EU extraterritorial obligations with respect to trade with occupied territories: Reflections after the case of Front Polisario before EU courts

Abstract

This paper provides a critical analysis of the recent judgments of the General Court of the EU and the Court of Justice of the EU in the case of Front Polisario v Council , which concerned the application of the EU-Morocco Liberalisation Agreement to products from Western Sahara. The central argument is that both EU courts failed to adequately consider the nature of the Moroccan presence on Western Saharan territory: a belligerent occupation. In light of this occupation, the courts should have channelled the EU’s extraterritorial obligations vis-à-vis the population of Western Sahara through the tailor-made regimes of the law of occupation and the international duty of non-recognition. It is argued that the application of the Liberalisation Agreement may notably run afoul of the EU’s duty of non-recognition, but that the Agreement may still apply insofar as it benefits the local population. More fundamentally, after Front Polisario , the EU may want to reconsider all trade relations in respect of occupied territories by distinguishing between legitimate and illegitimate products.

La evolución de las controversias en la Unión Europea respecto a la aplicación al Sáhara Occidental de sus Acuerdos con Marruecos en materia de relaciones pesqueras y agroalimentarias

“…Hasta ahora, las controversias que han ido planteándose en las instituciones europeas han sido abordadas de manera parcial y fragmentada, siguiendo el ritmo de la actualidad, bien en el contexto de celebración de los distintos acuerdos (Pastor Ridruejo, 1986;Juste Ruiz, 1988;Sobrino Heredia, 2000;Milano, 2006;González García, 2006y 2010Capaux, 2007;Torrejón Rodríguez, 2013;Iglesias Berlanga, 2019;Kassotti, 2019;Stephen, 2020); bien en el de las distintas sentencias (Dubuisson y Poissonnier, 2016;De Elera, 2017;El Ouali, 2017;Ferrer Lloret, 2017;González Vega, 2018y 2022Hilpol, 2017;Ryngaert y Fransen, 2018;Wrange, 2019;Kassoti, 2020;Suárez-Collado y Contini, 2021;Ruiz Miguel, 2022;Soroeta Liceras, 2016y 2022a, y también se mencionan en trabajos de conjunto que abordan cuestiones relativas a la autodeterminación del pueblo saharaui (por ejemplo, Ferrer LLoret, 2002;Riquelme Cortado, 2011;Badía Martí, 2013), o en análisis sobre las relaciones UE-Marruecos o sobre la acción de la UE respecto del Sáhara Occidental (por ejemplo, Riquelme Cortado y Sáenz de Santamaría, 2012; Ruiz Miguel, 2013;Soroeta Liceras, 2009;Torrejón Rodríguez, 2014). Por ello, ante la novedad que supone que el criterio de representación se movilice prioritariamente en las últimas sentencias de los tribunales europeos (2021), resulta necesario revisitar esta literatura con el objeto de interrogar cuáles han sido esos argumentos y cómo han evolucionado en el tiempo.…”

BetweenSollenandSein: The CJEU’s reliance on international law in the interpretation of economic agreements covering occupied territories

“…By a priori excluding the legal applicability of the agreements to Western Sahara on the basis of formalistic argumentation, the Court managed to avoid pronouncing thereonin a rather overt attempt to achieve conformity with international law without having to pronounce on the legal repercussions of the EU's policy and practice towards Western Sahara. 164 6. Conclusion: The Völkerrechtsfreundlichkeit debate in the light of the CJEU's case law relating to economic agreements covering occupied territories The article showed that the Court's approach to international law in cases involving economic agreements covering occupied territories is highly problematic.…”