The opposition parties in Morocco were expected to criticize the partial legislative elections that took place over five parliamentary seats especially that none of the many opposition parties was able to obtain any of those seats. The public expected the opposition to be critical but the actual criticism came from the governmental majority. The debate did not only revolve around the circumstances and outcomes of the elections although they will change nothing in the power balances within or outside the majority. There are some measures that are taken through the appeals that are guaranteed by the electoral law. Instead, a larger debate was launched on the role balances and the jurisdictions in the realm of the so-called “sovereign ministries," including the ministries of justice, internal and external affairs, as well as the ministry of Islamic affairs. The “Popular Movement" - which is headed by the Interior Minister, Mohammad al-Onsor, the first partisan leader who has ever been appointed to this ministry – raised the issue of the sovereign ministries in order to confront the criticism against its candidates in two districts. The Movement wanted to say that the criticisms of its performance in sponsoring the electoral process might call for re-evaluating the concept of the sovereign ministries even though the new constitution endorsed by the Moroccans linked the cabinet formation solely to the outcomes of the voting ballots. The Independence party - which is part of the Abdel Ilah Benkirane cabinet alongside the Popular Movement, the Takaddom, the Socialist Party, and the most powerful party, the Justice and Development party – is calling for a global investigation concerning the circumstances of the partial elections in at least two districts. This indicates that, even if the different sides of the majority are all allied, this does not mean that there will be no conflicts between the parties over the electoral districts. Despite the efforts that were recently exerted to show that the government is cohesive and harmonious, the restlessness of its partisan components is actually threatening the governmental solidarity. The agreement on the political level within the executive apparatus is unable to survive the small skirmishes on the field. One of the major indications to the present feebleness is that the cabinet cohesion has been actually imposed by some circumstances. Thus, a parliamentary majority had to be formed in order to allow the cabinet to pass laws and to take measures under the parliamentary support. In addition, the parliamentary majority allowed for overcoming the barriers of the opposition, which lacks a legal and numerical quorum thus making its mission harder. In addition, after his appointment, the prime minister was keen on including all the parties in his consultation for the formation of the cabinet. This implicitly means that the cabinet is not based on any ideological alliance although the opposing Socialist Union party deems the cabinet as being a “conservative movement" in reference to it being led by an Islamic party. The Justice and Development party went far in order to prevent the governmental majority from suffering any cracks by announcing its support of the former communist Progress and Socialism party. However, the continued conflict between the Independent party and the Popular Movement over two parliamentary seats reflects areas of weakness in the governmental cohesion. Indeed, if there are so many differences now over some partial elections that actually make no difference and no change in the balances, how will things be when it comes to the municipal elections and the elections of the House of Advisors that are planned to take place during the course of the year? These local elections will further include, for the first time ever, the election of some sides that have wide jurisdictions in running the local affairs, thus granting the different districts a form of rule that goes beyond a limited administrative centralization but that remains below an autonomic rule. Prior to the partial elections, the differences between the partners within the governmental coalition revolved around some essential matters such as the differences around the reform of the system, whereby the state grants subsidies for the basic consumer goods, in addition to the files of social dialogue with the partisan unions and the complaints of the so-called “dominance of the Islamic party over the governmental affairs." Currently, the hidden and public electoral conflict has been added to the list of the barriers to the work of the government. What makes these problems even more pronounced is that all the parties are unanimously speaking about the continuation of the governmental alliance, the abidance by its requirements, and the discussion of all the controversial issues. However, is this agreement sufficient to indicate that the government is indeed cohesive especially in light of the internal confrontation within its members? This question is worrisome for the government and it is also reigning over the political scene, which is almost drowning in the quagmire of the small wars, while it is supposed to achieve a major breakthrough in the thick wall of the growing reform developments.
