The Fight for Self -Determination Peter Caruana
Address to the 4th
|
Mr Chairman as the leaders of Gibraltar's Government, the Deputy
Chief Minister and I come once again to address you for three
reasons, First to re-assert our right to self determination which
we have demonstrated to you is firmly based on the political and
legal rights applicable to all non-self governing territories on
the UN's list as established by UN Resolutions and Covenants and
international law as determined by the international Court of
Justice. This applies to all non-self governing territories,
without exception Gibraltar is on your list of such territories,
Second, we come to rebut7 the arguments of Spain in her attempt
to obtain sovereignty of Gibraltar against the democratic wishes
of our people; and third to seek from the United Nations a clear
acknowledgement and declaration of the applicability of the
principle of self determination as the only principle relevant to
the decolonisation of Gibraltar.
Spain argues that because she has a 30(1) year old claim to the
territory, Gibraltar can only be decolonised by applying the
principle of territorial integrity and that we do not have the
right of self determination This is a misconceived position based
on the distortion of the principle that self determination cannot
be used to disintegrate a Member State Gibraltar is not and has
not been part of Spain for 294 years. The principle of
territorial integrity therefore has no relevance. Further the
International Court of Justice has rejected the concept of
territorial retrocession in the process of decolonisation It is
not possible under the doctrine of the UN Charter to decolonise a
colony by any principle other than self determination; that is
the doctrine of the UN.
In his speech to the Committee of 24 on 22 May this year, the
Secretary General Kofi Annan paid tribute to the mission of the
Committee of 24 during the week of solidarity with the peoples of
all Colonial Territories fighting for decolonisation. Gibraltar
is such a territory and Gibraltarians are such a people He
described decolonisation as a basic human right.
Most of the remaining territories on the UN's list have some
extraneous obstacle or other in the path of the exercise of their
right to self determination. The existence of those extraneous
obstacles usually at the suit of some county seeking to deny self
determination cannot render the Committee of 24 impotent since
otherwise it will cease to serve a useful purpose Indeed, it is
precisely because of those obstacles that the Committee has an
even more important role in defending the rights of these non
self governing territories. We therefore endorse the Secretary
General's call for a redoubling of the effort to conclude the
decolonisation of the remaining territories so that their people
can be masters of their own destiny.
In this respect it is highly regrettable that this year's report
of the Special Committee, in its first paragraph (under the
heading "future work" (paragraph 15)) alters the traditional
language in that part of its report by eliminating the use of the
words, self determination. Last year's phrase that the Committee
would "pursue its efforts in seeking the best ways and means for
the implementation of the Declaration in all territories that
have not yet exercised their right to self-determination has
disappeared. I think that I can say, without fear of
contradiction, that omission is not the handiwork of a country
committed to the UN's doctrine on self determination"
Mr Chairman, when the Kingdom of Spain addressed this Committee
last year the Spanish representatives urged you not to allow
yourselves to be deceived by me into believing that Gibraltarians
are a colonial people because, he said, we are not indigenous to
the territory.
Mr Chairman, in the last 1287 years Gibraltar has been Moorish
for 727 years, Spanish for only 266 years and British for 294
years. It has therefore been British longer than Spanish.
Gibraltar was ceded by Spain to Britain in perpetuity by Treaty
in 1713, having been taken by Britain in 1704. Over those 294
years since 1704 a population has established itself in Gibraltar
and developed into a unique people with our own very strong
culture, characteristics and identity.
How long does it take to acquire the rights given to colonial
people by the Charter of the UN ? Other ex-colonial peoples have
exercised the right to self determination after a much shorter
presence in their territories, for example the USA, Australia,
Canada, New Zealand, and all the Caribbean countries. All these
countries were once colonies like Gibraltar Why should the colony
of Gibraltar be any different? We are no less indigenous than the
peoples who exercised the right of self determination in those
and many other countries
What justification is there for Spain's argument that the colony
of Gibraltar should be the only one in respect of which
historical acts of 294 years ago operate to deny the right of
self determination to its inhabitants?
Mr Chairman, I very much regret that the Spanish representatives
should have insinuated deception of you on my part. The facts
about Gibraltar and its people speak for themselves Far from
wishing to deceive you I would warmly welcome UN visits to
Gibraltar and I have repeatedly extended invitations to the
Committee of 24 to come to Gibraltar and see and judge for
yourselves. Spain may not be so keen that you should do so and
you should ask yourselves why.
At the same time, Spain maintains the position (set out at
paragraphs 58 - 70 of the Working Paper on Gibraltar prepared by
the Secretariat, reflecting the Spanish representatives speech to
the Committee of 24 in June 1997) that Spain continues to hold
the inhabitants of Gibraltar in the highest regard and that the
Spanish authorities have proven time and time again that they are
fully prepared to duly respect "the legitimate interests, status
and special circumstances of the inhabitants of Gibraltar". How
can the people of a colony have legitimate interests, status and
special circumstances but not the right to self-determination
which the Secretary General has described as a basic human right
This is politically and intellectually incoherent.
It is against this backdrop of a denial of our right to self
determination that Sr Matutes, the Spanish Foreign Secretary,
tabled in December 1997 the proposals to which he referred in his
speech to the General Assembly last month. In a nutshell Spain's
proposals are that the United Kingdom and Spain should share
sovereignty for a transitional and indeterminate period of time
after which Gibraltar would become fully Spanish as part of the
Spanish state enjoying an autonomous status greater (they say)
than the one that we presently enjoy These proposals are not new
They have been repeatedly rejected by the people of Gibraltar,
and I reject them here again today The people of Gibraltar are
not Spanish and do not wish to be part of the Spanish State.
Sr Matutes said that he hoped that these proposals could form the
basis of an agreement that would put an end to the anachronism
that has arisen from the dynastic wars of the beginning of the
18th Century! The proposals cannot be a basis for anything of the
sort because they are not acceptable to the people of Gibraltar.
The reality is that contrary to what Sr Matutes asserts the
people of Gibraltar do not find his proposals generous and do not
find favour with his ideas. This should be enough for $pain. At
the time of presenting these proposals in December 1997 Senor
Matutes recognised that Spain did not want a solution to the
problem of the sovereignty dispute, which was imposed on the
people of Gibraltar. That seemed to be a most welcome
acknowledgement that the principle of democratic consent was
paramount What is disappointing is that having declared himself
in favour of democratic consent, Senor Matutes does not then
accept the fact that the proposals are rejected by the people of
Gibraltar Consent must be free. Adherence to the principle of
consent must mean acceptance of the democratic will even if you
don't like the outcome. It is a little incongruous to continue to
offer; and to present as generous, proposals which have been
rejected and which he knows to be totally unacceptable to the
people of Gibraltar if indeed there is a genuine adherence to the
principle of consent.
Sr Matutes proposals came with a warning that if Gibraltar did
not accept them he would "tighten the screw on us". This amounts
to a denial of the will of the people of Gibraltar and therefore
our right to self determination. indeed only last week the screw
was in fact tightened The Spanish authorities implemented lengthy
delays to cross the Gibraltar/Spain border because Gibraltar does
not agree to allow Spanish fishermen to fish in Gibraltar waters
using fishing methods prohibited by our Gibraltar Nature
Conservation laws in what amounts to a challenge to our
sovereignty of those waters. The result has been queues of up to
5 hours to cross the border and threats of further unpleasant
measures.
Such behaviour is contrary to numerous UN Resolutions and
Covenants which prohibit the use of such tactics by large
countries against small neighbours
Every year this Committee recommends to the General Assembly
(which adopts as a consensus resolution) a resolution calling on
the administering power) the United Kingdom and Spain to take
part in a bilateral process of dialogue aimed at overcoming all
the differences between them over Gibraltar with the object of
reaching a definitive solution to the problem of Gibraltar. Such
a recommendation does not address the fact that the issue is not
the resolution of supposed bilateral differences between the
administering power and the third party territorial claimant but
the rights of the people of Gibraltar to decide their own future
in the exercise of self determination which cannot be advanced in
bilateral dialogue between the UK and Spain. Only respect for
Gibraltar's right to self determination can bring about the
decolonisation of Gibraltar in accordance with the spirit of the
Charter of the UN and your recommendation to the General Assembly
should reflect this.
Many of the remaining territories are small and isolated
Independence may therefore not be the most appropriate or
favourable option for decolonisation The world is rapidly
reorganising itself into alliances and international bodies of
mutual inter dependence The concept of independence is becoming
increasingly qualified. Even within independent countries there
is a trend to decentralisation and subsidiarity. The modern,
practical options for decolonisation available to the remaining
non self governing territories have to be seen in the context of
these trends. The heart of decolonisation is the transfer of
effective political and administrative power and self rule to the
people of the colonies. What matters is not the label that
attaches to a territory but the reality of people being masters
of their own homeland and destiny, and that these should be
achieved by the free exercise of an act of self determination.
Gibraltar has legitimate aspirations to achieve a full measure of
self-government. Your support at this point would be enormously
significant but our agenda cannot be held back pending a
declaration by the United Nations on our representations. To this
end I informed the Committee last year, that the Gibraltar
Government was formulating proposals to the UK for further
constitutional change This process has moved forward over the
last year and we are now in discussions with HMC on achieving a
modernisation of our constitutional links with the UK We aim to
achieve a relationship that maintains close political ties with
the UK but which produces the greatest possible degree of self-
government. These new arrangements would give rise to a non
colonial relationship and thus their acceptance by the people of
Gibraltar in referendum would be a valid and legitimate exercise
of self-determination in accordance with the relevant General
Assembly resolutions. It would, in our view, end the colonial
status of Gibraltar and constitute the tailor made fourth option
to decolonisation provided for in General Assembly Resolution
2625(XXV) of 24th October 1970.
Quite separate from the question of our decolonisation is the
difficulties we have arising out of Spain's outdated territorial
claim to Gibraltar. The new constitutional arrangements we seek
from the UK would not, of course, settle the dispute with Spain.
We therefore want, on a parallel but unconnected basis, to pursue
a process of dialogue with Spain, to improve relations and to
establish a better communication with our neighbour on the large
variety of issues that affect us both. Our constitutional
development which involves us and our administering power the UK,
should not be an obstacle to better relations between Gibraltar
and Spain. Spain cannot seek to stifle our normal constitutional
development so as to pressure us into acceptance of her outdated
claim. This blackmail is not worthy of a country with the
democratic credentials and standing of modern Spain. Our agenda
is a threat to no one. Our aim is only to fulfil our aspirations
to undergo decolonisation and to live in harmony with all our
neighbours in the region, especially Spain.
On 29 June 1998 the Spanish representative confirmed to the
Committee of 24 Sr Matutes' publicly stated willingness to meet
with me I have expressed a willingness to meet with him.
Unfortunately the meeting has not yet occurred. The delay is not
at my end. I hope that the meeting, can occur soon.
|