Skip to main content

Recognition of state

 Recognition of State


Introduction


The international community is a collection of sovereign states operating on a global scale. Recognition of an entity as a state is critical for any state to enjoy the rights, duties, and obligations of international law and to be a member of the international community. Only when the entity has been recognized as a state is it recognized by other members of the International Community. The act of recognition is regarded by international law as a separate act of the existing statehood community. Recognition of state under the International Legal System can be defined as “the formal acknowledgement or acceptance of a new state as an international personality by the existing States of the International community”. It the acknowledgement by the existing state that a political entity has the characteristics of statehood.


Essentials

Article 1 of the Montevideo Conference of 1933 defines a state as a person and specifies the following key characteristics that an entity must exhibit in order to be recognised as a state:

  • It should have a permanent population.

  • A definite territory should be controlled by it.

  • There should be a government of that particular territory.

  • That entity should have the capacity to enter into relations with other   

            State.


Legal Effects of such recognition


When a country achieves recognition, it gains specific rights, obligations, and privileges, such as.


  • It gains the ability to form diplomatic ties with other countries.


  • It gains the ability to sign treaties with other countries.


  • The state has all of the rights and privileges that come with being a member of the international community.


  • State succession is a possibility.


  • The right to sue and be sued comes with the recognition of a state.


  • The country has the option of joining the United Nations.


Modes of Recognition


There are two modes of recognition of State:


De facto Recognition

De Jure Recognition


  • De Facto Recognition

De facto recognition is a form of interim statehood recognition. It's the first step toward de jure recognition. It is a true and momentary recognition of a state, and it might be conditional or unconditional. When a new state has a sufficient territory and control over a certain territory, but the other existing states believe it lacks stability or has other unsettling difficulties, this manner recognition is provided. As a result, we can think of it as a control test for freshly generated states. De facto recognition is the process of a non-committal act of acknowledging a new state.The states that have de facto recognition are ineligible to join the United Nations. Israel, Taiwan, and Bangladesh, for example.


  • De Jurie Recognition


De jure recognition is the recognition of a new state by the existing state when they consider that the new state fulfils all the essential characteristics of a state. The de jure recognition can be granted either with or without granting de facto recognition.  This mode of recognition is granted when the newly formed state acquires permanent stability and statehood The De jure mode of recognition grants the permanent status of a newborn state as a sovereign state.


In the case of Luther v. Sagar, it was held in this case that for the purpose of giving effect to the internal acts of the recognised authority there is no distinction between de facto and de jure.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree