Rabat – The recent reported decision to stop requiring couples to present marriage certificates when checking into hotels has sparked a heated debate across Morocco. While many celebrated the move as a step towards greater personal freedom and privacy, others view it as a challenge to traditional values and social norms.
Security services have reportedly issued verbal directives to hotels to end the requirement for marriage contract presentations. This comes days after Justice Minister Abdellatif Ouahbi contested the practice.
The change also allows women access to accommodation regardless of their residency location, whereas before, those with residential addresses in the same city as the hotel were denied stays.
Supporters of the change argued that individuals should not be required to present marriage certificates or be barred from hotels simply because they reside in the same city as the establishment.
A Moroccan social media user described the move as “great news for the country,” asserting that it is a matter of personal freedom and privacy.
Another netizen on X, formerly Twitter, said: “Good news, let’s hope this extends across all of Morocco … we no longer live in the 1970s.”
However, many were not pleased with the decision. Opponents argued that lifting the ban undermines Moroccan social values and goes against Islamic teachings.
“We are in a Muslim and non-liberal country! May Allah guide his people,” a social media user said on X. Others warned that the decision opens the door to behavior that goes against Moroccan morals and encourages adultery.
Meanwhile, others advocated for women’s rights to access accommodation without discrimination but expressed reservations about allowing unmarried couples without marriage certificates to stay.
“A woman being allowed to stay in the hotel alone should not be banned. However, couples without marriage certificates is another matter,” another netizen said.
No official legislation
Younes Mendris, a Riyad owner from Fez, has provided a detailed perspective on the controversy. He said that recent statements by hoteliers about accepting unmarried couples are “personal opinions” and not reflective of legal realities. “Only the legislator has the authority to criminalize or permit such practices through official legislative channels.”
He warned of potential legal consequences for hoteliers if issues arise involving unmarried couples, such as death or criminal activity. He emphasized the importance of clear legal directives before implementing changes in hotel policies.
“In this interim period, it’s prudent to wait for explicit legal or ministerial guidance on the matter. After the recent statement by the Minister of Justice, he was promptly summoned by the legislative committee for an urgent discussion. Until then, caution is advised,” the Riyad owner said.
On refusing female customers who have the same address as the hotel, he said that “there is no law or decree on this matter.”
“It has simply been a customary practice by hoteliers for years without legal backing. On the contrary, customers have the right to file complaints against hotels if they are denied accommodation despite having a reservation. Hotels are public spaces with duties and obligations to uphold,” Mendris stressed.
He recounted a case where a woman, after an argument with her husband, was refused accommodation at a hotel because of her local address and was subsequently robbed on the street. She sued the hotel and won the case, he said as he stressed the legal expectation for hotels to provide accommodation without discrimination based on residency.
