LUISS GUIDO CARLI AA 2014/2015 “Does the Right to Secede Exist under International Law? An ...

180 Pages·2015·1.06 MB·English

LUISS GUIDO CARLI
LIBERA UNIVERSITÀ INTERNAZIONALE DEGLI STUDI SOCIALI

DIPARTIMENTO DI GIURISPRUDENZA
A.A. 2014/2015

TESI IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
“Does the Right to Secede Exist under International Law?
An Analysis of the Conditions and Limits of Secession”

RELATORE: CANDIDATO:
Prof.ssa Silvia Scarpa Giuseppe Di Murro
Matr. 106533
CORRELATORE:
Prof. Daniele Gallo
“La natura de' populi è varia;
et è facile a persuadere loro una cosa,
ma è difficile fermarli in quella persuasione.”
(Niccolò Machiavelli, Il Principe)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

For the joyful moments experienced during my five years spent studying Law at LUISS
Guido Carli and for the successful outcome of this thesis, I feel the need to extend my sincerest
gratitude to the following people.
Professor Silvia Scarpa, my supervisor, for her continuous help and support provided during
the whole drafting of this work, from the very first ideas to the final revision. Her excellent
guidance, caring and patience gave me the freedom of doing research on my own and, at the same
time, the safety of having my mistakes corrected when my steps faltered.
Professor Daniele Gallo, my co-supervisor, for assisting me with his precious advice.
Professor Harry Post, who introduced me to the study of international law and has been a
source of great inspiration for my academic path.
Professor Angela Del Vecchio, Dr. Giulia Nicchia and Dr. Domenico Pauciulo, who allowed
me to participate to the 2015 “Phillip C. Jessup” Moot Court Competition. The strong motivation
and support they provided to the LUISS team has been determinant for the extremely positive
outcome of this experience.
My friends and relatives, who have offered me priceless moments of happiness, through
their smiles, their support and their love.
My grandparents, for teaching to me, with their example, the importance of wisdom and
hard work.
My mother and my father, for the trust they constantly grant to me.
My brothers, for reminding me every day the extraordinary value of responsibility.

I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................. I
Table of contents ................................................................................................................................II
List of abbreviations ........................................................................................................................ IV
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 1
1 Self-determination and territorial integrity ............................................................................. 3
1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 3
1.2 Self-determination of peoples ...................................................................................... 3
1.2.1 Minorities under International Law .................................................................... 19
1.2.2 External and internal self-determination ............................................................ 23
1.2.3 Self-determination in non-colonial cases ........................................................... 27
1.3 Territorial integrity .................................................................................................... 30
1.3.1 The uti possidetis principle ................................................................................ 33
1.3.2 Territorial integrity and non-State actors ........................................................... 37
1.4 The value of declarations of independence and referenda ........................................ 39
1.5 The struggle between self-determination and territorial integrity ............................. 43
1.6 Concluding remarks ................................................................................................... 45
2 Achieving independence ........................................................................................................... 47
2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 47
2.2 Secession and dissolution of States ........................................................................... 47
2.3 Secession and the violation of the jus cogens rules ................................................... 53
2.4 Secession and the prohibition of use of force ............................................................ 57
2.5 The Remedial Right Only theory: application and limits .......................................... 65
2.6 The statehood test ...................................................................................................... 72
2.7 Recognition: the risk of a legal limbo ....................................................................... 77
2.7.1 The constitutive and declaratory theories ........................................................... 79
2.7.2 The collective recognition in the practice of States ........................................... 82

II
2.7.3 Recognition and secession: premature recognition and new democratic standards 84
2.8 Succession of States................................................................................................... 89
2.8.1 In respect of treaties ........................................................................................... 90
2.8.2 In respect of public assets, archives and public debts ........................................ 92
2.8.3 In respect of the membership of international organizations ............................. 94
2.9 Concluding remarks ................................................................................................... 99
3 Secession in State practice ...................................................................................................... 100
3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 100
3.2 South Sudan ............................................................................................................. 100
3.3 Kosovo ..................................................................................................................... 107
3.4 Abkhazia and South Ossetia .................................................................................... 124
3.5 Crimea ..................................................................................................................... 132
3.6 Concluding remarks ................................................................................................. 140
Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................... 141
Bibliography ................................................................................................................................... 143
Table of legislation ......................................................................................................................... 156
Table of cases .................................................................................................................................. 164
Miscellaneous .................................................................................................................................. 169

III
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ACHPR African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights
CIS Commonwealth of Independent States
CPA Comprehensive Peace Agreement
CSP Comprehensive Proposal for the Kosovo Status Settlement
CRC Convention on the Rights of the Child
EPLF Eritrean People’s Liberation Front
EC European Community
EU European Union
EUJUST European Union Rule of Law Mission to Georgia
THEMIS
EUMM European Union Monitoring Mission in Georgia
EULEX European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo
FRY Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
FYROM Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
GTEP Georgia Train and Equip Program
HRC Human Right Committee
ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
ICJ International Court of Justice
ICERD International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination
ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
KFOR Kosovo International Security Force
KLA Kosovo Liberation Army
KPC Kosovo Protection Corps

IV
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
OSC Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
PCIJ Permanent Court of International Justice
SFRY Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
SGRS Special Representative of the Secretary-General
SPLA Sudan People's Liberation Army
SSR Soviet Socialist Republic
USSR Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics
UAR United Arab Republic
UN United Nations
UNGA United Nations General Assembly
UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
UNAMET United Nations Mission in East Timor
UNMIK United Nations Mission in Kosovo
UNMISS United Nations Mission in South Sudan
UNOMIG United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia
UNSC United Nations Security Council
UNTAET United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor
US United States
UPU Universal Postal Union
WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization
WMO World Meteorological Organization

V
INTRODUCTION
In the wake of the recent developments in the world arena concerning territorial
modifications and States secessions, a specific urgency to address a research on this matter is
particularly felt. Therefore, the scope of this work is to provide a thorough analysis, from an
international law perspective, of the recent and most significant cases of secession. In
particular, this work focuses on the need to establish whether secession could exist as a
qualified right, subjected to precise limits and conditions. Furthermore, in the light of the
verdict of the Supreme Court of Canada, which stated that international law is neutral in
respect of secession, utmost consideration is to be given to State practice, in order to assess
how effectively States have dealt with this pronunciation.
Chapter 1 introduces the two main principles of international law affected by
secession: self-determination of people and territorial integrity. After a historical background
of the formation and recognition of both, how these tenets are able to coexist in cases of
secession is examined. The former is deeply considered in relation with its ‘internal’ and
‘external’ aspects and the consequent impact on the rights of peoples and minorities. The
analysis of the latter, instead, is pivoted on the principle of uti possidetis and the respect of the
intangibility of frontiers by both State and non-State actors. Finally, the question of the
relevance of referenda and declarations of independence is addressed, together with a final
attempt to find an equitable balance between the two principles to which the Chapter is
dedicated.
Chapter 2 introduces the concept of secession and compares it with that of dissolution
of States. Furthermore, it takes into account all the necessary steps for a secessionist group to
achieve independence: remarkable obstacles, such as the violation of norms of jus cogens in

1
general and the breach of the prohibition of use of force in particular, are considered.
Nevertheless, the eventual existence of a right to secede following episodes of massive
violations of human rights is examined. Several aspects of this theory, including its
application and its drawbacks are addressed. Then, particular attention is drawn upon the
standards recognized by the international community for an entity to attain the status of
‘State’ and the different value they have acquired throughout history. The most disputed
element, the recognition by other States, is examined in the light of several theories. Finally,
all the regulations concerning States succession are contemplated, with specific regard to
treaties, public assets and membership of international organizations.
Chapter 3 is dedicated to case studies. Different degree of success characterize the
secession of South Sudan, Kosovo, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and Crimea. These particular
examples have been selected for their importance in the current international scenario and are
those that raise the major concerns in this domain. Each case enormously contributes to the
assessment of the practice of states vis-à-vis secessions. The strengths and the weaknesses of
the different approaches in relation with the cases are analyzed in depth.
On the basis of the study exposed throughout the four chapters, some conclusions are
drawn at the end.

2
1 SELF-DETERMINATION AND TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The aim of this Chapter is to analyze the principles of self-determination and territorial
integrity and their interaction. Therefore, a historical study of the right to self-determination,
with a particular focus on the UN practice and its role in favoring a shift of the principle of
self-determination from a political to a legal tenet is provided. Then, analyzing the conceptual
differences between ‘peoples’ and ‘minorities’, it is assessed how these groups exercise self-
determination. It is also necessary to consider how State practice took into account this
principle in relation with cases of secession outside the context of decolonization. The respect
of territorial integrity instead, is examined vis-à-vis other States, in the light of the doctrine of
uti possidetis, and vis-à-vis non-State actors. Finally, the chapter analyses how to balance
these two major principles of international law and which value is to be attributed to
declarations of independence and referenda.

1.2 SELF-DETERMINATION OF PEOPLES
In one of its most neutral definition, self-determination is “a community’s right to
choose its political destiny”.1 However, despite this apparent simplicity, its meaning has

1 ‘Wolfgang Danspeckgruber and Anne-Marie Gardner ‘Self-determination’ in Encyclopedia Princetoniensis,
available at:<http://pesd.princeton.edu/?q=node/266> accessed 21 April 2015.

3