A few weeks after the setback inflicted by the High Court in London, the court of Tarascon (France) in turn handed down, on June 14, a judicial decision in which it condemns the “Confédération paysanne”, a French agricultural union known for its alignment with the theses of the Polisario.

In April 2014, the “Confédération Paysanne”, which is behind the legal harassment of the agricultural agreement in France, brought legal action before the Tarascon commercial court against the company “IDYL” – a company specialising in the marketing of fruit and vegetables from Morocco, including the Southern Provinces.

The action of the “Confédération Paysanne” purported to prohibit this company from distributing these products and condemn it to the courts (penalties and damages for alleged harm suffered).

The decision of the Court disavowed the “Confédération Paysanne” on the whole line, in favour of the Company “IDYL”.

This legal blow to the Polisario and its relays comes a few weeks after the setback inflicted on them by the High Court in London.

“IDYL” succeeded in exposing during the trial, the fact that the legal action brought in the name of the “Confédération Paysanne”, is in reality only the action of a minority not representative of the Organization, deprived of any capacity to act in justice.

Beyond the procedural aspects, the action - aborted by force of law - of this minority is a real blacklisting of certain leaders of the “Confédération Paysanne”, who do not hesitate to circumvent the own regulations of the organisation, for the sole purpose of carrying out political activism hostile to Morocco.

In a real denial of democracy, they hijacked the legitimate authorities of the “Confédération Paysanne” and violated the will of its members.

“IDYL” claimed that the legal action of the “Confédération Paysanne” was not admissible, because it was subject to the prescription of the regulatory deadlines.

The Court ruled in favour of the company “IDYL”, judging that the limitation period has indeed passed, thereby confirming that the aims of the “Confédération Paysanne” were hostile political activism and not a legitimate legal action.

On this basis, the Court condemned the “Confédération Paysanne”, thus granting a legal victory to “IDYL”, which stigmatized the manipulations indulged by certain relays of the Polisario, in the interest of well-known parties, and for purely political reasons.

This condemnation of the “Confédération Paysanne” by the Court of Tarascon is indeed a new defeat for the circles hostile to Morocco.

The “Confédération paysanne” (to which the activist José Bové belongs) has repeatedly demonstrated its hostility and its dogmatic alignment with the theses of the Polisario.

By attacking the agricultural agreement, the “Confédération Paysanne” was not seeking to assert so-called rights, but simply to exploit, out of sheer opportunism, an artificial controversy aroused by the Polisario.

The court ruling only confirms the truth and confirms Morocco in its right. This judgment confirms, once again, the legitimacy of the action of the Kingdom in its southern provinces and the compliance of the development of natural resources with international legality.

The Tribunal's judgment agrees with the position that Morocco has always expressed with regard to the indisputable legality of the Agreements concluded with its international partners and the need to ensure their legal certainty.

The judgment of the Court of Tarascon is therefore satisfactory. It did not recognise the right of the “Confédération Paysanne” and those who pull its strings to have any regard for the economic development of the Kingdom's southern provinces.

The Tribunal did not allow itself to be drawn into the trap set by the “Confédération Paysanne”. He refused to comment on the merits of the case.

By this judgement, the “Confédération Paysanne” is challenged and brought back to its real dimension.

As for economic relations between Morocco and the EU in the agricultural sectors, they are and remain favoured by history and geographical proximity, which make their respective markets prime outlets for Moroccan and European products.

Since its entry into force, the agreement has been implemented in a mutually beneficial approach, as confirmed by the various reports drawn up by the European Commission.

In addition to complying with international law and European law, the decision of the Tarascon Court confirms a bottom line and consolidates the case law established only a few weeks ago by the High Court in London.

The latter had effectively dismissed the Polisario and irrevocably confirmed the legality of the agreements concluded by Morocco and covering its southern provinces.