Morocco will not accept any agreement or legal document that does not respect its territorial integrity and national sovereignty

Agadir 24 | Agadir24

The European Court’s decision exceeds its European regional jurisdiction, and infringes on the powers of the United Nations by employing political and illegal terms that are not consistent with the judicial justice of a European Union court. Its decision does not concern the Kingdom of Morocco and cannot be used as an argument against it if it is not a party to the claim issued regarding it, and therefore it must Explanation as follows:

There are those who practice political blackmail and strive to direct the decisions of European Union organizations in their favor.
The European Court’s decision does not concern Morocco and is not a party to it.
What the European Court’s reasoning concluded was the use of concepts such as “the people of Western Sahara,” and “the proper classification of products coming from Western Sahara to avoid any ambiguity regarding their origin,” which is legally unacceptable for a court bound to be neutral and to stay away from everything that contradicts Considering it a European judicial body, it sought to align politically and employ political concepts, as stated in the last explanation for its decision: “The court affirmed that Western Sahara needs the consent of the people in any international agreement, which reflects the importance of the rights of peoples to self-determination.”

Gentlemen, I will not go into analyzing this flawed decision, nor will I go to the trouble of researching and referring to the law specifying the jurisdiction of the European Court, since it is a decision that does not concern the Kingdom of Morocco and is not a party to the lawsuit in which it was issued.
However, in order to clarify what is clear to the jurisdiction, the use of “the people of Western Sahara” forces us to ask who this “people” is, since there is no people in the records of the United Nations with this name, and if the situation is then summoned from those in the Western Moroccan Sahara, They would have confirmed that they are part of the Moroccan people, and they would have proven that the riches, development, and infrastructure that the Moroccan rocks abound with are not available even to those who bothered with the expenses of the litigation brought before it, and the fees of lawyers paid in hard currency, and from the money of a people who are still suffering in queues to obtain their share of the money. Basic foodstuffs were not even disbursed to those in Tindouf under the name of refugees.

In addition to the same context, the occurrence of terms such as “classification of products coming from Western Sahara.” The issue of classification of exported or imported materials is directly linked to the state, which has full sovereignty over its products, whether agricultural, industrial, or services, and is linked to the state’s ownership rights to its original products. Which bears stickers in its name, and the fact is that the only country that has that right is the Kingdom of Morocco, which exercises its legitimate and legal sovereignty over an area of ​​its national territory and is a member state of the United Nations and internationally recognized.
As for the legal stupidity and dangerous injustice, it is the transformation of the same court that issued its flawed decision into a UN body competing with the jurisdiction of the United Nations to decide on international disputes that have not yet been resolved in the fabricated Sahara file, despite the international consensus on Morocco’s sovereignty over its Sahara and recognitions of that, to say in Its latest decision, “The approval of the people?” In any international agreement that reflects the importance of peoples’ rights to self-determination??!!!

The situation is that the United Nations with jurisdiction is pushing for a consensual political solution, while emphasizing the seriousness of the autonomy proposal, which was signed by international consensus, and which the Security Council has noted since 2007. Indeed, all of the latter’s decisions regarding the Sahara file were characterized by its contents and content, and there is no room to talk about it. The referendum or even the concept of self-determination, which contradicts the principles on which the United Nations was founded, including the principle of the state’s right to remain united.
The issue, gentlemen, is that there are those who are striving to obstruct the process of political settlement of the file, and to influence the Security Council regarding its expected decision after the 79th meeting of the United Nations General Assembly, and the report of the UN Secretary-General, which reveals the truth about the other party.

In conclusion, the question remains, and in light of Morocco’s constant endeavor to search for new partners, without abandoning its old partners and allies, will the European Union abandon its strategic partner, the Kingdom of Morocco, which will not and will not accept any agreement or legal document that does not respect its territorial and national unity?

Mr. Al-Hussein Bakkar Al-Sibai
Lawyer and researcher on immigration and human rights.