Moroccan lawyers' strike sparks debate over judgments issued without defense

A strike by Moroccan lawyers against a new professional law has led to a contentious debate over the validity of criminal judgments issued in the absence of defense counsel. The lawyers' action has resulted in several rulings being made in criminal appeals courts without the accused being represented, a situation that has drawn criticism from those who see it as a violation of legal procedure.

Specifically, the first paragraph of Article 316 of the Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates that "the assistance of a lawyer is mandatory before the Criminal Chamber." This article is central to the argument of legal professionals like Mourad Al-Ajouti, a lawyer from the Casablanca Bar Association, who views the current situation as a breach of established legal norms. The strike, which began recently, is a direct response to the new "Law of the Profession," the specifics of which have not been detailed but are clearly a point of contention.

“

The assistance of a lawyer is mandatory before the Criminal Chamber.

The core of the dispute lies in the principle of the right to defense, a fundamental aspect of criminal justice. By proceeding with judgments without legal representation, critics argue that the system is undermining this right. The situation highlights a tension between the government's legislative agenda and the legal community's commitment to procedural fairness. The ongoing strike and the resulting legal challenges suggest a significant impasse that could have lasting implications for the administration of justice in Morocco.

“

The issuance of judgments in criminal cases in the absence of defendants' lawyers, due to the strike that lawyers are undertaking in the face of the 'Law of the Profession,' has caused resentment among those who see a 'violation of the Code of Criminal Procedure.'