A mistake in the documents sent to the Constitutional Court has stopped it from ruling on a new law governing lawyers. The court was “unable to rule” on Law 66.23 because it did not receive the final version of the law approved by parliament.
The decision does not say whether the law is constitutional. It only deals with the way the case was sent to the court.
Rachid Talbi Alami, Speaker of the House of Representatives, sent the law to the court on 8 July. MPs had approved it in a second reading on 6 July.
But the House of Representatives sent the court a report from the House of Councillors’ Justice, Legislation and Human Rights Committee.
The House of Councillors approved the final version of the law on 7 July. The court never received that version.
The Constitutional Court said it can only examine a law after parliament has fully approved it and when the final text has been formally sent to the court.
The court said the missing final version made it impossible to examine the law.
It also said it “cannot rule in a matter that the Constitution has not provided for”.
The court had received written comments from MPs and senators, the head of government and the Speaker of the House of Councillors on 20 and 22 July. Those documents could not replace the missing final text.
The decision was signed by court president Mohamed Amine Benabdellah and 11 other members, including Latifa El Khal, Amina El Messaoudi and Khalid Berjaoui.
The decision will be sent to the head of government and the speakers of both houses of parliament. It will also be published in the Official Bulletin.
Lawyers’ strike continues
The decision leaves the main dispute over the law unresolved.
The Association of Bar Associations of Morocco began an open-ended strike in July. Lawyers suspended court hearings across the country, causing delays in cases before trial and appeal courts.
The association has made a return to court hearings conditional on a Constitutional Court decision or a response from the authorities to its demands.
Justice Minister Abdellatif Ouahbi has backed Law 66.23 as a major reform of the legal profession. The law would replace Law 28.08, which has been in place since 2008.
Lawyers’ associations oppose several parts of the reform. They say it could weaken defence rights and give the authorities more control over the profession.
What the new law would change
Law 66.23 would change how people become lawyers.
Applicants would have to pass a national entrance competition. They would then complete one year of theoretical training and a 24-month practical internship.
The maximum age for entering the training institutes would be 45.
The law would also allow lawyers to create civil professional companies. Lawyers could form partnerships, share offices and work together through professional groups.
It would also create rules for working with foreign lawyers, with the aim of supporting economic activity and protecting foreign investment.
The law would raise the minimum number of practising lawyers needed to create an independent regional bar association from the current level to 500.
Bar councils would also have to include women.
The president of a bar association, known as the Bâtonnier, would serve one non-renewable term.
Financial rules would also change. Article 77 would keep a 10% limit on deductions from lawyers’ fees for administrative management by bar councils. The law would also regulate client deposit and settlement accounts.
More than 17,000 lawyers
More than 17,000 lawyers currently practise across 17 regional bar associations.
The profession has operated under Law 28.08 for 18 years.
Law 66.23 passed the House of Representatives by 85 votes to 21.
The dispute has also reached the Competition Council.
Ouahbi appeared before Competition Council president Ahmed Rahhou in June to defend the reform against allegations of anti-competitive practices raised by labour unions.
After parliament approved the law, legal coordination committees also called for royal arbitration to settle the dispute between the Justice Ministry and lawyers.
The Constitutional Court’s decision does not stop another referral.
Parliament can send the law back to the court with the complete version approved by the House of Councillors on 7 July.
The court could then examine the law itself. For now, it has not ruled on whether any part of Law 66.23 complies with the Constitution.
