In a globalized world, cross-border exchanges—whether commercial, personal, or judicial—often require the validation of official documents from one country to another. Whether it isa company wishing to establish subsidiaries abroad, a citizen applying for a visa, or the execution of an international judicial decision, the legal recognition of documents plays a crucial role. Three mechanisms are commonly used in this context: the apostille, legalization, and, in some cases, exequatur. Although they share a common goal—ensuring the legalvalidity of documents—their procedures and fields of application differ significantly. In thisarticle, we will examine these three processes in detail.
Definition and Purpose of the Apostille
The apostille is a certification issued by a competent authority of a country to attest that the signature or seal affixed to a public document is authentic. This unique seal allows an official document to be directly recognized in any other country that is a member of the Hague Convention, without requiring additional legalization. The convention applies to a variety of public documents, including civil status acts (birth and marriage certificates), diplomas, judicial decisions, and notarial documents.
The fundamental purpose of the apostille is to reduce the administrative burden, which isoften costly and time-consuming, associated with the cross-border recognition of documents. In other words, it streamlines international procedures by establishing a universally acceptedcertification system among the States parties to the convention.
DifferenceBetweenLegalization and Apostille
While both apostille and legalization aim to authenticate documents for use abroad, these twoprocedures differ in both application and complexity.
1. ClassicLegalization: This involves several steps. First, documents must beauthenticated by a competent national authority (usually a ministry or a local administrative authority). They are then submitted for successive legalizations to national authorities and the consulate of the destination country. This process can belengthy, often involving multiple institutions, and varies from country to country.
2. Apostille: Under the Hague Convention, the apostille replaces this multi-step process with a single certification issued by a designated authority, thus significantlysimplifying the procedure. In the signatory countries of the convention, the apostille spares users the need to have their documents certified by consular authorities, makingauthentication faster and less costly.
The Apostille Process
Obtaining an apostille is relatively straightforward in the member countries of the Hague Convention. The applicant must submit the document to the competent authority, often a court or a designated administrative institution, which will verify the authenticity of the signature or seal and affix the apostille directly on the document or as an annex.
For documents such as educational diplomas or marriage certificates, it is essential to check in advance whether the destination country is a signatory to the Hague Convention. If not, the traditional legalization procedure must be followed.
Legalization of Documents for Non-Signatory Countries
When a document needs to be used in a non-signatory country of the Hague Convention, the legalization process is more rigid and requires several steps of certification, both at the national and international levels. Let’s take the example of a legalization procedure for the United Arab Emirates, a non-member of the convention.
1. Ministry of ForeignAffairs: The process begins with the legalization of documents at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the country of origin. This step ensures that the document is authenticated at the national level before being presented to foreignauthorities.
2. Local and RegionalLegalization: The documents are then submitted to the Mouqataâ(local public services office) and the Wilaya (regional administrative authority). Thesesteps provide a double validation at the local and regional levels.
3. Return to the Ministry of ForeignAffairs: Once the documents have been legalizedat these various levels, they are submitted again to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for a final verification.
4. ConsularLegalization: Finally, the documents are presented at the embassy or consulate of the destination country to obtain diplomatic legalization, which is the last step of the procedure.
It is important to note that this legalization procedure, which is longer and more complex, usually incurs additional consular fees that must be paid at designated banks.
Exequatur: Recognition of ForeignJudicialDecisions
Exequatur, unlike apostille and legalization, is a procedure by which a judicial decisionrendered in a foreign country is recognized and can be executed in another country. This mechanism is essential for decisions such as divorce judgments or international arbitration awards.
The exequatur application must be submitted to the courts of the country where the executionof the judgment is requested. Local authorities verify whether the foreign decision meets the legal requirements necessary to be recognized in their legal system before allowing itsapplication.
Conclusion
The apostille, legalization, and exequatur are essential mechanisms to ensure the recognition of documents and judicial decisions at the international level. While the apostille considerablysimplifies procedures for member countries of the Hague Convention, legalization remains alonger and more complex process for non-signatory countries. As for exequatur, it is a specific procedure to guarantee the execution of foreign judgments.
For businesses, lawyers, and individuals involved in international transactions or disputes, itis crucial to understand these distinctions to navigate effectively the administrative and legalrequirements of different countries. A good understanding of these procedures can help avoidcostly delays and unnecessary complications in validating essential documents abroad.
Appendix
List of Countries Signatory to the Hague Convention
A
• South Africa
• Albania
• Andorra
• Antigua and Barbuda
• Saudi Arabia
• Argentina
• Armenia
• Australia
• Austria
• Azerbaijan
B
• Bahamas
• Bahrain
• Barbados
• Belarus
• Belgium
• Belize
• Bolivia
• Bosnia and Herzegovina
• Botswana
• Brazil
• Brunei
• Bulgaria
• Burundi
C
• Canada (effective January 11, 2024)
• Cape Verde
• Chile
• China
• Cyprus
• Colombia
• South Korea
• Costa Rica
• Croatia
D
• Denmark
• Dominica
E
• Ecuador
• Spain
• Estonia
• Eswatini
• United States
F
• Fiji
• Finland
• France
G
• Georgia
• Greece
• Grenada
• Guatemala
• Guyana
H
• Honduras
• Hong Kong
• Hungary
I
• Cook Islands
• Marshall Islands
• India
• Indonesia (effective June 4, 2022)
• Ireland
• Iceland
• Israel
• Italy
J
• Jamaica
• Japan
K
• Kazakhstan
• Kyrgyzstan
• Kosovo
L
• Lesotho
• Latvia
• Liberia
• Liechtenstein
• Lithuania
• Luxembourg
M
• Macao (Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China)
Companies in Morocco that wish to hire foreign employees must follow a specific procedure that is regulated by the Moroccan labor code law no 65-99 (The “Labor Code”) as promulgated by Dahir no. 1-03-194 of September 11, 2003, in particular Chapter 5, Article 516, which stipulates that “any employer wishing to recruit a foreign employee must obtain authorization from the government authority responsible for labor. This authorization is granted in the form of a visa affixed to the employment contract”.
The process of hiring foreign employees in Morocco is regulated by the Labor Code and by the following legal dispositions:[1]
Order of the Minister of Employment n° 350-05 of February 9, 2005 establishing the foreign employment contract;
Order of the Minister of Employment n° 1391-05 of November 25, 2005 ;
Joint note on the implementation of a specific procedure for granting residence permits to foreign investors and rare skills (September 2015) by the ministries of Interieur, Employment, Industry with the-DGSN-ANAPEC-AMDI
Resolution N°04 of the ANAPEC Board of Directors of 29/06/2016 and its amendment of 30/06/2017.
This article outlines in the first part (I) the process of hiring foreign employees in Morocco with focus on the procedure of acquiring the work certificates from the relevant government agency in charge of recruitment of foreign employees and in second part (II) the process of acquiring the employment contract from the ministry of labor, and in the third part (III) the professions and nationalities that are exempt from the above-mentioned recruitment formalities to conclude with the residency process.
Part I. Procedure for granting activity certificates to foreign employees in Morocco
The process for granting the activity certificates is administered by the National Agency for the Promotion of Employment and Skills (“Anapec”). It is a process that formally takes 30 days upon submission of the relevant documents by the employer with acknowledgement of receipt. However, in practice, it can take up to 60 days for the Anapec to study the file and call for tender in the employment market if there’s any eligible local candidate for the position.
Documents to be deposited at the head office (DIRECTION GENERALE. 4, Lotissement La Colline Entree B Sidi Maarouf Bp 188, Casablanc, Casablanca 20100):
a. Letter of request for activity certificate addressed by the company to the ANAPEC General Manager
b. Employer’s identification sheet in accordance with the model provided by ANAPEC
c. Job description sheet in accordance with the model provided by ANAPEC
d. Sample advertisement in accordance with the template
e. The foreign employee’s curriculum vitae
f. Copies of diplomas
g. Copies of work certificates
h. A copy of the company’s Trade Register (Model J)
i. A copy of the “identity” page of the foreign employee’s passport.
Once the activity certificate is ready, Anapec invoices the company 5,000MAD.
However, it should be noted in the case of the following outcomes:[2]
Firstly, if one or more profiles exist, the list of shortlisted candidates is forwarded to the company for interview and selection;
And if the company decides that the profile does not exist among the candidates, a report is drawn up and forwarded to the Ministry of employment.
Part II. procedure for granting the foreign workers contract
Upon receipt of the positive work certificate of activate from the Anapec, the next steps to obtain the employment contract from the ministry of labor:
The company must register on the Taechir website (https://taechir.travail.gov.ma:4433/admin/login)
Request a foreign employment contract[3] and submit all related information
Print out the edited contract (the company can add a small section directly related to the position, as it’s a very generic contract, with only 3 about sections), sign and stamp it
The company representative must go to the Taechir office (in Hay Mohammedi, near the Ain sebaa-hay mohammedi labor inspectorate) to file the contract and obtain the work visa.
The file to submit for the employment contract to the ministry of labor must be as follows:
A. for a first-time employment contract
The employer must attach the following documents to the contract:
Printout of the request for visa of the employment contract in (2) two copies, signed by the foreign employee concerned ;
Printout of the foreign employee’s employment contract in (5) five original copies
Diplomas obtained by the employee and his/her technical qualifications
Copies of first pages of passport
Certificate issued by Anapec stating that the skills required for the position in question are not available in Morocco.
B. For the renewal of an employment contract
Printout of the request for visa of the employment contract in (2) two copies, signed by the foreign employee concerned ;
Printout of the foreign employee’s employment contract in (5) five original copies
Certificate of contribution to the social security of the employee for the last 3 months
Copy of the residence permit in Morocco
Certificate issued by Anapec stating that the skills required for the position in question are not available in Morocco.
The process to obtain the employment contract from the ministry of labor takes from ten (10) days to one month.
It should be noted that in practice, together the procedure to obtain the work certificate from the Anapec and the employment contract from the ministry of labor can take up to six (6) months.
Part III. Professions that are exempt from the Anapec formalities
However, it should be noted that this ANAPEC certificate is not required for certain categories of foreign employees, notably:
Foreigners born in Morocco or to a Moroccan mother;
Foreigners residing in Morocco continuously for at least six months;
Foreigners married to Moroccan women and foreigners married to Moroccan men;
Partners and shareholders in a company’s capital;
Persons seconded to foreign institutions for a fixed period;
Delegates working in a cooperative capacity for a period not exceeding six months;
Foreign sports trainers and players, subject to authorization by the authorities in charge of the sports sector;
Foreign artists, authorized by the Direction Générale de la Sûreté Nationale (the « DGSN »);
Political refugees and stateless persons.
What happens upon receipt of the employment contract to apply for the residence permit?
Normally, what happens is that the employee then makes a request for a residence permit from the relevant administration with submission of a particular set of documents. To acquire the residence permit, it takes about three (3) weeks to receive the temporary ID in form of a receipt until the finale residence card is offered in one (1) to two (2) months.
The following are the set of documents submitted to obtain the residence:[4]
Yellow (2) and white (3) forms given by the administration
8 passport photos (3.5*4.5)
2 certified copies of passport (identity page and page with last stamp and entry date into Morocco)
Lease contract in your name with legalized signature and certified photocopy.
Copy of utility bill
Certified copy of family record book (all pages)
Birth certificate
Medical certificate
Work contract and certified photocopy
Criminal record obtained from the ministry of justice
The process of hiring foreign employees can present its own challenges for companies that would like to expedite the onboarding processes of their new foreign recruits. Therefore, Westfield is available to assist in the necessary formalities to acquire the work certificate with the Anapec, through to obtaining the employment contract with the ministry of labor and advising the expatriates with their cumbersome visa needs.
Our firm, WESTFIELD, is one of Morocco’s leading national and international business law firms. Our team is dedicated to serving our clients in a full range of Moroccan legal matters as the above mentioned.
Artificial intelligence (AI), as illustrated by applications such as Midjourney , Dall-E and the famous ChatGPT, represents a major turning point in global technological evolution. While its applications promise to revolutionize various economic, social and legal sectors, they also raise profound questions about the regulation of this technology and the fundamental rights it could affect. In particular, the issues of intellectual property, access to justice and the regulation of generative artificial intelligence are at the heart of legislators’ concerns, both in Morocco and in Europe.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is unquestionably at the heart of contemporary legal concerns, particularly in terms of regulation. For several years now, it has been attracting not only scientific and economic interest, but also increased attention from legislators worldwide. The European Union was one of the first to take up this issue, with draft regulations aimed at framing the use of AI in areas as varied as data protection, civil liability and security. After several years of discussion, AI law now looks set to become a reality.
The European Union pioneers the Artificial Intelligence Regulation
On June 13, 2024, the European Union adopted its Regulation on Artificial Intelligence, a major legislative breakthrough that lays the foundations for strict supervision of emerging technologies. The particularity of this text lies in the integration of mandatory human control for
all AI systems, especially those termed “high-risk”. It is now required that humans be involved in the monitoring and operation of these technologies, to guarantee their compliance with safety, ethical and fundamental rights standards.
The meteoric rise of generative artificial intelligence, illustrated by applications such as ChatGPT, has highlighted the importance of regulating these fast-growing technologies. This phenomenon, which has revolutionized the way individuals and companies interact with machines, has also raised concerns about its ethical, social and legal implications. In light of this, the European Union has taken legislative action to frame the use of these systems through the adoption of the AI Regulation (RIA), which came into force on August 1, 2024 and is due to be fully enforced from August 2, 2026. This regulation addresses in detail the issue of general-purpose AI systems (GPAI) and GPAI models, introducing transparency obligations and specific rules for providers of these technologies.
Generative AI: a global phenomenon
At the end of 2022, the emergence of ChatGPT by OpenAI marked a turning point in the use of generative AI. This language model, based on pre-entrained transformer (GPT) technology, is capable of generating text, as well as images, video and audio, from simple instructions. These systems are based on so-called “general- purpose” AI models, capable of performing a multitude of tasks, regardless of the application domain. They are having a major impact, particularly in the fields of content creation, customer service, education and research.
However, the rise of these technologies has also highlighted risks, particularly in terms of misinformation, identity fraud and copyright infringement. It became obvious that clear regulation was needed to prevent the misuse of these technologies and ensure their compliance with ethical and legal standards.
The AI Regulation (RIA): an ambitious legislative framework
Against this backdrop, the RIA has been drawn up by the European Union to provide a framework for AI systems, with a particular focus on general-purpose AI systems (GPAI) and GPAI models. The main aim of the regulation is to ensure that these technologies are transparent, safe and respectful of fundamental rights.
Transparency obligations for CAPM system suppliers
Article 50 of the RIA imposes specific transparency obligations on providers of IAM systems. This includes the need to clearly mark AI-generated or manipulated content, such as images, video or text, as artificial. These systems, such as Midjourney or Dall-E, will need to incorporate robust and reliable marking techniques, such as the use of digital watermarks for visual content.
However, areas of uncertainty remain. For example, Article 50 refers to chatbots, such as ChatGPT, which must inform users when they interact with a machine. But this rule raises practical and legal questions, particularly as regards its specific application to GPAI systems. In addition, labeling creative or artistic content as artificial could pose dilemmas, as it is
difficult to determine when content is clearly creative and exempt from the strict requirements of the regulation.
Special rules for GPAI models
The regulation also distinguishes “GPAI models”, which are AI systems that can be integrated into a variety of applications and services. These models are defined as general technologies capable of performing a wide range of tasks. Suppliers of these models must comply with specific rules, in particular with regard to technical documentation and transparency on the data used to train the models.
Obligations include providing information on training content, including copyright issues. Suppliers must ensure that the content used to train their models does not infringe intellectual property rights, unless specific exceptions are provided for by legislation. In addition, specific rules apply to models deemed to be at ” systemic risk” due to their advanced technical capabilities, such as OpenAI’s GPT-4. These models are subject to additional monitoring, risk assessment and cybersecurity requirements.
Severe penalties for non-compliance
The RIA provides for strict penalties for violations of its provisions. Providers of GPAI systems can face administrative fines of up to 15 million euros, or 3% of their annual worldwide sales. In addition, fines may be imposed if a supplier fails to comply with transparency obligations, or refuses access to its model for evaluation by the competent authorities.
The question of systemic risks and personal data
One of the major concerns of the regulation is the systemic risks that certain AI models could generate. If a model has extremely advanced capabilities that could have a significant impact on users or society, it may be included on a public list of models at systemic risk. This assessment takes into account several criteria, such as the size of the model, the volume of computation used to train it, and the number of users it reaches.
Another issue that remains under-explored in the regulation is that of personal data protection. Given that GPAI models are often formed from vast quantities of data harvested from the Internet (notably by web crawling), the question of the use of sensitive, personal or unauthorized data remains a point of vigilance.
Why is Human Control Necessary?
One of the main reasons why AI regulations require human control is the autonomy of these systems. AI, by definition, operates without immediate human intervention, which can lead to serious malfunctions if oversight mechanisms are not in place. The lack of clarity about the inner workings of AI systems also creates a climate of mistrust. This is why legislation imposes some form of human guarantee to ensure a minimum of transparency and accountability.
The aim is to prevent the “dehumanization” of human activities, by maintaining human control that can be more or less strong depending on the risks associated with AI applications. To achieve this, current legislation focuses on three types of “human guarantor”: the person in charge, the interlocutor and the observer.
The person in charge: The complexity and autonomy of artificial intelligence means that there is a pressing need for a clear person in charge, capable of assuming the risks associated with its use. There are two levels of responsibility:
Ex ante liability: This requires AI designers and operators to take all necessary precautions upstream to avoid risks. This includes measures such as dataset supervision, regulation by design, and the adoption of strict ethical standards when designing systems.
Ex post liability: In the event of damage, liability must be clearly assigned. Victims need to know who to turn to in the event of malfunction or harm caused by an AI system. The European regulation of June 2024 tackles this issue by detailing the liability of AI designers, suppliers, and deployers.
The key here lies in identifying the responsible players. The legislator must determine who, among all those involved in the chain of creation and use of AI, is responsible for the risks and damage associated with its use. In Europe, this responsibility is divided between algorithm designers and end-users, providing a clearer division of obligations.
Interlocutor: The autonomy of AI leads to a dematerialization of relationships, which can have the effect of rendering users incapable of interacting directly with a human interlocutor. This poses risks of discrimination or bias, and undermines the transparency of decisions made by these
systems. The solution envisaged by European and international regulations is to guarantee the presence of a human interlocutor in certain situations:
Minimal intervention: In certain cases, a human interlocutor must be available to monitor the AI’s operation and intervene in the event of malfunction, but without systematically interfering in the AI’s decision-making process.
Maximum intervention: In situations where the AI’s decision may have a direct impact on the individual’s life (for example, a medical diagnosis or a judicial decision), a human interlocutor could be responsible for making the final decision, thus excluding the AI from this process.
The choice of contact person is a key issue. The European regulation requires deployers to designate a natural person with the necessary skills and authority to intervene on the AI system. Furthermore, the possibility for users to refuse a fully automated decision (via an “opt-out” system, for example) is one of the most innovative proposals in terms of regulation.
The Observer: The role of the observer is to ensure that human control functions effectively and in accordance with legal requirements. This external guarantor must check that managers and interlocutors are fulfilling their obligations, and intervene when irregularities are detected. In this sense, the observer can be an independent authority with the power to investigate, verify compliance and sanction unlawful behavior.
The EU is planning to set up an Artificial Intelligence Office to oversee and coordinate national regulations. In Morocco, institutions such as the Commission Nationale de Protection des Données à Caractère Personnel (CNDP) could see their role strengthened, notably to ensure that AI applications comply with fundamental rights and data protection.
AI Regulation in Morocco: Between Opportunities and Challenges
In Morocco, the issue of AI regulation is rapidly emerging. The country has already laid solid foundations for framing the digital transformation through initiatives such as the Maroc Numérique 2030 strategy, as well as legislative proposals, the latest of which was presented at a public hearing by members of the opposition Haraki party, highlighting the major stakes of this technology and the associated risks.
The 17-article text was presented at a public hearing by members of the opposition Haraki party, highlighting the major stakes of this technology and the associated risks.
The draft law in preparation aims to guarantee the ethical use of AI, while protecting citizens against its risks. The draft is largely inspired by European regulations, while incorporating specific features adapted to Moroccan realities. Morocco is putting in place a legislative framework that will guarantee not only the security of personal data, but also respect for ethics in the use of emerging technologies.
So, although AI regulation in Morocco is still in the construction phase, the country seems resolutely committed to a proactive approach aimed at preventing abuses and maximizing the benefits of this digital revolution.
Artificial intelligence in the field of intellectual property: Innovation or confusion of rights?
The development of artificial intelligence has profound implications for intellectual property, particularly with regard to the creation of machine-generated works. Traditionally, works protected by copyright must be the fruit of the creative activity of a human author. However, with the emergence of generative AIs, capable of producing artistic, musical or literary works, a new issue is emerging: who owns the rights to these works? The tool, designed by man, or the machine that executes the instructions?
To date, international legislation, notably the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, has not taken machine-generated creations into account. In the USA, for example, the Office of Copyright has already ruled that only human creations can be protected by copyright, leaving aside autonomous AI creations. In Europe, the question remains unresolved, although some legal experts are advocating an extension of copyright or the creation of a new type of protection for these AI-generated works.
When drafting their own digital legislation, Moroccan legislators will have to face this central question: how can AI-generated creations be integrated into a legal system that, historically, has been based on the idea of the human author?
Artificial intelligence represents a technological revolution that needs to be
rigorously managed. The issues at stake are manifold and require appropriate legislative responses, both in Morocco and in Europe.
Moroccan and European legislators will need to combine innovation and caution, drawing up regulations that promote the exploitation of AI’s potential while preserving citizens’ fundamental rights, particularly in terms of confidentiality, transparency and fairness. The future of AI in our societies will largely depend on the ability of legislators to anticipate possible abuses while maximizing the benefits of these technologies for all.
Sources :
European Commission, “AI Act: Artificial Intelligence Regulation,” 2021.
UNESCO, “Recommendations on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence,” 2022.
CNDP, “Rapport annuel sur la Protection des Données Personnelles,” 2024.
Conseil Économique, Social et Environnemental, “Avis sur l’Intelligence Artificielle et ses Défis,” 2025.
Revue Dalloz IP 2024
Westfield Morocco is a Rabat-based legal and tax advisory firm specialized in assisting Moroccan companies with their internal growth operations (creation of subsidiaries, joint ventures) or external growth operations (acquisitions, mergers), their regular operations in contract law, or corporate law and their compliance projects (CNDP, RGPD) as well as their international litigation or arbitration.
Wassim Benzarti is a member of the Paris Bar and heads Westfield Morocco, a company specializing in legal and tax advice
“I mainly work with companies to help them turn a corner: either by restructuring to be more efficient, or by going international by setting up operations abroad, or by opening up their capital to new investors or in external growth operations via acquisitions or mergers”.
Aya is a fluently trilingual business lawyer with a Master’s degree in Business Law from Mundiapolis University and Université Côte d’Azur.
With an excellent academic background and a marked penchant for research, Aya has acquired significant experience in the fields of mergers & acquisitions, personal data protection, corporate law, industrial property, distribution law and competition law.
