Friday, March 14, 2014

Referendum in Crimea: Legality and Implications.

These days, the international issue, hovering the newspapers, is the issue of referendum in Crimea. In this post, I will post about the meaning, legality and implications of legality in Crimea. 
referendum (also known as plebiscite, or a vote on a ballot question) is the process of democracy, wherein a direct vote is cast by electorates on the issue of either accepting or rejecting a particular proposal. This process can be used for adoption of a new constitution, a constitutional amendment, or a law. It is a right reserved to the people to "approve or reject" an act of the legislature, or legislation that has been referred to them by the legislature.

Legality of Referendum in Crimea.
The question for referendum is the whether the people of Crimea (majority of whom are ethnically Russian), want to part themselves off from Ukraine and embrace the arms of the Russian Federation[1]. Both the Crimean parliament and the city council of Sevastopol consider the referendum legitimate as they consider the ousting of the former President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, as an illegal act, arguing that it did not follow due process. Because of this, the bodies argue that they must inquire of its people what they want of their future.
As far as the legality of referendum in Crimea is concerned, Russia and America are don’t see it in same sense. Vladimir Putin insists that "the steps taken by the legitimate leadership of Crimea are based on the norms of international law". Barack Obama, on the other hand, rejects the referendum as he says that "we are well beyond the days when borders can be redrawn over the heads of democratic leaders."

Violation of Ukrainian law. 
From Ukraine's stand point, Article 73 of the Ukrainian Constitution is plain in terms of the issue of present referendum. It says: "Alterations to the territory of Ukraine shall be resolved exclusively by the All-Ukrainian referendum." But opposite to this, Crimea is not allowing the rest of Ukraine's 44m people to weigh in on the fate of the peninsula. Hence, the upcoming referendum is bound to violate Ukrainian law.
However, it is worth noting that secession movements, in majority of historical incidents, have proceeded without the permission of the mother country. Example being, America's fight for independence was an illegal war of secession against Britain. The most recent one is that of Kosovo (formed in 2008, under the modern international legal regime), whose split from Serbia did not have the backing of the government in Belgrade, nor that of dozens of other states. Yet it was recognised by a large majority of UN member countries. Situation of Crimea is also similar to that of Kosovo. 

ICJ Verdict favors right of self determination.
For the clear picture in the legal perspective, we should look into the judgment of the International Court of Justice delivered in 2010, regarding the declaration of independence by Kosovo in 2008[2], wherein Judge Hisashi Owada, president of the ICJ held that:
"The court considers that general international law contains no applicable prohibition of declaration of independence."

[1] Crimea is an autonomous republic.

[2] Accordance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence in respect of Kosovo (Request for Advisory Opinion).

No comments:

Post a Comment