Under the guise of defending human rights, some human rights associations in Morocco engage in practices that are exposed by evidence and field data. These organizations have turned human rights activism into a means of livelihood, relying on selective advocacy for sensitive issues, such as land grabbing, settling political scores, and organizing paid protests.
A former member of the Moroccan League for Citizenship and Human Rights broke the silence, revealing in a live Facebook broadcast that the association he belonged to pays participants in protests. This statement raises a shocking question: have paid slogans become a part of “civil activism”?
The facts go beyond the slogans. Some of these associations play the role of brokers in housing and illegal construction issues, intervening in judicial cases as “rights advocates,” while in reality, they execute hidden agendas driven by narrow interests. These same associations become tools of extortion for influential figures, exploiting issues related to public property liberation or urban redevelopment to achieve private gains.
Over time, some leaders of these associations have amassed significant wealth that is inconsistent with the supposed nature of associative work. In reality, this wealth stems from shady relationships, brokerage activities, and illegal interventions in sensitive matters. Associations that once raised the banner of independence now operate as arms moved by entities with direct interests, funded to undermine their opponents or to exert pressure for contract approvals.
Some of these associations now offer what resembles a “service” of selling malicious complaints. They choose a target, prepare a ready-made complaint, and then wave it in the media or market it to the authorities to create pressure and obtain compensation. Extortion here has become systematic, under the protection of the “human rights” label that grants these associations a maneuvering space not available to ordinary actors.
When Abdelhamid El Mahfoudi was appointed governor of the Kenitra region, one of these associations called for a protest in front of the governorate. Suddenly, they withdrew. Local sources linked this decision to a failed attempt to extort the governor, aiming to have him meet with representatives of the association for photo opportunities to present the association as a relevant participant in local affairs, paving the way for new “interventions” in matters related to real estate and development projects.
These behaviors did not go without an official response. Justice Minister Abdellatif Ouahbi sounded the alarm, affirming before Parliament that the time for nonsense has passed. He clarified that filing complaints against elected officials would not fall under the purview of associations, but solely within the authority of the Minister of Interior, as the body responsible for overseeing financial management of local entities. He justified this by stating that malicious complaints from certain associations have become a sword hanging over the heads of elected officials, driving away competent individuals from seeking candidacy.
Ouahbi stated that opening judicial investigations for two years based on complaints from associations “claiming” to protect public funds harms political work, emphasizing that monitoring state funds is the responsibility of state institutions, and citizens can relay their observations to their representatives in Parliament instead of relying on associations that have lost their way and turned into tools of pressure and profit-making.
The fundamental question now is: who holds these associations accountable? Who monitors their funding sources? Who tracks the wealth of their leaders? And who prevents them from continuing to undermine trust in both human rights and political work?
