|
Brussels, 22/03/2007, (SPS) The Le Minister Delegated for
Europe, Mohamed Sidati, considered on Tuesday that "the Moroccan
autonomy is not only a questioning of the international legality but
also of the cease-fire", in its intervention before the European
Parliament’s Delegation for relations with the Maghreb countries and
the Arab Maghreb Union, which organised a conference on Western
Sahara in the Parliaments’ seat in Brussels.
"
the grotesque pseudo solution proposed by Morocco carries great
danger. Not only does it mean an undermining of the International
Consensus, endorsed by the resolutions of the General Assembly and
the Security Council, but it also means a reconsideration of the
cease-fire that both parties – the Kingdom of Morocco and the Front
POLISARIO – have accepted as an inseparable element of the
referendum process, which justifies the presence of the MINURSO in
Western Sahara. (MINURSO: Mission des Nations Unies pour le
Referendum au Sahara Occidental)", he underlined before
Parliamentarians, ambassadors, experts in the international law, the
European Commission as well as members of the Belgian Committee of
support to the Saharawi people.
The Saharawi Minister who was chairing the delegation of the
Polisario Front, which participated to the conference to which
Morocco was the bigger absent since it opted for the policy of the
empty chair.
Here is the complete text of the intervention:
Statement by Mohamed Sidati, Minister Delegated for Europe, for the
Delegation for relations with the Maghreb countries and the Arab
Maghreb Union
20.03.07
It is never too much emphasised that the conflict on Western Sahara
is above all a problem of decolonization, of which the correct and
definite solution depends on the exercise by the Saharawi people of
their inalienable right to self determination, through a free and
democratic referendum. This right is affirmed by the the UN Charter
and resolutions.
Therefore, the UN, in cooperation with the Organisation of African
Unity (OUA), known today as the African Union, has elaborated the
Settlement Plan endorsed by the Security Council (Resolution 40/50)
and accepted by the two parties to the conflict, the Kingdom of
Morocco and the POLISARIO Front. On its part, the European Union has
supported the peace-plan (Declaration by the Presidency, June 1999),
and the European Parliament did the same in its Resolution of March
16, 2000.
The Houston Agreements, concluded thanks to the mediation of Mr
James Baker, in his capacity as Personal Envoy of the Secretary
General of the UN, have enabled resuming the peace plan: the
proclamation of the cease-fire, the arrival of the MINURSO in
Western Sahara, the identification procedures, which had nearly
reached the point of completion until Morocco put a brutal stop to
the ongoing process.
The new efforts undertaken by the UN resulted in the “Peace Plan for
Self-Determination for the people of Western Sahara”, also referred
to as the Baker Plan. It is a diligent compromise endorsed by the
Security Council in its Resolution 1495 (2003), and accepted by the
Front POLISARIO. The Secretary General of the UN qualified it as the
optimal political solution. Morocco hesitated, before finally
rejecting the plan, to the big surprise of the International
Community.
Morocco not only continuously abandon its international commitments,
which it had signed both in New York and in Houston, it subsequently
proceed to systematically disrupt the Saharawis’ right to
self-determination and the road which leads to the referendum, which
result Rabat fears.
It goes without saying that serious consequences stem from this
attitude displayed by Morocco, because it aims to weaken, to reduce
the efforts deployed by the International Community, which casts a
shadow on the perspectives to a correct, peaceful and definite
solution grow gloomier.
Morocco conducts a “war of attrition”, campaign after campaign, to
force its illegal occupation of the Western Sahara on the Saharawi
people and the International Community, although it does not
exercise any form of sovereignty over the territory, as was clearly
stated by the International Court of Justice (ICJ legal opinion of
October 16, 1975).
This historical and juridical truth is supported by the Secretary
General of the UN in his report to the Security Council
(S/2006/249), in which he indicates that no state in the world
recognizes the Moroccan sovereignty over the territory of Western
Sahara. Neither is Morocco juridicaly the administrative power
(Legal Opinion by Hans Corell, UN Under-Secretary-General for Legal
Affairs). Its presence in Western Sahara was defined as “a military
occupation” (Resolution UNGA 3437). Put otherwise, the Moroccan
presence is in violation of international law, and is incompatible
with the principles and the UN Charter.
More than ever, the right to self-determination remains pertinent as
it has been reaffirmed by the Security Council and by the UN General
Assembly in October and December 2006. Many member states of the EU
have subscribed to the position of the UN by voting the General
Assembly’s Resolution, supporting “a just and definitive mutually
acceptable solution that provides for self-determination”.
It is now obvious that the efforts of the international community
continue to face obstacles consisted in the intransigence of the
Moroccan kingdom and its policy of annexation of Western Sahara by
force.
After having deserted its international commitments and having
rejected the Baker Plan, Morocco takes another step in its
escalation, in its conspiracy against the inalienable right of the
Saharawi people to self-determination. It attempts to make “tabula
rasa” of everything the UN has accomplished so far in the peaceful
settlement of the Western Sahara conflict. It further shamelessly
tries to evade the international legality by presenting a pseudo
solution, the so called “autonomy plan”.
It is thus via an unilateral, illegal and dangerous proposition that
Morocco wants to extort the renunciation by the International
Community of the fundamental right of the Saharawi people, and
impose the recognition of its colonial fait accompli in Western
Sahara, without beforehand satisfying the demands of the doctrine
and the practice of the United Nations in matters of decolonization.
We denounce and reject this project which is incompatible with
International law, which puts the national aspirations of the
Saharawi people in a deadlock, which violates the law and
international legality. According to international law, Western
Sahara does not form part of Morocco, because the latter arrogates
to oneself to decide instead of its people. Only the people of the
territory can decide on its definite status through a free and
legitimate referendum.
This project is all the more dangerous, because wanting to impose a
pseudo solution upon a people that resists the illegal Moroccan
occupation, is taking the risk to increase tension and to create an
incontrollable situation that endangers the stability of the entire
region and reduces the possibilities of a correct and definite
settlement of the conflict.
One should not forget that the grotesque pseudo solution proposed by
Morocco carries great danger. Not only does it mean an undermining
of the International Consensus, endorsed by the resolutions of the
General Assembly and the Security Council, but it also means a
reconsideration of the cease-fire that both parties – the Kingdom of
Morocco and the Front POLISARIO – have accepted as an inseparable
element of the referendum process, which justifies the presence of
the MINURSO in Western Sahara.
(MINURSO: Mission des Nations Unies pour le Référendum au Sahara
Occidental)
Morocco is playing with fire, looking to drag the Saharawi people
and the region into a situation of extreme tension and risks that to
this moment could have been avoided in order to give possibilities
to the search for a just and durable peace.
The occupation of Western Sahara, the denial of justice to its
people, translates itself into a ferocious repression conducted
against the civil population. Each day brings its part of suffering
and mourning, of persecutions, of one unfair trial after the other.
Not more than a week ago, 33 people were injured by the Moroccan
occupying forces. Four youngsters were arrested and submitted to
torture, 3 of them are currently in a critical condition. Amnesty
International has recently drawn attention to the persecutions of
which the victims are human rights defenders, such as Brahim Sabbar
and Ahmed Sbai. The black prison, “cárcel negra” serves as a
sinister reminder…
In 2006 alone, almost a thousand Saharawi (all age-categories
represented) have been condemned to prison. Detained Saharawi
citizens are systematically subjected to torture, for peacefully
claiming respect for their human rights and those of their people.
In order to cover its crimes, Morocco has closed off the territory
and denies access to independent observers, the press, etc. A
perfect illustration is the example of the ad hoc delegation of the
European Parliament, which to this day is hindered to visit the
illegally occupied territories. This is not only an insult to the
European Union, but also to its principles and founding values.
Numerous institutions and organisations in defence of Human Rights,
such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Freedom House,
World Organisation against Torture, Reporters without Borders, etc.
have reported on the massive human rights violations perpetrated by
Morocco in Western Sahara. In his latest two reports, the Secretary
General of the UN didn’t fail to make reference of his concern on
the serious human rights violations committed by Morocco in Western
Sahara.
In its mission report (15/23 May and 19 June 2006), the High
Commissioner for Human Rights makes statement of the policy of
systematic Human Rights violation of conducted by Morocco against
the civil population that lives under occupation, before concluding
that “As has been stated in various UN fora, the right to
self-determination for the people of Western Sahara must be ensured
and implemented without any further delay… As underlined above, the
delegation concludes that almost all human rights violations and
concerns with regard to the people of Western Sahara… stem from the
non-implementation of this fundamental human right”.
The UN doctrine and its resolutions regarding non autonomous
territories, like Western Sahara, which is subject of a
decolonization process, are clear. They affirm the sovereignty of
colonized peoples over their natural resources. The legal opinion
elaborated on 29 January 2002 on demand of the Security Council by
Dr. Hans Corell, UN Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs,
emphasizes the illegal character of the exploitation of natural
resources in Western Sahara. Consequently, the Fisheries Partnership
Agreement, concluded after long debates between the European Union
and the Kingdom of Morocco, is illegal when including the
territorial waters of Western Sahara, which definite status has not
yet been determined.
The Saharawi people, the Front POLISARIO and the Saharawi
Government, will continue to plead in favour of a reconsideration of
this agreement, so that its signatories will revise it in order for
it to comply with international standards and rules of international
law.
The European Union has particular responsibilities. It can and
should contribute to a right, peaceful and definite solution of the
Western Sahara conflict. It can accomplish this task by effectively
and resolutely supporting the UN and the efforts deployed by this
organisation to obtain a fair solution that excludes unilateralism
and pulverization of law. In stead of making soothing declarations,
the European Union should strongly reaffirm the primacy of the
corpus of resolutions adopted by the UN concerning Western Sahara.
This means demanding Morocco, of which it is the principal financial
and economical provider, to respect the Saharawi’s inalienable right
to self determination.
The European Union which ambitions in its capacity as an important
actor at the international stage to reinforce the UN as a regulatory
instrument of international relations, and in its capacity as
receptacle of a multi-polar world, has to encourage a solution based
on self-determination and on the respect for international legality.
What solution could be fairer, more legitimate, more democratically,
more acceptable, than a solution that respects the will of the
people of the territory, and that is in accordance to international
law, and the resolutions of the United Nations?
The Western Sahara conflict is unfolding itself by the gates of
Europe, in a territory located in the neighbouring Maghreb region
and so close to Europe. Its fair and peaceful solution is the only
way to bring stability and security to all the peoples of the
Maghreb region, without exclusion, and to give full dimension to the
relations of partnership and cooperation that unite the Maghreb and
Europe". (SPS)
060/090/000 220100 MAR 07 SPS
|
