KINGNEWSWIRE // PRESS RELEASE

Programme at the Church of Scientology & Community Centre of Dublin will connect international humanitarian principles with everyday community service

DUBLIN, Ireland, 3 August 2026 — A World Humanitarian Day programme focused on community service and practical methods of helping others will be held at the Church of Scientology & Community Centre of Dublin on Saturday, 29 August 2026.

The three-hour programme, scheduled from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. at the centre on Firhouse Road, Dublin 24, will celebrate humanitarian service and introduce techniques that people can use when assisting relatives, neighbours, colleagues and members of their communities.

The event will place the international observance within a local context, examining how humanitarian values can be expressed not only during major disasters but also through organised community work and individual acts of practical assistance.

Humanitarian service is often associated with emergency teams operating in areas affected by natural disasters, displacement or severe hardship. At community level, however, the same principles can be seen when volunteers help an isolated resident, support a family facing difficulties, organise essential supplies or provide additional hands to a civic or charitable project.

The Dublin programme will examine skills intended to help individuals respond constructively when someone around them is experiencing stress, confusion or practical difficulty. The subjects include communication, organisation, conflict resolution and methods of providing calm and responsible support.

These areas form part of the training used by Scientology Volunteer Ministers, a religious social-service programme established in the mid-1970s by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard.

The programme is based on the principle that individuals can become more effective in helping others when they are equipped with practical knowledge and are prepared to apply it responsibly.

“Humanitarian responsibility is not confined to institutions, governments or international organisations,” said Ivan Arjona, representative of the Church of Scientology to the European Union, the OSCE, the Council of Europe and the United Nations.

“It is also expressed through citizens who notice when help is needed and who possess the skills, discipline and willingness to respond. European values of human dignity, solidarity and civic participation become meaningful when they are reflected in practical service within our neighbourhoods and communities.”

Arjona added that humanitarian education can help strengthen local resilience by enabling people to cooperate more effectively during both ordinary difficulties and larger emergencies.

From an international observance to local responsibility

The United Nations observes World Humanitarian Day each year on 19 August to recognise humanitarian personnel and the people who provide assistance to communities affected by crises.

The annual observance draws attention to humanitarian needs around the world and to the importance of protecting those who deliver assistance. It also provides an opportunity to consider the contribution of volunteers and community organisations that work outside the international humanitarian system but share the objective of reducing hardship and preserving human dignity.

The Dublin event will take place ten days after the official United Nations observance, extending its themes into a programme centred on practical community service.

Ireland has a long tradition of voluntary involvement in social care, education, sport, cultural life, neighbourhood development and support for vulnerable people. Much of that work takes place through local associations, charities, faith communities and informal networks whose members contribute their time and experience.

Such activity can become particularly important when public services or specialist organisations require additional community support. Volunteers may assist with logistics, communications, distribution, administration or direct care, depending on their training and the needs of the situation.

Practical tools for everyday situations

The methods introduced through the Volunteer Ministers programme are drawn from The Scientology Handbook, compiled from the works of L. Ron Hubbard.

Its 19 areas of study cover subjects including communication, study and learning, marriage and family relationships, children, workplace difficulties, personal integrity, organisation, setting goals and resolving conflicts.

The Volunteer Ministers training programme presents these subjects through individual courses designed to provide step-by-step methods that can be applied in everyday situations.

A person attempting to help may have good intentions but still lack the communication or organisational skills needed to improve the situation. Training can provide a clearer structure: establishing what has occurred, listening to those involved, identifying immediate priorities and coordinating useful action.

Communication is particularly important when people are distressed or when several groups are attempting to work together. Misunderstandings can delay assistance, create unnecessary tension or lead to duplicated efforts. Clear communication and defined responsibilities can make community responses more orderly and effective.

Conflict resolution is another area with direct relevance to humanitarian and civic work. Volunteers frequently encounter people with different backgrounds, beliefs and expectations. The ability to reduce hostility and restore cooperation can be essential when assistance depends on several individuals or organisations working together.

The programme also includes organisational principles that may be used when coordinating activities, distributing materials, managing volunteers or establishing a sequence of priorities.

Volunteer Ministers and humanitarian service

The Scientology Volunteer Ministers programme in Dublin forms part of an international network whose members participate in community projects and provide assistance following emergencies and disasters.

Volunteer Ministers have worked with public authorities, emergency responders, religious communities, charities and other voluntary groups. Their activities have included organising and distributing supplies, assisting at shelters and collection centres, cleaning damaged premises and supporting logistical operations.

The programme’s motto, “Something can be done about it,” reflects Mr. Hubbard’s view that people should not regard social and personal difficulties as inevitably beyond their ability to influence.

In everyday settings, this approach may involve helping a community organisation prepare an event, assisting someone who is struggling to communicate a problem, supporting a neighbourhood initiative or contributing practical work to a charitable activity.

Participation in the training is not restricted by religious affiliation. The methods are available to people of different backgrounds who are interested in developing their ability to help others.

A home for community activity in Dublin

Opened in October 2017, the Church of Scientology & Community Centre of Dublin was established as a venue for religious, cultural, educational, charitable and community activity.

The multi-acre Firhouse Road property includes an auditorium, meeting and seminar rooms, audiovisual facilities, a café and sports areas. The centre has hosted programmes organised by local associations, cultural groups, charities and organisations working in education and social betterment.

The World Humanitarian Day programme continues the centre’s emphasis on providing space for civic engagement and cooperation among people from varied cultural, national and religious backgrounds.

By focusing on skills that can be used in everyday life, the event will connect a global humanitarian observance with the practical question of how individuals can become better prepared to assist those around them.

About the Church of Scientology in Europe

The Church of Scientology, its churches, missions, groups and members are present throughout the European continent. Inspired by the religious and humanitarian work of founder L. Ron Hubbard, Scientologists support initiatives in education, drug prevention, human-rights awareness, moral education, disaster response and community betterment. Recognition of Scientology as a charitable and bona fide religion continues to grow across Europe, alongside its commitment to education, prevention, volunteer service and constructive participation in civil society.

The EU launched a call for tenders to establish up to seven AI Gigafactories across Europe, as part of its latest major push to accelerate Europe’s technological sovereignty and ambition of becoming the AI Continent.

Led by industry and supported by up to €10 billion in EU and national funding, the initiative is expected to unlock at least €20 billion in private investment across the Union. It will expand Europe’s AI computing capacity and give start-ups, scale-ups, small and medium-sized enterprises, industry, academia and public authorities access to infrastructure for training, inference and fine-tuning advanced frontier AI models.

The AI Gigafactories will combine advanced AI processors, software and cloud technology stacks, high-speed connectivity and energy-efficient data centres. Together with Europe’s network of 19 AI Factories, they will strengthen Europe’s technological leadership, resilience and strategic autonomy.

The initiative will ensure that Europe can develop advanced AI on its own infrastructure, in line with EU rules and values. AI technologies developed in the AI Gigafactories will follow EU standards on data protection, safety, security and ethics.

Who can apply

Consortia or Special Purpose Vehicles bringing together companies, public entities, investors and other partners can apply.

The AI Gigafactories may be established in a single Member State, either on one site or across several locations. They may also include cross-border developments in several Member States through distributed AI computing facilities.

Proposals will undergo a competitive evaluation to select the successful projects.

Funding and scale

The European High Performance Computing Joint Undertaking (EuroHPC JU) and Member States will jointly procure compute access time from the selected AI Gigafactories. Eighteen Member States have signed a joint procurement agreement with the EuroHPC JU: Croatia, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain and Sweden. The procurement process will support up to seven AI Gigafactories across two consecutive development phases and two lots, with participating Member States matching EU funding. Public funding acts as a powerful catalyst for the initiative, driving the deep private investment required to construct and operate these facilities.

The first lot will support up to four projects, each eligible for up to €100 million in EU funding in phase one and up to an additional €400 million per project in phase two. Each Gigafactory selected in this lot must deploy at least as many of the most advanced AI processors as are currently installed in Europe’s most powerful AI factory. In phase two, capacity must increase to at least three times that level. The second lot will support up to three projects, each eligible for up to €200 million of EU funding in phase one and up to an additional €800 million per project in phase two. Each Gigafactory selected in this lot must deploy up to twice as many of the most advanced AI processors as are currently installed in Europe’s most powerful AI factory. In phase two, capacity must increase to at least four times that level.

Hardware for the AI Continent

Advanced AI depends on highly specialised computing hardware. As global AI adoption accelerates, access to large-scale sovereign AI infrastructure is becoming increasingly important for Europe’s industrial competitiveness and technological sovereignty

AI Gigafactories consortia may procure hardware during any of the two development phases of the AI Gigafactory from any hardware providers in Europe or likeminded countries. Part of this procurement may be dedicated to European start-ups and scale ups, with the AI Gigafactories providing concrete opportunities to strengthen the European digital supply chain. At the same time, and as a follow up of the EU-US trade deal, the Commission has signed three letters of intent with major US hardware providers, AMD, NVIDIA and Qualcomm to ensure consortia have seamless access to necessary hardware.

Next steps

The call closes on 12 November 2026.

Following an evaluation process managed by the EuroHPC JU, award decisions are expected by early 2027. The necessary framework and specific contracts will then be signed to allow construction to begin in 2027.

Selected AI Gigafactories are expected to begin operations within a maximum of 18 months from the signature.

Des milliers de Marocains ont tenté de rejoindre l’enclave espagnole de Ceuta en quelques heures, dans des circonstances qui continuent d’alimenter les interrogations. Entre malaise social, rumeurs, défaillance apparente des contrôles et tensions diplomatiques, cet épisode dépasse largement la seule question migratoire. Il oblige à s’interroger sur le rapport des citoyens marocains à leur avenir, sur le fonctionnement des institutions et sur les explications que les autorités doivent encore fournir.

Une journée qui restera gravée dans l’histoire du Maroc

Il y a des événements qui dépassent le simple fait divers pour devenir les marqueurs d’une époque. L’afflux massif de Marocains vers l’enclave espagnole de Ceuta en fait incontestablement partie. En l’espace de quelques heures, des milliers de personnes, majoritairement des jeunes, mais également des familles et des mineurs, ont tenté de franchir la frontière dans l’espoir d’atteindre le territoire espagnol. Les images de cette journée ont fait le tour du monde : des foules avançant vers la frontière, des jeunes nageant autour des digues au péril de leur vie, des familles séparées et des destins suspendus à quelques mètres seulement du territoire européen. Derrière ces scènes spectaculaires se cache pourtant une interrogation bien plus profonde : comment un mouvement d’une telle ampleur a-t-il pu se produire aussi rapidement dans un pays réputé pour la maîtrise de son territoire et la densité de son appareil sécuritaire ?

L’importance de cette question tient moins à la seule traversée de la frontière qu’à la succession d’événements qui l’a rendue possible. Une foule aussi nombreuse ne se constitue pas spontanément en quelques minutes sans qu’une information, une rumeur ou un signal ne se propage auparavant. Elle suppose également que des personnes venues de plusieurs villes et régions aient pu se déplacer, se rapprocher de Ceuta et se retrouver presque simultanément aux abords de l’enclave. C’est précisément cette convergence qui nourrit les interrogations et qui rend nécessaire une explication détaillée du déroulement des faits.

Le lendemain du discours du Trône, une réalité totalement différente

Le calendrier donne à cette séquence une portée particulière. La veille des événements, le roi Mohammed VI prononçait son traditionnel discours de la Fête du Trône, un rendez-vous annuel au cours duquel sont généralement évoqués les grands projets du Royaume, les investissements réalisés, les réformes engagées et les ambitions économiques et sociales du Maroc. Quelques heures plus tard seulement, les images de milliers de Marocains tentant de rejoindre Ceuta occupaient les écrans de télévision et les réseaux sociaux du monde entier. Le contraste était saisissant : d’un côté, le récit institutionnel d’un pays qui progresse et qui construit son avenir ; de l’autre, une partie de sa jeunesse prête à risquer sa vie pour partir.

Il serait simpliste d’opposer mécaniquement ces deux réalités, car les progrès économiques d’un pays peuvent coexister avec de profondes difficultés sociales. Leur juxtaposition mérite néanmoins d’être interrogée. Elle peut révéler un décalage croissant entre la vision présentée par les institutions et le vécu quotidien d’une partie de la population. Les infrastructures, les investissements et les grands projets constituent des éléments essentiels du développement, mais ils ne suffisent pas toujours à créer un sentiment de sécurité, de justice ou d’appartenance chez les citoyens. Lorsque des milliers de personnes considèrent l’exil comme une possibilité immédiatement préférable à leur vie actuelle, la question ne porte plus uniquement sur les chiffres de la croissance, mais sur la confiance collective dans l’avenir.

Une frontière habituellement placée sous haute surveillance

Le Maroc est connu pour disposer d’un dispositif sécuritaire particulièrement dense. Les barrages de police et de gendarmerie sont fréquents sur les grands axes routiers, les contrôles d’identité sont réguliers et les déplacements de groupes importants passent rarement inaperçus. Cette réalité est familière aux citoyens marocains comme aux visiteurs étrangers. C’est précisément pour cette raison que les événements de Ceuta continuent d’alimenter autant d’interrogations. Comment des personnes venues de Casablanca, Rabat, Kénitra, Marrakech, Essaouira, Taroudant ou encore du sud du Royaume ont-elles pu se rapprocher de la frontière dans un laps de temps aussi court ? Comment des véhicules transportant des groupes de jeunes ont-ils pu parcourir de longues distances sans que les mécanismes habituels de contrôle ne semblent ralentir cette convergence ?

Des vidéos diffusées sur les réseaux sociaux ont été interprétées par certains observateurs comme montrant une absence inhabituelle d’intervention ou de contrôle de la part des forces de l’ordre. D’autres images auraient montré des véhicules poursuivant leur route à proximité de postes de sécurité. Il convient naturellement de rester prudent : une vidéo isolée ne permet pas toujours de connaître le lieu exact, la date, le contexte ou les ordres reçus par les agents présents. Elle ne suffit donc pas à démontrer l’existence d’une opération coordonnée. Mais l’accumulation de séquences et de témoignages impose au minimum une question légitime : les dispositifs de contrôle ont-ils fonctionné normalement ce jour-là, et, dans le cas contraire, pour quelle raison ?

Des témoignages qui alimentent les interrogations

À leur arrivée à Ceuta, plusieurs migrants se sont exprimés devant des journalistes ou sur les réseaux sociaux. Certains ont déclaré avoir entendu que la frontière était exceptionnellement accessible. D’autres ont évoqué la réception de messages annonçant que l’Espagne accueillerait les nouveaux arrivants ou leur distribuerait des titres de séjour. Quelques personnes ont affirmé ne pas avoir été empêchées d’avancer par les forces de l’ordre marocaines, tandis que d’autres témoignages, plus graves encore, évoquent une orientation ou un transport vers des localités proches de la frontière. Ces récits doivent être vérifiés avec la plus grande rigueur, car des témoignages individuels ne permettent pas, à eux seuls, d’établir une réalité générale.

Ils ne peuvent cependant pas être simplement ignorés. Leur répétition et leur diffusion posent des questions précises. Qui était à l’origine des messages annonçant une prétendue ouverture de la frontière ? S’agissait-il d’une rumeur spontanée, d’une manipulation diffusée sur les réseaux sociaux ou d’informations transmises par des individus disposant d’une certaine crédibilité auprès des personnes concernées ? Comment ces messages ont-ils pu se propager suffisamment vite pour provoquer un mouvement aussi important ? Pourquoi tant de citoyens leur ont-ils accordé une confiance immédiate, au point de quitter leur domicile et de se rendre vers Ceuta sans garantie sur ce qui les attendait ?

Comment des milliers de personnes ont-elles pu arriver presque simultanément ?

La question de la rapidité est au cœur de cette affaire. Une foule de plusieurs milliers de personnes ne surgit pas instantanément aux abords d’une frontière. Même avec la puissance des réseaux sociaux, un déplacement massif suppose du temps, des moyens de transport, des trajets parfois très longs et une certaine coordination, au moins informelle. Des jeunes auraient quitté plusieurs villes du Royaume, emprunté des voitures, des camionnettes ou des camions, puis convergé vers le nord. Dans un pays où les contrôles routiers sont fréquents, cette progression collective ne pouvait théoriquement pas passer totalement inaperçue.

Deux explications principales peuvent alors être envisagées sans tirer de conclusion prématurée. La première serait celle d’une défaillance exceptionnelle des services chargés de surveiller les routes et la frontière, provoquée par la soudaineté du mouvement et par le nombre de personnes impliquées. La seconde serait celle d’instructions particulières ayant conduit les agents à ne pas intervenir immédiatement. Ces hypothèses ne sont pas équivalentes et aucune ne peut être présentée comme établie sans preuves. Mais elles montrent pourquoi une enquête transparente sur la chronologie, les ordres reçus et les décisions prises serait indispensable pour mettre fin aux spéculations.

Pourquoi tant de Marocains étaient-ils prêts à partir immédiatement ?

L’un des aspects les plus troublants de cette crise ne réside peut-être pas dans l’ouverture réelle ou supposée de la frontière, mais dans la rapidité avec laquelle une foule immense s’est constituée. Une rumeur, même largement diffusée, ne produit pas à elle seule un mouvement d’une telle ampleur. Si des milliers de Marocains étaient prêts à courir vers Ceuta au premier signe d’une possible ouverture, c’est probablement parce qu’un grand nombre d’entre eux nourrissaient déjà depuis longtemps le projet de quitter le pays. L’événement n’aurait alors pas créé le désir d’émigration ; il aurait simplement déclenché un désir déjà profondément installé.

Cette réalité oblige à dépasser l’analyse purement sécuritaire. La question essentielle n’est pas uniquement de savoir comment les personnes ont atteint Ceuta, mais pourquoi elles étaient psychologiquement prêtes à tout abandonner en quelques heures. Pourquoi des citoyens parfois très jeunes considèrent-ils qu’une traversée incertaine, dangereuse et potentiellement mortelle représente une meilleure perspective que leur vie au Maroc ? Pourquoi l’idée d’un départ immédiat apparaît-elle à beaucoup comme une chance à saisir plutôt que comme un risque insensé ? Ce sont ces interrogations qui révèlent la profondeur du malaise social.

Le chômage et la précarité nourrissent le désir d’exil

Le Maroc a réalisé d’importants progrès dans plusieurs domaines et développé de nombreux projets d’infrastructure, mais une partie significative de la population continue de faire face au chômage, à la précarité et à l’augmentation du coût de la vie. Les jeunes sont particulièrement touchés. Même lorsqu’ils disposent d’un diplôme, beaucoup peinent à trouver un emploi stable correspondant à leur formation. D’autres enchaînent les activités informelles, les contrats temporaires ou les longues périodes sans travail, sans pouvoir construire un projet de vie autonome. Ce manque de perspectives nourrit un sentiment de stagnation et affaiblit progressivement la confiance dans l’avenir.

Les inégalités territoriales renforcent encore ce phénomène. Les opportunités ne sont pas réparties de manière uniforme entre les grandes métropoles, les villes moyennes, les zones rurales et les régions éloignées. Pour de nombreux citoyens, l’accès à un emploi, à des soins de qualité, à un logement convenable ou à une administration efficace reste difficile. Lorsque les possibilités d’évolution semblent réservées à ceux qui disposent de relations, de ressources financières ou d’un accès privilégié aux centres de décision, le départ à l’étranger peut apparaître comme l’unique moyen de rompre avec une situation ressentie comme bloquée.

La « hogra », un sentiment qui fragilise la confiance

À la précarité économique s’ajoute un phénomène souvent résumé au Maroc par le terme de « hogra ». Ce mot exprime un sentiment d’humiliation, de mépris, d’injustice ou d’absence de considération ressenti par certains citoyens dans leurs relations avec les institutions ou avec les détenteurs de pouvoir. La hogra ne se mesure pas seulement par des statistiques. Elle se manifeste dans le sentiment de ne pas être entendu, de ne pas bénéficier des mêmes droits que les autres ou de devoir constamment rechercher des intermédiaires pour accéder à des services qui devraient être garantis à tous.

Lorsqu’il s’installe durablement, ce sentiment détruit le lien de confiance entre le citoyen et son pays. Une personne peut supporter temporairement des difficultés économiques si elle conserve l’espoir que ses efforts seront récompensés et que les institutions la traiteront avec équité. En revanche, lorsque la précarité s’accompagne d’un sentiment d’injustice, l’envie de partir devient plus forte. Ceuta révèle peut-être cette combinaison dangereuse : le manque de perspectives matérielles et la perte de confiance dans la capacité des institutions à offrir un avenir digne.

Une tragédie humaine avant d’être une crise diplomatique

Au-delà des débats politiques et géopolitiques, il ne faut jamais perdre de vue la dimension humaine de cette crise. Des personnes ont risqué leur vie en nageant vers l’enclave, parfois dans des conditions difficiles. Certaines ont disparu, d’autres ont été secourues, interceptées ou renvoyées. Des familles ont vécu des heures d’angoisse sans savoir où se trouvaient leurs enfants. Derrière les images diffusées en boucle se trouvaient des individus avec une histoire, des proches, des espoirs et des peurs. Réduire cette foule à une simple masse de migrants reviendrait à effacer la réalité humaine de chaque parcours.

Les chiffres relatifs aux morts et aux disparus doivent être utilisés avec prudence et vérifiés auprès de sources fiables, car les bilans diffusés dans les premières heures d’une crise sont souvent contradictoires. Mais même lorsqu’un bilan exact reste difficile à établir, la dangerosité de la traversée ne fait aucun doute. Chaque personne décédée ou portée disparue rappelle que la migration irrégulière n’est pas une aventure, mais souvent la conséquence d’un désespoir suffisamment profond pour faire accepter le risque de la mort.

Le contexte diplomatique entre Rabat, Madrid et Alger

Les événements de Ceuta ne peuvent pas être totalement séparés du contexte diplomatique régional. Les relations entre le Maroc et l’Espagne ont connu plusieurs périodes de tension, tandis que le rapprochement entre Madrid et Alger est régulièrement observé avec attention à Rabat. Certains analystes ont interprété l’afflux vers Ceuta comme une forme de pression exercée sur l’Espagne. D’autres ont estimé que les autorités marocaines avaient momentanément relâché le contrôle de la frontière pour envoyer un message politique. Cette lecture a été largement discutée, mais elle ne peut être présentée comme une certitude sans documents, témoignages officiels ou preuves établissant une décision coordonnée.

La migration est depuis longtemps utilisée comme un enjeu de négociation entre les États du nord et du sud de la Méditerranée. L’Union européenne dépend en partie de la coopération des pays de transit pour contrôler les départs, tandis que ces derniers cherchent à obtenir des soutiens financiers, diplomatiques ou politiques. Dans ce contexte, toute variation soudaine du contrôle frontalier alimente inévitablement les soupçons. La seule manière de dissiper ces soupçons serait de rendre publics les éléments permettant de comprendre qui a décidé quoi, à quel moment et pour quelles raisons.

Une hypothèse qui ne peut être ni écartée ni confirmée à ce stade

Au regard de l’ampleur de l’événement et des nombreuses interrogations qu’il suscite, certains observateurs pourraient également envisager l’hypothèse d’une crise interne ou d’une tentative de déstabilisation provenant de cercles proches du pouvoir. L’histoire du Maroc rappelle d’ailleurs que, sous le règne de Hassan II, les tentatives de coup d’État n’étaient pas venues d’acteurs extérieurs, mais de responsables appartenant eux-mêmes aux plus hautes sphères de l’État. Ce précédent historique explique que cette lecture puisse être évoquée dans certaines analyses.

Pour autant, il serait abusif d’en tirer une conclusion concernant les événements actuels. À ce jour, aucun élément public, vérifiable et indépendant ne permet d’établir qu’une telle opération aurait été menée ou même préparée contre le roi Mohammed VI. Cette hypothèse ne peut donc être présentée que comme une piste de réflexion parmi d’autres, et non comme un fait établi. En matière d’analyse, la prudence impose de distinguer clairement les faits démontrés des scénarios qui, faute de preuves, demeurent au stade des interrogations.

.

Les autorités doivent répondre aux zones d’ombre

Plusieurs questions restent aujourd’hui sans réponse claire. Quelle a été l’origine exacte des messages annonçant une ouverture de la frontière ou la distribution de titres de séjour en Espagne ? Les services de sécurité avaient-ils détecté leur circulation avant le début des déplacements ? Quels ordres ont été transmis aux policiers, aux gendarmes et aux responsables locaux ? Pourquoi les contrôles routiers habituels n’ont-ils pas empêché la convergence de groupes venus de plusieurs régions ? Des véhicules ont-ils réellement transporté des personnes vers les environs de Ceuta, et, dans l’affirmative, qui les conduisait et dans quelles circonstances ?

Ces interrogations ne constituent pas une attaque contre l’État. Elles correspondent à une demande normale de transparence sur un événement qui a exposé la vie de milliers de personnes, affecté l’image du Maroc et provoqué une crise avec un pays voisin. Une enquête indépendante ou, à défaut, un rapport officiel détaillé permettrait de clarifier la chronologie, d’identifier les éventuelles défaillances et de déterminer les responsabilités. Le silence, au contraire, laisse le champ libre aux rumeurs, aux accusations et aux théories les plus extrêmes.

Ceuta, le miroir d’un malaise plus profond

Au fond, Ceuta n’est peut-être pas seulement une crise migratoire ou diplomatique. C’est le miroir d’un malaise beaucoup plus profond. Les frontières peuvent être ouvertes ou fermées, les contrôles peuvent être renforcés et les rumeurs peuvent être combattues, mais aucune mesure sécuritaire ne suffira à résoudre le problème tant qu’une partie de la jeunesse considérera que son avenir se trouve nécessairement ailleurs. La question centrale n’est donc pas uniquement de savoir comment des milliers de Marocains ont réussi à atteindre la frontière, mais pourquoi ils étaient déjà prêts à partir.

Un pays ne se construit pas seulement avec des autoroutes, des ports, des lignes ferroviaires, des investissements industriels ou de grands projets internationaux. Il se construit aussi avec la confiance de ses citoyens, la justice sociale, l’égalité devant les institutions et la conviction que chacun peut y trouver sa place. Lorsque cette conviction disparaît, la moindre rumeur d’ouverture d’une frontière peut devenir un appel au départ. C’est précisément ce que les événements de Ceuta semblent avoir révélé avec une brutalité exceptionnelle.

La question que le Maroc ne peut plus éviter

Les images de Ceuta finiront peut-être par disparaître de l’actualité, mais la question qu’elles posent restera entière. Pourquoi des milliers de Marocains, parfois très jeunes, étaient-ils prêts à risquer leur vie au premier signe d’une possibilité de départ ? La réponse ne se trouve probablement pas dans une seule cause. Elle se situe au croisement du chômage, de la précarité, des inégalités, du sentiment de hogra, de la perte de confiance et de l’attrait persistant de l’Europe.

Comprendre cette réalité exige davantage qu’un renforcement des frontières ou qu’une condamnation morale de ceux qui tentent de partir. Cela suppose d’écouter ce que leur départ dit du pays qu’ils quittent. Ceuta ne doit pas seulement être considérée comme une anomalie sécuritaire ou un épisode diplomatique. Elle doit être entendue comme un signal d’alarme. Tant que les raisons profondes du désir d’exil ne seront pas traitées, d’autres rumeurs, d’autres routes et d’autres frontières continueront d’attirer ceux qui ne voient plus de place pour eux dans leur propre pays.

À propos de l’auteur

Isaac Hammouch est journaliste et écrivain belgo-marocain. Auteur de plusieurs ouvrages et tribunes, il analyse les enjeux de société, les questions de gouvernance et les mutations du

France and Spain’s emergency response shows why heat plans must reach farms, building sites and delivery routes

Wildfires and extreme heat in France and Spain are exposing a wider workplace-safety problem across Europe. Fire crews face the most visible danger, but agricultural labourers, builders, delivery riders and municipal workers may also spend long hours in hazardous heat and smoke. Protecting them requires more than public warnings: employers and authorities need practical plans that allow work to slow or stop without leaving workers to bear the financial cost.

The fires that forced evacuations in late July have placed emergency services and local communities under intense pressure at the beginning of August. The European Union has supported the response with aircraft, firefighters, vehicles and satellite mapping through its Civil Protection Mechanism.

That cross-border assistance is essential. Yet the danger does not end at the perimeter of an evacuation zone. High temperatures, drifting smoke and physically demanding work can combine to place people at risk many kilometres from the flames.

Danger beyond the fire line

Outdoor workers are not one uniform group. Some operate heavy machinery. Others harvest crops, repair roads, collect waste, maintain public spaces or carry goods through city streets. Their exposure depends on temperature, humidity, air quality, protective clothing, workload and access to shade and drinking water.

The risks are also shaped by employment conditions. A permanent municipal employee may be able to report symptoms or request a schedule change more readily than a seasonal farm worker paid by output. A subcontracted builder or platform courier may fear losing income if work is suspended. Migrant workers may receive alerts late, encounter language barriers or be uncertain about their rights.

This makes extreme heat a labour-rights issue as well as a weather emergency. Telling people to avoid strenuous activity is of little use when their wages depend on continuing it.

Smoke adds another layer of uncertainty. Air pollution can affect communities beyond the immediate fire area, while wind direction and fire behaviour can change quickly. Employers therefore need to follow official air-quality and emergency information throughout the day rather than relying on conditions observed at the start of a shift.

Workplace plans must function in practice

EU workplace guidance on heat recommends that employers assess exposure and organise work accordingly. Practical measures include reliable access to water, shaded or cooled rest areas, more frequent breaks, lighter workloads, schedule changes and time for workers to acclimatise.

Those measures are most effective when agreed before a crisis. A written plan should identify who monitors conditions, when work will be modified, which tasks must be postponed and how workers can report symptoms. Supervisors also need authority to act without waiting for an individual worker to collapse.

Paid rest is especially important. A break that reduces a precarious worker’s earnings may exist on paper but fail in practice. The same is true of stop-work arrangements if employees believe they will be punished, replaced or denied future shifts for using them.

Information should be provided in languages and formats understood by the workforce. This includes temporary staff and people employed through contractors, not only an organisation’s directly employed personnel. Symptoms of heat exhaustion can develop rapidly, and workers need clear instructions on when to seek medical assistance.

A shared responsibility

Employers carry the immediate duty to manage workplace risks, but public authorities also have an important role. Heat and smoke alerts should connect weather information with concrete occupational guidance. Labour inspectorates need sufficient capacity to respond during emergencies, particularly in sectors that rely heavily on seasonal or subcontracted labour.

Municipalities can adjust permitted working hours, open cooling spaces and coordinate advice for local businesses. Public bodies can also use procurement contracts to require credible heat-protection plans from construction, cleaning, transport and maintenance providers.

Companies further up the supply chain should examine whether delivery schedules, agricultural purchasing practices or construction deadlines encourage unsafe work. A supplier should not be penalised for suspending activity when official warnings or on-site conditions make continued work dangerous.

Climate adaptation is also worker protection

Europe’s recent experience shows that extreme heat can no longer be treated solely as a short-lived disruption. As earlier European Times coverage of western Europe’s heat emergency noted, repeated episodes are placing communities and public services under growing strain.

Adaptation therefore needs to reach the ordinary organisation of work. Shaded agricultural facilities, cooler building materials, improved urban tree cover and better-designed working hours can reduce exposure before an emergency begins. Health systems and labour authorities also need to collect enough information to identify which occupations and communities are bearing the greatest burden.

Firefighting aircraft and emergency crews remain indispensable when flames threaten homes and livelihoods. But a credible European response must also protect the people whose working day continues under the same hostile sky. No worker should have to choose between a day’s income and avoiding a preventable injury.

On June 19, 1862, the U.S. Congress passed the Territorial Slavery Act, which outlawed slavery in all present and future federal territories of the United States. The complete and final abolition of slavery in the United States was later achieved through the Thirteenth Amendment in 1865.

The act explicitly stated that slavery or involuntary servitude would not exist in any of the U.S. territories (the lands not yet stateless, mainly in the West) except as punishment for a proven crime.

This move directly overturned the Supreme Court’s infamous Dred Scott decision of 1857. The court then ruled that Congress did not have the constitutional right to prohibit slavery in federal territories.

By signing the law, President Abraham Lincoln fulfilled a key promise from his 1860 campaign—to stop the spread of slavery outside the South so that it could gradually “die a natural death.”

Congress voted and passed the legislation on June 9, 1862, and Lincoln officially signed it on June 19, 1862.

The June 19, 1862 law was just one of many interim steps during the American Civil War. Slavery was first abolished in the federal capital of Washington, D.C., through a program of financial compensation to owners.

In June 1862, the ban extended to the western territories (such as Utah, Nebraska, and Dakota). In January 1863, Lincoln’s historic Emancipation Proclamation went into effect, declaring slaves in the seceded southern states (the Confederacy) free.

In December 1865: Slavery was finally and completely abolished throughout the country with the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

The date June 19 is symbolic in American history. Three years after this law was passed – on June 19, 1865 – Union troops reached Galveston, Texas, to declare and enforce the freedom of the last remaining black slaves in the South. Today, June 19 is celebrated as an official federal holiday in the United States, called Juneteenth (officially Juneteenth National Independence Day – a federal holiday in the United States. It is celebrated annually on June 19 to commemorate the end of slavery in the United States. The holiday’s name, first used in the 1890s, is a portmanteau of June and nineteenth, referring to June 19, 1865, the day when Major General Gordon Granger ordered the final enforcement of the Emancipation Proclamation in Texas at the end of the American Civil War).

Illustrative photo: pexels-krivitskiy-6665722

One of the most important humanitarian acts in world history. On August 1, 1834, the Slavery Abolition Act 1833, passed by the British Parliament the previous year, officially came into force. This historic step granted the status of free citizens to approximately 770,280 colonial slaves, forever changing the economic and social map of the world.

The Act covered most of the territories of the British Empire, including key regions in the Caribbean, Mauritius and South Africa. However, the process of abolishing slavery was neither instantaneous nor completely unconditional.

The Road to Freedom: Compromises and Economic Cost

Although the Act proclaimed freedom, full emancipation was delayed by the introduction of the so-called “apprenticeship system”. Freedom came into effect immediately only for children under the age of six. Adult former slaves were forced to continue working without pay for their former masters for a transitional period of four to six years.

The government allocated a colossal sum of 20 million pounds for the time in the form of compensation, but not for the injured people, but for the slave owners themselves. This amount represented about 40% of the annual budget of the state treasury. A curious detail is that the remainder of the state debts accumulated for the payment of these compensations were finally cleared by the United Kingdom only in 2015.

The final and complete freedom without forced labor came ahead of schedule at midnight on July 31, 1838, after mass peaceful protests in the colonies. Today, August 1 is celebrated all over the world as Emancipation Day. It reminds us of the long struggle against racial prejudice and the importance of upholding equal human rights in the modern world.

Illustrative photo: pexels-tangie-bodden-2223571-16106378

There is a bird in Akan mythology that flies forward while its head turns backward. It is called Sankofa, and it carries a warning as old as the continent itself: go back and fetch it. Not nostalgia. Not paralysis. The deliberate act of retrieving what was left behind so that the journey ahead might have meaning.

In an era of climate collapse, debt crises, and resurgent authoritarianism across the Sahel, that ancient symbol has never felt more urgent. A new book, Sankofa, invites readers to confront precisely this tension — between the Africa the world thinks it knows and the Africa still struggling to narrate itself on its own terms. The result is less a novel than a geopolitical provocation disguised as a family story.

The plot is deceptively intimate. Anna Bain, a middle-aged British woman of mixed heritage, discovers after her mother’s death that the African father she never knew did not simply disappear. He became a president. Or, depending on who is telling the story, a dictator. The revelation sends her from London to the fictional West African nation of Bamana, where she must reconcile the idealistic student who once wrote radical diaries in 1970s London with the aging strongman who now rules through a calculus of patronage and fear.

What begins as a personal quest quickly expands into something far more unsettling. Onuzo, who holds a doctorate in history from King’s College London, did her research on the West African Students’ Union — that generation of young intellectuals who arrived in post-war Britain with borrowed suits and revolutionary dreams, then returned home to inherit nations that colonial cartographers had designed to fracture. Kwame Nkrumah studied here. Jomo Kenyatta passed through. The list is long, and its endings are rarely tidy.

The genius of Sankofa lies in its refusal to sanitize this inheritance. Anna’s father is not a cartoon villain, nor is he a misunderstood hero. He is something far more disquieting: a man who once believed in liberation and learned, over decades, to equate survival with control. The novel asks a question that Western development reports rarely dare to voice aloud — what happens when the generation that defeats colonialism becomes the generation that reproduces its methods?

This is where the book transcends fiction and enters the terrain of human rights advocacy. Across the Sahel today, military juntas in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger are selling a narrative of sovereign restoration, casting off French influence and UN peacekeepers with the same nationalist vocabulary that Anna’s father once used in his London diaries. The cycle is almost mechanical. New leaders arrive promising to break the old compact. Within a decade, the prisons fill, the opposition press shutters, and the resource concessions simply change hands from European to Chinese or Russian firms.

Sankofa captures this choreography with a historian’s precision. The reader sees how anti-colonial legitimacy curdles into authoritarian habit. How the language of Pan-African solidarity becomes a shield for kleptocracy. And how the international community — forever oscillating between paternalistic intervention and strategic neglect — rarely bothers to distinguish the two.

Anna’s own position embodies this hypocrisy. In London, she is invisible. In Bamana, she is suddenly the president’s daughter, granted access and suspicion in equal measure. Her mixed-race body becomes a contested map. To her father’s entourage, she is the obroni, the foreigner who judges African efforts by standards she does not apply to her own crumbling marriage or her estranged daughter. To the dissidents, she is a potential witness, a bridge to an international attention span that flickers between crises.

The novel does not let her, or the reader, settle comfortably into either role.

What makes Sankofa essential reading for anyone tracking African geopolitics is its insistence on complexity as a moral obligation. The book refuses the easy binaries that dominate Western coverage of the continent: democracy versus autocracy, tradition versus modernity, victimhood versus resilience. Instead, it traces how ordinary people navigate systems that have been rigged long before they were born.

Anna’s mother, we learn, spent decades in low-paid work to buy the council flat that ultimately funds her daughter’s journey. It is a quiet revelation, easily missed, but it reframes the entire narrative. The so-called “personal” sacrifice is also political economy. The capacity to search for one’s roots depends on property ownership, on visa regimes, on the sale of a flat in a gentrifying London borough. The global inequality that makes Bamana poor enough to be ruled by Anna’s father is the same inequality that makes Anna’s mother rich enough, by comparison, to buy a flat on a cleaner’s wages.

Onuzo trusts her readers to hold these contradictions without resolving them. That trust is rare, and it is political.

There is a scene near the novel’s center that will stay with human rights observers. Anna confronts her father about the disappearances, the prisons, the silenced journalists. He does not deny them. Instead, he speaks of vision, of infrastructure, of the roads and clinics built while the West fretted about elections. It is the classic authoritarian bargain, and Onuzo renders it with chilling familiarity because she has done the archival work. She knows how Nkrumah’s Ghana looked from the inside, how the early victories of independence contained the seeds of later solitary confinement.

The novel’s title thus becomes more than metaphor. It is a methodological demand. To understand why Mali’s junta enjoys 70 percent approval while shuttering human rights offices, one must look backward — not to some romantic pre-colonial past, but to the specific failures of structural adjustment, of the war on terror’s collateral damage, of French Operation Barkhane’s unintended legitimization of armed groups. The past is not a refuge. It is evidence.

Sankofa does not offer a policy blueprint. It offers something more valuable: an emotional grammar for discussing power in post-colonial states without defaulting to either despair or Orientalist fantasy. Anna’s journey ends, as journeys do, in ambiguity. She does not save Bamana. She does not even fully save herself. But she learns to see the machinery. And seeing, as the old proverb goes, is the beginning of the end of blindness.

For diplomats drafting the next African Union summit communique, for NGO workers preparing shadow reports on civic space, for journalists trying to explain why another coup feels inevitable — this book is required reading. It will not tell you which sanctions to impose or which elections to monitor. It will, however, force you to ask whether the frameworks you are using were designed to understand Africa, or to manage it from a safe distance.

The Sankofa bird keeps flying. Its wings are tired. But its head remains turned, stubbornly, backward. Not because the past was better. Because the past is still unpaid. And Africa will not move forward until the bill is settled.

Sankofa is available now. For readers who believe that human rights begin with the right to narrate one’s own history, it is a place to start.

Most of Europe’s landmark AI rulebook applies from 2 August, shifting attention from legislation to enforcement

The European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act reaches its main application date on Sunday, bringing most of the bloc’s rules for high-risk systems, transparency and accountability into effect. The deadline marks a decisive change for companies and public authorities: compliance must increasingly be demonstrated in practice, while regulators face scrutiny over whether they can enforce the law consistently across 27 member states.

The regulation entered into force in August 2024 but was designed around a phased timetable. Prohibited AI practices and duties to promote AI literacy began applying in February 2025. Governance provisions and obligations for general-purpose AI models followed six months later.

From 2 August 2026, most of the remaining provisions in the AI Act’s legal framework become applicable. These include central requirements governing many high-risk systems, transparency duties for certain AI-generated or manipulated content, and rules intended to give affected people clearer information about automated systems.

High-risk systems face stricter duties

The Act places its strongest operational obligations on AI considered capable of creating serious risks to health, safety or fundamental rights.

Depending on how a system is used, this category can include AI involved in recruitment, education, access to essential services, law enforcement, migration administration and parts of the justice system. Providers must establish risk-management procedures, maintain technical documentation, enable logging and human oversight, and address accuracy, robustness and cybersecurity.

Organisations deploying these systems also carry responsibilities. They must follow operating instructions, appoint appropriately qualified people to oversee use, monitor performance and retain relevant records. Public bodies and certain organisations providing essential services may additionally have to assess how deployment could affect fundamental rights.

For workers, applicants, students, benefit claimants and other people subject to automated assessments, the significance will depend on whether these safeguards become visible and usable. Documentation that remains inside a compliance department offers little protection if an individual cannot identify when AI influenced a consequential decision or how to challenge it.

Transparency reaches synthetic content

The new phase also expands transparency obligations. People should generally be informed when they are interacting directly with an AI system unless that fact is already apparent. Providers of systems generating synthetic audio, images, video or text must make outputs detectable in a machine-readable form, subject to the regulation’s exceptions.

Deployers of deepfake technology must disclose when content has been artificially generated or manipulated. Similar notification requirements apply to certain emotion-recognition and biometric-categorisation systems.

These provisions arrive as convincing synthetic media becomes easier to produce and distribute. Their effectiveness will depend partly on technical standards and platform practices: a disclosure attached when material is created may be lost when it is edited, compressed or reposted.

Not every deadline arrives at once

The 2 August date does not complete the Act’s timetable. According to the European Commission’s implementation overview, obligations concerning some high-risk AI systems embedded in products regulated by existing EU safety legislation are scheduled to apply from August 2027.

Special transitional arrangements also cover systems and general-purpose models placed on the market before particular deadlines. Whether a product is new, substantially modified or already deployed can therefore affect which obligations apply and when.

This layered timetable makes clear guidance essential, particularly for smaller companies, hospitals, schools, municipalities and civil-society organisations without large legal or technical teams. Regulatory uncertainty could discourage beneficial uses of AI, while weak interpretation could leave harmful applications insufficiently controlled.

Enforcement becomes the central question

National authorities will carry much of the day-to-day responsibility for supervision, while the European AI Office has a central role in coordinating implementation and overseeing general-purpose AI models.

The system creates an immediate risk of uneven enforcement. Regulators differ in staffing, technical expertise and institutional independence. Cross-border AI services may also involve several authorities, raising questions about who investigates complaints and how quickly evidence can be secured.

Earlier European Times reporting on AI Act enforcement highlighted the pressure on specialists expected to translate broad legal safeguards into workable supervision. That challenge now moves from preparation to daily administration.

Civil-society groups, trade unions and equality bodies will be important in identifying harms that technical audits may overlook. Discriminatory outcomes can reflect biased data, poorly designed objectives or the social context in which a system is used. Measuring accuracy alone cannot establish whether an automated decision is lawful or fair.

The EU has presented the Act as a global model for governing artificial intelligence without blocking innovation. Its credibility will now be determined less by the ambition of its text than by ordinary encounters with automated power: a job application rejected, a public service delayed or a synthetic recording circulated without adequate warning.

Europe’s AI rulebook has reached its main deadline. The harder phase begins with ensuring that its protections work for the people whose lives these systems increasingly shape.