In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYT,  Azerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

By Matthew Russell Lee, Periscope, song, II

UNITED NATIONS GATE, March 18 – On Western Sahara, when the UN Security Council's rare meeting began back on March 21, Secretary General Antonio Guterres' personal envoy Horst Kohler walked in with security. Asked if he would speak with the press afterward, he had one word: "No." He is based in Germany and has been allowed to spend public funds on his own holdover team, just as Guterres spends public funds to go to his home in Portugal. Now as Guterres' retaliatory ban on Inner City Press even entering the UN, now in its 257th day and based on a frivolous Morocco Mission complaint, this: "The Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for Western Sahara, Mr. Horst Köhler, will convene delegations from Morocco, the Frente POLISARIO, Algeria and Mauritania in a second roundtable meeting on Western Sahara on 21 and 22 March 2019 in Switzerland.     The meeting will take place in accordance with UN Security Council resolution 2440 as a further step in the political process towards reaching a just, lasting, and mutually acceptable political solution, which will provide for the self-determination of the people of Western Sahara.     The purpose of the meeting is for delegations to start approaching elements needed for building an enduring solution based on compromise. The meeting will also serve as an opportunity for the delegations to revisit regional issues and discuss how to build trust.     The Personal Envoy has held bilateral consultations with the delegations in order to prepare for the roundtable. He hopes that the meeting will consolidate the positive dynamic created by the first roundtable, that was held in December 2018. " We'll have more on this. Morocco which Guterres has praises so much on migration has been bragging about a European court decision on which Guterres has refused to answer Inner City Press' written question. Now, finally, the decision is online and here are paragraphs 26-30, Google translated: "However, a decision such as the contested decision adopted on the basis of Article 218 (3) and (4) TFEU is not addressed to the applicant but to the negotiator appointed there, namely the Commission. It follows that the use of the examination may be declared admissible only if the applicant is directly and individually concerned by it.  27       As regards direct assignment, that condition requires the meeting of two cumulative criteria, namely that the contested measure, in the first place, has direct effects on the individual's legal position and, secondly, leaves no the discretion of the addressees who are responsible for its implementation, which is purely automatic and derives from Union rules alone, without the application of other intermediate rules (judgment of 13 October 2011, Deutsche Post and Germany v Commission, C-463/10 P and C-475/10 P, EU: C: 2011: 656, paragraph 66).  28       However, in accordance with Article 218 (3) and (4) TFEU, a decision such as the contested decision is intended only to designate the negotiator and / or the head of the Union's negotiating team and to send directives to them. It is therefore an act having legal effects only in relations between the Union and its Member States and between the institutions of the Union (judgment of 16 July 2015, Commission v Council, C-425 / 13, EU: C: 2015: 483, paragraph 28, see also, to that effect, judgment of 4 September 2014, Commission v Council, C-114/12, EU: C: 2014: 2151, paragraph 40).  29       Consequently, as the Council argues, that measure has no effect on the applicant's legal position and therefore can not be regarded as being directly concerned by the contested decision within the meaning of the case-law referred to in point 27 above.  30      The applicant's arguments that the impugned decision produces such results because the proposed agreement is intended to apply in the territory of Western Sahara and, consequently, to affect the Saharawi people, can not be accepted. . Indeed, if, of course, the Saharawi people are to be regarded as enjoying the right to self-determination and as being a "third party" within the meaning of the principle of the relative effect of the treaties (decision of 21 December 2016, Council / Polisario Front , C-104/16 P, EU: C: 2016: 973, paragraphs 90 to 92 and 106), the fact remains that any possible allocation of the applicant's legal position must be assessed in the light of the content of the agreement on which the negotiations initiated under the contested decision On the other hand, the effects which a decision such as the impugned decision might have on the applicant, which merely authorizes the Union to open negotiations, consists in the fact that the latter will not count among the political actors who will negotiate and sign the agreement. It follows that, as the Council submits, the effects in question are of a highly political nature and that, as a result, the contested decision can not be regarded as directly affecting the applicant's legal position within the meaning of Article 263, fourth paragraph, TFEU." So it's not as pro Morocco trolls including diplomats are saying. We'll have more on this. Before the December 19 UN noon briefing Inner City Press in writing asked Guterres, his Spokesman Stephane Dujarric and Global Communicator Alison Smale who promised answers, questions including this: "December 19-3: On Western Sahara, confirm SG receipt of and state his response to letter of Polisario urging him to clear “mines that threaten the lives of Saharwis” and that on Friday, December the 14th, two mines caused the “death of a Sahrawi man and serious injuries to others”? Dujarric didn't read out the question the way for example even the IMF does with Inner City Press' questions; he entertained questions from pro-Morocco scribes to which he and Guterres and Smale give UN office space even if they write no articles. Today's UN is corrupt.  

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

Past (and future?) UN Office: S-303, UN, NY 10017 USA
For now: Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2019 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com for