PUSL analyzed the dozens of online petitions concerning Western Sahara of the last years (*of which we have placed only a few links of those that immediately appear in a google search) and we come to the following conclusions:
1) Avaaz, Change org and other platforms disguised as non-profit organizations do not function, nor in the number of signatures collected, nor are they delivered to the recipients, nor is there any information at the “end of the Campaign” by the promoters “of the campaigns.
2) The most successful campaign in the number of signatures (several thousand), which was delivered to the recipient and whose outcome was published, was the campaign of the Swiss Committee of support to the Saharawi People. This campaign was developed by the committee itself on an online site without intervention from any other organizations or platforms such as avaaz etc.
3) The Swiss Committee campaign could have been even more successful if it had not been “boycotted” proactively. That is to say that when the Committee’s campaign was launched, soon afterward a challenge with the same name was launched (by an unknown part) so that people would take pictures of a painted finger of blue as if they had voted, which immediately resulted in “deviation” from the real campaign.
4) The Avaaz website has a world map where Western Sahara appears as part of Morocco without any identification. Curiously, someone launched a campaign in Avaaz to ratify the Google map so that the Sahara would appear as a distinct country, without realizing that Avaaz itself includes the Sahara in Morocco.
5) Campaigns that are publicized, and have a relevant number of signatures on the Avaaz, Change org and other platforms are PAYED campaigns of lobbies with economic power or whose “supporters” send “donations” to the platforms.
It is thus proven that initiatives such as that of the Swiss Committee are examples to be repeated while the other alternatives are clearly ineffective.
The recollection of signatures of the “Referendum NOW in Western Sahara” had the text in 6 languages, was easy to access and use and the promoter (Swiss Committee) informed supporters of the evolution of the campaign step by step. The aim was to involve supporters of the referendum. The delivery of the signatures was public.