IN THE COURTS OF THE NATIONS - DataSpace - Princeton ...

the Moroccan legal system more broadly. Such a seemingly basic task is necessary given how
little we know about Morocco’s legal history. Understanding how Jews engaged the state to help
them address legal matters requires some comprehension of the Makhzan’s legal obligations and
capacity.
The Makhzan generally played two kinds of roles in the Moroccan legal system. Locally,
Makhzan officials held tribunals whose jurisdictions to some extent overlapped with those of
qāḍīs. At the level of the central government, the sultan (and the Makhzan more broadly) acted
as a court of appeals. Moroccan subjects, including Jews, could petition the state when they felt
that justice had been denied them at the local level in any kind of tribunal—including sharī‘a
courts, batei din, and Makhzan courts. In this section, I examine how Jews (and to a lesser extent
Muslims) appealed to the Makhzan for judicial redress. While it would be fascinating to look at
the functioning of local Makhzan courts, there are very few sources that record the activities of
these institutions. 12 Evidence about the Makhzan as a forum for appeal, however, is relatively
abundant. Understanding the legal responsibilities of Makhzan officials enables us to
contextualize how the central government addressed petitions in general, and the origins and
functioning of the Ministry of Complaints in particular.
Makhzan Courts and Sharī‘a Courts
The existence of extra-sharī‘a tribunals presided over by administrative officials was a
feature of many Muslim governments. Although qāḍīs’ jurisdiction theoretically extended to all
areas of life, much like the sharī‘a itself, the difficulty of prosecuting criminal cases under
12
Moroccan Makhzan courts did not keep written records of their proceedings. Moreover, unlike sharī‘a courts—
which issued written legal documents to the individuals involved in a case—Makhzan courts did not seem to
produce any sort of written record.
153