Q1) What is the meaning of the notions of contract and negotiation in the Moroccan (and

Arab) society, and what is its implication for its system of law? (600 words)

Understanding the law and the terms of negotiation in the Moroccan culture, we must first
understand the values and norms of such a society. A lot of laws and customs are derived
from the cultural pattern of the society. Moroccan population is a blend of Berber and Arab
ethnicity. Religion plays significant role in the lives of the residents. A lot of other factors
comes into play when a society’s notion for contract is being studied.

People of morocco are particularly concerned about the concept Hshuma also known as
concept shame. People value their honor and dignity very highly. It is of outmost importance
for Moroccan people to maintain the level of trust among themselves. They have extended
families and this aspect is exhibited by altogether. They protect and sustain their self-worth
throughout their entire life. Not a single instance comes where they behave exceptionally. So
in order to avoid these instances of shame, Moroccan people always avoid activities that
bring disgrace to themselves and demean their family repute. Conducting business is a usual
activity in Moroccan society and especially due to the religion Islam, trade is highly valued.

The staunch Muslims believe in the divine significance of profit sharing and conducting trade
in their daily life. So people frequently conduct trade and form contracts with each other. It
constitutes a daily part of their routine. They perform business transactions on fair basis and
give preferential treatment to the people in order to fulfill Allah’s commands of constituting a
society based on giving favors to other Muslim brothers. So while performing the contract
with a counter party a just and fair route is opted. The incidents of frauds, scams and business
blunders are very few owing to this fact. People found guilty of such acts are looked down
upon by the society members and in some cases even by the members of the family
themselves. So when a contract is signed in Moroccan culture it constitutes a binding
agreement on behalf of both the parties, and it would be unbiased to expect that the contract
will definitely be honored. The stakes for those who act otherwise are overwhelmingly
menacing.

Another aspect of their contractual agreements is the concept of Gawah, the very same
concept as laid out in the religion Islam, which guides the two contracting parties to perform
the contract in the presence of a third party so that witnesses testify the originality of the
contract. In this way, back turns are avoided in the business. The functionality of such a
practice doesn’t end here but rather witnesses are also a source of verification of the business
deal.

Moroccan people are so considerate and careful about their self-image that they avoid doing
public dealings in order to avoid the risk of embarrassment and shame. All of this stems from
the impact of culture embedded in the society.

Negotiations and decision making is central in these cultures. There is a proper hierarchy,
which is strictly being followed in the companies. There is Top-Down approach while taking
critical decisions, However consensus from the group is always followed, in accordance with
the teachings of Islam. Moroccan always build long lasting and trustworthy relationship in
the business in order to avoid the risk of doing business with new people. They are habitual
of bargaining and seldom perceive a deal as finalized. So they negotiate thoroughly with their
client or business partner in order to reach an agreement. Their non-confrontational nature is
the reason behind their calm and diplomatic nature while doing business meetings.
Aggressive behavior is never manifested by Moroccan people.

The implication of such a culture is evident from the fact that culture of trust is widespread.
People are honest and binding upon their written and verbal agreements & contracts in all
circumstances.

Q2) what is the rules-relationships continuum? What is the difference between a rule-oriented
litigant and a relationship-oriented one? Elaborate on this (600 words)

In some parts of the world there is rule based governance while in the other parts of the world
there is principle based governance. It depends upon the outlook of the society and what
people prefer. Similar is the case when it comes to litigation. It is the legal process of
following a suit against a person(s). A person can be individual or a company, as per the
terminology of the statue.

In cultures where there is rule oriented litigation, the course of legal dispute is resolved in
light of specifically and clearly written statutes or codes. It is known as codified law, which is
applicable upon the entire nationals and residents of the country. Principles are being
followed and fulfilled.

Relationship continuum is the exact opposite of rule based, where rules are sidelined and
ignored. In such cultures proper judicial pattern is not followed and other justice systems are
put in place instead. Because people are hesitant to go out in front of a jury to avoid the risk
of embarrassment.

Research paper written by shestowsky explains that according to Litigant Procedure

Perception Study more that litigants valued a future relationship with the opposing party, the
more they liked the idea of settlement negotiations that would include the parties alongside
their attorneys. (Shestowsky)

Some alternatives of a proper judiciary system are the ones as mentioned and explained in the
abstract. They are informal in nature and are present in most of the parts of the world.

1. House Palavar or Moot

According to the article, this is system of justice where justice is promptly delivered. It
consist of a council comprising of the leaders or the tribes or the elders, which decides the
verdict of the matter in hand. Mostly such matters are domestic in nature or related to
marriage. There is no compulsion on those attending. Local people can also take their part in
the hearing process

2. Panchayat

It is a system where 5-6 men decides on the conclusion of any incident. They are like the
authority of the villages and frequently resolve such disputes. They actively take their part in
order to act as mediator and give their verdict on the matter.

3. Cuttica Djuka system of law

It is a system of law where punishments are nonexistent. Western culture =s are the depiction
of such a system. There are no rules or standards that are required to be followed. People
behave impulsively and unpredictably. They also do not owe any sort of obligation towards
any member of the society.

According to the author, cultural differences can create marked difference on the legal
consequence. As mentioned in the abstract, sometimes the defendant claims that their actions
were not criminal.

With reference to the case mentioned People vs Moua

The above mentioned case is a strong proof that cultural context and framing can lead to
different verdicts, which can be surprisingly different. Sometimes the entire course of the
disputes are altered altogether.

References:

Entelis, John Pierre. Culture and counterculture in Moroccan politics. University Press of
America

Heering, Liesbeth, Rob Van Der Erf, and Leo Van Wissen. "The role of family networks and
migration culture in the continuation of Moroccan emigration: A gender
perspective." Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies

Sater, James N. "Reforming the rule of law in Morocco: multiple meanings and problematic
realities." Mediterranean Politics 14.2 (2009): 181-193.