Public Property in Morocco: Between Legal Mandate and Selective Enforcement Noureddine Boutahar

Recently, Morocco has launched extensive campaigns to reclaim public property, targeting illegal construction and unauthorized occupation of sidewalks, streets, and urban spaces by  shops, street vendors, cafés, and various artisans. These efforts, which include the demolition of unlicensed structures and the removal of makeshift markets, have gained visible traction, particularly in anticipation of global events such as the Africa Cup of Nations 2025 and the FIFA World Cup 2030. But while these campaigns have sparked broad public approval, they also raise troubling questions about past inaction, selective enforcement, and the long-standing normalization of urban disorder.

It would be intellectually dishonest to oppose efforts aimed at restoring the integrity of Morocco’s public domain. Sidewalks that were once swallowed up by cafés, makeshift kiosks, and concrete barriers are finally being freed for pedestrian use. Randomly erected shanties and unauthorized extensions to homes and shops, many built without permits, are being torn down. This process is undeniably necessary and, one might argue, long overdue.

However, the critical question remains: why was such blatant encroachment on public property tolerated for so long by authorities and elected officials? For years, massive structures went up in broad daylight, while minor home improvements by ordinary citizens were met with swift punishment. The absence of early intervention is a glaring example of administrative leniency—or worse, complicity. And now, suddenly, with the pressure of upcoming global events, bulldozers are rolling in as though decades of negligence can be erased with a few months of action.

This shift raises the specter of opportunistic governance. The timing of the current campaigns—closely aligned with Morocco’s preparation for international sports events—suggests that what is now treated as a national priority was long viewed as an inconvenient truth, better left unaddressed for electoral or political expediency.

Perhaps most disheartening is the selective nature of enforcement. While some street vendors are chased away for blocking a few meters of sidewalk, large enterprises with steel or glass barricades occupying vast swathes of public space have long been overlooked. Such inconsistencies not only breed public resentment but also erode faith in the rule of law.

The essence of justice is equality before the law—yet the reality on the ground suggests otherwise. As the saying goes, “What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,” but in this case, certain geese appear to be more equal than others. Ordinary citizens face swift penalties for minor violations, while powerful figures or well-connected businesses seem to operate with impunity.

This double standard undermines the legitimacy of the campaign and casts a shadow over otherwise laudable efforts. The credibility of public initiatives rests not just on their outcomes, but on the fairness of their implementation. If transparency and equality are not guaranteed, then these campaigns risk becoming mere theatrics—a façade of order hiding the rot of favoritism.

A closer look at the institutional framework reveals a complex web of responsibility. According to Law 57.19, local councils hold the legal authority to regulate temporary occupation of public property. Yet, in practice, it is often the Ministry of Interior—through its local representatives such as pachas and caïds—that initiates action. This duality of power has led to inertia, finger-pointing, and missed opportunities.

There have been repeated instances where proactive municipal councils have seen their decisions undercut by passive local authorities—and vice versa. In other cases, both parties have turned a blind eye, either to avoid conflict or to protect vested interests. This dysfunction has turned what should be a shared governance model into a fragmented and ineffective approach.

Worse still, the administrative failure to enforce regulations over the years has allowed illegal behaviors to become normalized, and even aquired rights. The occupation of sidewalks by vendors, for instance, is no longer seen as a violation but as a fact of urban life. “If you can’t beat them, join them,” seems to be the motto. This normalization is more than a societal adaptation; it is a symptom of systemic breakdown.

One of the most visible and contentious aspects of urban disorder is the explosion of informal vendors—known colloquially as farrasha. Since the Arab Spring of 2011, their numbers have surged across Moroccan cities, peaking during religious holidays and especially during the holy month of Ramadan, and on Fridays around mosques.

While the informal economy offers a lifeline for thousands, it also deprives the state treasury of billions of dirhames of taxes. Even worse, it disrupts daily life in profound ways. Residents complain of noise, waste accumulation, and the complete hijacking of sidewalks. Shoppers navigate mazes of handcarts and shouting vendors. The situation has even escalated into legal disputes, with some formal business owners considering lawsuits against municipalities for failing to protect their livelihoods from unfair competition.

The government did try to intervene by creating “model markets” to house these vendors in organized spaces. Yet many beneficiaries rent out their spaces and return to the streets, where they can earn more without paying taxes. This is a classic example of a policy that fails not because of bad intentions, but due to lack of enforcement. When rules exist but are not applied, chaos fills the vacuum.

Cleaning up the streets and demolishing illegal structures may offer immediate aesthetic and functional benefits, but they do not address the deeper structural issues. How will local governments ensure that public spaces remain respected after the dust settles? Will new urban policies be crafted to balance economic necessity with legal obligations? Will there be real consequences for officials who fail to act?

Moreover, Morocco must resist the temptation to treat this moment as a one-off. The reclaiming of public property must not become another “hit-and-run” campaign—visible during international spotlight years and forgotten the next. Citizens have seen this movie before: authorities act under pressure, only to retreat once the pressure fades. It is a cycle as predictable as the tide, and just as relentless.

The battle to reclaim Morocco’s public spaces is as symbolic as it is practical. It signals a choice between order and chaos, equity and privilege, legality and complacency. But to win this battle, Morocco needs more than bulldozers and camera-friendly demolitions. It needs consistent, transparent governance rooted in the rule of law.

Let us not forget the idiom, “Justice delayed is justice denied.” The current momentum must be seized to institutionalize practices that have been ignored for decades. Selective enforcement must give way to systematic reform. Policies must be designed not for headlines, but for the people who walk the streets every day—the elderly woman navigating a crowded sidewalk, the child playing in front of their home, the shopkeeper struggling to stay afloat amid unfair competition.

The streets and sidewalks belong to all. It is time Morocco ensures that this is not just a legal fact, but a lived reality.