Akhichin Leads the Union towards Ruin… Strengthening Ties with Foreigners, Disparaging Constitutional Institutions, and Mobilizing Impersonators
Mahmoud Al-Gharbawi/
The National Union of Moroccan Journalists is experiencing one of its most severe crises following the step taken by its president, Abdel Kabir Akhichin, who contacted the International Federation of Journalists, asking it to intervene in the discussion of the draft law concerning the reorganization of the National Press Council.
This action, which was undertaken without the knowledge or consultation of the executive office, has been perceived within the union as an individual act lacking institutional sensitivity and undermining the principle of national sovereignty. Most members of the executive office expressed their rejection of what they described as a “serious transgression,” emphasizing that Akhichin acted in his personal capacity, exploiting an administrative mandate that does not grant him the authority to make political decisions of this magnitude.
The seriousness of this initiative lies not only in the content of the message sent to the International Federation but also in its symbolism, as it reveals a Moroccan institution seeking assistance from a foreign entity regarding an internal legislative matter. This has been viewed by professionals and observers as a reliance on foreign support and a weakening of Morocco’s image at a sensitive time when the country is working to enhance its international presence and host major events.
The Moroccan Parliament, where the draft is currently under discussion among its committees, as an independent constitutional institution, will not succumb to any external blackmail or pressure, as legislation in Morocco remains a purely sovereign matter exercised by elected institutions representing the popular will. The kingdom is not in a position to allow any entity, regardless of its capacity, to dictate its positions, steer its internal discussions, or impose amendments on its national laws.
The messages that the communication with the International Federation attempted to convey undermine the principle of independence that characterizes the Moroccan experience in regulating the profession and show a clear attempt to politicize professional discourse. However, Morocco, through its constitution and institutions, has demonstrated on numerous occasions that it does not accept any foreign intervention in its affairs, and that dialogue regarding journalism, freedom, and reform occurs nationally, through domestic means, fully respecting its sovereignty and the independence of its institutions.
Several actors in the media sector recalled the contradiction in the union president’s position, who was, just a few years ago, a staunch defender against foreign intervention when the federation itself issued a report about a journalist, asserting at that time that Moroccan justice is untouchable. The irony today is that he resorts to the same foreign institution when he feels that his organizational interests are threatened within the National Press Council.
This duality in positions sparked a wide discussion about the nature of union leadership and the limits of its role between defending the profession and serving personal agendas. The union, which is supposed to be a voice of balance, found itself in direct confrontation with the state that finances a portion of its activities, and with the parliament which it has been exerting unwarranted pressure on.
The crisis deepened further after the union organized a protest in front of parliament a few days ago, attended by around fifty people, most of whom do not possess press cards, and some are facing legal actions. The protesters raised slogans against the reform process of the National Press Council and the governing law.
Strangely, the union chose to hold the protest on the same day that King Mohammed VI received the national youth team, crowned with the World Cup, which saw widespread public celebration.
This timing was interpreted as an attempt at pressure and provocation, yet it failed, as the protest did not attract more than a limited number of journalists, while the majority of participants were impersonators, YouTubers, or civil society actors with no relation to the profession.
Observers described what occurred as an institutional predicament that tarnishes the union’s reputation and places it in a difficult position before the professional and national public opinion. Many believe that what transpired should be a moment of deep reflection within the union, redefining its role as an independent national proposing force, rather than as an emotional body that exports its crises abroad.
