In a recent resounding verdict, the Court of Tarascon (France) inflicted a resounding defeat on the Confederation Paysanne, a powerful French trade union, putting an end to its misuse of the legal system, in the context of the dispute surrounding the agricultural agreement between Morocco and the European Union.
This decision constitutes a new setback for the "polisario" and its allies in France, who see their maneuvers thwarted by the rigor of the French judicial system, like the debacle recently suffered before the High Court in London.
At the heart of this case, the action brought by the Confédération Paysanne aimed to hinder the activities of the French company IDYL, which specializes in the distribution of fruit and vegetables from Morocco, including the Southern Provinces. The avowed objective was to obtain a ban on the distribution of IDYL products, while demanding financial penalties and damages for the alleged harm suffered.
However, during the legal proceedings, IDYL brilliantly demonstrated that this action was only a project carried out by a handful of dissidents not representative of the Confédération Paysanne, in total violation of the internal procedures of the organization, and motivated by a campaign hostile policy in Morocco. The court also confirmed that the action was time-barred, thus exceeding the regulatory deadlines, thus corroborating IDYL's arguments that the Confédération Paysanne was pursuing political objectives rather than a real quest for justice.
The condemnation of the Confédération Paysanne by the Court of Tarascon therefore constitutes a new disappointment for the circles hostile to Morocco, revealing, once again, their dogmatic adherence to the theses of the polisario. By attacking the agricultural agreement between Morocco and the European Union, the Confédération Paysanne has only indulged in calculated opportunism, exploiting an artificial polemic, with no real concern for defending legitimate rights.
This court decision thus confirms the legitimacy of the action taken by Morocco in its southern provinces, while ensuring that the exploitation of natural resources complies with the standards of international law. It strengthens the country's position and validates the approach adopted by Morocco, in agreement with its international partners.
In fact, the judgment rendered by the Court of Tarascon is to be welcomed, because it categorically refuses to recognize the Confédération Paysanne and its political supporters decision-making power in matters of economic development of the southern provinces. By refraining from ruling on the merits of the case, the court thus recalls the fair measure that is required of this organization.
It is to remind that economic relations between Morocco and the European Union in the agricultural sector are characterized by a common history and geographical proximity, which makes them first-rate outlets for Moroccan and European products. Since the entry into force of the agricultural agreement, a mutually beneficial approach has been put in place, as evidenced by the reports drawn up by the European Commission.
It is clear that the decision of the Court of Tarascon is in perfect conformity with international law and European law, thus reinforcing the jurisprudence recently established by the High Court of London, which had rejected the claims of the polisario and affirmed, of irrefutably, the legality of the agreements concluded by Morocco for its southern provinces. This means that this legal consistency confirms the correctness of the Moroccan position, which is in strict compliance with the international legal framework.
Comments