THEMEANINGANDRANGEOFTHE

PRINCIPLEOFSELFDETERMINATION
M.K.NAWAZ*

SEVERAILquestionshavebeenraisedinconnectionwiththeprin

cipleofselfdetermination:tWhatisselfdetermination?Isitan
individualright,orthatofapeople?Whatarethecircumstancesand
conditionsunderwhichselfdeterminationcanbeapplied?Arethere
anylimitationsgoverningtheprincipleofselfdetermination?Answers
tothesequestionshavevariedconsiderably,someofthemgoingtothe
extentofdenyingthatselfdeterminationbelongsintheprovinceoflaw
atall.'Suchaviewcannotremainunchallengedinalegalinquiry.Itis
incorrectinasmuchasitassumesthatthereisadichotomyoperatingat
theconceptuallevel.Selfdetermination,likeotherUnitedNations
Charterconceptssuchasdomesticjurisdictionandaggression,belongsas
muchtotheprovinceoflawasofpolitics,andnousefulpurposewillbe
servedbysetting"lawupagainstpolitics,orpoliticsagainstlaw. . .
betterbyfar'tofind
A.B.1947,AndhraUniversity;LL.B.1951,LL.M.1953,MadrasUniversity.Re.search
Associate,DukeUniversityRuleofLawResearchCenter.Theauthorgratefullyacknowledges
.theassistanceof.Mr,RobertScottoftheDukeUniversitySchoolofLawinthecollection
ofhistoricalmaterialusedinthepreparationofthisarticle.t Concerningabibliographyon
selfdetermination,itmay be saidingeneralthat treatisesoninternationallawcontain
little,ifany,information.OppenheimandBrierly,twooftheleadingBritishauthorities,make
nomentionofselfdetermination.SeeBiERLY,THELAwoFNAnONS(5thed.1955);
OPPENHEIM,INTERNATIONALLAW
(8thed.1955).AstoAmericanwriters,BriggsandBishoprefertoselfdetermination
intheircasebooks,butdonotdealwiththesubjectadequately.SeeBISHOP,INTER
NATIONALLAw274(2ded.1962);BRIOS,THELAWOFNATONS65(1952).Continental
writershavedevotedmoreattentiontoselfdetermination.See,e.g.,DEVisscnan,
TaEoRy ANDREALITYINPUBLicINTERNATiONAL

LAW5480,

12829(1957);

VERDROSS,

V6LKERREcHT41,226,428(1959).LevinhasrecentlyanalyzedtheSovietdoctrineofself
determination.Levin,ThePrincipleofSelfDeterminationofNationsinInternationalLaw,SoviET
YB.INT'LLAw45(1964).

Themostimportantsourceofinformationconcerningselfdeterminationis,ofcourse,
the,documentsoftheLeagueofNationsandtheUnitedNations.Higginshasrecently
analyzedUnitedNationspractice.HIGGINS,THEDEVELOPMENTOFINTERnATONAL
LAwTROUGHTHEPOLITICALORGANSOFTHEUNimrNATIONS90106(1963).
1

"Therightofselfdeterminationhasasyetfoundnostableplaceintheinternational

legalstructurenorhasitbeenacceptedbystatesasapolicytobeappliedconsistentlyand
acrosstheboard.Indeed,Iwouldsuggestthatitisessentiallymiscastintheroleofa
legalrightwhichcanbemadeanoperativepartofeitherdomesticorinternationalsystems."
EMERSON,FROMEMPIRETONAnON307(1960).

Vol.1965:82]

SELFDETERMINATION

withinthelimitsofpowertheelementsofcommoninterestonthebasis
ofwhichjointactionandagreedstandards[can]...beestablished.'"2The
argumentalsogivesinadequateregardtothedevelopmentsthathave
beentakingplaceinthefieldofselfdeterminationintheUnited
Nations.Althoughthisisnottoimplythatthescopeoftheprincipleof
selfdeterminationcanbedefinedonceandforall,northatitsfuture
coursecanbepredictedwithmathematicalprecision,thecontextin
whichitoperatescanbesetforthandthejuridicalaspectsofthedoctrine
ofselfdeterminationcanbeoutlined.

SELFDETERMINATIONINHISTORICALPERSPECTIVE

Historicallyspeaking,certainaspectsoftheprincipleofself
3

determinationareasoldasthenationstate. Thebestknownhistorical
instancesofselfdeterminationareprobablytheAmericanandFrench
Revolution.Nevertheless,internationallegaldoctrinewasslowto
recognizethejuridicalsignificanceofselfdetermination,
4

notwithstandingthewritingsofseveralearlyFrenchjurists. Woodrow
Wilson,however,effectedprofoundchangesinregardtoselfde
termination.ItwasprobablyWilson,morethananyotherperson,who
5

firstcontributedtoatheoryofselfdetermination. Wilsonnever
preciselydefinedtheprincipleofselfdetermination,buthispredilec
tionsweremanifestedinhisstatementtotheeffectthat"national
aspirationsmustberespected;peoplesmaynowbedominatedand
governedonlybytheirownconsent.'Selfdetermination'isnotamere
phraseitisanimperativeprincipleofaction."6Alsorelevantinthis
connectionisthefifthofWilson'sFourteenPoints:
Afree,openminded,andabsolutelyimpartialadjustmentofallcolonial
claims,baseduponastrictobservanceoftheprinciplethatin
determiningallsuchquestionsofsovereigntytheinterests
2HIGGINS, THE

DEVELOPMENTOFINTERNATIONALLAWTHROUGHTHEPOLITICAL

ORGANSOFTHEUNITEDNATIONS9(1963).

8SeegenerallyCOBBAN,NATIONALSELFDETERMINATION(1944).
'AnexcellentsummaryoftheviewsofseveralFrenchwriters,includingHoltzendorff,Bluntschli,
Bonfils,Despagnet,HallandPhillimore,willbefoundinWAMBAUGH,
AMONOGRAPHONPLEBIscITEs2226(1920).

5 "NearlyfortyyearsagoaProfessorofPoliticalSciencewhowasalsoPresident oftheUnited
States,PresidentWilson,enunciatedadoctrinewhichwas. . .widelyacceptedasasensible
proposition,thedoctrineofselfdetermination."JENNINGS,THE
APPROACHTOSELFGovERNMENT5556(1956).

(I1THEPuucPAPERSOFWOODROWWILSON,WARANDPEACE180(Baker&Doddeds.1927).

DUKELAWJOURNAL

(Vol.1965:82

ofthepopulationsconcernedmusthaveequalweightwiththeequitable
claimsofthegovernmentwhosetitleistobedetermined.

TheessenceoftheWilsonianconceptofselfdeterminationconsistedof
thenotionofselfgovernmentofpeoples.Similarviewshavebeen
expressedbyothercommentators."Thedoctrineofnationalself
determination,"saysSarahWambaugh,"isbasedonandinseparable
fromthatofpopularsovereignty.""Morerecently,KurtRablhassaid
that
viewedinhistoricalperspective,thedoctrineofthe'rightofself
determination'hasevolvedtomeanthatnopeoplemustbeforcedtolive
underforeigndominationorunderaconstitutionalsystemwhichitdoes
notagreeto.Everypeoplehastherighttolivewithinitsownterritoryin
externalfreedomandinternalliberty.

ThereisalsoconsiderabletheorizingamongtheCommunistsonthe
subjectofselfdetermination.Here,ofcourse,adoctrineofself
0

determination hasdevelopedwhichvariesconsiderablyfromthe
Wilsonianconcept.Stalin,whoisreportedtohavewrittenextensively
onthesubject,oncearguedthat"therighttoselfdeterminationcannot
andmustnotserveasanobstacletotheexercisebytheworkingclassof
itsrighttodictatorship.Theformermustgivewaytothelatter.""Since
theSovietdoctrineoperateswithintheoverallframeworkofMarxist
politicalthought,itisnecessarilyalimitedone.'

SELFDETERMINATIONANDTHELEAGUEOFNATIONS

Asnotedabove,theprincipleofselfdeterminationoccupiedanalmost
3

pivotalpositioninthepoliticalphilosophyofWoodrowWilson.1
Wilson'scontribution,however,consistsnotmerelyinhishaving
recognizedtheimportanceofthedoctrinebutalsoinhis
7WItuAMS,SOMEAsVEcrsOFTHECOVENANToFTHELEAOUEOFNATIONS

SWAMBAUGH,

243(1934).

op.cit.supranote4,at2.

OABL,DASSELBSTBESTIMMUNGSRECHTDERVOLKER272(1963).
2oFor anexcellentaccount

of

theBolshevikdoctrineofselfdeterminationsee1

CARR,THEBOLSHEVIKREVOLUTION,19171923,at41028(1950).Foramorerecent

Sovietinterpretationofselfdetermination,seeLevin,ThePrincipleofSelfDetermina

tionofNationsinInternationalLaw,SOVIETYB.INT'LLAW45(1963).

22STALIN,MARXISMANDTHENATIONALANDCOLONIALQUESTION168(2ded.1936),quotedin
COBBAN,op.cit.supranote3,at107.Seealso1CARR,op.cit.supranote

10, at426.
2

' ForasurveyofSovietattitudes,seeGoodman,TheCryofNationalLiberation:Recent
SovietAttitudesTowardsNationalSelfDetermination,14INT'LORGANIZAT10N

92106(1960).
28COBBAN,

op.cit.supranote3,at13.

SELFDETERMINATION

Vol.1965:82]

havingtakenmeasurestoinstitutionalizeit.Wilsononcestatedthat"if
thedesireforselfdeterminationofanypeopleintheworldislikelyto
affectthepeaceoftheworldorthegoodunderstandingbetweennations,
itbecomesthebusinessoftheLeague..."14Jessuphaspointedout
that"Wilsonbelievedaninternationalorganizationwasneededto
transformthedoctrineofselfdeterminationintopoliticalreality."'For
Wilson,theimplementationofselfdeterminationwastobecomeoneof
theessentialfunctionsoftheLeagueofNations;selfdeterminationwas
16

toconstituteanintegralpartoftheLeague. YettheCovenantofthe
LeagueofNationsdidnotcontainanyexplicitreferencetoself
determination.Article3oftheoriginaldraftoftheCovenantproposed
byWilsonexplicitlymentionedtheprincipleofselfdetermination:
TheContractingPowersuniteinguaranteeingtoeachotherpolitical
independenceandterritorialintegrity;butitisunderstoodbetweenthem
thatsuchterritorialreadjustments,ifany,asmayinthefuturebecome
necessarybyreasonofchangesinpresentracialconditionsand
aspirationsorpresentsocialandpoliticalrelationships,pursuanttothe
principleofselfdetermination,andalsosuchterritorialreadjustmentsas
mayinthejudgmentofthreefourthsoftheDelegatesbedemandedby
thewelfareandmanifestinterestofthepeoplesconcerned,maybe
effectedifagreeabletothosepeoples ....17
ThedraftarticleunderwentseveralchangesattheParisPeaceCon
ference,however,and"duetotheoppositionofthestatesmenwho
representedtheBritishEmpire,"thereferencetoselfdeterminationwas
8

eliminated.' Thisisnottosay,however,thattherewasnoreflectionof
theprincipleofselfdeterminationintheCovenant.Article22relatingto
mandateswasapartialrecognitionoftheprincipleofselfdetermination.
19

Thesignificanceofarticle22wasthefactthatitattackedthedoctrine
ofsovereignty.ThetheorythattheStatehadtorenderanaccounttoan
internationalorgani
1'2THEPUBLIcPAPERSOFWOODROWWILSON,WARANDPEAcE244(Baker&Doddeds.
1927),quotedinCOBBAN,op.cit.supranote3,at27.
5
2 jessup,SelfDeterminationTodayinPrincipleandinPractice,33VIRGINIA
QUARTERLY174,177(1957).

'aCOBBAN,op.cit.supranote3,at44.
7

' LANSING,THEPEACENEGOTIATIONSAPERSONALNARRATIVE93(1921).

18Id.at9495.

29"Indeed,Point5oftheFourteenPoints,whenitemphasizestheprincipleof
safeguarding'theinterestsofthepopulationsconcerned'intheadjustmentofallcolonialclaims,
maybetakenasopeningthedoortosomethinginthenatureoftheMandatoryscheme."
WIIIAMS,op.cit.supranote7,at201.

DUKELAWJOURNAL

[Vol.1965:82

zation,whichwasthequintessenceofthemandatesystem,wascer
tainlynewtointernationallaw.Williamshassaidthat"thisisaclearand
incontrovertibleassertionoftheexistenceofsomethingsuperiortothe
Stateinhumanaffairs."

20

Severalquestionsaroseconcerningtherelationsbetweensovereignty
andthemandatesystem,themostintricateofwhichwaswhowas
sovereigninamandatedterritory.Numerousanswershavebeengivento
thisquestionwhichonceplaguedinternationallawyers21Whileitmay
notbeeasytosaywhichoftheseanswersiscorrect,itcanbesaidthat
theviewthatthemandatoryshouldberegardedasthesovereignofthe
territoryisopentoseriousdoubt.2Suchathesiswouldrobthemandate
systemofitsmeaningandusefulness.Alsoofsomesignificancehereis
thequestionofwhoisentitledtochangethestatusofamandated
territory.Itissubmittedthatifamandatoryisnotthesovereignofa
mandate,afortioriitcannotchangethestatusofthemandatedterritory.
"[TlheLeagueofNations,"saysQuincyWright,"seemscompetentand
alonecompetenttochangethestatusofterritorynowunderarticle22.""
Furthermore,itshouldbenotedthatthedisappearanceoftheLeagueof
Nationsinnowayenlargesthepoweisorauthorityofthemandatory,
nordoesitremovethemandatoryfromthecategoryofmandatoies.

TheCaseoftheAalandIslands
DuringtheLeagueperiodseveralproblemsconnectedwith,orbearing
upon,theprincipleofselfdeterminationarose,andtheLeagueof
Nationshadtograpplewiththem,notwithstandingthefactthatthe
Covenantcontainednoreferencetoselfdetermination.Forexample,in
thecontroversybetweenFinlandandSwedenin1920concerningthe
AalandIslands,theInternationalCommitteeofJurists,appointedbythe
CounciloftheLeague,consideredthebearingofselfdeterminationon
therelativemeritsoftheparties.

24

20Id.at206.

22SeeIOPPENHEIM,INTERNATiONALLAW222n.5(8thed.1955).
2

ButseeRexv.Christian,11924]So.Afr.L.R.App.Div.101(1923),wheretheappellatedivision
oftheSupremeCourtofSouthAfricaheldthatthemandatory,thatis,theUnionofSouthAfrica,
hadsufficientinternalmajestastosupportaconvictionofoneoftheinhabitantsofSouthWest
Africaforhightreason.Thisdecisionissometimesinvokedinsupportofthetheoryofsovereignty
ofthemandatoryinrespectofthemandate.
:WKUHT,MANDATESUNDERTHELEAGUEOFNAnIONS506(1930).

"For

astatementoftheFinnishandSwedishcasesconcerningtheAalandIslands,

Vol.1965:82)

SELFDETERMINATION

TheCommitteeofJurists,referringtoselfdetermination,observedthat:
Althoughtheprincipleofselfdeterminationofpeoplesplaysanimportantpart
inmodernpoliticalthought,especiallysincetheGreatWar,itmustbepointed
outthatthereisnomentionofitintheCovenantoftheLeagueofNations.The
recognitionofthisprincipleinacertainnumberofinternationaltreatiescannot
beconsideredassufficienttoputituponthesamefootingasapositiveruleof
theLawofNations.
Onthecontrary,intheabsenceofexpressprovisionsininternationaltreaties,
therightofdisposingofnationalterritoryisessentiallyanattributeofthe
sovereigntyofeveryState.PositiveInternationalLawdoesnotrecognizethe
rightofnationalgroups,assuch,toseparatethemselvesfromtheStateofwhich
theyformpartbythesimpleexpressionofawish,anymorethanitrecognises
therightofotherStatestoclaimsuchaseparation

25

ThisstatementoftheCommitteeofJuristshassometimesbeeninvokedin
2

supportofthethesisthatselfdeterminationhasnobasisininternationallaw.
Thereareseveralobjectionstothisview.First,thisisnotacompletestatement
oftheCommitteeofJurists'expositiononselfdetermination.TheCommitteeof
Juristssaidinalaterpassagethat:
Undersuchcircumstances,[thosearisinginthecontextofrevolutionsand
wars]theprincipleofselfdeterminationofpeoplesmaybecalledintoplay.
Newaspirationsofcertainsectionsofanation,whicharesometimesbasedon
oldtraditionsoronacommonlanguageandcivilisation,maycometothe
surfaceandproduceeffectswhichmustbetakenintoaccountintheinterestsof
theinternalandexternalpeaceofnations.
Theprinciplerecognisingtherightsofpeoplestodeterminetheirpoliticalfate
maybeappliedinvariousways;themostimportantoftheseare,ontheone
handtheformationofanindependentState,andontheotherhandtherightof
choicebetweentwoexistingStates.

27

seeLEAauEOFNAmroNsOF.J.,SpecialSupp.No.1,Aug.1920,pp.324.Inthis
case,whileSwedeninvokedtheprincipleofselfdetermination,Finlanddeniedits
applicability.Swedenarguedthat:"ThereisnoneedtoremindtheCouncilthatwhen
peacewasbeingconcludedendeavoursweremade,intracingthefrontiersofthenew
States,toapplyasfaraspossibletheloftyprincipleoftherightofselfdeterminationof
thepeopleswhichthePeaceConferenceproclaimed.Thisprincipleisexpressedwith
particularforceinthereplyoftheAlliedandAssociatedGovernmentstotheGerman
counterproposalsof15thJune,1919."Id.at22.
23Id.,SpecialSupp.No.3,Oct.1920,p.5.
"EMERSON,op.cit.supranote1,at303.
1

LEAruEoFNATiONSOFF.J.,SpecialSupp.No.3,Oct.1920,p.6.

DUKELAWJOURNAL

[Vol.1965:82

Thispartofthecommittee'sexpositionmaynotwarranttheconclusion
thatselfdeterminationisaprincipleofinternationallaw,butitcertainly
justifiestheconclusionthattheCommitteeofJuristsrecognizedthe
significanceoftheprincipleofselfdeterminationincertain
circumstances.Furthermore,insofarastheprincipleofself
determinationrepresentsanewdevelopmentininternationallaw,itisnot
fairtojudgeitsvalidityonthebasisofthetraditionalrulesof
internationallawwhichitseekstomodify.Inanycase,manychanges
haveoccurredinthefieldofinternationallawingeneralandwithregard
toselfdeterminationinparticularsincetheexpositionoftheCommittee
ofJurists.
SELFDETERMINATIONANDTHEUNITEDNATIONS

Itmaybementionedattheveryoutsetthatselfdeterminationoccupiesa
farmoreimportantpositionintheUnitedNationsthanitdidinthe
LeagueofNations.Theexpression"selfdetermination"isexplicitly
mentionedintwoarticlesoftheCharter.Article1(2)specifiesoneofthe
purposesoftheUnitedNationstobethedevelopmentof"friendly
relationsamongnationsbasedonrespectfortheprincipleofequalrights
andselfdeterminationofpeoples,andtotakeotherappropriatemeasures
tostrengthenuniversalpeace."Article55,relatingtointernational
economicandsocialcooperation,statesthattheUnitedNationsshall
promotecertainobjectives"withaviewtothecreationofconditionsof
stabilityandwellbeingwhicharenecessaryforpeacefulandfriendly
relationsamongnationsbasedonrespectfortheprincipleofequalrights
andselfdeterminationofpeoples...."
Thefirstquestionthatnaturallyariseshereiswhatismeantbythe
conceptof"selfdetermination"intheabovearticles?Second,whatisthe
practiceoftheUnitedNationsonselfdetermination,andinwhatway
doesUnitedNationspracticeclarifythemeaningandcontentofself
determination?Anyattempttoanswerthesequestionsmustbeginwith
aninquiryintotheintentionsofthefoundingmembersoftheUnited
Nations.
TravauxPreparatoires
ItisofsomeinteresttonotethattheDumbartonOaksdraftofarticles1
(2)and55didnotcontainanyreferencetoselfdetermination.The
DumbartonOaksproposalcorrespondingtoarticle1(2)

Vol.1965:82]

SELFDETERMINATION

wasdesignedsimply"todevelopfriendlyrelationsamongnationsandto
takeotherappropriatemeasurestostrengtheninternationalpeace."The
expression"basedonrespectfortheprincipleofequalrightsandself
determinationofpeoples"wasaddedforthefirsttimeattheSan
FranciscoConferenceattheinstanceofthefoursponsoringpowers,
28

China,theUnitedKingdom,theUnitedStates,andtheSovietUnion.
Thesponsoringpowersleftnodefinitiverecordastowhattheymeantby
selfdeterminationorwhatitsmeaningshouldbeinthecontextof
articles1(2)and55.However,thecommitteewhichdiscussedthe
conceptofselfdeterminationhadthistosay:
Concerningtheprincipleofselfdetermination,itwasstrongly
emphasizedontheonesidethatthisprinciplecorrespondedcloselyto
thewillanddesiresofpeopleseverywhereandshouldbedearly
enunciatedintheChapter;ontheotherside,itwasstatedthatthe
principleconformedtothepurposesoftheCharteronlyinsofarasit
impliedtherightofselfgovernmentofpeoplesandnottherightof
secession

29

Onemaybetemptedtosaythatthisstatementisnotveryhelpfulin
determiningthemeaningofselfdeterminationofpeoplesinarticle1
(2).Itmayalsobesaid,as,indeed,HenriRolinoftheBelgiandelegation
pointedoutattheSanFranciscoConference,thattheusageoftheterms
30

"peoples"and"nations"inarticle1(2)isconfusing. Inorderto
removeanypossibledoubtsconcerningthescopeofselfdetermination
intheproposedamendment,Rolinsuggestedthefollowingtext:"To
strengtheninternationalorderonthebasisofrespectfortheessential
rightsandequalityofthestates,andofthepeoples'rightofself
31

determination." However,theBelgianproposalwasrejectedinteralia
forthefollowingreasons:
[P]aragraph2hasforapurposetostrengthenuniversalpeaceand
friendlyrelationsonthebasisofequalityorrightasstated.
TheequalityofstateswasdealtwithandacceptedunderChap
28It issaidthattheSovietUnioninitiatedthemovefortheadditionofwhat
subsequentlybecamearticle1(2)containingreferenceto"selfdeterminationofpeoples."In
explainingthescopeofthisconcept,Mr.Molotovisreportedtohavesaidatapressconferencethat
theSovietUnion"attachedfirstrateimportance"tothenewlyaddedprinciplesof"equalityandthe
selfdeterminationofnations."Thesegoals,itwasalleged,would"draw[the]particularattentionof
thepopulationofcoloniesandmandatedterritories,"whichwouldhelptorealizethemsooner.
RussFu.

&MuTsrz,AHistoRyoFTmUNrEDNA'ioNsCHARTER81011(1958).SeealsoLevin,

supranote10.
21Doc.No.343,1/I/16,6U.N.CONF.INT'LORG.Docs.296(1945).11Doc.No.374,1/1/17,6
U.N.CONF.INT'LORG.Docs.300(1945).
"1Ibid.

DUKELAWJOURNAL

[Vol.1965:82

terII,Principles,soitwasirrelevantheretothepointatissue.[W]hatis
intendedbyparagraph2istoproclaimtheequalrightsofpeoplesassuch,
consequentlytheirrighttoselfdetermination.EqualityOfrights,therefore,
extendsintheCharterto
states,nations,andpeoples.

32

Thefullcommitteecommenteduponarticle1(2)asfollows:
TheCommitteeunderstandsthattheprincipleofequalrightsofpeoplesandthat
ofselfdeterminationaretwocomplementarypointsofonestandardofconduct;
thattherespectofthatprincipleisabasisforthedevelopmentoffriendly
relationsandisoneofthemeasurestostrengthenuni-versalpeace;
thatanessentialelementoftheprincipleinquestionisafreeandgenuine
expressionofthewillofthepeople....sB
Afewcommentsmaybegermaneherewithregardtothedraftinghistoryof
article1(2).First,theconceptofselfdeterminationembodiedinarticle1(2)is
distinctfromtheconceptofequalityofstatesmentionedinarticle2(1).Second,
theCharterconceptofselfdeterminationiscloselyconnectedwith,andbears
upon,thenotionofthegenuinewillofthepeopleinagivenstate.Beyondthis,
itisnotclear,however,whattheintentionsofthefoundingmembersofthe
UnitedNationswerewithregardtoselfdeterminationinarticle1(2).
JuristicOpinion
Ithasbeenmentionedearlierthatjuristicopinionvarieswidelyonthequestion
ofthe.natureoftheprincipleofselfdetermination.Tosomewriters,
recognitionoftheprincipleofselfdetermination
34

Toothersit
representsanewdevelopmentininternationallaw.

meansnothingmorethanthedeclarationofanalreadyexistingruleof
internationallaw.

35

Whatevertherelativemeritsoftheseoppos

82

Doc.No.725,I/I/A/19,6U.N.CONF.INT'LORG.Does.696,704(1945).SSDoc.No.944,

I/1/34(1),6U.N.CONF. INT'L ORG.Docs.445,455(1945).

$'WmIGHT,INTERNATIONALLAWANDTHEUNITEDNATIONS

49(1960).

Levinsays

thattheprincipleofselfdetermination,whichexpresses"thelawconsciousnessofthe
masses,"hasbecome"aprimaryinternationallegalprinciple."Levin,supranote10,
at48.

5,The relevantprovisionsoftheCharterwerenotcreativeofanewruleoflaw. All

theydidwastoconfirmandlaydowninwritingaprinciplewhichhadlong been
growingandmaturingininternationalsocietyuntilitgainedgeneralrecognition.By
includingandlayingitdownasoneoftheprinciplesofthenewlybornorganization,the
Chartergaveexpressiontooneoftheelementsofinternationallawofthetime."Lachs,The
LawinandoftheUnitedNations,1INDIANJ.INT1'.L.

429,432(1961).

Vol.1965:82]

SELFDETERMINATION

ingviews,thefactremainsthatitispartoftheUnitedNationsCharter
andhasprofoundlegalsignificancetocontemporaryworldpolitics.On
thequestionofthemeaningandrangeoftheprinciple,opinionsamong
juristsalsovary.AccordingtoKelsen,"theformulaofArticle1,
paragraph2,hasthesamemeaningastheformulaofArticle2,paragraph
1,inwhichtheprinciplesofsovereigntyandequalityarecombinedina
ratherproblematicalwayintooneprinciple:thatof'sovereignequality.'
"31Kelsenarrivesatthisconclusionbyinterpretingtheexpression"self
determinationofpeoples"inarticle1(.)assovereigntyofthestates.With
allduerespect.itissubmittedthattheconclusionandthereasoning
leadingtheretoareopentodoubt.Theyareinconsistentwiththetravaux
7

preparatoires, andtheycannotbesupportedbyanyknowncanonof
treatyinterpretation.ItcouldscarcelybeexpectedthattheUnitedNa
tionsCharter,aformoftreaty,wouldmentiononeandthesameconcept
intwoarticles.Consequently,theKelsenianinterpretationaffordslittle
assistanceinconstruingarticle1(2).Ross,however,cameveryclosetoa
correctinterpretationwhenhewrotethatselfdeterminationmeans

arightforapeopleoragroup(inasociologicoethnographicalsense)to
determinethenationaldependencyoftheterritoryinhabited.Onthe
positivesidethiswouldmeanarighttoclaimterritorialchangesin
accordancewiththewishesofthepopulation;onthenegativesideit
wouldmeanthatnoterritorycouldbecededunlessconfirmedbya
plebiscite.

38

Ross'caveat,however,thatitis"quiteimpossibletodefinebyany
preciseorrationalcriterionthegrouptowhichthisrightshouldbelong..
...3hasmarredthesoundnessofhisinterpretation,which,ofcourse,is
otherwiseabovereproach.Thisisneithertosaythattheprincipleofself
determinationcanbesmoothlyapplied,northateverydemandfor
secessioninthenameofselfdeterminationistobeconsidered
40

rational. However,itisstronglyurgedthatdifficultiesinthe
applicationoftheprincipleofselfdeterminationarebynomeansunique
tothatprinciplealone.Whatis
"1KELSEN,LAWOFTHEUNITEDNATIONS53(1950).

"*Seetextaccompanyingnotes2833supra.
"3Ross,CONSTITUTIONOFTHEUNITEDNATIONS135(1950).
80Ibid.

"WehavenoreasontodisagreewiththeconclusionofDeVisscherthat"appliedwithout
discernment,selfdeterminationwouldleadtoanarchy."DEVsscom,THEORY
AND

REALITYINPuBucINTERNATIONALLAW128(1957).

DUKELAWJOURNAL
[Vol.1965:82

requiredisthedevisingofusefulcriteriafordeterminingtherationality
ofademandforselfdetermination.Herein,asEagletonhaspointedout,
lies"anewfieldofinternationallaw...beingopenedup;itdeservesthe
mostseriousstudy...."'WithintheUnitedNationsitshouldbecome
feasibletodeviseusefulcriteriaandmethodsforascertainingwhothe
"peoples"arethatareentitledtoselfdetermination.Consequently,the
scepticismraisedinsomequarters42astotheimplementationofthe
principleofselfdeterminationmakeslittlesense.Onemayagreeor
43

disagreewithaparticulardeterminationoftheUnitedNations, for
opinionscanvaryinthismatteraswellasothers.However,thefact
remainsthattheUnitedNationsoperatesasakindofguideandmonitor
oftheprincipleofselfdetermination.Onemust,therefore,lookinto
variousrelevantdecisionsofUnitedNationsorgansinordertoascertain
thescopeofselfdetermination.

UnitedNationsPractice
Perhapsitishardlynecessarytopointoutthevalueandsignificanceof
theresolutionsoftheorgansoftheUnitedNationsinthedevelopment

44

andcrystallizationofconceptscontainedintheUnitedNationsCharter.
ThisbecomesevidentfromanexaminationofUnitedNationsresolutions
4

relatingtothecolonialquestion "andthedoctrineofselfdetermination.
Theprincipleofselfdeterminationhasbeendiscussedonseveral
occasionsintheplenarymeetingsoftheGeneralAssembly,aswellasin
thesessionsoftheTrusteeshipandNonSelfGoverningTerritories
46

CommitteeoftheGeneralAssembly. Butforthemostpart,
,1Eagleton,

SelfDeterminationintheUnitedNations, 47

Am. J.

INT'L

L.

88,

93

(1958).
42 "Onthesurfaceit[theprincipleofselfdetermination]seemedreasonable: let
thepeopledecide.Itwasinfactridiculousbecausethepeoplecannotdecideuntilsomebodydecides
whoarethepeople."JENNINGS,op.cit.supranote5,at56.
,"'See generallyEagleton, ExcessesofSelfdetermination, 81 FOREIGN ArE. 592 (1958). "4
SeegenerallySloan,TheBindingForceofa'Recommendation'oftheGeneral

AssemblyoftheUnitedNations,25BRaIT.YB.INT'LL.1(1948);Schachter,LAWANDFLEXIILITY,
ANN.REV.U.N.ArF.17386(1952).Schachterhasmorerecentlyanalyzedindetailtheeffectof
resolutionsofUnitedNationsorgans,dissentingfromtheviewthatsuchresolutionshavenojuridical
significance.Schachter,Interpretationofthe
CharterinthePoliticalOrgansoftheUnitedNations,inLAW,STATE,ANDINTERNA
TIONAL

LEGALORDER:ESSAYSINHONOROFHANSKELSEN270(Engeled.1964).

"See

generallyNawaz,Colonies,SelfGovernment,andtheUnitedNations,11

INDIANYB.INT'LAFF.3(1962).

"SeegenerallyHIGGINS,op.cit.supranote2,at90106;Eagleton,supranote41;Lachs,supranote
35.

Vol.1965:82]

SELFDETERMINATION

thediscussionsandresolutionsoftheGeneralAssemblyhavecon
cernedwhatisgenerallyknownas"classical"colonialisminsuchcases
asCyprus,Algeria,Indonesia,TunisandMorocco.DespitetheUnited
Nations'presentpreoccupationwith"classical"colonialism,however,
therearealsootherformstobeconsidered.Thesehavecometothefore
asaresultoftheadoptionofthenowfamousresolutionconcerningthe
47

grantingofindependencetocolonialterritoriesandpeoples. The
resolution"solemnlyproclaimsthenecessityofbringingtoaspeedy
andunconditionalendcolonialisminallitsformsandmanifestations."
Thequestionthatariseshereiswhatformsofcolonialismareenvisioned
bytheresolution?Althoughitis
difficulttoanswerthisquestiondecisively,itissubmittedthatthe
resolutioncondemnsallformsofcolonialism.

48

Anotherimportantaspectoftheresolutionisthatitdoesnotrestrictthe
principleofselfdeterminationtopeopleslivingincolonies,butextends
theprincipletoallpeoples.Boththepreambleandtheoperativepartof
theresolutionineffectrefertoselfdeterminationasaprincipleof
universalapplicability.TherepresentativeofCyprusstatedinthe
plenarymeetingoftheGeneralAssemblythat:
AlthoughtheAfricanAsiandraftresolutionismainlyconcernedwith
thegrantingofindependencetocolonialcountries andpeoples,yetitisin
nowayrestricted.Itsscope,intermsoffreedomandselfdetermination,isall
embracing.Itincludesallpeoples,inwhateverlandandinwhatever
circumstancestheyare

dominatedandbywhatevermeanstheyaredeprivedoftheirinalienable
righttoselfdeterminationandfreedom.

49

Similarviewswereexpressedbyothermemberstates.Forexample,the
representativeofEcuadorsaidthat:
"TThisresolutionwasbaseduponatextproposedbyfortythreeAfroAsian

memberstatesoftheUnitedNations.Aboutseventytwodelegations
participatedinageneraldebateontheresolutionwhichlastedfromNovember
28,1960,toDecember14,1960.Forthedebates,seeU.N.GEN.Ass.OFF.
REc.15thSess.,Plenary981(A/PV.925)(1960).Asummaryofthedebatesand
thetextoftheresolutionisalsopublishedinU.N.Rlv.,Jan.1961,pp.69,37
41.ThisresolutionwasadoptedbytheGeneralAssemblywithoutdissent.
Australia,Belgium,DominicanRepublic,Portugal,theUnionofSouthAfrica,

theUnitedKingdomandtheUnitedStates,however,abstainedfromvoting.
Mr.TsiangofChinawasoftheopinionthattheclauseappliedtoalltypes of
colonialism.Hestatedthat:"Acolonyisacolony,whetheritistheproductofoverseas
expansionortheproductofoverlandexpansion."U.N.GEN.Ass.OFF.REc.
48

15thSess.,Plenary1145(AIPV.935)(1960).
'9 U.N. GEN. Ass.OFF. REc. 15thSess.,Plenary1256(A/PV.945)(1960).

DUKELAWJOURNAL

[Vol.1965:82

Thisprinciple[ofselfdetermination]must,however,beexercised
broadlywithoutdiscriminationandwithoutadmittingexclusivist
subtletiesorfallaciousexceptions,whetherfromthesideofclassic
colonialismorofneocolonialism,andwhetherfromthe
leftortheright.r
0

Theresolutionalsobearsuponthequestionoftheexerciseof
sovereigntyinacolonialterritory.Itdeclaresthat"allpeopleshavean
inalienablerighttocompletefreedom,theexerciseoftheirsovereignty
andtheintegrityoftheirnationalterritory."Whatdoesthissignify?
Whatfreedomsarereferredto?Whatismeantby"integrityoftheir
nationalterritory"?Thesearealldifficultquestionstoanswer,butone
canperceivethegeneraldirectioninwhichthewindsofchangeare
blowing.ThefollowingstatementoftheIranianrepresentative,inthe
plenarymeetingoftheAssembly,probablyservestoenlightenthe
meaningofthispassage:
ThecolonialPowersmustrecognizethatoneofthefirstandmost
importantattributesofapeople'sindependenceistheexerciseof
sovereignty,whichisthesoleprerogativeofthoselivingwithinthe
nationalterritory.Sovereigntyappertainstothembothdefactoand
dejureandnoonemayexerciseitontheirbehalfwithouttheirfreely
givenconsent.

51

Fromthisitwouldappearthatsovereigntyinacolonialterritorybelongs
tothepeople,andthattheexerciseofitshouldbeinaccordancewiththe
wishesofthecolonialpeoples.
Themostimportantaspectoftheresolution,however,consistsinits
providingsubstancetoanotherwiseabstractconceptofself
determination.Theresolutionnotonlydeclaresthatallpeopleshavea
rightofselfdetermination,butproclaimsthat"byvirtueofthatright
theyfreelydeterminetheirpoliticalstatusandfreelypursuetheir
economic,socialandculturaldevelopment."Inotherwords,theconcept
ofselfdeterminationhasmorethanpoliticalcontent;indeed,itappears
asacomprehensivedoctrineencompassingeconomic,socialandcultural
factors.AccordingtotheVenezuelanrepresentative,theprincipleofself
determinationincludes
therightofeverypeopletochooseitsownformofgovernment,toenjoy
itsspiritualandmaterialpatrimonywithoutrestriction,tolivefreelyin
accordancewithitsmostcherishedtraditions,and

11U.N.GEN.Ass.O'F.Rzc.15thSess.,Plenary1101(A/PV.933)(1960)."1U.N. GEN. Ass.

OFF. REc. 15thSess.,Plenary994 (A/PV.926)(1960).

Vol.1965:82]

SELFDETERMINATION

tobeexemptfromanyformofsubjectiontoanyothermore
52

powerfulnationorpeople.
Itpurportstocondemnallformsofdomination.Itseekstoremovetheevilsof
colonialisminvolving"politicalcaptivity,economicdomination,social
enslavementandculturalsubjugation...."53
DebateintheGeneralAssemblywasalsoconcernedwiththequestionofthe
compatibilityoftheresolutionwiththeCharter.Thecaseofthesponsoring
memberswasputforwardbyCeylonasfollows:
Afterall,itdoesnotrequiregreatintelligenceorgreatwisdomtoseethatArticle
78,76and,whatismore,Article1,paragraph2,oftheCharter,orArticle55,
areverysimplematters,propositionswhichareacceptedbytheworld
community,andyet,intheimplementationoftheseArticleswefindthatthese
authoritieshavenotconformedtotheobligations,andthatis,asIsay,the
justificationforourdraftresolution.

54

55

Similarviewswereexpressedbyothermemberstates. Intheinterpretationof
thesponsoringmembers,thisdeclarationsaysnothingmorethanwhatisalready
containedintheUnitedNationsCharter.Itonlyclarifiestheprincipleofself
determinationcontainedintheCharter.

56

Thatselfdeterminationisnotanemptyphrase,butaprincipleoflawwhichcan
beappliedtocontemporaryworldpolitics,maybedemonstratedbyreferenceto
suchconcretecasesasAngolaandMalaysia.
TheCaseofAngola

AtonetimePortugalarguedthattherewasnoneedtoapplytheprinciple
7

ofselfdeterminationtoAngola. Thisargumentdid
12U.N. GEN. Ass.Orr.REc.15thSess.,Plenary1200(A/PV.939)(1960). U.N.GEN.Ass.Orv.
REc.15thSess.,Plenary1012(A/PV.927)(1960).
5'U.N.GEN.Ass.OrF.Rxc.15thSess.,Plenary1002(A/PV.926)(1960).
See thestatementofthePhilippinesrepresentative.U.N.GEN.Ass. OFF. REc. 15thSess.,
Plenary1103(A/PV.933)(1960).
"TheinterpretationoftheUnitedStates,however,wasthatsomeofthetermsoftheresolutiongo
beyondthelanguageoftheCharter.U.N.GEN.Ass.OFF.REc.15th
Sess.,Plenary1283(A/PV.947)(1960).
7
4 InitscommentsonthereportoftheSubcommitteeontheSituationinAngola,thePortuguese
delegationemphasizedthat"therehaveneverbeendemonstrationswiththispurpose[viz.,self
determination]inviewwhichhavehadtoberepressedbytheauthorities."ReportoftheSpecial
CommitteeonTerritoriesunderPortuguese

Administration,U.N.GEN.Ass.OFF.Rae.17thSess.,Annexes,AgendaItemNo.54,at82
(A/5160)(1962).InJune1961,PremierSalazarisreportedtohaveannouncedthattherewasnoneed
fortheexpressionofselfdeterminationbythepeopleofthe

DUKELAWJOURNAL

[Vol.1965:82

notfindfavorwiththeUnitedNations,however,whichdeclaredmore
58

thanoncethattheprincipleofselfdeterminationshouldapply. Inthe
latestresolutiononthesubject,theSecurityCouncilcalleduponall
statestocomplywithaformerresolutioncallinguponPortugalto
implementtheimmediaterecognitionoftherightofpeoplesofthe
territoriesunderitsadministrationtoselfdeterminationand
59

independence.TheAngolansthemselvesagitatedforindependence.
TheUnitedNationsSpecialCommitteeonTerritoriesunderPortuguese
Administrationreportedthatrepresentativesofvariouspolitical
organizationswhichithadexaminedtoldthecommitteethattheir
organizationswerededicatedtotheattainmentofindependence."The
NationalFrontfortheLiberationofAngola(FNLA)announcedin1962
thatithadsetupaprovisionalAngolangovernmentinexileinthe
Congo.

61

Thereisperhapslittlejustificationtodayfortheargumentthatthe
principleofselfdeterminationdoesnotapplytoAngola.Itisofsome
interesttomarktherecentchangesinthePortuguesepositioninregard
toAngola.NolongerdoesPortugalarguethatselfdeterminationdoes
notapply;itonlymaintainsthatthemeaningattributedtoself
determinationintheUnitedNations'resolutionsisincorrect.Inthis
connectionthepreciseargumentofthePortugueseforeignminister,who
participatedinthejointtalksbetweenPortugalandtheAfricanstates,
wastotheeffectthat:
Frankly,Portugalwasopposedtoacertainconceptofselfdetermination
whichispredeterminedinitsresultsandwhichignoresallactsunlessthey
aredoneinaccordancewithcertainresolutionsorcriteria.Portugaldidnot
believethatselfdeterminationcouldbepredetermined.Portugalbelieved
thattherewasmorethanonemodalityofselfdeterminationjustasthere
wasmorethanonemodalitywithregardtotheformofadministrationofa
State.SelfdeterminationtoPortfugalmeanttheagreementandconsent
overseasterritoriesfor"thiswasdonelongagoandisexpressedandconfirmedinthe
Constitution."Ibid.
58Itmustbementionedherethatalmostallstates,exceptPortugal,have'cometoregard
theprincipleofselfdeterminationasapplicabletoAngola.Forexample,Mr.Adlai
Stevenson,U.S.AmbassadortotheUnitedNations,statedthat"intheviewoftheUnited
Statesdelegation,threegreatprinciplesareinvolved.Firstis
theprincipleofselfdetermination...."46DEP'T STATEBuLL.385(1962).
g'ForanaccountoftheobjectivesofthepoliticalpartiesoftheAngolansinand outside
Angola,SeeU.N.GEN.Ass.OFP.REc.16thSess.,Supp.No.16,at42(A/4978)

(1962);U.N.GEN.Ass.OFF.R.e.17thSess.,Anhexes,AgendaItemNo.54,at28-35

(A/5160)(1962).
:Id.at31.

"N.Y.

Times,April6,1962,p.1,col.1.

Vol.1965:82]

SELFDETERMINATION

ofthepopulationtoacertainpoliticalstructure,typeofStateandadministrative
organization...
ToPortugal,selfdeterminationmeanttheconsentofthepeopletoacertain
structureandpoliticalorganization.Itcameaboutbyparticipationin
administrationandbyparticipationinpoliticallife.

62

Thisinterpretationofselfdetermination,however,wasopposedbythe
spokesmenfortheAfricanStatesofLiberia,Madagascar,SierraLeone
andTunisia,whoassertedthat"itwasessentialthatthepeopleofthe
PortugueseTerritoriesshouldbeabletomaketheimportantdecisionsas
towhattheirpresentandfuturepoliticalrelationshipwithPortugal
shouldbe."6ThusweseedifferencesofopinionbetweenPortugalandthe
Africanstateswithregardtothescopeofselfdetermination.However,thefact
thatPortugalevenagreedtodiscusstheAngolanproblemwiththeAfrican
statesataconferencetableandrecognizedtherelevanceofselfdetermination
totheAngolanproblemishighlysignificant.Itprobablyservestoshowthe
impactoftheUnitedNations,ontheonehand,andtherealityoftheconceptof
selfdeterminationontheother.Astotherelativemeritsofthearguments
advancedbytheinterestedstatesonthescopeofselfdetermination,wehave
alreadystatedthatselfdeterminationderivesitscontentfromthedecisionsof
theorgansoftheUnitedNations.Accordingly,Angolanshavetherightto
determinefreelytheirpoliticalstatusandpursuetheireconomic,socialand
culturaldevelopment.ThismeansthattheAngolanscanhavecomplete
independenceoranyotherstatuswhichtheAngolansthemselvesfreely
determine.TheUnitedNationsistheretoinsurethatthedecisionsAngolans
arriveathavebeenarrivedatvoluntarily.Portugalsurelycannotlegallydictate
thepoliticalfutureofAngola.

TheCaseofMalaysia
ThecaseofMalaysiaservesasanotherillustrationoftheapplicationofthe
principleofselfdetermination.Notinfrequently,itissupposedthatself
determinationisaforceforpromotingsecessionarytendenciesamongnational
groupswithinstates.ButfromtheMalaysiansituationwelearnthatself
determinationhasother
"ReportbytheSecretaryGeneralinPursuanceoftheResolutionAdoptedbytheSecurityCouncil
atits1049thMeetingon31July1963(S15380),U.N.Doc.No.S/5448,at4(1963).
8

0Id.at5.

DUKELAWJOURNAL

[Vol.1965:82

dimensionsalso.InthecaseofMalaysia,theSecretaryGeneralofthe
UnitedNationswasentrustedwiththetaskofascertaining,priortothe
establishmentoftheFederationofMalaysia,thewishesofthepeopleof
Sabah(NorthBorneo)andSarawakonthequestionoftheproposed
federation.TheSecretaryGeneralwasspecificallyrequiredtoinsure
4

thatprincipleIXofresolution1541(XV)6 wascompliedwithbythe
parties.IndonesiaandthePhilippines,twooftheStateswhichopposed
theformationofthefederation,statedthattheywouldwelcomeMalaysia
iftheSecretaryGeneralweresatisfiedthattherehadbeencompliance
withtheresolution.TheSecretaryGeneralacceptedthetaskand
appointedaUnitedNationsmissiontogotothesceneandascertainthe
factsrelatingtotheconsentofthepeoplelivinginSabahandSarawakon
theissueofthefederation."TheUnitedNationsMalaysiaMissionre
ported[in1963]...thatagreatmajorityofthepeopleofSarawakand
Sabah(NorthBorneo)favoredparticipationofthetwoterritoriesinthe
5

proposedFederationofMalaysia." Themissionadoptedthreedifferent
modalitiesforascertainingthewishesofthepeople.First,therewas
consultationwiththelegislativeinstitutionsinthetwoterritories.In
Sarawak,theterritory'shighestlegislativebodyauthorizedthegovernor
toinitialthedraftagreementforthefederationonbehalfofSarawak.
TherewassimilaractionbythehighestlegislativeorganofSabah.The
secondmodalityadoptedbytheUnitedNationsmissionwasthatof
consultationwithrepresentativesofthepeopleintheaboveterritories.
Thisconsultationdisclosed,accordingtothemissionreport,thatthe
representativesexpressedthemselvesinfavoroftheproposedFederation
ofMalaysiabyamarginofbetterthantwotoone.Thethirddevice
employedbythemissionwastocollecttheopinionoftheelectoratein
SarawakandSabahontheMalaysiaissue.About61percentofthe
peopleofSarawakwerefoundtofavorMalaysia,22.2percentopposed
thefed
0"PrincipleIXprovidesasfollows:"Integrationshouldhavecomeaboutinthefollowing
circumstances:(a)theintegratingterritoryshouldhaveattainedanadvancedstageof
selfgovernmentwithfreepoliticalinstitutions,sothatitspeopleswouldhavethe
capacitytomakearesponsiblechoicethroughinformedanddemocraticprocesses;(b)
Theintegrationshouldbetheresultofthefreelyexpressedwishesoftheterritory's
peoplesactingwithfullknowledgeofthechangeintheirstatus,theirwisheshavingbeen
expressedthroughinformedanddemocraticprocesses,impartiallyconductedandbased
onuniversaladultsuffrage.TheUnitedNationscould,whenitdeemsitnecessary,
supervisetheseprocesses."U.N.REV.,Aug.Sept.
1963,p.12.
05U.N.RFv., Oct. 1963,p.11.

Vol.1965:82]

SELFDETERMINATION

eration,and16.8percentremainedneutral.Themissionsimilarlyfound
thatagreatmajorityofthepeopleofSabahsupportedtheproposed
FederationofMalaysia.Themissionalsoconsultedwithnonpolitical
groupsandorganizations,theresultsofwhichindicatedthattheissueof
Malaysiawaswidelydiscussedamongthepeopleatthetimeofthe
elections,andthatamajorityfavoredtheproposedfederation.The
missionfoundseveralmotives,suchassecurityandeconomic
considerations,forsupportingtheproposedfederation.Therewasalsoan
expectationthattheproposedfederationwouldleadtoharmonyamong
theseveralethnicgroupslivingintheterritories.
TheMalaysiamissionalsoconsideredtheeffectofpoliticaldetentionof
personseligibletovoteontheissueoffederationandconcluded,inthe
wordsoftheSecretaryGeneral,that"theactualvotesofthisgroup
wouldnothavebeensufficienttohavehadamaterialeffectonthe
'66

result." TheSecretaryGeneralacceptedthefindingsofthemission
andreportedtothepartiestotheManilaAgreementthattherewas
completecompliancewiththeprincipleofselfdeterminationwithinthe
requirementsofprincipleIXofresolution1541(XV)oftheGeneral
Assembly.ItisofsomeinteresttonotethatalthoughprincipleIXis
containedinaGeneralAssemblyresolutionwhichlists"principleswhich
shouldguideMembersindeterminingwhetherornotanobligation
existstotransmitinformationcalledforunderArticle73(e)ofthe
Charter,"itwasappliedhereinacaseinvolvingtheissueofself
determinationofpeoples.Thistendstoindicatetheinterrelationship
betweendecolonizationandselfdeterminationandtheusefulnessofthe
principlesdevelopedinthecontextofdecolonizationtotheissueofself
determinationingeneral.

ARETROSPECT
Oneofthemainpointsthatemergesfromthepresentstudyisthatself
determinationconstitutesoneofthemodemprinciplesofinternational
law.ItderivesitsvalidityprincipallyfromtheCharteroftheUnited
Nations.TheCharterdoesnot,however,definetheconceptanymore
thanitdoesaggressionordomesticjurisdiction.Onehastolooktothe
variousresolutionsoftheorgansoftheUnitedNationstoascertainits
meaningandcontent.Itis,indeed,
60Id.at15.FortheSecretaryGeneral'sconclusionsontheMalaysiamission,seeid.at1415.

DUKELAWJOURNAL

(Vol.1965:82

thebodyofprecedentsintheUnitedNationsthatenrichestheprincipleof
selfdetermination.
Oneofthequestionsthathasbeenraisedinconnectionwiththeprinciple
ofselfdeterminationconcernsthecircumstancesorcasesinwhichitcan
beapplied.Itisextremelydifficult,ifnotimpossible,tovisualizethe
differentkindsofcasesinwhichtheprincipleofselfdeterminationcan
beemployed.Thisisnolesstrue,however,withregardtootherconcepts
referredtointheUnitedNationsCharter.Whatcanbedoneistoutilize
thebodyofprecedentsdevelopedintheUnitedNationsinsimilar
circumstances.
Theprincipleofselfdeterminationhassofarbeeninvokedonlyinthe
contextofdecolonization.Morespecifically,itwasinvokedbypeoples
livingincolonialterritoriesseekingselfgovernmentorindependence.
CasesinpointareIndonesia,Algeria,andCyprus.Inthesecasesthe
principleoperatedasaforcefortheseparationofterritoryfromastate.
Butselfdeterminationhasotherdimensionsalso.InthecaseofMalaysia
itwasdemonstratedthatselfdeterminationcanbeaninstrumentfor
integrationandunification,which,ofcourse,mustbebaseduponthe
freelyexpressedwishesanddesiresofthepeopleclaimingtheinterestor
rightinquestion.TheresolutionsoftheorgansoftheUnitedNations
servegenerallyasguidelinesindeterminingthenatureofthewishesofa
people.Inascertainingthewishesofapeople,onecanemployany
modalitythatisbestunderthecircumstances.TheUnitedNationscan
andshouldoperateasthelegalinstrumentalityforupholdingornegating
theclaimsofselfdeterminationofagroupofpeopleinaparticularcase.
Therightofselfdeterminationextendstoeconomic,socialandcultural
matters.Thefactthatithassofarnotbeenemployedforthispurpose,or
employedtothesamedegreeasinthecaseofpoliticalmatters,doesnot
inanywayprecludeitsbeinginvokedonfutureoccasions.
Thequestionhasalsobeenraisedastowhethertherightofself
determinationbelongstoanindividualortoagroupofpeople.Thecases
thathavecomeupfordiscussionanddecisionintheUnitedNations
wouldseemtosuggestthattherightofselfdeterminationbelongstoa
collectivityratherthantoanindividual.Casesinpointarethose
involvingtheAalandIslandsandMalaysia.Thisisnottosaythatself
determinationcannotbecomeanindividual

Vol.1965:82]

SELFDETERMINATION 101

right;butsofarnoeffortshavebeenmadetovestintheindividualtherightof
selfdetermination.

67

Theprinciple"ofselfdeterminationrepresentsanimportantmovementaway
fromtheoldlegalviewunderwhichinternationallawrightspertainonlyto
68

statesandgovernments,andnottogroupsorindividuals." Alogicalcorollary
ofthisdevelopmentisthatmatterscoveredbyselfdeterminationare
automaticallyliftedfromdomainereservdandareregulatedbyinternational
lawandtheUnitedNations.

07EventhesocalledDraftCovenantsonHumanRightsdonotconfertherightofself
determinationonanindividual.SeeSOHN,BASICDOCUMENTSOF THEUNITED
NATIONS136(1956).

08HIGGINS,THEDEVELOPMENTOFINTERNATIONALLAwTHROUGHTHEPOLITICAL
ORGANSOFTHEUNITEDNATIONS106(1963).
"Old.at103.