Hanane Harat

Morocco — Amid the national debate surrounding the reform of Morocco’s Family Code, several sensitive issues that directly affect women’s rights are resurfacing, most notably child marriage and polygamy.

In this context, feminist activist and president of the association “Kif Mama Kif Baba,” Ghizlane El Maamouni—one of the most prominent figures working on family and childhood issues—offers a critical reading of the current legal provisions. In an interview with our agency, she explains why she believes that exceptions to the legal marriage age constitute a gateway to the continued marriage of minors. She also highlights problems related to polygamy and warns against new proposals she considers a “setback” that directly harms women’s dignity and the confidentiality of their health data.

 

Child Marriage: What Are the Persistent Problems in the Family Code?

The fundamental issue is that the current Family Code, although it sets the legal marriage age at 18, continues to allow broad exceptions granting judges the authority to authorize the marriage of minors without specifying a minimum age. This loophole has led to alarming cases where girls as young as 12 or 11 are being married, simply because the law does not explicitly prohibit it.

Although certain legal conditions are supposed to regulate exceptions, they are rarely respected in practice. Requests for marriage are often approved without a serious social investigation or a proper assessment of the psychological, social, and economic circumstances of the minor.

The problem is further deepened by government proposals released in 2023. While they maintained the marriage age at 18, they set the exception limit at 17—as if the issue lies only in lowering the age below 17. We completely reject this logic. The real question is: Why keep exceptions at all?

The age of 18 is not symbolic; it is the legal age of majority, at which citizens can vote, assume civil responsibilities, and manage their own finances.

It is incomprehensible that the state considers citizens unfit to bear legal responsibilities before 18, yet deems them capable of marriage before that age. This is a profound contradiction and a step backward in protecting young girls. Therefore, we demand the complete abolition of the exception—not merely regulating it.

 

Polygamy: Where Does the Law and Practice Go Wrong?

The problem with polygamy is twofold: legal and practical. The current law requires the first wife’s consent, but in reality, this consent often becomes merely symbolic, extracted under economic or social pressure, or simply bypassed by judicial decisions that allow men to take another wife without respecting the will of the first.

In practice, women face a harsh equation: either accept polygamy against their will or face divorce and its heavy social and economic consequences. This makes the concept of “consent” a mere formality that does not reflect the actual power dynamics within the family.

As for the 2024 proposed amendments to the Family Code, drafted by the committee assigned to review the laws, they unfortunately fail to address the core issues. In fact, some of them represent a serious regression. Among the proposals is a clause allowing a woman to sign her pre-approval for polygamy at the time of the first marriage contract—an idea widely criticized by rights advocates as unrealistic. A young woman entering marriage is rarely in a psychological or social position to anticipate the long-term consequences of such a decision. The proposals also ignore the issues of pressure and inequality in marital relationships, making this “consent” more symbolic than protective.

 

New Conditions for Polygamy Linked to Women's Health: Why Are They Dangerous?

This is one of the most alarming parts of the proposed amendments. They grant men the right to marry a second wife if the first suffers from a health condition that prevents her from having children or from “fulfilling marital duties.”

The first danger is the violation of women’s medical privacy. It is unacceptable for a husband to present his wife’s medical records before a judge to justify his desire for polygamy. This exposes women and reduces their physical and reproductive health to a matter of courtroom debate, undermining their dignity.

The second—and even more serious—danger is linking polygamy to the so-called “marital duty,” meaning sexual relations. This reinforces the idea that women are legally obligated to perform sexual acts even if they do not want to.

While society is working toward recognizing marital rape, these proposals take us backward, turning sexual relations into a mandatory duty tied to the legality of polygamy.

Sex within marriage must always be consensual. It cannot become a legal benchmark for assessing a woman’s worthiness as a wife.

 

If a Man Is Dissatisfied with the Marriage… Is Polygamy a Solution?

Absolutely not. If a man is dissatisfied with the relationship or faces difficulties, divorce is always an option. There is no justification for transforming marital problems or a woman’s health challenges into a legal excuse for polygamy. Marriage is an emotional and human bond before it is a social contract built on mutual respect and balance.

When illness, reduced fertility, or sexual challenges become grounds to seek another wife, the issue is not problem-solving but rather abandoning a partner at her weakest moment.

Polygamy based on such justifications grants men an indirect license to commit emotional betrayal under the protection of the law. It reduces a woman’s body and health to a function that, if “broken,” can simply be replaced—stripping women of their humanity and dignity.

The deeper danger lies in reinforcing the notion that a woman’s value depends on her fertility or ability to sexually satisfy her husband. If she becomes ill or weakened, she becomes replaceable—a clear violation of women’s rights and the very essence of marriage.

The law already recognizes divorce as a legitimate way to end a marriage when it becomes untenable. This straightforward mechanism makes it unnecessary—and unethical—to circumvent issues by forming a second marriage. Polygamy in such cases only multiplies the suffering, creating a second family built upon the wounds of the first wife.

Thus, we oppose not only the use of illness or disability to justify polygamy but consider it a form of legal violence—one that legitimizes discrimination and turns women’s suffering into grounds for punishing them rather than supporting them.