Suchergebnisse

Whilst external selfdetermination refers to the right to decide international status, internal selfdetermination refers to the right of people to choose their own political, economic and social system. The question of whether selfdetermination is internal or external implies a relationship between human collectivities having the characteristics of peoplehood and political power. (PAS)

This thesis compares the history and politics of the "Indigenous question" in Norway and Australia, using the Norwegian experience as a point of reference for a critical examination of the prevailing discourse and policies in Australia. Although the territory inhabited by the Sami extends into four states – Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia – the Norwegian Sami have been the most active in global campaigns for Indigenous rights, and the Norwegian state has adopted the most developed policies designed to implement such rights. At the same time, the Norwegian Sami – in sharp contrast to the shocking poverty and social disadvantage of Aboriginal Australians – enjoy a relatively high standard of living. The relationship between Indigenous rights and socio-­economic development is at the heart of the thesis. Its distinctive approach is to eschew theoretical and philosophical abstractions and focus on an exploration of the historical and political circumstances that shaped the nature and the range of possible solutions, of the problem: the very different pace and nature of colonisation, in Australia rapid and driven by the rapacious appetite of British capitalism for global expansion which had little use for the Indigenous peoples it encountered and dispossessed, in Norway/Fennoscandia a much more protracted process which allowed for some coexistence and cooperation (and mutual adaptation) between Indigenous and non-­Indigenous societies over several centuries; the strategic importance of the Sami in their geopolitically contested region; the very different (and historically changing) possibilities for economic relations and political alliances between Indigenous and non-­Indigenous interests and movements. As the first ever systematic comparison between the Sami and Aboriginal Australia (which is more commonly compared with the Maori or Native Americans), the choice of a comparative reference point outside the historical context of the British Empire and Anglo­-American political culture is in itself an original ...

The book questions the classic idea of self-determination - the right to self-determination is a right of peoples, not of minorities - by examining the content of the right to self-determination and the content of minority rights. Self-determination has four dimensions: the political, the economic, the social and the cultural dimensions. Minorities have minority rights that touch on most aspects of life as a member of a minority. If there is an overlap between minority rights and the different dimensions of self-determination, the concept that the right to self-determination is only applicable to peoples loses credibility. No global and general conclusion is envisaged; there are restrictions in place. The work is limited to the European framework and is further restricted to classic minorities. The argument is based on a legitimacy and justice approach. The analysis in this book shows that some minority rights overlap with the different dimensions of internal self-determination. In short, classic minorities in Europe have a right to internal self-determination

Denying the identity of a race is the step towards committing the crime of genocide, which may also result in ethnic cleansing. This article has tried to strategically depict the nexus between the identity denial and ethnic cleansing of Rohingyas. From the very inception to now, the gradual development of ignoring the identity of Rohingyas is evident to deny their rights. Also, Buddhist extremism has outnumbered the demands of Rohingya as an ethnicity among 144 races of Myanmar. Then, it has claimed the proposition that might become applicable for their internal recognition, which is 'right to internal self-determination'. This article also discusses the development of the Gambia versus Myanmar case, which may contribute to the resurrection of Rohingya identity within the lands of Myanmar. Internal recognition of the Rohingyas under the legal instruments of Myanmar will restore their fundamental rights along with their political and social recognition.

Internal self-determination is a popular, but insufficiently researched, concept in mainstream international law scholarship. It has emerged and gained prominence as a consequence of the understanding that the right to self-determination in international law is composed of two natural and distinct dimensions, namely: the 'internal' (guaranteeing political and democratic freedoms to people within a State); and the 'external' (guaranteeing political independence from colonial rule). Traditionally understood to be promoted by the West, 'internal' self-determination is often regarded as a right or principle guaranteeing democratic governance to people within a State, and importantly, political autonomy for minority groups. This thesis is a critical study which seeks to problematize the mainstream understanding of 'internal' self-determination. Its principal arguments are broadly three-fold: that 'internal' self-determination is based on an artificially constructed dichotomy of the concept of self-determination; that while both the West and the Third World have promoted 'internal' self-determination in different ways, its promotion by powerful actors needs to be approached with caution; and that contrary to popular perception, 'internal' self-determination can be problematic for minority groups, both as a distinct right or principle of international law, and as a political slogan. These central arguments are further illustrated and substantiated by a critical and detailed examination of the protracted ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka; i.e. through a re-reading of the conflict from an 'internal self-determination perspective. The thesis also contains brief studies of a few other cases. This thesis proposes that 'internal' self-determination is yet another political expression which, contrary to the popular mainstream view, has indeterminate potential. The broader challenge is to subject 'internal' self-determination to constant critical scrutiny, exploring how the concept advances or retards the realization of greater equality and self-determination by peoples, when struggling within complex and hierarchically-constructed political structures. For minority peoples in protracted self-determination conflict situations, 'internal' self-determination is best understood as a choice arising after or upon (and not before or in the absence of) the recognition of their right to self-determination. ; published_or_final_version ; Law ; Doctoral ; Doctor of Philosophy

The right to internal self-determination offers a legal 'checklist' for the UN to provide both legitimacy and sustainability to peacebuilding processes. The right both clarifies the actors of post-conflict reconstruction and also concretises to what extent these actors should be incorporated into peacebuilding processes. Although the concept of local ownership has become an often-cited concept in peacebuilding literature, the legal ground of the concept (i.e. the right to internal self-determination) has been disregarded. This paper aims to reveal the legal aspect of the concept of local ownership and thus, attaches the right to internal self-determination with local ownership.

Although it does not provide a "magic cure" against secession, internal selfdetermination, both in effect and in practice, diminishes the desire for external selfdetermination and softens the tendencies toward separatism. The recognized and internationally proclaimed right of self – determination of the people gets a new lease of life through the implementation of its internal aspects as a possible way for the accommodation of the differences of separate groups that exist in society. Although it has still not been established as a right, the legal grounds for practicing internal selfdetermination can be found in several international documents and the moral basis for identity and the need to practice it within a particular group or sense of group distinctiveness. Since there is insignificant support in the standards of international law for the accommodation of different expectations based on the need to protect and promote any so-called separate nationality, in our efforts to endorse security and peaceful coexistence it may be better to look at the internal aspects of the right of selfdetermination from a different angle and try to find solutions through measures that are part of the state's democratic traditions. The internal aspect of self – determination offers a wide range of options that need to be taken into account. Although, these are far from perfect, they are still based on presumptions and have many limitations, the costs of the realization of internal self- determination comprise solutions that are worth trying out. Building on theoretical research, this paper addresses the modalities for the realization of internal self – determination. An overview of the necessary tools for addressing the right of self-determination envisages the possible ways that can provide the means for accommodating differences between the existing communities within the established states. The effectiveness and efficiency of these models, depends as well on commitment, and the strong and clear efforts of national and ...

It is generally agreed that peoples have a right to self-determination. The right to self-determination for all peoples was enshrined in the founding Charter of the United Nations. Self-determination has been the subject of extensive debate and controversy. The controversy is embedded in the content of the right as well as who can assert the right as it continues to evolve in the arena of customary and international law. Self-determination has two dimensions, namely internal and external. Internal self-determination is the right of the people of a state to govern themselves without any interference, whereas external self-determination is the right of peoples to control their own political well-being and to be free of any alien domination, including in the formation of their own independent state. According to current interpretation, the right of groups to govern themselves is increasingly inter-woven within the human rights ambit, in particular with the rights of minorities and indigenous peoples. The question is whether self-determination has the characteristics of reaching the status of a peremptory norm from which there is no derogation.