The objective of this thesis is to analyse whether Sri Lanka could have avoided the civil war, if changes in the constitution, from 1948 to 1978, offered a political structure guaranteeing the minority rights. Furthermore, the thesis intends to study if the Swiss and Lebanese political models could offer any guidelines for the Sri Lankan conflict. The stated purpose of the thesis is studied by analysing official documents, literatures and articles. The finding of the study is that Sri Lanka might have prevented the civil war if the constitutional arrangements had guaranteed the minority rights. The Sri Lankan conflict is a unique case, which probably requires its own resolution model. The Swiss and Lebanese models may be applicable in the Sri Lankan case to some extent. However, a possible solution that could prevent the current political and ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka, by avoiding another fatal civil war, is to establish power-sharing political arrangements, under a federal state. Whether or not Sri Lanka can achieve a sustainable peace is a question of political willingness.

This paper explores the current understanding of the right of peoples to self-determination and its impact on international relations. A number of new states have gained international recognition outside the scope of decolonisation, several of which have not fulfilled the usual criteria for statehood, based on existing state practice. In addition, the parent states of Bangladesh, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as Kosovo have not consented to the secession of these territories. The main purpose of this paper is to determine whether based on the stipulations of international documents and mainly on existing state practice, it is possible to verify the existence of a customary law enabling peoples to unilaterally secede. Such a right would pose a threat to the future application of the principle of territorial integrity as one of the basic principles of international relations. In order to answer this question I compare case studies of successful and unsuccessful nations striving for their own state outside the realm of decolonisation. Based on this comparison I analyse the current understanding of the right to self-determination and its impact on international relations. I conclude by stating that it is not possible to unambiguously confirm the existence of such a right. However, in practice the principle of territorial integrity is being breached nonetheless, due to persisting uncertainties regarding the possible application of secession by peoples whose internal right to self-determination was not respected. Together with the fact that the current concept of self-determination ignores collective rights of national groups, this poses a threat to international stability.

In its relatively unchanged form and effective for nearly 140 years the Indian Act of 1876 is the basic law governing the rights and responsibilities of First Nations and their status within Canada. The law protects the special status of Indigenous groups in Canadian society albeit it has been criticized as discriminatory. Voices calling for change of the legislation are growing stronger with the deepening socio-economic problems of Aboriginal peoples. First Nations primarily require the assertion of their constitutional right to self-determination in any future reform. In contrast, the current Conservative government of Stephen Harper emphasizes self- sufficiency and financial responsibility of Native peoples. Legislative actions that Conservatives rarely consult with representatives of the Indigenous peoples themselves correspond to the general priorities of the Harper Government based on the principles of market economy and do not reflect the demands for self-determination and self-government of Indigenous communities. The Idle No More protest movement founded in 2012 in reaction to some of Harper's laws pertaining to Aboriginal peoples fights for their rights and environmental protection inextricably linked with their identity. The purpose of this thesis is to analyze different perspectives on...

Conflit présenté comme gelé, la guerre du Haut-Karabagh n’en est pas moins réelle, s’inscrivant dans une géopolitique régionale complexe et passionnante, nécessitant de s’intéresser à l’histoire des peuples de la région, à l’histoire des conquêtes et politiques menées concomitamment. Comprendre les raisons de ce conflit situé aux limites de l’Europe et de l’Asie, comprendre les enjeux en cause, que se soit la problématique énergétique ou l’importance stratégique de la région du Caucase à la fois pour la Russie mais également pour les Etats-Unis ou l’Union Européenne ; autant de réflexions que soulève cette recherche. Au delà, c’est l’influence réciproque du droit international et du politique qui sera prise en compte, notamment concernant l’échec des négociations actuelles. Les difficultés d’application du droit international à ce conflit sui generis se situent à plusieurs niveaux ; sur le statut de la région principalement, mais également sur les mécanismes de sanctions et de réparations devant s’appliquer aux crimes sur les personnes et les biens et qui se heurtent à la classification difficile du conflit. / The Nagorno-Karabagh conflict, often described as frozen, reveals the certainty of a war encompassed in complex regional geopolitics. To understand this complexity, one must look closer to the history of peoples, of conquests and of ruling politics over this region. Not only are to be understood the energy issues, but also the strategic importance regarding the interests of Russia, the United States or the European Union. Here is the purpose of this research. Also, the relationship between international law and politics is of a particular importance, especially regarding the difficulties of the current negotiations. The difficulties in regard of the application of international law to this sui generis conflict are to be seen at different levels; concerning the statute of the province, as well as the mechanisms of sanctions and compensations that must be applied over crimes on people and goods, facing the issue of the definition of this conflict.

Cette recherche aborde la question de l’avis consultatif de la CIJ sur la conformité au droit international de la déclaration unilatérale d’indépendance relative au Kosovo du 22 juillet 2010 et ses possibles incidences sur la question de la sécession du Québec. Plus précisément, ce mémoire traite de la migration des idées constitutionnelles au sujet des questions d’autodétermination dans les cas kosovar et québécois, en effectuant une analyse comparative des deux situations. Le présent mémoire conclut tout d’abord à un respect du droit international public par la CIJ dans son avis, le Kosovo remplissant les conditions de mise en oeuvre de la sécession remède. Néanmoins, notre recherche conduit à affirmer une impossibilité de transposition de solution du cas kosovar à la problématique québécoise, mais à une possible migration des influences, qui assouplirait la position prise ces dernières années par le Canada, notamment avec la Loi sur la clarté. / This research studies the ICJ advisory opinion on the accordance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence in respect of Kosovo delivered on 22 July 2010 and its probable impacts on the question of Quebec’s secession. Specifically, it examines the migration of constitutional ideas concerning the right to self-determination in the cases of Kosovo and Quebec. A comparative analysis of both situations is thereby undertaken. This thesis concludes to a non-violation of general international law by the ICJ in its opinion, Kosovo being an illustration of remedial secession. Nonetheless, our research leads us to assert an impossibility of transposition of the ICJ solution about the former Serbian province to the Quebec issue. However, the case is not closed as a migration of the spirit of the advisory opinion could take place, which would soften the position adopted by Canada, especially with the Clarity Act.

No description available.

Cette étude repose sur l’hypothèse selon laquelle, de l’adoption de la constitution fédérale à la Première Guerre Mondiale, l’expansion territoriale des États-Unis d’Amérique, de même que le projet fédéral, ont appelé une « construction » des règles et principes du droit international au sein même des frontières américaines. Car, en 1789 déjà, tant les États-Unis,que les États membres de la Fédération ou les Nations indiennes, revendiquent sur tout ou partie de cet espace la souveraineté que reconnaît le droit international à tout « État ». C’est alors en définissant, en aménageant, en repensant, les notions d’ « État » ou de « souveraineté » sur un territoire, les conditions de détention et de formation d’un titre territorial, ou encore en fixant la valeur juridique interne du droit international, que ces revendications seront – ou non –satisfaites. Fondé sur l’analyse de la pratique, de la doctrine et de la jurisprudence américaines durant le « long XIXe siècle », ce travail a ainsi pour objet d’interroger la question du territoire telle qu’elle se pose au sein de cet « État fédéral » territorialement souverain que constitueraient les États-Unis. Il espère ce faisant mettre au jour des constructions du droit international dont l’actualité tient à leur objet : la question du territoire aux États-Unis entre 1789 et 1914interroge en effet les principales notions et problématiques de ce droit – au premier rang desquelles celle de l’articulation spatiale des compétences. / This study is based upon the hypothesis that, from the entry into force of the federal constitution to the First World War, the United States territorial expansion, as well as the federal project, called for a « construction » of international law’s rules and principles within the American boundaries. It is to be remembered that, in 1789, the United States, the member States and the Indian Nations claimed for themselves, on parts or the whole of that space, the sovereignty that every « State » is entitled to according to international law. It is therefore by defining, adapting, or rethinking the notions of « State » or « territorial sovereignty », the conditions required for a territorial title to be held or formed, and by setting the legal status of international law, that those claims have been enforced – or not. Grounded upon the analysis of the American doctrine, practice and case law, the purpose of this study is thus to inquire about territorial issues as raised within what is usually described as a « federal State », sovereign on its territory. Because those issues, and mainly jurisdictional ones, are fundamental to international law, this work hopes to bring to light constructions of international law which are still relevant today.

Cette thèse examine les arguments et les modalités de justification des interventions armées des Etats, des coalitions étatiques et des organisations régionales dans les conflits internes d’autres Etats sous le prisme du droit international, lorsque ces interventions sont menées en dehors du cadre de l’ONU. Ce type d’intervention caractérise notre époque où les conflits intra-étatiques constituent l’écrasante majorité des conflits mondiaux et où l’ONU traverse une crise pluridimensionnelle. Les justifications, invoquées aussi bien par les Etats que par la doctrine, visent à légaliser ou du moins à légitimer ce qui serait, à première vue, considéré comme un recours à la force illégal au regard du droit des Nations Unies et en particulier au regard du principe de non intervention dans les guerres civiles. / This thesis examines the arguments and the modalities of justification of the military interventions of States, of the coalitions of the willing and of the regional organizations in the internal conflicts of other States by virtue of the international law, when these interventions take place outside the framework of the UNO. This type of intervention is current nowadays given that the intra-state conflicts constitute the overwhelming majority of world conflicts and taking into consideration the multidimensional crisis of the UNO. The justifications invoked by States as well as by the doctrine aim to legalize or at least to legitimize what would be considered at first sight as an illegal use of force under the law of the United Nations and in particular under the principle of non- intervention in civil wars.

No description available.

Die Arbeit untersucht aus rechtlicher Perspektive das Phänomen der Finanzierung politischer Nichtregierungsorganisationen (NRO) durch ausländische Akteure. Die Arbeit legt hierfür ein liberales Verständnis der Funktion von NRO in nationalen politischen Prozessen zugrunde. NRO spielen eine wichtige Rolle bei der Organisation von politischen Interessen. Daher wirft die Auslandsfinanzierung die Frage auf, inwiefern ausländische Akteure an innerstaatlichen politischen Diskurse teilnehmen. Durch einen Vergleich fünf verschiedener Staaten werden deren Rechtfertigungsansätze für Regulierungen der Auslandsfinanzierung von NRO herausgearbeitet. Der Vergleich zeigt auch Ähnlichkeiten und Unterschiede der Regelungsansätze auf, etwa bei der Definition „politischer Aktivitäten“ oder der Qualität der Beziehung zwischen einer NRO und ausländischen Geldgebern. Die Auslandsfinanzierung von NRO wird sodann den völkerrechtlichen Regeln zum Schutz der staatlichen Souveränität und dem Selbstbestimmungsrecht der Völker gegenüber gestellt. Die Arbeit zeigt, dass das Phänomen beide berührt. Dies gilt insbesondere, wenn die Finanzierung den politischen Wettbewerb verzerrt. Die Zurechnung solcher Effekte ist indes schwierig, da in der Regel eine Vielzahl von Akteuren NRO finanziell unterstützen. Zuletzt untersucht die Arbeit die Regulierung der Auslandsfinanzierung von NRO aus der Perspektive der menschenrechtlich gewährleisteten Vereinigungsfreiheit. Diese umfasst auch das Recht, finanzielle Mittel aus dem Ausland zu erhalten. Die Effekte auf die Souveränität und das Selbstbestimmungsrecht stellen zwar legitime Gründe für Beschränkungen dar. Aufgrund der wichtigen Rolle von NRO in demokratischen Prozessen ist jedoch eine strenge Verhältnismäßigkeitsprüfung angezeigt. Während Transparenzvorgaben grundsätzlich gerechtfertigt werden können, verletzten striktere Maßnahmen, wie etwa ein Verbot der Auslandsfinanzierung, in der Regel die Vereinigungsfreiheit. / The study examines the phenomenon of political non-governmental organizations (NGOs) receiving funding from foreign actors from a legal perspective. It departs from a liberal understanding of the role of NGOs in domestic political processes. NGOs play a decisive role in organizing political interests. As a result, foreign funding implicates the participation of outside actors in domestic political discourses. The comparative analysis of five different national legal regimes for regulating the receipt of foreign funding by NGOs sheds light on common justifications for regulating the receipt of foreign funding by NGOs. It also highlights similarities and differences in the approaches taken, such as the definition of ‘political activities’ or the quality of the relationship between NGOs and foreign donors. In the context of international law, state sovereignty and the right to self-determination are examined vis-à-vis the phenomenon of NGOs receiving foreign funding. The study finds that foreign funding to NGOs can implicate both, especially where the funding leads to an uneven playing field in the political sphere of a given state. The attribution of such effects is difficult, however, as funding is often provided by numerous actors. Lastly, the study examines the regulation of NGOs receiving foreign funding through the lens of human rights law. It finds that receiving foreign funding is protected by the freedom of association. However, the effects of foreign funding on sovereignty and the right of self-determination can provide a legitimate reason for specific regulations. Given the importance of NGOs in democratic processes, a strict test of proportionality applies. While transparency requirements can be justified, more severe measures – especially a complete prohibition of foreign funding – will usually violate the freedom of association.