Morocco Litigation Update 2026: Draft Law, Lawyers' Strike and What Foreign Investors Must Know

Morocco’s litigation landscape shifted dramatically in early 2026 when Draft Law No. 66. 23, a sweeping overhaul of the legal profession, triggered a nationwide lawyers’ strike that began on 17 January 2026 and escalated into mass protests on 6–7 February 2026. For foreign investors with active or planned litigation in Morocco, the draft law and the resulting court disruptions have created a convergence of regulatory uncertainty and operational risk that demands immediate attention.

This guide cuts through the news cycle to deliver what in-house counsel, general counsels and international law firms actually need: a plain-language summary of the legislation, a verified timeline of the strike, and a step-by-step contingency playbook for protecting commercial interests while Moroccan courts and the legal profession navigate this period of reform.

Key Takeaways for Foreign Investors

• Draft Law No.66.23 proposes fundamental changes to entry requirements, disciplinary oversight and bar governance that could reshape how foreign investors instruct and retain Moroccan counsel.
• The lawyers’ strike that began on 17 January 2026 caused widespread hearing adjournments, enforcement delays and reduced access to provisional measures across Moroccan courts.
• Immediate contingency action, including updated powers of attorney, arbitration-readiness audits and early provisional-measure applications, is essential for any business with litigation exposure in Morocco.

What Is Draft Law No.66.23? A Quick Legal Summary for Litigation in Morocco

Draft Law No.66.23 is the Moroccan government’s proposed legislation to regulate the legal profession. It represents the most significant Morocco legal reform in 2026, touching virtually every aspect of how lawyers are admitted to the bar, how they are disciplined and how bar associations are governed. For foreign investors engaged in litigation in Morocco, several provisions carry direct commercial implications.

At its core, the draft law seeks to tighten entry requirements for the legal profession, introducing new educational thresholds and professional examination standards. It also restructures the disciplinary framework, shifting certain oversight functions from the bar associations to government-supervised bodies. This rebalancing of power between the state and the organised bar is the primary flashpoint that ignited the profession’s opposition.

A particularly controversial element, flagged by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), concerns immunity provisions within the draft law. The ICJ has called on Morocco to remove what it describes as blanket immunity for the armed forces from the legislation, arguing that such provisions could restrict lawyers’ ability to pursue claims against state entities, a concern with direct relevance to foreign investors in sectors where government contracts or regulatory disputes are common.

The Confédération Générale des Entreprises du Maroc (CGEM), Morocco’s leading business confederation, reported that lawyers have rejected the draft law regulating their profession, reflecting a business community acutely aware that disruption to the legal profession disrupts commercial dispute resolution.

Industry observers expect the draft law’s passage to remain contentious. The legislative process in Morocco requires passage through both chambers of parliament, and early indications suggest that significant amendments may be necessary before the text achieves sufficient support. Foreign investors should treat the current text as a signal of regulatory direction rather than a finalised framework.

Timeline, Lawyers’ Strike Morocco 2026 and Court Disruptions

The lawyers’ strike of Morocco 2026 did not emerge overnight. It was the culmination of months of tension between the legal profession and the government over Draft Law No.66.23. The following timeline captures the critical dates and their operational impact on courts.

The strike’s duration and intensity were unprecedented in recent Moroccan legal history. For foreign investors, the operational consequence was simple but severe: cases that were scheduled for hearing, enforcement or provisional-measure determination during January and February 2026 were adjourned indefinitely in many courts, and the resulting backlog continues to affect commercial docket timelines.

Immediate Impact on Access to Courts Morocco 2026 and Enforcement

Access to courts in Morocco during 2026 was not formally suspended by the judiciary, courts remained technically open throughout the strike. However, the practical reality was markedly different. Without lawyers willing to appear, plead or file submissions, the court system operated at a fraction of its normal capacity. The impact varied by procedure type and jurisdiction.

For foreign investors, three consequences deserve particular attention. First, limitation periods and procedural deadlines continued to run during the strike in most instances, the strike was not a force majeure event that automatically tolled statutory time limits. Second, provisional measures under Morocco’s référé procedure remained technically available, but obtaining them required finding counsel willing to break the strike or applying through alternative procedural channels. Third, enforcement of existing judgments and arbitral awards was practically impaired because the coordination between counsel, bailiffs and court registries that enforcement requires was disrupted.

The likely practical effect of these disruptions will be felt throughout 2026 and into 2027 as courts work through the accumulated backlog. Industry observers expect commercial chambers in Casablanca and Rabat, where the majority of foreign-investor litigation is concentrated, to face the longest delays.

What the Draft Law Means for Foreign Investors in Litigation in Morocco

Foreign investors engaged in litigation in Morocco face a dual challenge: the immediate operational disruption caused by the strike, and the longer-term regulatory uncertainty created by Draft Law No.66.23 itself. The following risk matrix maps the key investor activities against both current and anticipated impacts.

Risk Assessment by Investor Activity

• Active litigation (pending cases). Red flag: hearing dates lost during the strike may not be rescheduled for months. Mitigation: instruct counsel to file written submissions proactively, request priority relisting and consider whether settlement negotiations should be accelerated.
• Injunctions and provisional measures. Red flag: reduced availability during strike periods; judges may be reluctant to grant ex parte relief without opposing counsel present. Mitigation: prepare applications in advance so they can be filed immediately when court operations normalise; ensure evidence preservation measures are in place independently.
• Enforcement of judgments and awards. Red flag: registry delays and bailiff coordination issues. Mitigation: instruct bailiffs directly where procedurally permitted; maintain contact with court registries; consider whether enforcement in another jurisdiction (for cross-border assets) offers a faster route.
• Instructing Moroccan counsel. Red flag: the draft law’s changes to bar governance and disciplinary oversight may create uncertainty about counsel availability and independence. Mitigation: maintain relationships with multiple firms; ensure engagement letters address strike contingencies and alternative counsel provisions.
• Cross-border discovery and evidence. Red flag: court-ordered discovery mechanisms may be delayed. Mitigation: use contractual disclosure obligations and voluntary production where possible; preserve electronic evidence independently.

The Morocco draft law on the legal profession does not directly restrict foreign investors’ right to access Moroccan courts. However, by restructuring the profession through which that access is exercised, it introduces a layer of practical risk that demands proactive contingency planning.

Practical Checklist, Immediate Steps for GCs and Foreign Investors

The following six-point checklist provides a framework for immediate action. These steps apply whether your organisation has active litigation in Morocco, is considering new proceedings, or simply needs to protect existing commercial interests during this period of uncertainty. Always seek local counsel advice before implementing any procedural step.

1. Review and update all powers of attorney (POA). Ensure that POAs granted to Moroccan counsel are current, sufficiently broad to cover emergency applications and, critically, that they permit substitute counsel to act if your primary lawyer is unavailable due to strike action. Consider executing a general POA alongside any case-specific authority.
2. Identify alternative counsel. If your current Moroccan lawyers participated in the strike, confirm their availability going forward and identify at least one alternative firm that can step in for urgent matters. The Morocco lawyer directory is a practical starting point for identifying qualified litigation counsel.
3. Audit arbitration clauses. Review all current contracts with Moroccan counterparties to determine whether disputes can be referred to arbitration rather than the courts. Where arbitration clauses exist, assess whether the seat and institution are outside Morocco (reducing exposure to local court disruption) and whether the clause covers the specific dispute at issue.
4. Preserve documents and electronic evidence. Implement litigation holds immediately for any matter where proceedings are contemplated. Do not rely on court-ordered preservation during periods of court disruption, use contractual preservation notices and internal hold protocols instead.
5. File provisional-measure applications early. If you anticipate needing injunctive relief, a freezing order or any form of provisional measure, prepare the application now and file it as soon as court operations permit. Waiting for the backlog to clear before filing significantly increases the risk that your counterparty will dissipate assets or destroy evidence.
6. Issue contractual notices and preserve rights. Review all contracts for notice provisions, cure periods and force majeure clauses. Where counterparty performance is affected by the strike or the draft law’s consequences, issue protective notices to preserve your contractual rights, even if you do not intend to exercise them immediately.

Emergency Remedies and Enforcement During Court Disruption

Moroccan procedural law provides several mechanisms for urgent relief that remain available even during periods of disruption to ordinary court operations. Understanding these mechanisms, and their practical limitations during the 2026 strike, is essential for foreign investors seeking to protect their interests while litigation in Morocco faces the draft law’s uncertainty.

Provisional Measures (Référé)

Morocco’s Code of Civil Procedure empowers the president of the competent court to order provisional measures in urgent cases through the référé procedure. This mechanism is designed for situations where delay would cause irreparable harm, and it operates on an expedited timeline. During the strike, référé applications were still accepted by court registries, but the practical challenge was securing a hearing date and ensuring that counsel could appear. Early indications suggest that référé chambers have resumed normal operations in most jurisdictions.

Ex Parte Applications

In cases of extreme urgency, Moroccan procedural law permits applications on an ex parte basis, that is, without notice to the opposing party. These applications are particularly relevant for asset-freezing measures and evidence-preservation orders. During periods of strike action, ex parte relief may be the most viable option because it does not require opposing counsel’s participation. However, any ex parte order must be followed by an inter partes hearing, and investors should be prepared for that hearing to be delayed.

Bailiff-Led Enforcement

Enforcement of existing judgments and court orders in Morocco relies heavily on huissiers de justice (judicial officers or bailiffs). Bailiffs are not members of the bar and were not directly bound by the lawyers’ strike. Their operations continued throughout the disruption, although coordination with lawyers and court registries was impaired. Investors with enforceable judgments should instruct bailiffs directly to proceed with enforcement actions to the extent that court registry cooperation permits.

For matters where domestic court remedies are insufficient or unavailable, investors should also consider whether international enforcement routes, such as enforcement of arbitral awards under the New York Convention or enforcement of foreign judgments under bilateral treaties, offer a more reliable path.

Instructing Moroccan Counsel During Reforms and Strikes

Instructing Moroccan counsel effectively during a period of professional upheaval requires additional diligence beyond normal engagement protocols. The following checklist addresses the key practical considerations for foreign clients.

• Powers of attorney. Execute POAs in both French and Arabic (Morocco’s two official court languages); ensure notarisation and, where required, apostille or consular legalisation.
• Fee structures. Agree fee arrangements in writing before instruction. Consider contingency retainers that compensate counsel for maintaining readiness during strike periods, even when active court work is suspended.
• Remote communications. Establish secure communication channels for document exchange and case updates. Moroccan counsel increasingly use encrypted platforms, but confirm data-protection compliance for any sensitive commercial or personal information.
• Language and translation. Court filings in Morocco are predominantly in Arabic, with French widely used in commercial matters. Ensure that your engagement letter specifies the language for reporting and that key documents are translated by certified translators.
• Strike contingency clause. Include a provision in your engagement letter that addresses the consequences of future strike action, including substitute counsel arrangements, communication obligations during strikes and fee adjustments for periods of enforced inactivity.

Building and maintaining relationships with experienced Moroccan litigation counsel is the single most effective risk-mitigation strategy for foreign investors. The reforms proposed by Draft Law No.66.23 make this investment in professional relationships more important, not less.

Dispute Resolution Morocco, Arbitration vs Courts After 2026 Reforms

The 2026 disruptions have prompted many foreign investors to reassess their dispute resolution strategy in Morocco. The comparison below provides a structured framework for evaluating whether arbitration or the Moroccan courts better serve your commercial objectives.

The decision between arbitration and court litigation should be driven by the specific dispute, the contractual framework and the enforcement landscape. For new contracts, industry observers expect a marked increase in the adoption of arbitration clauses with seats outside Morocco, particularly in Paris, London and Geneva, as foreign investors respond to the uncertainty generated by the 2026 reforms. For existing disputes already before the Moroccan courts, switching to arbitration is generally not an option unless both parties agree, but parallel protective measures (document preservation, provisional-measure applications) should be pursued vigorously.

Conclusion and Recommended Action Plan for Litigation in Morocco Under the Draft Law

Draft Law No.66.23 and the 2026 lawyers’ strike represent a watershed moment for litigation in Morocco. While the legislative process continues and courts work through their backlogs, foreign investors cannot afford a wait-and-see approach. The following six-point action plan provides a framework for immediate implementation.

1. Conduct an urgent audit of all active and anticipated litigation, enforcement and arbitration proceedings in Morocco.
2. Update all powers of attorney and ensure substitute counsel arrangements are documented and legally effective.
3. File or prepare provisional-measure applications for any matter where delay creates asset-dissipation or evidence-destruction risk.
4. Review all Moroccan-law-governed contracts for arbitration clauses and assess whether dispute forum options should be exercised or renegotiated.
5. Instruct experienced Moroccan litigation counsel with a track record of operating during periods of professional disruption, the Morocco lawyer directory can assist in identifying qualified practitioners.
6. Monitor the legislative progress of Draft Law No.66.23 through official government channels and trusted legal advisors, and adjust your litigation strategy as the regulatory picture clarifies.

The 2026 Morocco legal reforms will ultimately reshape the operating environment for dispute resolution in Morocco. Investors who act decisively now, securing counsel, preserving evidence, filing protective applications and stress-testing their dispute-resolution clauses, will be best positioned to protect their interests regardless of the final legislative outcome.

Sources

1. SSRN, Analysis of Draft Law No.66.23
2. International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), Morocco: Remove Blanket Immunity from Draft Law
3. CGEM, Lawyers Reject a Draft Law Regulating Their Profession
4. Diplomatie.ma, Upper House Adopts Draft Bills
5. Centre for Law and Democracy, Morocco: Analysis of Access to Information Law
6. SMEX, Morocco Draft Criminal Law Analysis
7. Global Law Experts, Morocco Lawyer Directory