You may remember Harry who took a riad under management lease without having a management permit?
Many years later, we bumped into Samir in the street, and we learned more details about the “end of the story”.
Harry had been sued to force him to regularise the employment contracts of his predecessor, and to prohibit him from dismissing people overnight given their seniority.
Regularising the employment contracts meant paying overdue CNSS contributions and taxes for the entire “recoverable” period: five years.
Harry felt morally justified and saw himself in an increasingly certain fіnаnсіаl mess. He argued:
It wasn’t my time, if I don’t get a discharge I don’t care
He had discussed the matter with the labour inspector, who had assured him that with a little ‘effort’, his point of view would be fully confirmed by the judge.
Because if we started to annoy people who wanted to invest in Marrakesh and develop the country, where would we go? It was obvious that he was acting in good faith and that he had been conned by the wrong people.
So Harry paid.
The judge ruled against Harry and ordered him to pay between 6,000 and 8,000 dirhams to each of the employees.
And made sure that Harry did so before leaving Morocco.
This was less than 100,000 dirhams. After paying, Harry collected his passport.
Immediately afterwards, Harry received a much larger bill of 250,000 dirhams plus penalties from the CNSS.
Before receiving the third bill, the tax bill, Harry made an appointment with the CNSS to negotiate, and the day before his appointment he flew back to France for good.
He put the house in his wife’s name so that it could not be seized.
His wife returned regularly for long stays in her new villa.
The last I heard, she had not returned to France for four years.
– 0 –
I find this story to be a perfect example of the pitfalls Europeans fall into when they try to play the baksheesh game (apart from the ethical aspects):
- Not identifying the right interlocutor: in this case the labour іnѕресtоr does not have the final authority, the judge does.
- Not intervening at the right time: it is before the case goes to court that one should intervene, then it is too late, it may take years, but it will be judged, and most often, “in law”.
- Paying too much, not enough, at the wrong time, in the wrong way.
- Believing, because “that’s how it works in Morocco”, that еѵеrуthіng works that way. What works well enough on a regular basis is the oil in the wheels, a small note as a thank you for speeding up the case, the deletion of a ticket, etc. But as soon as it becomes more serious, it no longer “works” according to the same rules. A judge or a civil servant, if he is open to bribes (and not all of them are) will always balance between the risk of punishment and profit.
- Not knowing how to play with the imperfections of the Moroccan administration: when you are not 200% sure of your case, it is better to try to bury the case than to give it a suitable solution. A small note at the bottom of the ladder, so that the file remains at the bottom of the pile, is effective, because it is less dangerous for everyone, it is not a fault on the part of the civil servant who buries, he has just managed the emergencies…. But for that you have to know the bottom of the ladder.
- Try to do it yourself: don’t offer a bribe to an honest civil servant, and there are many. You have to know how to interpret the signs, and what the right price is. Or be in a position to be more subtle, to offer an exchange of services… Unless you’ve been here a long time, you don’t know how to do that.
- Not realising that they are putting themselves in a weak position: аuthоrіѕаtіоnѕ given in exchange for gifts do not change the law, they can be called into question every time there is a change of official.
This is why I agree with Bernard’s conclusion:
Those who think they can succeed in Morocco by “watering down” are making a double mistake. On the one hand, a foreigner will never be a winner at this game. There will always be someone who will “water” more or who will be happy to “plant” you. On the other hand, even if Morocco often remains opaque and it is undeniable that part of the business operates in a grey area, the vast majority of companies in the formal sector operate within the rules.
(…) if the field you have chosen can only function with baksheesh, change field.
And don’t forget one more thing: if your “case” pits you not against a Moroccan, but against another European, then beware, because this is probably the only configuration where baksheesh will be auctioned.
– 0 –
Finally, it’s quite moral, all that :)
– 0 –
On the other hand, if you’re being hassled by someone who’s pushing hard for you to give something, or if you feel that your competitor is benefiting from “financed” privileges, there’s a place to complain, and it’s effective. (Thanks to AJFT who gave the link in a comment), it is the Instance Nationale de Lutte contre la Corruption (and it is effective)
A typo or syntax error? You can select the text and hit Ctrl+Enter to send us a message. Thank you! If this post interested you, maybe you can also leave a comment. We'd love to exchange with you !
