The European Union and the Western Sahara Conflict: Managing the Colonial Heritage

Author(s):  
Jordi Vaquer i Fanés
Author(s):  
Iryna Tykhonenko

The article focuses on one of the current areas of European Union cooperation within the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership, namely with the Kingdom of Morocco. The official Rabat has both a historical basis for cooperation with the EU (colonial past) and an established dialogue with the European Union from associate membership to the acquisition of a special partnership status in 2008. The purpose of Morocco’s special status in the EU is to: strengthen dialogue and cooperation in the field of politics and security; gradual integration of Morocco into the EU internal market through approximation of legislation and regulations. The main directions and areas of multilateral cooperation between Morocco and the EU are highlighted especially Rabat ties with leading European powers (notably France and Spain) as implementation of bilateral level and at the level of integration with EU as political body. It is revealed that the acquisition of a special status in cooperation with the EU aims to deepen cooperation not only in the economic, security and energy spheres, but also the human dimension of bilateral relations, which affects human rights and cultural and humanitarian level of relations. In particular, the topical agenda for bilateral Moroccan-European relations is migration issues, the problem of Western Sahara, which complicate dialogue somewhat. The leading role in Morocco’s relations with EU Member States is played by dialogue within the Francophonie, as well as interpersonal contacts in the fields of culture, education and science. These contacts are closely maintained between Morocco, France and Spain, and implemented the EU’s values policy mentioned in the Association Agreement. It is revealed that cultural cooperation plays a positive role in the fight against religious extremism and civil society building.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 327-352
Author(s):  
Balingene Kahombo

Abstract This paper reviews the relevance of the Western Sahara cases brought before the Court of Justice of the European Union to international law. These cases relate to the contestations of the consistency of a number of economic agreements concluded between the European Union (EU) and the Kingdom of Morocco, as well as the EU acts that approved them, with the Treaty on the European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The issues arising from these disputes include the legality of the Court’s jurisdiction to review the validity of a treaty which is already in force between parties and the rules of international law that the contested legal instruments have violated, perhaps entailing their invalidity under EU law. While the Court has rightly found that none of the aforementioned agreements is applicable to Western Sahara—since their territorial scope does not extend to a territory which is not subject to Moroccan sovereignty——this paper tries to answer a different question as to whether the Court’s decisions are in line with international law. It is demonstrated that though the Court’s competence to rule on the validity of EU unilateral acts is obvious, the establishment of its power to review the validity of a treaty which is in force, such as the fisheries agreement of 2006, is dubious because of the inconsistency of such power with the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. In any event, the question which remains to be solved—and which was not submitted to the Court—pertains to the determination of the effects of the illegal application of the EU-Morocco agreements to Western Sahara on the rights of its people. It is concluded that such an application has violated the law of occupation and eventually international human rights law. These violations do not touch upon the validity of the contested legal instruments but relate to the question of responsibility for a wrongful act stemming from the illegal application of those agreements to occupied Western Sahara in a manner which is harmful to the interest of its people.


2017 ◽  
Vol 111 (3) ◽  
pp. 731-738 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jed Odermatt

On December 21, 2016, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) dismissed an action brought by the Front Polisario challenging a decision of the Council of the European Union (EU) approving the conclusion of an agreement between the European Union and the Kingdom Morocco on the reciprocal liberalization of certain agricultural products. The CJEU held, based on the relevant rules of international law applicable between the EU and Morocco, that the agreement did not apply to the territory of Western Sahara. Apart from its obvious political overtones, the judgment is significant in further developing the CJEU's approach to the law of treaties and the principle of self-determination in international law.


Author(s):  
E. Cherkasova

The article provides an overview of the history of this "forgotten" conflict, as well as its current state. The author reveals the position of stakeholders, including the European Union, France, the U.S. and Russia. Particular attention is paid to the position of Spain as a former colonial power, and to the correlation of the conflict with other problems in the Spanish-Moroccan relations.


2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pål Wrange

In two recent cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the General Court (at first instance), the High Court of Justice of England and Wales and the Grand Chamber of the CJEU found that a trade agreement and a fisheries agreement between Morocco and the European Union cannot be applied to occupied Western Sahara without the consent of its people. In spite of the fact that it is the general view that Western Sahara is under belligerent occupation, none of the three courts invoked the law of occupation but based themselves instead on the principle of self-determination and the law governing the administration of non-self-governing territories, including the principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources. A possible implication of these judgments is that that law and the law of occupation are converging in certain respects, in particular as regards long-term occupation. This pertains not only to the substantive rules on the exercise of authority, which seem to require that the people are heard, but also to the basis for the establishment of that authority, namely bare control.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document