THE PRINCIPLE OF TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY IN THE CONTEXT OF TERRITORIAL DISPUTES RESOLUTION

INTRODUCTION. The research of the conceptual foundations of the principle of territorial integrity of states, taking into account possible conflicts of this principle with the principle of the right of people to self-determination equivalent in their legal force, is actual, especially in the context of contemporary international relations. At the same time, the justification of the need to respect the territorial integrity of states in the process of settling territorial disputes is also demonstrated in the works of the early representatives of international legal doctrine. MATERIALS AND METHODS. On the example of the activities, first of all, of the UN the article shows the effectiveness of the appeal of universal and regional judicial and non-judicial bodies to the principle of territorial integrity in the process of settling territorial disputes arising in the course of realizing the right of peoples to self-determination. The special materials for the research were the decisions of the UN Security Council on territorial disputes, the resolutions of the UN General Assembly on territorial disputes, the Declaration on the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations of 1970, the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples of 1960 and doctrinal interpretations of these documents. RESEARCH RESULTS. Based on the results of the analysis, the author notes that the absence in international law of a sufficiently clear legal definition of the principle of territorial integrity and its interdependence with the right of peoples to self-determination leads to double standards in assessing contemporary threats to international stability and security. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The author emphasized the necessity of progressive development and codification of the norms of international law, aimed at adapting to contemporary realities and the principle of territorial integrity, and the principle of the right of peoples to self-determination, so as to enhance the opportunities for their equivalent action as sources of international law.

1. Abbé de Saint-Pierre. Projet pour rendre la paix perpétuelle en Europe (1713). Paris: Fayard. 1787. 720 p.

2. Brownlie I. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo. V 2 kn. Kn. 1 [International Law. In 2 books. Book 1]. Moscow: Progress Publ. 1977. 535 p. (In Russ.)

3. Bukhanova A.S. Kolliziya printsipov samoopredeleniya narodov, territorial’noi tselostnosti gosudarstv i vozmozhnye puti ee resheniya [Collision of Principles of Self-determination of Peoples and Territorial Integrity of States and Feasible Ways of its Resolution]. – Pravo i upravlenie: XXI vek. 2011. No. 4(21). P. 24–31. (In Russ.)

4. Carley P. Self-determination Sovereignty, Territorial Integrity, and the Right to Secession. Washington DC: United States Institute of Peace Press. 2004. 21 p.

5. Castellino J. International Law and Self-determination: The Interplay of the Politics of Territorial Possession with Formulations of Post-colonial “National”. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. 2000. 286 p.

6. Grotius H. O prave voiny i mira. Tri knigi, v kotorykh ob”yasnyayutsya estestvennoe pravo i pravo narodov, a takzhe printsipy publichnogo prava [The Rights of War and Peace]. Moscow: Ladomir Publ. 1994. 868 p. (In Russ.)

7. Hartwig M. Das Gutachten des Internationalen Gerichtshofs zur Unabhängigkeitserklärung des Kosovo: Vorgeschichte und “Urteils” kritik. – Osteuropa-Recht. 2013. No. 4. P. 11–28.

8. Ignatenko G.V. Ot kolonial’nogo rezhima k natsional’noi gosudarstvennosti [From Colonial Regime to Real Statehood]. Moscow. 1966. 157 p. (In Russ.)

9. Kohen M., Mar K. del. The Kosovo Advisory Opinion and UNSCR 1244 (1999): A Declaration of ‘Independence from International Law’? – Leiden Journal of International Law. 2011.Vol. 24. P. 109–126. DOI:10.1017/ S0922156510000634

10. Kurdyukov G.I. Priznanie i nepriznanie v praktike OON [Recognition and Non-recognition in the Practice of the UN]. – Vestnik ekonomiki, prava i sotsiologii. 2008. No. 5. P. 64–70. (In Russ.)

11. Leslie P. Canada: The Supreme Court Sets Rules for the Secession of Quebec. – Publius: The Journal of Federalism. 1999. Vol. 29. No. 2. Р. 114–143.

12. Naryshkin S.E. Otvety Predsedatelya Gosudarstvennoi Dumy Federal’nogo Sobraniya Rossiiskoi Federatsii S.E. Naryshkina na voprosy glavnogo redaktora Moskovskogo zhurnala mezhdunarodnogo prava [Answers of the Chairman of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation S.E. Naryshkin to the Questions of the Editor-in-chief of the Moscow Journal of International Law]. - Moscow Journal of International Law. 2015. No. 1 (97). P. 5–10. (In Russ.)

13. Orlov A.S. Pravo narodov na samoopredelenie kak faktor razresheniya mezhdunarodnykh territorial’nykh sporov [The Right of Peoples to Self-determination as a Factor in the Resolution of International Territorial Disputes]. – Prava cheloveka i ikh zashchita v usloviyakh globalizatsii obnovlyayushchegosya mnogopolyarnogo mira: mezhdunarodno-pravovoi i vnutrigosudarstvennyi aspekty: Materialy III Mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoprakticheskoi konferentsii studentov i aspirantov, posvyashchennoi 60-letiyu so dnya prinyatiya Vseobshchei deklaratsii prav cheloveka 1948 g. [Human Rights and their Protection in the Context of the Globalization of a Renewing Multipolar World: international legal and domestic aspects: proceedings of the III International Scientific and Practical Conference of Students and Postgraduates, dedicated to the 60th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948]. Kazan’. 2008. P. 121–123. (In Russ.)

14. Vylegzhanin A.N., Kalamkaryan R.A. Znachenie mezhdunarodnogo obychaya v sovremennom mezhdunarodnom prave [The Role of International Custom in the Contemporary International Law]. – Moscow Journal of International Law. 2012. No. 2(86). P. 5–29. (In Russ.)

15. Vylegzhanin A.N., Potier T. Shaw’s Interpretation of International Law: Theoretical Reflections. – Moscow Journal of International Law. 2017. No. 4. P. 7–18. DOI: 10.24833/0869-0049-2017-4-7-18.