فاس نيوز ميديا جريدة الكترونية جهوية تعنى بشؤون و أخبار جهة فاس مكناس – متجددة على مدار الساعة
The National Forum for Higher Education and Scientific Research closely monitors recent developments within the higher education and scientific research system, particularly the government’s approval of Draft Law 59.24 regulating higher education and scientific research and amending the pedagogical system. In this context, the Forum’s National Committee held an online meeting on Wednesday, 17 Rabi’ al-Awwal 1447 (corresponding to September 10, 2025), from 6 pm to 8 pm, to study and assess these developments. After a serious and responsible scientific discussion, the National Forum for Higher Education and Scientific Research:
- Initially appreciates any initiative aimed at developing the higher education and research system, provided it stems from an objective evaluation that recognizes the achievements while overcoming the defects revealed by the application of Law 00.01, which has been in place for a quarter of a century, in order to update it and align it with the provisions of Framework Law 51.17, pursuant to Article 17 thereof;
- Affirms that involving the research professor, as a key and central actor in the higher education and scientific research system, is essential for the success of the reform process, given their accumulated expertise in pedagogical, research, and administrative roles across various university structures. In this regard, the Forum expresses serious concern and strong objection to the ministry’s unilateral amendment of the pedagogical structure for bachelor’s and master’s degrees and its haste in activating these new amendments during the 2025-2026 academic year;
- Supports the step to increase knowledge units and reduce horizontal and skills units in the pedagogical structure, recognizing its positive impact on strengthening core disciplines and thus improving the quality of higher education;
- Endorses restoring the department as a fundamental structure in managing pedagogical and scientific affairs, while emphasizing the need to maintain the role of the pedagogical coordinator of the track, clearly defining their responsibilities and relationship with the head of department;
- Regards Draft Law 59.24 as reinforcing an established reality, marked by the emergence of several institutions outside the framework of Law 00.01, created based on choices made away from authorized structures and excluding academic and political actors, without any participatory public debate. In this context, the establishment of the so-called “Board of Trustees” is seen as a blow to university democratization, a regression from involving stakeholders in university governance, and marginalizing the role of research professors. For example, the draft withdraws from the university council the power to give opinions on appointing heads of institutions and entrusts this to the Board of Trustees, which is detached from the university’s academic space. This threatens to allow non-academic considerations in selection processes. Accordingly, developing the university’s strategy cannot be entrusted to individuals outside the academic-scientific sphere. Therefore, the Forum calls for the university council to remain the appropriate body for this task, after reviewing its composition to ensure adequate and effective representation of research professors;
- Expresses regret over the omission in Draft Law 59.24 of the option to unify the higher education system and sees in its fragmentation, especially through the proliferation of private institutions, an added factor deepening social disparities and undermining equal opportunity. This also leads to commodification of higher education and research by opening the field to private sectors and licensing foreign institutions to open branches domestically. The Forum is also surprised by the exemption of so-called non-profit higher education institutions serving the public interest from structural regulation and controlling operational, monitoring, and evaluation mechanisms.
Finally, the National Forum for Higher Education and Scientific Research, looking forward to retracting the current draft and returning it to the consultation and dialogue table with all university components and higher education and research institutions, emphasizing the participatory approach that must be respected in any reform process, reaffirms that accelerating the pace of “reform projects” and changing their contents with each change in sector leadership, following the logic of “each ruler curses the predecessor,” inevitably leads to instability in the higher education and scientific research system and constitutes a waste of time, effort, and public funds. The Forum also expresses its readiness to assume a proactive, advisory role to help improve the quality of the higher education and research system serving the public interest and the nation.
