Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-23-Speech-3-208"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20021023.5.3-208"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Question No 2 by Josu Ortuondo Larrea (): On 13 July 2002, the EU Presidency issued a declaration in which it voiced its concern over the situation created by Morocco on the island of Perejil, expressed its full solidarity with Spain and urged Morocco to immediately withdraw its forces. The Presidency’s action on behalf of a Member State is to be welcomed. However, I assume the Presidency is unaware that some Spanish historians claim Spain has no right or title to this island, which was occupied by Spanish troops for defensive purposes until the early 1960s, when these forces were withdrawn as part of the winding-up of the Spanish Protectorate of Morocco following that country’s independence in 1956. Does the Presidency not believe that the Spanish Government has overstepped the mark in sending a substantial military force to occupy this tiny island, which Morocco considered to be an act of war, and that the best thing for the European Union to do would be to advocate that the International Court of Justice in the Hague should settle the issue of the sovereignty of Perejil? Does it not feel that there is a contradiction in Spain claiming sovereignty over Gibraltar from the United Kingdom when it rejects Morocco’s claims over this island and other possessions in Africa?"@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"Subject: Declaration by the EU Presidency concerning the island of Perejil"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph