Morocco’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations hosted an international seminar in New York on July 1, 2026, focusing on implementation guarantees for territorial autonomy agreements. The event brought together scholars and experts to examine case studies from around the world.

Opening the discussions, Omar Hilale, Morocco’s Permanent Representative to the UN, described the gathering as taking place in an “exceptional context.” This backdrop includes significant diplomatic progress on the Western Sahara issue, highlighted by the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 2797 last October.

Hilale emphasized that the resolution marked a “historic turning point” by unequivocally endorsing Morocco’s autonomy plan under Moroccan sovereignty as the sole foundation for a mutually acceptable political solution. He noted that the plan enjoys strong international backing, with over 130 UN member states—including three permanent Security Council members (the United States, France, and the United Kingdom)—supporting its principles.

The diplomat linked this diplomatic momentum to tangible developments in Morocco’s southern provinces. He cited progress in infrastructure, renewable energy, higher education, healthcare, investments, a major data center project in Dakhla, and plans for a deep-water port on the Atlantic coast. For Hilale, these achievements demonstrate that the autonomy plan “is not merely a political slogan but a concrete governance project,” underpinned by constitutional, institutional, and democratic safeguards.

The seminar’s central theme—“in a negotiated autonomy, value lies in its guarantees”—reflects the Moroccan initiative’s core principle. The proposal envisions self-governance for Western Sahara’s population through legislative, executive, and judicial bodies with distinct competencies.

Comparative academic perspectives

Marc Finaud, Senior Advisor and Associate Researcher at the Geneva Centre for Security Policy, moderated the seminar. He clarified that the academic gathering was not intended as a substitute for UN-led negotiations but aimed to enrich them through international comparisons.

Finaud highlighted key features of Morocco’s initiative, including provisions for local population participation, consultative referendums, the principle of subsidiarity, representation in national institutions, constitutional human rights guarantees, and mechanisms for integration and transition. He also underscored the autonomy’s constitutional anchoring within Morocco’s legal framework.

Diego Muñoz, a researcher, presented the case of Rapa Nui (Easter Island), which is part of Chile. He described an “unfinished” autonomy process, with decades-long discussions yielding limited progress. Muñoz contrasted the island’s legal and historical context with Western Sahara’s UN-mediated framework, stressing that meaningful autonomy requires genuine consultation with affected populations. He praised Morocco’s initiative for embedding local representation, participatory mechanisms, and institutional safeguards—elements that reflect an autonomy built on cultural recognition and inclusive governance.

Administrative vs. political autonomy

Sémir Al Wardi, a political science professor at the University of French Polynesia, distinguished between administrative and political autonomy. He noted that French Polynesia operates under administrative autonomy, while New Caledonia enjoys legislative powers. Al Wardi argued that Morocco’s plan is “more generous” than France’s model for Polynesia, as it grants legislative authority to Western Sahara. He likened this approach to autonomy models in unitary states like Spain and the United Kingdom.

The professor also emphasized the critical role of financial resources in any autonomy framework, asserting that regions cannot exercise real competencies without adequate funding. He framed autonomy as a means for regions to “assert their identity” while remaining part of a larger state structure.

Heikki Mattila, a professor at the School for International Training in Geneva, examined the Åland Islands, an autonomous Swedish-speaking region of Finland. This model emerged from post-independence tensions between Finland and Sweden and was later formalized by the League of Nations. Mattila outlined its core guarantees: protection of the Swedish language, restrictions on non-resident land acquisition, fiscal autonomy, local representation, and demilitarization. He noted that Åland’s autonomy laws enjoy near-constitutional protection, requiring enhanced procedures—including regional involvement—for amendments.

Mattila stressed the need for clear competency-sharing and flexibility to allow the autonomy’s evolution. He highlighted institutional oversight mechanisms, such as regional law reviews and recourse to Finland’s Supreme Court in cases of competency disputes.

Beyond legal text: ensuring autonomy works

Dagikhudo Dagiev, a senior researcher at the Institute of Ismaili Studies in London, presented the case of Gorno-Badakhshan in Tajikistan. He described an autonomy enshrined in the constitution but largely ineffective in practice due to centralized governance, direct central appointments of regional officials, and the absence of exclusive competencies.

Dagiev argued that autonomy must extend beyond legal frameworks to be meaningful. He contrasted Gorno-Badakhshan’s limitations with Morocco’s initiative, which includes constitutional anchoring, fiscal resources, dispute-resolution mechanisms, protections against unilateral revocation, and potential international oversight during implementation.

In his closing remarks, Marc Finaud distilled shared lessons from the case studies: constitutional recognition of autonomy, international agreements, precise competency definitions, dedicated resources, dispute-resolution mechanisms, and protections against unilateral changes. These elements, he noted, bolster the credibility of Morocco’s autonomy plan, positioning it as a sustainable solution that evolves with the needs of the concerned populations.