A Live Debate: Between Political Denunciation and the Call for Divine Justice

On social media, certain spaces have become true platforms where anger, hope, and the search for justice are openly expressed. It is in this context that an Amazigh activist from the Rif, Ahmed Soultana (أحمد سلطانة), regularly hosts live broadcasts, during which he exposes the tyranny of the Moroccan system, denouncing policies of division, oppression, and injustice.

Ahmed Soultana, born on January 26, 1984, in Nador, Morocco (Rif), is deeply involved in the Hirak Rif Movement, a social and political movement in northern Morocco advocating against marginalization, corruption, and injustice. He was imprisoned twice for his active participation in the Hirak protests, alongside Nasser Zefzafi, the prominent leader of the movement. His arrests were part of a broader crackdown on the movement’s demands for social justice, economic development, and recognition of Rifian rights.

Following these persecutions, Ahmed Soultana applied for political asylum in Spain, continuing his activism abroad and using social media to raise awareness about the conditions and rights of the Rif population. His story reflects the persistent and peaceful struggle for justice and dignity in a historically marginalized region.

It was during one of these live sessions that I was invited to speak, joining the conversation on justice, equity, and the path toward a society guided by divine principles.

An Invitation to Propose a Real Solution

During this broadcast, the host was not only denouncing the situation; he raised a fundamental question to his audience and guests: “If this system were to collapse, what should replace it in order to establish true justice, real equity, as well as peace and dignity for the people?” Faced with this question, I took the floor to present what I believe is the only true solution: The establishment of the State of Divine Justice, as outlined in the manifesto of the Mahdi. I spoke as a companion of the Imam Mahdi, represented today by Abdullah Hashem Aba Al Sadiq, affirming that justice can only truly be achieved when God Himself chooses the guide and ruler of mankind.

A Debate Between Identity, Power, and Visions of Islam

It is important to highlight the particular context in which this exchange took place. The host of the live, an Amazigh from the Rif — a region historically marked by resistance and a strong identity — positions himself in a political struggle against an oppressive and unjust Moroccan system. However, when the discussion shifted toward a solution based on religion and divine governance, the debate took on another dimension.

Several guests, presented as religious scholars, intervened to defend a vision of Islam aligned either with the dominant religious framework or with the legitimacy of the Moroccan kingdom. Their position consisted of supporting an institutional form of Islam, often in harmony with political authority, and opposing any challenge to that balance.

In this context, my brother Ismael and I found ourselves defending a minority but firm position: the call to Imam Mahdi and the establishment of the Divine Just State.

We were thus facing a double opposition:

• Defenders of what is often called “mainstream Islam,” attached to traditional interpretations and established institutions

• Supporters of the Moroccan kingdom, for whom current political stability outweighs any alternative.

This confrontation revealed a deep fracture — not only political, but also spiritual. Beyond the apparent disagreements, the real issue at stake was the question of authority: human or divine.

Ismael and Maryam calling people and debating

Ismael and Maryam calling people and debating

Ismael and Maryam calling people and debating

An Intense Exchange Against Multiple Opponents

Following this position, the host broadened the debate by inviting several participants: religious scholars, supporters of the regime, and various opponents. In order to balance the exchange, I also invited a fellow believer to join the live. We thus found ourselves defending this perspective against three, four, sometimes even five opposing voices.

The debate was intense but deeply revealing of the fundamental divergence between two visions of the world:

• one based on human-made systems,

• and the other based on divine designation.

A Large and Engaged Audience

This live session was far from insignificant. It gathered a considerable audience, with more than 1,200 simultaneous viewers on TikTok alone, not including other platforms where the broadcast was shared.

This reflects a growing interest in these fundamental questions: justice, legitimacy of power, and the future of societies.

The Core Issue: Divine Legitimacy

A central point emerged during the discussion: the recognition of Imam Mahdi.

In a country that claims to be Muslim, a crucial question arises:

Should the Moroccan people not support and grant victory to the Mahdi, as the rightful successor of the Prophet Mohammed?

According to the perspective I defended, the fundamental issue lies in the fact that:

• People are unaware that the current system usurps the legacy of the Prophet,

• It diverts governance away from the one who should be divinely appointed,

• and it excludes the true and legitimate spiritual heirs.

Thus, the injustices observed are not merely political or economic, but the direct consequence of abandoning the divine choice.

Live Debate Cut Short by Mysterious Interruption

During the live stream, the host repeatedly claimed to be under close surveillance by Moroccan intelligence services, and even his broadcasts were being reported. However, the situation took an unexpected turn when the religious scholar, confronted with his own contradictions, found himself in difficulty as he read hadiths of the Prophet Mohammed that, rather than supporting his claims, actually reinforced our arguments.

It was at that moment that a particularly strange  thing occurred: control of the live stream was suddenly lost, and an unidentified, extremely loud voice began shouting, “Long live King Mohammed VI.” This intrusion was accompanied by insults and the blasting of Moroccan music at a very high volume. The voice ordered the host and all listeners—including us—to abandon the topic, stop discussing it altogether, and instead turn to light activities on TikTok, such as dancing or taking on challenges, while continuing to hurl insults.

According to the claims made during the live broadcast, this interruption was allegedly due to an intervention by Moroccan intelligence services, which reportedly succeeded in shutting down the stream before the debate had concluded or a new topic for the next debate had been determined. As a result, the approximately 1,300 people who were attentively following the discussion were suddenly disconnected, including myself and brother Ismael.

Recognizing the True Guide

The debate also addressed a crucial question: how can one distinguish the true Mahdi from a false one?

Ismael and I emphasized that this recognition can only be achieved through:

• knowledge of the signs transmitted in religious traditions,

• the consistency of the message with divine justice,

• and a sincere search for truth, beyond political or cultural interests.
  

Ismael and I also highlighted a fundamental point in this reflection:

If God is perfectly just, and if He has sent a great number of Prophets — 124,000 according to the Prophet Mohammed — then He must have provided humanity with a clear method, a tool, a law, or a universal criterion to recognize His Messenger in every era.

Otherwise, a question arises:

How could humanity protect itself from misguidance?

If anyone could claim to be the Mahdi without a divine criterion to verify such a claim, this would imply injustice, which contradicts the very nature of God.

Therefore, it becomes logical that:

• God has established a reliable method of recognition,

• accessible to those who sincerely seek the truth,

• and allowing a clear distinction between truth and falsehood.
  

Moreover, the Mahdi is not sent to Muslims alone, but to all of humanity.

Consequently, this method of recognition cannot be limited to a single tradition. It must necessarily be found, in different forms, across all revealed religions, so that every people, every culture, and every believer can access the signs needed to identify the true guide.

Conclusion

This live debate was far more than a simple exchange: it revealed a deep divide between two approaches to justice and power.

On one side, contested and criticized human systems.

On the other, a call to return to governance based on divine will.

In a world searching for direction, one question remains:

Can justice truly exist without returning to its divine source?