In a case that is not truly a cause for concern, Morocco is being dragged into a conflict that is not at the heart of its otherwise genuine struggle, especially when it is a country that has the declared slogan of establishing the foundations of the state of the rule-of-law and justice. At the same time, many are voicing their discontent with the authorities' practices which they describe as a crackdown on the freedom of the press. As such, it must be a great irony that the same endeavours aimed at improving the country's human rights track record, in addition to closing the chapter on violations, giving greater importance to improving the status of women and at ratifying the international conventions and treaties that ban torture have all led to a conflict that is almost marginal regarding journalistic practices, when the principal issue here is the greater struggle for freedom and responsibility. Thus, two possibilities arise from the problematic issue of the press in Morocco: Perhaps it has not become customary yet to go in the right direction, where some reactions can be viewed as part of long-term exercises that will eventually lead to resorting to a gradual maturity, which is attained through an accumulation of experience. Either this or the very definition of the novel freedom margin has been dominated by haste and rashness, resulting in something that goes against what was intended from adopting the values of openness and modernity in the first place. In both cases however, a reversion will not be acceptable, whatever its source may be. Meanwhile, the best approach in dealing with passing setbacks is to leave it to the justice system to handle any violations. This is because the fault here does not lie in having the courts interfere and arbitrate the disputes between the government and some in the press. Nor does it lie in the disputes between these latter and those who believe they have been slurred or damaged by the press's actions; rather, the fault entirely lies in not benefiting from the chances at reform and correction given by such experiences, which are otherwise available to all concerned parties. In fact, in any nascent course of change, there are some who are led to extremism and zealousness, while others might excessively gamble on the values of moderation and wisdom; as such, the dangers that can threaten the freedom of the press do not only stem from passing mistakes, but also from allowing negative attitudes to cancel out all other positive aspects. In other words, construction is always more difficult than demolition, and construction has never been proven more difficult anywhere else than when it comes to the efforts of building the values of modernism and evolution. Some in the Moroccan press have apologized for the mistakes they had committed in conveying certain events, such as in the coverage of the illness suffered by the Moroccan King Mohammed VI. Although the court has issued its rulings [in these cases], the problems at hand do not end at this point. This is because nothing guarantees that such reproaches will not happen again, as over the last ten years, the question of the press in Morocco has simultaneously provided the most prominent instances of both enlightenment and darkness. If anything, this means that a certain imbalance is prevailing across the board, where all parties believe that they have conclusively determined the realities at play. What goes beyond the direct implications of the press's practices, which may sometimes get things right and other times wrong, are the equations of the political balance in Morocco which have been adversely affected by the vacuum caused by the repositioning of the main parties (who were formerly in the opposition) to being in power. This move was smoothly prepared in a manner that deserves lauding and appreciation; however, no parallel preparation was done to fill the now vacant seats in the opposition. Naturally, the press seized this sizable opportunity to further proliferate and arouse sentiments. It was also natural that new influences and sources of capital, and even adventurers would seep into the press world, as in any vacuum abhorred by nature. Perhaps then that at the origin of the imbalance in this experience mentioned above is the war of economic and political posts that started in conjunction with the shifting roles. What everyone failed to notice however, is that a man with such an integrity and honesty as the former Moroccan Prime Minister Abdul-Rahman al-Yousifi had warned once against a possible “chaos” in the press. It is for this reason perhaps that al-Yousifi, who had lived in exile and tasted the bitterness of prison in defence of the freedom of the press, had allowed himself to cross some press outlets out of existence. However, he has now laid down his arms and moved on in silence. In his time and before it, there were prices placed on many heads. Yet, one of the senior Moroccan officials used to say: let people speak openly and without restrictions. However, between the declared stances and the implicit insinuations, many principles have been altered and many concepts have fallen, where some in the press have become their own victims after having been the victims of its exploitations. This is because this open-ended crisis facing some within the press sums up yet another crisis, but of a different kind. The latter is in fact closer to being the last knot whose undoing would herald the final resolution. In other words, the question of the press in Morocco cannot be reduced to that of a need for a dose of freedom that is greater than the dose of the medicine that a simple pain hampering the progress forward may require.
