nach oben

Erschienen in:

2018 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

2. Exploring the Legal Color of Secession

verfasst von : Jing Lu

Erschienen in: On State Secession from International Law Perspectives

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

In this chapter the legal color of secession is explored according to Article 38(1) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, so international conventions, international custom, the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations, and subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law including judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations are taken into consideration. Through this thorough exploration of international legal sources, it is revealed that lex generalis, such as international legal principles, is not in a position to offer a satisfactory solution to secessionist conflicts: the high degree of ambiguity embodied in legal principles invariably leaves them open to numerous and contradicting interpretations. A satisfactory solution to secessionist conflicts is much more concerned with lex specialis, namely an agreement between conflicting parties. In order to formulate such an agreement, the influence of state recognition cannot be ignored: premature recognition disturbs the formulation of an agreement between the conflicting parties and thus negatively affects the solution. Since another major obstacle to the formulation of an agreement between conflicting parties is the divergence of opinion between opponents and proponents of remedial secession, it is meaningful to consider moderating the disagreement between them by replacing a remedial right to secession with a right to a remedy.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Introduction

Nächstes Kapitel Secession and Self-Determination Conflicts

Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Declaration of Judge Simma, I.C.J. Reports 2010, pp.480–481, paras. 8–9.

See Chap. 1, Note 32.

See Chap. 1, Note 33.

See e.g. Brownlie (2003), p. 5; Jennings and Watts (1992), p. 24; Hudson (1934), pp. 601 ff. quoted from Shaw (2008), p. 70.

Thirlway (2010), p. 114.

Eleftheriadis (2008), p. 5.

Reference Re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 S.C.R. 217, para.111, http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1643/index.do, last accessed on 15.06.2018.

Eleftheriadis (2008), pp. 2–3.

Shaw (2008), p. 93.

A/RES/25/2625.

Kohen (2006), p. 10.

Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Separate Opinion of Judge Yusuf, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 618, para. 11.

Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Separate Opinion of Judge Cançado Trindade, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p.523, para. 176.

Del Mar (2013), pp. 80–81.

Shaw (1997), p. 483.

See above Note 11.

The ICJ treated General Assembly resolutions in the case of Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua as evidence of opinio juris, see Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America). Merits, Judgement. I.C.J. Reports 1986, p. 14, para. 188; in the case of Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons General Assembly resolutions were also treated as evidence of opinio juris, see Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226, para. 73.

Treaty Concerning the Establishment of the Republic of Cyprus (Treaty of Nicosia), http://peacemaker.un.org/cyprus-nicosia-treaty60, last accessed on 15.06.2018.

Agreement among the People’s Republic of Angola, the Republic of Cuba, and the Republic of South Africa (Tripartite Agreement), http://peacemaker.un.org/angola-tripartite-agreement88, last accessed on 15.06.2018.

See the official Website of United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) regarding the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, https://unmis.unmissions.org/comprehensive-peace-agreement, last accessed on 15.06.2018.

Ibid.

Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Declaration of Judge Simma, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 481, para. 9.

Agreement between the United Kingdom Government and the Scottish Government on a referendum on independence for Scotland (Edinburgh Agreement), 15 October 2012, http://www.gov.scot/About/Government/concordats/Referendum-on-independence, last accessed on 15.06.2018.

Scottish independence: Post-referendum agreement reached, 18 June 2014, http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27906062, last accessed on 15.06.2018.

Sudan: Second Review Under the 2009-10 Staff-Monitored Program-Staff Report; Staff Supplement; and Statement by the Executive Director for Sudan, IMF Country Report No. 11/86, April 2011, p. 4.

For instance, Quebec as the secessionist entity used to have this misinterpretation, so the Canadian Supreme Court made it clear in the Reference re Secession of Quebec: “the democratic principle identified above would demand that considerable weight be given to a clear expression by the people of Quebec of their will to secede from Canada, even though a referendum, in itself and without more, has no direct legal effect, and could not in itself bring about unilateral secession”, see Reference re Secession of Quebec, para. 87.

Solum (2004), p. 182.

Edinburgh Agreement, paras. 5 and 7.

Ibid.

Solum (2004), p. 316.

Ibid. p. 264.

See above Note 22.

Hart (1961), p. 155.

Thirlway (2010), pp. 102–103.

Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226, para. 73.

Thirlway (2010), p. 103.

Weller (2008a), p. 33.

Raič (2002), p. 314.

Škrk (1999), pp. 8–9.

Mikulka (1999), p. 109.

Report of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, A/51/18 (1996), p. 126.

Walter (2009), pp. 7–8.

Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America). Merits, Judgement. I.C.J. Reports 1986, p. 14, para. 184.

Shaw (2008), p. 98.

Ibid. p. 99.

Brierly (2012), pp. 63–64.

Buchheit (1978), p. 51.

Ibid.

Hobbes (1962), p. 143.

Ibid. p. 233.

Buchheit (1978), p. 52.

Grotius (1964), p. 150.

Müllerson (2009), p. 21.

Grotius (1964), pp. 261–262.

Livius (1853), http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19725/19725-h/19725-h.htm#b32, last accessed on 15.06.2018.

de Vattel (1964), Book 1, Chapter 2 §16.

Ibid. Chapter 17 §200.

Ibid. Chapter 17 §201.

Reference re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 S.C.R. 217, para.92.

Pufendorf (1964), Book 8, Chapter 11 §4.

Ibid.

Locke (2012), Chapter 11 §22.

Ibid. Chapter 11, §135.

Ibid. Chapter 11, §168.

Ibid. Chapter 11, §225.

United States Declaration of Independence (1776).

Jasanoff (2012), pp. 5–53.

Peters (2011), p. 104.

Buchanan (2004), p. 354.

Bentham (1843), p. 501.

Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book I, Introduction, quoted from Brierly (2012), p. 20.

Brierly (2012), p. 21.

Shaw (2003), pp. 248–249.

Thirlway (2010), p. 110.

Ibid.

Shaw (2008), p. 110.

Ibid.

Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1998, p. 275, para. 28.

Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002, p. 3, paras. 56–58.

Thirlway (2010), p. 111.

Shaw (2008), p. 112.

Reference re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 S.C.R. 217, para.1.

Ibid. para. 26.

Shaw (2008), p. 99.

Wolfrum (2011), para. 46.

Reference Re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 S.C.R. 217, para. 153.

Reference re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 S.C.R. 217, para. 100.

Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Dissenting Opinion of Judge Bennouna, I.C.J. Reports 2010, pp. 500–501.

Ibid. p. 501.

Ibid. p. 504.

Ibid. p. 505.

Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Separate Opinion of Judge Keith, I.C.J. Reports 2010, pp. 483–484.

Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Declaration of Vice President Tomka, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 455.

Ibid. pp. 455–456.

Ibid. p. 462.

Reference re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 S.C.R. 217, para. 31.

Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 407, para. 1.

Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Separate Opinion of Judge Yusuf, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 618, para. 17.

Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 438, para. 83.

100

Ibid. p. 452, para. 122.

101

Falk (2011), pp. 51–52.

102

Shaw (2008), pp. 445–446.

103

Dugard and Raič (2006), p. 100.

104

Brierly (2012), p. 149.

105

Craven (2010), p. 242.

106

Ryngaert and Sobrie (2011), p. 477.

107

Reference Re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 S.C.R. 217, para. 143.

108

Shaw (2008), p. 447.

109

Reference Re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 S.C.R. 217, paras. 142 § 146.

110

Vidmar (2012), p. 378.

111

Brierly (2012), p. 151.

112

Christakis (2011), p. 75.

113

See above Note 107.

114

Shaw (2008), p. 461.

115

Security Council Resolution 217 (1965), para. 6.

116

Security Council Resolution 541 (1983), para. 7.

117

Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 403, para. 81.

118

Weller (2008b), p. 64.

119

A/RES/60/147, Annex: Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law.

120

Nolte (2006), pp. 85–86.

121

Kohen (2006), p. 11.

122

Müllerson (2003), p. 128.

123

Janik (2013), p. 54.

124

See Chap. 1, Note 2.

125

Sisson and Rose (1990), p. 207.

126

United Nations Security Council Official Records, 1611th Meeting, 12 December 1971, S/PV. 1611, paras. 124 and 128.

Bentham J (1843) Anarchical fallacies: being an examination of the declaration of rights, The Works of Jeremy Bentham, Band 2, edited by Sir John Bowring, William Tait, Prince Street, p 501

Brierly JL (2012) Law of Nations, 7th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 63–64

Brownlie I (2003) Principles of public international law, 6th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 5

Buchanan A (2004) Justice, legitimacy and self-determination: moral foundations for international law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 354

Buchheit LC (1978) Secession: the legitimacy of self-determination. Yale University Press, New Haven, p 51

Christakis T (2011) The ICJ advisory opinion on Kosovo: “Has International Law Something to Say about Secession?”. Leiden J Int Law 24:75

Craven M (2010) Statehood, self-determination, and recognition. In: Evans MD (ed) International law, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 242

de Vattel E (1964) The law of nations or the principles of natural law (trans: Fenwick CG). Oceana Publications Inc., New York

Del Mar K (2013) The myth of remedial secession. In: French D (ed) Statehood and self-determination: reconciling tradition and modernity in international law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 80–81

Dugard J, Raič D (2006) The role of recognition in the law and practice of secession. In: Kohen MG (ed) Secession: international law perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 100

Eleftheriadis P (2008) Legal rights. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 5CrossRef

Falk R (2011) The Kosovo advisory opinion: conflict resolution and precedent. Am J Int Law 105:51–52

Grotius H (1964) De Jure Belli ac Pacis (trans: Kelsey FW) Book I, Chapter 4. Oceana Publications Inc., New York, p 150

Hart HLA (1961) The concept of law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 155

Hobbes T (1962) Leviathan, edited by John Plamenatz, Fontana Library, p 143

Hudson MO (1934) The Permanent Court of international justice. The Macmillan Company, New York, p 601 ff

Janik R (2013) The responsibility to protect as an impetus for secessionist movements — on the necessity to re-think territorial integrity. In: Kettemann MC (ed) Grenzen im Völkerrecht. Jan Sramek Verlag, Wien, pp 41–69

Jasanoff M (2012) Liberty’s exiles: American loyalists in the revolutionary World. Vintage Books, New York, pp 5–53

Jennings RY, Watts AD (eds) (1992) Oppenheim’s international law, 9th edn. Pearson Education, Limited, London, p 24

Kohen MG (2006) Introduction. In: Kohen MG (ed) Secession: international law perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 10CrossRef

Livius T (1853) The History of Rome (trans: Spillan D) Book 2. John Childs and Son, Bungay. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19725/19725-h/19725-h.htm#b32. Accessed 15 June 2018

Locke J (2012) The second treatise of government. Philipp Reclam jun, Stuttgart

Mikulka V (1999) The dissolution of Czechoslovakia and succession in respect of treaties. In: Mrak M (ed) Succession of states. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, p 109

Müllerson R (2003) Sovereignty and secession: then and now, here and there. In: Dahlitz J (ed) Secession and international law: conflict avoidance – regional appraisals. United Nations Publications, New York, p 128

Müllerson R (2009) Precedents in the mountains: on the parallels and uniqueness of the cases of Kosovo, South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Chin J Int Law 8:21CrossRef

Nolte G (2006) Secession and external intervention. In: Kohen MG (ed) Secession: international law perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 85–86

Peters A (2011) Does Kosovo lie in the lotus-land of freedom? Leiden J Int Law 24:104CrossRef

Pufendorf S (1964) De Jure Naturae Et Gentium Libri Octo (trans: Oldfather CH, Oldfather WA). Oceana Publications Inc., New York

Raič D (2002) Statehood and the law of self-determination. Kluwer Law International, Alphen aan den Rijn, p 314

Ryngaert C, Sobrie S (2011) Recognition of states: international law or realpolitik? The practice of recognition in the Wake of Kosovo, South Ossetia, and Abkhazia. Leiden J Int Law 24:477CrossRef

Shaw MN (1997) Peoples, territorialism and boundaries. Eur J Int Law 8:483CrossRef

Shaw MN (2003) The role of recognition and non-recognition with respect to secession: notes on some relevant issues. In: Dahlitz J (ed) Secession and international law: conflict avoidance - regional appraisals. United Nations Publications, New York, pp 248–249

Shaw MN (2008) International law, 6th edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 70CrossRef

Sisson R, Rose LE (1990) War and secession: Pakistan, India and the creation of Bangladesh. University of California Press, Berkeley, p 207

Škrk M (1999) Recognition of states and its (Non-) implication on state succession: the case of successor states to the former Yugoslavia. In: Mrak M (ed) Succession of states. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, pp 8–9

Solum LB (2004) Procedural justice. South Calif Law Rev 78:182

Thirlway H (2010) The sources of international law. In: Evans MD (ed) International law, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 95–121CrossRef

Vidmar J (2012) Explaining the legal effects of recognition. Int Comp Law Q 61:378CrossRef

Walter BF (2009) Reputation and civil war: why separatist conflicts are so violent. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 7–8CrossRef

Weller M (2008a) Why the legal rules on self-determination do not resolve self-determination disputes. In: Weller M, Metzger B (eds) Settling self-determination disputes: complex power-sharing in theory and practice. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, p 33

Weller M (2008b) Escaping the self-determination trap. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, p 64

Wolfrum R (2011) Sources of international law, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, last updated in May 2011

Titel: Exploring the Legal Color of Secession
verfasst von: Jing Lu
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: On State Secession from International Law Perspectives
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-97447-7

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-97448-4

Copyright-Jahr: 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97448-4_2

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner