Morocco Leaks : Note on the Polisario’s appeal to the Court of Justice of the EU

This is a note addressed to the King of Morocco regarding a lawsuit filed by the Polisario Front before the Court of Justice of the European Union against the Council of the EU and the European Commission concerning the agricultural agreement between Morocco and the EU. The Polisario claims that the agreement is invalid due to a procedural defect, a lack of consultation, and a violation of international law. The note outlines three options for Morocco: 1) intervene in the proceedings as a third party, 2) support the defense of the Council of the EU without directly intervening, or 3) adopt a cautious approach and not intervene. The letter emphasizes the high legal, political, diplomatic, and economic stakes of the trial for Morocco and its claimed territorial integrity.

—————————————

Note to the Highest Attention of His Majesty the King

نعم سيدي أعزك الله

I have the distinct honor of bringing to His Majesty the King’s Highest Attention that the Polisario filed an appeal on November 19, 2012, before the Court of Justice of the European Union against the acts of the Council of the EU and the European Commission relating to the conclusion and implementation of the Agricultural Agreement with Morocco.

The opposing party bases its appeal on three types of allegations: a defect of form (violation of the principle of motivation), a procedural defect (lack of consultation with the Polisario on the conclusion of the Agreement), and a defect of substance (violation of EU commitments and several norms of international law).

According to the rules of procedure of the said Court, the filing of an appeal includes a written phase and an oral phase. A written request by a lawyer or agent opens the way for the procedure. The essential points of the appeal are published in a communication to the Official Journal of the EU, as was undertaken by the Polisario’s lawyer, Chems-Eddine Hafiz, an Algerian naturalized French.

The defendant party, in this case the Council of the EU, has a period to submit a defense brief. To this end, a consultation of the EU has already been initiated to define a coherent defense position and prepare arguments requesting the outright rejection of the Polisario’s request.

This appeal, which directly involves the higher interests of Morocco, involves major legal, political, diplomatic, and economic stakes since it aims to defeat, through the Agricultural Agreement, all the legal instruments concluded between Morocco and the EU and thereby call into question the territorial integrity of our country.

Faced with this appeal, several options are available to Morocco:

1. The procedure in force provides that any person, natural or legal, justifying an interest in resolving a dispute submitted to the Court may intervene in the proceedings. The intervening party may submit its observations during the written or oral proceedings. As such, Morocco could, if it deems it necessary, submit, in its capacity as a third-party contracting party to the Agricultural Agreement, a brief justifying its real and certain interest in resolving the dispute submitted to the court by becoming a party in support of the Council of the EU. Given the date of filing of the appeal, Morocco must submit its request, before April 16, 2013, to the EU Court which will study the admissibility or not of the Moroccan request. Morocco’s intervention could then be done through non-state bodies or professional associations concerned by the Agricultural Agreement.

This option has the advantage of accessing, partially or fully, the file, submitting written observations within the time limits set by the President’s order and intervening at the hearing if it is convened. It avoids a direct intervention of the Moroccan State in the ongoing procedure and seeing our country submit to a jurisdiction on an equal footing with the opposing party.

2. Morocco’s intervention could take place only in the written phase of the procedure by presenting an argument by the State developed with the support of experienced jurists in support of that of the Council of the EU. Such an option presents the risk of seeing Morocco’s image tarnished in the event of a judgment in favor of the opposing party.
3. Morocco could favor a cautious approach aimed at not intervening in this process and leaving the defendant party alone, in this case the Council of the EU, to defend the legality of the Agreement concluded with Morocco and request the rejection of the appeal for annulment formulated by the opponents of the territorial integrity of Morocco. This approach implies close, active, and regular consultation with the Council of the EU in order to best preserve the national interests of Morocco.

و لسيدنا المنصور بالله واسع النظر و سديد الرأي.

SOURCE:

#Morocco #WesternSahara #EU #EuropeanUnion #FishingAgreement #MoroccoEUTtradeAgreements #CJUE #CourtJusticeEuropeanUnion #Appeal