Lawsuit to rescind the Evian agreements with Algeria before the European Court of Justice

The French association “Grand Maghreb” has filed a lawsuit to annul the Evian agreements with Algeria before the European Court of Justice, after the Council of State ruled that it had no jurisdiction to consider the case, based on the French Interior Ministry’s response that the lawsuit was unacceptable because it was directed against government action and was filed late.
The European Court replied to the French association, according to a document obtained by ”Echorouk”, that it “received a request for the annulment of the Franco-Algerian agreements and registered it in its files to be examined according to the information and documents that will be prepared, and as a result you will be informed of the decisions that will be taken”.
The association considers that the decision to annul the agreements would enable the Algerians to obtain their rights in terms of financial compensation and rehabilitation, especially since what was included in the agreements is still causing harm to the Algerians, as a result of their exposure to nuclear radiation from the French experiments in the Algerian Sahara.
The association said that the signing of the agreements by the Algerian side took place before independence and that, according to international law, the signatories were subordinate to the French government because their country was still under French rule at the time and therefore a French party could not sign an agreement with its own country, According to the association’s officials, the agreements “guarantee the protection of French officers and soldiers who committed crimes against humanity in Algeria from rape, murder and expulsion, and they benefit, by virtue of the same agreements, from amnesty and impunity from any prosecution or punishment. ”
The same French association, “Grand Maghreb”, had contacted the French Council of State almost a year ago to demand the cancellation of the agreement for several reasons.
This was mentioned in a document containing the reply of the French Council of Justice, a copy of which was obtained by “Echorouk”.
The letter states that the Algerian signatories to these agreements were not competent and were deceived in good faith, because they did not know the consequences of the authorization granted to France in these agreements to carry out nuclear, chemical and bacteriological experiments, not to mention the secret annex relating to the maintenance by France of four test centres in the desert for a certain period of time. This is contrary to the Geneva Convention and the principles of respect for human rights.
One of the reasons given by the French Assembly, which includes French representatives of African descent and is chaired by the French representative, Carlos Martinez Bilongo, is that the nuclear tests authorised by these agreements have caused damage to public health and pollution of animals, plants and the environment, which constitutes a continuing crime punishable under Article 223-1 of the Penal Code.
In their application to the French Council of State, the initiators pointed out that the agreements, which were tainted by abuse of power, were intended to absolve the French authorities of their responsibility for acts committed in Algeria before and after independence.
The Council of State replied to the applicants in an official letter in which it stated that “following an exchange of letters with the French Ministry of the Interior on the application, the Minister of the Interior concluded that the application was unacceptable because it was directed against government action and had been submitted late, and after considering the other documents in the file, after examining the administrative law and after listening to the report of François Weil in plenary session, the Council of State concluded that the application was unacceptable because it was directed against government action and had been submitted late, and after considering the other documents in the file, after examining the administrative law and after listening to the report of François Weil in plenary session, the Council of State concluded that the application was unacceptable, and the conclusions of the general rapporteur, Sophie Roussel, state that these actions took place within the framework of procedures undertaken by the government with the aim of creating a new state that cannot be separated from France’s international relations and therefore does not fall under administrative jurisdiction, and decides to reject the request because it is before a court that does not have jurisdiction to consider it,” as the response states.