Christopher Borgen, Professor and Associate Dean for International Studies, has written a series of blog posts on Opinion Juris about the current crisis in Ukraine. The most recent post involves the Crimean parliament’s decision to secede Crimea from Ukraine to join Russia through the use of a parliamentary vote and a referendum. Here’s an excerpt:
The legal issue here is really one of Ukrainian Constitutional law more than of international law, because, as it is generally understood, there is no right to secede under international law. Under international law, a secession is neither a right nor necessarily illegal. It is treated as a fact: a secession either was successful, it was not, or it is still being contested.
There is, however, a right to self-determination, which is understood to be, for communities that are not colonies and are within existing states, meaningful political participation and the pursuit of economic, social and cultural development under the auspices of that existing state, in this case Ukraine. This conception of internal self-determination makes self-determination closely related to the respect of minority rights and it does not include a right to dismember an existing state. Furthermore, modern views of self-determination also recognize the “federalist” option of allowing a certain level of cultural or political autonomy as a means to satisfy the norm of self-determination.
You can also read Professor Borgen’s earlier posts about the background of the conflict and sanctions, Russian intervention in Ukraine, and who speaks for Ukraine.
St. John's University Law Faculty Blog 
Leave a Reply