I. Overview

Morocco has made great strides in human rights since the early 1990s, releasing many political prisoners, widening the boundaries of permissible speech, formally acknowledging past abuses and compensating thousands of victims, and amending several laws in ways that protect basic rights.

However, many of the improvements remain tenuous and reversible because they have not been institutionalized. Morocco has yet to amend many repressive domestic laws that do not conform to the international human rights treaties it has ratified. One example of such an unamended law is the article of the penal code that provides prison terms for persons who "offend" state institutions. This is among several laws that violate the right to freedom of expression and that continue to be used to jail critics of the government.[1] And where Morocco has reformed its repressive laws, the political will is lacking to put into practice the new, more progressive provisions by holding accountable those who fail to apply them.

In Morocco, both types of restrictions-provisions of the law that are repressive and the non-application of provisions that are progressive-constrain the right of persons to create and maintain associations. Specifically, the law on associations[2] states that an association cannot exist legally if its objectives or aims are deemed "contrary to good morals" or "undermine" Islam, or the monarchy, or the country's "territorial integrity," or if it is deemed to "call for discrimination." The restrictions on undermining Islam, the monarchy, and the country's "territorial integrity" (understood to mean Morocco's claim to the disputed Western Sahara) are the well-understood red lines on free discourse in the country.[3] The law does not elaborate on the meaning of these broad phrases, or on the equally sweeping restrictions on associations whose objectives are "contrary to good morals" or "call for discrimination." These restrictions in Moroccan law far exceed the limits that the applicable international human rights treaties permit on freedom of association and of expression, and provide the authorities with a basis in domestic law for dissolving organizations whose political agenda displeases them.

In other respects, the law of associations as amended in 2002 contains provisions that are progressive but that in practice authorities sometimes refuse to implement. Notably, the law creates a "declarative regime" for associations, meaning that associations need only to declare to authorities their creation but do not need to obtain prior authorization to be legal. The 2002 amendments also provide that once an association has been legally "declared," only the courts have the power to dissolve it. These provisions are favorable to the exercise of the right of freedom of association. Yet the practice by authorities remains far from the role assigned them in the written text. The administration responsible for handling the declarations filed by associations routinely and with impunity disregards and subverts the procedures laid out in the law, in what seems to reflect a government policy designed to weaken and keep off-balance the associations that are affected.

This report documents the pattern whereby the administration fails to do its part to implement the most basic procedures laid out for creating associations. In so doing, the administration violates the right to freedom of association by arbitrarily depriving associations and their members of the legal protections that allow them to operate freely. The affected associations espouse a variety of objectives and are spread out across Morocco and Western Sahara, the latter being a disputed territory that Morocco administers de facto.[4]

This is not to say that Morocco has shut down civil society, or crushed all associations that challenge the government. Observers have expressed admiration for the vibrancy of Morocco's civil society,[5] which includes more than 30,000 legally declared associations, according to some estimates,[6] among them many whose purpose is to monitor, expose, confront, and criticize official policies and practices. But the fact that Morocco boasts many truly independent associations that are legally recognized cannot excuse the arbitrary means by which authorities deprive scores, if not hundreds, of other associations of their right under law to register.

The cases we studied and discuss here do not allow us to present a comprehensive picture of the types of associations that authorities prevent from declaring themselves. However, our research shows that those that are adversely affected include many organizations working in politically sensitive realms. While not necessarily representative of all associations that Moroccan authorities have deprived of legal recognition, these case studies demonstrate that interference with associational life is not the result of isolated initiatives by local officials, but rather part of a nationwide policy. This policy does not consist of crushing outright those organizations whose names, aims or office-holders displease the authorities, but rather of imposing a repression "lite" whereby such organizations are kept legally vulnerable in a way that marginalizes and weakens them. For example, members of an association that is not properly declared are subject to prosecution if they raise money or collect dues on behalf of the association. The association is commonly denied access to public subsidies, rentals of public halls, and the possibility of opening a bank account. It will also lack the status required to hold a legally authorized demonstration in a public space, and to file a case in court. The authorities' refusal to allow an association to regularize its status induces some members to suspend their activities and dissuades some potential members from joining.

The affected associations include several working to defend the human rights of the Sahrawi and the Amazigh populations, and others that promote the rights of unemployed persons and of immigrants in Morocco from sub-Saharan Africa. In other instances, it seems that the administration blocks charitable and educational associations from obtaining legal recognition merely because these groups have selected as their leaders persons affiliated with the country's biggest and most potent Islamist movement, al-Adl wa'l-Ihsan (Justice and Spirituality).

The most common maneuver that undermines what the law purports to provide on paper is the refusal by local authorities to issue a provisional receipt for the documents that associations are required to submit as part of their declaration process, a receipt that would prove the date on which the association had made a good-faith effort to file its declaration. Almost equally common are refusals by local authorities to accept the declarative documents at all. The law requires associations to submit written declarations to the authorities both at the moment of their creation and at specified moments during the life of the association, such as when it holds elections or amends its bylaws or changes its address. The law does not give local authorities such discretion to refuse the declarative documents or the right not to issue a receipt upon having received them. Nor does it give the administrators the authority to evaluate the organization and pass judgment on its legality.

This widespread refusal of local administrators to apply provisions of the law on associations in effect transforms the law from what is, on paper, a declarative regime, to one that is, in practice, a prior-authorization regime. These refusals occur too frequently, and in too many parts of the country for them to be dismissed as the isolated acts of low-level bureaucrats. Moreover, they continue in spite of these practices being challenged in administrative courts, and being exposed and criticized by local and international human rights organizations.[7] The widespread occurrence of these refusals, and the similarity of the practices of local administrators across the country, indicates that these practices emanate from a policy decided upon at a high level to weaken certain categories of associations whose methods or whose objectives disturb the authorities.

International law gives persons the right to an effective remedy when their rights are abridged. Moroccan law specifies remedies available to an association when local officials do not fulfill their obligation to process its declarative documents. Associations have the option to send in their paperwork via registered mail; they can hire a bailiff as a legally authorized witness to testify to their good-faith efforts to register; or they can bring a case against the official in question in an administrative court. As this report shows through examples, associations have tried these remedies to secure their rights, with unsatisfactory results overall.

A better way to curb violations of the right of association is for the Moroccan government to exercise the political will to lift the obstacles that local authorities place in the way of associations that follow the legal procedures for declaring themselves, and to hold accountable those local officials who undermine the rule of law by arbitrarily obstructing the rights of associations.

Morocco's obligations under international law require nothing less. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Morocco has ratified, states in article 22, "Everyone shall have the right to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and join trade unions for the protection of his interests." The same article makes clear that states can restrict this right only under narrow and specific conditions: "No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of [the right of association] other than those which are prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others."[8]

Recommendations

To bring to an end to the violations of the right of Moroccans to freedom of association as documented in this report, the government of Morocco should:

• Reaffirm publicly the right of Moroccans to exercise their right to freedom of association as set forth in international conventions, and inform local officials that they must fulfill their obligations under Moroccan law pertaining to the registration of associations, and that they will be held accountable for deviating from the law's provisions.
• Revise article 3 of the law on associations to bring it into conformity with international standards of freedom of association (including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights' article 22), by narrowing the criteria by which an association can be banned on the basis of its objectives. Article 3's stipulation that no association may be created whose objectives include "harming" Islam, the monarchical regime, or Morocco's "territorial integrity," or that "calls" for discrimination, is excessively broad and invites politically motivated suppression of associations.
• Revise the law on associations to require that authorities provide a clearly stated motive in those instances when they decide, in accordance with the law, to oppose legal recognition for an association.
• Implement rulings by Morocco's administrative tribunals in favor of associations that have encountered arbitrary administrative obstacles to filing their declaration.

• Halt the prosecutions of persons for "membership in an unrecognized association," an offense that has no clear legal basis;  while Moroccan law criminalizes specific activities when undertaken on behalf of an association that has not filed the proper declaration, it does not criminalize mere membership in one.

Furthermore, in order to promote transparency in its treatment of associations under the law, the government should issue on a regular basis a list of associations whose documents government officials have refused to accept or for which national and local government officials have refused to issue a receipt, or whose legal constitution the government has contested, with the reasons for doing so.

Methodology

This report is based on missions to Morocco conducted in March and July 2009. Eric Goldstein, research director of the Middle East and North Africa Division of Human Rights Watch, researched and wrote the report. Sarah Leah Whitson, executive director of the Middle East and North Africa Division, and Ian Gorvin, senior program officer, edited the report. Clive Baldwin, senior legal advisor, provided legal review. Brahim Elansari, intern at Human Rights Watch, and Abderrahim Sabir, project leader for the Civilian Protection Initiative at Human Rights Watch, provided research assistance.

The report was prepared for publication by Brent Giannotta and Nadia Barhoum, associates in the Middle East and North Africa Division, Grace Choi, publications director, and Fitzroy Hepkins, mail manager.

Human Rights Watch sought input from Moroccan authorities when preparing this report. It wrote to the ministers of justice and interior prior to its March and July visits to Rabat, proposing to meet with appropriate officials to discuss the issue of freedom of association. It received no reply and no meetings took place. Together with the Euro-Mediterranean Network for Human Rights and the Moroccan Observatory for Public Liberties, it addressed to the ministers of interior and justice on June 26, 2009, a detailed letter (reproduced as an appendix to this report), containing numerous examples where local authorities appeared to be flouting the law on associations. Human Rights Watch followed up the sending of this letter by phoning, faxing, and emailing officials at the ministries of justice, interior, and foreign affairs, and at the Moroccan embassy in Washington, DC, to reiterate our interest in receiving a reply to that letter and our readiness to meet with officials in Rabat to discuss the issues raised therein. No reply was received by the time this report went to press in September.