THE RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION OF PEOPLES THROUGH EXAMPLES OF KOSOVO AND CATALONIA: WHY IS THE SECESSION OF KOSOVO ACCEPTABLE IN MODERN PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW?

Mirza Ljubović
{"title":"THE RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION OF PEOPLES THROUGH EXAMPLES OF KOSOVO AND CATALONIA: WHY IS THE SECESSION OF KOSOVO ACCEPTABLE IN MODERN PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW?","authors":"Mirza Ljubović","doi":"10.21533/epiphany.v15i2.412","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"At a time of progressive development of public international law, the internal self-determination of peoples has no alternative, but external self-determination is justifi ed in a situation where, as a result of oppression, dispossession, and collective discrimination, a certain people have full rights to freely determine its political, social, economic, and cultural setting. In the case of Kosovo, the right to “remedial secession” based on the right to external self-determination has been achieved. According to many legal scholars, the related right is an exception and could be realized outside the colonial context, in limited circumstances that resemble the colonial paradigm. Modern customary public international law provides a legal basis for the introduction of the concept of the right to “remedial secession” and forms an argument that is supported by the “Great Powers” and is consistent with international institutional practice provided that the people’s fundamental human rights are threatened. Th is article aims to explain through the case of Kosovo that the external form of self-determination, which includes secession, is possible only exceptionally in the case of grave violations of human rights and freedoms, war crimes, repression, and systematic oppression, and that the internal self-determination of the peoples is a more acceptable form of realizing this collective human right, which should be realized through broad constitutional and legal reforms in every multi-ethnic state (a certain degree of autonomy or decentralization).","PeriodicalId":30629,"journal":{"name":"Epiphany","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epiphany","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21533/epiphany.v15i2.412","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

At a time of progressive development of public international law, the internal self-determination of peoples has no alternative, but external self-determination is justifi ed in a situation where, as a result of oppression, dispossession, and collective discrimination, a certain people have full rights to freely determine its political, social, economic, and cultural setting. In the case of Kosovo, the right to “remedial secession” based on the right to external self-determination has been achieved. According to many legal scholars, the related right is an exception and could be realized outside the colonial context, in limited circumstances that resemble the colonial paradigm. Modern customary public international law provides a legal basis for the introduction of the concept of the right to “remedial secession” and forms an argument that is supported by the “Great Powers” and is consistent with international institutional practice provided that the people’s fundamental human rights are threatened. Th is article aims to explain through the case of Kosovo that the external form of self-determination, which includes secession, is possible only exceptionally in the case of grave violations of human rights and freedoms, war crimes, repression, and systematic oppression, and that the internal self-determination of the peoples is a more acceptable form of realizing this collective human right, which should be realized through broad constitutional and legal reforms in every multi-ethnic state (a certain degree of autonomy or decentralization).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从科索沃和加泰罗尼亚的例子看人民的自决权:为什么科索沃的分离在现代国际公法中是可以接受的?
在国际公法逐步发展的时代,各国人民的内部自决没有其他选择,但在由于压迫、剥夺和集体歧视,某些人民有充分权利自由决定其政治、社会、经济和文化环境的情况下,外部自决是正当的。就科索沃而言,已经实现了以外部自决权为基础的“补救性分离”权利。根据许多法律学者的观点,相关权利是一种例外,可以在殖民语境之外,在类似殖民范式的有限情况下实现。现代习惯国际公法为引入“补救性分离”权利的概念提供了法律基础,并形成了一种得到“大国”支持的论点,在人民的基本人权受到威胁的情况下,这种论点符合国际体制惯例。这篇文章的目的是通过科索沃的情况来解释,包括分裂在内的外部自决形式,只有在严重侵犯人权和自由、犯下战争罪行、进行镇压和有系统的压迫的情况下才有可能,而各国人民的内部自决是实现这一集体人权的更可接受的形式。这应该在每个多民族国家通过广泛的宪法和法律改革(一定程度的自治或分权)来实现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
CLASSICAL VERSUS BLACK MUSIC AS AN IDENTITY TROPE IN LANGSTON HUGHES’S THE WAYS OF WHITE FOLKS DYSFUNCTIONAL BELIEFS ABOUT SEXUAL INTERCOURSE: INTERACTION EFFECTS OF SEX AND AGE ON THE BOSNIAN SAMPLE THE ALTERNATE HISTORY OF THE 1918 FLU AS A CONSPIRACY IN DON’T NOD’S VAMPYR HAMLET’S STOIC DELAY: SHAKESPEAREAN APPROACH TO SENECAN PHILOSOPHY "FROM THE I TO THE WE": DESIRE AND BECOMING IN CARSON MCCULLERS’ THE MEMBER OF THE WEDDING
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1