alt Hacker NewsFor reference, Algeria too has a constitution : https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Algeria_2020
But I assume you did not call Algeria a constitutional dictatorship because the Algerian constitution itself isn't really binding. If your constitution doesn't allow for the impeachment of the head of state/government for violations of the constitution, then it is effectively meaningless. That's the difference between a law and a rule, the law is binding while rules aren't.
The US and French constitutions for example clearly outline procedures to impeach the head of the executive, while no such measures exist for the head of the executive in Morocco.
You don't need a constitution to depose leaders, a popular revolution will do the trick. Also, an impeachment clause doesn't prevent fascism. Many supposed democracies see their leaders flout the constitution constantly without consequences.
Constitution aren't truths, they're collective lies we agreed upon. In Morocco, authority is a social contract that is bound by customs, not by a blind belief in the moral superiority of law.
An impeachment clause is only necessary when you believe that government is the ultimate authority. If Moroccans believed that, then yes, your argument about hereditary monarchy would make sense.
That's not the case. No-one believes in authority here; we only accept it. So we know that if the king loses legitimacy, a popular revolution will happen. And the king knows that, so he won't push the buttons too much either.