Talk:Jdiriya

Selective quotation

User: Regioncalifornia has selectively quoted from an academic source that argues that the area concerned is Moroccan-occupied to justify a recent change in wording from Moroccan administered, but the quoted source then goes on to say that if others do not accept this wording under International law then the area is definitely under Moroccan administration. I felt mentioning both possibilities preserves the communities nPOV approach, which was then reverted in an issue where there are likely to be different perspectives. What is the best wording for nPOV ?. ChaseKiwi (talk) 03:52, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

@ChaseKiwi the author is citing UN resolutions, which explicitly state that it is occupied by Morocco. Also, I don't know where it says that "administration" thing. Could you clarify that for me please? Regioncalifornia (talk) 04:48, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Simon starts his legal analysis justifying his opinion that an occupation has occurred of a Self Governing Territory originally administered by Spain on p259 and concludes on this issue in the ultimate paragraph on p270 of the source "even if Western Sahara, contrary to my arguments above, was merely 'administered', the fact remains that the rules governing the administration of Non-Self-Governing Territories point in the same direction as the law of occupation. This is provided for in Article 73 of the UN Charter and was developed in a legal opinion by the then UN Legal Counsel, Hans Corell in 2002.⁸³"

83 'Letter dated 29 January 2002 from the Under Secretary-General for Legal Affairs, the Legal Counsel, addressed to the President of the Security Council' (12 February 2002) UN Doc S/2002/161. ChaseKiwi (talk) 06:09, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

The author is making a hypothetical case; he doesn't claim in any way that Morocco is the administrator. What he says is if Morocco were the administering power, it would still have to recognize and protect the interests of the inhabitants of the territory, as Article 73 of the UN Charter states, which it isn't doing. I didn't find anything about "if others don't accept this wording..." as you claim. Spain is still de jure the administering country, because Western Sahara is in the process of decolonization. Anyway, if you think the source is ambiguous, we can replace it with the UN resolutions which explicitly state that Morocco is occupying the territory. Regioncalifornia (talk) 04:01, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

It turned out we both ran the risk here of inaccurate contributions. I now accept you are correct that it is occupied in relevant International Law based on a more recent source being Kalicka-Mikołajczyk.

Simon is ambiguous so should be removed as a source and anyway Kalicka-Mikołajczyk acknowledges Simon. It would seem to be a bad idea to use an early UN resolution as source, as the wording occupation has not been used in the 35 years since 1980 in a UN resolution according to Saul who gives possible reasons.

I am happy if you make the change in source, if you having reviewed the sources you now agree with me.

ChaseKiwi (talk) 20:19, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for providing a more recent and less ambiguous source. I'll make the changes, as we have an agreement. Regioncalifornia (talk) 21:45, 13 July 2025 (UTC)