Lawyers competition: Accused of nepotism, Ouahbi responds

The results of the written examinations for access to the legal profession, announced Friday by the Ministry of Justice, sparked a lively controversy and a large wave of criticism questioning the integrity of the list of selected candidates.

Since last Friday, especially after the publication of the list of candidates selected to take the oral, social networks have been awash with messages accusing the Ministry of Justice of “favoritism, clientelism and nepotism” especially since the list includes the names of a few family members of ministers, lawyers, magistrates and ministry officials.

All this outcry was played down by the Minister of Justice and main supervisor of entrance exams, Abdellatif Ouahbi, who called it a bargain “artificial that has no place to be”.

Mentioned by name in the accusations, since the name of his son appears on the list of detainees, Ouahbi ended up breaking the silence to ensure that contrary to the insinuations circulating on social networks, there was no favoritism since the review was supervised by nine magistrates whose integrity cannot be called into question.

The Minister, who considered that these accusations are serious and likely to undermine the image and respectability of a profession that is an integral part of the justice system, Ouahbi ended up responding to journalists who questioned him on the question.

A commission supervised the different stages of the competition and I have confidence in this commission. It is not because someone sees fit that we open an investigation that we will do so. The commission includes honorable magistrates of different categories,” he said.

He argues that “These people are in bad faith!. While the one who did not pass his exam or the one who spends his time in a cafe and has no other occupation than Facebook, he is in good faith. Be serious.!”

“I have nothing to hide, if you want me to publish the list of admitted and rejected candidates with the notes, I will. The commission consisted of nine members. It is impossible for them to agree to favor such and such a candidate,” he added.

For candidates with “names known in the profession”Ouahbi pointed out that this is of citizens having the same rights as others. How many are they? Sixty, seventy out of 2000! Where is the problem? If it were the other way around, it would have been problematic! “.

Will these “explanations” calm the ardor of the protesters? Answer tomorrow Tuesday January 3, date on which, some of the unsuccessful candidates intend to demonstrate to “demand an investigation into suspicions of corruption and nepotism and to dissect the results of the examinations”.

Another group of “failed” has announced its intention to file a complaint and resort to the Administrative Court to obtain redress for injustice.

Previous Post Next Post