Full Text Available

Note: Clicking the button above will open the full text document at the original institutional repository in a new window.

In the light of the Crimean Crisis will International law have to accept that it is to the advantage of the citizens of Crimea that, in this case, the law of state succession applies De Facto in preference to that of occupied territory law?

The Crimea Crisis didn't just influenced the political world, it also challenged the international law system. It is one of the major crisis after the Cold War where the relationship between western states and Russia were at a point of collapsing. After the fled of the former Russian president, the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Handschumacher, Konstantin
Other Authors: Powell, Cathleen
Format: Thesis
Language:English
Published: Department of Public Law 2016
Subjects:
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1867613142756884480
access_status_str Open Access
author Handschumacher, Konstantin
author2 Powell, Cathleen
author_browse Handschumacher, Konstantin
Powell, Cathleen
author_facet Powell, Cathleen
Handschumacher, Konstantin
author_sort Handschumacher, Konstantin
collection Thesis
description The Crimea Crisis didn't just influenced the political world, it also challenged the international law system. It is one of the major crisis after the Cold War where the relationship between western states and Russia were at a point of collapsing. After the fled of the former Russian president, the "Little Green Man" entered Crimea and took over the control over the territory. In the beginning Russia denied any connection to this rebel group, but according to the effecting control test, their action can be attributed to Russia. Therefore Russia used illegally force in Crimea. After holding a referendum, which didn't met the international standards, Crimea singed a treaty, which lead to the incorporation into the Russian Federation. Because of the link to the illegal use of force these actions violated international law. Crimea is therefore occupied territory and the law of occupation applies to the area. But because Russia considers the territory as part of the Russian Federation, it considers the law of state succession as the applicable law. When we compare the two legal systems in regards to the rights and citizenship, it can be concluded that none of the two legal systems are more beneficent for the inhabitants than the other. As a consequence one can hypothetical ask if there are legal arguments in international law, which can be put forward to underpin the assumption that for the benefit of the inhabitants the de jure legal system has to evade in favor for the de facto system. There are several possible legal arguments, but none of them is in the position to underpin the raised question. Even there are no legal arguments the current discussion in international has the possibility to strengthen the law of occupation.
format Thesis
id oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/20866
institution University of Cape Town (South Africa)
language eng
last_indexed 2026-06-10T12:31:26.417Z
license_str Not specified — see source repository
provenance_str_mv Harvested via OAI-PMH from UCTD — University of Cape Town Open Access Repository
publishDate 2016
publishDateRange 2016
publishDateSort 2016
publisher Department of Public Law
publisherStr Department of Public Law
record_format dspace
source_str UCTD — University of Cape Town Open Access Repository
spelling oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/20866 In the light of the Crimean Crisis will International law have to accept that it is to the advantage of the citizens of Crimea that, in this case, the law of state succession applies De Facto in preference to that of occupied territory law? Handschumacher, Konstantin Powell, Cathleen International Law The Crimea Crisis didn't just influenced the political world, it also challenged the international law system. It is one of the major crisis after the Cold War where the relationship between western states and Russia were at a point of collapsing. After the fled of the former Russian president, the "Little Green Man" entered Crimea and took over the control over the territory. In the beginning Russia denied any connection to this rebel group, but according to the effecting control test, their action can be attributed to Russia. Therefore Russia used illegally force in Crimea. After holding a referendum, which didn't met the international standards, Crimea singed a treaty, which lead to the incorporation into the Russian Federation. Because of the link to the illegal use of force these actions violated international law. Crimea is therefore occupied territory and the law of occupation applies to the area. But because Russia considers the territory as part of the Russian Federation, it considers the law of state succession as the applicable law. When we compare the two legal systems in regards to the rights and citizenship, it can be concluded that none of the two legal systems are more beneficent for the inhabitants than the other. As a consequence one can hypothetical ask if there are legal arguments in international law, which can be put forward to underpin the assumption that for the benefit of the inhabitants the de jure legal system has to evade in favor for the de facto system. There are several possible legal arguments, but none of them is in the position to underpin the raised question. Even there are no legal arguments the current discussion in international has the possibility to strengthen the law of occupation. 2016-07-27T10:25:23Z 2016-07-27T10:25:23Z 2016 Master Thesis Masters LLM http://hdl.handle.net/11427/20866 eng application/pdf Department of Public Law Faculty of Law University of Cape Town
spellingShingle International Law
Handschumacher, Konstantin
In the light of the Crimean Crisis will International law have to accept that it is to the advantage of the citizens of Crimea that, in this case, the law of state succession applies De Facto in preference to that of occupied territory law?
thesis_degree_str Master's
title In the light of the Crimean Crisis will International law have to accept that it is to the advantage of the citizens of Crimea that, in this case, the law of state succession applies De Facto in preference to that of occupied territory law?
title_full In the light of the Crimean Crisis will International law have to accept that it is to the advantage of the citizens of Crimea that, in this case, the law of state succession applies De Facto in preference to that of occupied territory law?
title_fullStr In the light of the Crimean Crisis will International law have to accept that it is to the advantage of the citizens of Crimea that, in this case, the law of state succession applies De Facto in preference to that of occupied territory law?
title_full_unstemmed In the light of the Crimean Crisis will International law have to accept that it is to the advantage of the citizens of Crimea that, in this case, the law of state succession applies De Facto in preference to that of occupied territory law?
title_short In the light of the Crimean Crisis will International law have to accept that it is to the advantage of the citizens of Crimea that, in this case, the law of state succession applies De Facto in preference to that of occupied territory law?
title_sort in the light of the crimean crisis will international law have to accept that it is to the advantage of the citizens of crimea that in this case the law of state succession applies de facto in preference to that of occupied territory law
topic International Law
url http://hdl.handle.net/11427/20866
work_keys_str_mv AT handschumacherkonstantin inthelightofthecrimeancrisiswillinternationallawhavetoacceptthatitistotheadvantageofthecitizensofcrimeathatinthiscasethelawofstatesuccessionappliesdefactoinpreferencetothatofoccupiedterritorylaw