Although the adoption of a framework governing this fundamental right has been awaited for many years, the draft organic law n°97-15, intended to define the modalities for exercising the right to strike, has given rise to strong criticism and deep discontent on the part of the unions. This text, far from achieving consensus, fuels tensions and further widens the gap between these representative worker organizations and the government.
Recently adopted by a majority in the House of Representatives (124 for, 41 against, no abstentions), the organic bill governing the right to strike marks a crucial stage in the social and legislative history of Morocco. However, far from being unanimous, this text arouses strong opposition from the unions, who do not hide their dissatisfaction with its content.
Although amendments have introduced important new features to strengthen the balance between rights and obligations, the legislative process remains incomplete. The unions, hardening their position, denounce a law that they consider unsuitable and restrictive, making this adoption a milestone that is as contested as it is strategic in the framework of a fundamental right.
When talking about the right to strike in Morocco, it is essential to underline the constitutional institutional attachment to this universal right, enshrined for 58 years through constitutional recognition, specified Abbas El Ouardi, professor of public law at the FSJES in Rabat and general director of the African Journal of Political Sciences, in an analysis sent to Hespress FR.
He recalled that the 2011 Constitution currently in force stipulates in its article 29: “ The right to strike is guaranteed. An organic law establishes the conditions and modalities of its exercise “. Five years later, in September 2016, the Council of Ministers approved a draft organic law regulating this right in Morocco. However, this project has not yet completed the legislative process to enter into force, the professor noted.
The various Moroccan constitutions have constantly affirmed the right to strike. Indeed, the 1962 Constitution, through its article 14, stipulates that “the right to strike is guaranteed” and provides that an organic law specifies the conditions and modalities necessary for its exercise. This provision was confirmed in the 1970 Constitution, still in article 14, with identical terms. The 1972 Constitution reiterated this right in the same article, specifying that the organic law will set the terms. Subsequently, the Constitution of 1992 maintained this guarantee in the same terms in article 14. Finally, the Constitutions of 1996 and 2011 also enshrined this right, respectively in article 14 for that of 1996 and article 29 for that of 2011, detailed El Ouardi.
« Despite this constitutional anchoring, why is the legislative aspect of this right, namely the promulgation of the organic law on the right to strike, slow to see the light of day? 58 years of waiting have exacerbated the problems linked to the exercise of this constitutional right, faced with dilemmas such as the relationship between salary and work, deductions from salary, and the constitutional principle of the continuity of public services“, he lamented.
According to the expert, the exercise of the right to strike in Morocco has often taken place in a context of recurring tensions between unions and the government. These frictions, fueled by divergences in approaches and interests, were particularly evident around draft organic law no. 97-15, intended to regulate this fundamental right. Presented several years ago, this project remained pending in the House of Representatives for almost eight years, illustrating the institutional and political obstacles that hinder the adoption of a clear and effective regulatory framework. This prolonged blockage gave rise to intense and often heated negotiations, accentuating the delays in the legislative realization of this right.
Under the current government mandate, efforts have been made to review key elements to finalize this law within a reasonable time frame. However, disagreements persist around strategic issues, he said. Among the main points of friction are the modalities for implementing the strike, the balance to be found between the right to strike and the preservation of public order, as well as the regime of applicable sanctions. These differences continue to fuel a conflictual dynamic between unions and the executive, hampering the development of a consensus.
According to the professor, it is crucial that the regulation of the right to strike is not seen as an obstacle to the exercise of this constitutional right, but rather as a mechanism aimed at facilitating it while promoting a spirit of civic responsibility. . Such a framework should guarantee both respect for workers’ rights and the continuity of public services, by placing the exercise of the strike within a logic of institutional cooperation and mutual respect between the different stakeholders.
« The punitive approach towards the exercise of the right to strike must be abandoned in favor of a constructive dialogue between stakeholders. Such an approach would favor results based on the general interest of the nation and citizens“, concludes El Ouardi.
