Self Determination In Modern International Law

TABLE OF UN DOCUMENTS.

In this book, leading scholars re-examine the principle of national self-determination from diverse theoretical perspectives.

"Modern Law of Self-Determination" examines the significance of the right to self-determination in the new world order. For decades, self-determination was seen as a right of colonial peoples. Now the decolonization process has come to an end, its scope and meaning need to be re-examined. Increasingly, the ethnic groups within established nation States claim some separate political status. In extreme cases of persecution of an ethnic group by a ruling majority, secession may provide the only viable remedy to resolve the conflict. However, international law cannot promote a general Balkanization' of the globe. The legitimate interests of all ethnic groups should be accommodated within the framework of existing States. Self-determination, which today is predominantly understood as implying a right to independent statehood, may have to be re-interpreted as conferring no more than a right to autonomy or federal statehood. Such a conception is in line with a modern tendency that highlights the necessary internal dimension of self-determination. "Modern Law of Self-Determination" is based on papers delivered at a conference in Bonn in August 1992 which have been updated and reviewed by the authors in light of the discussions following their presentation.

Peoples and minorities in many parts of the world assert a right to self-determination, autonomy, and even secession from a state, which naturally conflicts with that state's sovereignty and territorial integrity. The right of a people to self-determination and secession has existed as a concept within international law since the American Declaration of Independence in 1776, but the exact definition of these concepts, and the conditions required for their application, remain unclear. The Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice concerning the Declaration of Independency of Kosovo (2010), which held that the Kosovo declaration of independence was not in violation of international law, has only led to further questions. This book takes four conflicts in the post-Soviet Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) as a starting point for examining the current state of the law of self-determination and secession. Four entities, Transnistria (Moldova), South Ossetia, Abkhazia (both Georgia), and Nagorno-Karabakh (Azerbaijan), claim to be entitled not only to self-determination but also to secession from their mother state. For this entitlement they rely on historic affiliations, and on charges of discrimination and massive human rights violations committed by their mother state. This book sets out its analysis of these critical issue in three parts, providing a detailed understanding of the principles of international law on which they rely: The first part sets out the contours and meaning of self-determination and secession, including an overall assessment of secession within the Commonwealth of Independent States. The second section provides case studies investigating the events in Transnistria, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and Nagorno-Karabach in greater detail. The third and final section extends the scope of the examination, providing a comparative analysis of similar conflicts involving questions of self-determination and secession in Kosovo, Western Sahara, and Eritrea.

The principle of self-determination has at heart the achievement of true representation and democracy based on the idea that the consent of the governed alone can give government legitimacy. The principle was primarily responsible for the decolonisation process that shaped our current international community. `Self-determination' has been used in equal rhetorical brilliance by a number of leaders - some meritorious, with a genuine concern for human emancipation, others dubious, with ascendancy to power at the heart of their project. In any case, `self-determination' has come to mean different things in different contexts. Being a vital principle, especially in the post-colonial state, it is one factor that represents a threat to world order while at the same time holding out the promise of longer-term peace and security based on values of democracy, equity and justice. This book looks at the intricacies of the norm in its current ambiguous manifestation and seeks to deconstruct it with regard to three particularly inter-related discourses: that of minority rights, statehood and sovereignty, and the doctrine of uti possidetis which shaped the modern post-colonial state. These norms are then analysed further within two case studies. One, concerning the creation of Bangladesh where `self-determination' was achieved. The second, examines the situation in the Western Sahara where `self-determination' (whatever its manifestation) is yet to be expressed. In the course of these case studies we seek to highlight the problematic nature of `national identity' and the `self' in settings far removed from post-Westphalian Europe.

Although most international lawyers assumed that the distribution of the land surface of the earth between States was more or less final after the end of decolonization, recent practice has disproved this assumption. Eritrea separated from Ethiopia and new States were created out of the former Soviet Union, the former Yugoslavia and the former Czechoslovakia. There is no reason to believe that these events form the end of the creation of new States. Numerous communities within existing States claim a right to full separate statehood on the basis of their entitlement to an alleged right to self-determination. However, in most cases, the international community rejected such claims to statehood, even if the territorial entity satisfied the traditional criteria for statehood. On the other hand, in other cases, including some of those mentioned above, the international community acknowledged the statehood of entities which clearly failed to meet these criteria. In the light of the above-mentioned developments, this book examines the modern law of statehood, and in particular the role of the law of self-determination in the process of the formation of States in international law. The study shows that the law of statehood has changed considerably since the establishment of the United Nations. It is argued that the law of self-determination is particularly relevant for explaining the international community's position regarding the general recognition, or the general denial, of statehood of different territorial entities under contemporary international law.

Peoples and International Law is the most comprehensive current account of the right of self-determination in international law. The book examines the law of self-determination as the product of the interaction between nationalism and international law. This broad and interdisciplinary work charts this interaction through different aspects of the legal process – in international instruments, judicial decisions, legal obligations and historical context – critically and in extensive detail. The book is essential reading for those with an interest both in peoples’ rights in international law and the study of nationalism.

Presents the legal cases for self-determination in East Timor, Kosovo, Chechnya, Georgia (South Ossetia and Abkhazia) and in South Sudan.

Internal self-determination is an under-explored topic in international law. It is popularly understood to be a principle of relatively recent origin, promoting democratic freedoms to populations and autonomy for minority groups within states. It has also been viewed as a principle receiving the support of Western states, in particular. In this first book-length critical study of the topic, the reader is invited to rethink the history, theory and practice of internal self-determination in a complex world. Kalana Senaratne shows that it is a principle of great, but varied, potential. Internal self-determination promises democratic freedoms and autonomy to peoples; but it also represents an idea which is not historically new, and is ultimately a principle which can be promoted for different and conflicting purposes. Written in a clear and accessible style, this book will be of interest to international lawyers, state-officials, minority groups, and students of law and politics.

Secession in International Law argues that the effective development of criteria on secession is a necessity in today’s world, because secessionist struggles can be analyzed through the legal lens only if we have specific legal rules to apply. Without legal rules, secessionist struggles are dominated by politics and sui generis approaches, which validate secessionist attempts based on geo-politics and regional states’ self-interest, as opposed to the law. By using a truly comparative approach, Milena Sterio has developed a normative international law framework on secession, which focuses on several factors to assess the legitimacy of a separatist quest.