The right to self-determination is one of the most important, yet contentious, principles of international law. This right exists not only under public international law but also under international human rights law. It is linked to many fundamental principles such as the principles of State sovereignty, the equality of States and territorial integrity. It incarnates the concept of the right of peoples to determine their own destiny without outside interference or subjugation, presupposing all peoples are equal. For this reason it has served as a powerful slogan and a vital justification for the independence of many peoples, most significantly the independence of colonial peoples. In fact, the colonial context is what specifically comes to mind when the right to self-determination is brought up.
The right to self-determination consists of many elements and contains several aspects. The colonial aspect of this right is the only aspect that is free from contention, for it is in the context of colonialism and during the process of decolonization that the right to self-determination emerged into an actual right in international law. In this essay, I set out to examine this aspect in order to determine whether it is still relevant today or whether it belongs to the pages of history books.
Many contentions surround the right to self-determination. Its exact scope is unclear and it is doubtful that it ever will be given the ambiguous and political nature of the right. The biggest dilemma concerning this right is its duality which can be described in terms of who the holder of the right is, a State or a people. On the one hand the right to self-determination entails independence, territorial integrity, unity and the right to freedom from intervention or interference in the internal affairs of a State. On the other hand, self-determination means peoples’ right to determine their own destiny, a right which collides with the principle of State Sovereignty and territorial integrity. With this inherent contradiction come many controversies and differences of opinion regarding this legal principle. This is linked to the second problem concerning this right, namely the dichotomy that seems to exist on the international scene, a sort of North-South division where Western States and Third World countries often take diametrically different positions on issues relating to the right to self-determination. Moreover, there is huge inconsistency in State practice regarding the application of the right to self-determination. The fact that this right is a two-faced right is hand in glove with the inconsistent behavior of States. This is the reality of international relations.
In this essay I have not only dealt with the contentious issues such as that of the conflicting aspects of the right but I have also examined the consequences of colonialism or, as I have called it, the colonial heritage which is still felt throughout the Third World today. With decolonization a new system was established in international law, a system consisting of equal and sovereign States and the principle of sovereign equality became a foundation on which modern international law was based. Yet, long after the dust of the battles for decolonization and independence had settled, inequality still remains. The voices of Th...
