Dismissal and Removal of Civil Servants in Morocco (2026): Procedure, Appeals and Reinstatement

Before discussing the dismissal or removal of a civil servant in Morocco, you must determine which legal text applies to your situation—this is the first question asked by any lawyer specialising in administrative law. The answer determines the applicable procedure, appeal time limits and rights to compensation. Confusing these systems often means losing a case on its merits before even addressing a single argument.

Tenured state civil servants are governed by Dahir No. 1-58-008 of 24 February 1958 establishing the General Statute of the Civil Service, which has been amended several times and remains in force. This foundational text governs the entire career path—recruitment, advancement, disciplinary sanctions and termination of service. This is the system people have in mind when they use the term “civil servant” in its strict sense.

Since Decree-Law No. 2-15-770 of 23 March 2016, the State may hire contract employees for permanent or temporary assignments. These employees are not tenured civil servants: their relationship with the administration is governed by this Decree-Law and their individual contracts, with significantly different protections, particularly in disciplinary matters. However, disputes involving them fall within the jurisdiction of the administrative court, as discussed below.

Employees of local authorities—municipalities, provinces and regions—are governed by special statutes inspired by, but distinct from, the General Statute. In practice, many municipal employees do not realise that they are not governed by exactly the same system as state civil servants and make the mistake of applying to the wrong court. Lastly, staff of public institutions may be governed by a special statute for the institution's own professional corps, making each case even more specific and requiring consultation of the applicable text before taking any action.

The disciplinary procedure always begins with a report—often prepared by the immediate supervisor or resulting from an inspection—setting out the allegations against the civil servant. This document is crucial because it defines the scope of the allegations. In practice, many civil servants are unaware that such a report has been prepared against them before they are summoned, placing them at a disadvantage when preparing their defence.

The next stage is notification of the allegations. The competent authority must inform the civil servant in writing of the alleged facts and allow a minimum period—in practice, at least fifteen days—to prepare written observations. Note that this right to a defence is guaranteed not only by Articles 65 to 68 of the 1958 Dahir, but also by Article 120 of the Constitution of 29 July 2011, which enshrines the right to a fair trial and the rights of the defence. Any failure to comply with this stage constitutes a procedural defect that may lead to the annulment of the sanction.

The right of access to the individual file is absolute and often overlooked. As soon as the allegations are notified, the civil servant may—and should—request access to the entire administrative file, including the investigation report. This inspection makes it possible to identify the evidence against the civil servant and prepare an effective defence. Refusing or delaying access constitutes a clear violation of the rights of the defence, which administrative courts consistently sanction by annulling the decision.

For third- and fourth-level sanctions, the file is referred to the Disciplinary Council, a joint body composed of representatives of the administration and elected representatives of civil servants, governed by Decree No. 2-59-0188 of 5 June 1959. The civil servant may receive assistance during the hearing, submit observations and call witnesses. The Council deliberates and issues a reasoned opinion—supporting or opposing the proposed sanction—but this opinion is not binding on the appointing authority. In major ministries such as National Education or Health, the time between the summons and the Council's deliberation may extend over several months, sometimes creating procedural defects that can be relied upon.

The final decision is made by the appointing authority—the minister, wali or director, depending on the professional corps—which may impose a sanction equal to, less severe than or more severe than the one proposed by the Council, up to the fourth level. This decision must state the reasons, be notified to the civil servant and specify the available remedies and applicable time limits. A precautionary suspension may be imposed as soon as the procedure begins to remove the employee from the workplace during the investigation; salary may or may not be maintained, depending on the seriousness of the facts.

Before applying to the administrative court, the law—and above all sound strategy—often calls for a prior administrative appeal. There are two types: the informal appeal, submitted to the same authority that made the removal decision, and the hierarchical appeal, submitted to the higher authority. These appeals are not always mandatory for a judicial appeal to be admissible, but in practice they are an almost unavoidable step for several reasons.

First, the time limit: you have sixty days from notification of the removal decision to file this informal appeal, in accordance with Article 23 of Law No. 41-90 of 10 September 1993 establishing administrative courts. Note one important detail: notification is not always formalised by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt. Many civil servants receive the decision through a simple internal service form or memorandum, raising legitimate questions about when the time limit begins—an argument experienced lawyers know how to use before the court.

If the administration remains silent for two months from the filing of the informal appeal, this constitutes an implicit rejection under Article 23 of Law No. 41-90. From this implicit rejection—or an express rejection if the administration responds earlier—a new sixty-day period begins for applying to the administrative court. Failure to follow this timeline may result in the judicial appeal being completely time-barred, even if the removal is clearly unlawful on its merits.

In practice, the informal appeal also helps build a case file: it requires the administration to respond in writing, producing an additional document that can be used before the court. An administration may acknowledge a procedural irregularity in its response and propose a lesser sanction. The documents to be attached to the informal appeal are the challenged decision, any notification received and observations on the identified irregularities. You must retain the acknowledgement of receipt for the filing, in whatever form is available.

The judicial annulment of a dismissal decision on the grounds of abuse of power has a clear legal consequence: the administration must reinstate the civil servant to their grade and duties, with retroactive effect from the date of the annulled dismissal, pursuant to Article 75 of Dahir No. 1-58-008 of 24 February 1958. It must also pay the salary arrears corresponding to the period of removal. Reinstatement restores promotion and pension rights as though the dismissal had never occurred.

In practical terms, back pay is calculated on the basis of the gross salary that the civil servant would have received during the period of removal, less any other income they may have received during that period. According to prevailing administrative case law, the five-year limitation period applies to back-pay claims against the State: after five years, the corresponding arrears may be time-barred. It is therefore necessary to act quickly and not allow enforcement proceedings to drag on after annulment.

The enforcement of administrative judgments against the State is, admittedly, the weak point of the entire system. Article 7 of Law No. 41-90 provides for an injunction and daily penalty mechanism to compel the administration to comply: in practice, penalties imposed by judges range from 200 to 2,000 DH per day of delay. However, appropriations allocated under the Finance Act for the enforcement of judgments are often insufficient, and civil servants sometimes wait several years after the final judgment before they are actually reinstated.

Enforcement proceedings are initiated by petitioning the enforcement judge. The civil servant must file an application for enforcement and, if the administration continues to delay, request assessment of the penalty—that is, calculation of the total amount due for the days of delay. This phase may take an additional six to eighteen months. Where specific performance is demonstrably impossible—for example, if the position has been abolished—the judge may order the administration to pay damages in lieu of reinstatement, assessed at the judge's sole discretion.

The first—and most fatal—error is allowing the sixty-day time limit to expire without lodging either an administrative appeal or a judicial appeal. Article 23 of Law No. 41-90 is unforgiving: once this period has expired, the appeal is inadmissible even if the dismissal is manifestly unlawful on the merits. The case law of the Administrative Courts of Appeal, particularly that of Rabat, is consistent and strict on this point. The only way to avoid this outcome is to establish a duly proven event of force majeure, which judges accept extremely sparingly.

The second common error is confusing the regime under the Labour Code with the General Civil Service Regulations. A permanent civil servant who claims dismissal compensation calculated according to the formula in Article 41 of the Labour Code—which is reserved for private-sector employees—will have their claim summarily dismissed by the Administrative Court. Civil service law is an autonomous body of law, and compensation under it is not awarded on a lump-sum basis: it takes the form of back pay and damages assessed at the judge's sole discretion.

A third classic pitfall is failing to request disclosure of the disciplinary file before appearing before the disciplinary board. This is an absolute right, guaranteed by the 1958 Dahir and the Constitution. Many civil servants, intimidated or poorly informed, appear before the board without having reviewed the evidence against them. This radically weakens the defense, even though reviewing the same file might have revealed irregular documents or contradictory testimony that could be used before the judge.

Submitting ordinary photocopies without certification is another common error when filing the application. The registry may refuse to register it, or the judge may exclude documents that have not been certified as true copies, weakening the entire application from the very first procedural step. For documents originating abroad or concerning civil servants posted abroad, an apostille may be required under the 1961 Hague Convention, to which Morocco has acceded.

A lawyer specializing in administrative law plays a decisive role at several levels. They identify procedural defects in disciplinary proceedings—an irregular notice, incorrect composition of the disciplinary board or failure to state reasons for the decision—which constitute independent grounds for annulment, irrespective of the merits. They accurately calculate time limits, strategically draft the administrative appeal to maximize the chances of a favorable response and build the litigation file. Fees range from 5,000 to 25,000 DH at first instance depending on complexity, within the framework of Law No. 28-08 regulating the legal profession in Morocco (practice observed at the Rabat and Casablanca Bar Associations in 2025-2026). An initial consultation often makes it possible to assess the actual prospects of success before making any commitment.