The University of Manchester
School of Law
POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH CONFERENCE 2010
Alan Turing Building, Friday 17 September 2010
SESSION 2: 11.30am – 1.00pm
Panel: Issues of national sovereignty
Shared sovereignty: Falklands
From Chaucer women’s sovereignty through Bodin’s modern notion and to Nietzsche’s sovereign individual, the word sovereignty has had several meanings. In this investigation I aim to examine only one of them: State sovereignty. The paradigm I propose, although using the same elements from classical notions, twists their reciprocal relation. Many names or labels can be given to the model I intend to accomplish: bi-polar, shared, dual, double sovereignty. It is a necessary requirement then for the proposed model to have at least two sovereign States that somehow have (or intend to have) at the same time the same legal prerogatives over the same population and territory. We are used to seeing and accepting as a fact that in one territory there is one population governed by a single ultimate authority with a common legal bond or system of norms. What would it happen if that same territory and population had two ultimate and equal (legally speaking) sovereigns and two valid set of norms? There are several actual examples within the real context that show this is both a theoretical and a practical dilemma. Would it be possible, for example, that Israel and Palestine had sovereign authority at the same time over Jerusalem? Would it be plausible that Argentina and the United Kingdom could be at one time sovereign over the territory and population of the Falkland/Malvinas islands? If the answer were positive, what would be the consequences in terms of territory, population and law?