Internal self-determination external

Of course, classically, self-determination has been defined as the right of peoples freely to determine their political status and pursue their economic, social and cultural development.In practice, the application of this provision had been severely contextually reduced, in both its external and internal dimensions. As was noted at the outset, external self-determination in the sense of secession would appertain only to colonial peoples defined by prolonged colonial administration within uti possidetis boundaries. Internal self-determination would address both the constitutional system of public authority and the right of democratic participation in governance. However, it was simply presumed that any constitutional system and structures of governance were, merely by virtue of their existence, the product of free determination by the people concerned. Internal self-determination was therefore, until quite recently, practically irrelevant. 

The contextual restriction of external self-determination and the sharp division between external and internal self-determination... 

Understanding self-determination is crucial to this project. There is a classic tale of self-determination which focuses on the external dimension. Here, the tale is different because it focuses on internal self-determination and self-determination as process rather than result. 

CERD General Comment The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has adopted a General Comment on self-determination even though the Convention does not mention self-determination. The Committee points out that self-determination has an internal and an external aspect. Internal self-determination concerns the economic, social and culmral development while external self-determination means freely determining the political stams. ... 

Regarding self-determination, this tripartite covenant is tested. The exercise of self-determination is not dependent on the breach of obligations by the state. Self-determination can be exercised under any circumstance. It is the form self-determination takes that can be dependent on the state behaviour. Internal self-determination— in a narrow or a wide understanding—can be (and this will be agreed upon in the original position) part of the covenant. Internal self-determination structures society. External self-determination is only a possible remedy when the covenant is broken by the state. 

The understanding of internal and external self-determination becomes extremely important. The term self-determination is simply too broad and too general. While internal self-determination lies within the contract, external self-determination does not. The contract is negotiated in the original position. 

The contract on self-determination is a compromise. While peoples do not seek external self-determination, the states obligate themselves to treat peoples well. Internal self-determination does not pose a threat to a liberal state. If there is agreement on the right to possibility of participation, equality and the right to existence, then internal self-determination can be used as the term covering all this. Internal self-determination needs then to be defined more closely and the self-determination of the minority may clash with that of the majority, but in a liberal state there is an underlying agreement that internal self-determination is valuable. 

Thomas Franck s procedural fairness termed legitimacy and aspects of John Rawls distributive justice have been introduced as the tools chosen for the analysis. As has been shown, the basis of the discussion is contractarian in the sense that the different actors are related by contracts. Minorities and their rights are considered with a positive attitude without letting minorities have unlimited rights. Self-determination needs to be divided into internal and external self-determination. Internal self-determination is a positive value for individuals. It is still valuable for the group however, the group s needs have to be balanced with those of the majority. This is the content of the contract the restriction to internal self-determination balanced by the well treatment by the state. 

I choose to focus on internal self-determination for three main reasons. Most importantly, I see external self-determination as the exception and not the rule. Self-determination was originally conceived to be an internal concept and focusing on internal self-determination today follows up oti the original understanding. Secondly, minority rights are already quite close to internal self-determination. If there indeed can be spoken of a right to self-determination for minorities, then it... 

Another reason for focusing on internal self-determination is territorial integrity. Regarding self-determination, there has always been a bias towards an internal solution which is most obviously pronounced in the principle of territorial integrity. Even when considering the external possibilities as listed in Res. 1514, territorial integrity is always a limit to the exercise of self-determination. Internal self-... 

Ibid., para. 134 ( when a people is blocked from the meaningful exercise of its right to self-determination internally, it is entitled, as a last resort, to exercise it by secession ). Note that the Canadian Supreme Court declined to answer the issue of under what circumstances such a right to secession accmes, as it determined that the population of Quebec is entitled to meaningful internal self-determination and thus is not in a position to claim the tight to external self-determination. Dunoff et al., op. cit., p. 222. 

The second issue in the legal analysis of self-determination for Kosovo is a normative one which paradigm of self-determination, and consequently, which norms and rules, apply to the case of Kosovo Unlike East Timor, Kosovo does not entail a case of decolonization. Serbia was never Kosovo s colonizer Kosovo was never Serbia s colony. Rather, Kosovo was an autonomous province within a larger federal state (SFRY), and later a province within a smaller non-federal state (Serbia).Thus, Kosovo s right to self-determination will be analyzed under the non-decolonization paradigm, requiring a distinction between the exercise of internal self-determination and external self-determination. 

---