SEPARATE OPINION of JUDGE DE CASTRO 1 Have Voted in Favour of the Advisory Opinion Because It States That There Are No Ties of S
SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE DE CASTRO [Translation] 1 have voted in favour of the Advisory Opinion because it states that there are no ties of sovereignty between the territory of Western Sahara and the Kingdom of Morocco and the Mauritanian entity, and that the principle of self-determination should be applied to the said territory, thereby giving a correct, clear and conclusive reply to the real questions put to the Court. On the other hand, 1 cannot go along with the Advisory Opinion either in its statement regarding the existence of other legal ties between the territory and the Kingdom of Morocco and the Mauritanian entity, nor in al1 its reasoning. In order to justify my vote, 1feel obliged to set out my separate opinion below. 1. Origins of the Case For the sake of clarity and to avoid repetitions, 1 think it as well to refer to the more important features of the background to the case before the Court. The ultimate origins of resolution 3292 (XXIX) of the United Nations General Assembly can be traced back to the determined activity of a most extraordinary personality, Si Allal El Fassi, to whom must be attributed Morocco's interest in the expansion of its frontiers. It would seem that, around 1956, Moroccans firmly believed that the Sherifian Kingdom did not extend beyond the Wad Dra'a. Government ministers were unaware even of the existence of the southern region of the Spanish Protectorate '. El Fassi, on the other hand, even before Morocco's independence, was advocating the reconstitution of Greater Morocco, by claiming, on the basis of Morocco's historic rights, Mauritania, Rio de Oro, the Sakiet El Hamra, part of Algeria - Tindouf and Colomb-Béchar- and part of Mali.
[Show full text]