Who defends whom? When the union becomes a bridge to undermine media sovereignty…
Once again, the National Union of Moroccan Journalists finds itself teetering on a tightrope of contradictions, caught between slogans advocating for the profession and practices that call into question the legitimacy of some who speak in the name of journalists. Following the controversy surrounding the “provocative” meeting with what is referred to as the “Qatari Center for Media,” the question arises: what about the legality of the union president continuing in his position despite his retirement? Was the legal procedure for his extension respected as stipulated by Moroccan labor law?
According to Article 526 of the Labor Code, an employee is to be retired upon reaching the age of sixty, and the extension of their work period can only happen at the written request of the employer, with the employee’s consent, and by a decision from the Ministry of Labor. This raises significant questions about the situation of Abdelkabir Khashichin, the retired president of the union: Did he submit a formal request for extension? Did the ministry approve it? Was this administrative and substantive procedure that ensures equal opportunities and avoids professional favoritism followed? Or was it dealt with under the logic of “the interim committee,” “consensus,” and the distribution of privileges, away from the law?
If it is proven that the extension did not occur according to legal procedures, then Abdelkabir Khashichin’s continued presidency of the union constitutes a gross violation of the law and an exploitation of a professional position that should have been opened to a new generation of journalists. Is it reasonable for talented and ambitious young graduates to be excluded from professional positions on the grounds of “lack of successors,” while retirees retain their salaries and professional titles without legal justification? Does a person who does not actually work or practice journalism have the right to keep their press card, sign agreements, and represent the Moroccan journalism community before external entities?
The clarification issued today by one of the media groups, which denied any connection to the initiatives of some union colleagues, while significant, reveals the extent of the overlap between professional, partisan, and union identities, and exposes how the union has been turned into a platform for influence and murky relationships. This clarification was necessary, even urgent, as some individuals have begun using their professional affiliation as a bridge to justify unwarranted openness to parties exerting soft and questionable influence over Moroccan media, transforming it from a fourth estate into a functional tool serving regional agendas.
However, the clarification alone is not enough.
The real battle today is a battle of authenticity with oneself, a battle to purify union work, and to liberate it from the grip of favoritism and dubious extensions. The union, which should have been a shield for the profession and the nation, cannot be run with the mindset of retirees or through under-the-table deals. It cannot be monopolized by those who no longer practice the profession, who only show up at the headquarters for photo opportunities or to sign dubious agreements.
It is time to open a frank discussion within the Moroccan journalism community: Who has the right to represent journalists? What are the criteria for continued responsibility within the union? Do we accept that the professional card and union title remain hostage to narrow interests and stagnant positions?
We are at a moment that demands courage, not flattery. At a sensitive stage that requires legal and ethical integrity, not temporary patchwork solutions. An investigation should be launched, and the question raised before public opinion: Is the union president today working according to the law? If not, let the press card be returned, and let a new page be opened, based on transparency, not loyalty, and on respect for the law, not its circumvention.
