Normative content of the principle of sovereign equality of states. International law
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/
Introduction
2. Basic principles of international law: concept, types
3. The principle of sovereign equality of states: concept, content, features
Conclusion
Introduction
The emergence of states led to the emergence of interstate relations and international law. Its beginnings took shape in the form of regional international legal systems covering relatively small geographical areas - those where states first appeared.
The history of the principles of international law and its science has always been closely connected with the history of society and interstate relations, constituting its organic part.
The constitution of international law is formed by its basic principles. They represent fundamental generally accepted norms that have the highest legal force. All other international legal norms and internationally significant actions of entities must comply with the provisions of the basic principles.
The principles of international law are universal in nature and are criteria for the legality of all other international norms. Actions or contracts that violate the provisions of the basic principles are considered invalid and entail international legal liability.
All principles of international law are of paramount importance and must be strictly applied, each one being interpreted in light of the others.
1. Principles of international law: concept, types, features
The principles of international law are the guiding rules of behavior of subjects that arise as a result of social practice, the legally established principles of international law. They represent the most general expression of established practice international relations. The principle of international law is a norm of international law that is binding on all subjects. Compliance with the principles of international law is strictly mandatory. A principle of international law can only be abolished by abolishing social practice, which is beyond the power of individual states or a group of states. Therefore, any state is obliged to respond to attempts to unilaterally “correct” social practice by violating principles. The principles of international law are formed by customary and contractual means. They simultaneously perform two functions: they contribute to the stabilization of international relations, limiting them to a certain normative framework, and consolidate everything new that appears in the practice of international relations, and thus contribute to their development. The basic principles of international law are historically determined fundamental generally accepted norms that express the main content of international law, its character traits and having supreme, imperative legal force.1 The basic principles of international law are fundamental, universal and generally accepted rules of conduct for subjects of international law. Fundamental principles form the core of international law. Being a criterion for the legality of all other norms of modern international law, they determine the qualitative features of the entire system of norms of international law and reveal its essence as the law of peace and peaceful coexistence. According to the findings of the Institute of International Law, in the resolutions of the UN General Assembly the term “principle” has the following meanings: a) legal or non-legal principle; b) a norm of a higher or higher order; c) a norm that gives rise to specific rules; d) a norm important for the purposes of the resolution; e) the goal to be achieved, legal or other policy requirement; f) guiding principle of interpretation. In international law, there are principles-ideas and principles-norms of the most general nature (the principle of diplomatic immunity), but the basic principles of international law are a special category of principles, different from all others. These principles are not only norms, but also have the highest legal force. In concentrated form, they reflect the main content of international law and are universal, generally recognized and binding norms. Having a normative nature, the basic principles of international law have a number of features that distinguish them from specific international legal norms. Firstly, the basic principles must receive general recognition and active application in the practice of interstate relations. Secondly, the basic principles are universal. They constitute the legal foundation, a kind of “constitutional basis” for the creation of other norms of international law, which either specify these principles or consolidate new interstate relations that are in full accordance with the basic principles. Specific international legal norms must comply with the basic principles of international law; otherwise these norms are invalid. Thirdly, the basic principles must be recorded in certain sources of international law - in multilateral treaties, conventions, etc. Fourthly, the basic principles are interrelated and interdependent. So, for example, simultaneously with the violation of the principle of non-interference, the principle of respect for state sovereignty is violated. Compliance with the principle of non-use of force or threat of force creates preconditions for more active implementation of the principle of cooperation between states, for the principle of resolving disputes only by peaceful means, etc. The UN Charter codifies seven basic principles of modern international law: sovereign equality; conscientious execution international obligations; resolution of disputes by peaceful means; non-use of force or threat of force; non-interference; equality and self-determination of peoples; cooperation between states. The principle of sovereign equality means, firstly, respect for state sovereignty and, secondly, recognition of the equality of all states in international relations. State sovereignty as an integral property of states is inherent in all states without any exception. All states, regardless of economic, political, social or other differences, are equal members of the international community and have the same rights and responsibilities. For each state, only that international legal norm is binding which it itself has recognized and considers obligatory for itself; no other state or group of states can impose norms of international law on it without its express consent. The fundamental rights and responsibilities of states are set out in detail in the Declaration of Principles of International Law relating to friendly relations between states in accordance with the UN Charter of 24 October 1970 and the Final Act of 1975: a) each state has the rights inherent in sovereignty and is obliged to respect the sovereignty of others states; b) from the moment of its emergence, each state is a full-fledged subject of international law and is obliged to respect the legal personality of other states; c) every state has the right to freely choose and develop its political, economic, social and cultural systems, as well as the right to establish their own laws and administrative rules; d) each state has political independence and has the right to the inviolability and integrity of its territory and the resolution of territorial issues, including borders, peacefully, by agreement, on the basis of international law. It is also obliged to respect these rights in relation to other states; e) all states are legally equal - they have the same rights and obligations as members of the international community, regardless of the differences in their economic, social and political systems; f) each state has the right to take or not to take part in international organizations, conferences, to be or not to be a party to bilateral and multilateral treaties, agreements, to take part in resolving international issues affecting its interests; g) every state is obliged to conscientiously fulfill its international obligations and live in peace with other states; h) each state has the right to participate on an equal basis with other states in the creation of norms of international law and its further development.
2. Basic principles of international law: concept, types
The core of modern international law is formed by its basic principles - generalized norms that reflect the characteristic features, as well as the main content of international law and have the highest legal force. These principles are also endowed with special political and moral force. The principles of international law are divided into basic and additional, general (recorded in multilateral conventions of global significance) and regional (recorded in regional conventions), general and sectoral (principles of the law of the sea).
The basic principles of MPP were enshrined in the UN Charter, the Declaration of Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation between States in accordance with the UN Charter of 1970, the Final Act of the CSCE of 1975. It should be noted that the principles of MPP are constantly being developed in connection with the complication of social and legal practice. For example, the first two documents fixed seven such principles, and the Final Act added two more to them.
The principles of International Law have their own characteristic features:
1. universality, which is understood as the obligation of all subjects of international law to comply with them (principles are the foundation of the international legal order);
2. the need for recognition by the entire world community (which follows from general feature MPP systems);
3. the presence of principles-ideals or the anticipatory nature of the content of some of the principles (for example, the principles of peace and cooperation that remain unrealized);
4. interconnectedness, which means that they can fulfill their functions only if they are considered as a system of interacting elements;
5. avant-garde regulation with the emergence of new IPP subjects or a new area of cooperation (they set the “rules of the game” or fill the “gaps” in international law);
6. hierarchy (for example, the principle of non-use of force occupies a central place). The complex of international legal principles has two main functions: stabilizing, which consists in determining the basis for the interaction of subjects of International Law by creating a normative framework; and developing, the essence of which is to consolidate everything new that appears in the practice of international relations.
The issue of peaceful coexistence of states with different economic, social and political system stood up to his full height after October revolution and the formation of the Soviet state.
The principle of peaceful coexistence has received, albeit in a very general form, legal recognition in the UN Charter - the main document of modern international law. The term “peaceful coexistence” itself is not used in the UN Charter, but the idea of peaceful coexistence of states, regardless of their economic, social and political systems, runs like a red thread through it. States are called upon to “show tolerance and live together, in peace with each other, as good neighbors,” and “to develop friendly relations between them.” The UN Charter, the Charter says, should be a center for coordinating the actions of nations in achieving common goals. This is the peaceful coexistence of Yu.V. Klyuchikov. The limits of validity of national legal norms and international law. // Constitutional international law. - 2002. - No. 1. - P. 45. .
The science of international law in Western countries, with rare exceptions, denies the existence of the principle of peaceful coexistence in modern international law. Of course, the legal content of the principle of peaceful coexistence is very broad and therefore somewhat vague. It must also be recognized that the Soviet interpretation of peaceful coexistence emphasized struggle between the states of the two systems, rather than cooperation. Meanwhile, cooperation is the main thing in peaceful coexistence, and the degree of cooperation is an indicator of the level of peaceful coexistence.
The principle of non-use of force or threat of force.
For the first time, the principle of non-use of force or threat of force was proclaimed in the UN Charter. Paragraph 4 of Article 2 of the Charter states: “All Members of the United Nations shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force either against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations” Charter United Nations. Current international law. In 3 volumes. Compiled by Yu.M. Kolosov. T.1. - M.: Publishing house of the Moscow Independent Institute of International Law, 1996. - P. 12. .
The authoritative interpretation of the principle of non-use of force or threat of force is given in documents such as the Declaration of Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States, 1970, the definition of aggression adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1974, the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe 1975 and the Declaration on Strengthening the Effectiveness of the Principle of Non-Threat or Use of Force in International Relations, adopted by the UN General Assembly on November 18, 1987.
Having analyzed these documents, we can conclude that the following are prohibited:
any action constituting a threat of force or the direct or indirect use of force against another state;
the use of force or the threat of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another state or to resolve international disputes, including territorial disputes and issues relating to state borders, or to violate international demarcation lines, including armistice lines;
reprisals using armed force; These prohibited actions include, in particular, the so-called “peaceful blockade”, i.e. blockade of the ports of another state carried out by armed forces in peacetime;
organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed gangs, including mercenary activities;
organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts civil war or terrorist acts in another state or condoning organizational activities within one’s own territory aimed at committing such acts, in the event that said acts involve the threat or use of force;
military occupation of the territory of a state resulting from the use of force in violation of the UN Charter;
acquisition of territory of another state as a result of the threat or use of force;
violent acts that deprive peoples of the right to self-determination, freedom and independence Declaration on strengthening the effectiveness of the principle of non-threat or use of force in international relations. UN General Assembly Resolution 42/22 of November 18, 1987 Current international law. In 3 volumes. Compiled by Yu.M. Kolosov. T.1. - M.: Publishing house of the Moscow Independent Institute of International Law, 1996. - P. 103. .
As stated in Art. 51 of the UN Charter, states may exercise the right of self-defense in the event of an armed attack, “until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.” Thus, when Iraq committed aggression against Kuwait in the summer of 1990, the right of self-defense could be used by Kuwait and, at its request, any other state.
The principle of non-use of force does not apply to actions taken by resolution of the Security Council on the basis of Chapter VII of the UN Charter. The use of armed force against Iraq is one of the important examples of the use of this provision of the UN Charter. Lukashuk I. International security of the state and international law // Security of Eurasia. - 2003 - No. 3 - P. 291. .
Naturally, the principle of non-use of force does not apply to events occurring within a state, since international law does not regulate intrastate relations.
The principle of peaceful resolution of international disputes.
The principle of peaceful resolution of disputes is closely related to the principle of non-use of force. According to it, states should resolve disputes among themselves only by peaceful means.
The principle of peaceful resolution of international disputes means the obligation of states to resolve all disputes and conflicts arising between them exclusively by peaceful means. It does not matter whether the dispute threatens international peace and security or not. Any dispute between states, regardless of whether it is global or regional, whether it affects the vital interests of the state or secondary ones, whether it threatens international peace and security or not, is subject only to peaceful resolution Dekhanov S.A. Law and force in interstate relations // Moscow Journal of International Law. - 2006. - No. 4. - P. 46. .
In accordance with modern concepts According to international law, states are obliged to resolve their disputes only by peaceful means. On international conferences Representatives of some countries sometimes resort to arbitrary interpretation of the UN Charter in order to prevent the inclusion of the word “only” in the formulation of the principle. At the same time, they argue that the Charter does not so much enshrine the provision that disputes must be resolved by peaceful means, but rather require that when resolving international disputes, a threat to the peace and security of states must not be created.
The 1970 Declaration of Principles of International Law emphasizes that “international disputes shall be settled on the basis of the sovereign equality of States and in accordance with the principle of the free choice of means for the peaceful settlement of disputes” Declaration of Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the Organization United Nations, October 24, 1970 Current international law. In 3 volumes. Compiled by Yu.M. Kolosov. T.1. - M.: Publishing house of the Moscow Independent Institute of International Law, 1996. - P. 68. . It also states that if the parties do not reach a settlement by one of the peaceful means, they are obliged to “continue to strive for a settlement by other peaceful means agreed upon between them.”
In accordance with Art. 33 of the UN Charter, parties to a dispute “shall, first of all, endeavor to resolve the dispute through negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial trial, appeals to regional bodies or agreements or other peaceful means of their choice" Charter of the United Nations. Current international law. In 3 volumes. Compiled by Y.M. Kolosov. T.1. - M.: Publishing house of the Moscow Independent Institute of International Law, 1996. - P. 25. .
At the same time, the development of international relations, especially in last years, is marked by the desire of states to go beyond negotiations and create other acceptable means of resolving disputes that would be based on appealing to third parties or international bodies. This often raises questions related to the role International Court of Justice UN.
Attempts by some Western states to establish the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, as a rule, meet with sharp resistance from many states. These states consider the jurisdiction of the Court to be optional, and this position is precisely in accordance with Art. 36 of the Statute of the Court, according to which states may (but are not obliged) to make a declaration that they are bound by the jurisdiction of the International Court. The vast majority of states have not yet accepted the Court's jurisdiction as compulsory.
An analysis of the principle of peaceful resolution of international disputes, as enshrined in the 1970 Declaration of Principles of International Law and the Final Act of the CSCE, shows that, despite resistance, it was possible to defend a number of important provisions, which, undoubtedly, are a further development of the relevant provisions of the UN Charter. sovereign equality international legal order
These include the duty of states to “endeavor to ensure that short term reach a just solution based on international law", the duty to "continue to seek mutually agreed means of peaceful settlement of the dispute" in cases where the dispute cannot be resolved, "to refrain from any action that could worsen the situation to such an extent that it would endanger threat to the maintenance of international peace and security, and thereby make a peaceful settlement of the dispute more difficult" Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, August 15, 1975. Current international law. In 3 volumes. Compiled by Y.M. Kolosov. T .1. - M.: Publishing house of the Moscow Independent Institute of International Law, 1996. - P. 45. .
The normative content of the principle of the peaceful settlement of international disputes has in recent years been the subject of careful analysis at meetings of the CSCE expert on the peaceful settlement of disputes. Thus, the Meeting in Valletta (Malta, 1991) recommended the parameters of a pan-European system for the peaceful settlement of international disputes. The final document of the Conference provides for the creation in Europe of a special body - the “CSCE Dispute Settlement Mechanism”, which can be used at the request of any of the disputing parties and acts as a conciliation body. In addition, the document recommends a wide range of mandatory and optional procedures, from which the disputing parties freely choose those they consider most suitable for resolving a particular dispute.
The mandatory procedures recommended by the Conference do not apply if one of the disputing parties considers that the dispute involves questions of “territorial integrity or national defence, the right to sovereignty over a land area or concurrent claims of jurisdiction over other areas... Principles of dispute settlement and provisions of procedure CSCE on the peaceful settlement of disputes, dated February 8, 1991. Current international law. In 3 volumes. Compiled by Y. M. Kolosov. Vol. 1. - M.: Publishing house of the Moscow Independent Institute of International Law, 1996. - P. 821. "
In general, we can consider that recent years have been marked, on the one hand, by an increase in the share of peaceful means of resolving international disputes, and on the other, by the constant desire of states to bring the normative content of the principle into line with the needs of social practice.
To implement this principle and increase its effectiveness, international meetings were convened within the framework of the Helsinki Process, at which a generally acceptable method of peaceful settlement was developed, aimed at supplementing existing peaceful methods with new means.
The principle of territorial integrity of states.
Established with the adoption of the UN Charter in 1945. The process of its development continues. The name of the principle itself has not been finally established: one can find mention of both territorial integrity and territorial inviolability. The significance of this principle is very great from the point of view of stability in interstate relations. Its purpose is to protect the territory of the state from any encroachment.
In the Declaration of Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation between States in accordance with the UN Charter, 1970, when disclosing the content of the wording of paragraph 4 of Art. 2 of the UN Charter reflected many elements of the principle of territorial integrity (inviolability), although this principle itself was not separately mentioned. In particular, it was established that each state “must refrain from any actions aimed at violating the national unity and territorial integrity of any other state or country.” It was also noted that "the territory of a State shall not be the subject of military occupation resulting from the use of force in violation of the provisions of the Charter" and that "the territory of a State shall not be the object of acquisition by another State as a result of the threat or use of force." In this regard, it was further noted that any territorial acquisitions resulting from the threat or use of force should not be recognized as legal. However, as you know, the law does not have retroactive effect.
The next stage in the development of this principle was the Final Act of the 1975 Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, which contains a separate and most complete formulation of the principle of territorial integrity of states: “The participating states will respect the territorial integrity of each of the participating states. In accordance with this, they will refrain from any action inconsistent with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations against the territorial integrity, political independence or unity of any participating State and, in particular, from any such action constituting the use or threat of force. likewise refrain from making each other's territory the subject of military occupation or other direct or indirect measures of force in violation of international law, or the subject of acquisition by means of such measures or the threat thereof.No occupation or acquisition of such kind will be recognized as lawful "Charter of the United Nations. Current international law. In 3 volumes. Compiled by Yu.M. Kolosov. T.1. - M.: Publishing house of the Moscow Independent Institute of International Law, 1996. - P. 25. .
We are talking about any actions against territorial integrity or inviolability. All natural resources are integral components of the territory of the state, and if the territory as a whole is inviolable, then its components, that is, natural resources in their natural form, are also inviolable. Therefore, their development by foreign persons or states without the permission of the territorial sovereign is also a violation of territorial integrity.
In the peaceful communication of neighboring states, the problem of protecting state territory from the danger of causing damage to it through any influence from abroad often arises, that is, the danger of deteriorating the natural state of this territory or its individual components. A state's use of its territory must not harm the natural conditions of the territory of another state.
The principle of territorial integrity of states is one of the basic principles of international law, enshrined in paragraph 4 of Art. 2 of the UN Charter.
Principle inviolability state borders.
It determines the cooperation of states in establishing borders, protecting them, and resolving controversial issues in connection with borders. The significance of relations associated with borders is determined by the fact that they are the boundaries of the spread of state sovereignty, the boundaries of the operation of the state legal order. Issues about borders occupy a fairly large place in the most important treaties of our time, but they are not inferior to those that have long become only milestones of history. Since ancient times, it has been believed that violation of the border is a casus belli - a reason for a legitimate war. Air, sea, and land borders are protected by the entire power of the state, its diplomatic apparatus, as well as its political allied treaties.
Taking into account the universality, uniformity, and length of practice of states in protecting state borders, it should be noted that in international law there is a principle of the inviolability of state borders.
In written form, it is, as indicated, reflected in bilateral and multilateral allied treaties, charters of universal and regional political organizations.
Its understanding by states is reflected in such moral and political norms as the norms of the Declaration of Principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (1975) “The participating states regard as inviolable all the borders of each other, as well as the borders of all states in Europe, and They will therefore refrain now and in the future from any encroachment upon those frontiers. They will accordingly refrain also from any demands or actions tending to seize and usurp part or all of the territory of any State Party." International Law in Documents: Tutorial/ Comp.: N.T. Blatov - 3rd ed., revised. and additional - M.: 2000. - P. 26-27. , declarations and resolutions of the UN General Assembly, in particular in the Declaration of Principles Concerning Friendly Relations between States (1970).
The rights of the state, determined by the imperatives of the principle, consist in the requirement of the absolute inviolability of established borders, the illegality of changing them without consent and under any pressure, using force or the threat of force. This also defines the responsibilities of states - strict adherence to borders, dividing or demarcation lines established in accordance with international law, including armistice lines, for the period of an armistice, until the conclusion of a permanent treaty, in connection with which such lines can be considered temporary boundaries, dispute resolution about borders only by peaceful means, failure to provide assistance to states that violate the principles of ensuring border security.
States are obliged not to violate the border regime rules established by domestic and international standards. Thus, the regime for protecting the border of the Russian Federation, established by the Law “On the State Border of the Russian Federation” of 1993, provides for strictly visa entry into the territory of Russia, the Schengen Agreement of 1990. concluded by 9 European states, on the contrary, established the principle of visa-free border crossing for citizens of the states party to the Agreement. The right of the state is to establish or remove customs and other restrictions related to the passage of borders by individuals, vehicles, and goods.
In relation to borders, there is also the institution of confidence-building measures, expressed in the prohibition of the movement of troops or holding exercises near borders, the creation of security zones, etc., in the establishment of transparency of borders for certain types of goods and services. This regime has been established between some CIS countries. Sokolov V.A. Models of legal behavior of states and the regulatory properties of international law // Moscow Journal of International Law. - 2003. - No. 1. - P. 69. .
Violation of borders is considered an international crime, in connection with which it is possible to apply the most stringent retaliatory measures provided for, in particular, in Art. 39-47 of the UN Charter: the use of armed forces, other emergency sanctions, up to limiting the sovereignty of the guilty state and violating its borders.
The principle of non-interference in internal affairs.
The principle of non-interference is enshrined in the UN Charter (Clause 7, Article 2). An authoritative interpretation of this principle is given in a number of resolutions of the UN General Assembly on the inadmissibility of interference in the internal affairs of states, in the Declaration of Principles of International Law of 1970, in the Final Act Pan-European Conference 1975. According to the UN Charter, interference “in matters essentially within the internal competence of any state is prohibited. Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, dated August 15, 1975. Current international law. In 3 volumes. Compiled by Yu.M. Kolosov. T.1. - M.: Publishing house of the Moscow Independent Institute of International Law, 1996. - P. 103."
According to the 1970 Declaration, the principle of non-intervention means the prohibition of direct or indirect interference for any reason in the internal or external affairs of any state. According to this Declaration, this principle includes the following:
a) prohibition of armed intervention and other forms of intervention or threat of intervention directed against the legal personality of a State or against its political, economic and cultural foundations;
b) prohibition of the use of economic, political and other measures with the aim of achieving the subjugation of another state in the exercise of its sovereign rights and receiving any advantages from it;
c) prohibition of organizing, encouraging, assisting or allowing armed, subversive or terrorist activities aimed at changing the system of another state through violence;
d) prohibition of interference in internal struggles in another state;
e) prohibition of the use of force to deprive peoples of freely choosing the forms of their national existence;
f) the right of a state to choose its political, economic, social and cultural system without interference from other states Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, dated October 24, 1970. Current international law. In 3 volumes. Compiled by Yu.M. Kolosov. T.1. - M.: Publishing house of the Moscow Independent Institute of International Law, 1996. - P. 70. . The content of the concept of “matters essentially within the internal competence of any state” changed with the development of international law. In the process of such development, there are more and more cases that, to a certain extent, fall under international legal regulation, therefore, they cease to relate exclusively to the internal competence of states.
The principle of self-determination of peoples and nations.
When enshrining the Human Rights Covenants in the UN, the colonial powers resolutely resisted including in them the principle of self-determination of nations and peoples in a more extensive formulation than that contained in the UN Charter. Some representatives of the Western doctrine of international law tried to prove that this principle is not a principle of international law at all. Thus, the American scientist Eagleton tried to present it only as a moral principle. The Frenchman Siber called the principle of self-determination of nations “hypothetical and false” Kryazhkov V. Indigenous Peoples International Law // State and Law. - M.: - 1999. - No. 4 - P. 97. .
However, as a result of the ongoing changes in the world situation, the principle of self-determination of peoples received further development. This was reflected in a number of international documents, the most important of which are the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples of 1960, Article 1 of the Human Rights Covenants and the Declaration of Principles of International Law of 1970, which provide a detailed definition of the content of the principle of equality and self-determination of peoples.
Without strict respect for and adherence to the principle of self-determination of peoples, it is impossible to achieve many of the vital tasks facing the UN, for example, the task of promoting universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, gender, language or religion. Without strict adherence to this principle, it is also impossible to maintain relations of peaceful coexistence between states. Each State, in accordance with the 1970 Declaration, is obliged to refrain from any violent action that could prevent peoples from exercising their right to self-determination. An important element of the principle is the right of peoples to seek and receive support in accordance with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter in the event that they are deprived of the right to self-determination by force.
a) all peoples have the right to freely determine, without interference, their political status and to pursue their economic, social and cultural development;
b) all states are obliged to respect this right;
c) all states are obliged to promote, through joint and independent actions, the exercise by peoples of the right to self-determination;
d) all states are obliged to refrain from any violent actions that deprive peoples of their right to self-determination, freedom and independence;
e) in their struggle for independence, colonial peoples can use all necessary means;
f) the subjection of the people to foreign domination is prohibited.
The principle of self-determination of nations and peoples does not mean that a nation (people) is obliged to strive to create an independent state or a state uniting the entire nation. The right of a nation to self-determination is its right, and not its obligation. Karpovich O. International legal problems of the protection of national minorities. // Lawyer. - 1998. - No. 6 - P. 52. .
There is no doubt that every people has the right to freely decide its own destiny. But in a number of cases this principle is used by extremists, nationalists, eager for power and eager for fragmentation existing state. Speaking on behalf of the people, but not representing them at all, inciting rabid nationalism and enmity between peoples, they are destroying multinational state. This, in most cases, contradicts the true interests of the peoples of a given state, since it leads to a severance of economic, family, cultural, scientific, technical and other ties that have developed over centuries and contradicts the general integration trend of world development.
The principle of cooperation between states.
It is the result of the deepening of the international division of labor, the widespread development of international economic and other relations in the modern era. The economic and political need for cooperation between states to ensure international peace and security, development of productive forces, culture, nature conservation, etc. gave rise to this legal principle.
After the adoption of the UN Charter, the principle of cooperation was enshrined in the charters of many international organizations, in international treaties, numerous resolutions and declarations.
Representatives of some schools of international law argue that the duty of states to cooperate is not legal, but declarative. Such statements no longer correspond to reality. Of course, there was a time when cooperation was a voluntary act of state power, but subsequently the requirements of developing international relations led to the transformation of a voluntary act into a legal obligation.
With the adoption of the Charter, the principle of cooperation took its place among other principles that must be observed under modern international law. Thus, in accordance with the Charter, states are obliged to “carry out international cooperation in resolving international problems economic, social, cultural and humanitarian character" and are also obliged to "maintain international peace and security and to take effective collective measures to this end."
Developing the provisions of the Charter, the Declaration of Principles of International Law of 1970 defines the content of the principle of cooperation between states as follows:
a) states are obliged to cooperate with each other in various fields of international relations in order to maintain international peace and security, development international cooperation and progress;
b) cooperation between states should be carried out regardless of the differences in their political, economic and social systems;
c) States should cooperate to promote economic growth throughout the world, especially in developing countries.
The Final Act of the Pan-European Conference of 1975 specifies the content of this principle in relation to the situation in Europe. The Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, dated August 15, 1975. Current international law. In 3 volumes. Compiled by Yu.M. Kolosov. T.1. - M.: Publishing house of the Moscow Independent Institute of International Law, 1996. - P. 150. .
The obligation of all states to act in accordance with the principles of the UN clearly implies their obligation to cooperate in solving various international problems, “as this may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security” Kalamkaryan R.M. The concept of the rule of law in modern international law // State and law. - 2003. - No. 6. - P. 34. .
The principle of respect for human rights.
The emergence of the principle of universal respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all as one of the main international legal principles dates back to the post-war period and is directly related to the adoption of the UN Charter, although the concept of human rights itself appeared in political and legal terminology from the end of the 18th century and is associated with the era of bourgeois revolutions.
The 1970 Declaration of Principles of International Law does not contain a principle of respect for human rights, but, as already indicated, the list of principles contained in it is not exhaustive. Currently, almost no one disputes the existence of this principle in general international law O.I. Tiunov. International legal standards of human rights: development and characteristic features // Russian Legal Journal. - 2001. - No. 4. - P. 41. .
In the Final Act of the Pan-European Conference of 1975, the name of this principle is formulated as follows: “Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief.”
The Charter of Paris for a New Europe, dated November 21, 1990, emphasizes that respect for fundamental human rights and freedoms is “the primary duty of government” and that “their respect and full implementation are the basis of freedom, justice and peace.” Charter of Paris for a New Europe, dated November 21, 1990 Current international law. In 3 volumes. Compiled by Yu.M. Kolosov. T.1. - M.: Publishing house of the Moscow Independent Institute of International Law, 1996. - P. 50. .
In the preamble to the Charter, UN members reaffirmed "belief in fundamental human rights... in the equal rights of men and women...". In Art. 1 and the goal of the members of the Organization speaks of cooperation between them “to promote and develop respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.” The most important is Art. 55 of the Charter, according to which “The United Nations shall promote: a) improved standards of living, full employment and conditions of economic and social progress and development;... c) universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all...” In Art. Article 56 provides that “all Members of the Organization undertake to take joint and independent actions in cooperation with the Organization to achieve the goals specified in Article 55.”
It is easy to see that the obligations of states are set out here in the most general form, therefore, from the moment the Charter was adopted and to the present day, states have been striving to specify the normative content of the principle of universal respect for human rights. This is done most comprehensively and universally in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and two covenants adopted in 1966: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
An analysis of numerous international documents on human morals shows that in modern international law there is a universal norm, according to which states are obliged to respect and observe human rights and fundamental freedoms for everyone, without distinction of race, gender, language and religion A.V. Khovanskaya. Human dignity: International experience of understanding // State and law. - 2002. - No. 3. - P.52. .
As a rule, international documents do not determine how a state will fulfill its obligations. At the same time, the standards of conduct contained in international documents, to a certain extent, bind the freedom of behavior of states in the sphere of national legislation. Moreover, an analysis of the development of the normative content of the principle of universal respect for human rights shows that the individual is gradually becoming a direct subject of international law.
We are talking, first of all, about gross and massive violations of human rights, when the internal political situation in a particular country allows us to speak of “systematic, reliably confirmed gross violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms.” Phenomena such as genocide, apartheid, and racial discrimination have already been classified by the international community as international crimes and, therefore, cannot be considered as matters within the internal competence of the state.
a) all states are obliged to respect the fundamental rights and freedoms of all persons within their territories;
b) states are obliged to prevent discrimination on the grounds of gender, race, language and religion;
c) States have an obligation to promote universal respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and to cooperate with each other in achieving this goal.
Principle conscientious fulfillment international obligations.
It is one of the oldest fundamental principles of international law.
This principle is enshrined in the UN Charter. Its preamble underscores the determination of UN members “to create conditions under which ... respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be observed.” The Charter obliges all UN members to conscientiously fulfill the international obligations adopted under the Charter (clause 2 of Article 2). According to paragraph 2 of Art. 2 of the Charter, “all Members of the United Nations shall faithfully fulfill the obligations assumed under this Charter in order to ensure to all of them the integrity and benefits arising from membership in the Organization.”
The principle in question is also enshrined in the Vienna Conventions on the Law of International Treaties of 1969 and 1986, in the Declaration of Principles of International Law of 1970, in the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe of 1975 and in many other international legal documents.
The development of international law clearly confirms the universal nature of the principle in question. According to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, “every treaty in force is binding on its parties and must be performed by them in good faith.” Moreover, “a party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as a justification for its non-compliance with the treaty.” Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Current international law. In 3 volumes. Compiled by Yu.M. Kolosov. T.1. - M.: Publishing house of the Moscow Independent Institute of International Law, 1996. - P. 84.
This principle applies to all international obligations arising from international treaties and customary norms, as well as from binding decisions. international bodies"and organizations.
The scope of the principle under consideration has expanded noticeably in recent years, which is reflected in the wording of the relevant international legal documents. Thus, according to the Declaration of Principles of International Law of 1970, each state is obliged to fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by it in accordance with the UN Charter, obligations arising from generally recognized norms and principles of international law, as well as obligations arising from international treaties valid in accordance with generally recognized principles and norms of international law.
In the Declaration of Principles of the 1975 CSCE Final Act, the participating States agreed to “carry out in good faith their obligations under international law, both those obligations which arise from generally accepted principles and rules of international law and those obligations which arise from treaties or other agreements consistent with international law.” , of which they are participants" Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, dated August 15, 1975. Current international law. In 3 volumes. Compiled by Yu.M. Kolosov. T.1. - M.: Publishing house of the Moscow Independent Institute of International Law, 1996. - P. 143. .
Obligations “under international law” are certainly broader than obligations “arising from generally recognized principles and norms of international law.” Moreover, in recent years, states have adopted, particularly at the regional level, important documents which, strictly speaking, are not their obligations “under international law”, but which they nevertheless intend to strictly implement.
Different legal and socio-cultural systems have their own understanding of good faith, which directly affects states’ compliance with their obligations. The concept of good faith has been enshrined in a large number of international treaties, resolutions of the UN General Assembly, in declarations of states, etc. However, it should be recognized that determining the exact legal content of the concept of good faith in real situations can cause difficulties.
It seems that the legal content of good faith should be derived from the text of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, mainly the sections “Application of Treaties” (Articles 28-30) and “Interpretation of Treaties” (Articles 31-33). The application of the provisions of a treaty is largely determined by its interpretation. From this point of view, it is logical to assume that the application of a contract that is construed in good faith (in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the contract in their context and in the light of the object and purpose of the contract) will be fair.
The principle of faithful fulfillment of international obligations applies only to valid agreements. This means that the principle in question applies only to international treaties concluded voluntarily and on the basis of equality.
Any unequal international treaty, first of all, violates the sovereignty of the state and as such violates the UN Charter, since the United Nations is “founded on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members”, who, in turn, have undertaken the obligation to “develop friendly relations between nations on based on respect for the principle of equality and self-determination of peoples."
Similar documents
The essence of the fundamental principles of international law that have the highest political, moral and legal force. The principle of sovereign equality of states, cooperation, non-interference in each other's internal affairs, peaceful resolution of international disputes.
course work, added 02/18/2011
The concept of state jurisdiction and its types. Interpretation and application of principles of international law. The principles of sovereign equality of states, non-use of force and threat of force, inviolability of state borders, non-interference in internal affairs.
course work, added 01/12/2010
course work, added 02/16/2011
The principle of non-use of force, peaceful resolution of disputes, respect for human rights, sovereign equality, non-interference, territorial integrity, inviolability of borders, equality and self-determination of peoples, cooperation.
abstract, added 02/19/2003
The concept and role of the basic principles of international law. Their classification and characteristics: non-use of force, peaceful resolution of disputes, respect for people, sovereign equality, non-interference, territorial integrity, fulfillment of obligations.
abstract, added 10/02/2014
Characteristics of the basic concepts of the international legal order. Principles of international law as criteria for the legality of the entire system of international legal norms. General concept of international legal responsibility. Contents of an international offense.
course work, added 02/08/2011
Concept, social nature, features and principles of international law (IL). Sources of modern MP, succession of states. Concept and legal regime territorial waters. International legal violations and liability. UN and NATO: goals and principles.
cheat sheet, added 09/14/2010
Concept, subject and main functions of international law. Basic principles of modern international law, its sources and subjects. International cooperation of states in the field of human rights. Responsibility of states in international law.
test, added 08/20/2015
Concept and subjects, types and forms of international legal responsibility. Classification of international offenses of states. Circumstances excluding the responsibility of states. Responsibility of a state in connection with the act of another state.
It is the initial principle of international law and combines two important properties: sovereignty and equality with other states. This principle assumes that states are legally equal, enjoy the rights inherent in full sovereignty, and are obliged to respect the legal personality of other states; territorial integrity and political independence of states are inviolable, each state has the right to freely choose its political, economic and social systems, each state is obliged to fully and voluntarily comply with its international obligations.
2. The principle of non-use of force or threat of force. Each state is obliged to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of other states.
3. The principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of other states. No state or group of states has the right to interfere directly or indirectly in the internal or external affairs of other states. No State has the right to promote or encourage such measures as are aimed at subordinating one State to another State.
4. The principle of peaceful resolution of international disputes. According to this principle, states are obliged to resolve disputes arising between them exclusively by peaceful means, so as not to jeopardize peace and international security.
5. The principle of faithful fulfillment of international obligations.
6. The principle of international cooperation between states. States are obliged, regardless of differences in their political and economic systems, to cooperate with each other in order to maintain international peace and security and promote economic progress in the world.
7. The principle of equality and self-determination of peoples. All peoples have the right to freely determine their political status, carry out their economic and cultural development, freely make decisions on the creation of their own state.
8. The principle of territorial integrity of states. States must renounce the forcible dismemberment of the territory of other states, the separation of any parts of it, as well as the right of each state to freely dispose of its territory.
9. The principle of the inviolability of state borders. States must renounce any territorial claims and agree to the existing territorial distribution in the world.
10. The principle of respect for human rights and freedoms.
System of international law is a set of interrelated principles and norms governing international legal relations.
The system of international law includes, on the one hand, general legal principles and legal norms, on the other – industries as homogeneous sets of norms and intra-industry institutions.
Thus, the system of international law can be divided into the following categories:
1) generally recognized principles of international law, which form its core and are fundamental to the international legal mechanism for regulating relations;
2) norms of international law, which are generally binding rules of relations between states or other subjects of international law;
3) institutions common to international law, which are complexes of norms for a specific functional purpose. Institute of International Law on international legal personality, on international law-making, on international responsibility, on the succession of states;
4) branches of international law, which are the largest structural divisions of the system of international law and regulate the most extensive areas of social relations.
Branches of international law can be classified on various grounds.. Branches in international law can be distinguished both on the grounds adopted in domestic law, and on specific grounds of an international legal nature. The generally recognized branches of international law include the law of international treaties, the law of external relations, the law of international organizations, the law international security, international maritime law, international space law, international security law environment, international humanitarian law.
The branch of international law may include sub-branches, if the industry regulates a wide range of relations, the institutions of this industry, which are mini-complexes for regulating any individual issues.
The sub-sectors in the law of international relations are consular and diplomatic law, the institutions of this branch of law are the institutions of formation of missions, the functions of missions, immunities and privileges of diplomatic missions, in the law of armed conflicts - groups of norms regulating regimes of military occupation, military captivity.
From the above it follows that system of international law is a set of interrelated elements, generally recognized principles, legal norms, as well as institutions of international law.
Various combinations of these elements form branches of international law.
International law and domestic law do not exist in isolation from each other. Rule-making activities in international law are influenced by national legal systems. International law, in turn, influences domestic legislation. In some countries, international law is an integral part of national legislation. So, according to Part 4 of Art. 15 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation “generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation are an integral part of its legal system.” The laws of many countries provide that in the event of any conflict between legal provisions and international obligations, international obligations shall prevail.
Related information.
The principle of sovereign equality of states
| Parameter name | Meaning |
| Article topic: | The principle of sovereign equality of states |
| Rubric (thematic category) | Right |
This principle is, as it were, the initial beginning of modern international law as a whole, combining two specific legal features that characterize each state - the inherent property of the state, denoted by the term “sovereignty” (see Chapter V), and equality with other states in international relations. Therefore, often in agreements between states we are talking about mutual respect for each other’s sovereignty. The sovereignty of states also predetermines the method of international legal regulation of their relationships - an agreement between them.
The first interpretation of the term “sovereign equality” of states was given at the San Francisco Conference, which adopted the UN Charter. It was contained in the report of Committee I/1 of that Conference, which was then approved by the First Commission and the plenary session of the Conference.
According to this interpretation, the “sovereign equality” of states must mean that
1) states are legally equal;
2) they enjoy all the rights that arise from their sovereignty;
3) the personality of the state must be respected, as well as territorial integrity and political independence;
4) the state must conscientiously fulfill its duties and international obligations in international relations.
This interpretation fully retains its meaning to this day.
In turn, according to the Declaration of Principles of International Law of 1970, the main content of the principle in question is as follows.
All states enjoy sovereign equality. They have the same rights and the same responsibilities and are equal members of the international community, regardless of differences of an economic, social, political or other nature (clause 1).
The concept of sovereign equality includes, in particular, the following elements˸
a) states are legally equal;
b) each state enjoys the rights inherent in full sovereignty;
c) each state is obliged to respect the legal personality of other states;
d) the territorial integrity and political independence of the state are inviolable;
e) every state has the right to freely choose and develop its political, social, economic and cultural systems;
f) every state is obliged to fulfill fully and conscientiously its international obligations and to live in peace with other states.
Let us clarify that the expression that states “have the same rights and the same obligations” refers to the norms of general international law, i.e. norms established by the international community of states as a whole. Nowadays they are generally recognized as not only conventional, but also customary legal norms.
However, the equality of the rights and obligations of states under general international law does not mean at all that states cannot undertake, under local agreements, new international obligations or obligations that clarify and develop existing norms, if they do not contradict the basic principles of international law. It is in this way that modern international law primarily develops - from local norms to universal ones.
The principle of sovereign equality of states - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Principle of sovereign equality of states" 2015, 2017-2018.
The maintenance of international legal order can only be ensured with full respect for the legal equality of the participants. This means that each state is obliged to respect the sovereignty of other participants in the system, that is, their right, within their own territory, to exercise legislative, executive, administrative and judicial power without any interference from other states, as well as to independently carry out their foreign policy. The sovereign equality of states forms the basis of modern international relations, which is summarized in paragraph 1 of Art. 2 of the UN Charter, which states: “The Organization is founded on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.”
This principle is also enshrined in the charters of international organizations of the UN system, in the charters of the vast majority of regional international organizations, in multilateral and bilateral agreements of states and international organizations, in legal acts international organizations. The objective laws of international relations and their gradual democratization have led to an expansion of the content of the principle of sovereign equality of states. In modern international law, it is most fully reflected in the Declaration of Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation between States in accordance with the UN Charter. This principle was later developed in the Declaration of Principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Final Document of the Vienna Meeting of Representatives of the States Parties to the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe in 1989, the Charter of Paris for a New Europe in 1990 and a number of other documents.
The main social purpose of the principle of sovereign equality is to ensure legally equal participation in international relations of all states, regardless of differences of an economic, social, political or other nature. Since states are equal participants in international communication, they all have fundamentally the same rights and responsibilities.
According to the 1970 Declaration, the concept of sovereign equality includes the following elements:
- a) states are legally equal;
- b) each state enjoys the rights inherent in full sovereignty;
- c) each state is obliged to respect the legal personality of other states;
- d) the territorial integrity and political independence of the state are inviolable;
- e) every state has the right to freely choose and develop its political, social, economic and cultural systems;
- f) every state is obliged to fully and conscientiously fulfill its international obligations and live in peace with other states.
In the Declaration of Principles of the CSCE Final Act, states committed themselves not only to respect the principle of sovereign equality as set out in the UN Charter and the 1970 Declaration, but also to respect the rights inherent in sovereignty. The latter means that in their mutual relations, states must respect differences in historical and socio-political development, diversity of positions and views, internal laws and administrative rules, the right to determine and implement, at their own discretion and in accordance with international law, relations with other states. The elements of the principle of sovereign equality include the right of states to belong to international organizations, to be or not to be parties to bilateral and multilateral treaties, including union treaties, as well as the right to neutrality.
Pointing out the connection between the principle of sovereign equality and respect for the rights inherent in sovereignty simultaneously specifies and expands the content of this principle, which underlies international cooperation. This connection is especially clearly manifested in the field of international economic relations, where the problem of protecting the sovereign rights of developing states is most acute. In recent years, the need to respect the rights inherent in sovereignty has been especially often pointed out in connection with the achievements of the scientific and technological revolution, which should not be used to the detriment of other states. This applies, for example, to the problem of live television broadcasting, the danger of military or any other hostile use of means of influencing natural environment and so on.
The legal equality of states does not mean their actual equality, which is taken into account in real international relations. One example of this is the special legal status of permanent members of the UN Security Council.
There are statements that normal international relations are impossible without limiting sovereignty. Meanwhile, sovereignty is an integral property of a state and a factor in international relations, and not a product of international law. No state, group of states or international organization can impose the rules of international law created by them on other states. The inclusion of a subject of international law in any system of legal relations can be carried out only on the basis of voluntariness.
Currently, states are increasingly transferring part of their powers, which were previously considered integral attributes of state sovereignty, in favor of the international organizations they create. This happens for various reasons, including due to an increase in the number global problems, expansion of areas of international cooperation and, accordingly, an increase in the number of objects of international legal regulation. In a number of international organizations, the founding states moved away from formal equality in voting (one country - one vote) and adopted the so-called weighted voting method, when the number of votes a country has depends on the size of its contribution to the organization’s budget and other circumstances related to operational and economic activities of international organizations. Thus, when voting in the Council of Ministers European Union On a number of issues, states have an unequal number of votes, and small EU member states have repeatedly noted at the official level that such a situation helps strengthen their state sovereignty. The principle of weighted voting has been adopted in a number of international financial organizations UN system, in the Council of the International Maritime Satellite Telecommunications Organization (INMARSAT).
There is every reason to believe that the vital necessity of preserving peace, the logic integration processes and other circumstances of modern international relations will lead to the creation of legal structures that would adequately reflect these realities. However, this in no way means a derogation of the principle of sovereign equality in interstate relations. By transferring part of their powers to international organizations voluntarily, states do not limit their sovereignty, but, on the contrary, exercise one of their sovereign rights - the right to conclude agreements. In addition, states, as a rule, reserve the right to control the activities of international organizations.
While they exist sovereign states, the principle of sovereign equality will remain the most important element systems of principles of modern international law. Strict adherence to it ensures the free development of every state and people.
sovereign equality international legal order
This principle underlies all interstate relations and concerns any spheres of such relations; it occupies a special place in the system of principles, in a certain sense creating a legally favorable basis for the formation of other principles and their normal functioning. This is one of the cornerstones of international law and the international legal order. Modern world consists of states of different sizes, geographical location, the composition and size of the population, the nature and composition natural resources, level of development, political influence, economic strength, military power, etc. In these conditions, maintaining a certain balance and ensuring cooperation is possible to a large extent due to the existence of the legal principle of sovereign equality of states. The state monitors its compliance especially carefully.
A little history: This principle dates back to the Middle Ages, when monarchs sought to legally equalize their international status. For this purpose, the legal formula of ancient Roman jurists was borrowed: par in parem non habet imperium (an equal has no power over an equal). It was based on the principle of equality of monarchs - sovereigns.
The modern international community recognizes sovereignty as an integral property of every state and the most important basis for the existence of the international legal order.
This principle developed as an international legal custom and was subsequently enshrined in the UN Charter (Article 2), the Final Act of the CSCE on August 1, 1975, the Final Document of the Vienna Meeting of Representatives of the CSCE Participating States in 1989, the Charter of Paris for a New Europe of 1990, the Charter economic rights and obligations of states, in the charters of international organizations of the UN system, regional international organizations, in many bilateral and multilateral agreements, The final document of the World Summit dedicated to the 60th anniversary of the UN in 2005.
The entire international community is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all states. Only mutual respect by states for each other's sovereign equality ensures their cooperation and the maintenance of international legal order.
The Declaration of Principles of International Law points to the following elements of the principle of sovereign equality of States:
States are equal legally, those. have equal fundamental rights and obligations, the right to participate in international treaties and organizations;
Each state enjoys the rights inherent in full sovereignty, i.e. independently exercises legislative, executive and judicial power on its territory, builds international relations at its own discretion;
Every state is obliged to respect legal personality other states;
- territorial integrity and political independence b states are inviolable;
Every state has the right to freely choose and develop its political, social, economic and cultural systems;
Every State has a duty in good faith fulfill its international obligations and live in peace with other states.
In the CSCE Final Act, states committed themselves not only to uphold the principle of sovereign equality, but also to respect the rights inherent in sovereignty.
In their mutual relations, states must respect differences in historical and socio-political development, diversity of positions and views, internal laws and administrative rules, the right to determine and implement, at their own discretion and in accordance with international law, relations with other states. States have the right to belong to international organizations, to be or not to be parties to international treaties, including union treaties, as well as the right to neutrality.
The principle of sovereign equality of states, as it were, breaks down into two principles - the principle sovereignty and principle equality of states.
Sovereignty- This is the sovereignty of the state within the country and independence outside.
The sovereignty of states, according to the theory of the social contract (J. LOCKE, T. HOBBS, J.-J. RUSSO), is a secondary phenomenon. Sovereignty belongs to the people (primary sovereignty). The people, in the general interests of the social contract - the constitution - transfer to the state part of their rights inherent in sovereignty. Thus, the sovereignty of the state is secondary sovereignty.
It follows from this that the people themselves determine how to live, what kind of power to have, what kind of social system to build and in what direction to develop it. The state is the representative of the people, which is obliged to express their will. State sovereignty extends not only within the territory, but also to objects and actions of individuals/legal entities of the state outside its territory (to the extent and extent provided for by international law).
Sovereignty does not mean complete freedom of action, much less their isolation, since they live and coexist in an interconnected world. The freedom of action of states is limited by law - international law. International law is a tool for “docking” and ensuring “sovereignties.”
On the other hand, the increase in the number of issues that states voluntarily subordinate international regulation, does not mean their automatic removal from the sphere of internal competence.
The need to respect the rights inherent in sovereignty is especially often pointed out in connection with the achievements of scientific and technological progress, which should not be used to the detriment of other states. This concerns, for example, the danger of military or any other hostile use of means of influencing the natural environment, etc.
States are increasingly transferring part of their powers, which were previously considered integral attributes of their sovereignty, to international organizations. This happens for various reasons, including due to an increase in the number of global problems, expansion of areas of cooperation and, accordingly, an increase in the number of objects of international legal regulation. But by transferring part of their powers to organizations, states do not limit sovereignty, but, on the contrary, exercise one of their sovereign rights - the right to conclude treaties. By concluding an agreement, the state exercises sovereignty and limits freedom of action, but not its sovereign rights. Moreover, the treaty opens up new opportunities for the state that exceed the agreed restrictions. Otherwise, states would not enter into legal relations.
EXAMPLE: In the decision of the Permanent Court of International Justice ( predecessor of the International Court of Justice, operated within the framework of the League of Nations) in the Wimbledon case (1923) it was said: “The House refuses to see in the conclusion of any treaty ... a renunciation of sovereignty.”
In addition, states, as a rule, reserve the right to control the activities of international organizations.
Quite often the opinion is expressed that sovereignty is incompatible with international law. Meanwhile, thanks to sovereign power, states are able to create norms of international law, give them binding force and ensure their implementation within the country and in international relations.
International law ceases to protect the sovereign rights of states in which an anti-democratic regime tramples human rights. The state does not have the right to issue laws that violate human rights and people. Violation of a peremptory norm by a bilateral treaty is a matter for all states.
Part of the principle of sovereign equality of states is also the immunity of a state (its persons and things) from the jurisdiction of another state by virtue of the principle “equal has no power over equal.”
Equality means that every state is a subject of international law. States interact with each other as equals, despite their actual inequality. Yes, one state is large, the other is smaller; one state is economically powerful, the other is still developing; one state has many international treaties and international obligations arising from them, the other has fewer; But legally they are equal in rights, equal before international law, have an equal ability to create rights for themselves and accept responsibilities.
All states have the right to participate in solving international problems in which they have a legitimate interest. At the same time, states do not have the right to impose established international legal norms on other states.
At the same time, there is no reason to simplify the problem of ensuring equality. The entire history of international relations is permeated with the struggle for influence, for dominance. And today this trend is harming cooperation and law and order. Many scientists believe that the equality of states is a myth. No one, including me, will deny the actual inequality of states, but this is only emphasizes the importance of establishing their legal equality. People are also unequal in their capabilities, but this does not raise doubts about the meaning of their equality before the law.
PROBLEM: Are certain international legal regimes, say, for example, the position of permanent members of the UN Security Council, a violation of the principle of sovereign equality?
(A COMMENT: the number of members of the Security Council is 15. To make decisions on substantive issues nine votes are required, including the concurring votes of all five permanent members. This - the rule of "unanimity of the great powers", often called the "veto power" ( China, Russian Federation, United Kingdom, United States and France ) ),
status of nuclear powers under the Non-Proliferation Treaty nuclear weapons 1968
(A COMMENT : The Treaty establishes that a nuclear-weapon State is one that has produced and detonated such a weapon or device. before January 1, 1967(i.e. USSR, USA, UK, France, China). The treaty consists of a preamble and 11 articles. The most important are Art. I and II containing main obligations nuclear and non-nuclear states. Art. I obliges states possessing nuclear weapons not to transfer these weapons and control over them to non-nuclear states, and not to assist them in their production or acquisition; Art. II obliges the non-nuclear participants in Denmark not to accept transfers of nuclear weapons from anyone, not to produce them, and not to seek anyone’s help for these purposes. Art. Treaty III talks about guarantees for non-nuclear states to comply with their obligations not to produce their own nuclear weapons; verification of compliance with their obligations rests with the International Atomic Energy Agency. However, the agreement provides that the required guarantees must not interfere with economic development states or international cooperation in the field of the peaceful use of nuclear energy and obliges its participants to exchange equipment, materials, scientific and technical information for these purposes, and to facilitate the receipt of benefits by non-nuclear states from any peaceful use of nuclear explosions (§ 3, art. III, IV and V)),
(A COMMENT : The IMF operates on the principle of a “weighted” number of votes: the ability of member countries to influence the activities of the Fund through voting is determined by their share in its capital. Each state has 250 “basic” votes, regardless of the size of its contribution to the capital, and an additional one vote for every 100 thousand SDR of the amount of this contribution. This procedure ensures a decisive majority of votes for the leading states).
Reflecting the real state of affairs, international law in exceptional cases, allows inequality in rights, but at the same time associates special rights with additional responsibilities. All of the above examples concern specific rights, not sovereign rights. The sovereign status of all states is the same.
In my opinion, these exceptions only confirm the rule and there is no violation of the principle of sovereign equality of states. These are legitimate exceptions to it. Exceptions agreed between states and enshrined in international law, carrying additional responsibilities and special responsibility of states. A legitimate exception to this principle should be considered common system preferences, which provides special benefits and advantages to developing and least developed countries in international trade.
EXAMPLE:
The World Bank provides loans only to poor countries.
Such a system is seen as a way to move from formal equality of states to actual equality.
Much also depends on the legal activity of the state. Other things being equal, more active participation in international legal relations gives the state a wider range of rights and legal opportunities. The reality of a state's sovereign equality depends to a large extent on the consistency with which it defends it. Sovereign equality must be carried out taking into account the legitimate interests of other states and the international community as a whole. It does not give the right to block the will and interests of the majority.
Equality legal status states means that all norms of international law apply to them equally and have equal binding force. States have equal capacity to create rights and assume obligations. According to the International Court of Justice, equality also means equal freedom in all matters not regulated by international law.
All states have an equal right to participate in solving international problems in which they have a legitimate interest. The 1974 Charter of Economic Rights and Responsibilities of States states: “All states are legally equal and, as equal members of the international community, have the right to participate fully and effectively in international decision-making...”
At the same time, we should not close our eyes to reality. The actual influence of major powers on the rule-making process is palpable.
EXAMPLE: Thus, the regime of outer space was determined by them. The creation of arms limitation treaties depends on them. On this basis, some scholars express the opinion that equality is characteristic of the law enforcement stage than at the stage of creating norms of international law. However, international acts and international practice increasingly recognize the equal right of all states to participate in the rule-making process. In addition, acts created at the initiative of major powers must take into account the interests of the international community as a whole.
Legal tools ensuring the principle of sovereign equality in various areas are “principles-standards”: the principle of reciprocity, the principle of non-discrimination, the principle of granting most favored nation treatment, the principle of granting national treatment and others.
CONCLUSION: As long as sovereign states exist, this principle will remain the most important element of the system of principles of international law. Strict adherence to it ensures the free development of every state and people. Sovereign equality is only real within the framework of international law.
Loading...
