7/28/2019 Pila Readings Re Subjects of International Law

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pila-readings-re-subjects-of-international-law 1/5

Article 2, UN CHARTER

The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in

accordance with the following Principles.

The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.

All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from

membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with

the present Charter.

All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a mannerthat international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force

against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other

manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in

accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state

against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.

The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act

in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of 

international peace and security.

Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in

matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require

the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this

principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.

Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States

Published December 26, 1933

CONVENTION ON RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF STATES

The Governments represented in the Seventh International Conference of American States:

Wishing to conclude a Convention on Rights and Duties of States, have appointed the

following Plenipotentiaries:

ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qual

permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacit

relations with the other states.

ARTICLE 2

The federal state shall constitute a sole person in the eyes of international law

ARTICLE 3The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the othe

before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and inde

provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itse

to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the ju

competence of its courts.

The exercise of these rights has no other limitation than the exercise of the

states according to international law.

ARTICLE 4

States are juridically equal, enjoy the same rights, and have equal capacity in

The rights of each one do not depend upon the power which it possesses

exercise, but upon the simple fact of its existence as a person under internatio

ARTICLE 5

The fundamental rights of states are not susceptible of being affected i

whatsoever.

ARTICLE 6

The recognition of a state merely signifies that the state which recognizes

personality of the other with all the rights and duties determined by inte

Recognition is unconditional and irrevocable.

ARTICLE 7

The recognition of a state may be express or tacit. The latter results from

implies the intention of recognizing the new state.

7/28/2019 Pila Readings Re Subjects of International Law

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pila-readings-re-subjects-of-international-law 2/5

ARTICLE 8

No state has the right to intervene in the internal or external affairs of another.

ARTICLE 9

The jurisdiction of states within the limits of national territory applies to all the inhabitants.

Nationals and foreigners are under the same protection of the law and the national

authorities and the foreigners may not claim rights other or more extensive than those of 

the nationals.

ARTICLE 10

The primary interest of states is the conservation of peace. Differences of any nature which

arise between them should be settled by recognized pacific methods.

ARTICLE 11

The contracting states definitely establish as the rule of their conduct the precise obligation

not to recognize territorial acquisitions or special advantages which have been obtained by

force whether this consists in the employment of arms, in threatening diplomatic

representations, or in any other effective coercive measure. The territory of a state is

inviolable and may not be the object of military occupation nor of other measures of force

imposed by another state directly or indirectly or for any motive whatever even temporarily.

ARTICLE 12

The present Convention shall not affect obligations previously entered into by the High

Contracting Parties by virtue of international agreements.

ARTICLE 13

The present Convention shall be ratified by the High Contracting Parties in conformity with

their respective constitutional procedures. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of 

Uruguay shall transmit authentic certified copies to the governments for the

aforementioned purpose of ratification. The instrument of ratification shall be deposited in

the archives of the Pan American Union in Washington, which shall notify the signatory

governments of said deposit. Such notification shall be considered as an exchange of 

ratifications.

ARTICLE 14

The present Convention will enter into force between the High Contracting

order in which they deposit their respective ratifications.

ARTICLE 15

The present Convention shall remain in force indefinitely but may be denoun

of one year's notice given to the Pan American Union, which shall transmit i

signatory governments. After the expiration of this period the Convention sheffects as regards the party which denounces but shall remain in effect for

High Contracting Parties.

ARTICLE 16

The present Convention shall be open for the adherence and accession of th

are not signatories. The corresponding instruments shall be deposited in the

Pan American Union which shall communicate them to the other High Contrac

In witness whereof, the following Plenipotentiaries have signed this Convent

English, Portuguese and French and hereunto affix their respective seals

Montevideo, Republic of Uruguay, this 26th day of December, 1933.

RESERVATIONS

The Delegation of the United States of America, in signing the Convention on

Duties of States, does so with the express reservation presented to the Plen

the Conference on December 22, 1933, which reservation reads as follows:

The Delegation of the United States, in voting "yes" on the final vote on t

recommendation and proposal, makes the same reservation to the eleven

project or proposal that the United States Delegation made to the first ten

the final vote in the full Commission, which reservation is in words as follows:

"The policy and attitude of the United States Government toward every impo

international relationships in this hemisphere could scarcely be made m

definite than they have been made by both word and action especially sin

[Secretary of State Cordell Hull, chairman of U.S. delegation] have no dispos

to indulge in any repetition or rehearsal of these acts and utterances and s

Every observing person must by this time thoroughly understand that under

Administration the United States Government is as much opposed as any othe

7/28/2019 Pila Readings Re Subjects of International Law

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pila-readings-re-subjects-of-international-law 3/5

to interference with the freedom, the sovereignty, or other internal affairs or processes of 

the governments of other nations.

"In addition to numerous acts and utterances in connection with the carrying out of 

these doctrines and policies, President Roosevelt, during recent weeks, gave out a public

statement expressing his disposition to open negotiations with the Cuban Government for

the purpose of dealing with the treaty which has existed since 1903. I feel safe in

undertaking to say that under our support of the general principle of non-intervention as

has been suggested, no government need fear any intervention on the part of the UnitedStates under the Roosevelt Administration. I think it unfortunate that during the brief period

of this Conference there is apparently not time within which to prepare interpretations and

definitions of these fundamental terms that are embraced in the report. Such definitions

and interpretations would enable every government to proceed in a uniform way without

any difference of opinion or of interpretations. I hope that at the earliest possible date such

very important work will be done. In the meantime in case of differences of interpretations

and also until they (the proposed doctrines and principles) can be worked out and codified

for the common use of every government, I desire to say that the United States Government

in all of its international associations and relationships and conduct will follow scrupulously

the doctrines and policies which it has pursued since March 4 which are embodied in the

different addresses of President Roosevelt since that time and in the recent peace address

of myself on the 15th day of December before this Conference and in the law of nations as

generally recognized and accepted".

The delegates of Brazil and Peru recorded the following private vote with regard to

article 11: "That they accept the doctrine in principle but that they do not consider it

codifiable because there are some countries which have not yet signed the Anti-War Pact of 

Rio de Janeiro 4 of which this doctrine is a part and therefore it does not yet constitute

positive international law suitable for codification".

Draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States

Text adopted by the International Law Commission at its first session, in 1949, and

submitted to the General Assembly as a part of the Commission’s report covering the

work of that session. The report, which also contains commentaries and observations on

the draft declaration, appears in Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1949.

Text reproduced as it appears in the annex to General Assembly resolution 375 (IV) of 6

December 1949. 2

Draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States

Whereas the States of the world form a community governed by inte

Whereas the progressive development of international law requires effectiv

of the community of States,

Whereas a great majority of the States of the world have accordingly esta

international order under the Charter of the United Nations, and most of the

the world have declared their desire to live within this order,Whereas a primary purpose of the United Nations is to maintain inter

and security, and the reign of law and justice is essential to the realization o

and

Whereas it is therefore desirable to formulate certain basic rights

States in the light of new developments of international law and in harmony w

Charter of the United Nations,

The General Assembly of the United Nations adopts and proclaims this

Rights and Duties of States:

Article 1

Every State has the right to independence and hence to exercise freely, witho

any other State, all its legal powers, including the choice of its own form of gov

Article 2

Every State has the right to exercise jurisdiction over its territory and over all

things therein, subject to the immunities recognized by international law.

Article 3

Every State has the duty to refrain from intervention in the internal or exte

any other State.

Article 4

Every State has the duty to refrain from fomenting civil strife in the territ

State,

7/28/2019 Pila Readings Re Subjects of International Law

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pila-readings-re-subjects-of-international-law 4/5

and to prevent the organization within its territory of activities calculated to foment such

civil strife.

Article 5

Every State has the right to equality in law with every other State.

Article 6

Every State has the duty to treat all persons under its jurisdiction with respect for humanrights and fundamental freedoms, without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion. 3

Article 7

Every State has the duty to ensure that conditions prevailing in its territory do not menace

international peace and order.

Article 8

Every State has the duty to settle its disputes with other States by peaceful means in such a

manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

Article 9

Every State has the duty to refrain from resorting to war as an instrument of national policy,

and to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political

independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with international law

and order.

Article 10

Every State has the duty to refrain from giving assistance to any State which is acting in

violation of article 9, or against which the United Nations is taking preventive or

enforcement action.

Article 11

Every State has the duty to refrain from recognizing any territorial acquisition by another

State acting in violation of article 9.

Article 12

Every State has the right of individual or collective self-defence against armed

Article 13

Every State has the duty to carry out in good faith its obligations arising from

other sources of international law, and it may not invoke provisions in its con

laws as an excuse for failure to perform this duty.

Article 14

Every State has the duty to conduct its relations with other States in accordan

international law and with the principle that the sovereignty of each State is

supremacy of international law.

Recognition[edit] 

State recognition signifies the decision of a sovereign state to treat an

also being a sovereign state.[17]

 Recognition can be either express or implied

retroactive in its effects. It doesn't necessarily signify a desire to establis

diplomatic relations.

There is no definition that is binding on all the members of the

nations on the criteria for statehood. In actual practice, the criteria are main

legal.[18]

 L.C. Green cited the recognition of the unborn Polish and Czech state

I and explained that "since recognition of statehood is a matter of discretion

any existing State to accept as a state any entity it wishes, regardless of th

territory or of an established government."[19]

 

In international law, however, there are several theories of when a s

recognized as sovereign.[20]

 

Constitutive theory[edit] 

The constitutive theory of statehood defines a state as a person of int

if, and only if, it is recognized as sovereign by other states. This theory of re

developed in the 19th century. Under it, a state was sovereign if another s

recognized it as such. Because of this, new states could not immediately beco

international community or be bound by international law, and recognized n

have to respect international law in their dealings with them.[21]

 In 1815 at t

7/28/2019 Pila Readings Re Subjects of International Law

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pila-readings-re-subjects-of-international-law 5/5

Vienna the Final Act recognised only 39 sovereign states in the European diplomatic system,

and as a result it was firmly established that in future new states would have to be

recognized by other states, and that meant in practice recognition by one or more of 

the great powers.[22]

 

One of the major criticisms of this law is the confusion caused when some states

recognize a new entity, but other states do not. Hersch Lauterpacht, one of the theory's

main proponents, suggested that it is a state's duty to grant recognition as a possible

solution. However, a state may use any criteria when judging if they should give recognition

and they have no obligation to use such criteria. Many states may only recognize another

state if it is to their advantage.[21]

 

In 1912, L. F. L. Oppenheim had the following to say on constitutive theory:

...International Law does not say that a State is not in existence as long as it is not

recognised, but it takes no notice of it before its recognition. Through recognition only and

exclusively a State becomes an International Person and a subject of International Law.[23]

 

Declarative theory[edit] 

By contrast, the "declarative" theory defines a state as a person in international

law if it meets the following criteria: 1) a defined territory; 2) a permanent population; 3) a

government and 4) a capacity to enter into relations with other states. According to

declarative theory, an entity's statehood is independent of its recognition by other states.

The declarative model was most famously expressed in the 1933 Montevideo Convention. 

Article 3 of the Montevideo Convention declares that statehood is independent of 

recognition by other states. In contrast, recognition is considered a requirement for

statehood by the constitutive theory of statehood.

A similar opinion about "the conditions on which an entity constitutes a state" is

expressed by the European Economic Community Opinions of the Badinter Arbitration

Committee, which found that a state was defined by having a territory, a population, and a

political authority.

The Estrada Doctrine is the name of Mexico's core foreign policy ideal from 1930 to the early

2000s. Its name derives from Genaro Estrada, Secretary of Foreign Affairs during the presidency

of Pascual Ortiz Rubio (1930 –1932).[1] 

The doctrine was the most influential and representative instrument in the

country's foreign policy for seventy years, it claims that foreign governments should not

 judge, positively or negatively, the governments or changes in government of

in that such action would imply a breach to their sovereignty.[1] This policy w

based on the principles of non-intervention ,peaceful resolution of disputes and self

all nations.[2] 

Content[edit] 

The Estrada Doctrine suggests that under the establishment of  de fact

in other countries, Mexico is not in favor of giving recognition because it is

degrading practice. By hurting the sovereignty of other nations, it puts them position because their internal affairs can be judged by other government

assume a critical attitude when deciding about the legality and legitima

governments.[2] Hence Mexico was itself hurt because of the practice, as it

obtain recognition of its independence . The most extended use of the Estrada D

the 1970s, when Mexico did not withdraw its recognition of any South Americ

which was formed through a coup d'état , the only measure Mexico could us

governments was withdrawing its diplomatic mission.[1] 

In other words, the Estrada Doctrine claims that Mexico should not ju

or negatively, the governments or changes in government of other nations

action would imply a breach to their sovereignty.[1] In addition, this doctrine i

universally recognized principles of self-determination and non-intervention,

considered essential for mutual respect and cooperation amongst nations.[2]