Uti possidetis juris
Uti possidetis juris or uti possidetis iuris (Latin for "as [you] possess under law") is a principle of international law which provides that newly formed sovereign states should retain the internal borders that their preceding dependent area had before their independence.
History
[edit]Uti possidetis juris is a modified form of uti possidetis; created for the purpose of avoiding terra nullius, the original version of uti possidetis began as a Roman law governing the rightful possession of property.[1] During the medieval period it evolved into a law governing international relations and has recently (1820s) been modified for situations related to newly independent states.[2]
Application
[edit]Uti possidetis juris has been applied in modern history to such regions as South America, Africa, the Middle East, and the Soviet Union, and numerous other regions where centralized governments were broken up, where imperial rulers were overthrown, or where League of Nations mandates ended, e.g. Mandatory Palestine and Nauru. It is often applied to prevent foreign intervention by eliminating any contested terra nullius, or no man's land, that foreign powers could claim, or to prevent disputes that could emerge with the possibility of redrawing the borders of new states after their independence.[3]
The doctrine has been asserted in relation to Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, although (with the exception of East Jerusalem since 1980) Israel has not claimed these territories explicitly, and Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005.[4]
The principle was also applied by the Badinter Arbitration Committee established by the Council of Ministers of the European Economic Community in opinions related to the disintegration of Yugoslavia, specifically no. 2, on self-determination, and no. 3, on the nature of the boundaries between Croatia and Serbia and between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia.[5]
Argentina and Chile base their territorial claims in Antarctica on the uti possidetis juris principle in the same manner as their now-recognized Patagonian claims.[6]
References
[edit]- ^ C. J. Greenwood, E. Lauterpacht (1995). International Law Reports, Cambridge University Press, Volume 99.
- ^ The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, Volume 27, 2003.
- ^ Enrico Milano (2006). Unlawful Territorial Situations in International Law; Reconciling Effectiveness, Legality, and Legitimacy
- ^ Bell, Abraham; Kontorovich, Eugene. "Palestine, Uti possidetis juris, and the borders of Israel" (PDF). arizonalawreview.org.
- ^ Pellet, Alain (1992). "The Opinions of the Badinter Arbitration Committee A Second Breath for the Self-Determination of Peoples" (PDF). European Journal of International Law. 3 (1): 178–185. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.ejil.a035802. Retrieved 7 November 2021.
- ^ Prieto Larrain, M. Cristina (2004). "El Tratado Antártico, vehículo de paz en un campo minado". Revista Universum (in Spanish). 19 (1). University of Talca: 138–147. Retrieved 31 December 2015.
External links
[edit]- Shaw, Malcolm N. (1997). "Peoples, Territorialism and Boundaries." European Journal of International Law 8 (3).
- Hensel, Paul R.; Michael E. Allison and Ahmed Khanani (2006). "Territorial Integrity Treaties, Uti Possidetis, and Armed Conflict over Territory." Presented at the Shambaugh Conference "Building Synergies: Institutions and Cooperation in World Politics," University of Iowa, 13 October 2006.
- Hasani, Enver (2003) *85 UTI POSSIDETIS JURIS: FROM ROME TO KOSOVO, Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, Summer/Fall 2003