Упрощенная HTML-версия
Электронное приложение к журналу «
Международная жизнь
»
law, and they do not enjoy the rights that are enjoyed by subjects of international law.
L. Malksoo:
What is worrying in the case of Kosovo, on the one hand, and South Ossetia
and Abkhazia, on the other, is the regional fragmentation of international law. It seems
that a situation has evolved where international law is not equal with regard to all states:
Regional groups have emerged, some of which recognize a given entity as a state whereas
others do not. Historically, it is probably linked to thinking that assumes the existence of
spheres of influence within the scope of which decisions are made as to which entity may
become a state.
Ye. Lyakhov:
We are, essentially, speaking about the political aspect of recognition al-
though the recognition of a state as a subject of international law entails some far-reaching
consequences in the realm of international law. The first is on the border of international
and constitutional law.
A. Mezyaev:
Indeed, it only used four qualifications under the Montevideo Convention,
and the statehood of Croatia, as well as of Bosnia and Herzegovina, was assessed according
to some primitive qualifications as the existence of a permanent population, government,
and so on. It would be appropriate in this context to mention qualifications of statehood
in addition to those listed in the Montevideo Convention, namely legality and legitimacy,
according to Prof. J. Dugard and J. Crawford. The ICCJ purposely excluded them from
consideration, since the Croatian and Bosnian entities did not possess the qualification of
legality, because they were created in breach of both Yugoslav national law and interna-
tional law.
A. Filimonova:
There is a pressing need for us historians that experts on law respond to
global processes in a timely manner. In the present-day conditions, the problem of the
recognition of states started with Yugoslavia, and with the moment an outside actor be-
came closely involved.
In the case of Kosovo, aggression was not only external, on which the UN Security Council
had to pass judgment, but also internal, because the so-called Republic of Kosovo was
created with the active participation of extremist groups and gangs with support from out-
side actors. Obviously, gross pressure is applied to secure recognition for states that lack a
legal capacity and a legal personality, as in the case of Kosovo.
B. Ashavsky:
The problem of recognition of states, naturally, has both political and legal
aspects. To solve it, it is necessary to analyze the practice of interstate relations, the existing
norms of international law, and the doctrine of international law. Practice shows that the
issue of recognition comes up with the emergence of a new state. The significance of acts
of recognition is sometimes challenged, which is due, on the one hand, to the absence of
codification in this realm and on the other, to the existence of two competing theories in
the international-law doctrine declarative and constitutive. The declarative theory posits
that a state becomes a subject of international law the moment it is created, while recog-
nition only formalizes the fact. By contrast, the constitutive theory assumes that new states