the heckling of the opposition against the head of government

The absence of the head of government during the July monthly accountability session in the House of Representatives has drawn criticism from some opposition party MPs. They accuse Aziz Akhannouch of wanting to escape his responsibilities.

This caused a real outcry in parliament and on Monday we witnessed a revolt led by representatives of opposition groups, who accused Aziz Akhannouch of “violating” the provisions of the last paragraph of chapter 100 of the constitution. and to underestimate the parliamentary work by not appearing in the hemicycle. It is Abdallah Bouanou who presides over the destinies of the parliamentary group of the Justice and Development Party which launched the offensive.

He recalled the rules and accused Aziz Akhannouch of having attended only 4 times, while the law stipulates his presence once a month and this had already been raised on June 13th. Bouanou estimated that“there was a tendency to violate the constitution and material to an anti-democratic interpretation contradicting the internal parliamentary system and the Constitution, as to the presence of the Head of Government in Parliament», whenever the conditions are available.

For his part, the deputy of the People’s Movement Party, Abdennebi Aidoudi, called for the need for the presence of the Head of Government in order to answer questions, noting that “Akhannouch is required to interact with constitutional institutions and not dodge monthly accountability“. For his part, the president of the Socialist Group, Abderrahim Chahid, affirmed that “it is inconceivable that the Head of Government shirks spaces for public debate, especially since Moroccans are waiting for him and many questions arise today“. On the side of the majority, Hicham El Mhajri of the PAM, underlined that it was up to the “Council of Presidents” to decide on the question and not to the opposition. “This story weakens Parliament and gives the impression that it is unable to summon the Head of Government“.

To this end, the president of the Haraki group, Driss Sentisi, did not miss the opportunity to criticize El Mhajri’s remarks “It is unreasonable for people to hear that the representatives did not send requests to summon the Head of Government”, judging the context “irresponsible“. In this regard, the leader of the Authenticity and Modernity Party (PAM) team, Ahmed Touizi, as if to save face, felt that “the institution works collectively, and on several occasions the Head of Government, Aziz Akhannouch, has come to explain in detail to the council and to Moroccans critical situations“.

As a result, the presidency of parliament had to intervene to “exculpate” this “crime of lèse-majesté”, so to speak, of the Head of Government. Also to justify this absence and taking everything on her, she confirmed that it was the office of parliament that was responsible and not the other way around. In his last attempt to calm the situation, the First Vice-Speaker of the House of Representatives (Authenticity and Modernity Party (PAM), Mohamed Sabri in this case who chaired Monday’s session indicated that the Head of Government had not received any summons, and that the office of the Council is solely responsible. He further stated that after reading the questions, it was clear that they were not related to public order, and that therefore a summons from the Head of Government had no reason to exist.

With regard to accountability, Parliament’s function in public finance is essential to strengthen good governance in the implementation of public policies, in accordance with Article 77 of the Constitution. The Constitutional Court in 2013 rejected the approach of the House of Representatives to limit the number of accountability sessions to only four throughout the year. She considered this to be unconstitutional, as Chapter 100 of the constitution stipulates that the Head of Government attends Parliament once a month to answer questions from parliamentarians related to public policy.


Previous Post Next Post