scholarly journals Humanity Bounded and Unbounded: The Regulation of External Self-determination under International Law

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Howse ◽  
Ruti Teitel
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Recent Developments

Abstract One of the most complex and uncertain areas of international legal doctrine concerns how to deal with the aspiration of a people to achieve self-determination through the establishment of a new state and the related claim to a specific territory over which statehood is to be exercised. Recently, when the General Assembly of the United Nations referred to the International Court of Justice the question of the legality of the declaration of independence by Kosovar Albanians, the Court was given an opportunity to clarify and develop the law on external self-determination. Instead, the Court answered extremely narrowly, confining its analysis to the legality of the act of declaration without determining any consideration of international legal norms applicable to the act of secession that was being proposed. This article intends to fill the gap left by the ICJ’s decision: first by critiquing the inadequacy and tensions visible in the existing doctrine and second by examining how recent developments in international law may allow for a more normatively coherent approach to the problem.

A Note on the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Kosovo

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 867-880 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Muharremi
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Declaration Of Independence ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Unilateral Declaration ◽  
The Icj

On 22 July 2010, the International Court of Justice (hereinafter the “ICJ”) delivered its advisory opinion on the accordance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence in respect of Kosovo. The ICJ concluded that the declaration of independence dated 17 February 2008 did not violate any applicable rule of international law consisting of general international law, UNSC resolution 1244 (1999) (hereinafter the “Resolution 1244”) and the Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government in Kosovo (hereinafter the “Constitutional Framework”). The ICJ delivered the advisory opinion in response to a question set out in resolution 63/3 dated 8 October 2008 of the General Assembly of the United Nations Organization (hereinafter the “General Assembly”), which asked if “the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo is in accordance with international law.”

I. INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE, ACCORDANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW OF THE UNILATERAL DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE IN RESPECT OF KOSOVO, ADVISORY OPINION OF 22 JULY 2010

2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 799-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dov Jacobs
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Declaration Of Independence ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Unilateral Declaration ◽  
The Icj

‘Is the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo in accordance with international law?’ It is to answer this question that the General Assembly of the United Nations (‘UNGA’) requested an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (‘ICJ’). The request, adopted in October 20081 and initially sponsored by Serbia, was triggered by the declaration of independence of Kosovo issued on the 17 February 2008.2 Some two years later, on the 22 July 2010, the ICJ delivered its Advisory Opinion.3 By a 10–4 vote, the ICJ found that the declaration of independence of Kosovo did not violate international law.

Preparation of a New Treaty for the Settlement of International Disputes

1990 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 51-57
Author(s):  
Louis B. Sohn
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Peaceful Settlement ◽  
International Court ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes

In declaring the period 1990–1999 as the United Nations Decade of International Law, the General Assembly of the United Nations listed among the main purposes of that decade the need “to promote means and methods for the peaceful settlement of disputes between States, including resort to and full respect for the International Court of Justice”.

The Kosovo Advisory Opinion Scrutinized

2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 355-383 ◽  
Author(s):  
JURE VIDMAR
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Unilateral Declaration ◽  
The Right

AbstractIn the Kosovo Advisory Opinion, the International Court of Justice took the position that Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence did not violate any applicable rules of international law. This article does not dispute the final finding, but rather critically examines the Court's somewhat controversial reasoning and considers the added value of the opinion for the clarification of legal doctrine in relation to unilateral declarations of independence. An argument is made that the Court's interpretation of the question and the identification of the authors of the declaration had significant implications for the Court's final finding. Yet, the Court cannot be criticized for not answering the question of whether or not Kosovo is a state, whether Kosovo Albanians are beneficiaries of the right of self-determination, or even whether the ‘right to remedial secession’ is applicable. However, the Court may well have implicitly answered that recognition of Kosovo is not illegal.

The International Law Commission

1966 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 64-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. E. Gotlieb
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
General Scheme ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

One of the principal achievements of the United Nations is its work in codifying and developing international law. The International Law Commission, created in 1949, a subsidiary organ of the General Assembly, is the chief agency of the United Nations for achieving these tasks. The Chairman of the Commission at its sixteenth session, Professor Roberto Ago of Italy, stated in the Commission on July 16, 1964, that if the codification work which was now taking place in that body could be completed and accepted by states, progress would have been made without precedent since the time of Grotius.So well-established has the International Law Commission become on the international scene that it is almost surprising to recall that the existence of this body rests, not on any specific wording of the United Nations Charter calling for the creation of such a body of experts, but on the general phraseology of Article 13 of the Charter which provides that “the General Assembly shall initiate studies and make recommendations for the purpose of: (a) promoting … and encouraging the progressive development of international law and its codification.” In the space of seventeen years the International Law Commission has achieved widespread recognition for the high quality of its work; it would be no exaggeration to say that it has come to be regarded as rivaling in importance the work of the International Court of Justice. As “the principal judicial organ of the United Nations,” as successor to the Permanent Court of Justice — a new feature of international institutions in the modern era — and as the highest international judicial tribunal, the International Court of Justice is regarded, in the general scheme of the Charter, as an exceptionally prestigious body.

Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965; (Advisory Opinion)

2021 ◽  
Vol 192 ◽  
pp. 84-345
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
United Nations Charter ◽  
Chagos Archipelago

84International Court of Justice — Advisory jurisdiction — Article 65(1) of Statute of Court — Competence of General Assembly — United Nations Charter, 1945, Article 96(1) — Whether question submitted to Court of legal character — Alleged lack of clarity of terms of request — Whether having effect on legal nature of question — Whether depriving Court of jurisdictionInternational Court of Justice — Advisory jurisdiction — Discretion to decline to give opinion — Requirement of compelling reasons for Court to decline to give opinion — Whether questions raising complex and disputed factual issues unsuitable for determination — Whether Court having sufficient information and evidence — Requesting organ to determine whether opinion required — Whether advisory opinion would reopen findings of Arbitral Tribunal — Res judicata — Relevance of United Kingdom lack of consent to judicial settlement — Principle of consent to judicial settlement of disputes — Whether Court would be deciding a bilateral disputeStates — Decolonization — Independence — Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius — Whether process of decolonization of Mauritius lawfully completed — Relevant period — Applicable law — Right of self-determination — Whether self-determination customary law during relevant period — Territorial integrity — Whether detachment of Chagos Archipelago unlawfulInternational organizations — United Nations — General Assembly — Decolonization — Functions of the General Assembly regarding decolonization — Non-self-governing territories — Free and genuine will of people of a non-self-governing territory — MauritiusHuman rights — Self-determination — United Nations Charter, 1945 — General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) 1960 — Right erga omnes — Chagos Archipelago — Mauritius — Continued administration of Chagos Archipelago by United Kingdom — Consequences under international law arising from continued administration by United Kingdom of Chagos Archipelago — Whether continued administration constituting a wrongful act — Whether responsibility of United Kingdom engaged under international law — Whether United Kingdom obliged to put an end to any internationally wrongful act — Obligations upon all States under United Nations Charter and international law

Consolidation of Statehood through Membership in the UN: Some Remarks on Kosovo, Democracy and International Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 331-349
Author(s):  
Iliriana Islami ◽  
Remzije Istrefi
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
State Building ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Building Process

Kosovo declared its independence on 17 February 2008. Subsequently, one of the aims of Kosovo’s foreign policy was to further consolidate this position and to justify Kosovo’s prospective membership in the United Nations. This article examines the issue of recognition, elucidating how Kosovo is different from other countries and comparing it with the case of the former Yugoslavia. Other aspects in the state-building process such as ‘building constitutionalism’ will be presented as a step toward justifying recognition and membership. Furthermore, the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) of 8 October 2008 will be presented as evidence of Kosovo’s strengthening international position in its quest for further recognition. Thus, the article will discuss and analyze the arguments in favor of Kosovo being admitted to the UN.

Territorial Dimensions of Self-Determination

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 427-468
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
The Third ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Middle East Conflict ◽  
International Court ◽  
Generous Support

Professor Yaël Ronen introduced the workshop as the fourth in a series of events on legal aspects of the Middle East conflict. The first two events concerned the Palestine Mandate of 1922. The third focused on the 1948 refugee issue. All these events have and are being held with the generous support of the Knapp Family Foundation and under the auspices of the International Law Forum of the Faculty of Law. Also, as part of the Shabtai Rosenne International Law Center Initiative, the first session was dedicated to the commemoration of the work of the late Shabtai Rosenne, whose scholarship spanned a host of international law issues but who is most renowned for his work on the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Qatar v. United Arab Emirates): So Far, So Good?

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 387-407
Author(s):  
Udoka Ndidiamaka Owie
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Racial Discrimination ◽  
United Arab Emirates ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Convention ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
History Of ◽  
The United Nations

Abstract International law has a long history of dealing with racial discrimination, including its involvement in the perpetration of racial discrimination. However, in establishing a body of norms to tackle the problems of racial discrimination, several multilateral instruments have been adopted under the auspices of the United Nations addressing this malaise to various extents with the most extensive being the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) of 21 December 1965. While lauded for its singular and dedicated focus on racial discrimination, the Convention is challenged, at least interpretatively, as to the grounds for racial discrimination within its remit. Events occurring between Qatar and the United Arab Emirates on 5 June 2017 have afforded the International Court of Justice as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, an opportunity—the third since the coming into effect of the Convention—to interpret this landmark treaty.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document