Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
ODISHA
b)
b)
e) Independence: ................................................................................................................ 9
Self determination ...................................................................................................................... 9
Relationship between Self Determination and use of force: ................................................ 11
Other considerations for statehood .......................................................................................... 12
a)
b)
2)
3)
a)
b)
c) Devolution: ................................................................................................................... 15
d)
Secession:.................................................................................................................. 16
e) The various forms of amalgamation or merger into unions of states with distinct
legal personality: ................................................................................................................. 16
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................ 18
2|Page
3|Page
That is to say, 191 UN Members plus the Vatican City. This does not include Taiwan, Palestine or various
claimant entities
4|Page
Cf Chen, Recognition, 38 (a state, if it exists in fact must exist in law).This proposition is a tautology, and the
problem of separate non-State entities was not in issue in the passage cited.
4
Cf Chen, Recognition, 18-19: to argue that a State can become a subject of international law without the
assent of the existing States, it is necessary to assume the existence of an objective system of law to which the
new State owes its being. The point is that if the State owes its existence to a system of law, then that existence
to a system of law, then that existence is not, or not only a fact.
5|Page
fields closely
related to the existence and legitimacy of States. This work investigates the question whether,
and to what extent, the formation and existence of states is regulated by international law, and
is not simply a matter of fact.
It is useful to review the changing opinions as the topic since the seventeenth century.
Grotius; Pufendorf, Hobbes and Victoria were among few writers who defined State. They
held different opinions .The basic criterion is that To give a Nation the right to a definite
position in this great society, it need only be truly sovereign and independent... Sovereignty
is acquired by a State, either at the origin of the civil society of which it is composed, or
when it separates itself from the community of which it previously formed a part, and on
which it was dependent. This principle applies as well to internal as to external sovereignty
.But an important distinction is to be noticed. The internal sovereignty of a State does not, in
any degree, depend upon its recognition of other States. A new State, springing into
existence, does not require the recognition of other States to confirm its internal sovereignty
.The external sovereignty of any State, on the other hand, may require recognition by other
States in order to render it perfect and complete. If it desires to enter into that great society of
nations, such recognition becomes essentially necessary to the complete participation of the
new State in all the advantages of this society. Every other State is at liberty to grant, or
refuse this recognition.8
The same incoherence has been noted in respect of the legality of war :Lauterpacht,Recognition,4-5
Cf Charter Art 2 (4); Corfu Channel Case, I.C.J Rep 1949 p4,35
6|Page
The constitutive theory was the standard nineteenth-century model of statehood. In the
constitutive theory, a state exists exclusively via recognition by other states. The theory splits
on whether this recognition requires "diplomatic recognition" or merely "recognition of
existence". The constitutive theory, although it draws attention to the need for cognition, or
identification, of the subjects of international law, and leaves open the possibility of taking
into account relevant legal principles not based on fact', incorrectly identifies that cognition
with diplomatic recognition, and fails to consider the possibility that identification of new
subjects may be achieved in accordance with general rules or principles rather than on an ad
hoc, discretionary basis.
b)
The declaratory theory was developed in the twentieth century to address shortcomings of the
constitutive theory. According to declaratory theory, recognition of a new State is apolitical
act, which is, in principle, independent of the existence of the new State as a subject of
international law10.
In the declaratory theory of statehood, an entity becomes a state as soon as it meets the
10
7|Page
A permanent population:
If States are territorial entities, they are also aggregates of individuals, and thus require a
permanent population: it is not a rule relating to the nationality of that population. Persons
could very well be regarded as nationals of a particular State for international purposes before
the State concerned had established rules for granting or determining its nationality. In the
absence of any treaty, a new State is not obliged to extend its nationality to all persons
resident on its territory.
b)
Defined territory :
A state must possess some territory, though there is no rule prescribing the minimum area of
that territory.11Nor is there any rule requiring the contiguity of the territory of the State. The
separation of East Prussia from Germany between 1919 and 1945,of East Pakistan from West
Pakistan before 1971,or of Alaska from the lower Forty-Eight cast no doubt on the
statehood of Germany, Pakistan or the United States
c)
Government:
11
Frank and Hoffman (1976) 8 NYUJIL 331,384-4 (infinitesimal smallness has never been seen as a reason to
deny self determination to a population).
8|Page
d)
Capacity to enter into relations with States at the international level is no longer, if it ever was
an exclusive State prerogative.
14
territory, without which international obligations may not be carried into effect, and partly on
the entity concerned being separate for the purpose of international relations so that no other
entity both carries out and accepts responsibility for them.
e)
Independence:
Independence is the central criterion for statehood.15 Different legal consequences may be
attached to lack of independence in specific cases .Lack of Independence may be so complete
that the entity concerned is not a State but an internationally distinguishable part of another
dominant State or an entity may be independent in some basic sense but act in a specific
matter under the control of another State so that the relation becomes one of agency, and the
responsibility of the latter State is attracted for the acts of the former.16
SELF DETERMINATION
An obvious area for inquiry is the relation between statehood and self determination: self
determination is at the most basic level, a principle concerned with the right to be a State.
This concept has been recognised as en erga omnes principle which the nation owes to the
international community as a whole.17 Our Aim is to look and determine whether self
determination has become criterion of statehood; and if so, with what effects...This principle
is firmly established in international law, in particular in relation to territories of colonial
12
For present purposes, government is treated as the exercise of authority with respect with respect to persons
and property within the territory of the State.
13
See ARSIWA 2001, Arts 4-7 for the normal situation of responsibility for acts of State organs or agencies.
14
Cf Opinion 1/94,Community Competence to Conclude Certain International Agreements,1994 ECR I-5276
15
See e.g., Higgins,Development,25-42 ; Kamanda, Legal Status of Protectorates,188-91; Verzijl, International
Law, vol II,455-90
16
The ILC Articles on State responsibility avoid the terminology of agency but allow that one State may be
responsible for the conduct of another in several contexts : where the latter acts on the instructions of the former
or under its direction or control in the relevant respect (ARSIWA, Art 8)
17
East Timor Case (Portugal v. Australia) 1995 I.C.J. 90, 29 (June 30).
9|Page
a) Trust and mandated territories, and territories treated as non self-governing under
Chapter XI of the Charter
b) States, excluding for the purpose of the self determination rule those parts of States
which are themselves self determination units as defined
c) Other territories forming distinct political-geographical areas, whose inhabitants are
arbitrarily excluded from any share in the government either of the region or of the
State, to which they belong, with the result that the territory becomes non-self
governing.19
d) Where a self-determination unit is not already a State, it has a right of Selfdetermination: that is, a right to choose its own political organisation. Such right is to
be exercised by the people o the relevant unit without coercion and on the basis of
equality.20
e) It can result either in the independence of the self determining unit as a separate State,
or its incorporation into or association with another State.
f) Matters of self-determination are not within the domestic jurisdiction of the
metropolitan State.
Example: Rhodesia was a State, and that action against it, as based on contrary
preposition, had three prepositions- that it was unlawful; that recognition is constitutive, and
in view of its non-recognition Rhodesia was not a State; or that principle of self
determination in his situation prevented an otherwise effective entity from being regarded as
18
10 | P a g e
21
The Privy Council in Madzimabamuto v Lardner-Burke (1968) 3 WLR 1229, 1250 did not consider this
position, arguing instead that Southern Rhodesia was not a State because the legitimate government was still
trying to reassert itself.
22
Cf Restatement (3rd), Foreign Relations Law of the United Nations.S-202 (2): A State has an obligation not to
recognise or treat as a State an entity that has attained the qualifications for statehood as a result of a threat or
use of armed force in violation of the United Nations Charter.
23
Knox v Palestine Liberation Organisation,306 F Supp 2 d 424,437 (SDNY,2004)
11 | P a g e
a)
from this, there is so far in modern practice no suggestion that as regards statehood itself,
there exists any criterion requiring regard for fundamental human rights.24 In the Barcelona
Traction Case25 the court differentiated between obligations of a state towards the
international community as a whole and those arising vis-a-vis another state.
b)
Thus, there is a room for the insistence on general standards of human rights and of
democratic institutions as an aspect of the stability and legitimacy of a new State. But this has
not matured into a peremptory norm disqualifying an entity from statehood even in the cases
of widespread violations of human rights.28
24
Fawcett (1965-6) 41 BY 103,112 referred to the Rhodesian case as a Systematic denial of civil and political
rights. It is submitted that the relevant rubric is self-determination.
25
Barcelona Traction Case (Belgium v. Spain) 1970, I.C.J. 3, 33, (Feb. 5).
26
Crawford (1993) 64 by 113, and for general review, Marks and Clapham, International Human Rights
Lexicon, 61-70.
27
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. U.S.) 1986, I.C.J. 14, 202.
28
Malcolm N. Shaw, International Law, (6th ed. 2008).
12 | P a g e
1)
Statehood is a claim of rights based on a certain factual and legal situation. The case of
Taiwan raises the possibility that an entity which does not claim to be a State, even though it
might otherwise qualify for statehood in accordance with the basic criteria, will not be
regarded as a State.29
2)
There is a presumption that an entity with the formal attributes of a State which is established
by a belligerent occupant is not independent and hence not a State in international law. This
situation arose in Manchuria. As a result of deficiencies in existing international law, the four
Geneva conventions of 1949 were concluded. The creation of puppets as a means of
indirectly violating the international occupations has been outlawed but have branded as
illegal.30Article 47 establishes a categorical rule prohibiting puppet entities from being
created, or from achieving real independence over a period of time, and this view is
confirmed.31
3)
Andorra before 1993 was another possible case of an entity not claiming statehood. The Restatement (Third)
has added as a criterion of statehood that the entity in question makes the claim to be a State. S-201.
30
Identity and Continuity,120
31
ICRC, Commentary (1958) IV,272-4 ;Draper, The Red Cross Conventions,38-9
13 | P a g e
power lost
whatever international status they may have had, from an in international point of
view the treaty of agreement under which the territory is transferred ceased to be an
international agreement at the moment of transfer, by reason of disappearance of one
of the parties
32
14 | P a g e
Examples:
1) Liberia-Despite of the internal problems it was facing, Liberia never became a colony
of any other State and is still an original member of both the league of Nations and the
United
2) Other Examples of this could be the Boer Republics, the free state of the Congo,
Israel, Taiwan etc
b) Dependent States and other Dependent Entities:
There arose a problem in regard to the granting of the territorial status to the dependent
entities. Merely because of their independence, many of these did not qualify as States,
though they possess a legal personality distinct from any other State. With the liberal view
on international personality taken in modern practice including UN membership practice,
the notion of a half sovereign or dependent State is unnecessary. Internatinalisation of a
dependent entity may have several effects. The status of the entity in question is more often
to be determined than in a bilateral arrangement. Apart from this, the status of entity is thus
made the subject of rights and duties between the various signatories: it will thus be
subjected to abrupt and especially unlawful change. The general effect is to consolidate and
possibly to enlarge the extent of local against metropolitan powers.
c)
Devolution:
Two important methods by which new States are formed are the grant of independence by the
previous sovereign ( devolution) and the forcible seizure of independence by the territory in
question (secession).The distinguishing feature is the presence or absence of metropolitan
consent36,although in some circumstances this distinction is formal and even arbitrary.37The
importance of metropolitan consent varies in different situations, especially when the
principle of self-determination is at issue. Grants of independence can take different forms:
35
15 | P a g e
Secession:
Until 1914, secession was the most common method of the creation of new States. Secessionwhich may be defined as the creation of State by the use or threat of force without the consent
of the former sovereign
41
have succeeded, in
particular Indonesia, North Korea, North Vietnam, Bangladesh. In addition, there are the
exceptional cases of Israel and a putative Palestinian State; the creation or attempted creation
of these States has occurred without the consent of the previous administration and as a result
of armed conflict. The application of the criteria for statehood to situations where statehood is
disputed by the previous sovereign; the relation between third State recognition and status;
the legality of secession in modern international law, and the legal incidents of the process by
which a seceding unit attains international status-these questions calls for a consideration.42
e)
The various forms of amalgamation or merger into unions of states with distinct
legal personality:
The four different kinds of political Union can be classified as: real and personal unions,
federations and confederations.43Apart from the problem of characterisation, the main legal
problems of voluntary union have been those of succession to international obligations. In
most of the cases there is an existence of political union of two or more States with
substantial political and administrative continuity within the entities concerned, and a much
more extensive degree of succession to legal relations-which extends even to membership
in international organisations44- has accordingly been the established practice.45
38
16 | P a g e
46
17 | P a g e
49
18 | P a g e