Zawaya

The dilemma

By: Sofiene Ben Hamida

Morocco was elected unanimously to become a member of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. This appointment was accompanied by a mass media campaign in Morocco organized by the Moroccan government to highlight this event as evidence of the success of its policy, and as an international recognition of the progress the country has made in terms of respecting individual and public freedoms.

Morocco is the third country in the Arab Maghreb region to join the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, after Tunisia and Libya whose appointments at the time were focus events for governmental propaganda; and these memberships generated big hopes that they would impact freedoms and human rights in these countries, as well as in the Arab Maghreb region as a whole.

Experience has shown, however, that their memberships in the United Nations Commission on Human Rights did not substantially contribute to making progress in terms of freedoms and human rights in Tunisia and Libya. The freedom of opinion and expression is still subject to restriction and prohibition in Tunisia, as witnessed by all observers, including the Special Envoy of the Secretary General of the United Nations in charge of human rights. The press in Tunisia is still restricted and subject to a tight control that has eliminated all forms of criticism or dissenting opinions. As for Libya, its appointment in the Commission on Human Rights is a mere indicator of breaking out and returning to the international scene, without having the slightest impact on its internal situation, except from polishing the image of the Libyan leader’s son who is a candidate to succeed his father in power.

Despite having a monarchy, Morocco seems to be able to better exploit its membership in the United Nations Commission in Geneva compared to other countries in the region, in order to progress in terms of human rights. Morocco has for years been showing an interest in positive interaction with Moroccan civil society institutions working on freedoms and human rights, and it has also shown more ability than others in withstanding criticism from Moroccan and international human rights organizations. However, the progress that Morocco might achieve in the field of human rights will not be deep, as it will mostly involve superficial aspects that do not affect the essence of the human rights system.

In fact, Morocco shares with the rest of the Arab Maghreb countries, as well as with the rest of the Arab and Islamic countries, institutional values that are based on giving more importance to the group at the detriment of the individual. Arab and Islamic societies do not give individuals any value if they do not melt within the core of the group, and they call for unity and non-dispersion as being the substance of the contract that links individuals to their groups. These groups are supposed to be like a solid structure whose elements should mutually support each other. In contrast, the human rights system is unequivocally based on the value of the individual, as a fundamental value of modernity that resulted from the clear separation in the West between religion and the mechanisms of managing public political and social affairs, i.e. the clear and final separation between religion and the State.

Despite the positive developments occurring in many areas in Morocco, which is still led by a Commander of the Faithful like many other countries in North Africa and the Arab-Muslim region, the country cannot adopt the system of human rights in its universality and comprehensiveness, as long as it does not have a radical and final stance concerning the status of Islam in public life.