Bridging the Gap between Self-Determination and Sovereignty

The Workshop on ‘Bridging the Gap between Self-Determination and Sovereignty’ was conducted by the Centre for Just Peace and Democracy (CJPD) on 17th and 18th May 2008 at Lucerne, Switzerland in partnership with Berghof Foundation for Conflict Studies. The objectives of the workshop were to gain a theoretical understanding of the concepts of Self-Determination and Sovereignty and learn from practical cases how this gap was bridged.

The workshop was co-chaired by Mr. Ana Pararajasingham of CJPD and Dr Norbert Ropers of Berghof Foundation for Conflict Studies. The workshop began with opening remarks by the co chairs. It comprised three sessions.

In the first session Dr Thomas Fleiner addressing the topic of Self-determination and Sovereignty acknowledged that the concept of sovereignty has diminished in recent times. He expressed the view that this weakening of sovereignty did not strengthen the right to secession by sub states. Instead, he argued that there was a case for international law to be developed and redeveloped so as to recognize these sub states. His opposition to the concept of ‘Earned Sovereignty’ was based on the notion that since earning the sovereignty involved ‘suffering’, this notion encourages struggles and suffering. He was inclined to interpret the right to self-determination as being restricted and quoted the Quebec Supreme Court decision.

Ms Rose Parfitt introduced the subject of ‘Earned Sovereignty’ as developed by Williams and Pecci of the Public International Law and Policy Group (PILPG). She then critiqued the concept of ‘Earned Sovereignty’ on the grounds that it entailed exchanging one kind of domination for another. She was of the view that the exercise of self-determination by sub states resulting in several economically unsustainable microstates.

During the 2nd session of the workshop several case studies were taken up. Mr. Bakhtiar Abdulla, chief spokesperson for the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) spoke about the current status of the Memorandum of Understanding reached with the Indonesian Government.

Dr Damien Kingsbury’s paper introduced the concept of mediated sovereignty as a way of ‘bridging the gap’. While acknowledging that Earned Sovereignty had the potential to work past the state-secessionist dichotomy, he identified some of the negative features as being reliant on international goodwill and the parent state’s willingness to dismember its territory.

Dr Dieter Wolkewitz in his presentation addressed the process adopted in Kosovo specifically with a general reference to other states in the Balkans.

During the 3rd session of the Workshop, Dr Norbert Ropers provided an international perspective of the process during the Cease-Fire period between 2002 and 2008. Mr. Rudrakumaran articulated the Tamil case for the reversion of sovereignty and the case for the exercise of self-determination by the Tamils.

Each of the sessions was followed by discussions during which issues were clarified, challenged and re-interpreted. The Chatham House rule was evoked to promote a free exchange of ideas.

The importance of engaging with the international community/actors was considered to be significant and important. The engagement with the moderates on the Sri Lankan side who were committed to a negotiated resolution of the conflict was also similarly viewed as being very important.

The workshop ended as envisaged providing valuable insights through the presentations and discussions on the concepts of self determination and sovereignty. As part of the second phase of this project , these insights in the form of a detailed report on workshop proceedings will be sent to participants of the workshop and others to produce papers on the subject of ‘Bridging the Gap between Self-Determination and Sovereignty’. These papers will then be published by CJPD.