Legal personality of state-like entities. State-like formations as subjects of international law. International legal status of subjects of the federation

05.03.2020

Some political-territorial formations also enjoy international legal status. Among them were the so-called. Free Cities, West Berlin. This category of entities includes the Vatican and the Order of Malta. Since these formations are most like mini-states and have almost all the features of a state, they are called "state-like formations".

The legal capacity of free cities was determined by the relevant international treaties. Thus, according to the provisions of the Vienna Treaty of 1815, Krakow was declared a free city (1815-1846). Under the Versailles Peace Treaty of 1919, Danzig (1920-1939) enjoyed the status of a “free state”, and in accordance with the peace treaty with Italy in 1947, the creation of the Free Territory of Trieste was provided, which, however, was never created.

West Berlin (1971-1990) had a special status granted by the quadripartite agreement on West Berlin in 1971. In accordance with this agreement, the western sectors of Berlin were united into a special political entity with their own authorities (the Senate, the prosecutor's office, the court, etc.), to which some of the powers were transferred, for example, the issuance of regulations. A number of powers were exercised by the allied authorities of the victorious powers. The interests of the population of West Berlin in international relations were represented and defended by consular officials of the FRG.

The Vatican is a city-state located within the capital of Italy - Rome. Here is the residence of the head of the Catholic Church - the Pope. The legal status of the Vatican is determined by the Lateran Agreements signed between the Italian state and the Holy See on February 11, 1929, which are basically still in force today. In accordance with this document, the Vatican enjoys certain sovereign rights: it has its own territory, legislation, citizenship, etc. The Vatican actively participates in international relations, establishes permanent missions in other states (there is also a representative office of the Vatican in Russia), headed by papal nuncios (ambassadors), participates in international organizations, in conferences, signs international treaties, etc.

The Order of Malta is a religious formation with its administrative center in Rome. The Order of Malta actively participates in international relations, concludes agreements, exchanges representations with states, has observer missions in the UN, UNESCO and a number of other international organizations *.

International legal status of subjects of the federation

In international practice, as well as foreign international legal doctrine, it is recognized that the subjects of some federations are independent states, whose sovereignty is limited by joining the federation. The subjects of the federation are recognized to have the right to act in international relations within the framework established by federal legislation.

The German constitution, for example, provides that the Länder, with the consent of the federal government, may conclude treaties with foreign states. Norms of a similar content are enshrined in the law of some other federal states. At present, the states of the Federal Republic of Germany, the provinces of Canada, the states of the USA, the states of Australia and other entities, which in this regard are recognized as subjects of international law, are actively involved in international relations.

The international activity of subjects of foreign federations develops in the following main directions: the conclusion of international agreements; opening representative offices in other states; participation in the activities of some international organizations.

The question arises whether there are norms in international law on the international legal personality of subjects of the federation?

As is known, the most important element of international legal personality is contractual legal capacity. It represents the right to directly participate in the creation of international legal norms and is inherent in any subject of international law from the moment of its inception.

The issues of concluding, executing and terminating treaties by states are regulated primarily by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969. Neither the 1969 Convention nor other international documents provide for the possibility of independent conclusion of international treaties by subjects of the federation.

Generally speaking, international law does not contain a ban on the establishment of contractual relations between states and subjects of federations and subjects among themselves. However, international law does not classify these agreements as international treaties, just as contracts between the state and a large foreign enterprise are not. In order to be a subject of the law of international treaties, it is not enough to be a party to an international agreement. It is also necessary to have the legal capacity to conclude international treaties.

The question arises about the international legal status of the subjects of the Russian Federation.

International legal status of subjects of the Russian Federation

As is known, the 1977 Constitution of the USSR recognized the union republics as subjects of international law. Ukraine and Belarus were members of the UN , participated in many international treaties. Less active participants in international relations were other union republics, whose constitutions provided for the possibility of concluding international treaties and exchanging missions with foreign states. With the collapse of the USSR, the former Soviet republics acquired full international legal personality, and the problem of their status as independent subjects of international law disappeared.

However, the processes of sovereignization that engulfed the newly independent states raised the question of the legal personality of the former national-state (autonomous republics) and administrative-territorial (regions, territories) formations. This problem acquired special significance with the adoption of the new Constitution of the Russian Federation in 1993 and the conclusion of the Federal Treaty. Today, some subjects of the Russian Federation declared their international legal personality.

The subjects of the Russian Federation try to act independently in international relations, conclude agreements with the subjects of foreign federations and administrative-territorial units, exchange representations with them and fix the relevant provisions in their legislation. The charter of the Voronezh region of 1995, for example, recognizes that the organizational and legal forms of the region's international relations are forms generally accepted in international practice, with the exception of treaties (agreements) of the interstate level. Taking part in international and foreign economic relations on its own or with other subjects of the Russian Federation, the Voronezh Region opens representative offices on the territory of foreign states to represent the interests of the region, which act in accordance with the legislation of the host country.

The normative acts of some constituent entities of the Russian Federation provide for the possibility of them concluding international treaties on their own behalf. Yes, Art. 8 of the 1995 Charter of the Voronezh Region establishes that international treaties of the Voronezh Region are part of the region's legal system. Norms of a similar content are fixed in Art. 6 of the Charter of the Sverdlovsk Region 1994, art. 45 of the Charter (Basic Law) of the Stavropol Territory of 1994, Art. 20 of the Charter of the Irkutsk region of 1995 and other charters of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, as well as in the constitutions of the republics (Article 61 of the Constitution of the Republic of Tatarstan).

Moreover, in some constituent entities of the Russian Federation, regulations have been adopted that regulate the procedure for concluding, executing and terminating contracts, for example, the law of the Tyumen region “On international agreements of the Tyumen region and treaties of the Tyumen region with the constituent entities of the Russian Federation” was adopted in 1995. The law of the Voronezh region “On legal normative acts of the Voronezh region" 1995 establishes (Article 17) that the state authorities of the region have the right to conclude agreements that are regulatory legal acts with the state authorities of the Russian Federation, with the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, with foreign states on issues representing their common, mutual interest.

However, the statements of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation about their international contractual legal capacity do not yet mean, in my deep conviction, the existence of this legal quality in reality. It is necessary to analyze the relevant norms of legislation.

Federal legislation does not address this issue yet.

According to the Constitution of the Russian Federation (clause “o”, part 1, article 72), the coordination of international and foreign economic relations of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation belongs to the joint jurisdiction of the Russian Federation and the constituent entities of the Federation. However, the Constitution does not directly speak about the possibility of the subjects of the Russian Federation to conclude agreements that would be international treaties. The Federal Treaty does not contain such norms either.

The Federal Law "On International Treaties of the Russian Federation" of 1995 also refers the conclusion of international treaties of the Russian Federation to the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation. It has been established that the international treaties of the Russian Federation concerning issues related to the jurisdiction of the subjects of the Federation are concluded in agreement with the relevant bodies of the subjects. At the same time, the main provisions of agreements affecting issues of joint jurisdiction should be sent for submission of proposals to the relevant bodies of the subject of the federation, which, however, do not have the right to veto the conclusion of the agreement. The 1995 law does not say anything about the agreements of the subjects of the Federation.

It should also be taken into account that neither the Constitution of the Russian Federation nor the Federal Constitutional Law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation” dated July 21, 1994 fix the norms on checking the constitutionality of international treaties of the subjects of the Federation, although such a procedure is provided for international treaties of the Russian Federation.

As for the practice of exchanging representations with subjects of foreign federations, this quality is not the main one in characterizing international legal personality, however, we note that neither the Constitution nor the legislation of the Russian Federation has yet regulated this issue. These representative offices are not opened on the basis of reciprocity and are accredited by any authority of a subject of a foreign federation or territorial unit. These bodies, being foreign legal entities, do not have the status of diplomatic or consular missions and are not subject to the provisions of the relevant conventions on diplomatic and consular relations.

The same can be said about the membership of the subjects of the Russian Federation in international organizations. It is known that the statutes of some international organizations (UNESCO, WHO, etc.) allow membership in them of entities that are not independent states. However, firstly, membership in these organizations of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation has not yet been formalized, and, secondly, this sign, as already mentioned, is far from the most important in characterizing the subjects of international law.

Considering the above, the following conclusion can be drawn:

although at present the subjects of the Russian Federation do not fully possess all the elements of international legal personality, there is a clear trend towards the development of their legal personality and their registration as subjects of international law. In my opinion, this issue needs to be resolved in federal legislation.

Only the presence of all three of the above elements (possession of rights and obligations arising from international legal norms; existence in the form of a collective entity; direct participation in the creation of international legal norms) gives, in my opinion, reason to consider this or that entity a full-fledged subject of international law . The absence of at least one of the listed qualities in the subject does not allow us to speak about the possession of international legal personality in the exact meaning of the word.

Basic rights and obligations characterize the general international legal status of all subjects of international law. The rights and obligations inherent in subjects of a certain type (states, international organizations, etc.) form special international legal statuses for this category of subjects. The totality of the rights and obligations of a particular subject forms the individual international legal status of this subject.

Thus, the legal status of various subjects of international law is not the same, since the scope of international norms that apply to them and, accordingly, the range of international legal relations in which they participate are different.

International legal personality of states

It must be borne in mind that not all, but only a limited number of nations can (and do) have international legal personality in the proper sense of the word - nations that are not registered as states, but strive to create them in accordance with international law.

Thus, practically any nation can potentially become the subject of legal relations of self-determination. However, the right of peoples to self-determination was fixed in order to combat colonialism and its consequences, and as an anti-colonial norm, it fulfilled its task.

At present, another aspect of the right of nations to self-determination is acquiring special significance. Today we are talking about the development of a nation that has already freely determined its political status. In the current conditions, the principle of the right of nations to self-determination must be harmonized, consistent with other principles of international law and, in particular, with the principle of respect for state sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of other states. In other words, it is no longer necessary to talk about the right of all (!) nations to international legal personality, but about the right of a nation that has received its statehood to develop without outside interference.

Thus, the sovereignty of a struggling nation is characterized by the fact that it does not depend on its recognition as a subject of international law by other states; the rights of a struggling nation are protected by international law; a nation, in its own name, has the right to apply coercive measures against violators of its sovereignty.

International legal personality of international organizations

A separate group of subjects of international law is formed by international organizations. We are talking about international intergovernmental organizations, i.e. organizations created by the primary subjects of international law.

Non-governmental international organizations, such as the World Federation of Trade Unions, Amnesty International, etc., are established, as a rule, by legal entities and individuals (groups of individuals) and are public associations “with a foreign element”. The statutes of these organizations, unlike the statutes of interstate organizations, are not international treaties. True, non-governmental organizations may have a consultative international legal status in intergovernmental organizations, for example, in the UN and its specialized agencies. Thus, the Inter-Parliamentary Union has the status of the first category in the UN Economic and Social Council. However, non-governmental organizations do not have the right to create norms of international law and, therefore, cannot, unlike intergovernmental organizations, have all the elements of international legal personality.

International intergovernmental organizations do not have sovereignty, do not have their own population, their own territory, other attributes of the state. They are created by sovereign entities on a contractual basis in accordance with international law and are endowed with a certain competence, fixed in the founding documents (primarily in the charter). The 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties applies to the constituent documents of international organizations.

The charter of the organization defines the goals of its formation, provides for the creation of a certain organizational structure (acting bodies), and establishes their competence. The presence of permanent organs of the organization ensures the autonomy of its will; international organizations participate in international communication on their own behalf and not on behalf of their member states. In other words, the organization has its own (albeit non-sovereign) will, different from the will of the member states. At the same time, the legal personality of the organization is functional in nature, i.e. it is limited by statutory goals and objectives. In addition, all international organizations are required to comply with the basic principles of international law, and the activities of regional international organizations must be consistent with the purposes and principles of the UN.

The fundamental rights of international organizations are as follows:

the right to participate in the creation of international legal norms;
the right of the organization's bodies to exercise certain powers of authority, including the right to make binding decisions;
the right to enjoy the privileges and immunities granted to both the organization and its employees;
the right to consider disputes between participants, and in some cases with states not participating in this organization.

International legal personality of state-like entities

The legal capacity of free cities was determined by the relevant international treaties. Thus, according to the provisions of the Vienna Treaty of 1815, Krakow was declared a free city (1815-1846). According to the Versailles Peace Treaty of 1919, Danzig (1920-1939) enjoyed the status of a “free state”, and in accordance with the peace treaty with Italy in 1947, the creation of the Free Territory of Trieste was envisaged, which, however, was never created.

The Vatican City is a city-state located within the capital of Italy, Rome. Here is the residence of the head of the Catholic Church - the Pope. The legal status of the Vatican is determined by the Lateran Agreements signed between the Italian state and the Holy See on February 11, 1929, which are basically still in force today. In accordance with this document, the Vatican enjoys certain sovereign rights: it has its own territory, legislation, citizenship, etc. The Vatican actively participates in international relations, establishes permanent missions in other states (there is also a representative office of the Vatican in Russia), headed by papal nuncios (ambassadors), participates in international organizations, in conferences, signs international treaties, etc.

International legal status of subjects of the federation

The question arises whether there are norms in international law on the international legal personality of subjects of the federation?

The question arises about the international legal status of the subjects of the Russian Federation.

International legal status of subjects of the Russian Federation

Federal legislation does not address this issue yet.

In Art. 27 of the Federal Constitutional Law "On the Judicial System of the Russian Federation" of December 31, 1996, which establishes the competence of the constitutional (charter) courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, among the legal acts that may be the subject of consideration in these courts, international treaties of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation are also not named.

Perhaps the only norm of federal legislation that indicates that the constituent entities of the Russian Federation have elements of contractual legal capacity is contained in Art. 8 of the Federal Law "On State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activities" of 1995, according to which the subjects of the Russian Federation have the right, within their competence, to conclude agreements in the field of foreign trade relations with subjects of foreign federal states, administrative-territorial formations of foreign states.

However, the provisions on the recognition of certain elements of international legal personality for the subjects of the Russian Federation are enshrined in many treaties on the delimitation of powers.

Thus, the Treaty of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Tatarstan dated February 15, 1994 "On the delimitation of subjects of jurisdiction and mutual delegation of powers between the state authorities of the Russian Federation and the state authorities of the Republic of Tatarstan" provides that the state authorities of the Republic of Tatarstan participate in international relations, establish relations with foreign states and conclude agreements with them that do not contradict the Constitution and international obligations of the Russian Federation, the Constitution of the Republic of Tatarstan and this Treaty, participate in the activities of relevant international organizations (clause 11, article II).

In accordance with Art. 13 of the Treaty on the delimitation of jurisdiction and powers between the state authorities of the Russian Federation and the state authorities of the Sverdlovsk region of January 12, 1996. The Sverdlovsk region has the right to act as an independent participant in international and foreign economic relations, if this does not contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal laws and international treaties of the Russian Federation , conclude relevant treaties (agreements) with subjects of foreign federative states, administrative-territorial formations of foreign states, as well as ministries and departments of foreign states.

Considering the foregoing, we can draw the following conclusion: although at present the subjects of the Russian Federation do not fully possess all the elements of international legal personality, there is a tendency for the development of their legal personality and their registration as subjects of international law. In my opinion, this issue needs to be resolved in federal legislation.

International legal status of individuals

The problem of the international legal personality of individuals has a long tradition in the legal literature. Western scholars have long recognized the quality of an international legal personality for an individual, arguing their position with references to the possibility of bringing individuals to international responsibility, applying to international bodies for the protection of their rights. In addition, individuals in the countries of the European Union have the right to file claims with the European Court of Justice. After the ratification in 1998 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, individuals in Russia can also apply to the European Commission on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights.

For ideological reasons, Soviet lawyers denied for a long time that an individual had an international legal personality. However, in the late 80s. and in the domestic international legal literature, works began to appear in which individuals began to be considered as subjects of international law. At present, the number of scientists who share this point of view is constantly increasing.

In my opinion, the answer to the question whether an individual is a subject of international law depends on what characteristics this subject, in our opinion, should have.

If we consider that the subject of international law is a person who is subject to international legal norms, which these norms endow with subjective rights and obligations, then the individual is certainly a subject of international law. There are many international legal norms that can directly guide individuals (1966 Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1949 Geneva Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, Additional Protocols I and II to them 1977 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, etc.).

However, the concepts and categories of international law, as already noted, are not always identical to the concepts of domestic law. And if we believe that the subject of international law not only has the rights and obligations arising from international legal norms, but is also a collective entity, and, most importantly, takes a direct part in the creation of international law norms, then the individual is classified as a subject of international law it is forbidden.

GPO is a special political-religious, historical or political-territorial unit, which, on the basis of an international act or international recognition, has a relatively independent international legal status. General terms (generalizing concepts) for designating the GPO are free cities or free territories, free territories or zones.

GPOs are full-fledged subjects of international law; in terms of their international legal personality, they receive by direct expression of the will of states. These are self-governing entities that have been granted international legal status on the basis of a treaty. The GPO has the right to participate in international public legal relations. The supreme legal act for the GPO is an international treaty or an act of an international organization that defines its special international legal personality.

The creation of the GPO is predetermined by objective factors of the international order. As a rule, this is one of the most effective ways to freeze territorial claims. In essence, the GPO is a kind of state with limited legal capacity. May have its own constitution, state bodies, armed forces (but exclusively defensive in nature). The creators of the GPO usually develop a mechanism for monitoring compliance with its status. At the international level, the GPO represents either the state concerned or an international organization. Such representation is not obligatory - the GPO has the right to independently participate in the conclusion of international agreements, exchange official representations with other states, and make international claims. In international organizations and at international conferences, they usually have the status of observers.

In the old international law, there was a fairly large number of free cities with a special international status: Venice, Novgorod, Pskov, Hamburg, Krakow. Modern international law demonstrates a tendency to narrow the circle of such subjects. In 1918–1945 GPO status had the free city of Danzig (now Gdansk) - a disputed territory between Poland and Germany. Danzig received the status of GPO in order to freeze territorial claims in accordance with the provisions of the Versailles-Washington treaty system. In 1945, following the results of the Second World War, he went to Poland.

In 1947–1954 the Free Territory of Trieste, the subject of territorial disputes between Italy and Yugoslavia, had GPO status. It was created on the basis of the Peace Treaty with Italy in 1947. It was under the protection of the UN Security Council. In 1954, it was divided peacefully between Italy and Yugoslavia.

In 1945–1990 West Berlin had a unique special international legal status (on the basis of the 1971 Agreement between Great Britain, the USSR, the USA and France). These states had special rights and had special responsibilities regarding the status of West Berlin. The German government represented the interests of West Berlin in international organizations and at international conferences, and provided consular services to its citizens. In 1990, after the reunification of Germany, the 1971 Agreement was terminated, since West Berlin became part of the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany.

In 1947, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution providing for a free city regime for Jerusalem, but this decision has not been implemented to this day. In 2005, the Vatican called on the world community to give Jerusalem a special status of a city under international protection.

Currently, the main GPO with a specific international legal status is the Vatican (Holy See). The Vatican is a city-state, the residence, the administrative center of the Catholic Church. It has been recognized as a city-state and subject of international law since 1929 (on the basis of the Treaty with Italy). It has a specific international legal personality - it is the legal personality of the Holy See, and not of the Catholic Church as a whole.

The Vatican has almost all the external attributes of the state - territory, population, citizenship, has its own authorities and administration. However, this is not a state in the sense of a social mechanism for managing society. This is the administrative center of the Catholic Church. The Vatican maintains diplomatic relations with more than 80 countries of the world (including the Russian Federation). In the UN, the Vatican has the status of an observer, is a member of many UN specialized agencies (IAEA, ILO, UPU, FAO, UNESCO). Participates in many universal multilateral conventions and in bilateral agreements with states (concordats - agreements on the status of the Catholic Church in any state).

A Vatican passport is equivalent to a diplomatic one. To get it, you need to become a cardinal or legate of the Pope. Citizens of the Vatican either live and work permanently in the Vatican itself, or are abroad on a diplomatic mission for the Catholic Church. The privilege of being a citizen of the Vatican depends on a direct and permanent relationship with the papacy. When communication is interrupted, Vatican citizenship is lost. Only one person can break this connection until death: the Pope. He has a passport number one, he is the absolute ruler in the state of the Vatican and the sole authority of the Catholic Church.

The Holy See actively participates in international life, in the struggle for human rights. In 1965, it was adopted Nostra Aetate- Declaration of the Vatican on the refusal to accuse the Jews of responsibility for the crucifixion of Christ. In 2005, the visit of the head of Israel to the Vatican took place, in 2006 - the return visit of the Pope to Israel. At the VII conference on the revision of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (2005), the Permanent Representative of the Vatican to the UN noted that countries with nuclear weapons do not comply with their obligations on complete disarmament; clandestine production of nuclear weapons is growing, which risks falling into the hands of terrorists.

The Order of Malta is another active GPO in the modern world. This is an official historical-religious formation with internationally recognized charitable functions. The Order of Malta, originally known as the Order of San Juan, was created in 1050 in Palestine to assist strangers visiting the Holy Land. After the expulsion of the Crusaders in 1187, the Knights of Malta were forced to wander around the countries of the Mediterranean, until the Spanish monarch gave them the island of Malta. The Order of Malta was recognized as a subject of international law and sovereign at the international congresses in Aachen in 1818, in Verona in 1822, at negotiations with Greece in 1823-1828. and with Italy in 1912–1922. The official goal of the Order of Malta is charitable and historical and archival activities. It has diplomatic relations with more than 80 countries of the world (including Russia). Pope Benedict XVI is a member of the Order of Malta.

The Order currently consists of six Grand Priories: in Rome, Venice, Sicily, Austria, Bohemia and England; three sub-priorities (united Silesia and Rhine-Westphalia, Ireland and Spain) and 54 national associations and order organizations (including in Russia). The Order has more than 10 thousand members and carries out more than 150 projects in 35 countries of the world. An Auxiliary Commission for the provision of medical and humanitarian assistance was created under the Grand Master of the Order. Several hundred hospitals and hospitals of the Order are located around the world (the Order is one of the largest hospital organizations). It has observer status in the UN. Representatives of the Order participate in the work of the EU Commission, the Council of Europe, UNESCO, FAO, IATA, UNIDO and other international organizations.

In 2004, an agreement was signed between the government of the Republic of Malta and the Sovereign Order of Malta on providing the Order with one of the fortresses on the territory of Malta as an extraterritorial headquarters. Having received its own territory, the Order of Malta became the smallest city-state in the world (after the Vatican).

State-like formations are not typical subjects of international law, since their number is unstable and there are often situations when such formations are absent in the international arena. However, this does not exclude the possibility of the emergence of new GPOs in the modern world, primarily for the peaceful resolution of territorial disputes. It seems that at present there is an expediency to give such a status to the Southern Kuriles.

State-like entities have territory, sovereignty, have their own citizenship, legislative assembly, government, international treaties. These, in particular, are free cities, the Vatican and the Order of Malta.

free city is called a city-state with internal self-government and some international legal personality. One of the first such cities was Veliky Novgorod. In the 19th and 20th centuries the status of free cities was determined by international legal acts or resolutions of the League of Nations and the UN General Assembly and other organizations.

The scope of international legal personality of free cities was determined by international agreements and constitutions of such cities. The latter were not states or trust territories, but occupied, as it were, an intermediate position. Free cities did not have full self-government. However, they were subject only to international law. For residents of free cities, a special citizenship was created. Many cities had the right to conclude international treaties and join international organizations. The guarantors of the status of free cities were either a group of states or international organizations.

This category historically included the Free City of Krakow (1815-1846), the Free State of Danzig (now Gdansk) (1920-1939), and in the post-war period the Free Territory of Trieste (1947-1954) and, to a certain extent, West Berlin, which enjoyed a special status established in 1971 by the Quadripartite Agreement of the USSR, USA, Great Britain, France.

Vatican. In 1929, on the basis of the Lateran Treaty, signed by the papal representative Gaspari and the head of the Italian government, Mussolini, the “state” of the Vatican was artificially created. In the preamble of the Lateran Treaty, the international legal status of the state "Vatican City" is defined as follows: in order to ensure absolute and explicit independence of the Holy See, guaranteeing indisputable sovereignty in the international arena, the need to create a "state" of Vatican City was revealed, recognizing in relation to the Holy See its full ownership , exclusive and absolute power and sovereign jurisdiction.

The main goal of the Vatican is to create conditions for independent government for the head of the Catholic Church. At the same time, the Vatican is an independent international personality. He maintains external relations with many states, establishes his permanent representations (embassies) in these states, headed by papal nuncios or internuncios. Delegations of the Vatican participate in the work of international organizations and conferences. It is a member of a number of intergovernmental organizations, has permanent observers at the UN and other organizations.

According to the Basic Law (Constitution) of the Vatican, the right to represent the state belongs to the head of the Catholic Church - the pope. At the same time, it is necessary to distinguish between the agreements concluded by the pope as the head of the Catholic Church on church affairs (concordats), from the secular agreements that he concludes on behalf of the state of the Vatican.

Order of Malta. The official name is the Sovereign Military Order of the Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem, Rhodes and Malta.

After the loss of territorial sovereignty and statehood on the island of Malta in 1798, the Order, reorganized with the support of Russia, settled in Italy from 1834, where the rights of sovereign formation and international legal personality were confirmed to it. Currently, the Order maintains official and diplomatic relations with 81 states, including Russia, is represented by an observer in the UN, and also has its official representatives at UNESCO, the ICRC and the Council of Europe.

The headquarters of the Order in Rome enjoys immunity, and the head of the Order, the Grand Master, has the immunities and privileges inherent in the head of state.

6. Recognition of states: concept, grounds, forms and types.

International legal recognition- this is an act of the state, which states the emergence of a new subject of international law and with which this subject considers it appropriate to establish diplomatic and other relations based on international law.

Recognition usually takes the form of a state or group of states addressing the government of the emerging state and declaring the extent and nature of its relationship with the newly emerged state. Such a statement, as a rule, is accompanied by an expression of a desire to establish diplomatic relations with the recognized state and to exchange representations.

Recognition does not create a new subject of international law. It can be complete, final and official. This type of recognition is called de jure recognition. Inconclusive recognition is called de facto.

De facto (actual) recognition takes place in cases where the recognizing state does not have confidence in the strength of the recognized subject of international law, and also when it (the subject) considers itself a temporary entity. This type of recognition can be implemented, for example, through the participation of recognized entities in international conferences, multilateral treaties, international organizations. De facto recognition, as a rule, does not entail the establishment of diplomatic relations. Trade, financial and other relations are established between the states, but there is no exchange of diplomatic missions.

De jure (official) recognition is expressed in official acts, such as resolutions of intergovernmental organizations, final documents of international conferences, government statements, etc. This type of recognition is realized, as a rule, through the establishment of diplomatic relations, the conclusion of agreements on political, economic, cultural and other issues.

Ad-hock recognition is temporary or one-time recognition, recognition for a given occasion, a given purpose.

The grounds for the formation of a new state, which will subsequently be recognized, may be as follows: a) a social revolution that led to the replacement of one social system by another; b) the formation of states in the course of the national liberation struggle, when the peoples of the former colonial and dependent countries created independent states; c) the merger of two or more states or the separation of one state into two or more.

The recognition of a new State shall not affect the rights acquired by it prior to its recognition by virtue of the laws in force. In other words, the legal consequence of international recognition is the recognition of legal force behind the laws and regulations of the recognized state.

Recognition comes from an authority competent under public law to declare recognition of the state concerned.

Types of recognition: recognition of governments, recognition as a belligerent and rebellion.

Recognition is usually addressed to the newly emerged state. But recognition can also be granted to the government of a state when it comes to power in an unconstitutional way - as a result of a civil war, a coup, etc. There are no established criteria for recognizing such governments. It is usually assumed that the recognition of the government is justified if it effectively exercises power on the territory of the state, controls the situation in the country, pursues a policy of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, respects the rights of foreigners, expresses readiness for a peaceful settlement of the conflict, if any takes place inside country, and declares its readiness to comply with international obligations.

Recognition as a belligerent and rebellion is, as it were, a preliminary recognition aimed at establishing contacts with a recognized subject. This recognition assumes that the recognizing state proceeds from the existence of a state of war and considers it necessary to observe the rules of neutrality in relation to the belligerents.

7. Succession of states: concept, sources and types.

International succession there is a transfer of rights and obligations from one subject of international law to another as a result of the emergence or cessation of the existence of a state or a change in its territory.

The question of succession arises in the following cases: a) in case of territorial changes - the disintegration of the state into two or more states; the merger of states or the entry of the territory of one state into another; b) during social revolutions; c) in determining the provisions of the mother countries and the formation of new independent states.

The successor State inherits essentially all the international rights and obligations of its predecessors. Of course, third states also inherit these rights and obligations.

Currently, the main issues of State succession are settled in two universal treaties: the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States in respect of Treaties of 1978 and the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States in respect of State Property, Public Archives and Public Debts of 1983.

The issues of succession of other subjects of international law are not regulated in detail. They are permitted on the basis of special agreements.

Types of succession:

Succession of states in relation to international treaties;

Succession in relation to state property;

Succession to State Archives;

Succession in respect of public debts.

Succession of states in respect of international treaties. According to Art. 17 of the 1978 Convention, a newly independent State may, by notification of succession, establish its status as a party to any multilateral treaty which, at the time of the succession of States, was in force in respect of the territory that was the object of the succession of States. This requirement does not apply if it is clear from the treaty or otherwise established that the application of that treaty to a newly independent state would be inconsistent with the object and purpose of that treaty or would fundamentally change the terms of its operation. If the participation in a multilateral treaty of any other state requires the consent of all its participants, then the newly independent state can establish its status as a party to this treaty only with such consent.

By making a notification of succession, the newly independent State may - if permitted by the treaty - express its consent to be bound by only part of the treaty or choose between its various provisions.

Notice of succession to a multilateral treaty shall be made in writing.

A bilateral treaty that is the subject of a succession of states is considered to be in force between a newly independent state and another participating state when: (a) they have expressly agreed to do so, or (b) by virtue of their conduct, they must be deemed to have so agreed.

Succession to state property. The transfer of state property of the predecessor state entails the termination of the rights of this state and the emergence of the rights of the successor state to state property, which passes to the successor state. The date of transfer of state property of the predecessor state is the moment of succession of the state. As a rule, the transfer of state property occurs without compensation.

According to Art. 14 of the 1983 Vienna Convention, in the event of the transfer of a part of the territory of a state to another state, the transfer of state property from the predecessor state to the successor state is governed by an agreement between them. In the absence of such an agreement, the transfer of part of the territory of a State can be resolved in two ways: a) the immovable State property of the predecessor State located in the territory that is the object of the succession of States passes to the successor State; b) movable state property of the predecessor state related to the activities of the predecessor state in relation to the territory that is the object of succession passes to the successor state.

When two or more states unite and thereby form one successor state, the state property of the predecessor states passes to the successor state.

If the state is divided and ceases to exist and parts of the territory of the predecessor state form two or more successor states, the immovable state property of the predecessor state shall pass to the successor state in whose territory it is located. If the immovable property of the predecessor state is located outside its territory, then it passes to the successor states in fair shares. Movable State property of the predecessor State connected with the activities of the predecessor State in respect of the territories that are the object of the succession of States shall pass to the respective successor State. Other movable property shall pass to the successor states in fair shares.

Succession to State Archives. According to Art. 20 of the 1983 Vienna Convention, “Public archives of the predecessor State” is a collection of documents of any age and kind, produced or acquired by the predecessor State in the course of its activities, which, at the time of the succession of the state, belonged to the predecessor State in accordance with its internal law and were kept by it directly or under his control as archives for various purposes.

The date of transition of the state archives of the predecessor state is the moment of succession of states. The transfer of state archives takes place without compensation.

The predecessor state is under an obligation to take all measures to prevent damage to or destruction of state archives.

When the successor state is a new independent state, the archives belonging to the territory that is the object of the succession of states shall pass to the new independent state.

If two or more states merge and form one successor state, the state archives of the predecessor states shall pass to the successor state.

In the event of a division of a state into two or more successor states, and unless the respective successor states otherwise agree, part of the state archives located on the territory of that successor state shall pass to that successor state.

Succession in respect of public debts. Public debt means any financial obligation of a predecessor state towards another state, international organization or any other subject of international law, arising in accordance with international law. The date of transition of debts is the moment of succession of states.

When part of the territory of a state is transferred by that state to another state, the transfer of the public debt of the predecessor state to the successor state is governed by an agreement between them. In the absence of such an agreement, the public debt of the predecessor State passes to the successor State in an equitable share, taking into account, in particular, the property, rights and interests that pass to the successor State in connection with this public debt.

If the successor state is a newly independent state, no public debt of the predecessor state shall pass to the new independent state, unless an agreement between them provides otherwise.

When two or more states merge and thereby form one successor state, the public debt of the predecessor states passes to the successor state.

If, on the other hand, a State is divided and ceases to exist, and parts of the territory of the predecessor State form two or more successor States, and unless the successor States otherwise agree, the public debt of the predecessor State shall pass to the successor States in equitable shares, taking into account, in particular, , property, rights and interests that pass to the successor state in connection with the surrendered public debt.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/

COURSE WORK

on the topic: "Legal personality of state-like entities"

Introduction

Chapter 1. Legal personality of state-like entities partially recognized by states

1.1 Vatican

1.2 Order of Malta

1.3 The issue of international recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia

Chapter 2. Legal personality of entities with questionable status

2.1 Sealand

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

Special political-territorial formations (sometimes they are called state-like) can participate in international relations, which have internal self-government and, to various extents, international legal personality.

Most often, such formations are temporary in nature and arise as a result of the unsettled territorial claims of various countries to each other.

The common thing for political-territorial formations of this kind is that in almost all cases they were created on the basis of international agreements, as a rule, peace treaties. Such agreements endowed them with a certain international legal personality, provided for an independent constitutional structure, a system of government bodies, the right to issue normative acts, and have limited armed forces.

This topic is relevant due to the fact that in the modern world there are a fairly large number of such subjects, both known to the general public and unfamiliar. The first include South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria, the Vatican. To the second Sealand, the Free City of Christiania.

The purpose of this work is to study the legal personality of state-like entities. To achieve this goal, a number of tasks should be performed:

1) Define state-like entities

2) Study state-like formations by category and specific examples.

The time frame that this work covers is limited to the present and describes the legal personality of the entities that exist at the time of writing the work, however, in order to investigate the state of these subjects, we will resort to the historical method and study the past of the objects under consideration.

international recognition status public education

Chapter1. Legal personalitystate-likeentities,partiallyrecognizedstates

1.1 Vatican

Vaticann (lat. Status Civitatis Vaticanzh, Italian. Stato della Cittа del Vaticano, the name Vatican City State is also used) is a dwarf enclave state (the smallest state in the world) inside the territory of Rome, associated with Italy. The state got its name from the name of the hill Mons Vaticanus, from the Latin vaticinia - “place of divination”. The status of the Vatican in international law is an auxiliary sovereign territory of the Holy See, the seat of the highest spiritual leadership of the Roman Catholic Church. The sovereignty of the Vatican is not independent (national), but stems from the sovereignty of the Holy See. In other words, its source is not the population of the Vatican, but the papacy.

Foreign diplomatic missions are accredited to the Holy See, not to the Vatican City State. Foreign embassies and representations accredited to the Holy See, in view of the small territory of the Vatican, are located in Rome (including the embassy of Italy, which is thus located in its own capital).

The Holy See (not the Vatican) has been a permanent observer to the UN since 1964, cooperating with the organization since 1957. In July 2004, the rights of the mission of the Holy See to the UN were expanded. In addition, since August 2008, the Vatican began cooperating with Interpol on an ongoing basis.

The history of the Vatican dates back almost two thousand years, despite the fact that officially the state of the Vatican has existed since 1929. Since the Vatican is an auxiliary sovereign territory of the Holy See, its history is directly connected with the history of the papacy. In antiquity, the territory of the Vatican ("ager vaticanus") was not inhabited, since in ancient Rome this place was considered sacred. In 326, after the arrival of Christianity, a basilica of Constantine was erected over the alleged tomb of St. Peter, and since then this place has been populated. The later formed Papal State covered most of the Apennine Peninsula, but in 1870 it was liquidated by the Italian kingdom. As a result, the so-called "Roman question" arose. In the summer of 1926, negotiations began between the Holy See and the government of Benito Mussolini to resolve the "Question of Rome". From the side of the Pope, the negotiations were conducted by the Secretary of State Gasparri; Francesco Pacelli, the brother of the future Pope Pius XII, also played an important role in a series of negotiations that consisted of 110 meetings and lasted three years.

The three documents that constituted the Agreement between Italy and the Holy See were signed on February 11, 1929 in the Lateran Palace by the Secretary of State Gasparri and Mussolini. The Lateran Agreements remain in effect. Italy recognized the sovereignty of the Holy See over the Vatican (Stata della citta del Vaticano) - the restored Ecclesiastical State with an area of one and a half square kilometers. The Vatican and Italy mutually exchanged ambassadors. The concordat in 44 articles also regulated relations between the state and the Church in Italy: it ensured the complete freedom of the Church and declared the Catholic religion the state religion. The Holy See had the right to establish relations with the clergy and with the entire Catholic world. Members of the church were exempted from military service. The appointment of bishops is the prerogative of the Holy See (in the absence of political objections from the state). The Holy See recognized the secularization of church property that had been carried out by that time. Church property was exempt from taxes.

The concordat was supplemented by a financial agreement under which Italy committed to pay the Holy See 750 million Italian lire in cash and at the same time to allocate a five per cent Italian government loan in the amount of one billion Italian lire. The Vatican agreed to support Benito Mussolini, returned to public life, and banned divorces. On June 7, 1929, the constitution of the Vatican City State was published. In 1984, after successful negotiations with Italy, some outdated clauses of the Agreements were changed, mainly concerning the state status of the Catholic Church in Italy.

The Vatican is located on the Vatican Hill in the northwestern part of Rome, a few hundred meters from the Tiber. The total length of the state border, passing only through Italian territory, is 3.2 kilometers, although the Lateran agreements gave the Vatican some extraterritoriality (some basilicas, curial and diocesan offices and Castel Gandolfo). The border mostly coincides with a defensive wall built to prevent illegal crossings. In front of St. Peter's Basilica, the border is the edge of an oval-shaped square (marked with white stones in the paving of the square). The Vatican has a non-profit planned economy. Sources of income-primarily donations from Catholics around the world. Profits in 2003 amounted to 252 million dollars, expenses - 264. In addition, tourism brings in large incomes (sale of postage stamps, Vatican euro coins, souvenirs, fees for visiting museums). Most of the workforce (museum attendants, gardeners, janitors, and so on) are Italian citizens. The budget of the Vatican is 310 million US dollars. The Vatican has its own bank, better known as the Institute of Religious Affairs.

Almost the entire population of the Vatican is subjects of the Holy See (there is no citizenship of the Vatican), who have a passport (this passport has the diplomatic status of the Holy See, indicates belonging to the inhabitants of the Apostolic Capital (Vatican) and is issued by the State Secretariat) and are ministers of the Catholic Church.

As of December 31, 2005, out of 557 subjects of the Holy See, 58 are cardinals, 293 have the status of clergy and are members of the Pontifical Representatives, 62 are other members of the clergy, 101 are members of the Swiss Guard, and the remaining 43 are laymen. In 1983, not a single newborn was registered in the Vatican. Slightly less than half, 246 citizens, retained their first citizenship. Citizenship in the Vatican is not inherited and cannot be acquired by birth in the state. It can only be obtained on the basis of service to the Holy See and is annulled in the event of termination of employment in the Vatican.

Article 9 of the Lateran Treaty of 1929 between the Vatican and Italy states that if a person ceases to be a citizen of the Vatican and does not have the citizenship of any other State, he shall be granted Italian citizenship. Ethnically, most of them are Italian, with the exception of members of the Swiss Guard. The "daytime" population of the Vatican also includes about 3,000 Italians working there, but they live outside the state. In 2005, 111 marriages were registered in the Vatican.

The Vatican itself does not establish diplomatic relations, does not participate in international organizations and does not conclude international treaties, since it is the sovereign territory of the Holy See, and the sovereignty of the former directly follows from the sovereignty of the latter. The Chair of the Bishops of Rome has been recognized as a sovereign subject of international law since early medieval times. And between 1860 and the Lateran Accords of 1929, the sovereignty of the Holy See was recognized not only by the Catholic powers, but also by Russia, Prussia and Austria-Hungary.

Diplomatic relations between the Vatican and the Holy See are administered by the Section for Relations with States of the Secretariat of State. The section is headed by the Secretary for Relations with States in the rank of archbishop, currently Dominique Mamberti, titular archbishop of Sagona.

The Holy See maintains diplomatic relations with 174 countries of the world, in which it is represented by papal ambassadors (nuncios). The Vatican also maintains diplomatic relations with the EU and the Palestine Liberation Organization and is a member of 15 international organizations, including WHO, WTO, UNESCO, OSCE and FAO.

In the early 1990s, the Vatican established diplomatic relations with the countries of Eastern and Central Europe, which were previously controlled by communist parties, as well as with a number of states of the former Soviet Union.

The Vatican actively advocates for the preservation of peace and the settlement of international conflicts. In 1991 he warned against a Gulf War. The Catholic Church played a prominent role in ending the civil wars in Central America. During his trips to the region, the Pope called for an end to the civil war in Guatemala, reconciliation in Nicaragua, and the establishment of a "new culture of solidarity and love."

The Holy See is the oldest (1942) diplomatic ally of the Republic of China and is now the only sovereign entity of international law in Europe that formally recognizes the Republic of China. In 1971, the Holy See announced its decision to adhere to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in order to "provide moral support for the principles that underpin the Treaty itself." In 2007, the Holy See established diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia.

1.2 MalteseOrder

Order of Malta (Sovereign Military Order of the Knights Hospitaller of St. John of Jerusalem, Rhodes and Malta, Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of St. John, Jerusalem, Rhodes and Malta) is a chivalric religious order of the Roman Catholic Church. The oldest order of chivalry in the world.

The Order of Malta has observer status at the UN. It has diplomatic relations with 104 states, supported by a large number of ambassadors. According to international law, the Order of Malta is a state-like entity, while the order itself positions itself as a state. The sovereignty of the Order of Malta is considered at the level of diplomatic missions, but not as the sovereignty of the state. Sometimes considered as a dwarf state.

The Order issues its own passports, prints its own currency, stamps, and even license plates. The Grand Master of the order serves as papal viceroy, providing procedural support to Vatican diplomats in filing petitions, in making proposals for amendments, and in the need to make decisions in the field of international diplomacy. The order's claim to sovereignty has been disputed by some scholars.

The forerunner of the order was the Amalfi Hospital, founded in Jerusalem in 1080, a Christian organization whose purpose was to care for the poor, sick or wounded pilgrims in the Holy Land. After the Christian conquest of Jerusalem in 1099 during the First Crusade, a religious-military order with its own charter. The order was entrusted with the care and protection of the Holy Land. Following the capture of the Holy Land by Muslims, the order continued its activities in Rhodes, of which he was the lord, and then acted from Malta, which was in vassal submission to the Spanish Viceroy of Sicily. After the capture of Malta by Napoleon in 1798, the Russian Emperor Paul I granted the knights refuge in St. Petersburg. In 1834 the order established a new headquarters in Rome. For a long time, the Order owned only a complex of mansions in Rome, but in 1998 the government of Malta transferred Fort Sant'Angelo to the knights for exclusive use for a period of 99 years, while the building was granted extraterritorial status and appointed. At the moment, the Italian Republic recognizes the existence of the Order of Malta on its territory as a sovereign state, as well as the extraterritoriality of his residence in Rome (the Palace of Malta, or the Main Palace at Via Condotti, 68, residence, and the Main Villa on the Aventina). Since 1998, the Order has also owned Fort St. Angelo, which also has extraterritorial status for 99 years from the date of the conclusion of an agreement with the government of the Republic of Malta. Thus, the Order formally has a territory over which it exercises its own jurisdiction, but the question of the actual status of this territory (the Order's own territory or the territory of a diplomatic mission temporarily transferred to its needs) is the subject of abstract legal discussions. In fact, the Order is an extremely influential structure, and its political positions are such that the question of clarifying the status of its headquarters is unlikely to arise in the near future.

According to the order, its members are 13 thousand people, also in the structure of the order there are 80 thousand volunteers and more than 20 thousand medical workers. There are about 10.5 thousand subjects of the Order who have his passport. The Order of Malta passport is recognized by many countries, its holder has the right to visa-free entry to 32 countries.

According to the Constitution, members of the Order are divided into three classes. All members must lead an exemplary life in accordance with the teachings and precepts of the Church and devote themselves to the work of the Order in providing humanitarian assistance.

The members of the First Class are the Knights of Justice, or Recognized Knights, and Recognized Monastic Chaplains, who have taken vows of "poverty, chastity, and obedience leading to gospel perfection." They are considered monks under Canon Law, but are not required to live in monastic communities.

Members of the Second Class who have taken a vow of obedience are to live by Christian principles and the lofty moral principles of the Order. They fall into three categories:

Knights and Ladies of Honor and Devotion in Obedience

Knights and Ladies of the Grace of the Lord and Devotion in Obedience

Knights and Ladies of the Master's Grace and Devotion in Obedience

The third class consists of secular members who have not taken religious vows and oaths, but who live in accordance with the principles of the Church and the Order. They fall into six categories:

Knights and Ladies of Honor and Devotion

Monastic Chaplains ad honorem

Knights and Ladies of the Lord's Grace and Devotion

Trunk chaplains

Knights and Ladies of the Magister's Grace

Donations (men and women)

Requirements for acceptance into various classes and categories are determined by the Code.

According to Article 5 of the Constitution of the Order of Malta, the main legal documents are:

one). Constitution, Code of the Order and, as an appendix, Canon Law;

2). Legislative acts of the Grand Master in accordance with article 15, second paragraph, paragraph 1 of this Constitution;

3). International agreements approved in accordance with the principles set forth in Article 15, second paragraph, paragraph 8 of this Constitution;

four). Traditions and privileges of the Order;

One of the most ancient manuscripts with the rules and the Code of the Order dates from 1253.

Throughout history, there has been a continuous process of development of three main documents. It should be noted that throughout its existence, documents, like all sources, were based on the Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church. Its principles formed the basis of all legal acts of the Order. Thus, changes in the main document of the Church entailed corresponding changes in the documents of the Order. An example is the amendments to the Code of Canon Law 1917, 1983. Also in 1969, the Order Statutes responded to the decree of the Second Vatican Council on the renewal of monastic life in relation to modern conditions "Perfectae Caritatis" and the apostolic letter "Ecclesiae Sanctae". In addition to the documents listed in the Constitution, there are also "the customs of the Order, all the privileges granted and recognized by the popes.<…>Of particular note is the Constitution of Pope Benedict XIV "Inter illustria" of 1753. Rights, customs and privileges are valid as long as they remain in force in accordance with the norms of canon law, the Constitution of the Order and the Code.

On September 17, 1919, the Grand Master, together with the Council of the Order, approved the “Organic Norms of the Sovereign Knightly Order of Malta” (Norme organiche del sovrano Ordine militare di Malta). Then they were replaced by the Provisional Charter or Provisional Statutes, after 1921 they gained legal force. At the insistence of the Vatican, on May 5, 1936, an updated Charter of the Order of Malta was adopted, which emphasized the subordination of the Order's law to the new general church law. This was necessary for the Holy See to stop the trend of turning the Order of Malta into a purely secular organization. “Thus, it is from this moment that one can already unequivocally speak of the transformation of the Order of Malta into a purely “papal” one, and the final consolidation of the power of the Vatican over the Order.” In 1961, the Holy See approved the Constitution of the Order, and in 1966, the Charter and Code of the Order.

As for the latest changes to the Constitution, they were made by decisions of the Extraordinary Meeting of the General Chapter, held in Italy in 1997. The new text was approved by the Vatican and published in the Official Bulletin of the Order on January 12, 1998. John Paul II commented on the Constitution: "It is based on the fundamental values of mercy and beneficence that have continually inspired the Order through the ages."

The order has diplomatic relations with 104 states. It has observer status at the UN. The sovereign status of the order is recognized by the many international organizations of which it is a member. In addition to the United Nations, it is recognized by other organizations. Several states do not recognize the Maltese passport and do not have diplomatic relations with it: the Netherlands, Finland, Sweden, Iceland and Greece.

The relations of the Order of Malta with Russia have repeatedly changed. Emperor Paul I established close cooperation with him, accepting the status of Grand Master and Protector of the Order. The order system of Russia and the Order of Malta itself were partially integrated.

However, after the assassination of Paul I, relations with the Order were quickly severed and were absent until the end of the existence of the Russian Empire. The Russian priories of the Order were liquidated in the period 1803-1817.

The alleged backstage interaction between the Order and the USSR during the reign of Gorbachev became the subject of numerous speculations, but reliable documents on this subject have not been published.

Official relations with Russia were restored in 1992 by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation B. N. Yeltsin and are now carried out at the level of official representatives in the rank of ambassadors with accreditation in the states - places of representation (Rome). Russia's interests are represented by the Representative of the Russian Federation to the Vatican. Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Order of Malta in the Russian Federation - Mr. Gianfranco Facco Bonetti (since April 22, 2008).

1.3 internationalconfessionSouthOssetiaandAbkhazia

The Supreme Council of the Republic of South Ossetia (South Ossetia) declared the independence of the republic on May 29, 1992, during the armed conflict with Georgia. Abkhazia declared independence after the 1992-1993 war with Georgia. Its constitution, in which the republic was declared a sovereign state and a subject of international law, was adopted by the Supreme Council of the Republic of Abkhazia on November 26, 1994. The declaration of independence of the republics did not cause a wide international resonance; until the second half of the 2000s, these states were not recognized by anyone. In 2006, Abkhazia and South Ossetia recognized each other's independence; in addition, their independence was recognized by the unrecognized Transnistria.

The situation with international recognition changed after the war in South Ossetia in August 2008. After the conflict, the independence of both republics was recognized by Russia. In response, the Parliament of Georgia adopted a resolution "On the occupation of the territories of Georgia by the Russian Federation." These events were followed by the reaction of other countries and international organizations.

On August 20, 2008, the Parliament of Abkhazia turned to Russia with a request to recognize the independence of the republic. On August 21, 2008, this appeal was supported by the national gathering of Abkhazia. On August 22, 2008, a similar appeal was received from the Parliament of South Ossetia. On August 25, 2008, the Federation Council of Russia adopted an appeal to President Dmitry Medvedev to recognize the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. 130 members of the Federation Council voted in favor of the appeal, with no abstentions or votes against. On the same day, the State Duma, with 447 votes "for" in the absence of those who voted against (abstained - 0, did not vote - 3), adopted a similar appeal to the President of Russia. The Duma sent an appeal to the parliaments of the UN member states and international parliamentary organizations, in which it called on them to support the recognition of the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent, sovereign and independent states.

On August 26, 2008, international legal recognition by Russia of the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia followed. This decision was announced in his address by President Dmitry Medvedev: “Considering the free expression of the will of the Ossetian and Abkhaz peoples, guided by the provisions of the UN Charter, the 1970 declaration on the principles of international law relating to friendly relations between states, the 1975 Helsinki Final Act of the CSCE, and other fundamental international documents, I signed Decrees on the recognition by the Russian Federation of the independence of South Ossetia and the independence of Abkhazia.” On August 29, 2008, Georgia severed diplomatic relations with Russia. On September 9, 2008, Russia officially established diplomatic relations with Abkhazia and South Ossetia. On December 15, 2008, the first Russian Ambassador to Abkhazia, Semyon Grigoriev, presented copies of his credentials to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic, Sergei Shamba. The next day, December 16, 2008, President of Abkhazia Sergei Bagapsh received Semyon Grigoriev's credentials. On the same day, President of South Ossetia Eduard Kokoity received the credentials of the first Russian ambassador to South Ossetia, Elbrus Kargiev. On January 16, 2009, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev received the credentials of the first ambassadors of Abkhazia and South Ossetia to Russia, Igor Akhba and Dmitry Medoev. In February 2009, the Russian embassy was opened in South Ossetia. On May 1, 2009, the Embassy of the Russian Federation was opened in Sukhum. On May 17, 2010, a solemn ceremony of opening the embassy of Abkhazia took place in Moscow. On April 7, 2011, Dmitry Medvedev signed a law ratifying the Agreement with Abkhazia and South Ossetia on mutual visa-free travel

Immediately after the recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia by the Russian Federation, there were suggestions in the media (for example, by Leonid Slutsky, Deputy Chairman of the Russian State Duma Committee on International Affairs) that other UN member states could also recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Named such countries as Venezuela (recognized September 10, 2009), Cuba, Belarus, Iran, Syria, Turkey. In July 2009, the President of Abkhazia, Sergei Bagapsh, expressed the hope that Belarus would recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and not Papua New Guinea or Zimbabwe, and he also stated that he still did not abandon the idea of creating some new "union state" where his republic and South Ossetia will enter together with Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan

Officials of some states of the world (Belarus, Venezuela, Iran, Armenia, Lebanon) expressed support for Russia's actions to recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, or their right to self-determination. On April 27, 2011, it became known about the forthcoming recognition of Abkhazia by three states and one South Ossetia.

Meanwhile, the statement made by the Ambassador of Somalia to the Russian Federation, who said that in the near future the Somali government is going to recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, was refuted by the Director General of the Ministry of Foreign Relations and International Cooperation of Somalia, Mukhamed Jama Ali.

The current president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, when he was an opposition member, said that Ukraine should recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia and support the will of the peoples of the unrecognized republics. At the same time, he noted: "The recognition by the Russian Federation of the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia is a logical continuation of the process that was launched by Western countries regarding the recognition of the independence of the province of Kosovo." However, when he became president, Yanukovych said that he did not mean that he was ready to recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, but only opposed double standards when a large number of countries recognized the independence of Kosovo

Georgian Deputy Foreign Minister Giga Bokeria said: "Recognition is a covert annexation of territories that are part of Georgia." The President of Georgia, Mikheil Saakashvili, in his address to the people, stated: “The actions of the Russian Federation are an attempt at the military annexation of a sovereign state - the state of Georgia. This directly violates international law and threatens the international security system that has guaranteed peace, stability and order for the past 60 years. Russia's decision today confirms that its invasion of Georgia was part of a larger, premeditated plan to change the map of Europe. Today, Russia has violated all treaties and agreements that were previously signed. Russia's actions were condemned in the strongest terms by the entire world community, which reaffirmed its support for Georgia's territorial integrity. The Government of Georgia is grateful for the worldwide support. According to international law, the regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia are within the borders of Georgia.”

The head of the State Chancellery of Georgia, Kakha Bendukidze, in an interview with Russian Newsweek magazine answered the correspondent's question “Do you think you lost South Ossetia and Abkhazia or not?”: “No. I think that the existence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia will move from one plane to another. Previously, it was, in a sense, a cabal, such a discussion with Russian accompaniment. Now it's an international dispute. There was an incomprehensible riddle: Russia was both a party and a peacemaker. She was a sponsor of one of the parties and verbally recognized the territorial integrity of Georgia. Now the picture is much clearer."

NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said that the Russian decision “is a direct violation of numerous UN Security Council resolutions regarding the territorial integrity of Georgia, those resolutions that Russia itself has approved. Russia's actions in recent weeks cast doubt on its commitment to peace and security in the Caucasus. NATO firmly supports the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia and calls on Russia to abide by these principles.”

On August 27, the NATO Council at the ambassadorial level, having discussed NATO relations with Russia and Georgia in connection with Russia’s recognition of the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, condemned this decision and called for its annulment, expressing full support for the principle of Georgia’s territorial integrity: “Russia’s decision violates many resolutions adopted the UN Security Council regarding the territorial integrity of Georgia, and it is incompatible with the fundamental principles of the OSCE, on which stability in Europe is based.”

The NATO Council, saying that Russia's decision called into question its commitment to peace and security in the Caucasus, called on Russia, in order to ensure the security and stability of Georgia, "to respect the territorial integrity of Georgia and fulfill its obligations under the six-point agreement signed by Presidents Saakashvili and Medvedev"

Chapter 2. Legal personality of entities with questionable status

2.1 Sealand

Principality of Sealand (eng. Literally "sea land"; also Sealand) is a virtual state proclaimed in 1967 by British retired Major Roy Bates. Claims sovereignty over the territory of an offshore platform in the North Sea, 10 kilometers from the coast of Great Britain. Bates proclaimed himself the monarch (prince) of Sealand, and his family the ruling dynasty; they and persons who consider themselves subjects of Sealand are engaged in creating and developing the attributes of this principality, similar to the attributes of the states of the world (flag, coat of arms and anthem, constitution, government posts, diplomacy, collectible postage stamps, coins, etc.).

Sealand is a constitutional monarchy. The head of state is Prince Roy I Bates and Princess Joanna I Bates. Since 1999, Crown Prince Regent Michael I has exercised direct power. There is a constitution adopted on September 25, 1975, consisting of a preamble and 7 articles. The orders of the sovereign are issued in the form of decrees. There are three ministries in the structure of executive power: internal affairs, foreign affairs and telecommunications and technology. The legal system is based on British customary law.

Physically, the territory of Sealand arose during the Second World War. In 1942, the British Navy built a series of platforms on the approaches to the coast. One of them was the Roughs Tower. During the war, the platforms housed anti-aircraft guns and had a garrison of 200 men. After the end of hostilities, most of the towers were destroyed, but Roughs Tower, being outside British territorial waters, remained intact.

In 1966, retired British Army Major Paddy Roy Bates and his friend Ronan O'Reilly chose the Roughs Tower platform, long abandoned by that time, to build an amusement park. However, after a while they quarreled, and Bates became the sole owner of the island. In 1967 In the year O'Reilly tried to take possession of the island and used force to do this, however, Bates defended himself with rifles, shotguns, Molotov cocktails and flamethrowers, and O'Reilly's attack was repulsed.

Roy did not build an amusement park, but chose a platform to base his pirate radio station Britain's Better Music Station, but this radio station never broadcast from the platform. On September 2, 1967, he announced the creation of a sovereign state and proclaimed himself Prince Roy I. This The day is celebrated as a major public holiday.

In 1968, the British authorities tried to take over the platform. Patrol boats approached her, and the Bates responded with warning shots in the air. The matter did not come to bloodshed, but a lawsuit was initiated against Major Bates as a British subject. On September 2, 1968, an Essex judge issued a ruling that Sealand's independence advocates consider historic: he held that the case was outside British jurisdiction. In 1972, Sealand began minting coins. In 1975, Sealand's first constitution went into effect. There was a flag and coat of arms.

In August 1978, a putsch took place in the country. He was preceded by the emergence of tension between the prince and his closest associate, the country's prime minister Count Alexander Gottfried Achenbach (Alexander Gottfried Achenbach). The parties differed in their views on attracting investments to the country and accused each other of unconstitutional intentions. Taking advantage of the absence of the prince, who was negotiating with investors in Austria, Achenbach landed on the island with a group of Dutch citizens. The invaders locked the young Prince Michael in the basement and then took him to the Netherlands. But Michael escaped from captivity and met with his father. With the support of loyal citizens of the country, the deposed monarchs managed to defeat the usurpers and return to power.

The government acted in strict accordance with international law. The captured foreign mercenaries were soon released, as the Geneva Convention on the Treatment of Prisoners of War requires the release of prisoners after the end of hostilities. The organizer of the coup was dismissed from all posts and convicted of high treason in accordance with Sealand laws, but he had a second - German - citizenship, so the authorities of the FRG became interested in his fate. The British Foreign Office refused to intervene in this matter, and the German diplomats had to negotiate directly with Sealand. The senior legal adviser of the German embassy in London, Dr. Niemüller, arrived on the island, which was the pinnacle of the actual recognition of Sealand by real states. Prince Roy demanded diplomatic recognition of Sealand, but in the end, given the bloodless nature of the failed putsch, he agreed to verbal assurances and generously released Achenbach.

The losers continued to insist on their rights. They formed the government of Sealand in exile (FRG). Achenbach claimed to be the chairman of the Sealand Privy Council. In January 1989, he was arrested by the German authorities (naturally, they did not recognize his diplomatic status) and handed over his post to the Minister for Economic Cooperation, Johannes W. F. Seiger, who soon became Prime Minister. Re-elected in 1994 and 1999.

The position of Sealand compares favorably with the position of other virtual states. The Principality has a physical territory and has some legal grounds for international recognition. The requirement of independence is based on three arguments. The most fundamental of these is the fact that Sealand was founded in neutral waters before the entry into force of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which prohibited the construction of artificial structures on the high seas, and before the expansion of the UK sovereign maritime zone from 3 to 12 nautical miles in 1987 year. Based on the fact that the Roughs Tower platform, on which Sealand is located, was abandoned and struck off the lists of the British Admiralty, its occupation is considered as colonization. The settlers who settled on it believe that they had every right to establish a state and establish a form of government at their discretion. According to international norms, the size of the state cannot be an obstacle to recognition. For example, the recognized British possession of Pitcairn Island has only about 60 people.

The second important argument is the decision of the British court in 1968 on the lack of UK jurisdiction over Sealand. No other country has also claimed Sealand.

Thirdly, there are several facts of de facto recognition of Sealand. The Montevideo Convention states that states have the right to exist and defend themselves, regardless of official recognition. In modern international practice, tacit (non-diplomatic) recognition is a fairly common phenomenon. It arises when a regime does not have sufficient legitimacy, but exercises actual power on its territory. For example, many states do not recognize the Republic of China diplomatically, but treat it de facto as a sovereign country. With regard to Sealand, there are four such testimonies:

1. Great Britain does not pay a pension to Prince Roy for the period when he was in Sealand.

2. The UK courts refused to consider the claims against Sealand in 1968 and 1990.

3. The Ministries of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands and Germany entered into negotiations with the Government of Sealand.

4. Belgian postal service accepted Sealand stamps for some time.

Theoretically, Sealand's position is very convincing. If recognized, the principality would become the smallest country in the world and the 51st state in Europe. However, according to the founding theory, more common in modern international law, a state can exist only insofar as it is recognized by other states. Therefore, Sealand cannot be accepted into any international organization, cannot have its own postal address, domain name. None of the countries established diplomatic relations with him.

Sealand is trying to achieve recognition of independence by some large state, but has not tried to achieve independence through the UN.

Conclusion

We have studied the legal personality of state-like entities on the example of the most typical representatives. We have studied the legal personality of entities that are recognized as states only by a certain circle of other states, thus being, as it were, quasi-states. We also studied, using the example of the Principality of Sealand, subjects that are not recognized by states at all, however, de facto play such a role in international relations, moreover, they have their own territory, jurisdiction, taxation, thus, as if having internal legitimacy that has developed historically.

We saw the relevance of this topic, which lies in the fact that international relations are not in a static state, but are constantly changing and developing, in connection with this, the emergence of new subjects related to the research topic is possible. Also, the emergence of new subjects is possible due to circumstances beyond the control of international politics. In this study, we saw that the events associated with these entities are still happening today, for example, the issue of recognizing Abkhazia and South Ossetia is still unresolved.

Working out ways to resolve these issues is an important task for international law and the international community. At this time, when the preference for the peaceful resolution of such conflicts is declared, it is necessary to have a legal basis for this. It should not be forgotten that if such an entity is a community formed along ethnic or national lines, then this issue lies in the sphere of nations for self-determination or borders on it.

Bibliography

2. Constitution of the Republic of Abkhazia // http://www.abkhaziagov.org/ru/state/sovereignty/index.php

3. Constitution of the Order of Malta // http://www.orderofmalta.int/order-and-its-organization

4. Lateran Pacts of 1929 // http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/treaty.htm

5. Federal Law of the Russian Federation of April 5, 2011 N 54-FZ "On the ratification of the Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of South Ossetia on mutual visa-free trips of citizens of the Russian Federation and the Republic of South Ossetia" // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. - 2011. - No. 5451. - April 7.

6. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of August 26, 2008 N 1260 “On the recognition of the Republic of Abkhazia” // http://document.kremlin.ru/doc.asp?ID=47559

7. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of August 26, 2008 N 1261 “On the recognition of the republic

8. South Ossetia // http://document.kremlin.ru/doc.asp?ID=47560

9. Manhattan A. History of the Vatican. Power and the Roman Curia. - M.: Monolith-Eurolints - Tradition, 2008. - p.450

10. Vinogradov V.A. Fundamentals of the state structure of the State of the City of the Vatican // Journal of Russian law. 2002. No. 9.

11. Zakharov V.A. History of the Order of Malta. XI - XX centuries. - M.: SPSL - "Russian Panorama", 2008. - p. 464.

12. ELECTRONIC RESOURCES

13. Official website of the State of Sealand [Electronic resource] - Access mode: http://www.sealandgov.org

14. Act of Declaration of Independence of the Republic of South Ossetia [Electronic resource] - Access mode: http://osinform.ru/1646-akt_provozglashenija_nezavisimosti_respubliki_juzhnaja_osetija_5032.html

15. Appeal of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation to the President of the Russian Federation D. A. Medvedev on the recognition of the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia [Electronic resource] - Access mode: http://www.council.gov.ru/inf_ps/chronicle/2008 /08/item7997.html

Hosted on Allbest.ru

...

Legal personality of state-like entities. State-like formations as subjects of international law. International legal status of subjects of the federation

International legal personality of states

International legal personality of international organizations

International legal personality of state-like entities

International legal status of subjects of the federation

International legal status of subjects of the Russian Federation

International legal status of individuals

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar Documents

Report a typo

Text to be sent to our editors:

Your comment (optional):