EU/Morocco fisheries agreement – European countries insist on respect of ECJ rulings

This post is also available in: Español (Spanish) Português (Portuguese (Portugal)) Français (French)

fr.allafrica.com.- Brussels – Sweden opposed the conclusion of the new fisheries partnership agreement between the European Union and Morocco, reiterating that the extension of the geographical scope of the agreement to the territory of Western Sahara must receive the consent of the Saharawi people in accordance with the judgment of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) of 27 February, while Germany, Denmark and Ireland insisted that an agreement must be in accordance with European law and international law.

When the text of the agreement on the EU’s Competitiveness Council was adopted on 29 November in Brussels, Sweden issued an explanatory declaration following the vote in which it expressed its opposition to the Council decisions on the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and Morocco.

Sweden explained that this agreement did not respect the judgments of the CJEU which stated that Western Sahara was a “separate” and “distinct” territory from the Kingdom of Morocco and that any extension of agreement to that territory requires “consent “of the people of Western Sahara.

The full text of the Swedish declaration states that “Sweden will vote against Council decisions on the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco”.

Recalling that when the negotiating mandate for the new agreement was adopted in April 2018, Sweden had “made it clear that its support for a future agreement would depend on the agreement fully respecting international law, including the judgments of the Court of Justice”. of the European Union”.

Emphasizing one of the fundamental statements of CJEU judgments, Sweden stated in its declaration that the extension of the geographical scope of the agreement to the territory of Western Sahara and its adjacent waters “must receive consent of the people of Western Sahara, “adding that” Sweden has also made it clear that we mean ‘the people concerned’ in the mandate ‘the people of Western Sahara’, in accordance with the judgments of the Court of Justice of the EU “, while reaffirming” that it is essential that the people of Western Sahara give their consent to the agreement “, which was not the case, concludes said statement.