AN APPRAISAL OF THE LEGALITY OF UNILATERAL DECLARATIONS OF INDEPENDENCE: DISTINGUISHING CRIMEA FROM KOSOVO

Abstract

The question of whether Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence from Serbia adopted on 17 February 2008 was in accordance with international law was submitted to the International Court of Justice for determination by the United Nations General Assembly. In its advisory opinion delivered on 22 July 2010, the International Court of Justice ruled that the declaration did not violate any applicable rule of international law.1 This ruling has not only undermined the stability of international law, but has also created a loophole in international law which is unduly exploited by secessionist groups around the world. For example, Crimea’s unilateral declaration of independence from Ukraine in 2014 was specifically premised on this ruling. This paper compared Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence and Crimea’s unilateral declaration of independence so as to find out whether the former justified the latter under international law. The research methodology adopted by the researcher is purely doctrinal, whereas analytical, descriptive and prescriptive approaches were employed. This paper found that unlike Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence, Crimea’s unilateral declaration of independence was a clear illegality because it violated a fundamental rule of international law: it was actualized via Russia’s use of force against the territorial integrity of Ukraine. The paper therefore called on the United Nations General Assembly to seek the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the legality of Crimea’s declaration of independence so that the same will not serve as a precedent for other secessionist groups.