Page 191 - kdk-sempozyum-3

areas. For this purpose I will work on three successive steps, the first
one will be devoted to the description per se of the situation where the
two organisms carry out their mission in parallel and of their history. In
the second the focus will made on the idiosyncrasies of the functioning
of a national institution of mediation and in the third and last step I
will through general comments of the results achieved briefly mention
the difficulties that hinder the fulfilment of satisfactory performance.
Please allow me to introduce you a general discourse. Starting from
some aspects of the prevailing situation in Morocco which is amongst
the countries where the two entities coexist. The Moroccan constitution
has officially stipulated the existence of two complementary advisory
institutions devoted to the protection of rights we are therefore in
front of two different entities in charge of on one hand rights related
to human dignity and moral and physical integrity of citizens thus
having a lot spectrum and on the other hand to their rights in their
quasi daily rapport with the executive bodies and thus intervening in
a restricted domain. The two institutions are independent of the three
traditions of powers and have a real independence concerning such
powers giving that their heads are directly appointed by the supreme
authority of the state in order to escape any sort of foreign influence
or pressure which is harmful to their independence.
The motives that have motivated the creation of somehow different, 3 rd INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON OMBUDSMAN INSTITUTIONS
it is in fact for political motives in order to turn the page of default
unfortunate practices that the council of human rights has seen the
date towards the end of the last century and had successively two
appellations advisory council and about five ago national council. In fact
the conservations that have proceeded the adoption of the mediation
at the beginning of this century bear an administrative character in
order to precisely protect the citizens against the administrative
decisions and acts that may cause harm to the legitimate rights and
interests. First of all the mediator is close through his interventions to
the role of the administrative courts yet failing to have a binding power
of its decisions and of repressive legislation. He may not pretend
to replace the justice. In addition to what proceeds a difference
concerning the organizational structure of each of the two advisory
bodies the mediator precise in person or his institution without having
any deliberative instance in the form of a council or assembly while

16 - 17 September 2015, ANKARA | 189