On Thursday, 28 October, a majority of the members of the European Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries declared themselves to be in favour of continuing the EU-Morocco fisheries agreement, even though they fear it will be annulled after the EU General Court’s judgment.
At the end of September, the General Court ruled that the EU and Morocco had not consulted the Polisario Front separatists before concluding two agreements on trade and fisheries that affect the territory of Western Sahara (see EUROPE 12820/16). It thus annulled the two agreements in question, nevertheless maintaining their effects for 2 months or for the entire period required for an appeal if one were to be lodged.
Appeal? Francisco José Millán Mon (EPP, Spain) revealed that the EU Council’s Legal Service would be in favour of filing an appeal before the Court of Justice of the EU.
The European Commission indicated that the Council of the EU has until 16 December to lodge an appeal and that if it does not, EU vessels will have to leave Moroccan waters by mid-December. According to the European Commission, if an appeal is filed, the agreement should be maintained for about 2 years, the time it will take for the Court of Justice to hand down its judgment.
Peter van Dalen (EPP, the Netherlands) felt that the agreement was good for everyone.
Clara Aguilera (S&D, Spain) states, “this agreement needs to be maintained—not only for Spain but also because it is an important agreement for political relations with Morocco”.
Likewise, Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR, the Netherlands) felt that the Council of the EU should file an appeal before the EU court, if only to keep the agreement in force during the coming months.
Søren Gade (Renew Europe, Denmark) is of the opinion that this judgment could have “negative repercussions” on EU-Morocco relations.
Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (Renew Europe, Spain) wondered how the EU was going to proceed so as to comply with the EU General Court’s judgment.
The Greens/EFA group is concerned. Grace O’Sullivan (Greens/EFA, Ireland) expressed that she had “serious concerns” about a fisheries agreement “that utilises the waters of a country in which the local population has no say and has lived under occupation for decades”. According to Ms O’Sullivan, the agreement has little impact on the local populations. Ms O’Sullivan hammered home, “90% of the money and fish caught in Western Saharan waters goes to Morocco, to reward the occupier”.
The Greens/EFA group is thus calling for there to be no appeal before the Court of Justice but rather a dialogue to verify whether the people of Western Sahara want European trawlers to operate in their waters.
For João Pimenta Lopes (The Left, Portugal), the agreement should be suspended, given that the Court of Justice is of the opinion that it violates international law and the rights of the Saharawi people. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)