The debate in Morocco is no longer about the legislative election results, after the Ministry of the Interior announced that the final results of the 23 September 2026 vote matched the provisional overall results previously announced. The Authenticity and Modernity Party (PAM) came first with 97 seats. The formation of the next government is now the institutional stage that follows. The name of the person who will head the government, however, has not yet been announced.<\/p>\n
It is precisely at this point that the circulation of names has accelerated. Some readings have already established a direct link between the electoral ranking and particular political figures, as if a party coming first in Parliament automatically settled the identity of the next head of government. Sources familiar with the matter, speaking to Al Maghreb Al An, consider that such a reading gets ahead of the constitutional process. Until an appointment is actually made, the names being circulated remain part of political and media speculation, rather than an institutional decision.<\/p>\n
Article 47 of the 2011 Constitution sets out the basic rule in precise terms: the King appoints the Head of Government from within the political party that comes first in the elections to the House of Representatives, on the basis of the results of those elections. The constitutional provision therefore determines the party from which the Head of Government must come, but it does not turn the electoral result into an automatic announcement of the person who will occupy the position.<\/p>\n
That distinction matters when reading the current stage. The election produced a ranking of political parties and a distribution of seats in the House of Representatives. The appointment is a subsequent constitutional step. Moving from the figure of 97 seats to the name of a particular person therefore requires a decision that belongs neither to the media nor to social media platforms, but to the institutional process established by the Constitution.<\/p>\n
The sources cited stress that the determining criterion is compliance with the constitutional framework, not the amount of media attention surrounding a particular figure. The repeated appearance of a party secretary-general or another political leader in news reports does not give that person an official status as a candidate for the premiership. Likewise, the absence of another name from media coverage is not, by itself, evidence that the person has been ruled out.<\/p>\n
The current organisational structure of the Authenticity and Modernity Party, which came first in the 2026 election, gives this issue an additional dimension. The party is led through a collective structure that includes a national coordinator. Under these circumstances, speaking of a \u201cnatural name,\u201d an \u201cobvious candidate,\u201d or an automatic choice based on a particular party position risks confusing the internal organisation of the party with the constitutional authority to make the appointment.<\/p>\n
That does not mean, however, that the Constitution allows a person from outside the party that came first to be chosen. On this point, the text is clear: Article 47 links the appointment of the Head of Government to the political party that came first in the elections to the House of Representatives, on the basis of the electoral results.<\/p>\n
The existence of discretion in choosing the person should therefore not be turned into an assumption that the party placed first by voters can be bypassed. The issue concerns the choice of the individual within the constitutional framework, not the possibility of altering the political result produced by the ballot box.<\/p>\n
Article 42 operates at a different level. It defines the King\u2019s position as Head of State and as guarantor of the continuity of the State, the proper functioning of constitutional institutions and respect for the Constitution. These powers, however, are exercised within the limits of the authorities expressly granted to the King by the Constitution.<\/p>\n
Article 47 is precisely one of those provisions. The appointment of the Head of Government is a royal constitutional power and is not subject to countersignature by the Head of Government. That gives the appointment process its specific institutional character, while preserving the fundamental condition established by the same article: the Head of Government must come from the party that came first in the election.<\/p>\n
At this stage, it would therefore be difficult to describe the situation as an officially declared contest between several personalities. What is established is that the election took place on 23 September, that the final results confirmed the provisional results, that PAM came first, and that the formation of the government follows the completion of the electoral process. The identity of the next Head of Government remains tied to the appointment decision that must be made within the constitutional framework.<\/p>\n
Everything else belongs to another layer of the story.<\/p>\n
The names being circulated may reflect political readings, party expectations, calculations linked to future coalitions, or simply media interpretations. They do not, however, amount to an official list of candidates for the premiership. Until a decision is announced, that distinction needs to be maintained.<\/p>\n
The question of coalitions also needs to be placed where it belongs. With 97 seats, the party that came first does not hold an absolute majority of the House of Representatives, which has 395 seats. Building a governing majority will therefore require agreements with other parties. But that political reality comes after identifying the party from which the Head of Government is to be appointed under Article 47; it does not replace that constitutional rule.<\/p>\n
The speed with which public debate has moved from the election results to the names of individuals has effectively reduced a more complex institutional stage to a single question: who will be the next Head of Government? The constitutional text begins from a different question: which party came first? It is from that fact that the appointment process proceeds, while the choice of the individual remains an institutional decision that has not yet been announced.<\/p>\n
For now, the official facts therefore carry more weight than the lists of names circulating publicly. The election result is known, the party that came first has been identified, and the constitutional framework is established. The name of the next Head of Government remains tied to the decision that will be taken within that framework. Until that decision is made, the names being discussed belong to political and media debate, not to an official list.<\/p>\n
The story has not yet reached the name. It has reached the point at which the constitutional framework has become clear, while the person who will ultimately occupy that framework has not yet been announced.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The debate in Morocco is no longer about the legislative election results, after the Ministry of the Interior announced that the final results of the 23 September 2026 vote matched the provisional overall results previously announced. The Authenticity and Modernity Party (PAM) came first with 97 seats. The formation of the next government is now […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":4964,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[39,43,42,41,76],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4963","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-africa","category-asia-americas","category-europe-russia","category-middle-east","category-the-maghreb"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/diplomatique.ma\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4963","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/diplomatique.ma\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/diplomatique.ma\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/diplomatique.ma\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/diplomatique.ma\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4963"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/diplomatique.ma\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4963\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4965,"href":"https:\/\/diplomatique.ma\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4963\/revisions\/4965"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/diplomatique.ma\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4964"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/diplomatique.ma\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4963"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/diplomatique.ma\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4963"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/diplomatique.ma\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4963"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}