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.

scholarly journals History of self-determination of the people of Donbass. experience of the Soviet Republic of Donetsk and Krivoy Rog

2019 ◽  
pp. 148-152
Author(s):  
Vladislav V. Gruzdev ◽  
Dmitriy A. Babichev ◽  
Natal'ya A. Babicheva
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Cultural Development ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Political Status ◽  
The People ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Historical Past

The article is devoted to the burning problem that arose in 2014 in the Ukraine, in the regions of Lugansk and Donetsk, and that concerns the right of the people of Donbass to self-determination. This problem is not only of a local territorial nature, but it is also one of the most complex debatable problems of international law. Since the right to self-determination contradicts the principle of territorial integrity of the state, the consideration and solution of this issue is the most burning for the whole population living on the territory of the self-proclaimed people's republics of Lugansk and Donetsk. In the article, the authors analyse the concept of "self-determination of the people" and give a generalised characteristic of it, approving that it is the right of every nation to solve the issues of state structure, political status, economic, social and cultural development independently and at its own discretion. The author also examines the historical past of the people of Donbass, where, in terms of the Republic of Donetsk and Krivoy Rog and various documentary historical and legal materials, we come to the conclusion that the population of Donbass has the right to social, economic, cultural, spiritual and other development just as all the recognised countries of the world.

The Right of Nations to Self-Determination in the Context of the Regaining of Independence by Poland — an International-Law Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol Special Issue ◽  
pp. 7-14
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Andrzejczak-Świątek
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
International Law ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
World War ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
The People ◽  
The Right

This article aims to show the problem of self-determination of the people in the light of contemporary standards of international law, as well as to compare them with the factual and legal basis of regaining independence by Poland in 1918. The principle of the right of people to self-determination as one of the basic rules of international law was proclaimed only after World War II, however, concepts conferring on the population living in a given territory to decide about themselves appeared before the French Revolution. The issue of the right to self-determination of people is extremely complex — after World War II, there was in this respect the development of treaty guarantees concluded with international agreements for the system of human rights protection, which sanctioned this right as the only subjective collective right. On the other hand, the practice of contemporary states on this issue is not uniform and largely depends on the acceptance of the facts by the international community. From the point of view of developing the right to self-determination of people, and thus the right to independence, the case of Poland is extremely interesting not only because of the historical and political background, but also because it can be treated as a precedent in international law in the context of recognition and acceptance of independence by the state.

The Sudanese Revolution of October 1964

1967 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 491-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yusuf Fadl Hasan
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Advisory Council ◽  
World War ◽  
The People ◽  
Western Democracy ◽  
Traditional Institutions ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Self Determination ◽  
Legislative Assembly

About 70 years ago, the Mahdist or Ansār state, in many ways a traditional Muslim government, crumbled under the fire of the Anglotional Egyptian cannons. On the condominium government that followed fell the task of pacifying the country and introducing western concepts of administration. All Sudanese attempts to defy foreign domination had failed completely by 1924. The British, the stronger of the two partners, had the lion's share in shaping the destiny of the country. Towards the end of World War II, the influential and educated Sudanese, like other Africans and Asians, demanded the right of self-determination. In 1946, in preparation for this, a sample of western democracy was introduced in the form of an Advisory Council. This Council, which was restricted to the northern Sudan, was followed two years later by the Legislative Assembly, which had slightly more powers. Although these democratic innovations were quite alien to the country and were introduced at a relatively late date, they were in keeping with traditional institutions. Until recently, the Sudan consisted of a number of tribal units where no classes or social distinctions existed and the tribal chief was no more than the first among equals; the people were therefore not accustomed to autocratic rule.

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.

Decolonization in International Law

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mai Taha
Keyword(s):  
International Economic ◽  
International Law ◽  
Third World ◽  
International Economic Order ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Economic Order ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
The People ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Third World

In Gillo Pontecorvo’s evocative film The Battle of Algiers (1966), viewers reach the conclusion that the fight against colonialism would not be fought at the UN General Assembly. Decolonization would take place through the organized resistance of colonized people. Still, the 1945 United Nations Charter and the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights provided some legal basis, albeit tenuous, for self-determination. When Third World leaders assembled in the 1955 Bandung Conference, it became clear that the UN needed to shift gears on the question of decolonization. By 1960, and through a show of Asian and African votes at the General Assembly, the Declaration for the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples was adopted, effectively outlawing colonialism and affirming the right of all peoples to self-determination. Afro-Asian solidarity took a different form in the 1966 Tricontinental Conference in Havana, which founded the Organization of Solidarity with the People of Asia, Africa and Latin America. The conference gathered leftist activists and leaders from across the Third World, who would later inspire radical movements and scholarship on decolonization and anticolonial socialism. This would also influence the adoption of the 1974 Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order and later lead to UNESCO’s series that starts with Mohammed Bedjaoui’s famous overture, Towards a New International Economic Order (1979; cited as Bedjaoui 1979 under the Decolonization “Moment”). This article situates this history within important international-law scholarship on decolonization. First, it introduces different approaches to decolonization and international law; namely, postcolonial, Marxist, feminist, and Indigenous approaches. Second, it highlights seminal texts on international law and the colonial encounter. Third, it focuses on scholarship that captures the spirit of the “decolonization moment” as a political and temporal rupture, but also as a continuity, addressing, fourth, decolonization and neocolonial practices. Finally, this article ends with some of the most important works on international law and settler colonialism in the 21st century.

scholarly journals Shaping Indigenous Self-Determination: Promising or Unsatisfactory Solutions?

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 413-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mauro Barelli
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Straightforward Manner ◽  
History Of ◽  
United Nations Declaration ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Self Determination ◽  
Do So

AbstractThe right of peoples to self-determination represents one of the most controversial norms of international law. In particular, two questions connected with the meaning and scope of this right have been traditionally contentious: first, who constitutes a ‘people’ for the purposes of self-determination, and, secondly, what does the right of self-determination actually imply for its legitimate holders. Against this unsettled background, the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) affirmed, in a straightforward manner, that indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. In light of the uncertainties that were mentioned above, it becomes necessary to clarify the actual implications of this important recognition. This article will seek to do so by discussing the drafting history of the provision on self-determination contained in the UNDRIP and positioning it within the broader normative framework of the instrument.

scholarly journals PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THEIR ROLE IN CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN KOSOVO AND CRIMEA. Part 2

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Local Authorities ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Conflict Situations ◽  
History Of ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

The second part of the article considers the issue of the contradiction of the realization of the right to self-determination and the principle of territorial integrity of Serbia and Ukraine on the example of Kosovo and Crimea. It presents an analysis of the legitimacy of the will expression of Kosovars and Crimeans and its compliance with the norms of international law. The preconditions and factors of the ethnopolitical conflict are examined and the main problematic issues that caused controversies between the central and local authorities in Kosovo and Crimea are identified. The article emphasizes that the result of the plebiscites in Kosovo (1998) and Crimea (2014) was the declaration of independence, denied by central authorities of Serbia and Ukraine and met with mixed reactions by the international community. The self-proclaimed republics have only external features of statehood and are subject to external administration of other countries. A latent opposition of geopolitical opponents in the international arena is noted, which is to some extent traced through the position on the recognition / non-recognition of Kosovo and Crimea. The article draws attention to the fact that inconsistent interpretations of certain principles of international law promote secession movements in countries where conflicts periodically arise between central and local authorities. The emphasis is placed on the necessity of a clearer definition of the aforementioned international legal norms and obligations undertaken by subjects of international law. The article holds that in order to avoid such situations as in Kosovo or Crimea, to eliminate conflicts related to the possibility of an ambiguous interpretation and application of the principles of international law, an internationally recognized system of more stringent and comprehensive measures should be introduced to cease and prevent threats to the territorial integrity of countries. A strong position of the international community on the abovementioned principles with the history of the liberation movements of these peoples taken into account should become the measure precluding the aggravation of conflict situations related to the aspiration of peoples for self-determination.

scholarly journals The Influence of Political Economy on the “Self-Determination of Peoples”

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yavuz Çilliler
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Field Research ◽  
State Level ◽  
Comparison Method ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Theoretical Development ◽  
Historical Comparison ◽  
The People ◽  
The Right

The right of peoples to "self-determination” is influenced by varying motives in different times and geographies in its implementation, and is rarely operated according to its foundational ethic and legal bases dating back to the Kantian concept of free will and the international laws codified after the World War II. Particularly, political economy has always played an important but usually covered role in the application of this principle to national or international disputes. This paper aims to explain the dominance of political economy in international decision making processes about the people making a claim for their own state, and to highlight the changing nature of political economy supporting sometimes the sovereign states and sometimes the sub-state level ethnic groups. In this context, the theoretical development and the application of “self-determination” principle is assessed relatively by historical comparison method. Field research for the study comprises archival research of primary and secondary resources. This paper concludes that the political economy has usually greater influence on the application of “self-determination” to the national and international disputes than its ethic and legal content, and that the paradoxical content of this principle contributes to the redistribution of lands usually in compliance with the interests of great powers.

Part I The UNDRIP’s Relationship to Existing International Law, Ch.1 Who Are ‘Indigenous Peoples’?: An Examination of Concepts Concerning Group Membership in the UNDRIP

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Castellino Joshua ◽  
Doyle Cathal
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Group Membership ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The People ◽  
The Status ◽  
United Nations Declaration ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Continuum

This chapter assesses the question of the people and peoples to whom the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) applies, tracking the concepts of person, persons, groups, people, and peoples in international law, and the UNDRIP's contribution to these concepts. The opening section of the chapter illustrates that the status of indigenous peoples in customary international law stands closer to peoples in the continuum between minorities and peoples. Minorities, while gaining the right to protection and promotion of their group identity, do not automatically gain the right to self-determination. Indigenous peoples ought to, but their rights towards this are constrained by state interests.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document