Annexation of terra nullius by means of unilateral declaration (coupled
with occupation of some type) is a sort of example. Not much terra nullius
left nowadays, but the British annexation of Rockall about 50 years ago is
an example, and annexation of parts of Antarctica by various states (not
recognized by all) is another. And of course there were many examples in
the past, some of which are still relevant when litigation arises over
title. Though some exercise of sovereignty is required, in the case of
remote and inaccessible territory it can be pretty nominal (cf. Eastern
Greenland, or the Hawar Islands - esp. the ones other than the main island
- in Qatar v. Bahrain).
Another kind of unilateral declaration which will certainly affect title is
recognition. Above all, recognition by another state with its own
potential claim to the territory. There are of course many instances of
this. Likewise the recognition of secession by the "parent" State.
Another example would be the unilateral dedication of a piece of territory
to international use. Waterways (whether a canal or a river) wholly within
the territory of one State come to mind, or a similar act by all the
riparians. I do not have the time at the moment to check which of the
major international waterways have been subjected to such a regime by this
method rather than by treaty; but even in the case where the right was
conferred on third parties in a treaty, one can view this (notwithstanding
Art. 36 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties) as a unilateral
declaration vis-a-vis those third parties. Likewise, a renunciation of a
claim to territory could be said to affect title. An example close to your
home would be Turkey's renunciation of parts of its empire following World
War I. Although this was done by treaty, the direct beneficiaries in the
Gulf were not parties to the treaty.
Another type of example would be the unilateral proclamation by a state of
its maritime boundaries (baselines, territorial sea, EEZ, etc.). Provided
it is done in a way consistent with international law, this affects a
State's maritime territory (and zones analogous to territory).
Unilateral declarations can also affect title in a more indirect way. For
instance, if a State proclaims its sovereignty over islands A, B and C in
its vicinity, this may in appropriate circumstances be regarded as an
indication that it does NOT have title of island D.
I hope this helps, for a start.
At 20:46 28/10/03 +0400, Matar Alneyadi wrote:
> Dear Colleagues,
>Is there anybody have come across any unilateral declaration, whether oral
>or in writing, that affect state claim to territory. The classic example
>to such a case is the Norwegian Minister's oral statement to Danish
>Ambassador in respect to the status of Greenland.
>
>Matar
Maurice Mendelson, Q.C.
Blackstone Chambers
Blackstone House
Temple, London EC4Y 9BW,
England.
Tel. +44 20 7583 1770; fax +4420 7822 7350; email
[log in to unmask]
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may be confidential and legally
privileged. This e-mail is intended to be read only by the addressee. If you
are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any review,
dissemination or copying of this e-mail is prohibited and that privilege has
not been waived. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify
the sender by replying by email or by telephone and
then delete the e-mail.
|