What is the principle of the sovereign equality of states. International law. The principle of respect for human rights

The essence of this principle is the rule that the maintenance of international law and order is possible and can be ensured only 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, i.e. their right to exercise legislative, executive, administrative and judicial power within their own territory without any interference from other states, as well as to independently conduct their foreign policy. The sovereign equality of states is the basis of modern international relations, which is enshrined in paragraph 1 of Art. 2 of the UN Charter, which states: "The organization is based on the principle of sovereign equality of all its members."

This principle is also enshrined as fundamental in the charters of international organizations of the UN system, in the constituent documents (charters) of the overwhelming majority of regional international organizations, in multilateral and bilateral agreements of states and international organizations, in legal acts of international organizations.

In modern international law, this principle is most fully reflected in the Declaration on the principles of international law concerning friendly relations and cooperation between states in accordance with the UN Charter. Later, this principle was developed in the Declaration of Principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Concluding Document of the Vienna Meeting of Representatives of the States Parties to the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe in 1989, the 1990 Charter of Paris for a New Europe and a number of other documents.

The main social purpose of the principle of sovereign equality is to ensure equal participation in international relations of all states, regardless of differences of economic, social, political or other nature. Since states are equal participants in international communication, they all have fundamentally the same rights and obligations.

In accordance with the Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation between States in accordance with the 1970 UN Charter, the concept of sovereign equality includes the following elements:

1) the states are legally equal;

2) each state enjoys the rights inherent in full sovereignty;

3) each state is obliged to respect the legal personality of other states;

4) the territorial integrity and political independence of the state are inviolable;

5) each state has the right to freely choose and develop its political, social, economic and cultural systems;

6) each state is obliged to fulfill fully and in good faith 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. Thus, in relations among themselves, states must respect differences in historical and socio-political development, a variety of positions and views, internal laws and administrative rules, the right to determine and exercise, at their own discretion and in accordance with international law, relations with other states, the right to belong to international organizations, whether or not to be parties to bilateral and multilateral treaties, including union treaties, as well as the right to neutrality.

At the same time, it should be noted that the legal equality of states does not mean their actual equality, which is taken into account in real international relations. One example of this difference is in the status of permanent and non-permanent members of the UN Security Council.

Sovereignty is an inalienable property of the state. Thus, no state, group of states or international organization can impose the norms 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, the following tendency is observed: states are transferring part of their powers, which were previously considered integral attributes of state sovereignty, in favor of the international organizations they create. For example, in a number of international organizations, the founding states have moved away from the previously used principle of formal equality in voting (one country - one vote) and adopted the so-called weighted voting method, according to which the number of votes a country has depends on the amount of its contribution. to the budget of the organization and other circumstances.

The aforementioned 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law emphasizes that in the interpretation and application of the principles set out in it, they are interrelated and each principle must be considered in the context of all others. Thus, there is a close connection between the principle of the sovereign equality of states and their obligation not to interfere in matters that are essentially within their internal competence. The concept of the internal competence of the state in theory causes controversy, since it depends on the level of development of international relations. At present, it is customary to correlate internal competence with the international obligations of each specific state.

Sovereignty as a basic property inherent in a state does not mean complete independence of states or even less their isolation, since they live and coexist in an interconnected world, therefore, it is illogical to talk about absolute, unlimited sovereignty.

8. The principle of non-use of force or threat of force. Definitions: aggression, aggressive intention, armed intervention, peaceful blockade?

For the first time, the principle of non-use of force or threat of force was proclaimed in the UN Charter. Clause 4 of Art. 2 of the Charter reads: "All members of the United Nations refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force either against the territorial inviolability or political independence of any state or in any other way incompatible with the goals of the United Nations."

prohibited:

Prohibition of the occupation of the territory of another state in violation of international law;

Prohibition of reprisals with the use of armed force (for example, "peaceful blockade" - blocking the ports of another state by armed forces in peacetime);

Granting by a state of its territory to another state, which uses this territory for aggression against a third state;

Organization or encouragement of the organization of irregular forces (that is, without a permanent organization, a solid system of manning and service) or armed bands, including mercenaries;

Organization, incitement, assistance, or participation in acts of civil war, terrorist acts in another state or condoning of similar activities within its own territory, aimed at the commission of such acts, in the event that the said acts are associated with the threat or use of force;

Violent acts that deprive peoples of the right to self-determination;

Use of force or threat of force as a means of resolving international disputes over territory and borders, as well as for the purpose of violating borders;

Any other action that constitutes a threat to force or the use of force against another state.

Aggression is a crime against the peace and security of mankind, entailing international responsibility.

Only the UN Security Council can qualify an act as aggression. For this - the criteria of wrongfulness - the principle of primacy (the first use of armed force), the seriousness of intention.

AGGRESSIVE INTENTION - in international law, one of the criteria taken into account by the UN Security Council when determining the existence of an act of aggression in a specific situation. By stating an act of aggression, the Security Council ascertains the presence in the initially initiated actions of the state of intentions of an aggressive nature, such as, for example, the desire to annex the territory with the use of force, military occupation of the territory of another state, etc.

Intervention

(Late Lat. interventio - interference, from Lat. intervenio - I come, I interfere) in international law, the interference of one state in the internal affairs of another state or in its relationship with third states. Modern international law prohibits I. and regards it as an international Delict. In accordance with the principle of non-interference, no state (or group of states) has the right to interfere, directly or indirectly, for whatever reason, in the affairs of another state, therefore, armed intervention and all other forms of interference or threats of interference directed against political independence or territorial inviolability of any state are a violation of international law.

"Peaceful blockade" - blocking the ports of another state by armed forces in peacetime

The UN Charter regulates two cases of the lawful use of armed force:

1.Art. 51 of the Charter - self-defense in the event of an armed attack on the state. The use of armed force is excluded in cases where measures of an economic or political nature are applied to the state - the principle of proportionality must be observed.

2.Article. 39 and 42 of the Charter - by decision of the UN Security Council in the event of a threat to peace, violation of the peace or an act of aggression.

9. The principle of peaceful settlement of international disputes. List the ways to peacefully resolve international disputes?

It was first recorded in the Paris Pact on the Renunciation of War of 1928 (the Briand-Kellogg Pact) in Art. 2, where the parties have recognized that the settlement or resolution of all disagreements or conflicts, regardless of the nature of their origin, should be carried out only by peaceful means.

The principle of the peaceful settlement of international disputes is closely related to the principle of the non-use of force.

The principle of peaceful settlement of 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, affects the vital interests of the state or secondary ones, threatens international peace and security or does not threaten, is subject only to peaceful resolution.

At the same time, the UN Charter leaves for states the freedom to choose peaceful means in resolving a specific dispute.

To implement this principle and increase its effectiveness, international conferences 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.

All peaceful means of settling international disputes can be divided into 2 categories:

funds that do not require the participation of a third party (the third subject of the small business, not interested in the outcome of the dispute)

1 peace negotiations

2 consultations

3 investigative and conciliation commissions - with some stretch. Sometimes they may include experts who are not nationals of the States parties to the dispute. But they act as 3 persons.

funds requiring 3rd party participation

1 good offices and mediation

2 consideration of the dispute by international judicial authorities

3 consideration of a dispute within the framework of an international organization

10. The principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of states?

The principle of non-interference in the internal rights of states is to ensure the protection of the exercise by the state of its internal function in accordance with international law.

According to the 1970 Declaration, the principle of non-interference means the prohibition of direct or indirect interference for any reason in the internal or external affairs of any state. In accordance with this Declaration, this principle includes the following:

a) prohibition of armed intervention and other forms of interference or threat of interference directed against the legal personality of the state or against its political, economic and cultural foundations;

b) prohibition of the use of economic, political and other measures in order to achieve the subordination of another state to itself in the exercise of its sovereign rights and to obtain any advantages from it;

c) prohibition of the organization, encouragement, assistance or admission of armed, subversive or terrorist activities aimed at changing the structure of another state through violence;

d) prohibition of interference in the internal struggle 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 the state to choose its political, economic, social and cultural system without the interference of other states.

The content of the concept of "cases that are essentially within the internal competence of any state" has changed with the development of international law. In the process of such development, there are more and more cases that to a certain extent (and, as a rule, not directly, but through the internal law of states) fall under international legal regulation, therefore, cease to be exclusively within the internal competence of states.

11. The principle of respect for human rights?

The principle of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms is the guarantee by states of the inviolability of human rights on their territory and beyond.

The principle of respect for fundamental human rights and freedoms was enshrined, albeit in a very general form, in the UN Charter. In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and within the framework of the UN, the preparation of international Covenants on Human Rights began, which were adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1966.

The principle of respect for human rights has also been embodied and developed in a number of special conventions adopted within the framework of the UN or its specialized agencies (see Chapter 12).

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, practically no one disputes the existence of this principle in general international law.

In the Final Act of the 1975 European Conference, the title of this principle is formulated as follows: "Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief".

The Charter of Paris for a New Europe of November 21, 1990 emphasizes that respect for fundamental human rights and freedoms is "the primary responsibility of government" and that "their observance and full implementation is the basis of freedom, justice and peace."

a) all states are obliged to respect the fundamental rights and freedoms of all persons in their territories;

b) states are obliged to prevent discrimination based on gender, race, language and religion;

c) States are obliged to promote universal respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and to cooperate with each other in achieving this goal.

In the 1991 Document of the Moscow CSCE Meeting, it was stated that the issues of observance of human rights, democracy and the rule of law are of an international nature, since they constitute one of the foundations of international order.

12. The principle of equality and self-determination of peoples?

The principle of equality and self-determination of peoples and nations is to ensure the rights of this category of subjects of international law to choose a political status, to free economic development, cultural identity, and participation in international relations.

a) all peoples have the right to freely determine, without outside 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 the 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, the colonial peoples can use all the necessary means;

f) the subordination 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 that would unite the entire nation. The nation's right to self-determination is its right, not its obligation.

It also follows that the principle under consideration does not prejudge the international legal status of a particular nation (people). A nation (people) has the right to freely associate with another or with other nations (peoples), and in this case, depending on the nature of the association, the corresponding national entity will or will not act in international relations as a subject of international law.

The modern content of this principle includes economic aspects (the right to freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources), the right to cultural development, etc. In addition, we are talking not only about the rights of peoples, but also about the obligations of states, expressed in respecting the rights of peoples and promoting them.

The principle of self-determination is a right, not an obligation, and its implementation should not be associated with a violation of the territorial integrity and political unity of sovereign states.

13. The principle of territorial integrity of states, the principle of inviolability of state borders?

The principle of the territorial integrity of states is the protection of the state's right to the integrity and inviolability of its territory, for which legal and other means, including national ones, admissible by international law, can be used.

This principle is concretized in the 1970 Declaration of Principles of International Law, where it is interpreted as part of the principle of the sovereign equality of states and as part of the principle of the non-use of force or the threat of force. Indeed, this principle is closely related to both of these principles. The Declaration says: "The territorial integrity and political independence of the state are inviolable."

However, the principle of the territorial integrity of states is so important that in the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe it is singled out as an independent principle of international law: "The participating states will respect the territorial integrity of each of the participating states."

CSCE Final Act 1975 contains a separate and most complete formulation: “The participating States will respect the territorial integrity of each of the participating States. Accordingly, they will abstain:

Any actions inconsistent with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, against the territorial integrity, political independence or unity of any participating state;

From turning each other's territory into an object of military occupation or other direct or indirect measures of the use of force in violation of international law or into an object of acquisition with the help of such measures or the threat of their implementation. "

The principle of inviolability of state borders is the definition of methods and forms of cooperation between states in terms of ensuring and protecting borders, including the conclusion of treaties on their delimitation and demarcation, collective self-defense, settlement of border disputes and the development of appropriate mechanisms.

The principle of inviolability of state borders was also first formulated in the Final Act of the CSCE. “The participating States regard as inviolable all borders of each other, as well as the borders of all states in Europe, and therefore they will refrain now and in the future from any encroachment on these borders” - that is, from outside actions or demands to change the position of the border line, its legal registration or actual situation on the ground.

The normative content of this principle is as follows -

Recognition of existing boundaries as legally established in accordance with international law;

Refusal of territorial claims (for the moment and the future);

Refusal from other encroachments on borders, including the threat of force or its use.

It is necessary to distinguish the principle of inviolability of state borders from the principle of inviolability of borders - we are talking about observing the existing border line on the ground, crossing it without appropriate rules. Moreover, if the principle of inviolability is valid in Europe, the USA and Canada, then the inviolability of borders is a principle of general international law and operates independently of special agreements on this matter.

14. Subjects of modern international law. The content of the concept, international legal personality?

The definition of the concept of the subject of international law is associated primarily with the assessment of the subject of international legal regulation.

Modern. Extends the understanding of the subject in the general theory of law to international law. In other words, the subject is a participant in relations governed by international legal norms; bearer of the rights and obligations established by these norms.

The circle of subjects in this case includes legal entities and individuals, economic associations and non-governmental organizations, as well as parts (units) of federal states. This theory divides the subjects of international law into legal entities (these include "traditional subjects") and law enforcement, the range of the latter, of course, is much wider than the first.

Subjects of international law are participants in international relations with international rights and obligations, exercising them on the basis of international law and bearing, if necessary, international responsibility.

The subject of international law is an entity capable of having rights and obligations and defending its rights by making international claims.

The usual types of the subject of law in international relations are states and organizations.

The classification of subjects of international law is carried out on various grounds.

Primary subjects are created in the historical process; having arisen, they inevitably come into contact with each other, creating for themselves the rules of mutual communication.

Derived subjects are created by primary, the volume of their international legal capacity depends on the wishes of the creators and, as a rule, is determined by an international treaty.

Established subjects of international law:

The state is the most important category of subjects of international law, the main political organization of society. In international relations, where there is no supreme power dictating the rules of conduct for states, they themselves are the main creators and guarantors of compliance with the norms of international law.

the state as a subject of international law must have the following characteristics:

Permanent population

Defined territory

Government

The ability to enter into relations with other states, the so-called criterion of independence.

international legal personality is the simultaneous:

a) possession of international rights and obligations;

b) subordination to international law;

c) the ability to participate in international legal relations

The main characteristics inherent in international legal personality are:

Ability to assert claims for violations of international law;

Ability to enter into internationally legally valid treaties and agreements;

15. The individual is a subject of international law. Vatican. TNK.

The subject of international law is the bearer of international rights and obligations; this is a person (in a collective sense), whose behavior is governed by international law and who can enter into international public legal relations, defend his rights by directly filing claims with international bodies. The subject of international law must be directly subordinate to international regulation and have an international public status.

The generally recognized subjects of international law are states and interstate organizations. The legal personality of nations and peoples fighting for the creation of an independent state is not so clearly recognized. As an exception, there are atypical subjects - the Vatican, a free city.

The concept of a subject is inextricably linked to such categories of law as legal capacity, capacity to act and delinquency.

Whether an individual is a subject of international law depends on what characteristics this subject should possess. If we assume that the subject of international law is a person who is subject to international legal norms, who endows these norms with subjective rights and obligations, then the individual is undoubtedly a subject of international law. There are many international legal norms that individuals can directly follow (European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950, Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966, Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1966, Universal the Declaration of Human Rights, the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child, the 1949 Geneva Conventions for the Protection of War Victims, the 1977 Additional Protocols I and II, the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, etc. etc.).

International law directly creates rights and obligations for the individual. A number of crimes under international law are known: piracy, genocide, apartheid, which can be directly imputed as an international crime in the implementation of international criminal justice over an individual through the International Criminal Court or a specially created International Criminal Tribunal.

Cosmonauts, who are both individuals and citizens of a certain state, have a special status, but at the same time are recognized as messengers of humanity into space. However, in all these cases, the rights received by the individual are mediated by states and do not operate without their consent. An individual can perform certain actions prescribed by a separate agreement, or not perform them.

If we consider an individual as a direct addressee of many international legal norms, if we take into account the developing branch of international protection of human rights and international humanitarian law, take into account the facts of the implementation of international criminal justice in relation to international criminals, then we can conclude that an individual in some cases it has limited international legal personality and, therefore, is a special subject of international law.

State-like formations (Vatican City) (hereinafter referred to as GPO) are traditional, secondary, derivative, basic, partially sovereign, atypical, universal, law-creating and law-enforcing subjects of international law. GPOs are created by states on the basis of an international treaty, therefore they are secondary subjects; the scope of their international legal personality is determined by states and has a derivative character. On the basis of an international agreement, GPOs have partial sovereignty. Like MFNs, they do not always exist in principle in the international arena, therefore they are also atypical actors.

signs of state-like entities:

) territory;

) permanent population;

) citizenship;

) legislative bodies;

) government;

) international treaties

The Vatican is a city-state that is the seat of the center of the Catholic Church - the Holy See. Due to the established custom, it has a specific international legal personality. Participates in international relations under the name "Holy See". Its unique position in the system of subjects of international law, its special legal nature and religious specificity determine the methods of its activities in the international arena, the orientation of its foreign policy goals and priorities. The main vector of the policy of the papacy is the protection of human rights and freedoms, primarily religious, and the church as a whole, as well as activities to prevent international conflicts.

A transnational company implies the transnational nature of the capital of a given subject of private law activity, the capital does not belong to persons of one country.

Each state has the right to regulate and control the activities of transnational corporations within the limits of its national jurisdiction and to take measures to ensure that such activities do not contradict its laws, norms and regulations and comply with its economic and social policies. Transnational corporations should not interfere in the internal affairs of the host state. Each state must, with full respect for its sovereign rights, cooperate with other states in the exercise of this right.

In the Convention on Transnational Corporations, the concept of "transnational corporation" includes various transnational structures, including financial and industrial groups, companies, concerns, holdings, joint ventures, joint stock companies with foreign participation, etc.

The Corporation has the right to carry out in the territories of the parties any types of activities not prohibited by the legislation of the parties.

Members of the corporation can be legal entities of any organizational and legal form, including those from third countries.

State-owned enterprises can be members of a corporation in the manner and on terms determined by the owner of their property.

The corporation is created voluntarily both on the basis of intergovernmental agreements and in another way not prohibited by law. The procedure for registering a corporation is determined by the legislation of the state - the place of its registration.

The peculiarity of international law is that it is created primarily by states and regulates primarily interstate relations. The international legal appearance of other participants in international relations is also largely determined by states. As the creators of international rights and obligations, states act as the main subjects of international law. In this capacity, they have an exclusive and inalienable property based on the political organization of power - state sovereignty. The state exercises sovereignty within the framework of international law, taking into account respect for the sovereignty and interests of other states. It follows from this that the state as a subject of international law cannot exercise its power in relation to another state (par in parem non habet imperium - an equal has no power over an equal). In particular, this is expressed in the disobedience of one state to the legislation of another: the actions of the state are determined by its own laws and norms of international law. State immunity also covers its non-jurisdiction by the judiciary of another state: it can be brought before the court of another state only with its consent.

The international legal personality of a state is associated with participation in the activities of international organizations. Membership in an organization presupposes the acceptance of obligations under its charter, the recognition of certain powers of the organization and its decisions in accordance with their legal force.

The current Constitution of the Russian Federation now has a special norm (Article 79), according to which the Russian Federation can participate in interstate associations and transfer to them part of its powers in accordance with international treaties (obviously, first of all, the constituent acts of such associations), if this does not entail restrictions on the rights and freedoms of man and citizen and does not contradict the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation.
Thus, the state as a subject of international law has the ability to establish rights and obligations, acquire rights and bear obligations, as well as independently exercise them. The participation of the state in international lawmaking is associated not only with the acceptance of obligations, but also with their fulfillment, as well as the desire to ensure that the norms of international law are fulfilled by all subjects, have legal security. The legal personality of a state exists independently of the will of other subjects of international law and remains as long as the state exists. It is universal, covering all components of the subject of international legal regulation.

Several ways of forming new states as subjects of international law are historically known: replacement of states of one historical type by another; the emergence of the state as a result of the colonial people achieving their independence; territorial changes associated with the unification of several states into one state, or with the disintegration of a state into several states, or with the separation of one state from another. In these cases, the question arises about the recognition of new states as subjects of international law and about their legal succession.

Sovereign equality of states

The principle of sovereign equality of states took shape and was consolidated as a synthesis of traditional legal postulates - respect for state sovereignty and equality of states. Accordingly, it is characterized as a complex, two-pronged principle. The very combination of these two elements gives rise to a new international legal phenomenon - the sovereign equality of states.

In this capacity, it was enshrined in the UN Charter: "The organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its members" (paragraph 1 of article 2).

According to the 1970 Declaration and the 1975 Final Act, states have the same (equal) rights and obligations, that is, they are legally equal. Moreover, according to the Declaration, all states "are equal members of the international community, regardless of differences of an economic, social, political or other nature."

Each state enjoys the rights inherent in full sovereignty, and at the same time is obliged to respect the legal personality of other states and their respective rights, including the right to determine and exercise, at its discretion, mutual relations on the basis of international law. Specific to the Final Act is the wording regarding the right of states "to belong or not to belong to international organizations, to be or not to be parties to bilateral or multilateral treaties ...".

“Equal sovereignty” of states is characterized by the fact that “each state is sovereign within the system of states, the international community, that is, in conditions of interaction and interdependence of states. The sovereignty of one state is associated with the sovereignty of another state and, as a result, must be coordinated with it within the framework of existing international law (the phrase "agreed sovereignty" is found in the literature). The functions of international law include normative support for such coordination, a kind of streamlining of the implementation of international legal personality based on state sovereignty.

International treaties concluded by states, being the embodiment of the coordination of state wills, reflect the principle of sovereign equality and often contain direct references to it (for example, the preamble to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Article 1 of the Charter of the Commonwealth of Independent States, Article 1 of the Treaty on Friendly Relations and Cooperation between the Russian Federation ". and the Czech Republic dated August 26, 1993).
A concrete manifestation of the principle of sovereign equality also gets in such treaty formulations as "every state participating in the treaty has the right ...", "every state participating in the treaty undertakes", "no state can."

This principle applies to the entire sphere of implementation of international legal norms - to the operation of the mechanism of international legal regulation, to methods of peaceful settlement of interstate disputes and to the manifestation of responsibility of states for international offenses.

This principle underlies all interstate relations and concerns any spheres of such relations, 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 international legal order. The modern world consists of states that differ in terms of territory, geographic location, composition and population size, nature and composition of natural resources, level of development, political influence, economic strength, military power, etc. In these conditions, maintaining a certain balance and ensuring cooperation is possible largely due to the existence of the legal principle of the sovereign equality of states. The state monitors its observance especially carefully.

A bit of history: This principle dates back to the Middle Ages, when the monarchs sought to legally equalize their international status. For this, the legal formula of the ancient Roman lawyers was borrowed par in parem non habet imperium (equal over equal has no power). It was based on the principle of equality of monarchs and sovereigns.

The modern international community recognizes sovereignty as an inalienable property of every state and the most important basis for the existence of an international legal order.

This principle developed as an international legal custom and was subsequently enshrined in the UN Charter (Article 2), the CSCE Final Act on August 1, 1975, the 1989 Vienna Meeting of Representatives of the CSCE Participating States, the 1990 Charter of Paris for a New Europe, the Charter economic rights and obligations of states, in the charters of international organizations of the UN system, regional international organizations, in a variety of bilateral and multilateral agreements, the Final Document of the World Summit dedicated to the 60th anniversary of the UN 2005.

The entire international community is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all states. Only mutual respect by states for the sovereign equality of each other ensures their cooperation and the maintenance of international law and order.

The Declaration on Principles of International Law indicates the following elements of the principle of the sovereign equality of states:

States are equal legally, those. have equal basic rights and obligations, have the right to participate in international treaties and organizations;

Each state enjoys the inherent rights full sovereignty, i.e. independently exercises on its territory legislative, executive, judicial power, builds international relations at its own discretion;

Every state is obliged to respect legal personality other states;

- territorial integrity and political independence l states are inviolable;

Each state has the right to freely choose and develop its political, social, economic and cultural systems;

Each state is obliged in good faith fulfill their international obligations and live in peace with other states.

In the Final Act of the CSCE, states committed themselves not only to respect 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, a variety of positions and views, internal laws and administrative rules, the right to determine and exercise, 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 the sovereign equality of states, as it were, splits into two principles - the principle sovereignty and the 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 social contract (J. LOCKE, T. GOBBS, J.-J.RUSSO), is a secondary phenomenon. Sovereignty belongs to the people (primary sovereignty). The people in the general interests under a social contract - the constitution - transfers 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 peoples themselves determine how to live, what power to have, what social system to build and in what direction to develop it. The state is the representative of the people who is obliged to express their will. State sovereignty extends not only within the territory, but also to objects, actions of individuals / legal entities of the state outside its territory (to the extent and extent that are provided for by international law).

Sovereignty does not mean complete freedom of action, or even more so, 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 an instrument of "docking" and ensuring "sovereignty".

On the other hand, an increase in the number of issues that states on a voluntary basis subordinate to international regulation does not mean that they are automatically removed from the sphere of domestic 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 applies, for example, to the danger of military or any other hostile use of means of influencing the natural environment, etc.

States are increasingly transferring some of their powers, which were previously considered integral attributes of their sovereignty, in favor of international organizations. This happens for various reasons, including in connection with an increase in the number of global problems, the 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, restricts freedom of action, but not its sovereign rights. Moreover, the treaty opens up new opportunities for the state that exceed the agreed limits. Otherwise, the 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, acted within the League of Nations) in the Wimbledon case (1923) it was stated: "The Chamber refuses to see in the conclusion of any treaty ... a renunciation of sovereignty."

In addition, states generally reserve the right to control the activities of international organizations.

Quite often, the opinion is expressed about the incompatibility of sovereignty with international law. Meanwhile, thanks to sovereign power, states are able to create norms of international law, endow them with 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 violates human rights. The state does not have the right to issue laws that violate human and people's rights. Violation of a peremptory norm by a bilateral treaty is a matter for all states.

Part of the principle of the sovereign equality of states is also the immunity of the state (its persons and things) from the jurisdiction of another state by virtue of the principle “equal over equal has no power”.

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, while another has fewer; but legally they are equal, equal before international law, have the equal ability to create rights for themselves and accept responsibilities.

All states have the right to participate in solving international problems in which they are legitimately interested. At the same time, states do not have the right to impose the created 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 domination. And today, this trend harms cooperation and the rule of law. Many scholars believe that the equality of states is a myth. No one, including me, will deny the actual inequality of states, but this is only stresses the importance of establishing their legal equality. People are also unequal in their capabilities, but this does not raise doubts about the importance 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 take decisions on substantive issues nine votes are required, including the matching votes of all five permanent members. It - the rule of "great power unanimity", often referred to as "veto power" ( China, Russian Federation, United Kingdom, United States and France ) ),

the status of nuclear powers under the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,

(A COMMENT : The treaty establishes that the state possessing a nuclear weapon is the one that 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 basic obligations nuclear and non-nuclear states. Art. I obliges the states possessing nuclear weapons not to transfer these weapons and control over them to non-nuclear countries, and also not to assist them in their production or acquisition; Art. II obliges the non-nuclear participants of the Diaspora not to accept transfers from anybody of nuclear weapons, not to produce them, and not to seek anyone's help for this purpose. Art. III of the treaty speaks of guarantees of compliance by non-nuclear states with obligations not to produce their own nuclear weapons; verification of the fulfillment of their obligations rests with the International Atomic Energy Agency. However, the treaty provides that the required guarantees should not interfere with the economic development of states or international cooperation in the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes and oblige its participants to exchange equipment, materials, scientific and technical information for these purposes, and to facilitate the benefits of non-nuclear states from any peaceful use of nuclear explosions (ї 3, Art. III, IV and V)),

(A COMMENT : The IMF operates 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 amount of its contribution to capital, and one additional vote for every 100 thousand SDRs of the amount of this contribution. This arrangement provides a decisive majority of votes for the leading states).

Reflecting the reality, international law in exceptional cases, allows inequality in rights, but at the same time associates special rights with additional obligations. All of the above examples are about specific rights, not sovereign rights. All states have the same sovereign status.

In my opinion, these exceptions only confirm the rule and violations of the principle of the sovereign equality of states are not seen. These are legitimate exceptions to it. Exceptions agreed between states and enshrined in the norms of international law, bearing additional obligations, special responsibility of states. The general system of preferences, which provides special benefits and advantages to developing and least developed countries in international trade, should also be considered a legal exception to this principle.

EXAMPLE:

The World Bank only provides loans to poor countries.

Such a system is seen as a way of moving from formal equality of states to de facto equality.

Much still depends on the legal activity of the state. All other things being equal, more active participation in international legal relations gives the state a wider range of rights and legal possibilities. The reality of the sovereign equality of the state depends to a large extent on the consistency with which it defends it. Sovereign equality should 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 of the legal status of states means that all norms of international law apply to them in the same way, have equal binding force. States have an equal capacity to create rights and assume obligations. According to the International Court of Justice, equality also means equal freedom in all cases not regulated by international law.

All states have an equal right to participate in solving international problems in which they are legally interested. The 1974 Charter of Economic Rights and Duties 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 the international decision-making process ...".

At the same time, one should not close our eyes to reality. The actual influence of the major powers on the rule-making process is palpable.

EXAMPLE: So, the regime of outer space was determined by them. The creation of treaties in the field of arms limitation depends on them. On this basis, some scholars are of the opinion that equality is characteristic of the law enforcement stage, rather than at the stage of creating the 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 on the initiative of major powers should 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 the most-favored nation treatment, the principle of granting national treatment and others.

OUTPUT: As long as there are sovereign states, this principle will remain an essential element of the system of principles of international law. Strict observance of it ensures the free development of each state and people. Sovereign equality is real only within the framework of 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/

The principle of sovereign equality of states

Introduction

One of the basic principles on which international law and international relations lie and rely is the principle of the sovereign equality of states. However, it is not easy to understand and define. A number of scientists have different definitions and concepts of the same term. From the point of view of international law, all states are sovereign.

However, sometimes this concept of sovereignty is divided into two parts:

1. Legal sovereignty;

2. Behavioral sovereignty.

This abstract mainly focuses on the sovereign equality of states, which is a kind of legal sovereignty and is in fact a component of it. This concept is called the principle of sovereign equality of states, consisting of a number of ideals on which international organizations, nation-states, etc. build their relationships with each other. Some of them are:

1) In international organizations such as the United Nations Security Council and the IMF, the voices of different countries are unequal to reflect some of the basic measures of power. At the same time, international organizations use the principle of sovereign equality through equal voting procedures, such as the United Nations General Assembly;

2) All states are equal before each other, and therefore they should be given equal rights in relation to each other to self-determination and non-interference in their internal affairs.

1. Understanding sovereignty and the origin of the principle of sovereign equality

Sovereignty was defined by Oppenheimer as follows: "Sovereignty is the supreme power, which at the international level is exercised not by legal powers over all other states, but rather by legal bodies that are not rightly dependent on any other power."

The concept of state sovereignty is inextricably linked with its status as international legal personality. At this point, it is important to note that sovereignty and international law are concepts that are slightly antagonistic to each other.

The idea of state sovereignty is that, on the one hand, the state should be able to govern itself, without outside interference. On the other hand, at the heart of international law is the idea that rules should be able to restrict state behavior. None of the states, however, should claim absolute dominance at the present time, and a balance should be maintained between them.

The principle of "sovereign equality" is present in customary international law as well as in the League of Nations, which is the predecessor of the United Nations.

The Westphalia Congress was undoubtedly the first important event in the development of international organizations. This led to the Treaty of Westphalia, signed in 1648, which for the first time formally incorporated the principle of sovereign equality.

Despite the fact that the provisions of the treaty do not include the word "sovereignty", the treaty contains all the rules to implement this principle. The treaty respected the choice of each state in its choice of religion, including in the principle that the reigning monarch possessed exclusive, legal authority within its territory and could operate within that territory without interference from other powers. After Westphalia, the countries parties to the treaty began to respect each other's sovereignty.

And the final approval of the principle of sovereign equality is the inclusion of the principle in Article 2, paragraph 1 of the Charter of the United Nations. This principle in the UN Charter includes both internal and external sovereignty.

From the moment this principle was included in the UN Charter, all member states had to follow it. In practice, however, it has been found that it is not equally enforced by all states. An example can be cited from the Nicaragua case, where one of three claims raised by Nicaragua against the United States was based on sovereign equality.

The representatives of Nicaragua argued on the basis of the principle of sovereign equality, believing that the rules of international law governing relations between sovereign states equally do not give the right to amend declarations of recognition unilaterally if the right is expressly protected ...

In addition, the advisory opinion gives the ICJ to the case on the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons dated July 8, 1996, where Judge Weeramantry expressed his dissenting opinion that the use of nuclear weapons goes against the principle of the sovereign equality of states.

Thus, it can be noted that the contested principle has been called into question in a number of cases, a glance into which will help in a better understanding of this principle and its meaning in international law.

The essence of the principle of sovereign equality

This doctrine recognizes that all states are equal in law, despite their obvious inequalities in other respects: inequality in territory, wealth, military strength, or level of civilization. In the Norwegian Shipowners Claims case, the Permanent Court of Arbitration stressed that: "International law and justice are based on the principle of equality between states."

Oppenheimer also gives a definition: “States by their nature, of course, are not equal in terms of power, territory and the like. But, as members of the community of nations, they are, in principle, equal regardless of the differences between them, if differences between them may exist. "

Any attempt on the part of the state to weaken this principle can lead to serious consequences of political tension or protest, therefore. The concept of sovereign immunity is also expressed in the principles of independence and dignity of the state. It was adopted by the legislation of a number of countries. It was also reaffirmed in the draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property, provisionally adopted by the International Law Commission in 1986.

The theory of sovereign equality evolved from the concept of natural equality. This was first analyzed by Thomas Hobbes in his book Leviathan. This was after the research developed by Pufendorf. Hobbes compared the notion of the state of nature with scientific reasoning based on relations between states, which logically revealed the doctrinal ideas of sovereign equality. Grotius' ideas were not entirely based on the same premises, as some researchers mistakenly pointed out.

2. Elements of the principle of sovereign equality

sovereignty congress equality hobbes

Since states are equal participants in international communication, they all have fundamentally the same rights and obligations.

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) each state has the right to freely choose and develop its political, social, economic and cultural systems;

f) each state is obliged to fulfill fully and in good faith its international obligations and to 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, a variety of positions and views, internal laws and administrative rules, the right to determine and exercise, 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.

Conclusion

The principle of the sovereign equality of states is one of the fundamental principles in international law. If this principle is not observed, there can be no talk of any equal international relations. How can there be equal relations between countries, if one member of these relations influences the will of others, due to inequality in rights.

Of course, the principle of sovereign equality has largely contributed to the preservation of peace, but there are disagreements among scientists about the concept of the principle of sovereign equality. For example, "Is the UN Permanent Security Council a violation of the principle of the sovereign equality of states?" is one of the issues raised by the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Posted on Allbest.ru

...

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar documents