The Fight for Self -Determination Peter Caruana
Address to the 4th Committee
|
Mr Chairman, Excellencies, I am grateful for the opportunity,
once again, to address you in petition on behalf of the people
of Gibraltar as the Chief Minister of their democratically
elected Government.
The essence of the Gibraltar issue is simple enough. The Kingdom
of Spain claims from our Administering Power, the United Kingdom,
the return of the sovereignty of our homeland, Gibraltar, which
Spain lost to the UK in 1704 and subsequently ceded in perpetuity
by Treaty in 1713. For our part the people of Gibraltar assert
our right of self determination which the Charter of these United
Nations enshrine for the inalienable benefit of all colonial
peoples.
The Kingdom of Spain bases her claim on two fundamental
propositions, which we believe are misconceived or inapplicable.
The Alleged Principle of Territorial Integrity
The first of these is Spain`s contention that there exists in the
doctrine of the UN or elsewhere in international law, a principle
of territorial integrity in the process of decolonisation, and
further that it is the doctrine of the UN that it is this
principle, and not the principle of self determination, that
applies to the decolonisation of Gibraltar. The application of
the principle of territorial integrity, if it exists in the
process of decolonisation would, according to Spain, require
the transfer of the sovereignty of my country by the UK to Spain
contrary to the unanimous wishes of the people of Gibraltar. A
curious proposition between three democracies.
Mr Chairman, I believe that we have demonstrated in detailed
argument before the Special Committee on Decolonisation that
there is in fact no such principle or doctrine. In support of
her contention the Kingdom of Spain cites two or three General
Assembly Resolutions of the 1960s.
On the other hand, in the annual omnibus resolution on
decolonisation, the UN proclaims that "in the decolonisation
process there is no alternative to the principle of self
determination". This is the doctrine of the UN: No alternative
to the principle of self determination. Not no alternative to
the principles of self determination except the principle of
TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY as Spain would have you believe. And this
is because there is no principle of territorial integrity
applicable in the process of decolonisation of non self-governing
territories.
And if, as the Omnibus Resolution says, there is no alternative
to the principle of self determination in the decolonisation
process, I ask you is Gibraltar a colony? Yes! Are we on the
UN`s list of colonies? Yes!
General Assembly Resolution 46/181 of 19th December 1991 says in
paragraph 1 that the UN reaffirms the inalienable right of self
determination of the peoples of the remaining Non Self Governing
Territories. That, Mr Chairman, is UN doctrine. And we, Mr
Chairman, that is Gibraltar, is a Non Self Governing Territory as
listed by the UN.
In the Namibia case the International Court of Justice held that
"international law in regard to non self governing territories as
enshrined in the Charter of the UN made the principle of self
determination applicable to all of them". All of them, Mr
Chairman, must include Gibraltar which as I have just said is a
UN listed Non Self Governing Territory.
When the Distinguished Representative of the Kingdom of Spain
addressed you this time last year, in response to my address to
you, he said that Gibraltar was "a colonial enclave". When Sr
Matutes, Spanish Foreign Minister addressed the General Assembly
on 21st September this year he too referred to a colonial enclave
saying that his country "continues to suffer from the presence of
a colonial enclave on its territory". In using this phrase
"colonial enclave" the Kingdom of Spain means to suggest that
there is a special doctrine relating to decolonisation in the
case of "colonial enclaves". Mr Chairman, Excellencies, there
is no such special doctrine or regime. The general principles of
self determination and decolonisation cannot be deplaced by the
use of semantic labels. Nothing in UN doctrine or international
law conditions the right to self determination of colonial
peoples to considerations of size, geographical location or
history. This was made clear by the International Court of
Justice in the Western Sahara case when in relation to what the
Court referred to as "so-called colonial enclaves" it said:
"Even if integration of a territory was demanded by an interested
state it could not be had without ascertaining the freely
expressed will of the people, the very sine qua non of all
decolonisation".
It is however interesting to note that in the case of her own
"enclaves" of Ceuta and Melilla which, geographically, are
enclosed in the territory of and are claimed by the Kingdom of
Morocco, Spain draws contrived and irrelevant distinctions to
distinguish them from the case of Gibraltar.
The alleged effect of the Treaty of Utrecht
Mr Chairman, the second of Spain`s fundamental propositions is
that the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713 (by which she ceded Gibraltar
to Britain in perpetuity) operates to deny the people of
Gibraltar the right to self determination. Spain maintains that
this is the case because of the provision in that Treaty that
purports to give Spain first option if Britain were to alienate
sovereignty of Gibraltar. Mr Chairman, it is our contention that
even if this provision were to be capable of that interpretation
it could not be valid and effective today to deny the people of
Gibraltar the right to self determination, given the current
applicable principles of international law. Mr Chairman, so
confident are we of this view that we have on several occasions
invited the Committee of 24 to refer the point to the
International Court of Justice for a declaratory ruling, which we
are advised the Gibraltar Government itself does not have the
legal standing to do given that we are not a party to the Treaty
of Utrecht. I repeat that request again today. All sides must
benefit, regardless of their political positions, from
clarification of applicable international legal principles.
The people of Gibraltar
In a frankly reprehensible attempt to discredit our credentials
as a people, Spain systematically makes a series of allegations
that are either untrue or irrelevant. These include allegations
that we are military camp followers, engaged in all manner of
nefarious and illicit activities, and are economic parasites on
Spain. In addition Spain contends that the people of Gibraltar
(which she refers to as "inhabitants") are not indigenous, being
the descendants of people who arrived in the territory after the
act of colonisation and therefore are not a colonised people.
Mr Chairman, the people of Gibraltar have established themselves
in Gibraltar over the last 295 years having originally come,
like the people of so many ex-colonies from many different
places. We have over that very long period acquired a unique
and distinct identity and characteristics as a people.
Throughout the whole decolonising era, self determination has
been exercised all over the globe by colonial peoples who were
not indigenous to the territory and who had been in their
territories much less time than we have been established as a
people in Gibraltar. Mr Chairman, there is no principle that
self determination is only available to "indigenous people"
(whatever that may exactly mean). If there had been, a very
large number of ex colonies who today are sovereign independent
states as a result of the exercise of their right of self
determination by their non-indigenous colonial people would not
exist. The Charter of the UN grants the right of self
determination to the people of Non Self Governing Territories not
to indigenous people.
Our political and Administrative Autonomy
Gibraltar already enjoys a very large measure of self Government.
It took many years of political struggle to achieve that. We
have our own elected parliament that makes all our laws and an
elected ministerial Government, of which I currently lead, which
has political, executive and administrative responsibility for
all aspects of life in Gibraltar except defence, external affairs
and internal security. Even in these areas where the
Administering Power retains responsibility it is usual for the
Gibraltar Government to be consulted beforehand. I would urge
Excellencies to expel from their minds any notion that they may
have of a territory governed on behalf of the Administering Power
by colonial governors and expatriate administrators.
Our Economy
Economically Gibraltar is totally self sufficient. We have a
vibrant economy based principally on highly successful tourism
and port industries and one of the best regulated international
financial services centres in the world. Far from being a
parasite on Spain we give employment to over 2000 daily commuting
Spanish frontier workers. Spanish companies play a significant
role in our economy, we take a large part of our imports from
Spain and Gibraltarians make a very important spending
contribution to the economy of the immediate Spanish hinterland.
Mr Chairman, the perception of Gibraltar that Spain seeks to
project is a highly distorted one which in no way reflects the
reality. I appreciate that the picture that I have painted
sounds self serving. It is nonetheless a true and accurate one.
That is why we have repeatedly urged the Special Committee on
decolonisation to visit Gibraltar and assess for itself its
characteristics and credentials as a place and as a people. I
would, once again, urge and invite the UN to send envoys to
Gibraltar for this purpose.
The "Matutes Proposals"
When he addressed the General Assembly on the 21st September,
Senor Matutes, the Spanish Foreign Minister, told you that Spain
had submitted a proposal to the United Kingdom that takes into
account the interests of the population of Gibraltar and which
would allow for the recovery of sovereignty after a lengthy
period.
Mr Chairman, in this day and age Gibraltar is neither Spain`s to
claim nor the UK`s to give away it is the homeland of the people
of Gibraltar. It is not our interests as determined by Sr
Matutes or anyone else that must be taken into account, but our
wishes. That is the essence of self determination that only we
can determine our political future.
These so-called "Matutes proposals" provide for the inevitable
transfer of sovereignty to Spain, preceded by a transitional
period of joint sovereignty between Britain and Spain. This is
totally unacceptable to the people of Gibraltar who have so said,
not only through a massively subscribed public petition, but also
through a unanimous resolution of Gibraltar`s Parliament
supported by all political parties in Gibraltar.
The UK, as its representative told the General Assembly in
response to Sr Matutes address on 21st September, is solemnly
committed not to transfer the sovereignty of Gibraltar contrary
to the wishes of the people of Gibraltar. Given that Sr Matutes`
proposals are essentially about the transfer of sovereignty, the
UK cannot but reject those proposals, as they are contrary to
the wishes of the people of Gibraltar whose wishes in such
matters it is committed to respect
Spain now says that those proposals were intended "as a starting
point" and regrets their outright rejection by Gibraltar. That
is positive if it means that Spain is able to contemplate and
seek a solution to the issue that does not involve a Spanish
Gibraltar and which is in accordance with the wishes of the
people of Gibraltar.
Dialogue
Notwithstanding our determination to decide our own future
Gibraltar does not turn its back on Spain. Gibraltar is not
afraid to engage Spain in dialogue. The Government of Gibraltar
accepts and is committed to the principle that open agenda
dialogue is the only constructive way forward in addressing
problems between us and in exploring ways of establishing a basis
for a viable relationship between Gibraltar and Spain based on
friendship, cooperation and mutual respect. We have offered to
take part in such dialogue with Spain in a structure that is both
safe and appropriate. Indeed we have sought it and continue to
seek it.
However, Mr Chairman, the primordial factor and consideration
must be respect for the wishes of the people of Gibraltar. And
so it has to be clearly understood that any dialogue about
Gibraltar must be on the basis and subject to the overriding
principle that the people of Gibraltar have the right to freely
decide their own future and that their wishes must be respected.
We are not willing to negotiate a transfer of sovereignty to
Spain contrary to our wishes. The overwhelming reality is that
the people of Gibraltar do not wish Gibraltar to be Spanish.
In this respect, Mr Chairman, bilateral dialogue between the
Administering Power (the United Kingdom) and the territorial
claimant (Spain) which is what this Committee`s annual consensus
resolution calls for is inappropriate and unacceptable to the
people of Gibraltar because it fails to recognise the primary
role and say of the people of Gibraltar in such dialogue and is
thus inconsistent and incompatible with our right to self
determination.. This is why those bilateral negotiations between
the UK and Spain have achieved nothing in the nature of a
solution to the problem in nearly three decades.
Mr Chairman, with respect, the decolonisation of the Non-Self
Governing Territory of Gibraltar in accordance with the UN
Declaration on Decolonisation cannot, by definition, be a matter
of bilateral resolution of differences between the Administering
Power and a third party territorial claimant.
Decolonisation through Constitutional Modernisation
Mr Chairman, Gibraltar cannot stand still. Our offer to engage
Spain in dialogue is not an alternative to proceeding with our
natural aspiration as a people to be decolonised. Gibraltar`s
political evolution cannot stand still like a rabbit caught in
the headlights of Spain`s territorial claim. We do not accept,
as Spain asserts, that the options open to us are to remain a
colony of the UK or to become part of Spain. We are willing to
engage Spain in constructive open agenda dialogue but we are
not willing to mortgage our rights and aspirations as a people to
her territorial claim.
And so we are seeking to achieve our decolonisation through the
exercise of our right to self determination, by a process of
reform and modernisation of our current constitution.
To this end our parliament in Gibraltar has recently established
a Select Committee on Constitutional Reform with a view to
achieving consensus on constitutional proposals to submit to the
UK such as would put an end to the colonial status of Gibraltar
in manner acceptable to the people of Gibraltar in an act of self
determination.
And so, Mr Chairman, by way of conclusion I pose some questions.
When this Committee adopts every year that consensus resolution
urging the UK and Spain
"to continue their negotiations with the object of reaching a
definitive solution to the problem of Gibraltar in the light of
relevant resolutions of the General Assembly and in the spirit of
the Charter of the United Nations", what is the "light" to which
the resolution is referring? What are the relevant resolutions
of the General Assembly? What is the "spirit" of the Charter of
the UN to which reference is made? Does it mean the recognition
or the denial of the right to self determination of the people of
Gibraltar?
When the UN speaks about "eradicating colonialism" is it, in the
case of Gibraltar, advocating the handing over of my country to
Spain against the unanimous wishes of the people of Gibraltar or
does it set out to promote the right of the people of my country
to self determination"? I respectfully submit that only the
latter is consistent with the mandate of the Special Committee on
Decolonisation who are charged with our case.
Thank you, Mr Chairman and Excellencies.
|