Kiosk360. The opposition waited until the end of the first parliamentary session to come out of its hinges. She accuses the government and its majority of practices contrary to the spirit of the Constitution. This article is a press review taken from the daily Al Ahdath Al Maghribia.
A week ago, the fall parliamentary session, the first of the current legislature, ended. For the majority, given the very limited duration, from the inauguration of the government until the end of this session, the results are rather positive and in several respects. An appreciation that the groups and parliamentary groups of the opposition do not necessarily share.
In a report published by Al Ahdath Al Maghribia In its Monday, February 14th edition, co-signed by a former USFP MP, the daily points out that for the opposition, this is arguably one of the worst parliamentary terms Morocco has had in years. .
After having listed the prerogatives and rights of the parliamentary opposition as well as the role of political parties in general, cited in Articles 10 and 7, respectively, of the Constitution, the authors of this dossier rely on figures to identify the merits of the opposition’s vision. Thus, with regard to the legislative initiative, the opposition parties tabled 21 bills, while the three majority parties presented none. This is quite logical, it must be emphasized, since the initiatives of the majority in this area are presented in the form of bills by the government.
In short, specifies the daily, of these 21 texts tabled by the opposition, the PPS tabled eight bills, followed by the MP with six texts and the USFP with four proposals, then the parliamentary grouping of the PJD with two texts and that of the FGD with a single bill. As for written questions, the opposition submitted 682 to the government. It was the USFP that asked the most, with 215 written questions, followed by the PPS with 210 questions. With regard to oral questions, the opposition formations asked 640 with 204, just for the USFP.
The parliamentary group of the Socialist Party has also noted, contrary to what the government asserts, “practices contrary to the spirit of the Constitution, in particular because of the hegemony and control of the government and its majority”. Quoting the leader of the USFP parliamentary group, the two authors of this file, including, it should be remembered, a former member of the same party, affirm that the government, relying on its numerical majority, leaves little room for maneuver opposition in parliament. “He even suffocates him”, specify the authors of the file.
According to the daily, it is practically the entire opposition formed by the socialist group, the haraki group, the progress and socialism group and the justice and development group, which has expressed its dissatisfaction with what it qualifies as “practices which oppose the spirit of the Constitution, since the formation of the government and of the parliamentary majority”. While evoking the need to implement an urgent and in-depth reform of the internal regulations of the House of Representatives, so as to preserve pluralism and respect the rights of the opposition, the latter did not at all spare the Executive.
The opposition did not let the opportunity pass without bouncing back on the government’s decision to withdraw several bills which are either blocked during examination or have never been addressed by the deputies. In short, concludes the daily, if the opposition has been very critical of the government regarding this first parliamentary session, the latter does not lack arguments to defend its position. Thus, like every fall session, this year’s session was largely dominated by the examination and adoption of the PLF-22. Added to this is the fact that following setting up its various governing bodies, a procedure that takes time, Parliament has also worked on the examination and approval of the government program. The fluidity of parliamentary action was also highlighted, which reflects the cooperation between the legislative and executive powers as well as the collective will to rationalize the management of political and parliamentary time.
