A medical certificate issued by the head of the seventh administrative district in Temara, confirming a 30-day incapacity after a woman slapped him, has sparked significant controversy in Morocco.
The certificate, which was presented to a judicial police officer, has ignited widespread debate on social media and within the comment sections of the news outlet Hespress.
Many have questioned whether the injury aligns with the doctor’s diagnosis. Professional medical organizations have stated that only the certifying physician can explain the reasoning behind such a decision.
The National Medical Association of Morocco responded by clarifying its role, emphasizing that it is not responsible for defending doctors unconditionally but for ensuring that medical practice adheres to ethical standards.
The association also stated that if the accused believes the medical certificate could influence the case, she has the right to file a complaint with regional bodies, which will escalate the matter to the national council for review.
Najib Amghar, the association’s secretary-general, expressed willingness to discuss the issue if a formal grievance is filed. He noted that the case is currently in the hands of the judiciary, and no one has access to the official report or details of the incident. The association, Amghar added, would consider any new developments brought to its attention.
Amghar further stated that the association defends ethical standards that protect the public, while defending the doctor’s actions falls to the doctor’s representative union.
He also emphasized that, as the case is now before the courts, the opposing party’s legal team could challenge the validity of the medical certificate’s time frame, but it is unfair to question the integrity of all doctors based on one case.
A Hespress AR source from the National Union of Specialist Doctors in the Private Sector told Hespress that every individual is responsible for their actions, and no doctor should be criticized without knowing all the details. The source also pointed out that “reasonable means” likely justified the 30-day incapacity and argued that practices related to a specific group should not be generalized to all similar cases.
The controversy deepened after it was revealed that the administrative official “N.A.” had presented the medical certificate to a judicial police officer. This disclosure prompted mockery from many social media users and public figures, with some arguing that the video watched by the public could not have caused significant harm.
Others claimed the doctor had overstepped their role, emphasizing that the psychological impact of the incident should not be underestimated.
Mohamed Glousi, a lawyer and civil rights activist, stressed the importance of examining the contents of the medical certificate and identifying the doctor’s specialty before passing judgment.
He explained that if a psychiatrist had issued the certificate, it would typically include information about prescribed medications and the course of treatment, rather than specifying the degree of incapacity. Glousi also noted that understanding the doctor’s specialization is crucial to assessing the nature of the injuries and verifying the prescribed treatment.
As the identity of the doctor who issued the certificate remains unknown and is not listed in the judicial report, making it difficult to contact or identify him, the specialist who issued the certificate has the right to respond to any claims and clarify the reasoning behind the decision to grant a 30-day incapacity. The case continues to attract public attention.
add your comment
Terms of publication : Not to offend the writer, people, sacred things, or attack religions or the divine self, and refrain from racist incitement and insults.