Hamza Makraoui
The Minister of Economic Inclusion, Small Business, Employment and Skills, Younes Sekkouri announced yesterday that the organic bill No. 97-15 relating to the right to strike will be subject to additional amendments . A promise which will somewhat calm the enthusiasm of the unions, but what should we think of this way of piloting the legislation of a constitutional right?
Initiated by the 2011 Constitution, the organic bill governing the modalities of exercising the right to strike has been a long time coming. A boost was given when the text carried by Younes Sekkouri was adopted, on December 24, in plenary session and of course by a majority of deputies’ votes. Next step is the House of Advisors.
Unsurprisingly, the adoption of the text quickly sparked an outcry from the unions, who believe that they have not been heard enough, that the text did not respect constitutional law and are therefore calling for its revision.
On the other hand, certain observers or other interested parties welcome the adoption of the text and do not fail to consider this step as a “ major breakthrough » after years of waiting, this is certainly the case, but they fail to consider one thing, for a subject of this order: it is vital to have a consensus, it is not just a question of filling a void legal.
« The government shows great flexibility by accepting proposals from social partners » declared Younes Sekkouri on September 13 during a press briefing, on the sidelines of the government’s consultative meetings with the most representative trade union centers.
Read also: Health professionals announce to continue strikes in early 2025
This declaration would be seen as a disconnect between politics and social life, or even the very spirit of the Constitution.
However, the government is not showing simple benevolence by consulting the social partners and taking their proposals into account. He fulfills his obligation, respecting a right enshrined in the Constitution.
The political and economic convictions of some must not take precedence over any of the rights guaranteed by the supreme legal norm of the country. We should keep in mind that the parties will come, that the parties will go and that this text will remain.
A text awaited for 60 years, we might as well not miss an appointment with History by boasting of having held 65 meetings in 20 months with the social partners and rest on our laurels.
The Economic, Social and Environmental Council (CESE), to which the text was submitted for opinion, had expressed its concern on several points, notably the exclusion of numerous categories of workers such as self-employed workers or other economic actors likely to be affected by social conflicts.
For a Ministry of Inclusion, the least it could do would be to consult as many segments of the working population as possible and not just the unions. Should we remember that there are millions of Moroccans participating in political life and who have no union affiliation, out of disinterest, by choice or because they do not feel represented by organizations that have still not clear legislative framework.
This without returning to all the points which show the “ restrictive approach » of a text which seeks to restrict the right to strike rather than guarantee its exercise under fair conditions, as the CESE points out.
In a country governed by the rule of law like ours, it seems that this type of law, which must guarantee the freedom, dignity and security of our workforce, must be taken more seriously and be the subject of extensive consultation. national.
