  |
'Outdated and racist' Treaty of Utrecht should not be an excuse to deny self-determination to Gibraltar
|
The GSLP/Liberal Opposition notes that yesterday was the anniversary of the agreement in 1713 at Utrecht whereby Spain ceded Gibraltar to Britain in perpetuity as part of the general peace settlement that followed the War of the Spanish Succession.
It is worth recalling this event only because it is totally unacceptable that the clauses of this outdated and racist Treaty should continue to be used as an excuse by London and Madrid to thwart the legitimate aspirations of the people of Gibraltar to choose the political status that they want.
The Opposition has never accepted that the Treaty of Utrecht denies us our right to self-determination which is guaranteed by the Charter of the United Nations. We have seen that Spain continues to argue this and, without a shred of logic, claims that we have to stay with our present colonial status until we become a part of Spain.
JUSTICE
Indeed,they add, we have urged the United Kingdom over the years to take the applicability of the Treaty of Utrecht to the decolonisation of Gibraltar to the International Court of Justice so that the issue can be decided on its legal merits as opposed to on political considerations. This has not happened.
During the course of the constitutional talks in London earlier this month, the United Kingdom made it clear that as far as they are concerned the Treaty of Utrecht is a constraint on the exercise of self-determination for Gibraltar only in so far as Gibraltar cannot opt for independence without Spanish consent.
This was the policy of the British Government as stated in the 1999 White Paper on the Overseas Territories and repeated in an answer in the House of Commons by the then Minister of State Peter Hain in 2001.
It will be recalled that from 1999-2002 a Select Committee of the House of Assembly produced and signed up to a new constitution for Gibraltar. This objective of this constitution was to change the status of Gibraltar from being a colony to become a territory which sought to decolonised under the Fourth Option of the United Nations, which provides for a tailor-made solution.
REFERENDUM
The constitution provided for the holding of a referendum which would be an act of self-determination and provided for powers of self-government which were the maximum possible beyond which there was only independence.
The constitution was unanimously approved by the House of Assembly in February 2002 and again in January 2004 after the general elections of November 2003.
This is the position that the Opposition signed up to and it is the same position that we are still defending today. We have not changed our policy, our objective or our views one iota, they say.
The Opposition adds: It was apparent during the negotiations in London that it was as if we were negotiating with Madrid instead of negotiating with London and that Mr Chilcott and his team, on political instructions, were acting like a filter for what was deemed to be acceptable or unacceptable to Madrid.
This was seen very clearly over the question of the status of Gibraltar. In theory, the policy of the British Government is that our right to self-determination is only curtailed by not being able to choose independence without Spanish consent. In practice, to date, they have behaved as if they agreed with Spain.
"We therefore urge the United Kingdom to come out clearly and unambiguously supporting our right to self-determination and a form of decolonisation short of independence, which they have failed to do until now for fear of upsetting Spain," the Opposition say in a statement.
|
|
|
|
