The right to self-determination has played a crucial role in the process of assisting oppressed people to put an end to colonial domination. Outside of the decolonization context, however, its relevance and application has constantly been challenged and debated. This book examines the role played by self-determination in international law with regard to post-conflict state building. It discusses the question of whether self-determination protects local populations from the intervention of international state-builders in domestic affairs. With a focus on the right as it applies to the people of an independent state, it explores how self-determination concerns that arise in the post-conflict period play out in relation to the reconstruction process. The book analyses the situation in Somalia as a means of drawing out the impact and significance of the legal principle of self-determination in the process of rebuilding post-conflict institutions. In so doing, it seeks to highlight how the relevance of self-determination is often overlooked in this context.

The trend for international engagement in post-conflict reconstruction has produced a host of best-practice postulates on topics such as local involvement in decision-making, accountability for past atrocities, sensitivity to context, and the construction of democratic institutions of governance. International law has potential relevance for many of these themes, yet the question of how the implementation of best-practice policy recommendations might be affected by international law remains under-examined. This book offers a fuller understanding of the role of international law in the practice of post-conflict reconstruction. It explores how international legal issues that arise in the post-conflict period relate to a number of strands of the policy debate, including government creation, constitution-making, gender policy, provision of security, justice for past atrocities, rule of law development, economic recovery, returning displaced persons, and responsibilities of international actors. The chapters of the book work to reveal the extent to which international law figures in the policy of internationally enabled post-conflict reconstruction across a range of sectors. They also highlight the scope for international law to be harnessed in a more effective manner from the perspective of the transition to peace and stability. The book lays out a basis for future policy making on post-conflict reconstruction; one that is informed about the international legal parameters, and more aware of how international law can be utilized to promote key objectives.

Peoples and minorities in many parts of the world assert a right to self-determination, autonomy, and even secession from a state, which naturally conflicts with that state's sovereignty and territorial integrity. The right of a people to self-determination and secession has existed as a concept within international law since the American Declaration of Independence in 1776, but the exact definition of these concepts, and the conditions required for their application, remain unclear. The Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice concerning the Declaration of Independency of Kosovo (2010), which held that the Kosovo declaration of independence was not in violation of international law, has only led to further questions. This book takes four conflicts in the post-Soviet Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) as a starting point for examining the current state of the law of self-determination and secession. Four entities, Transnistria (Moldova), South Ossetia, Abkhazia (both Georgia), and Nagorno-Karabakh (Azerbaijan), claim to be entitled not only to self-determination but also to secession from their mother state. For this entitlement they rely on historic affiliations, and on charges of discrimination and massive human rights violations committed by their mother state. This book sets out its analysis of these critical issue in three parts, providing a detailed understanding of the principles of international law on which they rely: The first part sets out the contours and meaning of self-determination and secession, including an overall assessment of secession within the Commonwealth of Independent States. The second section provides case studies investigating the events in Transnistria, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and Nagorno-Karabach in greater detail. The third and final section extends the scope of the examination, providing a comparative analysis of similar conflicts involving questions of self-determination and secession in Kosovo, Western Sahara, and Eritrea.

The principle of self-determination has at heart the achievement of true representation and democracy based on the idea that the consent of the governed alone can give government legitimacy. The principle was primarily responsible for the decolonisation process that shaped our current international community. `Self-determination' has been used in equal rhetorical brilliance by a number of leaders - some meritorious, with a genuine concern for human emancipation, others dubious, with ascendancy to power at the heart of their project. In any case, `self-determination' has come to mean different things in different contexts. Being a vital principle, especially in the post-colonial state, it is one factor that represents a threat to world order while at the same time holding out the promise of longer-term peace and security based on values of democracy, equity and justice. This book looks at the intricacies of the norm in its current ambiguous manifestation and seeks to deconstruct it with regard to three particularly inter-related discourses: that of minority rights, statehood and sovereignty, and the doctrine of uti possidetis which shaped the modern post-colonial state. These norms are then analysed further within two case studies. One, concerning the creation of Bangladesh where `self-determination' was achieved. The second, examines the situation in the Western Sahara where `self-determination' (whatever its manifestation) is yet to be expressed. In the course of these case studies we seek to highlight the problematic nature of `national identity' and the `self' in settings far removed from post-Westphalian Europe.

The trend for international engagement in post-conflict reconstruction has produced a host of best-practice postulates on topics such as local involvement in decision-making, accountability for past atrocities, sensitivity to context, and the construction of democratic institutions of governance. International law has potential relevance for many of these themes, yet the question of how the implementation of best-practice policy recommendations might be affected by international law remains under-examined. This book offers a fuller understanding of the role of international law in the practice of post-conflict reconstruction. It explores how international legal issues that arise in the post-conflict period relate to a number of strands of the policy debate, including government creation, constitution-making, gender policy, provision of security, justice for past atrocities, rule of law development, economic recovery, returning displaced persons, and responsibilities of international actors. The chapters of the book work to reveal the extent to which international law figures in the policy of internationally enabled post-conflict reconstruction across a range of sectors. They also highlight the scope for international law to be harnessed in a more effective manner from the perspective of the transition to peace and stability. The book lays out a basis for future policy making on post-conflict reconstruction; one that is informed about the international legal parameters, and more aware of how international law can be utilized to promote key objectives.

Peoples and International Law is a detailed survey of the law of self-determination with a focus on the concept of nations and peoples. It engages with different aspects of this law with particular emphasis on the drafting and implementation of international instruments. The second edition includes new coverage of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the African and Arab charters. It considers recent practice by the Human Rights Committee, Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights dealing with the emerging political, economic and environmental aspects of the right. The book looks at the interaction of international law, nationalism and liberalism in theories of nationhood and self-determination, as well as, the historical development of the right and the decisions of international bodies. Lastly, it examines practice in this area, including new developments in remedial independence and international territorial administration.

A preliminary definition of international terrorism was agreed by the world community in 1937. Since then, a World War and the Cold War have made any such modern consensus impossible. In particular, the UN principles of equal rights and self-determination of `Peoples' have caused political and juridical confusion, in that liberation fighters who utilize terror methods as one tactic in an overall political strategy to achieve self-determination are frequently termed `terrorists', and are prosecuted as such. In order to regulate wars of self-determination under international law, and to control the means and methods of warfare utilized in them, international humanitarian law (IHL) was extended in 1977 to include armed conflicts for the right to self-determination `as enshrined in ... the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations'. Thus, acts of terrorism perpetrated during armed struggles for self-determination are separable from random acts of international violence and, when perpetrated by states or insurgent forces during wars of self-determination, may be prosecuted under IHL as war crimes. However, although states are obliged to seek out and prosecute the perpetrators of illicit acts of warfare, they rarely do so. Dr Chadwick argues that, should IHL be fully utilized during wars of self-determination, if only for purposes of guidance, the separability of illicit acts of war would enable the international community to reach consensus more easily in regard to a definition of terrorism in general, and a coordination of efforts to deter its occurrence.