AMDH, criticized for its partisan political actions
We are dealing with one of the most grotesque schizophrenic and paradoxical cases modern Morocco has ever known: the maligned injustice that the Moroccan Association for Human Rights promotes, while it thrives in an atmosphere of freedom and privileges, when other human rights associations that are partners in the Moroccan human rights coalition do not. Overly paranoid, the AMDH (French for: Association Marocaine des Droits de l’Homme) is used to portraying itself as an explicit target, thinking, wrongly, that conspiracies are being concocted against it day and night. It seems like its provocative actions led against Moroccans are based on an agenda that has been set beforehand in favor of Morocco’s detractors. This became particularly evident so many times and on various occasions, leaving no doubt that the AMDH’s actions and the puppeteers pulling its strings do not put Morocco’s interests and those of its citizens among their priorities. Those who are familiar with the current events of the AMDH are undoubtedly aware that it reeks of corruption and backstage intrigues.
Last week the AMDH celebrated its 42nd anniversary. It has been working in Morocco since 1979, and while standing on the sidelines, has witnessed major events in our country, including all the implemented changes.
The outcome of more than four decades of advocacy action is enough to discredit the frustrating and victimary rhetoric of its leaders. The association has not been dissolved or suspended, despite the serious mistakes it had made, but instead acquired the status of public interest decades ago, enjoying privileges most associations do not have. Furthermore, membership is open to Moroccans, as evidenced by its official statistics, which report hundreds of members active in all regions of Morocco and who are subject to no ban, as illustrated by an estimated one hundred branches, with premises open to all dissidents, in addition to an authorized newspaper. So how can the allegations of its pacesetters be believed when all they do is paint a dismal picture of Morocco, implying that they are the main target of all state policies, as if Morocco had nothing to do but stalk a human rights association against whose tireless pernicious conniving, Moroccans have become aware long ago.
In addition to the above privileges that enable the association to operate in a suitable environment, the association benefits from partnerships with ministries and public institutions, while a number of its activists enjoy full-time activities and facilitate the performance of their associative tasks. The association in question also receives funds from domestic sources as well as from abroad, taking advantage of public spaces for holding its conferences and meetings, throughout which it expresses its positions freely despite being irrational, and often based on incomplete or inaccurate data, or characterized by unbalanced and subjective analyzes, built on political and ideological backgrounds.
Let's honestly consider the Arab context : would an association with such an agenda that goes against the interests of its own country enjoy such a freedom of operation and take advantage of all these privileges?
Some may think that this narrative is somehow laudatory, but this is not true, as this is an inevitable result of Morocco’s major choices in the victory for pluralism, freedom and opposition rights. These are part of the general orientation of Morocco, aimed at ensuring a sustainable democratic pattern. As a matter of fact, Morocco has neither adopted single party rule, nor espoused single union and association. Hence, we will notice that the state has never targeted the association because of its positions, orientation, or choices. Morocco has rather made the law a decisive factor to remove any ambiguity therein. However, the association’s patrons do not relish that prospect. They rather take control of the AMDH’s fate through its dedication to politicize every legal response to the association’s violations. This includes not completing administrative documents or not providing full data on funds received by the association from abroad, which are estimated at tens of millions, or even deviating from the association’s inherent jurisdiction involving it in a direct partisan political action which takes it beyond the sphere of Associations Law into a different law.
This human rights sulking exposes those who have been in charge of the association for decades and who have gained their influence only to constitute a secret structure or a deep hidden entity without appearing in the foreground as responsible for decisions, until their practice is linked to legal responsibility. It would be absurd, for example, to believe that an ordinary and obscure young individual like Hammamoushi became one of the leaders of the association and a decision-maker in an association that is managed through tens of millions annually simply because he was “elected” as a member of its central office!! This is just one example that applies to those who adorn the institutional form of the association and withhold the control of a partisan political minority in the affairs of the association and who no longer have the right to legally be in charge, so they opted for backstage leadership in a manner they apparently reject but which they actually prefer.
Some may ask why the laws were not altered to prolong the leadership of this secret segment of the association. The answer is clear : fear of seeing funds from abroad decreased, which will be affected by the undemocratic appearance therein. Therefore, the association chose the worst solution by making it look more important than substance.
The association gives the ostensible impression that the responsibilities are assumed alternately, but does not admit that the alternation is the monopoly of activists of one political current which holds a tight grip on the chairmanship of the association, denying it to activists of other currents for decades. This is an occasion to recall that the last non-member of An-nahj Ad-dimoqrati chairman of the association in the nineties was the former president of the bar association Abderrahmane Benameur (“An-nahj Ad-dimoqrati, Literally for: « the democratic path » is a Moroccan Marxist-Leninist political party, constituted in 1995 by members of the clandestine organization "Ila Al Amame" (Forward), integrated also sympathizers of the Marxist–Leninist Moroccan movement (MLMM). Ila Al-Amam, was created in 1970 by dissidents of the short-lived Party of Liberation and Socialism - former Moroccan Communist Party). This is but an example of the absence of internal democracy within the association that keeps criticizing the state, parties, unions and associations and goes as far as lecturing others despite its numerous flaws.
It is worth emphasizing that the slogan of pluralism the association has chosen is nothing but a pipe dream. This is reflected in the fact that quotas underlay the assignment of responsibilities in which the organization of An-nahj Ad-dimoqrati holds the lion’s share. In fact, the goal of this « branding » - so to speak - is only to please international organizations. Worse still, key figures of the association put their successors in the central office. It should be noted that Hamamouchi is just a pawn of Maati Monjib who is keen to keep his finger in the middle of the association to employ it in his battles against the state and to serve his masters abroad, following the guidance of his protégé Muhammad Rida, who controls the association after he became its big boss even if he lacks an organizational position, fanning the flames in the midst of his lost battle against Morocco and its interests.
Backstage intrigues prevail in the work of the association, and its fateful decisions are mostly smuggled out of the association’s headquarters. It operates within An-nahj Ad-dimoqrati’s headquarters or in the homes of some of its militants who are the inheritors of the “temple” and who are ready to let it crumble down on its dwellers should they threaten their interests. It is worth noting that all currents within the association complain about this domination and with varying degrees, especially during the major stages of the election of the association’s organs.
Through this stranglehold, the association turned into a partisan faction of An-nahj Ad-dimoqrati, which failed to build a modern democratic party organization. An-nahj found what he coveted most in this ready-made association that tightened the screws on all its currents, especially after the failure of its union activists to control and subjugate the Moroccan Confederation of Labor from which they were ruthlessly expelled. Therefore, An-Nahj militants are trying to compensate for their union and partisan failure and the political and public control of the association, which is no longer a human rights organization, but has become a political party, a trade union organization, and an associative organization, with an agenda that rejects everything, and that has no respect for the legal framework governing its work and the attributions that fall within its remit.
The association, under the leadership of An-nahj, lost the most basic ethics of human rights work, and it suffices to recall the scandal of leaking the content of the hearing session of complainant Hafsa Boutaher, which includes information of a personal and confidential nature about her opponent/complainant Omar Radi. This incident embarrassed the association’s activists and showed their lack of impartiality and lack of trust in the data of the affected people they employ, as they themselves wanted them, not as the victims want and serve their interests. Surprisingly, managers of the association always accuse others of leaking investigation minutes and those of the judicial police, pouring out their anger on a press that has previously published accurate news, which it obtained through professional diligence. But throughout the first test of credibility and respect for the confidentiality of personal data, those whom An-nahj trusted failed « with distinction ».
The association became a trademark for the benefit of a few An-nahj party members who should definitely be called « the secret structure » or « deep entity» within the association: they share jobs, privileges, travels, compensation, and sabbaticals without supervision or accountability. How much will the association contribute to establishing a culture of transparency and setting an example for other organizations if their leaders and those who take turns in responsibility publish a declaration of their properties and the association publishes detailed reports on its financial management.
The association has become dependent and operates according to a political assessment of An-nahj, while its positions do not properly reflect the multiplicity of currents operating in it the way mass organizations are supposed to be. Ironically enough, the association per se adopts a “mass” type of human rights work. Thus, if one wants to know the truth about An-nahj positions, it is probably best to look for them in the positions announced by the association, as they have become the best, clearest and fastest channel for disposing of positions of the bankrupt political party/shop, since this employment is likely to give it a radiant dimension. Thus, the association became a front for partisan work with a “Human Rights” label and a means by which An-nahj adepts put pressure on the state to negotiate with it. So they think.
The association works with a non-national agenda that does not distinguish between political opposition and opposition to the higher interests of Morocco, but rather thrives in everything that harms the homeland, and its position on the issue of territorial integrity and its silence over the recent killing of a Moroccan person in Spain, without it condemning the repression of migrants by Spanish authorities at the entrance of Ceuta, although it accused Morocco of being Europe’s good policeman. The association is neither ashamed to identify with the theses of Morocco's opponents, nor choose the perfect timing for announcing certain positions even if they serve the interests of the enemies of Morocco.
Because it operates with a non-national agenda, the AMDH failed more than once to satisfy Morocco's opponents, by lying or conveying inaccurate facts, fanning the flames, distorting truths, or keeping silent about a part that does not serve its agenda. Therefore, its reports lack objectivity, as evidenced by their stance over the events of Gdeim Izik. This is further proof that the goal of the association is merely to please sponsors and international organizations.
The association’s work method is characterized by an imbalance that afflicts its impartial human rights nature, because most of its reports are unilateral and unbalanced when it comes to transferring testimonies and information that are prejudiced against authority, and characterized by hasty feedbacks; that is to say without waiting for the results of the investigation regarding certain facts that require investigation and that take time to complete to ensure fairness and coverage of the topic in all its aspects. The reason is that the AMDH not only exercises opposition, but has a political and ideological background and a hatred towards power.
In fact, most Moroccan Human Rights advocates used to defend the AMDH and thought that it might be a supporter of the underprivileged. Regrettably, it turned into a trumpet for the enemies of Morocco, and the echo of foreign voices all of whom are concerned with occupying Morocco and undermining its reputation.