Mobilization Against Corruption – CAJAC Nador

In the Oriental region of Morocco, which suffers from geographic isolation and underdeveloped rural and urban infrastructure, the project “Mobilization Against Corruption – CAJAC Nador” responded to the heightened corruption challenges exacerbated by:

  • Precarious living conditions;
  • Lack of basic infrastructure;
  • Limited civic resistance to corruption;
  • Weak capacity within local civil society organizations.

 

General Objectif (Outcome)

At the collective level, the project promoted civic behavior grounded in transparency and accountability. It served as a vital source of firsthand data on corruption, enabling Transparency Morocco to define its advocacy priorities better and supply stakeholders with accurate information to guide short- and medium-term institutional reform. Through its legal assistance component, the project communicated identified administrative dysfunctions to the relevant authorities, encouraging them to deliver justice to complainants and amend flawed procedures to promote transparency.

Specific Objectives (Outcome)

The project maintained a local presence. It worked closely with beneficiaries to:

  • Raise public awareness that corruption is unacceptable and that rejecting it is a civic responsibility, with Transparency Morocco offering support in this fight;
  • Educate citizens on the consequences of corruption and train public servants and private sector employees on identifying and combating different forms of corruption;
  • Collaborate with local associations, administrative officials, and media outlets through roundtables and training sessions;
  • Provide citizens with legal support in pursuing their rights, whether in court or through public administration complaints;
  • Identify the most corruption-prone sectors at the regional level that required targeted intervention;
  • Conduct advocacy for systemic institutional reforms and procedural improvements.

OBJECTIVES/RESULTS/ACTIVITIES/SUSTAINABILITY

OBJECTIVES RESULTS ACTIVITIES DURABILITY
Raise Awareness and Inform

1. Citizens knew their rights and available remedies.

2. Citizens refused corruption and demanded fair public services without illicit compensation.

3. Local media were informed of corruption cases and disseminated credible information.

1. Mobile caravans traveled in souks and markets

2. Stands were set up near public establishments

3. Leaflets and flyers were distributed for the use of the citizens

4. Meetings with the media were held

1. At least 2000 were sensitized

2. The media gained better knowledge surrounding the idea of corruption and reported the facts
Building civil society capacities

1. Civil society was involved in the fight against corruption;

2. It was equipped to support citizens.

1. Produced teaching tools;

2. Held training sessions for the benefit of the associations;

3. Held open days in TM premises to inform

1. At least 120 associative actors were trained;

2. The number of anti-corruption activists increased.

3. Associations gave greater priority to the fight against corruption.
Advocacy and awareness of administrative managers

1. Officials listened to advocacy efforts;

2. They were sensitized and increasingly adopted an integral behavior

1. Produced practical tools (manuals) for civil servants: good practice, code of good conduct, etc.

2. Organized advocacy sessions to benefit the administrations most affected by corruption.

 

 

1. At least six different administrations were sensitized and participated in the sessions;

2. The culture of integrity and transparency was promoted in administrations;

3. A greater number of civil servants adopted citizen behaviors

4. The culture of transparency and integrity began to take root within public institutions.
Listen and advise victims and witnesses

1. Victims and witnesses received helpful assistance to resist and denounce corruption;

2. The denounced administrations were arrested and took the necessary measures in the interest of the victims.

1. Welcomed and assisted victims in their efforts of resistance and denunciation;

2. Challenged the administrations on the facts that the whenouncers accused them

1. At least 250 victims or denouncers received practical assistance;

2. Administrations increasingly listened to their users and punished corrupt behavior.

OUR PARTNERS