Just a few months ago, Talk Morocco was merely a vague concept the two of us had tossed around. Though we are both dedicated writers and activists for free speech, we also both have full-time jobs and so at first found taking on such a project overwhelming at best, impossible at worst. Yet here we are.

So how did the idea first come about?

Our format was inspired in part by the Creative Syria forum which Jillian (a Syriaphile) discovered a couple of years ago and which deserves to be acknowledged for the role it has played in uniting Syrian bloggers. We can only hope Talk Morocco will do the same for the Blogoma (Moroccan blogosphere).

The prominence of new media has offered the Moroccan public new ways for expression that were unimaginable just decades ago, when under tight state control over mass media, the only outlets available to convey news and views were either official or partisan press. Although a new species of investigative print media appeared in the market in the past two decades, a wave of seizures and restrictions has limited Morocco’s once distinctively active independent press.

But in its wake came the Internet: In a relatively short amount of time, a lively Moroccan blogosphere has grown increasingly influential, circumventing an obsolescent system of censorship. Bloggers posting in Arabic, French, Spanish, Berber and English deal with different social, political, economic and religious issues that have marked the country’s recent history. In covering the Blogoma for Global Voices Online, we have noticed the rapid growth of this sphere of free speakers. At the same time, we saw a lack of interaction between groups of bloggers who aggregated in virtually separate realms according to their field of interest, location, language of expression, political or cultural background. Moreover, bloggers, the newcomers into the media landscape, seldom interact or share the same platform with professional journalists and authors who once exclusively dominated the space.

Our solution was Talk Morocco, aimed at bringing together these various groups around subjects of common interest. Talk Morocco will provide a platform for established and unknown bloggers, journalists and authors, Moroccans and non-Moroccans, English speakers and non-English speakers, to comment on subjects relating to Morocco and the diaspora.

We chose the first topic–that of free speech in Morocco–for a multitude of reasons, but most of all for how it represents our project on the whole. We, as bloggers and Moroccophiles, recognize the important role of the Blogoma, and believe that one key element of free speech comes from inclusiveness: of different opinions, different people, different voices. And since freedom of expression is, as we see it, a precondition to achieve all other forms of freedoms (thought, religion, association, academic and scientific freedoms), we thought it was appropriate to put forward this fundamental issue as an opening topic for discussion. Recent news coming out from Morocco has been (unfortunately) comforting us on our choice.

We hope that Talk Morocco will effectively connect the dots between different breeds of Moroccan bloggers and be a junction point where bloggers, journalists, and authors can come together and have enlightened and informed discussions on matters related to Morocco.

Sincerely,

Jillian and Hisham.

In five months, from June to October 2009, one Moroccan newspaper was shut down, five foreign publications were banned from entry into Morocco, 2 million euros [US$3m] in damages were pronounced against newspapers, 18 months imprisonment and 110 months suspended sentences against journalists, one of which is now in jail. A record for Morocco! All these cases share three constant features that generally characterize press related offenses in Morocco.

The first constant is the arbitrary triggering of prosecutions. Criminal and press codes severely punish infringement of the so-called red lines (monarchy, Islam, the Sahara). The problem is, these lines, supposed to define the “sacred,” are blurred and stretchable at the desire and goodwill of the prosecution and its judicial hierarchy. The indicted copy of Akhbar Al-Youm had been sold throughout a whole weekend and no one saw contempt for the Moroccan flag or a disrespect for the Prince. After a three days of selling, someone suddenly decided there was a case for shutting down a newspaper. And here lies the problem for the Moroccan press: a risky business that is carried out on a minefield of red lines, which no one knows where they begin or where they end. Jean-Francois Julliard, Secretary General of Reporters Without Borders, sums up the situation: “Moroccans themselves do not always understand what is going on in their own country. For foreigners, it is even more difficult, especially that the Moroccan regime is quite unpredictable.” All independent Moroccan journalists will tell you it is a very risky business. The wrath of arbitrary authorities can strike at any moment, at any newspaper. How then to talk about the King of Morocco, Head of State and Chief of the Executive, who decides the fate of 30 million Moroccan souls whilst the law lifts him to the rank of the sacred? It is an untenable situation. Especially after ten years of reign “the political power considers it no longer needs to be liberal,” as noted Driss Ksikes, a former journalist and editor of Nichane who was sentenced to three years suspended imprisonment for undermining the sacredness of the king and who chose to leave journalism, hence avoiding self-censorship.

The second constant concerns judges. There are laws and there are judges who apply the laws. That at least is a gain: unlike the unpredictability of the Moroccan authorities, the behavior of judges is clear and doesn’t admit any ambiguity. In matters of [the king's] holiness, when you are prosecuted you are automatically convicted. Until proven otherwise, the fact is that in the Morocco of Mohammed VI, as in that of Hassan II before him, no judge has ever dared acquitting anybody in a case in which the royal family was involved. That has simply never happened. Even if that implies some unimaginable judicial stunts. In the case of TelQuel, there was no legislation that prohibits public opinion polls on the King of Morocco. In December 2006, a bill had been proposed to prohibit such polls but was abandoned. How can the judge in this situation endorse the administrative ban of the newspaper? He did not fear the ridicule and motivated his decision as follows: “it would have been pointless to overturn the ban, since in any case, the seized copies had already been destroyed,” the judge declared. But there’s worse. Whenever the King is involved, the Moroccan judges forget even the basics of their mission, and that is to judge with humanity. In 2007, Nasser Ahmed was sentenced to three years in jail for having chanted slogans against King Mohammed VI. He died in prison. He was 95 years old. Ninety-five. Neither his old age nor his poor paralytic health were sufficient to inspire clemency to the judge. He sent a deadly ill old man to perish in prison. Without mercy, heartless.

Everyone will understand that even with the best criminal code and the most liberal of press codes in the world, Moroccan judges will continue to systematically pronounce sentences against opinion and press offenses whenever issues related sacredness come up. Because they do not judge according to texts of the law, but according to the customs in use, and mainly because they are afraid. “Judges are very serious whenever the monarchy is concerned. The law becomes immediately irrelevant, and all those who are supposed to ensure compliance to it, obey only one thing: fear. They are afraid that someone, somewhere, may accuse them of complacency with an “enemy” of the monarchy- even an alleged one, even for stupid reasons,” writes a Moroccan columnist.

The third constant is no less disturbing because it reveals a major regression in the Moroccan political culture. Recent cases were indicative of contemporary cowardice. Despite what observers may say, one must face the obvious: with the exception of some Moroccan associations, activists, some journalists and Internet users, there are probably a large majority of Moroccans who approve of, understand and justify such abuses. As for the political class, supposed to support freedom of expression, it counts in its ranks more courtiers than activists. And this does not bode well for the future. King Mohammed VI enjoys true popularity in Morocco, so much so that whatever arbitrary the motives of prosecution raised against journalists, and whatever severe the convictions, they do not provoke disapproval and do not raise much indignation in the public opinion. We will spare our readers here a reminder of contemporary Moroccan history, but the fact is that in recent years political opposition has been smashed so that the only opponents left today are… journalists. Before, newspapers were banned in Morocco for virulently challenging the foundations of power or explicitly attacking the King. Today they are banned for no reason, for a caricature or a survey, and in general indifference. Before, there was a strong political foothold represented by a strong political class which, although under control, fought against absolute power. Today there is a quasi-absolute power in Morocco, with no balancing opposition other than that of the press. Before, there was an aware political culture and political consciousness in the country, today it consists in finding a way to get as much closer to power as possible, and a group of people who succeeded in convincing Moroccans that economic progress is a “favor” granted to them. In writing this I am aware that this will intrigue and disturb the reader. Of course freedoms have improved a lot during the reign of Mohammed VI, his late father having set the bar so low it was easy for him to cross. But the reality is we built too much on the achievements of the first two years of the reign of the King, since which freedoms have stagnated. In exchange the political culture has largely diminished: for many politicians and actors in the civil society, and for many Moroccans in matters of freedoms everything has been achieved in the 1999-2002 period and the best thing to do now is to put one’s fate in the hands of the King and his men. Even if this means ignoring the abuses against freedom of opinion and expression. Our Tunisian neighbors know something about this model.

They say sometimes that asking the question is a way of answering it. And in reminding you of these three constants, I do not dodge the question that is asked here: “What will it take for real freedom of the press to settle in Morocco?” Changing the legislation and clearly defining the red lines are for sure necessary and capital, at least to reduce prison sentences. But this will not solve the problem. We have seen that one can be punished for an offense that is not even provided by the law. There is law on the one hand and there is the weak link called Justice that upholds this law. Judges who are the product of public Law schools, are not intellectually and legally better off than any enforcement officer or Caïds (local administrators). By diversifying the routes of access to the judicial office in Morocco, we would have provided for more fresh, more daring and perhaps even more independent judges.

These “technical” measures, although essential, would not solve a problem that is much deeper and infinitely more complicated. On the one hand, and I say this with great pain in my heart, it seems that the Moroccan society is not particularly adamant at requesting reforms to ensure more freedoms. In any case this is far from being its primary concern. On the other hand, I do not think we should count on an initiative coming from above. King Mohammed VI has certainly many qualities but he certainly doesn’t have the democratic feel. With no political force capable of carrying these aspirations I’m afraid the status quo is to be maintained for many years to come.

The priority now, I think, is to stop the ongoing bleeding of the political culture. Without political culture, there is no freedom of the press. Let’s keep in mind that in the coming years, there will still be censorship and prohibitions to “regulate” the field of freedoms, and there will still be self-censorship to avoid arbitrary [attacks]. Let’s keep in mind that the democratic transition started more than ten years ago, will not come to a conclusion in a foreseeable horizon. There is now an imperative to rebuild a democratic culture with the awareness that this must be implemented with courage to not let the flame of freedom of expression be toppled, and with pedagogy to explain that in terms of freedom of expression much has not been achieved and that instead everything remains to be done.

The successful Moroccan experiment–so to speak–was to allow for an independent press. Out of the dark some night came one of them who shouted: “We will allow you freedom of the press!” and then disappeared. They searched for him a long time, then they forgot about the whole matter when everybody–after the success of the idea, of course–claimed he or she was the initiator. Only then came out of the tunnel called Morocco, numerous investigations that have toured the world: How much does the king earn? How many possessions does he own? And about the princes, the palace, the Makhzen and so on and so forth; many subjects that young Moroccans could barely imagine their grandchildren one day might read [freely] without someone knocking on their door at the end of the night. The press was bold in comparison with that of Tunisia, Burkina Faso, and Gabon, but it was less than average in comparison with countries that have long surpassed Morocco while in its never ending march towards progress. This perhaps happened because the press had never come close enough, except in a few cases, to what the official media terms the fundamentals of the nation. The press instead has been carving in the margins [of Moroccan politics], dealing primarily with Prime Ministers and successive governments, although every child in the Sherifian kingdom will tell you that neither parliament nor ministers, not even the government can adopt any decision unless they were given the “kingly blessing” or orders descending from “higher circles.”

In Morocco, the red lines, the constants and the sanctities are well established, and for you to practice journalism you must first acknowledge and then abide by the rules based on the Press Code and the sanctions that it entails. And in case you were free enough to discover that this code was approved during the “glorious” Years of Lead, when through dubious referendums, ballot boxes were stuffed, you have to choose between three options: the first leads to jail, the second consists in waiting for the royal blessing and the third consists is begging for the king’s pardon.

Then, let’s keep waiting for progress to come…

It is true that Morocco has seen a widening of the scope of expression on print and on the Internet since the early 2000s. The stakes are nevertheless high. In light of the recent affairs that shook the media sphere in Morocco, one can wonder: Are these steps backward or only hurdles on the path?

The situation of freedoms in Morocco is similar to an eighth month pregnancy; a critical moment that involves high risk of miscarriage because of the lack of reforms and respect for freedoms.

My concern goes beyond to the actual space of “traditional” media: i.e., print, radio, TV…because I think we must preserve freedom of expression and “surfing” and publishing on the web to get rid of the label: “enemy country to the Internet.”

Beyond the mere reform of the press code, which is required, a predisposition of political actors at the highest level is needed to achieve transformation, with a democratic and constitutional approach, that would transcend the sense of sacredness [of the head of the state], to that of the rule of law. It is the only way for the kingdom to consolidate and boost its regional leadership.

Political reform must also be the end result of a concerted action, supported by civil society and actors of the ecosystems that are media and Internet. This action of pressure and advocacy must explore all legal means able to uphold the demands related to the preservation of freedom of expression online and offline.

Compared to many other Arab and Muslim countries, I think that Morocco has many assets to move forward in the dynamics of human, economic and political development. We must take advantage from our achievements to gain a place in the regional and international scene by 2050. An objective that can not be reached without freedom of press and free access to Internet: a freedom online and offline matching our ambitions.

A traditional press freedom argument is that access to free information and a free press is a basic human right. This is certainly the case, but beyond the argument that press freedom is moral and a self-evident good thing, there is compelling evidence that a strong, independent and free press is a powerful ally to socio-economic development and reduction of poverty.

Many people have long argued that a free and unfettered press plays a highly positive role in accelerating economic and social development. One is Amartya Sen, the 1998 Nobel Economics laureate, whose work has established a link between an active free media and the avoidance of famine and other disasters. When Mr. Sen was invited to address the World Newspaper Congress in Belgium in 2002, he said: “It is not at all hard to see why uncensored and active news reporting helps to prevent famines. Even though hardly any famine ever makes the ruling group suffer directly from it, the stigma and disgrace resulting from adverse press coverage impose direct costs on the rulers, and when combined with a functioning democracy, this can make it impossible for the incumbent government to withstand scrutiny or to be reelected.”

The link between press freedom and economic development has also been explored by the World Bank, which released a report in 2002 entitled “The Right to Tell – The Role of the Mass Media in Economic Development.” The report is a serious and substantial contribution to the research, analysis and arguments on the positive role of a free press in economic development and the reduction of poverty. Its 19 chapters by a wide range of experts explore the role of the media as a watchdog of government and the corporate sector, the media’s power to influence markets, its usefulness as a transmitter of new ideas and information, and its ability to give a voice to the poor.

To make it pertinent for a country like Morocco which is seeking human development by all means, the study is opportune for at least two reasons. Firstly, a free press helps remove the conditions of poverty, controlled information and the lack of public debate in which ignorance and extremism breeds and prospers. Secondly, the World Bank report puts another nail in the coffin of the idea, propounded by numerous autocratic governments, that economic and social development is somehow obstructed by the existence of a free press or that it is a higher priority that justifies the postponement of free information and free expression until a satisfactory level of economic development has been achieved.

As World Bank former President, Jim Wolfenson says: “Free press is not a luxury. It is at the core of equitable development. The media can expose corruption. They can keep a check on public policy by throwing a spotlight on government action. They let people voice diverse opinions on governance and reform, and help build public consensus to bring about change.” The Bank’s report concludes that free media help markets work better, that they facilitate trade and that they are important for human development. It also makes powerful arguments in favour of freedom of information laws and against state ownership of the media–not as philosophical concepts, but as the basis of clear evidence that free access to information and the predominance of private media accompany and encourage economic development. To cite one finding, the report says: “In countries with higher state ownership of the media, we observe inferior school attainment, enrollment and pupil-to-teacher ratios. Health outcomes, such as life expectancy, infant mortality and malnutrition are also worse in countries where the government owns more media outlets.”

To make it short: Press freedom pays.

As an American Muslim, the fact of the matter is I don’t mind certain forms of censorship, and in fact my religion mandates it. There are many Hadiths (sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him) which remind us about proper manners in speech, speaking badly about others, and being too concerned with matters that are of no relevance to our life. Additionally, another Hadith states harming others in any manner is prohibited for Muslims, which would encompass harming by speech.

On the authority of Abu Hurairah, radiyallahu ‘anhu, who said: “The Messenger of Allah, sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam, said: ‘Part of the perfection of someone’s Islam is his leaving alone that which does not concern him.’”

Abu Hurairah, radiyallahu ‘anhu, reported that the Messenger of Allah, sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam, said: “Let whosoever believes in Allah and in the Last Day either speak good or be silent. Let whosoever believes in Allah and in the Last Day honour his neighbour. Let whosoever believes in Allah and in the Last Day honour his guest.”

It was related on the authority of Abu Sa’id Sa’d bin Malik bin Sinan al-Khudri, radiyallahu ‘anhu, that the Messenger of Allah, sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam, said: “There should be neither harming nor reciprocating harm.”

When we don’t have something good to say it shouldn’t be said at all, and backbiting is one of the most hated sins by Allah. Gossiping and hearsay about family, neighbors, leaders, and members of the community serve no purpose in uniting people and striving for the common good. Since I’ve been living in Morocco, I actually appreciate that curse words, alcohol, and any scenes on television consisting of more than a hug are edited out. I prefer not to hear nasty speculation about any scandalous affairs of government officials on the nightly news, because most of those stories are hardly ever based on true facts. Once, someone told me that an Arabic translation of a curse phrase on an English television program was translated as “how is that relevant?” And, actually, I think that’s a good question for the foundation of my belief in this issue of free press in Morocco.

A lot of headlines of late lead with “Free Press” in the title, but the first mistake here is thinking that there is such a thing as free press in Morocco. The constitution of Morocco does not specifically guarantee freedom of the press. In fact, regarding free speech, the constitution states in Article 9:

The constitution shall guarantee all citizens the following:

a. freedom of movement through, and of settlement in, all parts of the Kingdom;

b. freedom of opinion, of expression in all its forms, and of public gathering;

c. freedom of association, and the freedom to belong to any union or political group of their choice.

No limitation, except by law, shall be put to the exercise of such freedoms.

And the law imposes plenty of limitations on free speech and free press. The Moroccan Press Code has a host of restrictions and guidelines on how independent non-governmental, and foreign press entities may operate. There are very clear guidelines on what subjects are off limits, and what fines and sentences result in a violation of the law. Since something is only truly free when it is without restriction, a better way of looking at it would be to say that independent press organizations are allowed to exist in the country, not necessarily free to write whatever they want.

In fact, many laws of the Press Code are also laws of the citizens as whole when it comes to speaking about the Royal family, Islam and the Western Sahara. An individual walking down the street speaking ill of a member of the Royal family is subject to arrest as much as someone writing the same exact thing and publishing it in a newspaper (though the actual punishment may differ).

Furthermore, the Code explicitly states “accurate and honest” reporting is a condition of operating a press organization. Speculating on the health of the King is not honest or accurate—it is merely guessing at a current state of health which may or may not be true based on weak evidence and sources. I understand people feel they have the right to know everything that is going on in the world. They want to debate every action, to criticize every movement, and have a say in something that they often cannot change. Which brings me back to my question of “how is that relevant?”

The news should be about reporting facts and providing people with information they need to know because it will affect their lives in a personal way whether it be their health, finances, or personal well-being. Instead, what the press is really fighting for- the ability or right to report on the health of the monarch, to publish cutesy caricatures of another member of the royal family, or to report some unimportant statistics of approval ratings? How is that relevant?

When the press is allowed complete freedom, fact and honesty often go out the window so that sensationalism and sales can prevail. Stories are slanted to shape a particular point of view or to skew an audience’s opinion around the story. Truth in reporting has become a value in word, but not in action. Personal opinion is interjected, speculation is stated as fact, and it’s the twist not the facts that often get people talking. Facts are not cross checked, and someone’s opinion is often given as evidence so that people are more often talking about news based on rumor and speculation rather than concrete evidence and given knowledge.

These things only stand to create more distrust between the press, the government, and the citizens. When an employee wants a promotion and raise in pay, do they get it by showing up late and producing poor quality work or by being a reliable employee, building trust with their superiors and producing the best results? Obviously, they have to build trust with the company in order to advance and gain more benefits. Applying this to the case of the press gaining more freedom, they should report relevant, fair, and factual stories so that both the government and the people win their trust. Perhaps then, restrictions will be lifted because the press would be considered a reliable and fair source on what they report and they way they report it.

The press needs to build trust in order for limitations and restrictions to be lifted. In doing so, following the current Press Code Law is essential in building trust and showing good faith. Remember, it hasn’t been very long since an independent press was even allowed to exist, so while much of the world is moving fast around Morocco, real progression takes time. Trying to break the mold by breaking the law in printing stories that are clearly against the law and Press Code will not accomplish the task of a freer press. Writing the truth, reporting what’s relevant, and showing reliability are the more likely route to change and a more open society.

Source: http://www.al-bab.com/maroc/gov/con96.htm

En cinq mois, de juin à octobre 2009, un journal marocain a été fermé, cinq numéros de publications étrangères ont été interdits d’entrée au Maroc. 2 millions d’euros de dommages et intérêts ont été prononcés à l’encontre des journaux, 18 mois de prison ferme et 110 mois de prison avec sursis à l’encontre des journalistes et l’un a deux est actuellement incarcéré. Un record du Maroc ! Toutes ces affaires ont en commun trois constantes qui caractérisent en général les délits de presse au Maroc.

La première constante concerne l’arbitraire du déclenchement des poursuites. Les codes pénal et de la presse marocains punissent sévèrement l’affranchissement ce qu’on appelle les lignes rouges (Monarchie, Islam, Sahara). Problème : ces lignes sensées définir le « sacrée » sont floues et extensibles à l’envie au bon vouloir du parquet et sa hiérarchie judiciaire. Le numéro incriminé de Akhbar Al yaoume avait été mis en vente durant tout un week-end et nul n’y a vu un outrage au drapeau ni un manque de respect au prince. Après trois jours de vente quelqu’un a décidé qu’il y a matière de fermer un journal. Et c’est bien cela le problème de la presse au Maroc : c’est un métier à risque qui s’exerce sur un terrain miné de lignes rouges, dont nul ne sait où commencent et où finissent. Le secrétaire général de Reporters sans frontières, Jean-François Julliard, résume bien la situation « Les Marocains eux-mêmes n’arrivent pas toujours à comprendre ce qui se passe chez eux. Pour des étrangers, c’est encore plus difficile, d’autant que le régime marocain est assez imprévisible ». Tous les journalistes marocains indépendants vous le diront : c’est un métier très risqué, du jour au lendemain la foudre peut s’abattre sur n’importe quelle rédaction au gré de l’arbitraire des autorités. Comment parler du roi du Maroc, chef de l’Etat et chef de l’exécutif, qui décide de la destinée de 30 millions de Marocains alors que la loi l’élève au rang du sacré ? C’est intenable. D’autant plus qu’après dix ans de règne « Le pouvoir politique considère qu’il n’a plus besoin d’être libéral » comme le note Driss Ksikes, ancien journaliste condamné à trois ans de prison avec sursis pour atteinte à la sacralité et qui a préféré quitter le journalisme au lieu de s’autocensurer.

La deuxième constante concerne les juges. Il y a les lois et il y a les juges qui appliquent les lois. Ca fait au moins ça de gagné : Contrairement à l’imprévisibilité des autorités marocaines, le comportement des juges est clair et ne supporte aucune ambiguïté. Dans les affaires de sacralité, si vous êtes poursuivis, vous êtes automatiquement condamnés. Le fait est que jusqu’à preuve du contraire, au Maroc de Mohammed VI comme au Maroc de Hassan II, jamais aucun juge n’oserait acquitter dans une affaire dont la famille royale est partie prenante. Cela ne s’est tout simplement jamais produit. Quitte à recourir parfois à des acrobaties judiciaires inimaginables. Dans l’affaire Tel Quel, il n’existe aucun texte de loi qui interdit des sondages d’opinion sur le roi du Maroc. En décembre 2006, un projet de loi avait bien été envisagé pour les interdire mais il a été abandonné. Que fait alors le juge dans pareille situation pour entériner l’interdiction administrative du journal ? Il ne craint pas le ridicule et motive son jugement comme suit : « c’eût été improductif d’invalider l’interdiction, puisque de toute façon, les exemplaires saisis avaient déjà été détruits ». Mais il y’a pire. Quand il s’agit du roi, les juges marocains oublient même le baba de leur mission à savoir juger avec humanité. En 2007, Ahmed Nasser a été condamné à trois ans pour avoir scandés des slogans visant le roi Mohammed VI. Il meurt en prison. Il avait 95 ans. Quatre-vingt-quinze ans. Ni sa sénilité avérée ni son état de santé paralytique n’étaient suffisants pour lui trouver grâce auprès du juge. Il a envoyé un vieillard en fin de vie mourir en prison. Sans pitié et sans cœur.

Chacun comprendra aisément que même avec le meilleur code pénal et le plus libéral des codes de presse du monde, les juges marocains continueront à prononcer systématiquement des peines pour délit d’opinion et délit de presse dès qu’il s’agit d’atteinte aux sacralités . Parce qu’ils ne jugent pas selon les textes de lois, mais selon les coutumes d’usage. Et surtout parce qu’ils ont peur . «Dès qu’il est question de la royauté, on ne rigole plus. La loi devient immédiatement hors sujet, et tous ceux qui sont supposés en garantir le respect n’obéissent plus qu’à une chose : la peur. Peur que quelqu’un, quelque part, puisse les accuser de complaisance envers un “ennemi” de la royauté – même présumé, même considéré tel pour des raisons stupides. » résume un éditorialiste marocain.

La troisième constante n’est pas la moins inquiétante car elle révèle une régression majeure dans la culture politique marocaine. Les récentes affaires de presse ont été révélatrices des lâchetés contemporaines. Quoiqu’en disent les observateurs, il faut se rendre à l’évidence : Hormis quelques associations marocaines et acteurs associatifs et hormis quelques journalistes et internautes, il existe probablement une large majorité de Marocains qui approuvent, comprennent et trouvent justes ces exactions. Quant à la classe politique censée soutenir la liberté d’expression, elle compte dans ses rangs plus de courtisans que de militants. Et ceci ne laisse rien présager de bon. Le roi Mohammed VI jouit d’une vraie popularité au Maroc si bien que quoi que soient les motifs de poursuites envers les journalistes, souvent arbitraires, et les condamnations, souvent sévères, ils ne suscitent pas de rejet et ne soulèvent pas grande indignation dans l’opinion publique. On épargnera ici au lecteur un rappel de l’histoire contemporaine du Maroc mais le fait est que durant les dernières années l’opposition politique a été laminée si bien que les seuls opposants aujourd’hui sont…. les journalistes. Naguère, on interdisait au Maroc des journaux pour avoir contesté en termes virulents les fondements du pouvoir et attaqué frontalement le roi. Aujourd’hui on les interdit pour un rien, une caricature ou un sondage dans l’indifférence générale. Naguère, il y avait au Maroc un relais politique fort, une classe politique solide, même contrôlée, qui se battait contre le pouvoir absolu. Aujourd’hui il y a au Maroc un pouvoir quasi-absolu et point de contre-pouvoir si ce n’est celui de la presse. Naguère, il y avait au Maroc une culture et conscience politiques vigilantes, aujourd’hui c’est à qui s’approchera le plus du pouvoir et ses hommes qui sont arrivés à convaincre les Marocains que le progrès économique est une « faveur » qui leur est accordée.
En écrivant cela, je suis conscient que cela va intriguer et troubler le lecteur. Bien sûr que les libertés ont beaucoup progressé durant le règne de Mohammed VI, son défunt père avait placé la barre si bas qu’il était facile de la franchir. Mais le fait est qu’on est resté sur les acquis des deux premières années du règne du roi et que depuis les libertés ont stagné. Le fait est qu’en contrepartie la culture politique a largement régressé : Pour beaucoup d’hommes politiques et acteurs de la société civile, et pour beaucoup de Marocains, en matière de libertés tout a été accompli en 1999-2002 et le mieux à faire aujourd’hui est de remettre son destin aux mains du roi et ses hommes. Quitte à fermer les yeux sur les exactions perpétrées à l’encontre des libertés d’opinion et d’expression. Nos voisins tunisiens en savent quelque chose sur ce modèle.

On dit parfois que poser la question, c’est déjà y répondre. Et en rappelant ces trois constantes, je n’entends pas esquiver la question qui est posée « Que faut-il donc pour qu’une liberté réelle de la presse, puisse s’établir au Maroc » . Bien sûr changer les textes de loi, préciser les lignes rouges, est indispensable et capital ne serait-ce que pour limiter les peines de prison. Mais ça ne résoudra pas le problème. On l’a vu, on peut condamner aujourd’hui pour un délit qui n’est même pas prévu par la loi. Parce qu’il y a la loi et il y a ce maillon faible qui applique la loi et qui s’appelle la justice. Issus de la filiale droit de l’enseignement public, les juges ne sont pas intellectuellement et juridiquement mieux lotis que n’importe quel agent de l’autorité ou caïd du coin. Sans doute il faudra diversifier les voies d’accès à la fonction de juge au Maroc pour lui apporter plus de fraîcheur, un peu d’audace et peut-être plus d’indépendance.

Ces mesures « techniques » bien qu’indispensables ne résolvent pas le problème qui est bien plus profond et infiniment plus compliqué. D’une part, je le dis la mort dans l’âme, il ne me semble pas que la société marocaine est demandeuse de réformes pour garantir plus de liberté en tout cas c’est loin d’être son premier souci. D’autres part, je ne crois pas qu’il faut compter sur une initiative par le haut. Le roi Mohammed VI a certainement beaucoup de qualités mais il n’a aucunement la qualité de la fibre démocratique. En absence de force politique capable de porter ces aspirations je crains que le statu quo se maintienne pour encore des années.

La priorité aujourd’hui, me semble-t-il, est de stopper l’hémorragie de la culture politique. Sans culture politique, il n’y a point de liberté de la presse. Avec la conscience que durant les prochaines années, il y aurait encore des censures et interdictions, ne serait-ce que pour « réguler » le champ de liberté, et qu’il y aurait encore des autocensures, ne serait-ce que pour échapper à l’arbitraire. Avec la conscience que la transition démocratique entamée il y a plus de dix ans n’est pas prête de s’achever dans un horizon moyen. Il y a aujourd’hui un impératif de re-construire une culture démocratique. Avec la conscience qu’il faut faire œuvrer beaucoup de courage pour ne pas laisser vaciller la flamme de liberté d’expression et beaucoup de pédagogie pour expliquer qu’en matière de liberté d’expression tout n’a pas été accompli et qu’au contraire tout reste à faire.

قبل أن أولد بسنوات كان المغرب في طريقه إلى التقدم و بعد أن ولدت كان لا يزال على نفس الطريق..كبرت و درست و تزوجت و أنجبت بنتا و هو لا زال على نفس الطريق أو بالأحرى لا زال منتظرا لسيارة تنقله إلى وجهته..المشكلة هي أن وجهة التقدم التي يبتغيها لا تضم بينها أعضائها الفاشلين و تقبل فقط من ارتضوا الحرية بديلا عن المسدسات و عهد الاستبداد..

خلطة المغرب الناجحة-على الأقل بالنسبة له- كانت هي السماح للصحافة المستقلة..خرج احدهم في ليلة مظلمة و صاح: نسمح لكم بحرية الصحافة ثم هرب..فتشوا عنه طويلا ثم ما لبثوا أن تناسوا الأمر حين ادعى –بعد نجاح الفكرة طبعا-كل واحد الفعلة، و حينها فقط خرجت من النفق الذي اسمه المغرب تحقيقات كثيرة جابت العالم، كم يجني الملك؟ كم يملك الملك؟ الأمراء..القصر..المخزن و هلم جرا من مواضيع كثيرة لم يتصور الشباب المغاربة أن أحفادهم سيقرؤونها يوما دون أن يطرق الباب احدهم في آخر الليل..كانت الصحافة جريئة بالمقارنة مع صحافة تونس و بوركينافاسو و الغابون و كانت أقل من عادية للدول التي طالما مرت أمام المغرب و هو في طريقه الأزلي نحو التقدم ربما لأن الصحافة لم تقترب أبدا إلا في حالات قليلة مما أطلق عليه الإعلام الرسمي ثوابت الأمة و ظلت تنحت في الهامش على رأس الوزير الأول و الحكومة رغم أن أبلد طفل في المملكة الشريفة يعرف أن البرلمان و الوزراء و الحكومة لا يستطيعون تبني أي موقف إلا حين “الإشارة الملكية” أو أوامر “الدوائر العليا”..

في المغرب، الخطوط الحمراء و الثوابت و المقدسات محسومة سلفا، و لكي تمارس الصحافة عليك أن تقر بها و لا تتعداها بحكم قانون الصحافة و عقوباته و في حالة كنت حرا لتعترف أن هذه الأمور لم يقر بها أحد سوى صناديق الاستفتاء التي تملأ نفسها بنفسها في عهد سنوات الرصاص المجيدة فأمامك ثلاث طرق لا غير: الأول يؤدي إلى السجن و الثاني ينتظر الإشارة المولوية و الثالث يأمل في عفو الملك..اذن؟

هيا ننتظر التقدم..

الشعرة نوفل

Certes, le Maroc a enregistré un élargissement du périmètre d’expression au niveau de la presse écrite et internet depuis le début des années 2000. Néanmoins, l’enjeu est de taille. S’agit-il d’un retour en arrière ou bien d’embûches de parcours compte tenu des affaires récentes qui ont secoué la sphère médiatique marocaine.

La situation des libertés au Maroc est comparable à celle d’une grossesse de huitième mois. Un mois critique qui risque d’entraîner une fausse couche faute de réformes courageuses et de respect des libertés.

Ma préoccupation ne se limite pas à l’espace réel des médias “traditionnels” : presse écrite, radio, TV…, mais j’estime qu’il faut préserver la liberté d’expression et de “navigation” et de publication sur la toile pour enrayer le label “pays ennemi de l’internet”.

Au-delà de la réforme du code la presse, qui s’impose, c’est une prédisposition des acteurs politiques, du plus haut niveau, à réaliser une mutation vers une approche démocratique et constitutionnelle qui transcende la logique de sacralité vers celle de l’Etat de droit. C’est le seul moyen en mesure de permettre au Royaume de consolider et booster son leadership régional.

La réforme politique doit être aussi la résultante d’une action concertée et soutenue de la société civile et des acteurs de l’écosystème des médias et de l’internet. Cette action de pression et de plaidoirie doit explorer tous les moyens légaux en mesure de faire prévaloir le cahier revendicatif lié à la préservation de la liberté d’expression offline et online

Comparé à beaucoup d’autres pays arabes et musulmans, je pense que le Maroc a beaucoup d’atouts pour aller de l’avant dans la dynamique de développement humain, économique et politique. Nous devrons profiter de nos pré-requis pour conquérir une place de choix dans l’échiquier régional et international d’ici l’horizon 2050. Un objectif qui ne peut être atteint sans liberté de presse et accès libre à l’internet. Une liberté online et offline à la hauteur de nos ambitions.

Let us not waste our time needlessly here: none of these conditions apply to Morocco. No need to read through John Waterbury’s masterpiece and only superficially outdated analysis, “Commander of the faithful .” Reading through a few articles in Morocco’s lightweight constitution is amply sufficient (and I will spare you the dismally drafted first chapter of the Constitution, devoted to basic principles): not only does the Monarch concentrate powers in his hands as demonstrated in the different sections of the Constitution, but his person is “sacred and inviolable” (article 23), the Monarch may address messages to the Nation and both houses of Parliament, which “shall not be subject to any debate” (article 28). As an extraordinary sign of departure from democratic practice, parliamentarians may be prosecuted, arrested and imprisoned for votes and opinions cast or expressed in Parliament, “when the opinions expressed may be injurious to the monarchical system and the religion of Islam or derogatory to the respect owed the King” (article 39).

With no checks and balances but rather an unchecked unbalance in favor of the King, individual and collective rights in Morocco are at His Majesty’s pleasure. Their scope is widened either when it so agrees with the Monarch, or when internal or external pressure make the political costs of repression too high for a régime that stakes much of its external political capital on an image of “moderation” and “tolerance”. There is therefore no contradiction in acknowledging the relative liberalization of political mores in Morocco since around 1991 (year of the publication of Gilles Perrault’s “Notre ami le Roi”, which proved to be the straw that broke the camel’s back, prompting a general amnesty of political prisoners and exiles), and bemoaning the sorry state of democratic freedom in 2009.

Another important factor must also be weighed in: contrary to the situation that prevailed in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s, there is today no credible and popular political opposition to the régime. The left has been either fully neutered (this is the case with the formerly socialist USFP and the formerly communist PPS) or marginalized (the socialist PSU and PADS, both spin-offs of the USFP, and the still Marxist-Leninist Annahj addimoqrati). The trade-unions, for their part, have been either been successfully cut off from politics (this is the case of the UMT) or have felt the effects of the incessant partisan scissions – the CDT, formerly close to the USFP, has split, while each split in other leftist parties has produced yet another acronym to add to the long list of Moroccan trade-unions. As for the Islamist factions, the two main ones – the PJD and Al adl wal ihsan – have fared differently: while the PJD has progressively been drawn and pressured into the bland and supine bunch of pro-Palace parties (although parts of the party resist that evolution, witness Mustapha Ramid), Abdeslam Yassine’s Al adl wal ihsan has felt the sharper edge of the makhzen’s political management techniques, still in a legal limbo with continued police and judiciary harassment of its leaders and sympathizers.

The recurrent swing between periods of repression and periods of relative tolerance – plainly visible as regards freedom of the press – is therefore not so much reflecting a real balance of power than the relatively autonomous policy choices of the Palace. Boubker Jamaï, founder of the most fiercely critical francophone magazine in Morocco, Le Journal, admits that the Palace sees both Le Journal and Ahmed Reda Benchemsi’s Tel Quel as vital to Morocco’s democratic façade (a privilege they undoubtedly owe not only to their editorial independence, but also to their being published in French, and thus widely relied on by foreign journalists and diplomats in Morocco), and that it therefore avoids going too far in its tit-for-tat relationship with the two.

The press sector in Morocco is an excellent example of how this cycle works. Ever since Morocco’s colonization, and the birth of a modern Moroccan press, newspapers have been at the frontline of the political fight over power. Repression has been a constant, whether under the French and Spanish occupation or since independence. In the 60’s and the 70’s, after the current Press Code was enacted (1958), seizures, closures, arrests and condemnations were rife – not to mention prior censorship. But at that time, the articles and opinions that led to repression were indeed subversive as I have noted earlier: the régime itself was bluntly attacked on ideological grounds, and described as authoritarian, medieval, neo-colonialist and oppressive. The papers voicing these opinions were mostly partisan papers, belonging to the USFP, the Istiqlal or the PCM (the PPS’ communist predecessor). They thus voiced political opinions susceptible of action by political parties and trade-unions.

Today, while some aspects of press censorship have abated – there’s no more prior censorship, except of course the self-censorship that most Moroccans writing publicly on political matters prudently opt for, and imprisonment of erring journalists tends to be exceptional – others are repeated yet again today – seizures, closures, while a new censorship instrument is now at the fore – libel charges, coupled with hefty fines and damages. What strike me however are the often ludicrous pretexts used to knock down independent titles: a poll on King Mohammed VI’s reign with figures that all elected heads of state would die for (the famous 91% poll that got Tel Quel in trouble in August) or a foolish caricature on a Prince’s wedding to a German Muslim. In other instances, they punished unduly harshly for real violations of press law (such as Rachid Nini’s Al Massae’s 6 million dirhams – roughly 550.000€ – condemnation for defamation of public prosecutors in Ksar el Kébir, whom he had accused of homosexuality, which is still a criminal act under Moroccan law).

What is striking today is that the editorials and articles triggering the clampdown are very subdued in comparison to those of the 60’s or 70’s – no longer is the principle of monarchy contested, nor is the Monarch described with various less than flattering adjectives. Most articles among those having led to judicial consequences recently have been critical on specific items of public policy, or generally critical of some tendencies in the Palace’s behavior or actions. None has condemned the régime in the radical ways of the 60’s or 70’s. Today’s independent press can be hard-hitting, on corruption or nepotism – and outside of the royal circle, some décideurs can be eviscerated in the press: royal treasurer Mounir Majidi, royal buddy Fouad Ali el Himma or minister of foreign affairs Taïeb Fassi Fihri are not spared.

With the fatal decline of the partisan press, the major newspapers no longer have a natural political partner to fall back on – nor are they on the other hand subject to the Byzantine alliances and politics that hamper any partisan media’s attempt at independent scrutiny of government. This of course reflects the weakness of the political parties and trade-unions, much less active and militant than the NGOs (feminist, Amazigh, Islamist or human-rights oriented) that nowadays dominate Morocco’s militant scene. This in its turn is a substantial weakness  in Morocco’s political system: NGOs can blog, petition or sit in front of Parliament till they’re blue in the face, journalists can write or editorialize till their arms fall off, but they are not in the – formal – decision loop that sits squarely with the Palace, Parliament and ministries. This not only reduces the leftist or Islamist opposition to background music, but also weakens the Palace’s hand: no longer can it credibly claim to have its plans thwarted by lofty leftists or restive Islamists, when it controls the whole political scene.

In that sense, the recent clampdown on Morocco’s remaining independent press could mark the decline of the refined sense of equilibrium that prevailed since the last few years of Hassan II, when the Palace seemed to recognize that its power would be more efficient if its legitimacy was perceived as being more and more rooted in modern democratic principles and respect of individual rights. While the massive killings, kidnappings and arrests of the années de plomb (“years of lead”) have not been repeated and are unlikely to be, the hegemonic control of society – at the very least in the political and religious fields – still seems to hold sway over hearts and minds among Morocco’s ruling circle.

And this hegemony is now extending into Morocco’s independent press – being already a norm in Moroccan radio and television channels, none of which can be described as independent. What remains for concerned Moroccan citizens is the abysmal or non-existing coverage of Morocco on foreign satellite or radio channels, or the very uneven information material provided through the Internet (and I have personally always felt that bloggers’ or twitterers’ claims to political fame to be ludicrously overrated). Whereas information flows infinitely more freely today than decades ago, the political potency of such free flows of ideas and opinions is limited by the reduction into insignificance of the other democratic elements of Morocco’s political scene, namely political parties and trade-unions.

When I first moved to Morocco the nation was still in a honeymoon stage. King Mohammed VI had been in power for only a couple of years since the death of his father, King Hassan II. The contrast was striking. It was as if the country was taking a deep breath and sighing with pleasure as the tension of many years was being released. New freedoms were being granted and promised and it seemed the sun was a little brighter. There were new, independent press ventures beginning left and right as old controls were eased and people began to report events from their own points of view instead of those of the government or an approved political party. However, very few, if any, chose to test the new boundaries right away. The memory of Hassan II’s secret prisons and the random disappearance of people who were outspoken against him was still quite strong.

While there was a promise of a new freedom of thought and expression, none were yet willing to find out whether this was a mere promise or a reality or where the safe lines lay. Editors continued to keep criticisms reined in and expressed only mildly, if ever. The first instances that I can recall during that time of limit testing were made by religious conservatives who voiced their complaints that the new king wasn’t a good enough Muslim and wasn’t worthy to sit on the throne. Granted, they thought the same thing about his father, but during his reign they were not willing to say so in voices above a whisper in places other than dark corners. Most in the society cheered, or at least smiled, when these early critics were arrested or otherwise silenced.

It is important to recall that this was happening in the early aftermath of 9/11 in New York and no one wanted to be publicly connected to groups who could be linked in any way to terrorist acts or philosophies that birth them. A wider form of censorship came to my attention later when a magazine called “Nichane” published an issue containing a number of jokes in Moroccan Darija, some of which directly made fun of the king and the government. At that moment I was doing research in my free time on Moroccan humor for a book which I later published, and I wanted very much to have a copy of the magazine. It took me three weeks and lots of questioning, prompting, and assurances that I had no connection with the government to acquire a copy–first as a photocopy of the issue, followed a couple more weeks later by an original copy purchased on the black market by a friend.

The comments and humor contained in the magazine were coarse and shocking for Moroccan literary society, but quite subdued compared to what I heard on the street daily. Compared to what might be heard in Europe or North America by local writers discussing their governments, the comments about the Moroccan government in this magazine were polite and deferential and the issue seemed overblown and silly. Most people I knew at the time said they felt the palace was being hypersensitive and insecure. This last sentence, I believe, is the crux of the matter.

For complete freedom of the press to appear and exist in Morocco there must be both a willingness of the monarchy to allow dissent to be voiced and criticism to be aired, as well as an active display of good faith in clearly outlining what it will or will not allow. At the moment, there are no clear or published guidelines as to what is or is not permissible, and what rules are known or inferred are enforced inconsistently; one person or entity may get away with saying something for which another would be punished. This has to change.

I believe the foundation for all of the suppression is fear, most likely based in personal insecurities. Hassan II survived multiple assassination attempts early in his reign and the paranoia they created in their aftermath was felt for decades afterward. Mohammed VI has experienced no such attempts and his throne and rule are relatively secure. He is imperfect, but generally well liked and respected and his fears of criticism seem unfounded. Why this king is so insecure is unknown, but overcoming that insecurity is going to be foundational in any attempt to bring freedom of the press to Morocco. There has to be a willingness of the palace to hear vocal and sometimes strong disagreement with its actions and policies. Another factor that is less foundational, but still vitally important involves society in general. While it is common for Moroccans to state strong opinions in their homes and in cafes, usually while surrounded by others who agree with what is being said, there is not a societal norm for positive discourse on controversial topics. Whether the controversy involves religion and how one should live out their beliefs or something more transient like the number of buses being run by a municipality, people in Morocco tend to either keep quiet or state their opinion vehemently to try to suppress alternate viewpoints. As an outsider it took me some time to realize that disagreement was okay in those instances, but that it had to happen with the same or greater vigor and volume as the original opinion was stated. This leads to a society of shouting at, rather than discussing with, opponents.

If freedom of the press is to take hold in Morocco, I believe it will be incumbent on members of Moroccan society to learn to listen to others without forcing them to win an emotional battle of decibels. A free press requires a willingness to allow ideas to flow without restriction, but it reaches its full potential when this happens in a place where those thoughts may be heard and considered, and ultimately to be made better with counterarguments and refinements. The beginning necessitates the liberty to speak ones mind. The end requires a will to listen, consider, and respond constructively to those thoughts. The palace has yet to show either, but when it will do so, society will respect it far more for the engagement. In a nation that has a 1200 year history of absolute rulers, change from the grassroots is unlikely. However, if the king will be willing to provide an example of thoughtful, respectful, and constructive dialogue with his detractors in an attempt to engage them in finding mutually beneficial solutions to problems held in common, I suggest that he will find a society that will love him more for his strength of character than he impresses now with his willingness to suppress dissent. I also believe he will help create a better nation because of it.

It doesn’t bother me in the least if Rachid Nini wants to criticize the dictator Qaddafi, or if some journalists want to make a name for themselves by spreading rumors about the king’s health, or by publishing silly cartoons. It’s just that I’ve come to feel that by raising a predictable outcry every time the Moroccan state raises a finger against the press, we are somehow dancing to their tune. These scandals have a predictable pattern to them by now: some blogger or journalist crosses a red line that he may not have even known existed; the authorities react with a heavy hand; an international outcry ensues; then the authorities retreat somewhat, whether by dragging out the process until everyone forgets about it, or with a lighter-then-expected penalty that gives everyone a sense of relief, or with a royal pardon after the fact. The end result is to remind everyone that power in Morocco is arbitrary, that justice is under orders both in punishment and forgiveness, and that journalists should mind their manners if they don’t want to get in trouble. In other words, the authorities are playing with us, because the controversy we generate is part of their game of cat and mouse.

What really matters, I think, is not these scandals de jour but the broader question of free expression in daily life. Do people feel free to speak to their work colleagues, their neighbors, their public officials about the many challenges and contradictions facing Moroccan society? Just as important, does such talk lead to action, or is it just the private griping of frustrated people needing to get something off their chests? Is Morocco a society where people take ownership of the problems they see, or are they passive witnesses bewildered by a sense that life is passing them by, that time is slipping through their fingers, while the real beneficiaries of change are powers beyond their reach? The answer to this question probably depends on where in Moroccan society you stand, because at least a few Moroccans believe they are masters of their own destiny. But from my experience, the overwhelming majority are all too conscious of the limits that circumscribe their lives. Modernity has come to Morocco, and with it the alienation, loss of identity, and sense of having been tossed into an unrelenting struggle of “all against all” that marked Europe in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. But unlike Europe in those days, Moroccans of today don’t even have ideology to fall back on as a new source of meaning, because the great ideologies of the past have all been discredited. So the average Moroccan finds himself adrift, drowning in a sea of change and swimming with the sharks. In such circumstances, what does “freedom of expression” even mean?

I think this may help to explain the feeling I have that the Moroccan authorities have let up, at least to some degree, on the controls they used to exercise over free expression among the population. They have succeeded in disorienting the people while remaining the masters of everything, so they let people say what they like, more or less, because they know that useless talk is a way to let off steam, an escape valve for the excess pressure—and in the end it will come to nothing, because the pistons firing so rapidly aren’t connected to any drive shaft, and there are no wheels on this car. Moroccans can complain all they like about corruption, about hagra, about sweetheart deals or the theft of public funds—and about the “bad mentality” of their fellow Moroccans. None of this matters so long as people feel disconnected and helpless, and assume for themselves that talk changes nothing. The next step, the connection of talk to action, is missing, because the idea has already been engrained and accepted that Moroccans don’t control their own destiny. Besides, as a high school teacher I know pointed out, Moroccans are afraid of change. Realizing one’s power to change things means accepting responsibility, both for the way things are and the way things could be—and it means accepting the risks of change. For most people, it’s easier to just bear the misery.

The question then becomes not what it will take to guarantee press freedom in Morocco, but rather, what it will take to connect talk to action and give ordinary Moroccans a stake in their own destiny. A long list of reforms immediately suggests itself, which I think we’ve all heard before: constitutional reforms to end the centralization of power and place it in the hands of popularly elected representatives; judicial reforms to ensure an independent court system, end “justice under orders” and hold even the most powerful accountable to the law; economic reforms to end monopolies by powerful officials and families, and encourage the emergence of a truly independent middle class; and educational reforms to produce a new generation of independent thinkers, aware of their rights and responsibilities as citizens, and capable of critical thinking and innovation. Beyond this, there is clearly the need for an ongoing program of human development, providing jobs, economic security and decent living conditions to average Moroccans, so that rather than being caught up in the battle of “all against all” they will be able to turn their attention to finding ways to give back to their community. And the state needs to change its mentality from one of control to one of encouragement, putting itself at the service of the people, rather than seeing their potential as something to be feared and contained.

The problem with these recommendations is that they are so obvious. They are discussed all the time, not just on blogs or in the press, but among ordinary Moroccans. So why, if everyone knows what needs to be done, is progress so limited and slow? One can’t help but wonder if the problem lies in the system itself. As I’ve heard more than once, those who hold power don’t want to give it up, or even share it, because they are happy with the way things are and have too much to lose. Once they open Pandora’s box or let the genie out of the bottle (choose your metaphor) they fear that change will be explosive. Morocco isn’t like Japan, where the state sees the development of its people’s potential as something of a sacred duty. Rather, those in power in Morocco want to keep everything for themselves, so they do their best to keep the people in a state of ignorance and confusion. I once wrote an article describing a friend’s theory that the public education system in Morocco was destroyed on purpose, so as to create two classes of people: the children of the rich whose training gives them the skills to manipulate others, and everyone else whose lack of knowledge leaves them vulnerable to manipulation. The Moroccan king termed this sort of thinking “nihilistic,” but if it’s an accurate depiction of reality, then the question of press freedom is the least of our worries.

It seems to me that it is up to ordinary Moroccans to bring the changes they seek. There is simply no alternative to a democratic spirit, widely shared among the people. This requires not just that individuals speak out when they encounter injustice in their daily lives, but that others support them and work with them for change, rather than taking cover or even attacking those who have stepped outside the safe zone. It will require many small acts of courage by teachers, doctors, bureaucrats and mothers willing to say, “Enough is enough!” Things being the way they are in Morocco, with a large percentage of the population illiterate or economically marginalized, it will require particular courage among the educated class: to reveal injustice where they see it, to speak up for those whose only ambition is to live a modest life free of hassles and with a modicum of dignity; and to resist getting sucked into a system all too willing to comfort them in exchange for their silence. It will require an optimistic spirit, a willingness to take risks in the pursuit of a better future. Finally, it will require a real and profound debate that engages all Moroccans, not just concerning the social ills that are obvious to everyone—shoddy schools, miserable working conditions, widespread poverty and unemployment, drug trafficking and prostitution, and so on—but also their ultimate causes in the system itself. Is it possible that Morocco’s current system requires keeping the people in poverty and ignorance? This should be the first order of debate, and to the extent that people decide it is so, the system must transform itself to accommodate the will of ordinary Moroccans to control their own lives.

Obviously this will involve sacrifice, because the state as an institution doesn’t like to have its authority challenged—and it controls everything, so it has many means at its disposal to enforce its will. But a people aware of its rights and willing to make sacrifices cannot be held back. The current system, which advantages the few at the expense of the many—and is arguably designed as such—can only continue so long as people are willing to accept their own marginalization, putting up with familiar injustices rather than assuming the risks of change. A friend recently told me a folk saying that could be the motto of the Moroccan state: “Give a dog a little, and it will follow you.” If you give the dog too much or nothing at all, it will wander away—the trick is to give it just enough to keep it in your charge. An artist I met put it another way: “The mafia is us.” If the Moroccan system is one in which everyone is on the take, even those whose take is next to nothing will still have something to lose should another system take its place. Paradoxically, these “minor operatives,” although victims themselves, may turn out to be the ones most resistant to change. I fear this is the real obstacle, not just to press freedom in Morocco, but to many other changes as well: a system of governance based on profit-taking and handouts, which ensures the complicity of nearly everyone in keeping things as they are.

Concerning Moroccan issues, we need concrete actions. Many opportunities have been lost because of individualism and even fear of pushing things as change is feared by many as it means for them disinheritance and the loss of key positions. There is an oligarchy in Morocco which has the reign of things. There can be nothing wrong with that if it can put its assets for the service of the country. But at the same time, everyone should have equal opportunity, starting from education to assuming responsibilities.

In my article, I will focus just on religious issues and the role the press should have in Morocco without hidden agenda.

Concerning contradictions, the Moroccans have to co-exist with those seeking modern ways and those seeing religious identity as the best conduct. But recently, these contradictions seemed to have taken some extremes. There are Islamist fundamentalists who have gone as far as to adopt terrorism. The Casablanca terrorist attacks on May 16, 2003 are a case in point. Last Ramadan, there was the association MALI, which tried to break the fast in public as a challenge to the law prohibiting taking food in public. Morocco need not to be in the grip of extreme views on both sides as it may end up in a kind of “sectarian” violence based on notions that have nothing to do with authentic Moroccan identity.

It may be argued that the arrests following the Casablanca terrorist attacks on May 16, 2003 were in some cases categorised with arbitrary verdicts and imprisonment, but if there is any good point about the campaign against extremists is that it limited the spread of extreme views infiltrating Morocco from Islamists with their own political agenda. At the time when it was common to hear of countless suicide attacks in Iraq adopted by Al Qaeda, there was the possibility that a few “desperate” Moroccans would see that suicide attacks were the best way to “put things right”. Currently, the state has restructured the religious field by appointing among other things the Murshidats. In this case, in line with the need to remain independent, it is better for Morocco to have its own religious figures and figure out its spiritual method than get a tsunami of other religious views like the Wahhabi, which in the context of Moroccan reality is alien to its inherited religious values from Moroccan religious thinkers.

Concerning press freedom, which has become an issue in Morocco, as from time to time, there are journalists who are tried because of their cartoons and articles, I think that the Moroccans have the right to know more about their country from their own press rather remain in the dark or get information from outside sources. The flaw with press freedom is when it becomes a source of manipulation and blackmail or a war between journalists to attack each other’s editorial line and to accuse them of being “subservient” to the Makhzen. Journalists like Rachid Nini of the newspaper Al Massae and Ahmed Reda Benchemsi  from TelQuel magazine have on many occasions degraded themselves by publishing disparaging attacks against each other in their columns and articles, especially in the last week of July 2009 coinciding with the 10^th anniversary of the accession of King Mohammed VI to the throne. Nini accused Benchemsi of being a drug addict. Benchemsi accused him of becoming subservient to the “Establishment” because of articles written that praise the Monarchy.

If the press does not have a wide circulation in Morocco, it is because of the content on its pages. Either there is banal information, which is repeated again and again like bad roads and train delays, or they try to take side with one camp at the expense of the other.  Some press like Tel Quel seek to “revolutionise” Moroccan society by bringing what they see as provocative news and articles, especially about the monarchy. But the fact that its sale is still one of the lowest compared with the “weight” they put in it proves that the majority of the Moroccans are interested in their daily matters. The press can have meaning when there are local newspapers that deal with what is of the most concerns to the citizens. Even national newspapers in Morocco seem out of touch with the readers as they focus just on particular areas like Casablanca and Rabat (where they can sell more copies). The irony about this is that many Moroccans do not know even who represent them in city councils or the parliament. They do not even know the face of the head of services in their locations because there is no press or media that deal with what should be local issues.

At the same, the press can be a force in redressing certain anomalies. The latest case was the trial of the wife of the judge in Oujda found guilty of torturing a minor maid. It was the big publicity that made an escape for her and her husband, now suspended, impossible.

On the whole, Morocco has great potentials to develop itself at all levels. It is only a matter of will on the part of everyone to redress its ailments. Instead of putting the blame just on the others, one should ask, “what wrong did I do and how I should redress it” instead of making a list of the wrongdoing of the others without having the means to end them.