Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
andMoldova(Transnistria),whichisbasedonanalleged
righttoself-determinationofthelocalpopulation.Such
Russianargumentationrequiresanalysis
ofthecontemporary(boththeoreticalandpractical)
approachofinternationallawtotherighttoself-
determination,inconnectionwiththeadmissibility
ofsecessionandtheprincipleoftheterritorialintegrity
ofstates.
Theaimofthisessayisnottoprovideasystematic
lectureonmutualrelationsbetweenthethreetenets
ofinternationallawmentionedinthetitle1,butrather
toindicatethemostimportanttheoreticalproblems
surroundingsecession,andthestanceoftheinternational
communitytowardsitfromthecontemporaryinternational
legalperspective.Someissueswillbeomittedaltogether,
e.g.thematterofarmedinterventioncarriedoutbythird
statesinsupportofbothseparatistmovementsand
governmentsopposingsecession.
1.Righttoself-determinationincontemporary
internationallaw
Thehistoryoftherighttoself-determinationasabasic
tenetofinternationallawiswellknown,soitdoesnotseem
necessarytopresentitindetail.Welimitourremarks
tothemostimportantissueswhichraisedoubtsordisputes.
Self-determinationasalegalnormisreflectedintheUN
Charter(Art.1(2)andArt.55),intheGeneralAssembly
Resolutionsthatinterpretorspecifythenormsincluded
intheUNCharter(inparticularinResolutions1514and
2625),inSecurityCouncilResolutions(e.g.183(1963)and
218(1965)),andfinallyintheprovisionsofArt.1ofboth
HumanRightsCovenantsof18December1976.Since
theentryofthelatterinstrumentsintoforce,thenature
oftherighttoself-determinationasabindinglegalnormhas
hadtogounquestioned,evenifpreviously-enactedacts
ofthepoliticalorgansoftheUnitedNationsmayhavebeen
consideredtoconfirmboththeconventionalandcustomary
natureoftherighttoself-determination.Therighthasalso
gainedconfirmationinthecaselawofinternationalcourts,
particularlytheICJintwojudgments:
EastTimor
and
Wall