Cotonou Agreement Text

Posted by on Sep 16, 2021 in Uncategorized | 0 comments

While both the EU and the ACP countries have managed to circumvent the migration blockade in the pre-negotiation mandate, there is no guarantee that a similar result will be achieved in the final negotiations. Hungary is not the only country to have advanced its skepticism about the migration chapter, Poland is also concerned and Italy is engaged in an ongoing saga with humanitarian NGOs “illegally” on its shores. The most desired result for these countries is that irregular migrants are systematically returned to their country of origin. That is why there will certainly be attempts to put the readmission mechanisms back at the centre of the concerns in the final Cotonou Agreement. On the ACP side, readmission should only be on a voluntary basis and development aid should not know how well a country is doing in recovery. The two sides seem to be on the opposite sides of the spectrum. The way out of the impasse is to put into practice the principles of shared responsibility and the obligation to respect generally recognized principles of human rights assessment, regardless of origin and ethnic origin. The EU and the Organisation of African, Caribbean and Pacific States have concluded a new agreement. DW is discussing with chief negotiators the search for common ground on issues such as migration and human rights. Dussey travelled to Brussels this week to join Jutta Urpilainen, Finland`s commissioner for international partnerships.

Despite the pandemic, the chief negotiators wanted to present the good news together: after more than two and a half years of negotiations, the European Union, represented by Urpilainen, and the Organization of African, Caribbean and Pacific States (OACPS), represented by Dussey, have concluded negotiations for a new partnership agreement. Recall that discussions on a new agreement began in September 2018 in New York, on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly. The new agreement is expected to redefine the terms of the existing partnership agreement between ACP countries and the European Union The IIA mapping project is a cooperative initiative between UNCTAD and universities around the world to represent the content of II A. The resulting database serves as a tool to understand trends in the development of the CEW, assess the prevalence of different policy approaches and identify examples of contracts. The Mapping of IIA Content allows you to browse the project results (the page will be updated regularly as new results become available). Please mention: UNCTAD, Mapping of IIA Content, available under investmentpolicy.unctad.org/international-investment-agreements/iia-mapping Read more: Mapping Project description – Methodological document The agreement contains cooperation activities for promotion: African members of OACPS are also offended by the fact that the EPO has negotiated with states. The African Union (AU) is trying to create an African Free Trade Area. But if different states have their own agreements with the EU, it makes things difficult.

“These agreements have led to a great division and fragmentation of the African position,” Carlos Lopes, the AU`s representative for relations with Europe, said in early June. Things have not been as simple as they were in 2000, when the Cotonou Agreement entered into force. “Africa and Europe want to develop and deepen their relations. But the African side also wants its priorities to be taken more into account,” said John Maré, a South African diplomat who has negotiated several agreements with the EU. Perhaps the most radical change introduced by the Cotonou Agreement concerns trade cooperation. Since the first Lomé Convention in 1975, the EU has not granted reciprocal trade preferences to ACP countries. During the negotiation process, critics expressed doubts about the renewal of the OACPS-EU partnership and raised questions about why a single agreement is needed for three very different regions of the world. .

. .