LESSON 11 - SECESSION

Hello. Thank you for joining me on my YouTube channel. My name is Christiana Sagie. On this channel, I will be teaching about international law, and these teachings will be in the form of short weekly lecture series. Over time, I will be surfacing varied concepts of international law. When and where applicable, these concepts will be analyzed and brought to you as it relates to current trends in international law as they arise. At the end of this lecture, you will find the transcript of the lecture in the link below. Also, for current trend and analysis in international law, you can subscribe to my blog. All the details you will find in the comments section below. For the 11th lecture in this lecture series, we'll be exploring the concept of secession. Specific to this lesson, we will unpack this concept by analyzing the following, the meaning of secession, legitimacy and legality of secession, and the relationship between self-determination and secession. What is secession? What exactly constitutes secession is challenging to situate within international law and politics, and even among international law scholars. But not to overcomplicate things, during this lecture, our working definition is that secession refers to the separation or withdrawal by a constituent part of the state from the larger entity of the state. Within the framework of international law, secession has implications for a number of other international law concepts, such as sovereignty, territorial integrity, self-determination, minority rights, and state secession. A number of these concepts we've addressed in previous videos. For further clarity, we will explore several examples history has afforded us, some successful and others not successful. For example, Katanga's attempt to secede from Congo, and Biafra's attempt to secede from the Federal Republic of Nigeria, were unsuccessful. Both attempts led to protracted civil wars, which eventually crushed the secession attempt. We also see Quebec's attempt to secede from Canada as yet another example of an unsuccessful attempt at secession. On the other hand, we see successful secession attempts by Bangladesh, formerly known as East Pakistan, from Pakistan, East Timor, leaving Indonesia, Uruguay, leaving Brazil, South Sudan, leaving Sudan, Eritrea, leaving Ethiopia, and Panama, leaving Colombia, to mention a few successful secession attempts. Having provided a walking definition and some examples of successful and unsuccessful secession attempts, it is essential to note that international law provides no unambiguous right to secession. Hence, we can see that it is not explicitly forbidding or illegal. It is interesting to see, however, that secession can negatively impact the principle of territorial integrity and also has the propensity to violate other norms of international law. Notwithstanding the impact it may have on territorial integrity, it may also provide a positive expression in providing a conduit for the expression of the collective right to self-determination. This concept of self-determination we talked about in more depth in our previous video. But briefly, we'll analyze the relationship between self-determination and secession. On the relationship between self-determination and secession, as we already established in our previous video, self-determination is a right under international law. We also established here that though secession is recognized under international law, it is not a right under international law. So quite often, secessionist movements lean on the right of self-determination to justify secession. And the argument that usually follows is that the seceding unit has, and in many cases, continually experiences inhibition to the advancement and fulfillment of the economic, social, and political objectives of the peoples that make up the seceding faction. In many cases, this may even include allegation of gross human rights violations of members of the seceding unit. In this case, the indication is that the international community may lean in favor of the secessionist attempt where members of the seceding entity are under oppression or subjugation. This is often indicative by recognition of the seceding entity by other states and even the United Nations. In this way, we see that the expression of one, self-determination in this case, can lead to the other, which is secession. Thus, we see that one of the ways that the rights to self-determination have taken expression is through secession. But whatever the case, our means of expression or exercise of the right to self-determination. International law jurisprudence is indicative of the fact that international law prohibits secessionist attempts that perpetrate human rights violations and violate foundational norms of international law, such as the prohibition on the use of force. We have alluded to the fact that secession is a valid international law question, especially when caused by oppression, subjugation, and gross human rights violations of members of the seceding entity. In cases not marred by issues of oppression, subjugation, and gross human rights violations, international law maintains neutrality on this subject. It funnels this question through the realm of domestic law and political negotiation. To this, Canada provides an excellent example. In Quebec's attempt at a unilateral secession from Canada, the question of the constitutionality of Quebec's unilateral secession was put to the Supreme Court of Canada in reference with secession of Quebec. To this question, the Supreme Court of Canada held that an attempt at secession by Quebec from Canada would involve a negotiation process that would require the reconciliation of various rights and obligations between two legitimate majorities, namely the majority of the population of Quebec and that of Canada as a whole. When we assess the fundamentals and relationship between self-determination, secession, and territorial integrity and the implications they carry, it may seem that these concepts are directly contrary to one another. To this end, we will briefly address the question of legality and legitimacy of secession. The legality and legitimacy of secession have been keenly contested among international law scholars. It is important to note that the question of the legality of a secession is specific and distinct from the question of the legitimacy of a secession. In this context, they refer to peculiar phenomena which can coexist or exist in isolation. First, a secessionist entity's legitimacy is gauged by a clear question in favor of secession by members of the seceding units. Also, the legitimacy of a secession is also viewed from the prism of recognition afforded the seceding units by all the states and the United Nations. The notion of secession arising from bouts of systemic oppression and gross violation of human rights of members of the seceding paths as legitimate has found its way into positive international law. So one way to analyze the legitimacy of a secession is by unpacking the underlying causes of the secession and determining if there has been a clear question put to members of the seceding units with a majority vote in favor of the secession, as well as gauging the level of recognition afforded the seceding entity by other nations of the world and the United Nations. At the same time, it is essential to highlight that secessionist attempts that trigger and perpetuate instabilities generally tend to lose their standing as legitimate. The question of legality analyzes whether the mode of secession conforms with prescribed standards for exercising secession. This is because international law deals with secession in ways that emphasize the stability of an existing state. Therefore, it does seem that unilateral secession may be deemed illegal as the seceding entity fails to seek and adhere to principles that promote the stability of the whole political entity being seceded for. In this lecture, we have briefly unpacked the concept of secession and attempted to address several questions that border on this issue, such as its relationship with the principle of self-determination and a brief analysis on the topic of legitimacy and legality of secession. In a nutshell, a seceding unit can secede from a lateral political unit under international law when it enjoys legitimacy and does not violate any foundational international law norms. So I wanna thank you so very much for joining in and remember to like, share, subscribe, leave your comments in the sections below and hit the notification button so that you're notified when there's a new video. Thank you.