by Col·lectiu Emma
We would like to bring to your attention some interesting reactions in Spain to the recent advisory opinion given by the International Court of Justice on the matter of Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence.
The Court has recalled in its opinion that "during the eighteenth, nineteenth and early twentieth centuries there were numerous instances of declarations of independence, often strenuously opposed by the State from which independence was being declared". It also states that the scope of the principle of territorial integrity, invariably invoked by States trying to outlaw such declarations, "is confined to the sphere of relations between States". And it concludes that "general international law contains no applicable prohibition of declarations of independence". The plural in "declarations" gives an indication that this doesn't only apply to the matter of Kosovo, but that it is understood to be a general principle.
In other words, a State cannot declare itself indivisible under international law. Which leaves Spain in an awkward position. By way of example, only a couple of weeks ago the Spanish Constitutional Court felt it necessary to include in its crushing decision on the Catalan autonomy Statute eight references to the "indissoluble unity of the Spanish nation". Today all three major newspapers in Madrid emphasize in their headlines that the International Court's opinion has no bearing on the situation in Spain. And yesterday a government spokesperson rushed to proclaim that this "can't be taken as a model for other situations that aren't comparable", in a clear reference to Catalonia, a point reiterated today by the Spanish Vicepresident.
It could be said that Spain doth protest too much. Indeed, official protestations are contradicted by the great lengths that the government has gone to in order to influence the result of the Kosovo affair. Note that Spain is one of the few EU countries that wouldn't recognize Kosovo as an independent State. And that the Spanish Foreign Ministry went as far as to dispatch a legal advisor to the Court's hearings in The Hague, defending the position that Kosovo's declaration of independence wasn't admissible under international law. Why would any country want to be so involved in the case of a small territory at the other end of Europe where it has no diplomatic or commercial interests? The fact is that no Spanish government can condone a unilateral move towards independence in another State because such a move could very well be replicated within its own borders. So, despite all claims to the contrary, the International Court's opinion has rattled some nerves in Madrid, where everyone is aware that it does have great significance for Spain and for other States with uneasy national minorities. And since a popular referendum on self-government along the lines of those envisaged for Scotland or Quebec is unthinkable given the political realities of Spain, Catalonia might well find in a unilateral declaration of independence the only means to start a peaceful process of separation.
We would like to bring to your attention some interesting reactions in Spain to the recent advisory opinion given by the International Court of Justice on the matter of Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence.
The Court has recalled in its opinion that "during the eighteenth, nineteenth and early twentieth centuries there were numerous instances of declarations of independence, often strenuously opposed by the State from which independence was being declared". It also states that the scope of the principle of territorial integrity, invariably invoked by States trying to outlaw such declarations, "is confined to the sphere of relations between States". And it concludes that "general international law contains no applicable prohibition of declarations of independence". The plural in "declarations" gives an indication that this doesn't only apply to the matter of Kosovo, but that it is understood to be a general principle.
In other words, a State cannot declare itself indivisible under international law. Which leaves Spain in an awkward position. By way of example, only a couple of weeks ago the Spanish Constitutional Court felt it necessary to include in its crushing decision on the Catalan autonomy Statute eight references to the "indissoluble unity of the Spanish nation". Today all three major newspapers in Madrid emphasize in their headlines that the International Court's opinion has no bearing on the situation in Spain. And yesterday a government spokesperson rushed to proclaim that this "can't be taken as a model for other situations that aren't comparable", in a clear reference to Catalonia, a point reiterated today by the Spanish Vicepresident.
It could be said that Spain doth protest too much. Indeed, official protestations are contradicted by the great lengths that the government has gone to in order to influence the result of the Kosovo affair. Note that Spain is one of the few EU countries that wouldn't recognize Kosovo as an independent State. And that the Spanish Foreign Ministry went as far as to dispatch a legal advisor to the Court's hearings in The Hague, defending the position that Kosovo's declaration of independence wasn't admissible under international law. Why would any country want to be so involved in the case of a small territory at the other end of Europe where it has no diplomatic or commercial interests? The fact is that no Spanish government can condone a unilateral move towards independence in another State because such a move could very well be replicated within its own borders. So, despite all claims to the contrary, the International Court's opinion has rattled some nerves in Madrid, where everyone is aware that it does have great significance for Spain and for other States with uneasy national minorities. And since a popular referendum on self-government along the lines of those envisaged for Scotland or Quebec is unthinkable given the political realities of Spain, Catalonia might well find in a unilateral declaration of independence the only means to start a peaceful process of separation.
No comments:
Post a Comment