Journal articles: 'Unilateral declaration of independence'

1

Kirkman, Bill. "Rhodesia’s Unilateral Declaration of Independence. An International History." Round Table 102, no. 3 (June 2013): 314–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00358533.2013.793569.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Stapleton, Tim. "Rhodesia's unilateral declaration of independence: an international history." Canadian Journal of African Studies / Revue canadienne des études africaines 47, no. 2 (August 2013): 344–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00083968.2013.829956.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Law, Kate. "Rhodesia's Unilateral Declaration of Independence: An International History." Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History 41, no. 3 (September 2013): 530–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03086534.2013.823743.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Nyamunda, Tinashe. "Money, Banking and Rhodesia’s Unilateral Declaration of Independence." Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History 45, no. 5 (September 3, 2017): 746–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03086534.2017.1370220.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

VIDMAR, JURE. "The Kosovo Advisory Opinion Scrutinized." Leiden Journal of International Law 24, no. 2 (May 6, 2011): 355–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156511000057.

Full text

Abstract:

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.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

van den Driest, Simone F. "From Kosovo to Crimea and Beyond: On Territorial Integrity, Unilateral Secession and Legal Neutrality in International Law." International Journal on Minority and Group Rights 22, no. 4 (October 27, 2015): 467–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718115-02204002.

Full text

Abstract:

In the aftermath of the Ukrainian Revolution, Ukraine’s autonomous region of Crimea declared independence and filed an application to subsequently join the Russian Federation. In seeking to justify these acts, both the Crimean authorities and the Russian Federation referred to international law, including the International Court of Justice’s Advisory Opinion on Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence. In this Advisory Opinion, the Court indeed found that the principle of territorial integrity merely applies in the relationship between States and concluded that general international law does not contain a prohibition on unilateral declarations of independence. These findings and the interpretation of the Advisory Opinion as put forward by the Crimean and Russian authorities, however, raise pertinent questions. This article therefore aims to shed light on the scope of the principle of territorial integrity of States and its implications for the legality of and perceived legal neutrality concerning unilateral secession under international law.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Arp, Björn. "The ICJ Advisory Opinion on theAccordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovoand the International Protection of Minorities." German Law Journal 11, no. 7-8 (August 1, 2010): 847–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2071832200018873.

Full text

Abstract:

Very seldom has a judgment or advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) received so much media coverage as the recent Advisory Opinion on theAccordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovorendered on 22 July 2010 in response to a question posed by the General Assembly. The question had been forwarded on behalf of a request by Serbia and was phrased in the following way: “Is the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo in accordance with international law?”

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Muharremi, Robert. "A Note on the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Kosovo." German Law Journal 11, no. 7-8 (August 1, 2010): 867–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2071832200018885.

Full text

Abstract:

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.”

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Paul, Susan. "Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Rhodesia: Fifty Years On." Round Table 104, no. 5 (September 3, 2015): 619–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00358533.2015.1090784.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Black, David, and Douglas G. Anglin. "Zambian Crisis Behaviour: Confronting Rhodesia's Unilateral Declaration of Independence." International Journal 51, no. 1 (1995): 155. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/40203756.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Nugroho, Wahyu Adin. "Perkembangan Status Unilateral Declaration of Independence dalam Hukum Internasional." Jurist-Diction 3, no. 1 (January 29, 2020): 347. http://dx.doi.org/10.20473/jd.v3i1.17640.

Full text

Abstract:

Kemerdekaan merupakan cita-cita bagi bangsa yang ingin membentuk sebuah negara baru ataupun negara independen yang terpisah dari negara induk. Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) merupakan salah satu cara bagi sebuah bangsa untuk merdeka. Pasca Perang Dunia II banyak negara yang mengklaim kemerdekaan sepihak, tak terkecuali Indonesia yang ingin memerdekakan diri dari Belanda. Namun dalam prosesnya, memerdekakan sebuah wilayah bukanlah sesuatu yang sederhana. Tidak secara otomatis sebuah negara merdeka setelah adanya proklamasi kemerdekaan. Banyak pertentangan khususnya dari negara kolonial dan negara induk untuk mencegah kemerdekaan sepihak. Hal ini membuat sengketa UDI seringkali dibawa ke ICJ untuk diproses menurut Hukum Internasional. ICJ pun dalam hal ini tidak membuat putusan yang sama dalam setiap sengketa UDI. Putusan mahkamah internasional ini menjadi penting karena menentukan keabsahan dan waktu berdirinya sebuah negara. UDI dalam perjalanannya mengalami perkembangan menurut Hukum Internasional. Beberapa negara mendukung dan beberapa negara yang lain menolak karena suatu alasan tertentu. UDI tidak dapat diterapkan sama dalam setiap kasus.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Orakhelashvili, Alexander. "Kosovo: The Post-advisory Opinion Stage." International Journal on Minority and Group Rights 22, no. 4 (October 27, 2015): 486–510. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718115-02204003.

Full text

Abstract:

The Unilateral Declaration of Independence by Kosovar authorities in Pristina in 2008 has generated heavy legal and political controversies. The delivery by the International Court of Justice of its advisory opinion on Kosovo unilateral declaration of independence in 2010 has not led to the elimination of unilateralist positions as to Kosovo’s status. Such unilateralist approach, favouring Kosovo’s independence either in principle or in practice, has since been adopted by the local Kosovar authorities, a number of governments and by the European Union. This contribution addresses the merit of such unilateralist positions and examines whether these positions could adversely affect the legal position as to Kosovo’s status under general international law as well as un Security Council resolution 1244 (1999).

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Jacobs, Dov. "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." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 60, no. 3 (July 2011): 799–810. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589311000340.

Full text

Abstract:

‘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.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Cirkovic, Elena. "An Analysis of the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Kosovo's Unilateral Declaration of Independence." German Law Journal 11, no. 7-8 (August 1, 2010): 895–912. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2071832200018915.

Full text

Abstract:

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled in an advisory opinion on 22 July 2010 that Kosovo's 17 February 2008 unilateral declaration of independence from Serbia did not violate international law. The Kosovo Parliament's declaration of independence stated that Kosovo would continue to be bound by the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999) (hereinafter “SC Resolution 1244 (1999)”), as well as the Ahtisaari plan. UN Special Envoy for Kosovo Martti Ahtisaari's proposal, produced in February 2007, defined Kosovo's internal settlement, minority-protection mechanisms, and allowed for independence under international supervision. The proposal increased the powers devolved to Kosovar institutions but without providing for the complete removal of international oversight and authority.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Sklar, Richard L. "Duty, Honour, Country: Coping with Rhodesia's Unilateral Declaration of Independence." Journal of Modern African Studies 34, no. 4 (December 1996): 701–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0022278x00055841.

Full text

Abstract:

On 11 November 1965, the Government of Rhodesia, firm in its resolve to maintain minority racial rule by persons of European descent, abrogated the colonial constitution then in effect and declared its independence of Great Britain. The works under review in this essay examine the dilemmas of Zambian leaders, on the one hand, and loyalist members of the Rhodesian judiciary as well as the loyalist governor of Rhodesia, on the other.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Bessant, Leslie, and Douglas G. Anglin. "Zambian Crisis Behaviour: Confronting Rhodesia's Unilateral Declaration of Independence, 1965-1966." International Journal of African Historical Studies 29, no. 3 (1997): 629. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/221385.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Swatuk, Larry A., and Douglas G. Anglin. "Zambian Crisis Behaviour: Confronting Rhodesia's Unilateral Declaration of Independence, 1965-1966." Canadian Journal of African Studies 31, no. 2 (1997): 378. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/486187.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

CHAN, S. "Zambian Crisis Behaviour: Confronting Rhodesia's unilateral declaration of independence, 1965-1966." African Affairs 95, no. 380 (July 1, 1996): 474–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.afraf.a007755.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

KOHEN, MARCELO G., and KATHERINE DEL MAR. "The Kosovo Advisory Opinion and UNSCR 1244 (1999): A Declaration of ‘Independence from International Law’?" Leiden Journal of International Law 24, no. 1 (February 11, 2011): 109–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156510000634.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis article focuses on the reasoning employed by the International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion rendered on 22 July 2010 with respect to the most formidable legal impasse of the accordance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence: the lex specialis that applied at the critical date, and which the Court affirmed continues to apply to Kosovo, as established by the United Nations Security Council in its Resolution 1244 (1999). The Court's analysis of the applicable lex specialis is questionable. Its analysis was coloured by the narrow approach it took to answering the question it was asked to address. It queried an unambiguous factual qualification made by the General Assembly, and it disregarded factual qualifications made by the Secretary-General, his Special Representative, and indeed all relevant actors. It failed to uphold the legally binding provisions of Security Council Resolution 1244, and it did not qualify as unlawful or invalid an act of a subsidiary body of the Security Council that was undertaken in excess of authority and contrary to the fundamental provisions of that Resolution. The resolute conclusion of the majority of the Court that the unilateral declaration of independence did not violate international law seems to read as a declaration of ‘independence from international law’.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Hebda, Wiktor. "KOSOVO STATUS ACCORDING TO STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB AND THE UNIVERSITY OF BELGRADE." Politika nacionalne bezbednosti 18, no. 1/2020 (May 25, 2020): 201–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.22182/pnb.1812020.9.

Full text

Abstract:

Kosovo independence still remains a key issue on a global scale. In simple terms, there are two contradictory stands on the sovereignty of Kosovo. According to the first one, Kosovo declaration of independence is illegal due to the breach of international law and the constitution of the Republic of Serbia of 2006. Meanwhile the second stand proves that unilateral Kosovo declaration of independence was legal since Kosovo Albanians are fully entitled to the right of self-determination. The following paper presents an opinion on Kosovo independence expressed by the students of the Faculty of Political Science at the University of Belgrade and the University of Zagreb – two most important universities in Serbia and Croatia. The results presented in the paper are based on the survey carried out by the author in 2013.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Sarriá, Pol Vila, and Agon Demjaha. "Kosovo-Spain Relations and the Dilemmas on the Problem of Non-Recognition." SEEU Review 14, no. 1 (July 1, 2019): 69–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/seeur-2019-0005.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Eleven years after Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence, Spain’s position vis-à-vis Kosovo has not only not varied, but it has become stronger, turning Madrid into the leader of the Kosovo non recognizers club within the EU. This paper analyses Kosovo-Spain relations in the last eleven years. More specifically, the paper examines the reasons behind the non-recognition of Kosovo and the approach of the Spanish governments toward Kosovo’s statehood. This is followed by a thorough analysis on how Kosovo’s path for self-determination played a major role in Catalonia’s quest for independence in 2017. The empirical research demonstrates that Spain’s main reason not to recognise Kosovo is based on the country’s internal dynamics; namely, Catalonia and the Basque country. Likewise, the paper argues that the Spanish governments throughout the last eleven years have created an analogy between Kosovo and Catalonia; not in their political statements, but in their political decisions, by worsening the almost inexistent diplomatic relations with Kosovo, when the Catalan path for independence was at its highest peak. By the same token, the paper reveals that this position was enhanced and driven by Catalan separatism, that continuously used Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence as a model to further their own path for self-determination. The data provided and analysed in this paper as well as the statements made are based on desk research and seven semi-structured interviews conducted in Prishtina, Brussels, Madrid and Barcelona in 2018.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Richter, Solveig, and Uwe Halbach. "A dangerous precedent? The political implications of Kosovo's independence on ethnic conflicts in South-Eastern Europe and the CIS." Security and Human Rights 20, no. 3 (2009): 223–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/187502309789192496.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractKosovo's declaration of independence on 17 February 2008 has re-ignited debates about the interaction among the fundamental international legal principles of self-determination, sovereignty and territorial integrity. The question of conformity with international law was interrelated to scenarios on the political implications of secession. After more than one year the following article elaborates if the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo had a precedent-setting impact for long-standing autonomist and secessionist conflicts in South-Eastern Europe and in CIS. The Kosovo-precedent formula had its biggest impact in the secessionist conflicts in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, where a powerful external actor Russia, made effective use of the precedent-formula in its coercive diplomacy against Georgia. Generally speaking, in South-Eastern-Europe, the independence of Kosovo had only minor destabilizing effects with the exception of Bosnia and Hercegovina and Macedonia where political entrepreneurs used the opportunity to play the nationalist card and to profit from worst case scenarios of a disintegration of their country.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

BARCLAY, G. ST J. "Friends in Salisbury: Australia and the Rhodesian Unilateral Declaration of Independence, 1965-72." Australian Journal of Politics & History 29, no. 1 (April 11, 2008): 38–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8497.1983.tb00301.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Zobeniak, Marta. "Kosowo - koniec Europy?" Refleksje. Pismo naukowe studentów i doktorantów WNPiD UAM, no. 1 (October 31, 2018): 121–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/r.2010.1.8.

Full text

Abstract:

Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, once said that Kosovo’s independence could be the beginning of the end for Europe, and that official recognition of its sovereignty would threaten global security. It was feared that Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence, and its recognition by European countries in particular, would open up a Pandora’s Box. In fact, as it is claimed in this article, Kosovo may be treated a precedent by other separatist republics and autonomous regions, which might one day demand similar recognition and the same rights that the Kosovars can now possibly enjoy

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Taylor, Scott. "Bridging the great divide: Contested Kosovo span is a symbol of international failure." Balcanica, no. 39 (2008): 277–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/balc0839277t.

Full text

Abstract:

The paper offers a first-hand insight into the situation in Kosovo shortly after its unilateral declaration of independence in February 2008 and takes a look at the unexpectedly poor results of the UN interim administration of Kosovo. Arguing against recognition of Kosovo?s independence, it draws attention to the fact that in 2007 a number of UN observers took the unprecedented step of compiling an independent analysis, which they published and circulated without filtering it through the chain of command and that in the immediate aftermath of Kosovo?s declared independence, a large number of UN field officers voiced their concerns about the international community turning a blind eye to the reality of the situation on the ground.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Wilde, Ralph. "Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo." American Journal of International Law 105, no. 2 (April 2011): 301–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.105.2.0301.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Watts, Carl. "“Men who smell of fear”: The Menzies Government and Rhodesia's Unilateral Declaration of Independence." Australian Journal of Politics & History 62, no. 3 (September 2016): 404–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajph.12270.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Onslow, Sue. "A Question of Timing: South Africa and Rhodesia's Unilateral Declaration of Independence, 1964–65." Cold War History 5, no. 2 (January 1, 2005): 129–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14682740500062135.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Orakhelashvili, Alexander. "Statehood, Recognition and the United Nations System: A Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Kosovo." Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online 12, no. 1 (2008): 1–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18757413-90000019a.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Khashchina, Ellina E. "The importance of legal positions of international and domestic judicial authorities for preventing secession: theoretical historical aspect." Current Issues of the State and Law, no. 19 (2021): 438–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.20310/2587-9340-2021-5-19-438-453.

Full text

Abstract:

The legal regulation of secession – the unilateral withdrawal of a part of territory from the parent state, is carried out at the junction of two branches of law – international and constitutional. Due to the absence in most of written constitutions of norms directly related to secession, and the laconic nature of relevant principles of international law, allowing for the possibility of ambiguous interpretation, decisions of international and domestic judicial authorities on the admissibility of secession play a special role in the legal mechanisms for its prevention, which determines the relevance of the chosen themes. Based on the analysis of the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice of the United Nations of July 22, 2010 “On compliance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo”, we formulate a conclusion about the absence of uniform international legal criteria to determine the admissibility of secession. In our opinion, the Inter-national Court of Justice has not resolved the legal issue underlying the pro-tracted political conflict, has not created a new norm of customary interna-tional law, but has not provided the supporters of the unilateral declaration of independence with the necessary and sufficient arguments for the legal justification of their position. This allows us to speak about the importance of this decision in the international legal mechanisms for the prevention of secession, which, however, are at the stage of formation. Their development should take place synchronously with the constitutional and legal intrastate mechanisms, which in modern conditions should be aimed at finding a bal-ance between the interests of the center and regional communities, establish-ing a dialogue with supporters of independence and protecting the national and cultural identity of population.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Cogan, Jacob Katz. "The 2010 Judicial Activity of the International Court of Justice." American Journal of International Law 105, no. 3 (July 2011): 477–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.105.3.0477.

Full text

Abstract:

The International Court of Justice rendered two final decisions on the merits in 2010: in Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay) and Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo). The Court also issued an advisory opinion in Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo and an order finding Italy’s counterclaim inadmissible in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy).

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

WELLER, MARC. "Modesty Can Be a Virtue: Judicial Economy in the ICJ Kosovo Opinion?" Leiden Journal of International Law 24, no. 1 (February 11, 2011): 127–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156510000646.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe Kosovo Advisory Opinion reaches its conclusions in what is admittedly a very condensed and swift way of reasoning. The Court did not expand upon the question that was put to it. However, it is unfair to criticize the Court for failing to address the very issues the drafters of the question carefully and deliberately did not ask. Moreover, the Court did in fact clarify a number of important points that go beyond the narrow question of the lawfulness of Kosovo's declaration of independence. In particular, the Court confirmed that a state is a matter of fact in the first instance. It can come into being in consequence of unilateral secession when attempts to negotiate a separation have been frustrated by the central government. The doctrine of territorial integrity operates among states and furnishes no legal bar in such instances that applies to the seceding entity. Moreover, a decision on independence by such an entity cannot be evaluated according to the domestic legal order of the state from which it secedes. In this instance, Kosovo's secession was in any event not quite as unilateral as it may have seemed. Its declaration of independence and new constitution fully incorporate the entire package of measures proposed by the UN mediators in the final status talks. Hence, Kosovo has implemented what was in fact developed and proposed under the UN mandate for final status talks contained in Resolution 1244. Rather than overturning that resolution, it has acted in accordance with its terms.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Garrido-Muñoz, Asier. "Prime Minister v. Parliament of Catalonia." American Journal of International Law 112, no. 1 (January 2018): 80–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2018.18.

Full text

Abstract:

Few in Spain would have imagined two years ago that so much attention would be paid to questions such as the allocation of powers to hold referenda or the constitutional tools to enforce compliance with the 1978 Constitution (Constitution). But since the celebration of a “referendum” on October 1, 2017, and the subsequent declaration of independence and immediate suspension thereof by the president of Catalonia, numerous international voices have taken a stance on Catalonia's right to unilateral secession.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Öberg, Marko Divac. "The Legal Effects of United Nations Resolutions in the Kosovo Advisory Opinion." American Journal of International Law 105, no. 1 (January 2011): 81–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.105.1.0081.

Full text

Abstract:

As the international community waited for the International Court of Justice (the Court) to deliver its advisory opinion of July 22, 2010, commentators wondered whether the Court would skirt difficult issues by adopting a narrow reading of the question put to it. While the Court's ruling in Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo did turn out to be limited, the opinion contributes significantly to the Court's jurisprudence on the legal effects of United Nations resolutions.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

CHRISTAKIS, THEODORE, and OLIVIER CORTEN. "Symposium: The ICJ Advisory Opinion on the Unilateral Declaration of Independence of Kosovo: Editors' Introduction." Leiden Journal of International Law 24, no. 1 (February 11, 2011): 71–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156510000592.

Full text

Abstract:

The present symposium follows on from a workshop held at the University of Cambridge on 2 September 2010 by the Interest Group on Peace and Security (IGPS) of the European Society of International Law, in collaboration with the Centre for International Security and European Studies (CESICE) of the University of Grenoble II and the International Law Centre of the Université Libre de Bruxelles.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Phimister, Ian, and Victor Gwande. "Secondary Industry and Settler Colonialism: Southern Rhodesia before and after the Unilateral Declaration of Independence." African Economic History 45, no. 2 (2017): 85–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/aeh.2017.0007.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Jamar, Hanna, and Mary Katherine Vigness. "Applying Kosovo: Looking to Russia, China, Spain and Beyond After the International Court of Justice Opinion on Unilateral Declarations of Independence." German Law Journal 11, no. 7-8 (August 1, 2010): 913–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2071832200018927.

Full text

Abstract:

When the International Court of Justice (ICJ) released its advisory opinion regarding the legality of Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence (UDI) on 22 July 2010, Serbia was not the only State to express its dissatisfaction with the outcome. The broader significance of the ICJ's finding that Kosovo's UDI in 2008 did not violate international law has profound relevance for other States. The United States and its allies claim that Kosovo's situation is unique and does not serve as precedent, but other nations facing separatist movements within their own borders may have reason to be concerned.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Ker-Lindsay, James. "Not such a ‘sui generis’ case after all: assessing the ICJ opinion on Kosovo." Nationalities Papers 39, no. 1 (January 2011): 1–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00905992.2010.532778.

Full text

Abstract:

For 60 years, the international community has limited the right of territories to gain independence without the permission of the “parent state.” Such limits were, however, challenged when Kosovo unilaterally declared independence from Serbia, in February 2008. As a result, Belgrade referred the matter to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). On 22 July 2010, it came back with its long-awaited decision. Taking a narrow view of the question, the majority argued that, in general, declarations of independence, as mere statements, do not violate international law unless stated otherwise by the Security Council. Thus, Kosovo's declaration of independence cannot be considered as being wholly “unique” – as those states that supported its statehood have claimed. On the key questions of whether Kosovo's secession is legal, or if it is even a state, they chose to avoid controversy. On these points, the international community is no clearer now than it was before the case.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Martín y Pérez de Nanclares, José. "LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING A HYPOTHETICAL UNILATERAL DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE BY CATALONIA: A LEGALLY UNFEASIBLE POLITICAL SCENARIO." Spanish Yearbook of International Law 19 (December 31, 2015): 35–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.17103/sybil.19.03.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

Bielsa, Esperança. "From ‘the people’ to the crowd: The push for independence in Catalonia." Social Science Information 60, no. 3 (June 17, 2021): 395–412. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/05390184211021354.

Full text

Abstract:

This article examines the sociological value of Elias Canetti’s work on crowds and power. It explores crowd action and imagery in the push for Catalan independence through the analysis of materials published on Twitter by Tsunami Democràtic, which emerged to coordinate the response to the sentencing of Catalan political leaders after the unilateral declaration of independence. It then goes on to discuss how a crowd-based approach offers a supplementary perspective to contemporary studies of populism, on the one hand, and to accounts that primarily focus on the role of social media in organizing political protest movements, on the other. An analysis of crowds not only avoids both methodological holism and methodological individualism. It also helps to understand why so many people were mobilized beyond the power of concepts, ideologies and discourse.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

WILDE, RALPH. "Self-Determination, Secession, and Dispute Settlement after the Kosovo Advisory Opinion." Leiden Journal of International Law 24, no. 1 (February 11, 2011): 149–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156510000658.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis piece provides critical analysis of some of the broader consequences of what is potentially suggested by certain findings in the 2010 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on ‘Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo’. The focus is on consequences for disputes generally, and disputes relating to self-determination and secession in particular, in either case including disputes that have been made subject to a Security Council-imposed settlement process. In the first place, the piece considers the relatively specific suggestion that sub-state groups are free to unilaterally terminate a Security Council-imposed process aimed at enabling the resolution of a dispute concerning their aspirations to external self-determination, without this termination having to comply with the principles of justice and international law. In the second place, the piece considers the relatively broad suggestion that the act of any sub-state group of declaring independence and seceding from the state within which it is located, without the consent of that state or any other international legal sanction, is likewise not regulated by international law.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

MEZYAEV, Alexander. "International Legal Aspects of the Reunification of Crimea with Russia in the Context of the Practice of the International Court of Justice." Perspectives and prospects. E-journal, no. 2 (18) (2019): 29–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.32726/2411-3417-2019-2-29-36.

Full text

Abstract:

The article addresses, from a sources of law perspective, the problem of legal qualification of Crimean reunification with Russia. Special attention is given to analyzing the International Court of Justice decision on the unilateral secession of Kosovo, including written statements by particular States during the ICJ hearings on this issue. The author argues why referring to the advisory opinion of the ICJ on Kosovo's declaration of independence is not appropriate in the Crimean case, and why the legitimacy of Crimea's reunification with Russia is much higher than the estimated, from the ICJ's point of view, legitimacy of Kosovo's secession.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

Kassoti, Eva. "The Sound of One Hand Clapping: Unilateral Declarations of Independence in International Law." German Law Journal 17, no. 2 (April 1, 2016): 215–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s207183220001974x.

Full text

Abstract:

In light of the uncertainty surrounding recent unilateral declarations of independence, this Article purports to re-visit the question of their legal nature under international law. The Article shows that the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) judgment in the Kosovo advisory opinion (hereafter referred to as the Kosovo Opinion) is of little assistance in establishing whether and to what extent such declarations fall within the ambit of international law. The Article proceeds to examine claims that unilateral declarations of independence are regulated—entirely or partly—by international law and argues that these claims are ill-founded on multiple grounds. The Article asserts that international law is legally neutral towards the claims—a proposition in accord with both the factual nature of the process of state formation in international law and with the relevant practice.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Dimitrijevic, Dusko, Ivona Ladjevac, and Mihajlo Vucic. "The analysis of un activities in resolving the issue of Kosovo and Metohija." Medjunarodni problemi 64, no. 4 (2012): 442–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/medjp1204442d.

Full text

Abstract:

After the Security Council had established the international administration in Kosovo on grounds of the Resolution no. 1244 of 10 June 1999 for the construction and reconstruction of the legal and economic systems, the support and protection of human rights, the provision of humanitarian and other assistance, it adopted the conclusion that the achievement of a political settlement for the southern Serbian province would primarily depend on the development and consolidation of peace and security. Accordingly, in May 2001, the international administration adopted the Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self- Government in Kosovo, which defined the status of the Serbian southern province as a whole and indivisible territorial entity under the interim international administration. The Constitutional Framework is regulated as a substantial transfer of state responsibilities by the peoples of Kosovo and Metohija to the provisional institutions of self-government and it should ?enjoy substantial autonomy within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?. This institutional development is aimed at establishing constructive cooperation among various ethnic communities in order to build a common democratic state. Since this solution is not quite legally balanced, it could not go without any negative consequences in terms of national sovereignty. The suspension of sovereignty of the Republic of Serbia in Kosovo and Metohija has eventually contributed to creating of the conditions for the socalled unilateral declaration of independence of the Republic of Kosovo. The analysis of the activities undertaken in the field of resolving the status issue after the unilateral declaration of independence of 17 February 2008 suggests that the solution for the Kosovo and Metohija should be primarily sought within the United Nations system.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

Choudhry, Sujit. "Secession and post-sovereign constitution-making after 1989: Catalonia, Kosovo, and Quebec." International Journal of Constitutional Law 17, no. 2 (April 2019): 461–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icon/moz035.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract The year 1989 marked the return of the right to self-determination to center stage in constitutional politics. It was at the root of demands for constitutional democracy; it was also invoked by minority nations to make claims for secession and independent states. That year also marked the emergence of a new model of “post-sovereign” constitution-making that rejects the idea of a sovereign people who can act unilaterally with unlimited power. While this new model was developed in the context of transitions to constitutional democracy, before and after 1989, minority nations have relied on the unilateral declaration of independence as a foundational act of constitution-making, which is firmly rooted in the pre-1989 sovereign mindset. Drawing on the example of the Supreme Court of Canada’s judgment in the Quebec Secession Reference, I sketch how we might complete the legacy of 1989 by extending the project of post-sovereign constitution-making to secession.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Zvobgo, Chengetai J. "Church and State in Rhodesia: From the Unilateral Declaration of Independence to the Pearce Commission, 1965–72." Journal of Southern African Studies 31, no. 2 (June 2005): 381–402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03057070500109607.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Oxman, Bernard H., and Stephen J. Toope. "Self-determination—Canada—Quebec—right to secede under constitutional law and public international law—role of international law in Canadian courts." American Journal of International Law 93, no. 2 (April 1999): 519–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2998007.

Full text

Abstract:

Re Reference by Governor in Council Concerning Certain Questions Relating to Secession of Quebec from Canada.Supreme Court of Canada, August 20, 1998.In an attempt to clarify the legal context in which continuing Canadian constitutional conundrums arise, the federal executive referred three questions to the Supreme Court of Canada regarding the legality under both Canadian constitutional law and international law of a potential unilateral declaration of independence by the Province of Quebec. The Court declared that unilateral secession is not permitted under either Canadian constitutional law or international law. The “underlying principles that animate” the Canadian Constitution preclude secession, even though there is no specific text prohibiting the dismantling of the Canadian state. However, if Quebecers were to vote yes to secession by “a clear majority on a clear question,” democratic legitimacy would be conferred on the secessionist project and a constitutional obligation to negotiate would arise binding the other provinces and the federal authority.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

ORAKHELASHVILI, ALEXANDER. "Kosovo and intersecting legal regimes: An interdisciplinary analysis." Global Constitutionalism 6, no. 2 (July 2017): 237–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2045381717000120.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract:The unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovar authorities in Pristina in 2008 has been the source of various controversies in international affairs. From a legal perspective, Kosovo’s secessionist drive is contrary to the well-established position of international law regarding the territorial integrity of states. From a political perspective, Kosovo’s case exemplifies the political drive to alter the law – a drive that applies to other entities in Kosovo’s position. Both these phenomena are accompanied by the divergent interests held by Kosovars as the ‘local agency’ and by the interests of Serbia and third states (including great powers) that support or oppose Kosovo’s independence. The interdisciplinary nature of this matter is enhanced by the intersection of applicable legal frameworks with competing political interests. The motivating factors – and implications of – great power conduct in this context should be examined through the prism of political realism, which provides an enhanced perspective on the relationship between legal and political factors in all their complexity.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

Wolff, Stefan. "Learning the Lessons of Ethnic Conflict Management? Conditional Recognition and International Administration in the Western Balkans since the 1990s." Nationalities Papers 36, no. 3 (July 2008): 553–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00905990802090223.

Full text

Abstract:

The unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo in February 2008 catapulted the Western Balkans back to the centre stage of international security concerns. Despite affirmations to the contrary, the recognition of Kosovo's independence by major Western powers is seen as a significant precedent in international law and the way in which self-determination conflicts are handled by the international community. At the same time, it raises major questions for the stability of borders across the Western Balkans region, and possibly beyond. At the centre of many of these questions is the role of the international community—defined by the international and regional organizations present in the region, as well as by their powerful member states—in tackling the complexity of interrelated self-determination conflicts, incomplete democratization processes, growing concerns about the economic viability of the successor states of the former Yugoslavia and an ever-increasing presence of transnational organized crime networks with significant reach beyond the region.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

Millard, Gregory. "The Secession Reference and National Reconciliation: A Critical Note." Canadian journal of law and society 14, no. 2 (1999): 1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0829320100006050.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIn its judgement on the constitutionality of a unilateral declaration of independence by Quebec, the Supreme Court claimed to be guided by the implicit or explicit constitutional principles of democracy, federalism, rule of law, and respect for minorities. French-English duality, as part of a “multination” conception of Canada, was not among these, despite being crucially implicit in the Court's reasoning. Had the principle of duality been articulated, it would have enhanced the theoretical cohesion of the judgement; more importantly, it would have furthered a necessary dialogue outside Quebec, insofar as national reconciliation requires the recognition of Quebec's distinctiveness by the rest of Canada. The secession reference was therefore a significant opportunity missed.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Journal articles on the topic 'Unilateral declaration of independence'

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles