The Constitutional Court of Morocco has validated the controversial Law 97-15 on the right to strike, ruling that it does not violate the Constitution. This law, which has faced significant opposition from labor organizations due to its restrictive measures on workers’ rights, was approved by parliament earlier this year. The court’s decision clarifies legislative boundaries concerning the exercise of strike rights, despite ongoing tensions and nationwide protests amid economic challenges.
The Constitutional Court of Morocco upheld the controversial organic law regarding the right to strike, officially designated as Law 97-15, stating it does not violate the constitution. This affirmation follows extensive debates and national labor protests following parliamentary approval on February 5, where the bill achieved 84 votes for and 20 against. Prime Minister Aziz Akhannouch presented the law to the court on February 11, which led to subsequent discussions with parliamentary leadership.
In its ruling, the court acknowledged the constitutional boundaries concerning the law’s stipulations. It indicated that any legislation formulated under this organic law must remain within the limitations outlined by the Constitution. The court addressed Article 1, emphasizing that it does not breach constitutional mandates, and noted that references to international strike principles are not inherently unconstitutional.
The court analyzed Article 5, which deems unlawful any strikes not conducted in accordance with the law, clarifying that this provision is constitutional only if the associated regulatory texts do not add conditions outside this organic law’s boundaries. Similarly, regarding Article 12 concerning strike procedures in the private sector, the court validated initial stipulations while insisting no new calling modalities be introduced beyond the specified guidelines.
Opposition from labor organizations is pronounced, as they assert the law restricts workers’ rights, giving government officials excessive powers to regulate strikes. UMT Secretary General Miloudi Moukharik declared it a “retrograde, unconstitutional law,” urging the government to halt its implementation. Despite some modifications, including a ban on hiring replacement workers during strikes, major unions like UMT and CDT remained dissatisfied, leading to UMT’s withdrawal from discussions.
The recent two-day nationwide strike reflects the intense opposition, with five significant unions estimating an 84.9% participation rate, which starkly contradicted the government’s reported figures. Disruptions ensued across crucial sectors, despite Minister Younes Sekkouri’s claims of lower turnout rates in public and private sectors.
The court also elaborated on Article 8, affirming that while collective agreements may facilitate temporary social truces, they cannot permanently restrict workers’ rights to strike. Amid escalating economic challenges, including rising unemployment and cost of living, union representatives have challenged the sustainability of earnings versus increasing prices for basic goods, further fueling the labor dispute.
The Constitutional Court’s validation of Morocco’s strike law highlights ongoing tensions between labor rights and governmental authority. The law, though deemed constitutional, faces strong opposition from labor unions who argue it undermines workers’ rights. The recent nationwide strike showcases the deep divisions between union claims and government statistics, revealing a broader struggle amid economic challenges. The court’s ruling will shape future regulations regarding strike procedures, ensuring that worker rights remain protected under specified circumstances, but significant contentious issues persist. As Morocco navigates these labor disputes, the interaction between constitutional stipulations and workers’ rights will be critical in evaluating the law’s practical implications and labor relations in the country moving forward.
Original Source: www.moroccoworldnews.com
