Travail de recherche/Working paper
| Résumé : | In three opinions jointly published on March 21, 2024, the Advocate General before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) expresses her position regarding how the Court should rule on the three cases submitted to it concerning the status of Western Sahara and the economic relations maintained with this territory between the EU and Morocco. Two of the cases consist of appeals against two annulment judgments rendered by the EU General Court, while the third stems from a preliminary question asked by the French Council of State concerning the labeling of products originating from Western Sahara.In the cases concerning the conclusion of economic agreements between the EU and Morocco, the question was whether and under what conditions it was possible to extend their effects to Western Sahara, considering its status as a non-self-governing territory, the right to self-determination enjoyed by the Sahrawi people, and the judgments rendered on the matter by the CJEU in previous cases. The Court had established that any application of agreements to Western Sahara should, in accordance with the right to self-determination and the principle of the relative effect of treaties, recognize a distinct status for this territory and receive the expression of the "consent of the people of Western Sahara."During the process of concluding the latest agreements, the Council and the Commission considered that it was possible to meet the requirements set by the Court by conducting certain consultations with stakeholders from Western Sahara, despite the opposition of the Polisario Front, and relying on the consent of Morocco, deemed a "de facto administering power" of the territory, with the clarification that the agreements are "without prejudice to the respective positions of the European Union on the status of Western Sahara and the Kingdom of Morocco on the said region."With a few nuances, the opinion of the Advocate General validates this understanding. The thesis defended by the Advocate General rests on three points: 1. The Polisario Front is not authorized to express the consent of the Sahrawi people; 2. Morocco can be considered the "administering power" of Western Sahara and conclude agreements "on behalf of the Sahrawi people"; 3. Nevertheless, a separate treatment of Western Sahara must be established in the agreements.François Dubuisson provides an analysis of each of these three points, showing how the Advocate General's argumentation substantially deviates from the contours given in international law to the right to self-determination, particularly in the context of the Western Sahara issue. |
