On the eve of the

designation by the Minister of Higher

Education and Scientific

Research

of the representative of

the Mohammed I University of Oujda within the commission for examining the files of candidates

for the position of president of the same, a group

of wise teachers

denounces the practices

of the PJD and its attempt to get its hands on this university. Here is the full text of their appeal.

"We could have resigned ourselves to silence, but when it comes to witnessing a ready-made and well-orchestrated staging to appropriate the university, we have decided to break this silence even if it is equal to gold.

This article comes at a precise moment in the life of this university, because on the one hand, the candidates aspiring to the position of president are in the final phases of drafting their development project, and on the other hand, very soon, the minister will have to designate the member representing this university within the commission for examining the files. According to the information gathered on this subject, the number of candidates is around twenty. This has become almost a tradition since Law 01.00 came into force in 2001. Let us recall that for reasons of procedure and lobbying games, the said university saw its first proposal for a president cancelled for quota reasons, and it was only as a remainder that this appointment took place, in February 2003.

With the president appointed in 2003, who died in 2014, the management of the university was of limitless opacity. The positions of heads of establishments are attributed well in advance to close friends, and these close friends, once at the head of the establishments, do the same by distributing positions of responsibility among close friends, etc. The vast majority of teacher-researchers were hit hard by this management, which pushed a good number of them to apply for this position for the second mandate launched in 2006. It was a way of saying no to this way of managing and to the clientelism sclerosing all life within the walls of this university.

At the level of recruitment for teacher-researcher positions, the commissions were tailor-made to favour 'princes' outside of any consideration of competence or scientific level. All the errors committed are known to all, and unfortunately, no voice was raised against the presidency of that era, because there too there was a give-and-take stake, and we could well have seen our friend the alchemist Aftati bestir himself to denounce 'Al Mounkar' of that stage.

Unfortunately, our parliamentarian kept silent by keeping a low profile throughout this period because it was his friend who was the president. This same profile took height to criticise loud and clear the management of A. Sadoc, in the press first and then under the Dome of the House of Representatives. Access to the presidency by A. Sadoc is only the result of the accumulation of errors during the 'reign' of the deceased. Although in the current race for this presidency, there is still a good residue of grains being part of his seeds (of the deceased), a large majority of teachers wish to exclude these grains from the next appointment.

The respected Minister of Tutelage and Head of Government are requested to rethink this problem in time and space, so that a president without links to the prosperous periods of the past 12 years is appointed, because we do not wish for our university to go towards the unknown. In clarity, we will say that there are parties that want to appropriate the university all by themselves with all the side effects that this could eventually entail, and which our university does not need at all in its current context.

Because at the beginning of the Sadoc mandate, everyone was happy and everything was going well with him, and each party was profiting from what exists: travel inside and outside the country, various commissions, mission charges. It only took two events for this trend to undergo an upheaval: the eviction of the interim dean of the Faculty of Sciences and the first appointments of heads of establishments during the Sadoc mandate. It must be recognised that these parties proposed themselves in masses by applying for these positions, and the result known to everyone, no appointment was granted in favour of these parties. These two events were at the origin of a whole series of unprecedented facts. A set of stereotyped union opinions emanate from the local offices of the SNESup of various establishments, all with the same contents: criticisms, protests, denunciations, and condemnations, etc., all pointing the finger and in the same way at A. Sadoc. The alchemist's declaration in Parliament, until then unprecedented, is part of an episode of the same soap opera by way of orchestration and nothing more. A. Sadoc is dismissed without the teacher-researchers knowing why, and is now part of the past.

But we prefer to look to the future, and regarding this future, the Minister of Tutelage is required to know every party that, through its past, has prejudiced the proper functioning of the university by shedding full light on every candidate who had any role of responsibility during the period of management of the deceased, because the teacher-researchers are very tired of their practices. Already, in the choice of the teacher who will appear in the commission for examining the files, there has been lobbying, and the best is not automatically the one who is elected with the greatest number of votes.

The first gesture that consists of remedying this situation will have to start there, then things will appear clearer.".