morocco’s destiny: first, national, with a majority in the Federal house, then regional, with a majority in the Regional Representatives’ house, and then royal, when the Monarch recognizes formally the party or coalition leader as the Prime Minister to be, then as the Prime Minister of the Federal Kingdom Of Morocco.

The federal government has a duty to carry out the manifesto upon which it has been elected, i.e. on a pre-election commitment (so as to prevent the post-election back-room deals that blotted all Moroccan elections since 1997, if not long before). In that sense, the federal government introduces legislation and enacts the parliament’s will.All government appointments, e.g. federal agencies, police and security apparatus are conditional on parliamentary consent.

In order for the federal government to carry out its business, ‘specialist’ bodies are attached to the traditional departments, and these aggregate other branches of power in joint-ventures, some of whom are ad hoc, and others are pre-specified:
* the Infrastructures and Transports Federal Board:
The board gathers the Infrastructures and Transports ministries (both at regional and federal levels) as well as Transport and Infrastructures labour and employers unions, the specialized construction and building companies, the Federal Audit Court and the National Infrastructures Parliamentary Committee. The board defines and discusses policies the ministries submit to their government and parliament for execution and funding.
* the Financial Regulatory Federal Board
the board gathers the Finances and Treasury ministries, the Federal Central Bank, representatives from all implanted banks (national and foreign alike), the regulatory bodies of the Stock Exchange, the Federal Audit Court and the Federal Supreme Court.
* the National Health Board
the board gather the National and Regional health departments, as well as representatives of N/RHS labour union, the board of national hospitals directors, the public health and safety parliamentary committee  and representatives from the Medical Profession (through the guild of doctors).
* the Higher Education and Research Board:
the board gathers the Education regional and federal departments, representatives from parents’ pupils societies, the federal and regional boards for curriculum design and assessment, and representatives from the education panel (academics specializing in education issues)
* the Federal Commission for Future Growth and Perspectives
the board encompasses the national statistics office (replacing HCP), the federal economic council board, the Central Bank and the federal budgeting parliamentary committee.

The need for these boards is not to burden the government or other branches of power with unnecessary bureaucracy, but it stems from the need to engage both federal and regional spheres into a cooperative setting; besides, the number of federal employees (that should remain within the ratio of 1 fed to 3 regionals) makes joint-ventures and interdepartmental structures necessary to share the burden of government. It also allows for civil society, unions and employers to convey their own views at the heart of the legislative and executive process.

3. The Federal Central Bank

It remains within the gift of the Prime Minister to appoint the Governor of the Bank, conditional on a joint confirmation from the Federal Parliament. The Central Bank is constitutionally independent from the executive branch, but the governor or their staff are required to testify before parliamentary committees on a regular basis to explain and justify their monetary policy.

4. The Federal Audit Court

The Federal Audit Court is another independent body who acts on its own will or upon request from any of the other branches of power. The appointments are jointly made by the King and the Prime Minister when a new government is elected. The Audit’s findings and decisions are transmitted to the Federal Supreme Court who then enforce it when necessary

5. The Federal Supreme Court

The Federal Supreme Court is an independent body, and judge appointments remain within the gift of both the Prime Minister and the King, conditional on a parliamentary approval

6. The Kingdom’s Mediator

The Mediator is an multi-partisan institution, i.e. only the house makes the appointments with no interference from other branches. The Mediator acts as a go between as a preliminary step when various litigations arise.

III. The Monarchy & General Principles

1. The Monarchy

(Apparently, I sound a bit like a republican to many. Let me square this once and for all: I remain conveniently agnostic on this issue. I do believe however that if the Moroccan people clearly chose a monarchical regime, it has to be parliamentary with honorary duties to the monarch.)

The Monarch, as a non-partisan figure, represents a symbol of unity, and the guarantee of our ethnic diversity within this unity. The Monarch, being above all political competition (or other), performs honorary duties, among which, recognizing the elected government, delivering opening statement to the annual joint session of the federal government, represent the Kingdom abroad on their own right. There remain some particular appointment that remain within the Monarch’s gift, conditional on a vote of approval from the parliament.

No more 'Beya'. There's no need to pay respect and submission time and again, for free and respectful citizens, is there? (Image Paris Match)

Rules of succession are not constitutional, and should comply with gender-neutral obligations (which means effectively, that we can end up with a Queen, hence the constitutional denomination of ‘the Monarch’). All symbols of respect and sovereignty are recognized, including a civil list (computed for the core Royal Household as a Civil Servant salary), honorary military and spiritual titles (but with no constitutional enforcement power, including the ‘Commandship of the Faithful’ title), the privilege of carrying a royal flag and coats of arms and royal designation of ‘His/Her Majesty’. As Head of State, he ‘Advises and Guides the Government of the Day’

2. General Principles: All international conventions signed have precedence over local legislation, especially in matters pertaining to human rights (including a full commitment to the International Penal Court) as well as a re-emphasis on the Universal Human Rights, their acceptance in their full universal meaning. In matters of Human Rights, Morocco surrenders all sovereignty and accepts international law as its own.

Now, if the Constitutional Commission comes up with something close to this aggregate of general statements, I will be more than happy to revert my position and enthusiastically campaign for a Yes vote. Now, I have to go back to my planet, I miss utopia so much…

24 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. fawzi said, on March 15, 2011 at 17:18

    Why do you keep obfuscating (or apologizing for) your anti-aristocratic leaning? It’s the same half-baked, fence-sitting principle you readily condemn when others do it.

    Neat proposal nonetheless! Anyone with half a brain would support federalism in Morocco. But I remain convinced that the king has no intentions nor interests in giving up his “executive head of state” role.

  2. Manus MacManus said, on March 15, 2011 at 20:13

    Federalism would be inescapable if the purpose of these reforms is indeed building deep democracy in the kingdom. Eventually, deep democracy is the best, and arguably only, reply to those who dread that the overthrow of dictatorship will lead to the populism of Islamist extremism. However, if these pledge to devolve power to parliament, the judiciary, Morocco’s regions, are not followed up with clear intentions and without areas of ambiguity, they will be swiftly rejected by the Moroccan people.

  3. Imad said, on March 15, 2011 at 23:04

  4. Imad said, on March 15, 2011 at 23:29

    The king of Morocco has no interest in giving up any of his real powers. The commission chosen by him will report to him and the final word is his. Referendum or not, it remains a cosmetic exercise. The king is well aware of what goes around him, the crimes committed by those close to him. He is also well aware that doing anything against his circle will geopardise his own rule so why take the risk ?
    His latest speech was forced upon him and it gave him an opportunity to buy some time until everything calms down. Of course the commission selected by him will have to do what he wants since he made it clear that certain important things to him are not up for discussion.
    So expect the fools to hang around for 3 months or even more awaiting the report of this commission, after all Morocco as described by some is a big waiting room. The political parties will of course try and score as many points as they can while getting favors in return for backing this new stunt.
    This is the game that kept the king in his place, kept the people in check and kept Morocco centuries behind.
    For those of you who think the king will give you anything, you are misguided. You only have to look at Tunisia, Egypt, Libya…to see that freedoms are taken and not given and that a price must be paid.

    • The Moorish Wanderer said, on March 15, 2011 at 23:32

      hi
      glad you put a comment instead of weblink😀 (thank you for these btw)
      I am fully aware that this whole thing will blow over in a disappointing outcome. But still, I enjoyed writing every sentence on what I believe to be the best constitution for Morocco🙂

      thank you for your comment(s)

  5. mouka said, on March 16, 2011 at 00:25

    I don’t see how the monarchy can reinvent itself overnight and allow a federation of Moroccan regions to come about. This is the antithesis of the monarchy.
    Having said that, some makhzeniens were floating the idea for some time now.
    I personally think that people are discovering that they could complain freely without the fears that used to haunt everybody in the past.
    A fuse just blew out, and revolutionary ideas are being openly debated, if not officially, at least in blogs and through the internet.
    The King is under enormous pressure, the “west” will not come to his help because Morocco has never been a strategic ally of the west. Morocco has been friendly to the western powers, but lacks the strategic importance that an Egypt or Saudi Arabia have.
    The only western power that would probably care to see him stay in power is France, but even France would not want to repeat the blunders it went through with the Tunisian revolution.
    I hope that the crowds in Moroccan streets this upcoming Sunday would be 1000 larger than they were the last February 20th.
    This regime needs to change dramatically, the so called “sacred” nature of the king has to be completely removed from the constitution. We need to be able to criticize the only political and economical actor in Morocco that counts: The king himself.

  6. Minibixx said, on March 16, 2011 at 10:00

    Did any of you watch the live tv debate on the national TV with the 20th february movement ? No comments ?

    • The Moorish Wanderer said, on March 16, 2011 at 10:06

      I don’t have TV, but I heard Ghizlane fared well.
      Don’t try to use that on us😉 From time to time, real opposition is allowed to reach out to the public (like Mohamed Sassi on Hiwar a couple of years ago). It is a sad indictment if we are to congratulate ourselves that ‘opposition is allowed on public TV’. This should be a routine procedure, not an exceptional favour.

      What do you think of it?

    • fawzi said, on March 16, 2011 at 12:49

      @Minibixx:

      There were no republicans nor secularists in that debate. Because officially…they can’t exist politically. That would defy the so-called consensus around the Moroccan “pillars” (constantes).

  7. Imad said, on March 16, 2011 at 20:03

    I couldn’t help but notice two important differences between Morocco and the other countries whose citizens got what they wanted, namely Tunisia and Egypt (Hopefully soon to be followed by Libya and Yemen and maybe others).
    Moroccans decided to have a part time revolution: Meet on a Sunday and march peacefully, allow everyone to observe, allow the police to arrest and allow the torturers to get their targets. Even worse, allow the king to take his time to come up with senseless plans to divert attention without making any real change.
    The Tunisians, Egyptians…have taken to the streets, stayed there until their got what they asked for. Even in Yemen, this is continuing to be the case.
    The other observation is the type of demands that people want: Apart from Feb 20, who only march on Sundays, the majority of people want jobs, income…and those someone has already termed “Khoubzists” [give them food, shelter, the basics and they will keep quiet]. A good recent example is that of those unemployed graduates who have now been given jobs. Not only will this not benefit Morocco as its public sector, already unproductive will now have to absorb even more costs. Another example is that of people of Khouribga who were asking for jobs as their primary concern.
    Tunisians and Egyptians asked for freedom, dignity and rights in the first instance and then of course there are always people who will ask for better opportunities, income, jobs and the like but dignity came first.
    This difference in approach is what will make Tunisia and Egypt great countries in the future (Egypt is now more strategic than ever and the West will seriously consider its weight in any move). Tunisia and Egypt have already dismantled their secret police force, have already arrested some big hitters, from ministers to heads of police cells, have already set in motion some real changes like returning stolen assets, blocking them and so on and more importantly anyone in a position of power now knows that people can riot in a heartbeat.
    So where will this leave Morocco ? forward 3 or 6 months when the situation has calmed down, Morocco will remain saddled with an autocratic monarch encircled by his usual circle of vulture criminals and a 35-million population with more than half illiterates and paupers. Yes we will have a new constitution that basically rewords the same old rules.
    In my opinion, I don’t think Moroccans do value their dignity and freedom enough. The few who do and they exist(ed) have either been killed, arrested or harmed in one way or the other.
    The picture looks even bleaker 5 or 10 years down the line, Morocco will still remain one of the best countries according to the MAP (Maroc Arabe Press) and the state-run bankrupt TV stations, with probably a new king and the same constitution, a new government that plays the same game.
    I think that we need to avoid this situation at any cost. This “free”doom that our neighbours have earned cost them dear (60 or so lives in Tunisia and I think about 300 in Egypt, Libya will probably reach 2 or 3000 but it won’t be in vain). They have secured very fundamental goals, you only need to consider that what they got in 1 month was more than 5 previous generations could do. This is immensely positive change.
    Moroccans have already lost 2 or 3 people in Khouribga, 5 in the past peaceful march, maybe another 5 on the 20th March. Moroccans must march peacefully but do it everyday until the demands are accepted. That is the only way I can think of. Doing this “Revolution” thing part-time will only get us the part-changed constitution and an unchanged system.
    In the past decade, we got rid (by pure luck) of Mr Driss Basri and he got replaced by Mr El Himma. The sinistry of Interior is still the same and their abusive methods have even improved.
    The past decade was definitely lost. The king has been running up and down the country with no real purpose to the people for most of the decade. Selected governments have been useless as one would expect, poverty has gone up, Morocco’s rankings in pretty much everything has gone backwards.
    Now that there is this chance which will not repeat for at least hundreds of years, we must seize it and call peacefully for profound changes. No one will give them to us but we must insist. The criminal police will not let us do anything peacefully but let them do what they do best, we just have to persist with real demands no matter the cost.

  8. Minibixx said, on March 17, 2011 at 00:44

    @ Imad :

    So basicaly what you ask for is a Revolution ? Just make it clear so Moroccans can agree or disagree with you…

    Cause for me the difference beteween Morocco and Tunisia & Egypt is that in Morocco the people who took the streets didn’t ask for the ‘king’ (the ruler of the country) to “get out”, no they actually said they wanted him to stay. That’s the BIG difference between Morocco and all the other arab countries today. They actually asked for a change of constitution (probably thinking the king would never agree), and guess what ? THEY GOT IT !

    So some Moroccans want a revolution, other want an islamic republic and the end of the monarchy, but many other moroccans would be willing to defend the king (physically) against these moroccans…

    Just know that.

    • fawzi said, on March 17, 2011 at 10:28

      @Minibixx

      Nobody’s out to assassinate the king. All that is wanted is that he steps aside from the political scene and that he become a symbolic figure…so that the people may ask for accountability from those that govern.

      Is that so hard to understand?

  9. Imad said, on March 17, 2011 at 19:43

    I think we agree on that. If you were to ask Moroccans to tell you if they want the king or not, I reckon at least 70 % would want him to stay. It also makes strategic sense for him to stay.
    Moroccans by simple observation have no qualms with the king as a human being. The problem arises when the king uses constitution written by his family to justify his way of life. Look at article 19, 23, 24, 29 …of the current constitution. The king according to his latest speech does not want to change that. In fact he made it clear that those and anything to do with his self-claimed commander of the faithful status is not for negotiation. If you look at the commission that he himself set up to “re-write” the constitution, its members do not have any credibility (ask people what they think about Mr Herzenni and ask around about the head of the commission). The mere fact that the king sets this commission without anybody having a say is flawed and is not considered democratic even in countries like Zimbabwe.
    So I do not agree with your point that “they got it”, it’s nowhere near the truth. What they got is a pledge to make changes and not changes themselves. Even if they were changes, they would be cosmetic and I guess we will just have to wait the next 3 or 6 months to see. I personally will not hold my breath for anything that comes out of that monarchy. It is corrupt to the core and see themselves beyond any laws.
    What is tragic is that people want the king so all he has to do is let us demand accountability from the rest of the people i.e. those we elect. Mr El Himma, who is he ? How do you want Morocco to advance when people like that have the privileges they have ? How do you want Morocco to advance when 2 or 3 families rule almost everything worth ruling ? Can you name 1 country in the present or in the past where members of one family hold important ministerial posts in the same government ? How do you want Morocco to advance when people like Mr El Majidi, some members of the royal family can do what they want beyond reproach ? Do you not see the conflicts of interest when the king of a country is its biggest businessman with both huge failures and a block to others ?
    If you care about Morocco, you will clearly join the people asking for this positive change. No one in their right mind would ask for non-peaceful means to achieve this. Morocco has to advance simply because we have been left behind, we wasted decades and it’s immoral that we stay like this.

    According to this definition http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution yes I want a peaceful revolution, I want profound and not cosmetic changes. I definitely do not want evolution because we are on the wrong path.

  10. Minibixx said, on March 17, 2011 at 20:07

    Some people, most of them living here think there has been traumendous achievements in 12 years, but I’m not having that debate again.

    Did the King ever promise something he hasn’t done before ? Has he ever betrayed his people ? I think No, you maybe think otherwise, I think we trust him (and that’s what I believe is gonna happen for most Moroccans…) and wait 4-6 months, a year for him to prove his good faith.

    Or you can go in the streets with the “everything now” generation and don’t forget your phone to make nice youtube propaganda videos…

    Salam Alaykoum

    • The Moorish Wanderer said, on March 17, 2011 at 20:43

      wow. Sorry to contradict you there, mate. What about that Talsint thing? and the INDH effect (for all the money spent)? (just 2 out of the top of my head, there are many more where the King didn’t deliver, but was blamed on his aides…)

    • Tikchbilol said, on March 17, 2011 at 21:46

      I’m trying real hard to stay polite and not to go berserk over your bullshit but you’re testing my limits here.

      Morocco is a prominent emerging market in Africa. Please don’t confuse economic growth with “achievements”. Just because McDonald and Zara open up new stores next to your house doesn’t make our country any less retarded. And I can say the same thing about this idiotic line of reasoning.

      Momo promised to make amends with our abysmal record of human rights when he “launched” the equity and reconciliation committee. Yet the CIA was given black sites all over Morocco, journalists get arrested (and banned) for criticizing the King, and torture is routinely practised in most police station (you can try and get arrested near the Jam3 Fna police station, make sure to bring lube, or Zite Argane).

      The INDH…Nuff said. Unless you’re one of those dumb asses who think a newly-built water fountain in the main avenue is a sign of Human development.

      I can go on and on but the thing is, he doesn’t make promises. “Al Nohoud bi 9ita3 t9wad”, “alTanmya Almoustadama”, “AlTanmya Albasharya”, “alWa7da Altourabiya”…Same BS over and over again. He’s pulling the same trick that Mao and Gaddafi pulled off : Permanent Revolution with the people for the people…And you’re falling for it.

      The biggest achievement he accomplished is his wealth. And while Tunisians are celebrating their democratically elected constitutional committee, you can show up in Le Matin or RTM and pretend that the Moudawana is the best thing ever since sliced Khoubz. Give me a fucking break already. I don’t contemplate everyday the fact that I’m better than the shit I took years ago.

      The social and economic “reforms” that took place in the last 12 years are modest to say the least for a stable North African emerging market. Political “reforms” are non-existent. You can cross your fingers for June though.

      Taking historical precedents into account, your default position should be one of scepticism and cautiousness, not one of herd-like (blind)”trust”. Your gullibility makes me ache.

      But hey, if it helps you sleep at night, you can jerk off quietly to the idea that we’re still miles ahead of Zimbabwe.

      والسلام ختام

      • Tikchbilol said, on March 17, 2011 at 21:56

        Damn it I hate the fact that I cant edit my comments. FIX IT a Dak K7al Rass Al’Talef (Moorish wanderer?).
        On second thought, I should stay away from the keyboard until I sober up a bit. Apologies for typos.

  11. Imad said, on March 17, 2011 at 23:38

    We should not confuse movement with progress. Even belly dancers move. Ask Ms Karima in Italy, a by-product of Moroccan policy. What was achieved in 12 years can be seen by those who care to look. This “Maroc en movement ” is true when you grasp that we are moving backwards. You only have to check Morocco’s rankings in everything and compare them with what used to be “4th World countries”. We have lost ground, lost a lot of time and lost a lot of income. Look at United nations reports, Amnesty Int. , Transparency, OECD…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index
    http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/MAR.html
    http://www.indexmundi.com/morocco/population_below_poverty_line.html

    check even the CIA who send us some of their prisoners because we have qualified torturers:

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2046.html

    Top countries unlike Morocco value human rights, freedoms, civil liberties, have justice and make people want to live in those countries. Once those conditions are available, economic progress follows, cultural advances happen and so on. Morocco is still falling on the first hurdles thanks to the policies or lack of them of the king. He wants to be in charge of everything so the buck stops with him.
    It is important to remember that we are in 21st Century meaning that the old-style tactics and tricks have long ceased to work. If you want to see a prosperous Morocco in the future, we must fight for it now so that we may achieve it in the next 15 years.

    • The Moorish Wanderer said, on March 18, 2011 at 00:11

      your comment didn’t show up instantly because of automatic filtering. Sorry for the delay.

  12. Polling Day « The Moorish Wanderer said, on July 1, 2011 at 21:01

    […] yet, in spite of all these fine things, I remain true to my word: I have set standards above which I would vote Yes for the new constitution. These standards have […]

  13. […] or the Civil Service can’t supply you with Demographic features of specific boroughs. No, a Federal Morocco is out of the question. No, it will be chaos and mayhem if you make Mokadem and Caid positions […]

  14. […] Constitutional Reforms […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: