The Legitimacy of Minorities' Claim for Autonomy through the Right to Self-Determination

1999 ◽  
Vol 68 (4) ◽  
pp. 413-438 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Ethnic Conflicts ◽  
Contemporary Debate ◽  
Nation States ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Stability ◽  
The Right

AbstractThe grant of autonomous powers to minorities is considered as a threat to the stability of the nation-State system. Nonetheless, many academics and jurists now believe that autonomy can be used to reduce ethnic conflicts, provided that parties to such arrangements are willing to implement them in good faith. In contemporary debate amongst academics it is frequently argued that there is an apparent link between minorities' rights and autonomy. Moreover, some minority rights campaigners stress that minorities' right to autonomy emanates from the right to self-determination. Such claims are, however, contested by most nation-States on the ground that autonomy is not a right in international law. It is only a small number of States that are prepared to experiment with autonomous arrangements to address minorities' concerns within their constitutional structure. Whilst investigating the current developments in United Nations and State practice with regard to autonomy, this article critically analyses whether autonomy gains its legitimacy through the right to self-determination and the extent to which autonomy is being evolved as an integral part of the internal right to self-determination.

Russland und das Selbstbestimmungsrecht der Völker im postsowjetischen Raum

2021 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-26
Author(s):  
Johannes Socher
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Legal Rhetoric ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Regional Comparison ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Soviet Space ◽  
The Right ◽  
Fragmentation Of International Law ◽  
Post Soviet Space

As a concept of international law, the right to self-determination is widely renowned for its unclarity. Broadly speaking, one can differentiate between a liberal and a nationalist tradition. In modern international law, the balance between these two opposing traditions is sought in an attempt to contain or ‘domesticate’ the nationalist conception by limiting it to ‘abnormal’ situations, i.e. to colonialism in the sense of ‘alien subjugation, domination and exploitation’. Essentially, this distinction between ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’ situations has since been the heart of the matter in the legal discourse on the right to self-determination, with the important qualification regarding the need to preserve existing borders. This study situates Russia’s approach to the right to self- determination in that discourse by way of a regional comparison vis-à-vis a ‘western’ or European perspective, and a temporal comparison with the former Soviet doctrine of international law. Against the background of the Soviet Union’s role in the evolution of the right to self-determination, the bulk of the study analyses Russia’s relevant state practice in the post-Soviet space through the prisms of sovereignty, secession, and annexation. Complemented by a review of the Russian scholarship on the topic, it is suggested that Russia’s approach to the right to self-determination may be best understood not only in terms of power politics disguised as legal rhetoric, but can be seen as evidence of traits of a regional (re-)fragmentation of international law.

Introduction

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Johannes Socher
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Academic Discipline ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Raw Material ◽  
Legal Argumentation ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Detailed Assessment ◽  
The Right ◽  
Open Question

The book provides a detailed assessment of Russia’s state practice in the post-Soviet space with the aim to ascertain a distinct Russian approach to the right of peoples to self-determination, illustrated by seven case studies on the secessionist conflicts over Abkhazia, Chechnya, Crimea, Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Tatarstan, and Transnistria. As such, it may serve as a detailed documentation of the raw material necessary to form and identify rules of customary international law, produced by one particular state. Beyond that, it seeks to test the accuracy of and give substance to Lauri Mälksoo’s general assessment in Russian Approaches to International Law that the ‘evolution of Moscow’s legal argumentation and views in these complex cases … has not followed some overarching legal principle but reflected changing power politics. Until 2014, Russia claimed that sovereignty trumped self-determination but in 2014 partly destroyed its own earlier argumentation by its own actions in Ukraine.’ Finally, this book is a contribution to what Mälksoo calls the ‘debatable nexus’ between legal scholarship and state practice of international law in Russia, that is the open question of to what extent international law as an academic discipline continues to be subjugated to the raison d’état in Russia.

The Uncomfortable Balance between a Minority and a People: The Global/Local Disconnect

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 254-272
Author(s):  
Parvathi Menon
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Personal Characteristic ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Minority Protection ◽  
Political Processes ◽  
Minority Identity ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship

The legitimacy of secessionist movements has emerged as an important debate, while the protection of minorities within a democracy has become merely of peripheral interest to international law. My project suggests that the advent of universalized (minority) rights re-conceptualized the majority-minority relationship and its balance, reducing the possibilities of political processes to balance the relationship. What was construed as a redress for dichotomous relationships between the oppressor and the oppressed through (the right to) self-determination, became a discourse between minority (identity) rights and a democratic entitlement, post-colonially. These norms universalized a demand to rethink minority protection, no longer from the perspective of advantaged and disadvantaged; rather, to introduce perspectives of individuals polarized around a personal characteristic in their identity thus establishing/reinforcing the inferiority of their identity within the hierarchy.

scholarly journals The Right to Self-Determination of Modern Secessionist Movements under International Law

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 285-302
Author(s):  
Ja’far Mohammad Khair Al Sabbagh
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Parent State ◽  
The World ◽  
New States ◽  
The Stability ◽  
The Right ◽  
Universal Order

States’ boundaries have changed to a large extent over the course of time, in fact, the world has not always been the same as nowadays. In place of archaic forms of social organisation, the universal order has appeared where determinate and inviolable borders play a crucial role in ensuring the stability of states and resisting separatist movements. At the same time, secessionist movements throughout the world continually aim to gain independence from the ‘parent’ state invoking the right to self-determination. In this paper, the researcher will examine whether a part of the population of a state or a sub-unit of that state has a right to secede and create a new state and/or integrate into another. The article consists of a strong theoretical part dealing with statehood, self-determination and secession with a view of the dynamic development of these notions since the rapid birth of many new states as a result of decolonization. Thereafter, the validity of the gathered results will be verified by a comparative analysis of the cases of Kosovo, Crimea and Catalonia with regard to the historical background of these secessionist entities.

Russia and the Right to Self-Determination in the Post-Soviet Space

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Socher
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Legal Rhetoric ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
South Ossetia ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Soviet Space ◽  
The Right ◽  
Fragmentation Of International Law ◽  
Post Soviet Space

As a concept of international law, the right to self-determination is widely renowned for its lack of clarity. Broadly speaking, one can differentiate between a liberal and a nationalist tradition. In modern international law, the balance between these two opposing traditions is sought in an attempt to contain or ‘domesticate’ the nationalist conception by limiting it to ‘abnormal’ situations, that is to colonialism in the sense of ‘alien subjugation, domination and exploitation’. Essentially, this distinction between ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’ situations has since, the distinction was made, been the heart of the matter in the legal discourse on the right to self-determination, with the important qualification regarding the need to preserve existing borders. This book situates Russia’s approach to the right to self-determination in that discourse by way of a regional comparison vis-à-vis a ‘Western’ or European perspective, and a temporal comparison with the former Soviet doctrine of international law. Against the background of the Soviet Union’s role in the evolution of the right to self-determination, the bulk of the book analyses Russia’s relevant state practice in the post-Soviet space through the prisms of sovereignty, secession, and annexation, illustrated by a total of seven case studies on the conflicts over Abkhazia, Chechnya, Crimea, Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Tatarstan, and Transnistria. Complemented by a review of the Russian scholarship on the right to self-determination, it is suggested that Russia’s approach may be best understood not only in terms of power politics disguised as legal rhetoric, but can be seen as evidence of traits of a regional (re-)fragmentation of international law.

scholarly journals Filipino Muslims and Issues of Governance in the Philippines: Some Thoughts by a Local Practitioner

ICR Journal ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-155
Author(s):  
Datu Michael O. Mastura
Keyword(s):  
Political Culture ◽  
International Law ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
Peace Negotiations ◽  
Nation States ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
Constitutional Regime

This article adopts the general theme of governance to provide an institutional framework for law reform and constitutional regime. To look into the political culture and religion of Filipinos is to ask why there is much reliance on law with an internal dynamics of hostility to all things religious in public life. The author employs the democracy argument to raise asymmetrical issues in a constitutional regime within the context of ‘the national state’ rather than problematise it as a majority versus minority relation. This makes it possible, for instance, to consider the Bangsamoro in the Philippines as a ‘people’ in legal terms and in reference to ‘state-nations’ instead of ‘nation-states’. The author also treats the dimension of international law regarding the right to self-determination with respect to the current peace negotiations between the government of the Philippines and armed non-state actors (MILF and MNLF). One might not necessarily agree with all that is stated in this contribution, which is intended to be an essay rather than a scholarly paper, but, nevertheless, it grants some insights into the mindset of contemporary Muslims in the Philippines.

Order and Justice: National Minorities and the Right to Secession

1999 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 389-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
International Law ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Colonial State ◽  
Post Colonial ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
The People ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Right

AbstractThe Versailles Treaty sought to protect minorities by giving them their own state. This practice, labelled 'self-determination' has changed guise considerably post World War II. Paramount to the emancipation of colonies, it came to be the concept that legitimated the 'rule of the people' over that of their colonial masters. However post-colonial 'self-determined' states are often manufactured entities forced into the strait-jacket of Westphalian statehood; and unlike the states that emanated from the Westphalian Treaty, were given no time to evolve by themselves. As a result these states often house disparate sets of minorities that go unrepresented within the Statist discourse. Further, these states have attempted to suppress their minorities through the various policies associated with nation-building. Today, with secession an increasingly attainable form of self-determination, the question arises as to whether these minorities have a right to form a separate state. The international law of self-determination suggests that this is a right of all peoples. It however leaves the parameters of this 'peoplehood' undefined. This paper seeks to examine the discourse of minority rights within that of the international right to self determination. It seeks to trace the history of minority rights protection, and to examine the way in which minority rights are protected within current international law. In addition, it examines the parameters of peoplehood and concludes by looking at two cases where disaffected minorities in a post-colonial state sought to form their own state.

Final Conclusions

2021 ◽  
pp. 206-212
Author(s):  
Johannes Socher
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Legal Rhetoric ◽  
The West ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Fragmentation Of International Law

The book concludes with the suggestion that Russia’s approach to the right of peoples to self-determination may be best understood not only in terms of Russian power politics disguised as legal rhetoric but can be seen as evidence of traits of a regional (re-)fragmentation of international law. Even basic agreement on what self-determination as a concept of international law means and what role related concepts such as territorial integrity, secession, referendum, or the prohibition of the use of force do or should play in that context seems almost unattainable, to the effect that international law as a single epistemological frame is arguably in a similar danger as during Soviet times. Today, apart from Lauri Mälksoo’s work and occasional contributions by a handful of other scholars in the West, analyses of Russia’s post-Soviet state practice and doctrine in the international legal discourse usually confine themselves to assess the legality of Russia’s actions in terms of positive international law. Such a limited approach fails to attempt to understand diverging views on international law, something which was perceived as self-evident during the Cold War period.

The Annexation of Crimea and the Boundaries of the Will of the People

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 365-383 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jure Vidmar
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
International Borders ◽  
The People ◽  
The Will ◽  
Territorial Status ◽  
The Stability ◽  
The Right

AbstractThe secession of Crimea and—more broadly—the conflict in Ukraine reopened questions concerning the limits of a democratic expression of the will of the people and the use of force in order to procure annexation of a territory belonging to another State. This article seeks to clarify the law governing the change of the legal status of a territory through secession and merger with another state. It argues not only that the right of self-determination does not grant an entitlement to alter the legal status of a territory, but also that general international law does not prohibit such an alteration. The rules of international law favor the stability of theexistinginternational borders and thus the territorial status quo, but this does not mean that a unilateral attempt at altering an existing territorial arrangement automatically constitutes an internationally wrongful act. Any change of the legal status of a territory becomes illegal, however, upon anoutsideuse of force. Such an illegality cannot be “cured” by a democratically expressed will of the people.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document