Rocznik_2014-215

Recommendations

Info

34 Tomasz Stępniewski, Tomasz Olejarz 4. The consequences of the recognition of Kosovo and its absence in international legal practice The problem of the recognition of the new subject aroused controversy in the international community. The Serbian government did not agree to the independence and secession of a part of Serbia considering it a breach of international law. Acting upon the initiative of that country, on October 8, 2008, the General Assembly of the UN made the decision of examining the international legacy of the unilateral Declaration of Independence of Kosovo. Voting 10 to 4 the International Court of Justice in the Hague ruled that the Declaration of Independence of Kosovo 15 proclaimed in February 2008 violated neither international law nor the Resolution 1244 of the Security Council of the UN. More importantly, as stated in the opinion of the International Court of Justice, the interpretation only concerns Kosovo and takes into account the particular historical and political conditions of the process and as such should not be used as a precedent in international law. In spite of the above, the international community is still divided over the question of the legitimacy of the Declaration of Independence and the recognition Kosovo by other countries. The split illustrates not only the division of the community into countries which recognize Kosovo and those which do not, but also the outcome of the vote on the resolution of the UN from 2008, concerning the motion for an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the compatibility of the declaration with international law (77 countries were for, 6 against, 74 abstained from voting or voted against the adoption of the resolution) 16 . We can try to estimate the influence of the recognition of Kosovo as a country by most subjects of international communities for international law. It seems that over the lack of common recognition, particularly by all the members of the Security Council of the UN the recognition does not result erga omnes but only inter partes. That means that Kosovo is a country in relation to the countries which recognize it. It is not a country for those which do not 17 . 15 E. Dynia, Uznanie Kosowa w świetle prawa międzynarodowego..., p. 21. 16 R. Kwiecień, Prawnomiędzynarodowe konsekwencje jednostronnej deklaracji..., p. 118. 17 Ibidem, p. 119. Rocznik Instytutu Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej • Rok 12 (2014) • Zeszyt 3
Is Kosovo a Precedent Legal and International Dilemmas... 35 What is more, it should be stated that for the international law the case of Kosovo is dangerous for essential reasons. It undermines an relativizes its stability and predictability and in this way proves its susceptibility to change, either revolutionary or evolutionary. Describing Kosovo as a case sui generis we accept that the international law is not sufficient or inadequate in this matter and seek solutions outside the law. The risk is not reduced by the reservations voiced by some countries as well as the very Declaration of Independence of Kosovo, claiming that the case should not be considered as a precedent. Moreover, this kind of statement is counterproductive as it implies the awareness of the resolving entities of the incongruity of the legal status of Kosovo with the international law. Secondly, it should be noted that the recognition of Kosovo by a numerous group of countries has had, despite the controversy of the act and due to its incompatibility with the principle of territorial integrity of a country, at least two measurable international consequences, i.e., a reduction of the Serbian territory and the establishment of a new state – the Republic of Kosovo 18 . Bibliography Borgen Ch., Is Kosovo a Precedent Secession, Self-Determination and Conflict Resolution, Wilson Center/Global Europe Program, http://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/350-kosovo-precedent-secession-self-determination-and-conflict-resolution Daranowski P., Uznanie niepodległości Kosowa – usankcjonowanie precedensu, [in:] Księga pamiątkowa ku czci Profesora Jana Białocerkiewicza, T. Jasudowicz, M. Balcerzak (ed.), Toruń 2009, p. 1-2 Hilpold P. (ed.), Kosovo and International Law, The ICJ Advisory Opinion of 22 July 2010, Leiden 2012 Kosovo Declaration of Independence, http://www.assembly-kosova. org/cid=2,100,45 [access: 01.08. 2010] Księga pamiątkowa ku czci Profesora Jana Białocerkiewicza, T. Jasudowicz, M. Balcerzak (ed.), Toruń 2009 Kwiecień R., Prawnomiędzynarodowe konsekwencje jednostronnej deklaracji niepodległości Kosowa, [in:] Prawo Międzynarodowe i Wspólnotowe wobec wyzwań współczesnego świata, E. Dynia (ed.), Rzeszów 2009, p. 115-116 18 Ibidem, p. 120; K. Pawłowski, Kosowo…, p. 210. Rocznik Instytutu Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej • Rok 12 (2014) • Zeszyt 3
Page 1: Rocznik Instytutu Europy Środkowo-
Page 4 and 5: Rada Naukowa „Rocznika Instytutu
Page 6 and 7: The Yearbook of the Institute of Ea
Page 8 and 9: Jan Muś Uneven and Combined Develo
Page 11 and 12: Mladen Karadzoski, Artur Adamczyk M
Page 13 and 14: Macedonia’s Difficult Path to the
Page 21 and 22: 3. Macedonia’s Difficult Path to
Page 27: Macedonia’s Difficult Path to the
Page 30 and 31: 28 Tomasz Stępniewski, Tomasz Olej
Page 40 and 41: 38 Abit Hoxha, Donika Emini governm
Page 42 and 43: 40 Abit Hoxha, Donika Emini and BiH
Page 44 and 45: 42 Abit Hoxha, Donika Emini Despite
Page 46 and 47: 44 Abit Hoxha, Donika Emini 4. Poli
Page 48 and 49: 46 Abit Hoxha, Donika Emini 6. Tran
Page 50 and 51: 48 Abit Hoxha, Donika Emini While,
Page 52 and 53: 50 Abit Hoxha, Donika Emini Fischer
Page 55 and 56: Bartosz Bojarczyk Radical Islamism
Page 57 and 58: Radical Islamism - A threat to Bosn
Page 63 and 64: 3. Radical Islamism - A threat to B
Page 75 and 76: Ewa Dominikowska Bosnia and Herzego
Page 77 and 78: Bosnia and Herzegovina - Unquiet Re
Page 79 and 80: 1. Bosnia and Herzegovina - Unquiet
Page 87 and 88:
Bosnia and Herzegovina - Unquiet Re
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93:
Page 96 and 97:
94 Magdalena Rekść Besides, the E
Page 98 and 99:
96 Magdalena Rekść All of this ma
Page 100 and 101:
98 Magdalena Rekść further reduct
Page 102 and 103:
100 Magdalena Rekść the only prov
Page 104 and 105:
102 Magdalena Rekść for the natio
Page 106 and 107:
104 Magdalena Rekść Here, it has
Page 108 and 109:
106 Magdalena Rekść Muratović R.
Page 110 and 111:
108 Jan Muś man (and minority) rig
Page 112 and 113:
110 Jan Muś of the country, where
Page 114 and 115:
112 Jan Muś fall 8 . The Sublime P
Page 116 and 117:
114 Jan Muś The main difference be
Page 118 and 119:
116 Jan Muś patiently, while obser
Page 120 and 121:
118 Jan Muś nations of the Kingdom
Page 122 and 123:
120 Jan Muś wards each other. Thes
Page 124 and 125:
122 Jan Muś economic independence
Page 126 and 127:
124 Jan Muś represented in each on
Page 128 and 129:
126 Jan Muś Hobsbawm E., The Age o
Page 131 and 132:
Anna Masłoń-Oracz Recommendations
Page 133 and 134:
Recommendations for Development of
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
About the Authors Artur Adamczyk -
Page 150:
Rocznik Instytutu Europy Środkowo-
show all

Rocznik_2014-215

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?