22.9.20

El nuevo reparto del Sáhara Occidental

por Haddamin Moulud Said

Desde hace tiempo venimos alertando del peligro que conlleva la ausencia de una estrategia bien definida y bien clara en materia de DDHH. Durante los últimos veinte años, ciertamente, el FP no ha hecho un estudio en profundidad del Sistema de NNUU para los DDHH para determinar cuál es el encaje del Sáhara Occidental en el entramado institucional de NNUU para los DDHH. 

Al no esforzarnos para elaborar una estrategia concreta, basada en el estudio pormenorizado y análisis profundo del Sistema de NNUU para los DDHH, hemos dejado vía libre para que el tratamiento de la cuestión de los DDHH en el Sáhara Occidental, por parte del Sistema de NNUU se lleve a cabo de un modo TOTALMENTE FAVORABLE a los intereses de Marruecos. 

 El resultado altamente peligroso de esa formar de tratar o abordar la cuestión de los DDHH en el Sáhara Occidental, por parte del Sistema de NNUU, es la división del territorio en dos partes. Una parte se atribuye a Marruecos y se aborda, por el Sistema de NNUU, como si del territorio nacional marroquí se tratara y, la otra, se atribuye a Argelia y se aborda como parte integrante de Argelia, haciendo desaparecer de esa manera el Sáhara Occidental. Es decir, al oeste del meridiano 8o39’ Oeste, es Marruecos; al este, es Argelia. Y, en medio, la nada. 

 Si el anterior reparto de 14 de noviembre de 1975 contó con la firme y feroz oposición del Polisario, frente a este nuevo reparto, el Polisario parece estar ausente. 

El último informe del Secretario General de NNUU sobre cooperación con las NNUU, sus representantes y mecanismos en la esfera de los DDHH (A/HRC/45/36), refleja de forma magistral el sentido de estas ideas. 

El informe, elaborado por la Oficina del Alto Comisionado de NNUU para los DDHH, se compone de 79 páginas que recogen las más importantes preocupaciones del Secretario General de NNUU, en relación a la intimidación y las represalias contra quienes buscan cooperar o han cooperado con las Naciones Unidas, sus representantes y mecanismos en la esfera de los derechos humanos. 

Ante este Informe, lo primero que hacemos es preguntarnos si la cuestión de los DDHH en el Sáhara Occidental, forma parte o no de las preocupaciones del Secretario General de NNUU. ¿Menciona el Secretario General el Sáhara Occidental, en su Informe Anual? 

La respuesta es “si”. Pero dónde o en qué parte del informe acontece esa mención? Hete aquí el quid de la cuestión. A juzgar por el último Informe del Secretario General de NNUU, parece que tendremos que editar nuevos mapas. Y es que, contra todo pronóstico, el Sáhara Occidental, ahora, se ubica al este (si, al Este. Usted ha leído bien) del meridiano 8o39’ Oeste, que es la línea vertical que hace de frontera entre el Sáhara Occidental y Argelia. 

En su informe, que contiene dos anexos, el Secretario General relata los casos de intimidaciones y represalias sufridas en todo el mundo y lo hace por países, según el orden alfabético. 

En el informe en sí mismo, el Sáhara Occidental no aparece citado. Sin embargo, cuando habla de Argelia, cita por su nombre el caso de una mujer saharaui. Y cuando habla de Marruecos, cita por su nombre el caso de tres saharauis, sin citar nuevamente, su nacionalidad. 

 Y por qué es tan importante la mención de esa nacionalidad? Es importante, porque de lo contrario, pasarían por nacionales de los dos países en cuyos epígrafes se citan. Es decir, esa no mención contribuye a diluir la cuestión saharaui en el mapa de los países vecinos. Para el lector, esos casos citados con sus nombres propios o son argelinos o son marroquíes. 

En el Anexo I, titulado “Información completa sobre presuntos casos de represalias e intimidación por cooperación con las Naciones Unidas en derechos humanos”, hay un Epígrafe relativo a Argelia. Y es precisamente aquí, en este Epígrafe, donde aparece la única mención del “Sáhara Occidental”. Y aparece en un contexto en el que Argelia ocupa la posición de un Estado que ‘oprime’ a una supuesta ONG que defiende supuestamente los DDHH en el Sáhara Occidental. 

 Nótese la incongruencia de hablar del Sáhara Occidental al este del meridiano 8o39’ Oeste, al mismo tiempo que se omite cualquier alusión a ese territorio al oeste del citado meridiano. 

Nótese igualmente cómo, en este caso, se cita el origen nacional de la supuesta víctima, pero se omite el dato de que vive en las zonas ocupadas y nunca ha pisado los campamentos saharauis. Pero aún así, Argelia es el ogro. 

En este mismo Anexo I, en los epígrafes relativos a Marruecos, hay dos párrafos referentes a un caso del Sáhara Occidental, pero se omite el origen nacional de la víctima y se omite, también, la alusión al Territorio. 

Finalmente, en el Anexo II, en el Epígrafe relativo a Marruecos, hay cinco párrafos referentes a personas del Sáhara Occidental, pero en ninguno de los cinco párrafos se cita el origen nacional de las víctimas ni, tampoco, se cita el Territorio. 

En definitiva cuando el dedo acusador apunta hacia Argelia, se cita el origen nacional de las víctimas y se cita el nombre del Sáhara Occidental. En cambio, cuando ese mismo dedo acusador apunta hacia Marruecos, no se alude al origen nacional de las víctimas y tampoco se menciona el Sáhara Occidental. 

 Lo dicho. Hay que reeditar los mapas para colocar el Territorio no autónomo del Sáhara Occidental al este del meridiano 8o39’ Oeste, para al final, seguir considerando que el espacio geográfico situado al oeste de ese meridiano es territorio nacional marroquí.

A continuación se reproducen, en su versión original inglesa, los párrafos del citado informe. 

A/HRC/45/36 - OHCHR

B. Summary of cases

Algeria  
 
42. In April 2020, special procedures mandate holders addressed alleged attacks against the privacy and dignity of Ms. Olaya Saadi following her engagement with the United Nations regarding the arbitrary detention of her husband (DZA 2/2020). 
 
Morocco
 
88. It was reported to OHCHR that in November 2019 and January 2020, Ms. Aminatou Haidar, of the Collectif des défenseurs sahraouis des droits de l’homme, was threatened, attacked and stigmatized online for her ongoing engagement with the United Nations. 
 
89.Annex II contains new developments in the situations of Mr. Ennaâma Asfari, and Ms. Naziha El Khalid. On 17 July 2020, the Government responded. 

Annex I 

 Comprehensive information on alleged cases of reprisals and intimidation for cooperation with the United Nations on human rights 

1. Algeria
 
1. On 16 April 2020, special procedures mandate holders expressed concern at allegations of attacks against the privacy and personal dignity of Ms. Olaya Saadi following her engagement with the UN (DZA 2/2020). Ms. Saadi, of Sahrawi origin, is the wife of Mr. Fadel Breika , of the El Khalil Ahmed Braih Coordination for the Defense of Human Rights in Western Sahara, whose detention and interrogation was addressed by special procedures (DZA 2/2019). 
  
2. On 1 November 2019, intimate photos of Ms. Saadi were posted on the “Sawt al Watan” website, which were allegedly obtained, without consent, from the confiscated phone of her husband while he was in detention. An article on this site referred to Ms. Saadi’s trip to Geneva, including a photo of her speaking at the Human Rights Council in September 2019. Mandate holders expressed concern that the publication of these photos appear to have aimed at tarnishing Ms. Saadi’s reputation and her efforts to advocate for the release of her husband with the UN (DZA 2/2020). 
...
4. On 6 July 2020, the Government of Algeria responded to the note verbale in connection to the present report indicating that it cannot verify allegations pertaining to a citizen of another State, and invited OHCHR to address the allegations to the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic or to the Polisario Front by virtue of General Assembly resolutions 37/34 (21 November 1979), and resolution 19/35 (11 November 1980).
 
24. Morocco
 
79. It was reported to OHCHR that Ms. Aminatou Haidar, of the Collectif des défenseurs sahraouis des droits de l’homme, was the subject of threats, physical attacks and online stigmatization in connection with her ongoing engagement with the UN (see also MAR 6/2005; 5/2009). On 29 November 2019, Ms. Haidar met with the Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva, the photos of which were posted on social media, and on 2 January 2020 returned to her place of residence after receiving a human rights prize in a ceremony with the Deputy High Commissioner. During her stay abroad, several on-line articles were published reportedly vilifying Ms. Haidar’s work. 
 
80. On 11 January 2020, Ms. Haidar was reportedly attacked by police officers on her way to a meeting. It was reported that the officers verbally insulted her and her children, and physically assaulted her. While she was physically attacked, one officer allegedly made a reference to her complaining to the UN. . Further, Ms. Haidar was reportedly followed and monitored by different unidentified individuals inside the Palais des Nations when she attended sessions and events of the 43rd session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva and delivered a statement and participated as a panellist in an NGO side-event. She also met with the High Commissioner for Human Rights and other UN staff members during the session. 
 
81. On 17 July 2020, the Government responded in detail to the note verbale in connection to the present report. Regarding the case of Ms. Haidar, it refuted the allegations that she is a human rights defender subjected to reprisals, but rather has a political agenda which does not correspond to the mandate of this report. The Government contends that the meeting of Ms. Haidar with the Deputy High Commissioner was not in the latter’s official capacity and that the award ceremony is not a UN event. It also stated that side events of the Human Rights Council are not part of the main programme, and allegations of surveillance can be refuted by video recordings. The Government informs that Ms. Haidar enjoys all her fundamental rights protected by the law, and that she has never filed a complaint with the judiciary or the national human rights commission. 

Annex II 

Information on alleged cases included in follow-up to previous reports 

17. Morocco
   
88. The case of Mr. Ennaâma Asfari was included in the 2019 and 2018 reports of the Secretary-General on alleged deterioration of detention conditions following the decision of the Committee against Torture on his case in 2016 (CAT/C/59/D/606/2014) (A/HRC/ 42/30, Annex II para. 73; A/HRC/39/41, para. 57 and Annex I, para. 77). Reported reprisals in the form of an entry ban against Ms. Claude Mangin-Asfari, the wife of Mr. Asfari, were also included in the 2019 report of the Secretary-General.  
 
89. In July 2019, while noting positive developments in the form of visits by his wife, the Chair of the Committee Against Torture requested the State party to refrain from reprisals against Mr. Asfari, invited observations on the implementation of the remedy that the Committee had previously communicated to the Government, and decided to keep the follow-up dialogue ongoing (CAT/C/67/3, para. 12-13). On 6 August 2019, the Government in a meeting with the Committee stated that Mr. Asfari had refused to cooperate with judicial authorities on the investigation of the allegations of torture, and that he was held in an individual cell, not in solitary confinement, is in contact with other inmates and has family visits and phone calls. The State party denied that the complainant or his wife, Ms. Mangin, had faced any reprisals (CAT/C/68/3, paras. 22-26). At its 68th Session, the Committee decided to keep the follow-up dialogue ongoing, and, given the absence of meaningful progress, to request Morocco to allow for a follow-up visit to monitor the lack of implementation of its decision in this case, including with regard to the detention conditions of the complainant (A/74/44, para. 65). 
 
90. The case of Ms. Naziha El Khalidi was included in the 2019 report of the Secretary-General (A/HRC/42/30, Annex I, para. 74) on allegations of interrogation following action of special procedures mandate holders on her case On 4 June 2019, mandate holders expressed their concern about the interrogation of Ms. El Khalidi following their first communication (MAR 2/2019). On 5 August 2019, the Government refuted the allegations that the questioning by police was an act of reprisals against Ms. El Khalidi, rather indicating it was part of an investigation into the reported ill-treatment during her arrest, which had come to their attention through the first communication by mandate holders. 
 
91. It has been reported to OHCHR that on 8 July 2019, Ms. El Khalidi was convicted in absentia by the Court of First Instance of Laayoun for practicing journalism without accreditation (article 381 of the Penal Code). The sentence included a fine of 4,000 Moroccan dirhams (about USD 400) and the confiscation of her mobile phone seized by the police during her 2018 arrest. During the reporting period, Ms. El Khalidi has been the subject of a vilification campaign through sexist and gender-biased posts on social media from an account known to target Sahrawi human rights defenders and journalists, and her close relatives receive notifications of these postings on their cell phones. Some posts have allegedly included intimate photos and private messages taken from her seized mobile phone. 
 
92. On 17 July 2020, the Government responded in detail to the note verbale in connection to the present report. The Government reiterated the information provided to the Committee against Torture pertaining to Mr. Asfari, including that which was presented during the August 2019 meeting between the Permanent Representative and Committee. The Government stated that Mr. Asfari and his wife are not subject to acts of reprisal and provided information about the conditions of detention of Mr. Asfari. The Government categorically refuted the allegations that Ms. Khalidi was the subject of an online smear campaign, and informed that she has not brought any complaints about such allegations to national administrative or judicial instances. 
 
Haddamin Moulud Said
22.09.20
<mouludsaid[at]gmail.com>

------------- Este texto expresa la opinion del autor y no de los moderadores del foro.


Share/Bookmark

No hay comentarios: