5. Sovereignty inside the State

2015 ◽  
pp. 84-104
Author(s):  
Vaughan Lowe
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
National Character ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
External Threats ◽  
Sovereign Equality ◽  
The Right

Limitations on the right to use force are a key element among the principles by which international law secures the sovereign equality and independence of States against external threats. ‘Sovereignty inside the State’ examines the principles of international law that spell out in positive terms the content of that equality and independence. Each State has the sovereign right to decide upon its social and economic structures, and to lay down laws that will influence the national character of the State and of life within it. The legal concept of jurisdiction determines the reach and priority of those laws. That freedom is not unlimited: it is constrained by obligations of the State under international law.

The right to the truth in international law: fact or fiction?

2006 ◽  
Vol 88 (862) ◽  
pp. 245-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasmin Naqvi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
The Right ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Legal Right

The right to the truth has emerged as a legal concept at the national, regional and international levels, and relates to the obligation of the state to provide information to victims or to their families or even society as a whole about the circumstances surrounding serious violations of human rights. This article unpacks the notion of the right to the truth and tests the normative strength of the concept against the practice of states and international bodies. It also considers some of the practical implications of turning “truth” into a legal right, particularly from the criminal law perspective.

The Scope and Content of Section 75(1)(a) of the Zimbabwean Constitution: An International Law Approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chiedza Simbo
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Education System ◽  
Basic Education ◽  
The State ◽  
Education Act ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
Basic Education System

Despite the recent enactment of the Zimbabwean Constitution which provides for the right to basic education, complaints, reminiscent of a failed basic education system, have marred the education system in Zimbabwe. Notwithstanding glaring violations of the right to basic education by the government, no person has taken the government to court for failure to comply with its section 75(1)(a) constitutional obligations, and neither has the government conceded any failures or wrongdoings. Two ultimate questions arise: Does the state know what compliance with section 75(1)(a) entails? And do the citizens know the scope and content of their rights as provided for by section 75(1)(a) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe? Whilst it is progressive that the Education Act of Zimbabwe as amended in 2020 has addressed some aspects relating to section 75(1)(a) of the Constitution, it has still not provided an international law compliant scope and content of the right to basic education neither have any clarifications been provided by the courts. Using an international law approach, this article suggests what the scope and content of section 75(1)(a) might be.

Self-Defence and Israel in International Law: A Reappraisal

1976 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 516-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry Feinstein
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Self Help ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence

Dean Acheson frankly reconfirmed the right of self-preservation, when he asserted, “…law simply does not deal with … questions of ultimate power—power that comes close to the sources of sovereignty…. No law can destroy the state creating the law. The survival of states is not a matter of law”. It is beyond the law.Given the existence of man's elementary loyalty to autonomous states, the necessity for using force springs from the need of states to depend fundamentally on self-help in order to guarantee their survival and welfare. This search for security in a system of politics without government, forces the state to be dependent upon military self-help.

Democracy

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Wheatley
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
English Language ◽  
Family Relationship ◽  
The State ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
International Governance ◽  
Science Literature ◽  
Democratic State ◽  
The Right ◽  
Over Time

Researchers on “democracy” in international law have to make an important methodological choice: They can examine the “democracy norm” from the perspective only of international law (state practice, treaty norms, international law texts, etc.) or they can locate their research within a wider body of social science literature, in particular considering the normative conception of democracy in political theory (electoral, deliberative, consociational, etc.) and the practice of democracy and democracy promotion identified in political science. The latter is recommended since the idea of democracy in international law did not emerge ex nihilo. To be meaningful, it seems reasonable to conclude that the international law conception of democracy must maintain its family relationship with the idea of democracy that has emerged in political thought and practice over time—after all no agreed definition of democracy exists in international law. For researchers engaged in a critique of doctrine and practice from the perspective of democratic legitimacy, more in-depth reading will be required and reading of the original materials is essential. This article introduces researchers to the key writings in the English language on democracy in international law and relevant readings that inform the debates in international law in cognate disciplines. While certain democratic elements can be found in international doctrine and practice over time, “democracy” as an identifiable principle of the international law order can be dated back to the 1990s and the ending of the Cold War. While the status and content of the “democracy norm” in international law remains contested, the influence of democratic ideals can be seen in a number of areas relating to legitimate political authority at the level of the state and, increasingly, the (democratic) legitimacy of international organizations and institutions. The principle of democracy is seen to have an influence in the functioning of international law and the practice of international relations and international governance: establishing a criterion for legitimate and lawful government, giving form to the right of peoples to political self-determination, providing a context for the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and establishing the basis for peaceable and nonpeaceable interstate relations. Moreover, following the globalization and fragmentation of governance functions, concern has grown increasingly with respect to the “democratic deficit” experienced by citizens at the level of the state, leading to proposals for the democratization of global governance and a literature that examines the extent to which a democratic state should accept the authority of nondemocratic international law norms.

Intervention: Individual and Collective

1945 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 645-663 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles G. Fenwick
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
The Other ◽  
Central Theme ◽  
Entire Volume ◽  
Foreign Government ◽  
Internal Affairs ◽  
The Right

Of all the terms in general use in international law none is more challenging than that of “ intervention.” Scarcely any two writers are to be found who define this term in the same way or who classify the same situations under it. To one writer it is the interference of one state in the affairs of another; to a second writer it is “ unwarranted” interference; to a third it is interference in the domestic or internal affairs of the state; to a fourth it is interference in external as well as internal affairs. Some writers include interference of a third state between two belligerents in time of war, by taking sides with one against the other; others include only interference between the parties to a civil war. Some include “ diplomatic intervention,” where the intervening state interferes in behalf of its citizens in cases of alleged denial of justice by the other state; others regard such interference merely as “ interposition,” since it does not involve an attempt to control the character of the foreign government but merely to influence its conduct. Many jurists regard all intervention as illegal; an American jurist constructs an entire volume on international law around the central theme of the right of intervention.

scholarly journals Rencana Pemisahan Catalonia dari Spanyol Ditinjau dari Prinsip Self-Determination

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-53
Author(s):  
Mochamad Ardhi Ma’arif ◽  
Wisnu Aryo Dewanto ◽  
Muhammad Insan Tarigan
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
The Self ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Cultural Aspects ◽  
Cultural Status ◽  
The Right ◽  
Political Economic

Abstract—This Study discussed the problem whether the secession of Catalonia from Spain is in accordance with the self-determination principle in the International Law. This study used a legal, concept and case approach and concluded as follows: Catalonia was able to separate them selves from the parent nation according to the self-determination principle by making a referendum. This act of making a referendum was a way for the Catalonia society to state their opinion. This condition was in accordance with the self-determination principle in the international law because the right for secession may occur in a certain condition other than the context of decolonization. When a country is retricted by the reigning government in savoring internal self-determination (in obtaining political, economic, social and cultural status), then the country may perform a secession from the parent nation. The requierements of self-determination in the Catalonia and Spain case were political, economic, social and cultural aspects. Afterwards, Catalonia needed full fill the requirements stated in Article 1 of the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, and they need to get a recognition from another country. Keywords : secession, referendum, self-determination principle, recognation Abstrak—Penelitian berjudul rencana pemisahan Catalonia dari Spanyol di tinjau dari prinsip self-determination, dengan membahas permasalahan apakah pemisahan diri Catalonia dari Spanyol sesuai dengan prinsip self-determination dalam hukum internasional. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang, konsep dan kasus, sehingga diperoleh suatu kesimpulan bahwa Catalonia bisa memisahkan diri dari Spanyol sesuai dengan prinsip self-determination dengan melakukan referendum. Referendum adalah suatu cara masyarakat Catalonia untuk menyampaikan pendapat. Hal ini sesuai dengan prinsip self-determination dalam hukum internasional, karena hak untuk memisahkan diri bisa muncul dalam keadaan khusus, selain dalam konteks dekolonisasi. Ketika suatu bangsa dihalangi haknya oleh pemerintah yang berkuasa dalam menikmati internal self-determination (untuk mendapatkan status politik, ekonomi, sosial dan budaya), maka sebagai jalan terakhir yang diperbolehkan dalam hukum internasional adalah upaya melepaskan diri dari negara tersebut. Syarat-syarat self-determination dalam kasus Catalonia dengan Spanyol yang ingin memisahkan diri adalah aspek politik, ekonomi, sosial dan budaya. Setelah itu Catalonia harus sesuai dengan Konvensi Montevideo Tentang Hak dan Tugas Negara Tahun 1933 Pada Pasal 1 yaitu syarat terbentuknya suatu negara, dan terakhir Catalonia harus mendapatkan pengakuan dari sebuah negara. Kata kunci : pemisahan diri, referendum, prinsip self-determination, pengakuan

Hot Pursuit

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bill Gilmore
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
The State ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Legal Justification ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence

This chapter examines the doctrine of ‘hot pursuit’ used by the state to exercise its coercive powers beyond national territory for law enforcement purposes. It discusses hot pursuit by sea, land, and air in the context of international law, particularly with respect to self-defence and reprisal. Whilst hot pursuit is well recognized in the customary international law of the sea, it has yet to achieve that form of normative recognition in relation to pursuit on land or by air. The chapter considers the debate over hot pursuit as a legal justification for cross-border military incursions independent of the right of self-defence and describes the concept of extended constructive presence before concluding with an analysis of hot pursuit in a use of force context.

The Existing Cause of Biafra and its Right to Self-determination

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Yinka Olomojobi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Regional Differences ◽  
The State ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
The South ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
Independent States ◽  
The Right

Abstract There has been recent agitation for self-determination in the south-east of Nigeria for the state known as Biafra (a pro-secessionist group). The principle of self-determination is a well-debated discourse since it connects with the right to secede and create a sovereign state. Like a marriage at gunpoint, a reluctant partner will always want a way out of the marriage, and will take a hike at the first opportunity. Given this political inheritance, Nigeria has fallen prey to several attempts to undermine state sovereignty originating in ethnic and regional differences. The controversy has concerned both the principle’s status in international law and its charter. This principle has played a prominent part in the emergence of former colonies as independent states. The aim of this article is to explore the ongoing agitation for a Biafran Republic and to assess whether it is in conformity with the right to self-determination.

Sovereign Equality of States in the System of Basic Principles of International Law

10.12737/3457 ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
pp. 5-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Олег Тиунов ◽  
Olyeg Tiunov
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Sovereign Equality ◽  
Grand Total ◽  
The United Nations

In the article have defined of the role of the principle of the sovereign equality of the states in the system of the principles of international law. The contemporary of the signs of the sovereign equality became aparent the grand total of the development of the international law. Its substance development was under the influence of the different history formations. The Charter of the United Nations there is the basic document of the contemporaneity in which has sealed the principle of the sovereign equality of the states as the part of the system of the principals the modern international law. The legal signs of the sovereignty appears on the supreme sovereignty within the limits of the state, and they must be independence of the state in the international relations. The basic principles of international law there are interdependence. They must be conform to the context each other.

Aerial Jurisdiction

1911 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-180
Author(s):  
George Grafton Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Exclusive Jurisdiction ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
Open Sea ◽  
Marginal Sea ◽  
General Proposition ◽  
State Authority ◽  
The Right

As a legal concept jurisdiction may be considered the right to exercise state authority. Story says that it may be “laid down as a general proposition that all persons and property within the territorial jurisdiction of a sovereign are amenable to the jurisdiction of himself or his courts; and that the exceptions to this rule are such only as by common usage and public policy have been allowed, in order to preserve the peace and harmony of nations, and to regulate their intercourse in a manner best suited to their dignity and rights.” (Santissima Trinidad 7 Wheat. 354) It is fully recognized that all land and the marginal sea, to a distance of a marine league at least, is subject to territorial jurisdiction and that the open sea is not within the jurisdiction of any state though vessels sailing upon such seas are within the jurisdiction of the state whose flag they rightfully fly. As Story says exceptions to this rule of exclusive jurisdiction are such “as by common usage and public policy have been allowed, in order to preserve the peace and harmony of nations, and to regulate their intercourse, in a manner best suited to their dignity and rights.”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document