The recent decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to annul the fishing and agricultural agreements between Morocco and the EU raises a wave of critical reactions, both in Morocco and within itself. the Union.
This verdict, which considers that these agreements would violate the rights of the “people of Western Sahara” due to the absence of their consent, is seen as disconnected from the political and economic realities on the ground.
A decision out of step with economic realities
On the European side, this decision could have immediate consequences on the economy of certain EU member countries, notably Spain. The Spanish fleets of Andalusia, the Canary Islands and Galicia depend largely on access to Moroccan waters for fishing. With the cancellation of these agreements, the local economies of these Spanish regions could suffer seriously. This decision calls into question a vital bilateral relationship for the EU, which depends on Morocco as a strategic partner on several levels.
Read also ｜ Sahara: Washington reaffirms its support for the Moroccan autonomy initiative
Lahcen Haddad, PhD and expert in international relations underlines that “Morocco is right to consider itself not concerned by the decision of the CJEU in the case between the EU and the separatist Polisario Front. » For him, it is surprising that the Court took the side of a group that the UN itself accuses of having violated ceasefire agreements, while ignoring the realities on the ground. “Moreover, it is astonishing that the Court arrogates to itself the right to rule on diplomatic questions,” he adds.
A legal approach disconnected from political realities
The CJEU’s decision is part of a transnational legal system which, according to Moroccan observers, does not take into account the political and human reality of the southern provinces of Morocco. The use of the term “Sahrawi people” seems to deny the integration of Sahrawi populations into Moroccan citizenship. For Lahcen Haddad, this decision stems from strictly legal considerations, ignoring the broader implications for Europe itself. Morocco, as a strategic ally of the EU, has always worked closely with Europe on crucial security and development issues, and it is surprising that this aspect was not taken into account in the decision .
Read also Sahara: Bourita meets in New York with De Mistura and reiterates the 4 fundamentals of Morocco
In reacting to this verdict, the Moroccan Ministry of Foreign Affairs denounced a “total ignorance of the realities of the Sahara issue” and a “blatant political bias”. Morocco considers itself “in no way concerned” by this decision, affirming that this matter only concerns the EU and the Polisario Front, supported by Algeria. The official press release insists on the fact that Morocco did not participate in this procedure and therefore does not recognize its legitimacy.
The trap of a transnational jurisprudence
This case illustrates the pitfalls of supranational legal governance which can prove counterproductive for the Member States themselves. In Europe, several countries find themselves “trapped” by legal decisions rendered in a legal framework disconnected from immediate economic interests. The postponement of the execution of the agricultural verdict for twelve months to avoid “serious consequences” on the EU’s external activities clearly shows that European authorities are aware of the risks that such a decision could generate. This delay measure illustrates the embarrassment of European authorities, who are well aware of the negative economic repercussions.
Morocco reiterates its position on territorial integrity
The Kingdom of Morocco has reiterated its firm position: it will not subscribe to any agreement that does not respect its territorial integrity and national unity. The Moroccan Ministry of Foreign Affairs also calls on the Council, the European Commission and EU Member States to take the necessary measures to respect their international commitments and preserve the achievements of the partnership with Morocco.
The Court of Justice of the European Union was also accused by Morocco of “taking the place of the competent UN bodies” and of contradicting their positions. Indeed, unlike the CJEU, the British High Court, in a similar case, had shown more discernment in recognizing the local realities of the Moroccan Sahara.
Related News :