Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 40kWORD 19k
15 April 2019
E-001838-19
Question for written answer E-001838-19
to the Commission
Rule 130
Florent Marcellesi (Verts/ALE)

 Subject:  Western Sahara and the future Europol agreement with Morocco
 Answer in writing 

The recommendation for a Council decision authorising the opening of negotiations for a Europol agreement between the EU and Morocco, adopted on 20 December 2017, states that ‘the Agreement may include a clause addressing its territorial application’. In contrast, the recommendation for a Council decision authorising the opening of negotiations for a Europol agreement between the EU and Israel, adopted on 20 December 2017, explicitly states that the Agreement does not apply to the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) held by Israel since 5 June 1967.

1. Can the Commission explain why there is a difference in treatment, even though the EU and its Member States have not recognised the sovereignty of either occupying power over a third territory, namely Western Sahara for Morocco and the OPT for Israel?

2. Can the Commission explain its rationale for including in its recommendation for a Europol agreement with Morocco a provision that provides for a possible territorial application clause?

3. Can the Commission confirm that a future Europol agreement with Morocco applying to Western Sahara would need to comply with Court of Justice case law, notably by securing the prior consent of the people of that territory?

Last updated: 2 May 2019Legal notice