Rabat - The Finance, Planning and Economic Development Committee has dropped Article N° 8-bis from the 2017 Finance Bill No. 73.16, amidst criticism that it violates the constitution.
Rabat – The Finance, Planning and Economic Development Committee has dropped Article N° 8-bis from the 2017 Finance Bill No. 73.16, amidst criticism that it violates the constitution.
During a discussion held on Monday at the House of Advisors, the committee ratified the first section of the 2017 Finance Bill, rejecting the Article N° 8-bis related to the implementation of judicial decisions against the state and territorial communities.
Minister of Finance and Economy, Mohammed Boussaid, has responded to the request to remove the article, which had been submitted by the party members of the parliament.
“The requirements of the article were not intended to devalue the court decisions or not giving citizens their rights[…] they came following an effort to achieve a balance between the implementation of court decisions,” the minister said.
The article, proposed by the Justice and Development Party group of the House of Representatives, said that “Creditors with final executive court verdicts against the State or territorial groups shall not demand the payment except in the officials of the disposer of the public administration or the territorial communities.”
The article states that officials in charge of public expenditures authority must pay the sum within a 60-day period-limit, but at the same time gives them right to do pay only part “as far as the budget allows.
“State and collective territories would not be subject to confiscation, according to the article. These officials are urged to pay the rest later on by allocating money from future budgets for that purpose.
The article has sparked controversy over the past few weeks. The Executive Bureau of the Moroccan Judges Club called on the government to review it, issuing a communiqué saying that it “constitutes a clear violation of separation of power and showing a clear retreat from the gains of the constitutional rights and is an explicit violation of the Supreme Royal guidance.”
The article goes against “society’s desire to transit to a country of the rule of law,” the club added.