What did the Court want to achieve, and did it succeed in doing so? In order to be elected, a candidate must receive an absolute majority of the votes in both bodies. [Marko Milanovic; M C Wood;] -- This volume is an edited collection of essays on various aspects of the 2010 Kosovo Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice. endobj script.setAttribute("async", true); To do so, the editors assembled a stellar cast of contributors, many of whom acted as counsel or advisors in the case, as well a number of eminent scholars of politics and international relations whose pieces further enrich the book and give it an interdisciplinary angle. Learn more ››. political arguments in favour of Kosovo's independence (e.g. The practice of States in these latter cases does not point to the emergence in international law of a new rule prohibiting the making of a declaration of independence in such cases. Please choose whether or not you want other users to be able to see on your profile that this library is a favorite of yours. There were, however, also instances of declarations of independence outside this context. <>stream While doubts and disagreements with the Court’s decision can be fairly expressed, the Court rather systematically addressed the principal legal arguments placed before it, and there is nothing about the opinion that operates outside the realm of plausible judicial reasoning. "true" : "false") + "; expires=" + d.toUTCString() + "; path=/"; 5 0 obj <>2]/P 6 0 R/Pg 409 0 R/S/Link>> The seat of the Court is at the Peace Palace in The Hague (Netherlands). <>329 0 R]/P 426 0 R/Pg 425 0 R/S/Link>> Declarations of independence (International law)\" ; Self-determination, National--Kosovo (Republic)\"@, Export to EndNote / Reference Manager(non-Latin). This page was processed by aws-apollo5 in 0.141 seconds, Using the URL or DOI link below will ensure access to this page indefinitely. document.cookie = "__adblocker=; expires=Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 GMT; path=/"; <>10]/P 23 0 R/Pg 409 0 R/S/Link>> Supervision, II The Scope and Meaning of the Question put to the Court, III The Legal Nature of UNMIK Regulations. In its 2010 advisory opinion on Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, the International Court of Justice was called upon to interpret the meaning and legal effects of Security Council Resolution 1244, which had authorized the deployment of international military forces and civilian administration into Kosovo in the aftermath of NATO’s 1999 bombing campaign against Serbia. <>286 0 R]/P 423 0 R/Pg 422 0 R/S/Link>> endobj The Court concluded, by ten votes to four, �that the adoption of the declaration of independence of 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law, Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) or the Constitutional Framework�. [citation needed] [citation needed] The advisory opinion by the court was seen to have set a possible precedent that could have far-reaching implications for separatist movements around the world, and even for Serbia's EU membership talks. The main theme of … How and why did the Court become the battleground in which Kosovo\'s independence was to be fought out (or not)? #ga-ad {display: none;} document.getElementsByTagName("head")[0].appendChild(script); The International Court of Justice is composed of 15 judges elected to nine-year terms of office by the United Nations General Assembly and the Security Council. Self-determination, National -- Kosovo (Republic), Kosovo (Republic) -- Politics and government -- 2008-, Declarations of independence (International law), http:\/\/www.worldcat.org\/oclc\/884743399>. Bearing this in mind, the Court could not accept the argument that Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) contains a prohibition, binding on the authors of the declaration of independence, against declaring independence. The law and politics of the Kosovo Advisory Opinion. Murphy, Sean D., Reflections on the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Kosovo: Interpreting Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999) (2013). 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. When the Court makes a determination as to the compatibility of the UDI with resolution 1244 ? THE LAW AND POLITICS OF THE KOSOVO ADVISORY OPINION, Michael Wood & Marko Milanovic eds., Oxford University Press, Forthcoming, GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. Additionally, the unilateral declaration of independence was an attempt to bring to an end the international presence in Kosovo established by Security Council resolution 1244 (1999), a result which could only be effected by the Security Council itself. And how was the opinion received, and what broader implications did it have so far? It was established in June 1945 by the Charter of the United Nations and began work in April 1946. Your Web browser is not enabled for JavaScript. 1 0 obj 30 0 obj <> Please enter the subject. d.setTime(d.getTime() + 60 * 60 * 24 * 2 * 1000); Please, Accordance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence in respect of Kosovo, Advisory opinion, ICGJ 423 (ICJ 2010), 22nd July 2010, International Court of Justice [ICJ], International law and international relations, Relationship between international and domestic law, Sources, foundations and principles of international law, Statehood, jurisdiction of states, organs of states, Middle Eastern Organizations/Institutions, A Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) and the relevant UNMIK regulations, B The relevant events in the final status process prior to 17 February 2008, C The events of 17 February 2008 and thereafter, IV The question whether the declaration of independence is in accordance with international law, B Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) and the UNMIK Constitutional Framework created thereunder, 1 Interpretation of Security Council resolution 1244 (1999), 2 The question whether the declaration of independence is in accordance with Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) and the measures adopted thereunder, (a) The identity of the authors of the declaration of independence, (b) The question whether the authors of the declaration of independence acted in violation of Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) or the measures adopted thereunder, Legal framework Applicable to Kosovo at the moment of adoption of the declaration, II Resolution 1244 (1999), the Constitutional Framework and the authors of the declaration of independence, 1 The propriety of the Court giving an advisory opinion, 2 The scope and meaning of the question posed, 3 Accordance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence, Separate Opinion of Judge A. You could not be signed in, please check and try again. How and why did states supporting either Kosovo or Serbia choose to frame their arguments? (July 1, 2014). endobj that Kosovo was a unique, sui generis case which set no precedent for other secessionist territories) change in the formal, legal setting of advisory proceedings before the Court? <>/MediaBox[0 0 595.32 841.92]/Parent 15 0 R/Resources<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageB/ImageC/ImageI]>>/Rotate 0/StructParents 39/Tabs/S/Type/Page>> 406 0 obj that Kosovo was a unique, sui generis case which set no precedent for other secessionist territories) change in the formal, legal setting of advisory proceedings before the Court? script.setAttribute("onerror", "setNptTechAdblockerCookie(true);"); To do so, the editors assembled a stellar cast of contributors, many of whom acted as counsel or advisors in the case, as well a number of eminent scholars of politics and international relations whose pieces further enrich the book and give it an interdisciplinary angle. Recommended Citation Sean D. Murphy, Reflections on the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Kosovo: Interpreting Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999), in THE LAW AND POLITICS OF THE KOSOVO ADVISORY OPINION (Michael Wood & Marko Milanovic eds., Oxford University Press, forthcoming). Kosovo (Republic) -- International status. edited by Marko Milanović and Michael Wood. Judge Mohamed Bennouna (Morocco) could not subscribe to the conclusions reached by the Court in its Advisory Opinion, nor to its reasoning. In his dissenting opinion, Judge Abdul G. Koroma (Sierra Leone) concluded that the Court, in exercising its advisory jurisdiction, is entitled to reformulate or interpret a question put to it, but is not free to replace the question asked of it with its own question and then proceed to answer that question, which is what the Court had done in this case. Jeremic noted that this is the first time for the ICJ to examine a case on the legality of secession, and Serbia extensively stressed "the fact that this case will affect all other such cases in the future"; moreover, he stated, "[s]ince all countries were allowed to send their opinions to the court, we wanted � as many countries as possible � [to] send their opinion regarding the Kosovo independence and whether they think it is against international law. 6 0 obj <>119 0 R]/P 417 0 R/Pg 416 0 R/S/Link>> var d = new Date(); AppendPDF Pro 6.3 Linux 64 bit Aug 30 2019 Library 15.0.4 How and why did. Oxford, United Kingdom : Oxford University Press, 2015. Of the six principal organs of the United Nations, it is the only one not located in New York (United States of America). This volume is an edited collection of essays on various aspects of the 2010 Kosovo Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice. The name field is required. uuid:686c764d-adb7-11b2-0a00-402236010000 content. . a determination central to the r�gime established for Kosovo by the Security Council - without a request from the Council, it substitutes itself for the Security Council. Reflections on the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Kosovo: Interpreting Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999) <> (not yet rated) endstream 2020-02-19T14:29:09-08:00 endobj . Sean D. Murphy Please enter the message. From: Oxford Public International Law (http://opil.ouplaw.com). Resolution 1244 (1999) thus does not preclude the issuance of the declaration of independence of 17 February 2008 because the two instruments operate on a different level: unlike resolution 1244 (1999), the declaration of independence is an attempt to determine finally the status of Kosovo. 1 The Constitutional Framework gave the Special Representative power to oversee and, in certain circumstances, annul the acts of the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government. All rights reserved. The Court’s treatment of Resolution 1244 entailed a rich mosaic of issues, some of which were specific to the situation of Kosovo, but others that have ramifications for the interpretation and application of Security Council resolutions more generally. This Chapter is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Scholarly Commons. (July 1, 2014). The terms of resolution 1244 (1999) the Security Council did not reserve for itself the final determination of the situation in Kosovo and remained silent on the conditions for the final status of Kosovo. 35 0 obj http:\/\/www.worldcat.org\/oclc\/884743399> ; http:\/\/purl.oclc.org\/dataset\/WorldCat> ; https:\/\/opac.eui.eu\/client\/en_GB\/default\/search\/detailnonmodal\/ent:$002f$002fSD_ILS$002f0$002fSD_ILS:392404\/one>. document.cookie = "__adblocker=" + (adblocker ? endobj <>326 0 R]/P 428 0 R/Pg 425 0 R/S/Link>> Whether Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence violated Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) or international law generally. 2020-02-19T14:29:09-08:00 . The Court observed that the declaration of independence reflects the awareness of its authors that the final status negotiations had failed and that a critical moment for the future of Kosovo had been reached.