International Law Territory Questions - Assignment Example

International Law Territory Questions Part A Uninhabited or Unclaimed Island Forming a is a process requiring assertion of meeting the legal threshold recognizable by other states and the United Nations charter. Transforming the unclaimed island into a state together with the classmates is not practical in meeting certain requirements for full recognition as a state. The main elements to make the unclaimed land a state include permanent population, defined boundary, a government, and ability to relate with the other state according to article 1 of the Montevideo convention (Rothwell et al., 2014). The set conditions are internationally holding for any other state to recognize the new entity as a state. Meeting Permanent population requirement is possible with the number of classmates, the article defining the requirements liberates the minimum number of people required to form a state. The report also leaves room for any national to be members of the state giving no specific definition (Rothwell et al. 2014). the threshold on defined territory is possible because the island is unclaimed piece meaning there are no possible international boundary wrangles. The only complication with the defined territory is capacity to guide the boundaries and protecting the permanent population. Forming a recognized government need an internationally legible election with a majority rule attracting support by other states as democratic and a representation of a people. Main complication is the last requirement of capacity to form good relations with the other nations. Many international treaties are basing on trade and mutual benefits. Forming the new entity means no identified resource and small population to offer market for other states. Few countries will be willing to recognize the new entity as a state on its own but will have an interest of colonizing it to be an affiliate state. Part B Recognition of States and Governments It is imperative to identify the distinction between recognizing states and recognition of governments. Identifying the distinction is basing on the idea that the government is like an instrument in providing service to the state which is like an entity comprising area, a population and a public authority. Recognition of the state is a generalized rule for newly created states describing the necessary threshold for statehood. Recognition of the state requires state territory, defined state population and the power to public authorities. Recognition of government concerns the central organ exercising sovereign power over the state (Rothwell et al., 2014). Any change on the governance does not make any difference on statehood. The international community legal recognition must be keen on distinguishing state recognition and government recognition. After state recognition, revolution, or unconstitutional events may, rise affecting the status of the governance, the new government then becomes an issue of concern to the other countries, which had good relations with the former. At instance of such political instability, problem rises with the other states whether to recognize the state or the government. Offering or refusal of recognition of the government has no effect on the recognition of a state. Recognizing a state has effects on its legal personality whether generating or accepting it. Recognizing a government affects the status of that government as the governing authority. South Sudan comes into existence confronting other states whether to recognize it or not. Such recognitions imply interest of the recognizing states to work with the newly formed state as a member of the international community. For the other nations to consider an entity as a state, they must ascertain that it satisfies the recommended thresholds (Rothwell et al., 2014). Sudan and Libya are entities legally recognized by other nations as states but the conflict of interest comes with state of instability with the governing system. Libyan government system is unstable since execution of the former president Gadhafi and the South Sudan young governance is unstable because of the rebellious opposition led by Machar prompting many nations to question their recognition as a sovereign state. The systems of rule will always change but the state recognition is never changing. Part C States Under International Law: Focus On South Sudan. The international law states internationally recognized legal criteria of statehood that enable the establishment of a state. Article (1) of the Montevideo Convention defines Rights and Duties of States providing the criteria for the statehood (Council on Foreign Relations, 2014). According to the Montevideo Convection for recognition as a state, an entity should have a permanent population, defined territory, representative government and the necessary capacity to enter into good relations with other nations. The Yugoslavia in opinion No. 1 had the same definitions for recognizing an entity as the state (Rothwell et al., 2014). Permanent population is a group of people to establish the existence of a state with no specified minimum and restriction of nationality. Territory describes the boundaries within which the permanent population is to inhabit North Sea Continental Shelf Cases states that territory must not have rule that the land frontiers of the country must have full delimitation and definition (Rothwell et al., 2014). A State needs a government functioning as an administrative body within the law of the land. Independence as a State has an indication by the criterion of ability to enter into positive relations with other nations. South Sudan is the youngest state within the United Nations. South Sudanese meets the threshold described in the Montevideo Convection. Following the 2005 Inclusive Peace Agreement with Sudan proceeded by the 2011 referendum which favored the south, they secured permanent boundary which the initial qualification of being State (Rothwell et al., 2014). The South Sudanese united during the rebellion from the northerners inviting all their members from all over the world to gather enough vote for winning referendum and forming their state. South Sudan celebrates independence with self-governance, they relate well with other countries joining trade unions with the other states. The United Nations recognizes Sudan as a state after successfully forming their government independent from the North; however, stability is still an issue with the eruption of political conflicts between incumbent president Salvakir and the opposition leader Riek Machar. Part D Legal Elements of Sovereignty Significant legal elements of sovereignty with international law protect equal rights and duties of each Member State in the international community. Sovereignty strives for equality across borders notwithstanding differences in economy, social status and political nature (Rothwell et al., 2014). The elements of sovereignty include, enhancing States joyance of equal rights to jurisdiction, this allows member states enjoy transparent and fair resolutions incases of cross-boundary wrangles. Element of duty to respect disposition of other States describes each state to having the duty of respecting the personality of the other states, for all nations to embrace the sovereignty they must maintain respect on ideologies of the other countries. Part of territorial integrity and political independence of each state protects the supreme rule of individual States. Each state is autonomous in its legal internal affairs. Every State has the freedom of defining rules and regulations that govern its internal affairs, borders and good relations with the neighbors (Rothwell et al., 2014). On equal measure, sovereignty requires each State to take responsibility of complying fully and in good faith with the international obligations and maintaining peace with other states. Sovereignty requires of each state to enjoy rights characteristic to integrity; the part of sovereignty are a universal concept that embraces the difference in understanding of sovereignty and legal equality. Part E. State Responsibility Elements of Internationally Wrongful Act Article 2 of the international wrongful act of the state identifies two elements that specify the condition necessary for meeting threshold to ascertain the presence of a globally wrongful act of the state. First part, the demeanor in question must be attributable to the state under the international law (Rothwell et al., 2014). Secondly, for accountability to bestow to the law of the state, the conduct needs conditionally to constitute a breach of an international legal-obligation of the state in force at that time. The element of attribution is in some cases understood to be subjective with the element of breach described as objective. Consequences of State Responsibility State responsibility for an internationally wrongful act attracts certain consequences. The most common consequences include obligation of cessation, non-repetition and reparation. The wrongful act does not affect the continuation of duty by the State responsible to perform a breached obligation. However, in case breach is continuing the responsible state is under obligation to cease its conduct. With continued breach, the state may be obliged to give assurances and guarantees of non-repetition if the circumstances in play so require. International wrongful act provides for additional consequence of requiring the State to make full reparation for the injury caused by the breach (Rothwell et al., 2014). State giving assurance and guarantee of non-repetition because of its breach of an international obligation is questionable. Many arguments are of the idea that the best consequence the State is supposed to face is cessation or reparation; radical policy makers questioned if such states breaching international obligation deserve an autonomous consequence. References Council on Foreign Relations. (2014). Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States. Retrieved September 5, 2014 from http://www.cfr.org/sovereignty/montevideo-convention-rights-duties-states/p15897 Rothwell, D., Kaye, S., Akhtarkhavari, A., & Davis, R. (2014). International Law: Cases and Materials with Australian Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Read More