Analysis of the Moroccan Autonomy Plan for Western Sahara: International Legality, Resource Management, and Democratic Prospects

The Moroccan Autonomy Plan for Western Sahara, proposed in 2007, is built on a legally contentious premise: it assumes that Morocco holds sovereignty over the territory. However, Western Sahara has been listed as a non-self-governing territory by the United Nations since 1963, and Morocco is not recognized as its administering power under international law. In the absence of recognized sovereignty, any initiative framed within Morocco’s constitutional framework lacks legal foundation. This fundamental contradiction undermines the plan’s credibility and raises critical questions about its legitimacy.

1. The Autonomy Plan and International Legality

1.1. Western Sahara: A non-self-governing territory

Western Sahara has been classified as a non-self-governing territory by the United Nations since 1963. Article 73 of the UN Charter affirms the inalienable right of the peoples of such territories to self-determination, including the options of independence, integration with another state, or autonomous governance within a framework of independence.

1.2. The limitations of the Moroccan plan

The Moroccan plan imposes Morocco’s sovereignty as the starting point for negotiations, which is inconsistent with UN resolutions, particularly Resolution 1514 (XV) on decolonization, which calls for a free and transparent process of self-determination encompassing all options. The absence of an independence option in the Moroccan plan directly contradicts international standards, significantly reducing its credibility as a viable solution.

2. Resource Management: A Contested Exploitation

2.1. Strategic wealth

Western Sahara is rich in natural resources, including phosphates, fisheries, and potential oil and gas reserves. These resources are central to the conflict, serving as a vital source of income for local populations on the one hand and the Moroccan economy on the other.

2.2. Exploitation and international law

The Moroccan autonomy plan allocates a portion of resource revenues to regional development but maintains centralized state control over strategic exploitation. This approach violates international law principles, which require that the resources of non-self-governing territories be utilized for the exclusive benefit of their inhabitants and with their explicit consent.

2.3. International criticism

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled in 2016 and 2018 to annul agreements between the European Union and Morocco that included resources from Western Sahara, citing the lack of explicit consent from the Sahrawi people. The Moroccan plan provides no mechanisms to ensure compliance with this principle, further undermining its legitimacy.

3. Democratic Prospects: A Lack of Credibility

3.1. Morocco’s democratic context

Although Morocco presents itself as a constitutional monarchy, its political system remains highly centralized under the king, who wields broad powers, including in defense, diplomacy, and religious affairs. Parliamentary and judicial institutions lack independence, and fundamental freedoms such as freedom of expression and assembly face significant restrictions.

3.2. Unrealistic democratic promises in the plan

The autonomy plan proposes the creation of regional institutions elected to govern the territory, including a regional parliament and government. However, these institutions would remain subject to Morocco’s overarching sovereignty. For instance:

• The regional government’s leader would be appointed by the king (Article 20 of the plan).
• Regional laws would need to comply with the Moroccan constitution (Article 24).

Given these constraints, the plan’s democratic promises appear unfeasible in practice.

3.3. Representation of the Sahrawi people

The plan fails to address how Sahrawi refugees, particularly those in camps in Tindouf, Algeria, would participate in the regional democratic process. Excluding these populations further erodes the plan’s political and democratic legitimacy.

4. Challenges to International Trust

4.1. A unilateral initiative

While Morocco frames its plan as a compromise solution, it is widely viewed by the Polisario Front and many states as a unilateral attempt to entrench Morocco’s control over the territory. The absence of independent oversight mechanisms, such as UN supervision, undermines trust in the plan’s implementation.

4.2. Possible alternatives

A durable resolution to the conflict requires:

• A referendum under UN supervision that includes all options, including independence.
• Transparent and equitable resource management, ensuring direct benefits for the Sahrawi people.
• Genuine guarantees of autonomous and democratic governance, supported by international monitoring to prevent abuses.

Conclusion

The Moroccan Autonomy Plan for Western Sahara suffers from significant shortcomings in terms of legality, resource management, and democratic governance. By presupposing Moroccan sovereignty over the territory, it conflicts with international law and ignores the legitimate aspirations of the Sahrawi people. Furthermore, its promises of autonomous democratic governance and resource sharing lack credibility in a broader context of limited democratic openness in Morocco. Resolving the conflict will require an inclusive approach that respects the rights of the Sahrawi people and ensures a transparent and fair process under international supervision.

Belgacem Merbah

Autonomy Plan for Western Sahara:

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/dmag/dv/dmag20101130_06-/dmag20101130_06-fr.pdf