Doha – In an exclusive interview with Morocco World News (MWN), international affairs expert Mohamed Bouden sharply criticized the Court of Justice of the European Union’s (ECJ) recent ruling on the EU-Morocco agricultural and fisheries agreements, calling it “devoid of any legal contribution” and “politically charged.”

The ECJ ruled on October 4 that the EU Commission “violated the right to self-determination of the people of Western Sahara” by concluding trade agreements with Morocco that included products from Morocco’s southern provinces. The ruling has sparked outrage from Morocco and support from several EU member states for the strategic EU-Morocco partnership.

“In reality, the ECJ decision regarding the agricultural and fisheries agreements signed in 2019 did not provide any legal contribution to international legal doctrine on the issue of Moroccan Sahara,” Bouden told MWN. “Rather, it went overboard in inserting politically charged concepts into the body of the decision.”

‘The ECJ cannot create a jurisdiction it does not have’

Bouden presented five legal arguments asserting the ECJ ruling is flawed.

First, he argued that the decision “violated the spirit of the UN Charter (signed in 1945), particularly the provisions of Articles 1 and 73, as well as a partial and extraneous reading of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.”

He pointed out that the court disregarded Article 26, which states that “every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith,” and Article 27, which prevents any party from invoking provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.

Second, Bouden maintained that “the facts relied upon by the court fall outside the scope of European law due to the subject matter of the case, over which the UN and Security Council have exclusive jurisdiction.”

The ECJ “cannot create a jurisdiction it does not have and grant legal and factual characteristics to an imaginary entity that has no legitimacy to represent the local population,” he added.

Third, he argued that the court cannot unilaterally interpret the principles of self-determination “without taking into account doctrinal opinions (internal self-determination democratically and developmentally), judicial precedents (judgments of the Court of Appeal in London and the Court of Tarascon…), and sovereign decisions of states supporting Morocco’s Autonomy Plan, particularly 19 European countries among them.”

Fourth, Bouden maintained that the decision “contains terms that can only be interpreted in a political context, far from the judicial authority of the ECJ or the legal framework of its work.”

He criticized the court for “recklessly relying on this imaginary narrative charged with political backgrounds in the drafting of its decision,” despite its inability to define the meaning and scope of the “people of Western Sahara.”

Finally, he argued that the court “did not take into account the impact of development on the lives of the population in Moroccan Sahara and regional stability, nor the Kingdom of Morocco’s diversification of international partnerships and agreements with multiple parties to increase investment opportunities and economic and social sustainability in the southern provinces.”

What lies ahead for Morocco-EU relations?

From a strategic and political perspective, Bouden argued, the ruling “makes relations between Morocco and the EU experience clear contradictions and a spiral of developments that affect sources of confidence and stability” at a time when bilateral ties between Morocco and European countries are reaching new heights of trust and partnership.

He outlined four key points for the future of Morocco-EU relations, saying that the EU “must work to remove and neutralize risks on some important and sensitive issues in its relations with Morocco.”

Bouden also emphasized the need for a “unified and coordinated approach to deal with Morocco,” noting that “it is useful to have a coherent and clear European strategy with Morocco, its supreme interests, and paths of joint action.”

Furthermore, he argued that the “deep-rooted framework of Moroccan-European relations should fortify sources of momentum and mutual respect in relations between the two parties from targeting.”

Bouden concluded by stressing that “the message that should reach various global decision-making centers is that Moroccan Sahara is the lens measuring the sincerity of friendships and effectiveness of partnerships.”

Shortly after the ECJ delivered its ruling last week, the EU Commission rushed to reaffirm its commitment to upholding the terms of its cooperation with Morocco. The EU and Morocco “firmly intend to preserve and continue strengthening close relations in all areas of the Morocco-EU Partnership, in line with the principle of pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be kept),” the Commission said in a statement.

Several EU countries followed suit, emphasizing the strategic nature of the Morocco-EU partnership.

In response to the ECJ’s hostile verdict, Morocco’s Foreign Affairs Ministry stated that the country does not consider the ruling as relevant or important for its agricultural or fisheries agreements with the EU.

“The content of this decision contains obvious legal errors and suspicious factual mistakes,” the ministry said, arguing that this indicates a “complete misunderstanding of the realities of the case if not a blatant political bias,” the ministry charged.

It went on to accuse the court of attempting to substitute itself for competent UN bodies, contradicting their positions and approaches.

“Morocco is consistent in its position that it will not agree to any agreement or legal instrument that does not respect its territorial integrity,” the ministry concluded, demanding the EU Council, Commission, and member states take all measures to respect their international commitments and preserve their partnership agreements with Rabat.