(/)

SigninforFullAccess(/user/login?destination=community)|ForgotPassword/UserID?
(https://online.asil.org/asilssa/ssaauthmain.forget_password?p_referrer=&p_context=CEN)|Join(/membership/membership)
Login

Home(/) / AJIL(/AJIL) / AJILUnbound(/blogs/ajilunbound?blog=83) /

DemocraticLegitimacyasaCriterionfortheRecognitionofGovernments:AResponsetoProfessorErikadeWet

DemocraticLegitimacyasaCriterionfortheRecognitionofGovernments:AResponsetoProfessorErikadeWet

Article

By:ObioraChineduOkafor|January27,20159:54am

Inherthoughtprovokingcontributiontothissymposiumonthecontemporarystatusofdemocraticlegitimacyasacriterionfortherecognitionofgovernments,
ProfessordeWetargues(http://www.asil.org/blogs/freetowncairokievunpredictableroaddemocraticlegitimacygovernmentalrecognition),inthemain,thatcontrary
tothegreatexpectationsofthe1990sthatdemocraticlegitimacywasbecominganadditionalorevenalternativecriteriontoeffectivecontrolforthepurposeofthe
recognitionofgovernments,thereisasyetnoclearcustomaryinternationallawruleagainsttherecognitionofgovernmentsthatcometopowerthoughnon
democraticmeans.Shearrivesatthisconclusionbyexaminingtherelevantstatepractice,almostallrelatingtotheAfricancontinent.Inherview,thisstatepractice
hasbeentooinconsistenttosupporttheemergenceoftherelevantcustomaryinternationallawruleandthedisplacementofthetraditionalinternationallawposition
thatitistheeffectivenessofagovernmentthatconferslegitimacyonitandwarrantsitsrecognitionbyothergovernments.Furthermore,ProfessordeWetalso
accountsforatleastsomeoftherelevanttreatylaw,pointingtowhatsheviewsastheinconsistentapplicationoftherelevanttreatyprovisionsbytheconcernedstates
andinternationalorganizations.

Assessedstrictlyonitsown(narrower)terms,ProfessordeWetsmajorargumentregardingthenonsolidificationtodateofacleargloballevelcustomaryinternational
lawruleagainsttherecognitionofundemocraticallyinstalledgovernmentsismoreorlesscorrect.Fewwoulddisagreethat,atleastonthegloballevel,therelevant
statepracticedoesnotappeartobeconsistentenoughatthispointtofoundcustom.Overdeterminedbypowerandideationalpolitics,statebehaviorinthisareahas
tendedtobobandweave,riseandfall,anddartaroundthemap.Forexample,asProfessordeWetmakesclear,viewedfromtheglobalperspective,the
undemocraticoustingofagovernmentfrompowerhasnotbeenasgoodapredictoroftherecognitionpracticesofstatesasonemighthaveexpected.Tothisday,the
morepowerfulglobalplayersoftenseemmuchmoreinterestedininstallingandrecognizingfriendlyregimesthaninthedemocraticnatureofagovernmentsclimbto
power(asinEgyptandUkraine).Thiswaswellrecognizedevenbymanyofthosewhohadpointedouttheemergingtrendtowardtheuseofthedemocraticlegitimacy
principleinrecognitionpraxis(e.g.,Murphy(http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=1530496&fileId=S0020589300063430)).And
so,ProfessordeWetandIagreeonthegeneralthrustoftheoverarchingargumentthatsheproffers.

Nonetheless,somemaytakeissuewithaspectsofthecontentsofProfessordeWetscomment,andIdosoontwomaingrounds.Thefirstiswithregardtocertain
omissionsintheargument:shedoesnotaddresssquarelyandinsufficientdetailcertainimportantquestionsandissuesthatmightshedsignificantlightonthesubject
ofhercommentary.WhileitisrecognizedthatspaceconstraintsmayhavelimitedthebreadthofProfessordeWetsanalysis,thefailuretoaddressthesequestions
pushedtothebackgroundcertainquestionsthat,weretheytohavebeenforegrounded,wouldhaveprovidedamorecompleteandbalancedpictureofthestateofthe
internationallawofgovernmentalrecognition.ThesecondgroundonwhichsomemaytakeissuewithProfessordeWetscommentconcernsseveralofherclaimsthat
areopentochallenge.

Silences

WhoDisappearedInternationalTreatyLaw?

ThefirstofthesilencesinhercommentarythatmighthavesignificanceforheroverallargumentisthatProfessordeWetdoesnotsquarelyinterrogateinternational
treatylaw,focusingheranalysisontheemergenceorotherwiseofacustomaryinternationallawnormthatprescribesdemocraticlegitimacyasoneofthecriteriafor
recognitionofgovernments.EvenherilluminatingconsiderationoftheAfricanregionaltreatiesisfocusedongleaningstatepracticeinobservingorviolatingthese
regionaltreatiesheraiminthisrespectbeingtoassesswhetherornottherelevantcustomhasemerged.Butcustomaryinternationallawis,obviously,nottheonly
genreofinternationallawavailabletobeassessedinthisregard.Thus,itisonethingtoarguethataclearcustomaryinternationallawruleagainsttherecognitionof
undemocraticgovernmentshasnotyetemergedandanothertocontendthatnointernationallawruleofasimilarcharacterexists.Thefirstargumentmaybecorrect
whilethesecondmaybewrong,orbothmaybeeitherrightorwrong.Andso,aconsiderationofthepositionundercustomdoesnotdisposeofthequestionathandin
acompletelysatisfactorymanner.
ProfessordeWet,however,leavesthereaderunclearastowhatherpositionisregardingtheexistenceontheglobal(asopposedtomerelyontheAfrican)levelofan
implied,subsidiaryruleofinternationaltreatylawprohibitingordiscouragingtherecognitionofundemocraticallyinstalledgovernments.Forexample,howdothe
sundrygloballeveltreatyprovisionsthatrequireallpeoplestohaveaccesstoselfdeterminationandpoliticalparticipationintheirowngovernance,andsoon(e.g.,
underCommonArticle1oftheInternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights(http://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx)(ICCPR)andthe
InternationalCovenantonEconomic,SocialandCulturalRights(http://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/cescr.aspx)(ICESCR))squarewitharuleof
governmentalrecognitionthattreatstheeffectivecontrolofasocietybyagovernmentaseithertheonlycriterionforrecognitionorthemostimportantone?Were
theseinternationaltreatyprovisionstobetakenseriouslyandaccountedforintheanalysisofthestateoftheinternationallawontherecognitionofgovernments,
wouldthisleadustotheconclusionthatrecognitiondoctrinemustbegoverned(atleasttoalargerdegreethanissuggestedbyananalysisoftherelevantcustom)by
theprincipleofdemocraticlegitimism(seeDugard(http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4507104?sid=21104990368441&uid=3737720&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739448)
andOkafor(http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1572533))?Woulditimplytheexistenceofasubsidiary,treatyrootednorminfavorofthedemocratic
legitimacycriterioningovernmentalrecognition?Canwehaveone(ademocraticentitlement)withouttheother(aruleofrecognitionthatisattheveryleaststrongly
rootedindemocraticlegitimism)?Howdoestheintersectionalityofnorms,awellacceptedaspectofinternationallegalanalysis,whichwasreliedonintheDeclaration
onFriendlyRelations,squarehere(see,e.g.,theconceptualframeworkunderpinningthediscussioninKirgis(https://litigationessentials.lexisnexis.com/webcd/app?
action=DocumentDisplay&crawlid=1&doctype=cite&docid=88+A.J.I.L.+304&srctype=smi&srcid=3B15&key=d142a99558bcb186742ab1412b30ce8a))?Dointernational
lawnormsnotspeaktoeachother?Aretheyconfinedtotheirsilos?Assuming,forexample,thattheinternationaltreatylawrighttoselfdeterminationinCommon
Article1oftheICCPRandtheICESCRconfersthedemocraticentitlementonatleastthecitizensofthosestatesthathaveratifiedoneorbothofthetwocovenants
(whichturnsouttobemoststatesintheworld),howcanitbethatagovernmentthatresultsinthosestatesfromtheexerciseofthatrightcanbelawfullydenied
recognition(evenifitisnotineffectivecontrol),andhowcanitbethatagovernmentthategregiouslyviolatestheserightscanbelawfullyaccordedrecognitionunder
theprevalentinternationaltreatylaw.

Theemphasishereisonthewordlawfullybecausewhenitcomestointernationaltreatylaw(asopposedtocustomaryinternationallaw),onecannotsimplywave
asidetreatylaworitsimplicationsbypointingtoinconsistentorcontrarystatepractice.Statesmaymanyatimeviolateornotobservetheprovisionsofatreatybutthat
doesnotnecessarilypushtherelevanttreatyintodesuetude.Ifthiswerethecase,internationaltreatylawasacategorymighthavealreadyceasedtoexistaltogether.
Afterall,violationsoftreatiesareasrifeininternationalsocietyasviolationsofthecriminallawareinthedomesticsphere.Agapmustnecessarilyexistbetween
normsandfacts(seeFranck(http://books.google.ca/books/about/Fairness_in_International_Law_and_Instit.html?id=2I0nI5t43v8C)andHabermas
(http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/betweenfactsandnorms)).

Onecan,ofcourse,disagreethatthereisevenanythinglikeademocraticentitlementunderinternationallaw,butitseemstomethatonceoneacceptsthatitdoes
exist,thenonemustalsoacceptthatatleastattheleveloflegaltextthatentitlementmayhaveparadigmaticimplicationsforinternationallawontherecognitionof
governments(seeDugard(http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4507104?uid=3739448&uid=2&uid=3737720&uid=4&sid=21105245376073)andOkafor
(http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1572533)).

Similarquestionsmayberaisedinrelationtoothernormsofinternationallawthatarewidelyrecognizedasalreadyhavingthestatusofjuscogens(peremptorynorms
ofgeneralinternationallawfromwhichnoderogationispermissible).Normssuchasthoseprohibitinggenocideandracialdiscriminationleapquicklytomind.Canthe
recognitionbehaviorofstateslawfullyderogatefromthesenorms(which,amongotherkeyhumanrightsnorms,complementtheselfdeterminationnormtoconstitute
whatmanywouldseeasthecoreofthedemocraticgovernanceidea)?ItwouldhelptohaveProfessordeWetsviewsontheserelevantandimportantquestions.

HowFaristheInternationalLawofRecognitionfromthePromisedLand?

AnotherissuethatisleftlargelyunaddressedinProfessordeWetscommentistheextenttowhichtoleranceforcoupsandotherundemocraticchangesof
governmentattheUNandAfricanUnionlevels,andthusinstatepractice,hasincreased,remainedthesame,orwanedsincethehighwatermarkofthe1990s.
Conversely,towhatextenthasrespectfordemocraticlegitimacyasacriterionforgovernmentallegitimacyandrecognitionincreased,remainedthesame,orwanedin
intensitysincethen?WhileitisunderstoodthatProfessordeWetsconcernistoanswerthequestionwhetherornotcustomaryinternationallawnowclearlyprohibits
therecognitionofagovernmentthathascometopowerinanondemocraticmanner,theseareimportantquestionsabouttrajectoryanddirectionthatmightgivethe
readerabetterideaofthestateofaffairsintheareaofinternationallawonrecognition.Forinstance,ProfdeWetarguesthatstateswillcontinuetoapplythe
democraticlegitimacycriterionasoneofvariousfactorstoconsiderwhenrecognizingagovernmentthemostimportantofthese,however,stillbeingeffective
control.Yet,withoutabroaderandthereforebetterunderstandingoftheextenttowhichthetidehasorhasnotturnedtowardtheuseofthedemocraticlegitimacy
criterion,itisdifficultforeventhosewhoacceptthisturntogetasenseofhowremotetheemergenceofsuchcustomis.Areweonthecuspofaparadigmshift,a
transformation?OrarewelightyearsawayfromthepromisedlandwhichJ.E.S.Fawcett(http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?
fromPage=online&aid=2974616)dreamtofasfarbackasthe1960s.HowfarawayarewefromfullyrealizingwhatKarenKnophasreferredtoastherightingof
recognition(TheRightingofRecognition:RecognitionofStatesinEasternEuropeandtheSovietUnion,CanadianCouncilofInternationalLawProceedings36
(1992))?WhilethisisnotahugeconcernwithProfessordeWetscomment,itisanimportantonenonetheless.TheAfricanUnionshandling
(http://www.bbc.com/news/worldafrica30076907)ofrecenteventsinBurkinaFasounderscoresthispoint.

ContentiousArgumentsandClaims

RereadingtheAfricanEvidence

Assuggestedearlier,therearecertainaspectsofProfessordeWetsanalysiswithwhichsomemaytakeissue.Thefirstandmostimportantoftheseisheranalysisof
theAfricanevidence,onwhichherargumentheavilyrelies.Acarefulreaderofheranalysiswill,forthemostpart,finditdifficulttoagreewithher.Shenotesquite
correctlythatArticle4(p)oftheConstitutiveActof2000oftheAfricanUnioncondemnsanyunconstitutional(includingundemocratic)changeofgovernment,butgoes
ontoclaimthatthepracticeofthatbodyinrelationtotheenforcementofArticle4(p)hashowevernotbeenconsistent.Buttheevidenceshesuppliesinfavorofthis
keyconclusiondoesnot,inmyview,supportsostrongaclaimonherpart.Infact,undercuttingherownargument,sheactuallycitestothefactthattheAfricanUnion
hassanctionedorcondemnedvirtuallyeveryunconstitutionalorundemocraticchangeofgovernmentofgovernmentinAfricasince2003(inatotalofsixcases).Her
groundsforregardingthisevidenceasinconsistentarethat,intwoofthosesixcases,theAfricanUnionmerelycondemnedthechangesofgovernmentwithout
imposingsanctions.Withrespect,theweightofevidencehereisnotsufficientlyinconsistenttogroundaclaimthatnoregionalcustomhasemergedinAfrica.Doesthe
emergenceofcustomrequirecompleteandtotaluniformityinstatepractice?Inanycase,asIreadthem,atbest,thesecasesrevealmarginalinconsistency.Indeed,
allsixcasesareoriented,albeitinvaryingdegreesofintensity,towardtherequirementofdemocraticlegitimacyasthechiefcriterionforgovernmentalrecognition.
Condemnations,evenwithouttheimpositionofsanctions,donotimplythattheimpugnedchangesofgovernmentwerecondonedinthetwocitedcases.

Similarly,ProfessordeWetstreatmentofthestatepracticewithregardtothepopularrevoltsthathaveoccurredinAfricaandtheinstallingofunelectedtransitional
regimesinsomestatesonthatcontinentleavesmuchroomfordisagreement.HerargumentthattheAfricanUnionsrecognitionoftransitionalregimesthataremeant
tobringpeacetoacountry,accommodateallsidestothetensionsandconflictsatissue,andcruciallytransitthecountrytodemocracy(e.g.,inLibya,Mali,andnow
 BurkinaFaso)isevidenceofinconsistentstatepracticeinthisareaisnotconvincing.Itisdifficulttoseehowthisevidencedetractssignificantlyfromtheapplicationof
thecriterionofdemocraticlegitimacyingovernmentalrecognition.Forexample,intheLibyancase,itisnotasifthetransitionalgovernmentinstalledinthatcountry
hadoverthrownademocraticregime.Quitetothecontrary,itclaimedtohaveseizedpowerinordertoattempttorestoredemocracy.Howdoesthisdetractfromthe
utilizationofthedemocraticlegitimacyprincipleintherecognitionofgovernmentsinAfrica?AsimilarargumentcanbemadeinrespectoftheMaliandBurkinaFaso
cases,wherethearmywaspressuredawayfromseizingpowerforanylongerthantheshorttransitionalperiodpreciselyindefenceoftheprincipleofthenon
recognitionofnondemocraticgovernmentsthatisbasedonAUtreatylawandtakingrootinthatorganizationspractice.Assuch,whileProfessordeWetis,asIhave
suggested,correcttoarguethatnogloballevelcustomaryinternationallawnormhasasyetemergedrequiringthenonrecognitionofallgovernmentsthatcameto
powerthroughundemocraticmeans,itisnotasclearthatsheisascorrectwithrespecttotheregionalAfricancontext.

Thesecondclaimthatismadeinthecommentwithwhichsomemaytakeissueisthat,asunconstitutionalastheactwas,theousteroftheYanukovychgovernment
[inUkraine]...wasnot,assuch,aviolationofinternationallaw,norwastherecognitionofitssuccessorgovernment.While,asIhaveargued,ProfessordeWetis
correctthatthereisnogloballevelcustomary(asopposedtotreaty)internationallawnormthatrequiresthenonrecognitionofundemocraticallyinstalled
governments,itismuchmoredoubtfulthanshehasacknowledgedthatthereisnosuchtreatyrooted,subsidiary,andimplied,nonrecognitionnormonethatflows,
interalia,fromthedemocraticentitlement,selfdetermination,antigenocide,andantiracialdiscriminationnorms.Whatismore,theclaimthattheousterof
Yanukovychinitselfwasnotaviolationofinternationallawis,inmyview,ofdoubtfulvalidity.Thisisaseparatequestionfromthatofthelegalityoftherecognitionof
thesuccessorgovernment.Andthetwoquestionsoughtnottobeconflated.Inanycase,thereissignificantevidencethatatleastintreatyinternationallawthe
ousterofademocraticallyelectedregimemaynowbewidelyregardedasunlawfulininternationallaw(Franck(http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2203138?
uid=3739448&uid=2&uid=3737720&uid=4&sid=21105245828383),MaxPlanckEncyclopaediaofPublicInternationalLaw(http://opil.ouplaw.com/home/EPIL),and
Okafor(http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1572532)).Whilethisdoesnot,ofcourse,necessarilymeanthatthedemocraticentitlementhasfully
emergedintointernationallaw,itshouldrequireamoretentativeanalysisofthequestionofthelegalityorotherwiseoftheforcibleorunconstitutionalousterof
Yanukovychandotherslikehim.

Thus,intheend,IcertainlydohavesignificantchallengestosomeaspectsofProfessordeWetscomment.However,thisdoesnotdetractfromthefactthatIfind
myselfinagreementwithhermainargument(concerningthecurrentstateoftheglobalcustomaryasopposedtotreatyinternationallawontherecognitionof
governments).

ObioraChineduOkafor(http://www.osgoode.yorku.ca/facultyandstaff/okaforobiorachinedu/)isaProfessoratOsgoodeHallLawSchool,YorkUniversity.

0comment(s)

Printerfriendlyversion(/print/2365)

Print(/print/blogs/democraticlegitimacycriterionrecognitiongovernmentsresponseprofessorerikadewet)

ConnectWithASIL

Follow@asilorg (http://www.youtube.com/asil1906) Follow

2016TheAmericanSocietyofInternationalLaw

2223MassachusettsAve.,NW,WashingtonDC20008

Phone+12029396000

Allrightsreserved.