Fez Corruption Case Returns to Judicial Spotlight
The financial and administrative corruption case that has rocked the community of Fez, Morocco, has once again come to the forefront of the judicial scene. On October 19, 2026, the mayor of Fez, Abdel Salam Boukali, along with the former secretary of the municipal council, Soufiane Driassi, and several municipal employees, appeared before the appellate criminal court after a review by the Court of Cassation in Fez. This development marks a new chapter in a case that continues to raise significant questions regarding accountability and the responsibilities of public officials regarding the operations of the institutions they oversee.
The judiciary decided to postpone the hearing of the case until November 9, 2026, responding to a request from the defense of one of the municipal employees to review the case documents and prepare their defense. This procedural delay does not imply any new judgments regarding guilt or innocence; however, it does bring the case back into the local spotlight, especially given that it involves the mayor of Fez, who is currently facing direct judicial scrutiny rather than merely being a name mentioned in connection with public financial management issues.
The significance of this case lies in the fact that Abdel Salam Boukali's judicial journey did not commence with Monday's session. Instead, it has traversed a series of judicial milestones, moving from an initial verdict of acquittal to a six-month prison sentence in June 2024, before the Court of Cassation accepted an appeal against that ruling and referred the case to another judicial body for reconsideration. This trajectory underscores the complexity of the legal landscape surrounding the allegations against him.
Legal Accountability Under Examination
The presence of the mayor of Fez as a defendant brings his legal accountability into direct question before the court. It places the trajectory of the case under significant scrutiny regarding the ability to uncover facts and establish responsibilities based on evidence, independent of the political and administrative status of those involved. A public official managing a city as substantial as Fez is not only confronted with questions about their daily performance but also bears a political and ethical obligation to the citizens who expect transparent governance, particularly concerning public contracts and resources. However, it is crucial to distinguish between political and ethical responsibility and criminal responsibility, which can only be established through legal proceedings and judicial rulings.
The prosecution of Boukali for failing to report a felony raises critical questions about the availability of legal elements required to substantiate such a crime and whether the evidence presented is adequate to prove the alleged facts. The upcoming trial must focus on this issue to prevent the case from devolving into mere political discourse or premature judgments that exceed the court's capacity to establish legal truth.
Furthermore, the firm application of the law does not equate to presuming guilt before a verdict is delivered, nor does respecting the presumption of innocence mean obstructing accountability or downplaying the seriousness of the charges. True justice requires that all parties involved in the case are treated equally under the law, ensuring that the defense is granted full rights, evidence is critically examined, and a reasoned judgment is issued based on what is established before the judicial body.
The backdrop of this case ties back to the well-known Fez corruption file, which has been associated with suspicions and irregularities in managing municipal contracts and deals. This case has also implicated former parliamentary official and ex-deputy mayor Abdel Qader Bouassiri, along with various employees, contractors, and other parties involved.
In June 2024, the appellate criminal court responsible for adjudicating financial crimes annulled the initial acquittal of Boukali and Soufiane Driassi, sentencing each to six months of imprisonment. Additionally, Bouassiri's sentence was increased from five to eight years. However, the acceptance of appeals and the annulment of the appellate decision regarding the implicated defendants means that the court is now required to reevaluate the case according to legal procedures, and the previous ruling cannot be treated as a final conviction against Boukali after its annulment.
It is essential to differentiate between the charges against the mayor for failing to report a felony and the other financial and administrative accusations faced by some other defendants. The new trial must establish whether the facts attributed to each individual are substantiated and whether the evidence meets the legal criteria necessary to impose criminal liability.
Nevertheless, reopening the case before a new judicial panel allows the judiciary to reassess the elements presented and provides the local public an opportunity to follow the developments of a case that impacts trust in municipal governance. The citizens of Fez are seeking clear answers regarding what transpired within the elected institution and want assurance that accountability standards remain constant regardless of the position or status of the accused.
As the hearing is scheduled for November 9, all eyes will be on the upcoming session to observe how the facts and evidence will be discussed and whether the elements of the prosecution will withstand judicial scrutiny or if new, impactful information will emerge. Premature conclusions regarding guilt or innocence before the conclusion of the trial do not serve the truth and are inconsistent with the principle of judicial independence.
The most significant message from this case is that the application of the law should not be subject to political considerations, party calculations, or sensitivity regarding positions. If the charges against any defendant are substantiated, the prescribed legal consequences must follow, and if they are not, the court's decisions must be respected. Accountability is not revenge, and the presumption of innocence is not a privilege granted to officials alone; rather, both are fundamental tenets of the rule of law.
Fez, with its historic and institutional weight, deserves to see trust in its elected institutions reinforced, and its financial and administrative operations should be subject to genuine oversight and accountability. Therefore, the case against Boukali and others should not merely be seen as a delayed session or a revival of a previous ruling but rather as a necessity to achieve judicial truth and delineate responsibilities based on evidence.
Between the annulment decision and the new court date, the final word rests with the judiciary. Neither the mayoral position should shield one from accountability, nor should an accusation alone suffice to prove a crime. What the public awaits is a serious and transparent trial, with the law applied to all without exception, safeguarding public funds and bolstering trust in justice and institutions.
As reported by fes24.com.
