Petitioners Push for Status Referendum, Autonomous Resettlement Plan, as Fourth Committee Continues Hearing on Western Sahara
During a meeting characterized by impassioned pleas, calls for justice and appeals to rationale, the Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization) heard testimony on Western Sahara for a second day in an effort to find a solution to the Territory’s 40-year pursuit of self-determination.
Petitioners from around the world, including the Saharan diaspora, offered insights into the conditions of the Territory — accusing both Morocco and Popular Front for the Liberation of Saguia el-Hamra and Rio de Oro (Frente Polisario) of mismanagement and human rights abuses — and perspectives on international law that applied to the situation. Several endorsed Morocco’s 2007 proposal for an autonomous resettlement plan and the long-promised United Nations-backed status referendum in order to bring the strife to an end.
Many recounted the history of the conflict, with several speakers blaming Spain for neglecting its responsibility to protect the Territory. Ahmed Boukhari, of the Frente Polisario, said that after 16 years of bloody warfare, the United Nations had put forth a peace plan including a referendum in which the people of Western Sahara could choose between independence and integration. However, he recalled that, during a speech on 6 November 2014, the King of Morocco had said Western Sahara would forever be a part of Morocco, ignoring the United Nations and “spitting on” the Saharans’ human rights.
Several legal scholars and European Parliamentarians said that Western Sahara was still a Territory that fell under Spanish administration, and although Spain had failed to protect the Saharan people, Morocco did not have jurisdiction over the Territory. Others noted that the lack of Saharan representation on an international level kept the Saharans in a constant state of limbo, with third parties deciding the terms of their existence and their future.
A Saharan refugee, Fatma Hossein Chajai, of the Femme et Jeunesse sahraouie en Belgique, said she stood before the Committee because of freedom of speech, a right she had gained after fleeing her own country, which could not guarantee her rights. Too many people had been killed or tortured, she stressed, adding that she was “terrified” to return home. “We want peace, we want freedom, we want equal rights for everyone,” she said, emphasizing that “we matter”.
Several petitioners called for the return of independent human rights monitors to the region or for the expansion of the mandate of United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO) to include oversight.
Craig Brown, of the Western Sahara Action Forum, said MINURSO was the only peacekeeping mission in the world without a human rights monitoring mechanism. United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon had called for an independent, impartial understanding of the human rights situation in Western Sahara and human rights monitoring was as important step to help MINURSO fulfil its mandate.
Giuseppe Romanini of the Intergroup of the Italian Parliament of Friendship with the Sahrawi People, said he saw first-hand how precarious and dangerous life was in the camps, and how human rights abuses committed by Morocco went unpunished, fuelling resentment and frustration, particularly among youth. “The sirens of Boko Haram and ISIS could prove irresistible” to that disenfranchised group, he warned.
Western rule-of-law organizations and human rights experts who petitioned the Committee, however, remained divided over the best way forward for the Saharans: continued management by the Frente Polisario or absorption into Morocco.
Juvenal Urízar Alfaro, a Chilean Professor of International Law, said the Saharan people “held captive” in the Tindouf camps had become a focus for Jihadi groups, and the camps also created a favourable atmosphere for trafficking in persons, drugs and arms. Morocco was one of the most stable countries in Africa and its 2007 autonomy proposal would ensure the stability of the region and spare the people of the Tindouf camps from radicalization.
Kirby Gookin of Western Sahara Human Rights Watch, who called Western Sahara the “touchstone of credibility for the United Nations”, said that a referendum was necessary if Morocco was to cease violating not only the civil and political rights of Saharans, but also the exploitation of phosphates and fisheries.
Katyln Thomas, another petitioner, said Morocco had refused to proceed with the referendum 15 years ago because it knew the results would not be in Morocco’s favour. Meanwhile, Morocco ran “rampant” in Western Sahara, brazenly proclaiming that the Territory was part of Morocco.
One of the final petitioners, Mula Ihfid sid Ahmed of the organization Sahrawi Students Collective Abroad, said his journey had started in the refugee camps, but he did not know where it would end. “Our future depends on this Committee,” he stressed, adding: “In Western Sahara, we believe in peace.”
Several other Saharan petitioners, as well as independent experts and representatives of non-governmental organizations from around the world, also took part in the discussion.
The Fourth Committee will next meet at 10 a.m. on 14 October to continue the joint general debate on decolonization.
Background
The Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization) continued its hearing of petitioners on Western Sahara this morning. See Press Releases GA/SPD/580 of 8 October, GA/SPD/581 of 9 October and GA/SPD/582 of 10 October for further background information.
Petitioners on the Question of Western Sahara
JAVIER COUSO PERMUY, Intergroupe “Western Sahara” du Parlement Européen, said that the European Parliament had held many debates and heard much testimony about the situation in Western Sahara, including Morocco’s violent expulsion of groups visiting the region and overseeing its well-being. The administering Power could not be turned into an occupying Power when the Territory still belonged to another country. Western Sahara was still a Territory, which should be under Spanish administration; Spain had constantly referred to its responsibility to Western Sahara. Nearly 25 years had gone by since the referendum on self-determination was initiated, but most of observers still lacked a mandate. Spain had failed to protect the people of the Western Sahara, but Morocco did not have jurisdiction over the Territory. The United Nations must facilitate a solution by enabling the people of Western Sahara to exercise their right to self-determination.
AHMEDOU HMAYEN, a judge in the Tindouf camps, said he had been held hostage by the Frente Polisario leadership and was forced to implement their strict instructions. Many times he would have rather been accused of a crime than be in a chair in the courts handing down the sentences. He fled the Tindouf camps, he said, and for 15 months bore witness to colossal oppression in Morocco. For 40 years the Saharan problem had been on the agenda of the United Nations, but the Organization had not been able to solve it. Undoubtedly the problem had not been solved because of the lack of Saharan representation at the United Nations during the proceedings that determined their interests, safety and dignity.
ERIC CAMERON, World Action for Refugees, said that the refugees in the Tindouf camps had been denied their most basic rights since the camps’ establishment. Equally heart-breaking was the fact that they were also systematically denied the right of voluntary repatriation that should have been granted to them in accordance with both international humanitarian law and international human rights law. Refugees’ rights were exploited by those tasked to protect them, and humanitarian aid sent to the camps was embezzled. Money was skimmed and food and others supplies were sold to the camp population rather than given for their free use. However, despite some mistreatment, Morocco was working towards creating a fabric of democracy and respect for human rights within its own territory and had launched a programme to educate those in public service in the Western Sahara on human rights.
JUVENAL URÍZAR ALFARO, a Chilean professor of international law, said Morocco was one of the most stable countries in Africa. While there was an expanded terrorist threat coming from the Sahel region, Morocco had instituted a series of reforms to counter that threat. The Saharan people were held captive in the Tindouf camps, he stressed, adding that the Frente Polisario was unable to control the area. The camps were a focus for Jihadi groups, and there was a favourable atmosphere for trafficking in persons, drugs and arms. He appealed to the United Nations and the international community to support Morocco’s 2007 autonomy proposal as a way forward to ensure the stability of the region and to spare the people of the Tindouf camps from radicalization.
KIRBY GOOKIN, Western Saharan Human Rights Watch, said Western Sahara was the “touchstone of credibility for the United Nations”. The colonizing Power, Spain, had not decolonized the area, and now the majority of the area was occupied by Morocco. The right to self-determination must be implemented without further delay. The civil and political rights of Saharans were being violated, with many political prisoners dying or remaining in prison. Economic rights also continued to be systematically violated through the exploitation of phosphates and fisheries. In addition, the social and cultural rights of the Saharan people also continued to be violated by Morocco. The longstanding dispute could not become an excuse for the United Nations to avoid its responsibilities, he stressed, urging the United Nations to help destroy the wall and antipersonnel landmines that surrounded it and set a date for the referendum.
AGAILA ABBA HEMEIDA said the women of Western Sahara were strong and beautiful. In Western Sahara, however, women were treated as a “second-class citizens” in their own homeland. The United Nations should never stand by and watch the type of violence and abuse that was taking place at the hands of the “brutal” Moroccan regime. It was time for the United Nations to take responsibility and prevent those actions. Morocco had no right to lay a hand on her fellow sisters and brothers, she stressed.
KATHRYN CAMERON PORTER, Leadership Council for Human Rights, said she had travelled to Western Sahara numerous times and met with bereaved family members of those who still languished in the refugee camps in Algeria. While there remained hope in the voices of those who had never left Western Sahara, there was nothing but horror stories from those who escaped the camps of Tindouf. However, there was hope in Western Sahara for the Saharans stranded in Tindouf: the application of the Moroccan autonomy plan, with a vote for self-determination. Morocco had invested billions of dollars to make Western Sahara a prosperous region for those living there and for those who wished to leave the camps and join their families for a future, if given the chance.
SHOJI MATSUMOTO said that it had been revealed in recent reports that even food and medicine destined for the Tindouf camps had been diverted by the Frente Polisario members and Algerian officials. Within the list of “crimes against humanity”, the crime of “extermination” included the deprivation of access to food and medicine calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population. Therefore, those individuals responsible for the diversion of that food and medicine could be punished under the International Criminal Court’s universal jurisdiction so long as any national justice system did not exercise its own jurisdiction. A State assumed responsibility for any internationally wrongful action or omission committed within its territory. Since the Frente Polisario was now a legal entity, the international community had the duty to call on Algeria to assume its responsibility as the host and sponsoring State of the Frente Polisario.
ADALBERTO AGOZINO, professor of international relations from Argentina, said that he estimated that the Frente Polisario and its predecessors had been for 40 years an obstacle to all efforts to find a solution to the Western Sahara conflict. That “separatist” movement also maintained inhumane conditions for the refugees in the Tindouf camps. The Moroccan autonomy initiative was the only one advanced in the Western Sahara, and the only one to guarantee the stability of the area. The Frente Polisario and Algeria had yet to propose any other political solution, other than to yield to all the requirements of the Frente Polisario. The Moroccan proposal would avoid the balkanization of the region and contain the terrorist threat there, he said, calling on the Algerian regime to end its support for the Frente Polisario.
SAYUMI ONODERA, Sapporo Institute for International Solidarity, said the exploitation of natural resources was a seriously misunderstood issue. Morocco had always tried to balance the profit of exploitation with the development of the Saharan people. In recent years, Morocco had allocated between $1.5 and $2 billion in the region, and all the agreements signed by the country were in line with the Vienna Conventions. Moreover, only a small percentage of Morocco’s total phosphate production came from the Western Sahara. It had launched a new model of sustainable growth from the territory, she said, urging the international community to consider Morocco’s autonomy proposal.
NYKAKY LYGEROS said the Frente Polisario was not a democratic system, though it might claim it was. For decades, the movement had been led in an autocratic fashion, which had a negative impact on its credibility. The Saharan people normally participated in the Moroccan elections, however, no election in refugee camps met all international standards – a “thorny” problem. The majority of the world disavowed the Frente Polisario action.
SMAIL DEBECHE said the people of Western Sahara had been waiting too long for a decision on their homeland. The Secretary-General had said 2015 would be the year in which the decolonization of Western Sahara would be achieved. He asked how such a human and noble project of the United Nations could be realized when people were still under colonization. An independent Western Sahara would not only help the United Nations achieve its great contribution to the world; it would also enhance peace and stability in the region.
STÉPHANE DOMINGUES RODRIGUES said some 10 million euros in aid were embezzled in Western Sahara every year. The European Union representatives had seen this in the OLAF report by the European Commission’s Anti-Fraud Office. A number of efforts had been made to secure aid. More than ever, an official census of the people in the Tindouf camps was needed, as there was currently no way to know exactly how many people needed aid. A resolution of the Security Council had called for such a census. Re-establishing trust was extremely important.
SURAIYA IT said the autonomy solution was commonly used to resolve territorial disagreements, as had been done in the Indonesian province of Aceh. In addressing conflicts such as Western Sahara, the international community should look at that case, she stressed, adding that a solution based on a process of autonomy could prevent frustration resulting from uncertainty over the future.
LIN-JOËL NDEMBET said the instability of the people in the Tindouf camps had been further shaken by the unrest in the Sahel region and the terrorist and jihadist groups present there. For decades, mediation had tried to resolve the problem but had not proven successful. The Security Council had agreed to a proposition: the sovereignty plan as put forth by Morocco. That was a correct course of action established through the Royal Consultative Council, which kept together the region’s culturally connected people, and it complied with the Charter. Unfortunately the Frente Polisario and Algeria had not taken advantage of the referendum; bad faith was involved in that decision.
GILONNE D’ ORIGNY, speaking as a legal scholar, said that Morocco had invaded Western Sahara 40 years ago in what it said was a move to reclaim parts of greater Morocco. But Spain was the administrative Power of the Territory. Morocco had not acquired more territory for itself; Spain had not abdicated its Territory. Morocco had carried out aggression against a Territory, and it was rare to see such injustice allowed by the United Nations. Spain must resume its position as the administrative authority and the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO) must take over to monitor the situation. The United Nations needed to set a date for the referendum and stick to it.
SALMA EL KASSMI, Conseil de la Communaute Marocaine a l’Etranger, said she was lucky to be British, to have “escaped the hellhole” of the Tindouf camps. It was unclear what authority had prohibited observers’ unaffected access to the camps; it was clear that women and children in the camps had been denied their basic human rights, including education. The region in which the camps were located was well known for its terror groups, and the dire lack of employment only provided the opportunity for more and more Saharans to be indoctrinated. She called for immediate action to allow observers to assess conditions in Western Sahara and to take the proposal of Moroccan sovereignty seriously as it was backed by the international community and the Saharan people.
ERICA VÁSQUEZ said the Committee had not met today to discuss the state of the refugee camps, but instead the legal right of the Western Saharan residents to vote in a status referendum. She had lived in Western Sahara for six weeks and had witnessed “inexplicable levels of violence” to prevent freedom of expression. She described an attempted demonstration where riot police had shown “completely unprovoked violent aggression”. She had also spoken to former political prisoners whose wounds from torture had become scars. She called on everyone in the room to act on “what is the right thing to do”.
KHAIRALLAH KHAIRALLAH, a journalist and political writer, said a “different” approach to the Saharan question was urgently needed. The issue found itself on the international agenda for 40 years because the international community did not want to take up the submission by Morocco offering expanded autonomy to the Territory. Morocco had taken many steps to achieve development in Western Sahara. Meanwhile, Algeria did not hesitate to invent a crisis or manoeuvres to destabilize Moroccan cohesion.
Speaking on a point of order, the representative of Algeria requested the Chair to restrict the petitioners to the items on the Committee’s agenda.
Also speaking on a point of order, the representative of Morocco said his colleague from Algeria still did not understand the way the Committee worked. Morocco, while it believed that Western Sahara was not an issue of decolonization, had joined in the dialogue in order to support the Territory’s rights and to explain its “incontestable sovereignty” over Western Sahara.
The Chair reminded the petitioners to abide by the question under discussion.
Mr. KHAIRALLAH then continued his statement, urging the Committee to look into the Moroccan proposal.
The representative of Algeria took the floor to respond to the petitioner, reminding him of Assembly resolution 38/40 of 7 December 1983, which outlined the need for a free and fair referendum. Algeria should not be involved in the matter.
CLARA RIVEROS, a Colombian consultant and analyst, said the Moroccan proposal was not only the most viable one but also the best chance for the Saharan people to achieve their rights. In a complex regional context, Morocco was in a position to ensure the security of its citizens. Morocco had helped to prevent radicalism, and its position provided many benefits for the Territory. Its proposal was in line with the decisions of the Security Council. Politically speaking, people of the Territory would be able to manage their own affairs. In economic terms, Morocco would assist with trade, tourism and agriculture. Housing, education, health, employment and social security would also be covered under the proposal.
EDUARDO ARROYO LAGUNA said that if the United Nations considered the social and geopolitical links in the region, it would have to make a decision that could not lead to the secession and separation of a country that had been tied to its native Morocco forever. After Egypt, the Moroccan State was the oldest in Africa, and Saharan tribes had once paid homage to the king of Morocco — the world could conceive neither a Sahara without Morocco, nor Morocco without a Sahara. Last December, during regional and municipal elections in Morocco, 40 per cent of Saharans voted. That was tantamount to a referendum.
The representative of Algeria, speaking on a point of order, said that at its thirty-fourth session the General Assembly urged Morocco to join in the peace process and recommended that under the Frente Polisario’s jurisdiction, people should participate fully in the question of Western Sahara.
The representative of Morocco said those resolutions being referred to by Algeria’s representative had been adopted in 1979. The Berlin Wall had already fallen, he said, and the representative from Algeria was paralyzed in its doctrine. The resolution for autonomy had been discussed in the Security Council for seven years.
The representative of Algeria asked what had become of the repercussions of the United Nations resolutions adopted around the same time if Morocco’s assertion was true.
MAHMOUD OUBLAL, Diaspora Sahraouie en Belgique, recalling the Moroccan invasion of his camps, said Morocco had also subjected the Saharans to exile and extra-judiciary measures. Every time his people, the Saharans, saw the Syrian refugees, he said, it reminded them of the injustice they had suffered. They had been deprived of cultural and civil rights in their own country, and if they sought political asylum in another country, they were met with rejection and deportation. He called on the Committee to take into consideration the humanitarian aspects of holding the referendum and expanding the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara’s (MINURSO) mandate to monitor human rights.
CRAIG BROWN, Western Sahara Action Forum, said MINURSO was the only peacekeeping mission in the world without a human rights monitoring mechanism and that Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon had called for an independent and impartial understanding of the human rights situation in Western Sahara. Human rights monitoring consisted of only one step on an arduous journey, but it was a vitally important step that laid the foundations for the Committee to help MINURSO fulfil its mandate. Additionally, the circumstances of Western Sahara’s resources under occupation had become graver, with the continued export of phosphate mineral rock and the first drilling for oil in the Territory’s seabed. Increasingly, the international community had expressed its concern for the plunder of Saharan resources.
SALKA DAHI BACHIR said the latest human rights violation in Western Sahara had been committed by Spain. She described a Saharan political prisoner whose asylum request was denied by that country. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights guaranteed the rights of refugees to seek asylum in cases where they feared persecution based on their race, religion or political beliefs. Spain had abandoned Western Sahara in 1975 and had left the once-called “Spanish Saharawis” alone and on their own. Indeed, Spain preferred not to compromise its relationship with its allies, even in light of the case of the 27-year-old political prisoner she had mentioned. Spain must guarantee him the right of asylum, she stressed.
AVA-MARIE MARINO said that, over the years, the question of Western Sahara had been pushed aside as other regional conflicts took centre stage. It was now time to address that matter directly. Article 73 of the Charter had been violated and the international community was responsible for negligence. The welfare of refugees living in the Tindouf camps should be of utmost concern to all those gathered in the room. The Saharan people needed stability, security and room to grow; they were not to be pawns in a political chess game. She appreciated the efforts of the Moroccan initiative for autonomy. “We cannot wait until conflict resumes” to act, she stressed.
KATLYN THOMAS said she had addressed the Committee four times and each time heard the same “irrelevant” speeches. They were irrelevant because if the Committee did its job properly the people of Western Sahara would be able to decide their future for themselves. There was no reason why a referendum could not be held; the excuse that there was no agreement on voting eligibility criteria was false. Morocco had refused to proceed with the referendum 15 years ago because it knew it the results would not be Morocco’s favour. Meanwhile, Morocco ran “rampant” in Western Sahara, brazenly proclaiming that the Territory was part of Morocco. She did not wish to come before the Committee again next year to listen to more empty speeches; if the Committee was no longer able to fulfil its mandate, she called on the United Nations to disband it.
AHMED BOUKHARI, Frente Polisario, noted the 40-year history of Western Sahara. After 16 years of bloody warfare, the United Nations had put forth a peace plan and a referendum in which the people of Western Sahara could choose between independence and integration. However, there was still no referendum. On 6 November, the King of Morocco said Western Sahara would forever be a part of Morocco. In that statement, he was ignoring the United Nations and “spitting on” the Saharan’s human rights. Morocco had remained in Western Sahara pillaging the Territory’s natural resources and flooding the region with drugs. The Frente Polisario had come seeking peace. The occupying Power was not only a lasting threat to Western Sahara, but also to regional peace. He asked why Morocco was afraid of the referendum, especially as it would help the region avoid the terrible things seen in other parts of the Middle East and the Africa.
The representative of Uganda, speaking on a point of order, asked the petitioner to expand more on the violation of human rights in Western Sahara.
The representative of South Africa said his delegation would like hear more about the various allegations of siphoning of humanitarian aid from the Tindouf camps and of terrorism surrounding the camps.
The representative of Ecuador said he would like to hear more about the humanitarian aid in the Tindouf camps.
Mr. BOUKHARI said there had been reports from not only the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) but also from other non-governmental organizations that listed the violations, including the lack of respect for self-determination and the lack of a mandate to oversee human rights in the Western Sahara. The Frente Polisario had opened the camps to human rights monitoring, he said. Regarding the referendum, Morocco did not want to risk losing it.
The representative of Morocco, speaking on a point of order, said he wished to remind the Committee Chair that responses to questions should not exceed one minute.
The Chair replied that he had granted four minutes of speaking time for the petitioners to answer questions.
The representative of Morocco said that he had been giving other petitioners one minute, as it was always done, and now he was giving the petitioner more time to answer questions. He asked the Chair to “please stop this game”.
The representative of Algeria said the representative of Morocco was calling into question the intentions of the speakers and questioning their credibility. Even if the petitioner had the right to one minute, if there were four questions, he had the right to four minutes.
Mr. BOUKHARI said that regarding the question of humanitarian aid, the accusations made were unjust and incorrect. Humanitarian aid sent into the camps was strictly controlled; the European Commission had established strict follow-up on the process.
FATMA HOSSEIN CHAJAI, Femme et Jeunesse Sahraouie en Belgique, said she stood before the Committee because of freedom of speech, a right she had gained because she had fled her own country, which could not provide her rights. She had been forced to leave the place she loved the most. Women should not be beaten and youth should not be locked up and made to feel as if their lives did not matter. Too many people had been killed or tortured, she stressed, adding that she was “terrified” to return to her Territory. “We want peace, we want freedom, we want equal rights for everyone,” she said, emphasizing that “we matter”.
SUZANNE SCHOLTE, President, Defense Forum Foundation, said her foundation had circulated a petition calling for the release of political prisoners in Western Sahara. Around the world, “you can always tell people of integrity by where they stand on this issue” — those who supported self-determination for Western Sahara. Supporters of Morocco’s position — the illegal occupation — were either being coerced or bribed by the country or did not believe in basic human rights. There had been continual human rights violations in the Territory, and those trying to exercise their rights languished in Saharan prisons. Thousands of Saharans had lived in inhospitable refugee camps waiting for a referendum. Through its inaction, the Committee was sending a message that trust in the United Nations would only result in your children growing up in refugee camps or being beaten.
MULA IHFID SID AHMED, of the Saharawi Students Collective Abroad, said his journey had started from the refugee camps, but he did not know where it would end. “Our future depends on this Committee,” he stressed. A year had passed since he had last addressed the Committee, and nothing had changed. His family, along with 200,000 other Saharan refugees, continued to live in limbo. The youth were the most frustrated, as they had been born into exile and had yet to see their homeland due to the Moroccan occupation. “In Western Sahara, we believe in peace,” he said, but there were those that would argue that the peaceful path chosen by the Saharans had been counterproductive. The fate of that people must be put back in its own hands.
DIEGO MORERA, Association for Peace in Western Sahara, said peace had no meaning unless it was shared with the people of the Western Sahara. The conflict had been covered up by the Moroccan delegation, which had displaced, tortured and massacred the people of the Western Sahara. Many times the United Nations had stood strong against tyranny. He asked why the people of Western Sahara were not afforded the same treatment by the Organization.
MANUEL OLLÉ SESÉ, APDHE, said that in 2006, the criminal courts in Spain had begun a legal inquiry into the crimes committed by Morocco in the Western Sahara. After citing the history detailed in the bill of indictment, he said that Spain’s total abandonment of Western Sahara had given way to the conflict between Morocco and the Frente Polisario. “The bill of indictment described with all due legal weight that Morocco had committed crimes tantamount to genocide,” he said. The torture, extrajudicial killings and the abuse of women and children continued. It was not only the United Nations resolutions that Morocco was obliged to follow but also the judgements of the courts, which required that the legal truth be respected.
GIUSEPPE ROMANINI, Intergroup of the Italian Parliament of Friendship with the Sahrawi People, said that after he went to a Saharan camp in December to provide support and solidarity for the people living there, he realized that life in the camp was more precarious and the dangers more acute than he had thought. Morocco consistently and with impunity violated the human rights of people in the camps. Those violations had been listed in many non-governmental organizations’ reports. But the international public remained unaware of them. The international community needed to intervene quickly. The lack of intervention fostered increased frustration, especially among young people. “The sirens of Boko Haram and ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Sham) could prove irresistible,” he said. Italy, which supported many Western Sahara projects, had passed a resolution in its national Parliament to respect the right to self-determination by the Saharan people. The United Nations must follow through.
AHMED NAFAÂ, President, Association Citoyenneté et Développement humain de Dakhla, said Morocco had recently held the first elections under its new Constitution, an “important step” for Moroccans who managed their own affairs under a policy of decentralization. The results had taken place in an atmosphere of democracy. Some 80 per cent in the Saharan provinces had voted, which reflected the aspirations of the Saharan people as well as the soundness of the Moroccan path to settle the issue. Indeed, the people of the provinces had voted despite the Frente Polisario’s propaganda campaign. Saharans were allowed to manage their own affairs under Moroccan control, but the same right was denied to their brothers living in the Tindouf camps.
MAHFOUD BOUAD said he had witnessed many human rights violations and abuses by the Moroccan regime in Western Sahara. The Saharan people wished to be freed from oppression. The Security Council was failing in its moral and legal duties to protect the rights of the Saharan people, in particular as a result of its failure to institute a human rights monitoring instrument in that region. “It is shameful that we have yet to bring decolonization and self-determination to every human being,” he said, calling for independent, impartial mechanisms for monitoring human rights both in Western Sahara and in the refugee camps, and for the United Nations to prevent the plunder of natural resources until the referendum could take place.