Brussels, The Eighth Chamber of the European Court of Justice rendered its judgment (49 pages) over the agricultural agreement between Morocco and the European Union, last Thursday.
Such European judgment was not expected because it is a drift: It was a judgment based on inconsistent arguments, suppositions and unfounded allegations put forward by lawyers known for their hostility towards Morocco, turning the trial to a flawed and unjust one.
No argument, being solid convincing and motivating, submitted by the European Commission and the EU Council was retained by the court, basing its judgment on a single element. This element was not introduced in due form: “the Council did not discuss the question whether or not the exploitation of the Sahara natural resources benefits of the local people.”
Even worse, the judgment specified that Polisario does not have the legal capacity to engage in legal proceedings and the court rejects all the pleas submitted by this pseudo-entity and its lawyers working for Algeria. This is a paradox that should be taken into account before annulling the agreement.
Nothing in the arguments or the pleas invoked by the petitioner showed the existence of any rule of a customary international law which prohibits concluding an international agreement that can be applicable over a disputed territory, stated in the judgment.
In front of this legal blunders, one can only wonders why did this court, which does not recognize any right of Polisario, rendered the judgment in its favor and how did the court ignore the well-elaborated, consistent and documented arguments of the UE Council and the European Commission?
It is also outrageous to observe that the court decision motivated by “benefit of local people” makes no reference whatsoever to the advanced regionalization, to the model of provinces development in the South, to the development programme launched by the King VI in Laayoun, last November, to the total participation in the Sahara around 80% in the last regional and communal elections, or to the per-capita income in these provinces, which is the highest in all Morocco.
Many tangible arguments, which refute the assertions over any exploitations of the natural resources in this region would have enlighten the jurisdiction and help in rendering a fair and consistent verdict.
The formation of Eighth Chamber and the defense explains these legitimate questions.
The trial Trio was composed of Grec Dimitrios Gratsias, as president, the Swedish, Carl Wetter and the Bulgarian Maryana Kancheva. The last two were lawyers in Brussels, an environment known for its permeability to lobbying.
They were happy to find a 3-year case permitting them to justify their luxurious stay in Grand Duche. The judgment rendered by this Trio will be remembered throughout their lives.
Carl Wetter himself evoked the idleness of the magistrates. In a press conference, he talked about «the spectacular drop » of cases to be proceeded.
In this case, what matters is the way to designate those lucky people. It is about the political friendship which precedes competence. The result is a European judgment which will ruin the Europe interests.
In the petitioner’s defense, the jury was composed of the French lawyer Gilles Devers, a fervent lawyer in generously paid cases. He started his career as a nurse. His Algerian friend, Chems-Eddine Hafiz, is the second lawyer of ‘Aolgesario’ in this case.
Upon leaving the court, after pronouncing the verdict, Gilles Devers and his colleagues entered into fits of laughter and conspicuously happy to claim a new prize paid by the poor Algerian taxpayers.
It is high time for the European institutions (Parliament, Commission, and Council) to avoid the tracks which do not serve the EU interests and which they are at the same time prejudicial to those countries considered as strategic partners in the region, like Morocco and others, which threaten other countries.
Today, Europe has to focus on the problems related to migration, terrorism and economic growth of its citizens, through facing all the attempts that divert from its objectives and bring troubles to its strategic alliances along with its trustworthy partners.
Written by Adil Zaari and Translated by Latifa Haboula Benali