Before going into the way in which we may address the
case of Northern Ireland by means of the Egalitarian Shared Sovereignty, it is
important to clarify the concept of self-determination.
In the context of international public law, there are
several documents that refer to self-determination:
Chapter 1, Article 1, part 2 of the UN Charter states
amongst its purposes: “To develop friendly relations among nations based on
respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination
of peoples, and to take
other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace.”
UN General Assembly Resolution 1514
Article 2: “All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that
right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their
economic, social and cultural development.”
UN
General Assembly Resolution 2649 Article 1: “Affirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples under colonial
and alien domination recognised as being entitled to the right of
self-determination to restore to themselves that right by any means at their
disposal.”
UN
General Assembly Resolution 2625 Article e: “The principle of equal rights and
self-determination of peoples.”
Although
it is often thought to be intrinsically linked to independence,
self-determination deserves a separate section because:
a)
there is a vast quantity and variety of documents related to this international
institution;
b)
there are many populations around the world at least considering it as an
option for their political status;
c) it
may lead to solutions other than independence.
In
international relations, self-determination can be understood as a principle
that allows a certain group of people who live in a given territory to have the
right to decide who will govern them. Although both are legal and political
concepts, sovereignty gives priority to the State whereas self-determination
gives preeminent place to the people. It is not uncommon in sovereignty
conflicts that the population of the third territory seeks independence by
applying the principle of self-determination. However, the fact that the third
territory is granted self-determination—and hence, may become
independent—implies always a negative response from at least one of the agents
involved in the original conflict.
More precisely, independence is not the
only way in which self-determination may evolve. This is key in Northern
Ireland since self-determination could enable them to get the best bargaining
situation out of Brexit resulting in multiple benefits to current inhabitants
and their future generations. In other words, it may be the case that Brexit
could be negative in many ways to the United Kingdom. That does not mean it has
to be negative for Northern Ireland. In fact, Brexit opens many doors for
Northern Ireland (doors that previously seemed to be closed).
NOTE: based on Chapter 5, Núñez, Jorge Emilio. 2017. Sovereignty Conflicts and
International Law and Politics: A Distributive Justice Issue. London and New
York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
Jorge Emilio Núñez
Twitter:
@London1701
30th July 2018
No comments:
Post a Comment