BOOK
Cite BOOK
Style
Smyrek, D. (2006). Internationally Administered Territories – International Protectorates?. An Analysis of Sovereignty over Internationally Administered Territories with Special Reference to the Legal Status of Post-War Kosovo. Duncker & Humblot. https://doi.org/10.3790/978-3-428-51948-4
Smyrek, Daniel Sven. Internationally Administered Territories – International Protectorates?: An Analysis of Sovereignty over Internationally Administered Territories with Special Reference to the Legal Status of Post-War Kosovo. Duncker & Humblot, 2006. Book. https://doi.org/10.3790/978-3-428-51948-4
Smyrek, D (2006): Internationally Administered Territories – International Protectorates?: An Analysis of Sovereignty over Internationally Administered Territories with Special Reference to the Legal Status of Post-War Kosovo, Duncker & Humblot, [online] https://doi.org/10.3790/978-3-428-51948-4
Format
Internationally Administered Territories – International Protectorates?
An Analysis of Sovereignty over Internationally Administered Territories with Special Reference to the Legal Status of Post-War Kosovo
Tübinger Schriften zum internationalen und europäischen Recht, Vol. 80
(2006)
Additional Information
Book Details
Pricing
Abstract
The author begins his survey by offering the reader an overview of the concepts of "physical control over a territory"" and "territorial sovereignty"". He then moves on to examine different scenarios in which territories have been administered by an organ representing the international community and explains how the issue of sovereignty was dealt with in each of these cases. In this context, the author offers a fascinating review of the recent case of Kosovo under UN administration describing the intricacies associated therewith. After thoroughly examining both the legal and factual situations, he evaluates the impact of the conclusions developed in the preceding chapters on the present and future status of this province. The author finally explores the relationship between the principle of democracy and the phenomenon of international territorial administrations, which he considers to be an example of "international governance".
Table of Contents
| Section Title | Page | Action | Price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Acknowledgments | 7 | ||
| Contents | 9 | ||
| List of Abbreviations | 18 | ||
| A. Introduction | 23 | ||
| I. Presentation of Case Study | 23 | ||
| II. Methodology | 24 | ||
| B. The Notion of “Sovereignty” | 28 | ||
| I. The Persisting Importance of the Concept of State Sovereignty | 28 | ||
| II. Material Interpretation of Sovereignty | 31 | ||
| III. Formal Interpretation | 33 | ||
| IV. Distinction Between Different Levels of Sovereignty | 36 | ||
| V. Territorial Sovereignty as a Feature of Sovereignty | 38 | ||
| 1. The Term “Territorial Sovereignty” as Departing from the Formal Concept of Sovereignty | 39 | ||
| 2. The Term “Territorial Sovereignty” as Departing from the Material Concept of Sovereignty | 40 | ||
| 3. Analysis of Commentator’s Opinions on the Relationship Between “Physical Control of a Territory” and “Territorial Sovereignty” | 41 | ||
| a) The Opinion which Totally Rejects the Difference Between Territorial Sovereignty and Physical Control | 42 | ||
| b) Theories Involving a “Material Corrective” in a Formal Concept of Territorial Sovereignty | 44 | ||
| c) The Strictly Formal Concept of Territorial Sovereignty as Opposed to Physical Control | 47 | ||
| d) The Substantiation of a Purely Formal Concept of Territorial Sovereignty | 50 | ||
| e) The Continuing Terminological Confusion | 52 | ||
| f) Summary | 54 | ||
| VI. Conclusion | 56 | ||
| C. Historical Examples | 57 | ||
| I. The Free City of Danzig (1920–1939) | 58 | ||
| 1. The Legal Framework Contained in the Peace Treaty of Versailles | 59 | ||
| 2. The Free City’s Dependence on the League of Nations and its High Commissioner | 60 | ||
| 3. Polish Rights and Prerogatives with Respect to the Free City | 61 | ||
| 4. Classification of the Status of the Free City by Authors | 63 | ||
| 5. Evaluation of the Free City’s Status | 64 | ||
| 6. Conclusion | 67 | ||
| II. The Saar Territory (1920–1935) | 67 | ||
| 1. The Legal Framework Set by the Treaty of Versailles | 68 | ||
| a) General Provisions | 68 | ||
| b) The Role of the Governing Commission as Set Forth in the Relevant Treaty Provisions | 69 | ||
| c) The Actual Extent of the Governing Commission’s Power | 70 | ||
| d) The Military and Police Functions of the Mission | 71 | ||
| e) Means of Participation by the Saar Population | 71 | ||
| 2. The Legal Status of the Saar Territory | 72 | ||
| a) Was the Saar Territory a State under International Law? | 72 | ||
| b) The Range of Opinions among Scholars Regarding the Issue of Sovereignty over the Saar Territory | 73 | ||
| c) Analysis | 74 | ||
| 3. Conclusion | 75 | ||
| III. Leticia (1933–1934) | 76 | ||
| 1. The Coup de Force of 1 September 1932 | 76 | ||
| 2. The Peace Keeping Efforts of the LON | 77 | ||
| 3. The LON Administration in Leticia | 78 | ||
| 4. The Final Settlement of the Crisis | 78 | ||
| 5. Evaluation of Leticia’s Legal Status and Concluding Remarks | 79 | ||
| IV. The Free Territory of Trieste | 79 | ||
| 1. The Route to the Statute of an Internationalised Trieste | 80 | ||
| 2. The Provisions of the Paris Peace Treaty with Italy (the “Peace Treaty”) Concerning Trieste | 81 | ||
| a) The Instrument for the Provisional Regime of the Free Territory of Trieste | 81 | ||
| b) The Permanent Statute of the Free Territory of Trieste | 82 | ||
| aa) The Council of Government | 83 | ||
| bb) The Popular Assembly | 83 | ||
| cc) The Position of the Governor | 83 | ||
| (1) The Governor’s Rights to Interfere in the Legislative Process | 83 | ||
| (2) The Governor’s Rights to Interfere in the Executive Process | 84 | ||
| (3) The Governor’s Control of Foreign Affairs | 84 | ||
| (4) Additional Prerogatives of the Governor | 84 | ||
| dd) The Judiciary | 85 | ||
| ee) The Interpretation of the Statute | 85 | ||
| c) The Free Port of Trieste | 85 | ||
| 3. Failure to Implement the Free Territory of Trieste | 86 | ||
| 4. The Status of the Free Territory of Trieste | 86 | ||
| a) Commentators Views on the Legal Status of the Free Territory of Trieste | 86 | ||
| b) Evaluation of the Free Territory’s Legal Status | 87 | ||
| 5. The Legal Capacity of the UN to Administer a Territory | 89 | ||
| V. Jerusalem | 92 | ||
| 1. Nature and History of UN General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) | 92 | ||
| a) The Events Preceding the Adoption of UNGAR 181 (II) | 92 | ||
| b) The Provisions of UNGAR 181 (II) | 93 | ||
| aa) The Partition Plan | 93 | ||
| bb) The Outlines for an International Status for Jerusalem | 94 | ||
| 2. The Non-Implementation of UNGAR 181 (II) | 96 | ||
| a) The First Draft Statute Submitted by the Trusteeship Council and its Failed Implementation | 96 | ||
| b) The Second Resolution of the General Assembly Demanding the Internationalisation of Jerusalem: UNGAR 194 (III) | 96 | ||
| c) The Third Resolution of the General Assembly Demanding the Internationalisation of Jerusalem: UNGAR 303 (IV) | 97 | ||
| d) The Second Draft Statute of the Trusteeship Council | 98 | ||
| e) The Proposal for a Functional Internationalisation | 98 | ||
| 3. Public Opinion and Scholars Views on the Legal Status of Jerusalem Pursuant to UNGAR 181 (II) and the Legal Capacity of the UN to Assume the Powers Allotted to it | 99 | ||
| 4. Conclusion | 100 | ||
| VI.West Irian | 101 | ||
| 1. History of the Conflict | 101 | ||
| a) The Controversy about the Sovereignty over West Irian Following Indonesian Independence | 102 | ||
| b) An Exit from the Crisis | 103 | ||
| 2. The Provisions of the Agreement Concerning West New Guinea and Subsequent Documents | 104 | ||
| a) The UN Administrator | 104 | ||
| b) The First Phase of the UNTEA Administration | 104 | ||
| c) The Second Phase: Indonesian Administration and Self-Determination | 105 | ||
| d) Financing the Mission | 106 | ||
| e) The Issuance of Passports and Consular Protection | 106 | ||
| 3. The Course of Events Following the Signature of the Dutch-Indonesian-Agreement of 15 August 1962 | 106 | ||
| 4. Analysis | 108 | ||
| VII. Namibia (SouthWest Africa) | 110 | ||
| 1. History | 110 | ||
| a) South West Africa before the World War II | 110 | ||
| b) The Dispute Between South Africa and the UN | 111 | ||
| aa) The Decisions of the General Assembly, the Security Council and the ICJ | 111 | ||
| bb) The UN Council for South West Africa – a Supposed Executive Organ | 112 | ||
| cc) The Way to Independence | 113 | ||
| 2. The Different Evaluations of the Legal Effects of the UN Action | 115 | ||
| a) The Arguments Raised Against the Legality of the Revocation of the Mandate | 115 | ||
| b) The Reasoning of the ICJ | 116 | ||
| 3. Conclusion | 117 | ||
| VIII. East Timor | 118 | ||
| 1. History of East Timor until the Popular Consultation | 119 | ||
| 2. The Popular Consultation and the Events thereafter | 122 | ||
| a) The Grave Situation in the Aftermath of the Consultation | 122 | ||
| b) The Creation of INTERFRET | 123 | ||
| 3. The Period of the UN Transitional Administration | 124 | ||
| a) Events after the End of the Indonesian Occupation | 124 | ||
| b) The Legal Framework of the International Involvement | 125 | ||
| aa) The Legal Basis | 125 | ||
| bb) The Competence of the Security Council | 125 | ||
| cc) The Key Provisions of UNSCR 1272 | 126 | ||
| dd) Important UNTAET-Regulations Concerning the Structure of the “State” | 127 | ||
| ee) The Applicable Law in East Timor | 128 | ||
| ff) The Courts System | 130 | ||
| gg) The Establishment of Village and Sub-District Development Councils | 132 | ||
| 4. The Status of East Timor until its Accession to Independence on 19 May 2002 | 133 | ||
| a) The Status of East Timor Before the Indonesian Invasion | 134 | ||
| b) The Status of East Timor During the Indonesian Occupation | 134 | ||
| c) East Timor’s Status During the Transitional UN Administration | 135 | ||
| 5. Conclusion | 137 | ||
| IX. Bosnia and Herzegovina | 139 | ||
| 1. History | 139 | ||
| a) History prior to 1990 | 139 | ||
| b) History after 1990 | 140 | ||
| aa) The Civil War | 140 | ||
| bb) The Dayton Peace Agreement | 141 | ||
| 2. Organisation of the State | 142 | ||
| a) The Legal Character of the Constitution | 142 | ||
| b) The Democratic Legitimacy of the Constitution | 142 | ||
| c) The Key Provisions | 143 | ||
| aa) The Territorial Structure of Bosnia and Herzegovina | 143 | ||
| bb) Provisions Concerning the Unity of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Protection of Human Rights | 144 | ||
| cc) The Institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina | 145 | ||
| (1) The Parliamentary Assembly | 145 | ||
| (2) The Presidency | 145 | ||
| (3) The Council of Ministers | 146 | ||
| (4) The Constitutional Court | 147 | ||
| (5) The Central Bank | 147 | ||
| (6) The Human Rights Commission | 147 | ||
| d) The Principle of Ethnic Proportion | 147 | ||
| 3. Powers of the International Community | 149 | ||
| a) Powers of the Civilian Component | 149 | ||
| aa) The High Representative for the Implementation of the Peace Agreement | 150 | ||
| (1) The Mandate of the High Representative | 150 | ||
| (2) The Fulfilment of the Mandate | 151 | ||
| (3) The Issue of who Created the Role of High Representative | 152 | ||
| (4) The Legal Basis for the High Representative’s Mandate | 153 | ||
| bb) The Peace Implementation Council | 153 | ||
| cc) The International Police Task Force (IPTF) | 154 | ||
| (1) The Legal Basis for the IPTFActivity | 154 | ||
| (2) The Mandate of the IPTF | 155 | ||
| (3) The Replacement of IPTF by the European Union Police Mission (EUPM) | 156 | ||
| dd) The Representation of the International Community in Bosnian Institutions | 156 | ||
| ee) The Brcko-Case – an Example of the Extensive International Influence | 157 | ||
| b) Powers of the Military Component | 158 | ||
| aa) The Legal Basis for the IFOR Activity | 158 | ||
| bb) The Competencies of IFOR | 160 | ||
| 4. Analysis of the International Status | 162 | ||
| a) The Status of the Entities | 162 | ||
| b) Is Bosnia and Herzegovina a Federation or a Confederation? | 163 | ||
| c) The International Status of Bosnia and Herzegovina – Protectorate or Sovereign State? | 166 | ||
| 5. Conclusion | 168 | ||
| X. Results | 170 | ||
| D. Kosovo | 172 | ||
| I. Introduction | 172 | ||
| 1. From the Illyrian Settlements to the League of Prizren | 172 | ||
| 2. From the First Balkan War to the NATOAir Campaign | 173 | ||
| 3. Methodology | 176 | ||
| II. The Legal Framework | 177 | ||
| 1. The Political Background to the Relevant Documents | 178 | ||
| a) UNSCR 1244 Including Annexes 1 and 2 | 178 | ||
| b) The Military Technical Agreement | 179 | ||
| c) The Rambouillet Accords | 179 | ||
| 2. The Key Provisions of UNSCR 1244 and of the Documents Referred to therein | 180 | ||
| a) The Key Provisions Concerning the International Military Presence | 180 | ||
| b) The Provisions Concerning the Return of Certain Armed Yugoslav and Serb Personnel | 180 | ||
| c) The Key Provisions Concerning the International Civil Presence | 181 | ||
| d) Important General Provisions | 181 | ||
| aa) Jurisdiction of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia | 181 | ||
| bb) Duration of the Mandate | 181 | ||
| cc) Provisions Regarding the Future Status of Kosovo | 182 | ||
| e) The Legal Framework for the Interim Administration and the Provisional Institutions of Kosovo Outlined in the Rambouillet Accords | 182 | ||
| f) The Key Provisions of the Military Technical Agreement | 183 | ||
| III. The Factual Scenario | 183 | ||
| 1. The Military Component | 183 | ||
| a) The Structure of KFOR | 183 | ||
| aa) The Horizontal (Operational) Structure | 184 | ||
| bb) The Vertical (Command) Structure | 184 | ||
| (1) The Long Way to an Agreement | 184 | ||
| (2) The Contents of the Helsinki-Agreement | 185 | ||
| cc) The Compatibility of the Command Structure with the Basic Legal Documents | 185 | ||
| b) KFOR-Activities in Kosovo Eligible for Exceeding the Mandate | 187 | ||
| 2. The Civil Component | 188 | ||
| a) The Competencies of the Special Representative and his Deputies | 188 | ||
| b) The Delegation to Other International Organisations – the “Four Pillars” of UNMIK | 189 | ||
| aa) The First Pillar: Humanitarian Aid / Police and Justice | 189 | ||
| bb) The Second Pillar: Civil Administration | 189 | ||
| cc) The Third Pillar: Democracy and Institution Building | 189 | ||
| dd) The Fourth Pillar: Economic Reconstruction | 190 | ||
| c) The Gradual Transfer of Powers to Local Authorities | 190 | ||
| aa) The Establishment of the Joint Interim Administrative Structures | 191 | ||
| bb) The Constitutional Framework | 192 | ||
| (1) Transferred Powers | 192 | ||
| (2) Reserved Powers | 192 | ||
| (3) Institutions | 193 | ||
| (a) The Assembly | 193 | ||
| (b) The President | 194 | ||
| (c) The Government | 194 | ||
| (d) The Judicial System | 195 | ||
| (e) The Ombudsperson and Other Independent Bodies and Offices | 195 | ||
| (f) Appraisal | 197 | ||
| (4) The Transfer Council | 197 | ||
| cc) Elections | 197 | ||
| d) Singular Measures Taken by UNMIK Eligible for Exceeding the Mandate | 198 | ||
| aa) The Introduction of a New Monetary System | 198 | ||
| bb) UNMIK Activities in the Banking and Finance Sector and Economic Affairs | 201 | ||
| cc) UNMIK’s Activities in the Justice Sector | 202 | ||
| IV. The Future Status of Kosovo | 204 | ||
| 1. Which Options are Left Open by UNSCR 1244? | 205 | ||
| a) The Right of Disposition as a Core Attribute of Sovereignty | 205 | ||
| b) Has Yugoslavia’s Right to Dispose of Kosovo been Delegated? | 205 | ||
| 2. Is there a Kosovar Right to Self-Determination? | 207 | ||
| a) The Existence of a General Right to Secession for all Peoples | 207 | ||
| b) Can the Notion of Non-Self-Governing Territories be Extended? | 209 | ||
| c) Is there a Right to Secession in Special Cases Beyond the Context of De-colonisation? | 209 | ||
| d) Specific Arguments Against the Existence of an Exceptional Right to Secession | 211 | ||
| e) Is there a Right to Secession in Case Yugoslavia Falls Apart? | 212 | ||
| 3. Prospects for a Solution to the Final Status Issue | 213 | ||
| V. Summary | 215 | ||
| E. The Principle of Democracy and the International Administration of Territories | 217 | ||
| I. The Conflict Between the International Administration of Territories and Democracy | 217 | ||
| II. The UN’s Commitment to Democracy | 219 | ||
| III. Limits on Democracy | 220 | ||
| 1. Limits on Democracy Derived from the Concept of Trusteeship | 220 | ||
| 2. Limits on Democracy by Virtue of Chapter VII of the UN-Charter | 221 | ||
| 3. Further Factors Determining the Degree of International Tutelage | 222 | ||
| IV. Limits on the Suspension of Democratic Rights | 223 | ||
| 1. “Good Governance” as Guiding Principle | 223 | ||
| 2. Human Rights Standards | 225 | ||
| V. Conclusion | 229 | ||
| F. Conclusion | 231 | ||
| I. Different Forms of International Territorial Administrations | 231 | ||
| 1. States under Permanent International Protection | 231 | ||
| 2. States under Temporary International Protection | 231 | ||
| 3. Internationalised Territories | 232 | ||
| 4. Trusteeships under Direct International Rule | 232 | ||
| II. The Two Conflicting Trends | 232 | ||
| 1. The Bolstering of International Governance | 232 | ||
| 2. Strengthening the Principle of Democracy | 233 | ||
| III. The Interaction Between the Trends | 233 | ||
| IV. Outlook | 235 | ||
| Bibliography | 238 | ||
| Index | 256 |