Maxim Allegans Contraria non est Audiendus, Junadagh, Jammu ve Keşmir

Year 2019, Volume: 3 Issue: 2, 53 - 89, 27.12.2019

Mehmet Şükrü Güzel

Abstract

5 Ağustos 2019 tarihinde Hindistan hükümeti, Jammu ve Keşmir eyaletine kayda değer siyasi özerklik kazandıran Anayasanın 370. Maddesinin iptal edildiğini duyurdu. 370. Madde, Jammu ve Keşmir’in dışişleri, savunma ve haberleşme dışındaki tüm konularda kendi anayasasına, ayrı bir bayrağa ve bağımsızlığına sahip olmasını sağlamakta idi. Hindistan hükümeti, Jammu ve Keşmir’in Birleşmiş Milletler Güvenlik Konseyi tarafindan tartışmalı bölge olarak tanımlamasına rağmen, Hindistan Anayasasının 370. Maddesinin Birleşmiş Milletler SözleşmesI`nin 2.7 Maddesi kapsaminda Hindistan’ın bir iç meselesi olduğunu iddia etmektedir. Bu makale, Birleşmiş Milletler dekolonizasyon sistemi içerisinde Jammu ve Keşmir sorununu, Hindistan’ın Junagadh’ın Eyaleti`nin dekolonizasyon süreci ile mukayeseli olarak inceleyerek, maxim allegans contraria non est audiendus prensibi çerçevesinde Hindistan`in Jammu ve Keşmir icin uluslararasi bir yükümlülüğünün olup olmadığını analiz etmektedir.

Keywords

Jammu ve Keşmir, decolonizasyon, Junagadh, Hindistan Anayasası 370. Madde, BM

Maxim Allegans Contraria non est Audiendus, Junadagh, Jammu and Kashmir

Abstract

On 5 August 2019, the Indian Government announced the revocation of Article 370 of the Constitution, which grants the state of Jammu and Kashmir considerable political autonomy. Article 370 allowed Jammu and Kashmir to have its own constitution, a separate flag and independence over all matters except foreign affairs, defence and communications. The Government says this is an internal affair of India, subject to Article 2.7 of the UN Charter even if the United Nations Security Council defines Jammu and Kashmir as disputed territory. This Article examines the dispute of Jammu and Kashmir within the UN system of decolonization, and analyzes whether there exits any international legal obligation for India arising from the decolonization of Junagadh for Jammu and Kashmir within the principle of maxim allegans contraria non est audiendus.

Keywords

Jammu and Kashmir, Decolonization, Junagadh, Indian Constitution Article 370, UN

References

• “For”, EUI, https://www.eui.eu/Documents/DepartmentsCentres/AcademyofEuropeanLaw/CourseMaterialsHR/HR2009/DeWet/DeWetBackgroundReading1.pdf, (Date of Accession: 03.10.2019). “Guiding Principles Applicable to Unilateral Declarations of States Capable of Creating Legal Obligations, with Commentaries Thereto”, UN, http://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/commentaries/9_9_2006.pdf , (Date of Accession: 03.10.2019). “Guiding Principles Applicable to Unilateral Declarations of States Capable of Creating Legal Obligations, with Commentaries Thereto”, UN, http://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/commentaries/9_9_2006.pdf p.379, (Date of Accession: 03.10.2019). “Indian Independence Act (1947)”, CVCE, https://www.cvce.eu/content/publication/2015/6/30/b95cc09b-eb90-400d-848d-266e2346a603/publishable_en.pdf, (Date of Accession: 03.10.2019). “Jammu and Kashmir in Legal Perspective”, The European Foundation for South Asian Studies, https://www.efsas.org/EFSAS-Jammu%20and%20Kashmir%20in%20Legal%20Perspective.pdf, (Date of Accession: 03.10.2019). “UN’s Failure in Kashmir a Factual Survey”, UN, https://www.epw.in/system/files/pdf/1965_17/40/un_s_failure_in_kashmira_factual_survey.pdf , (Date of Accession: 03.10.2019). CSATLÓS, Erzsébet, “The Legal Regime of Unilateral Act of States”, Miskolc Journal of International Law, 7(1) , 2010, p. 33-60. Government of India, White Paper on Indian States, Delhi 1950. HINGORANI, Aman, The Kashmir Issue: Differing Perceptions, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, Zurich 2007. International Commission of Jurists, Human Rights in Kashmir, Report of a Mission, ICJ, Geneva 1995 p.12-13. International Law Commission on the Eve of the Twenty-first Century, UN, New York 1997, p. 53-54. KATKE, Santoshkumar M, “A Study on Contributions of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel in Consolidating Social Elements in New India After Independence”, International Journal of Creative Thoughts, 3(1), March 2015, p. 202-215. KHANAM, Attiya, “An Historical Overview of the Accession of Princely States”, Journal of Historical Studies, 2(1), January-June 2016, p. 84-103. LONE, Fozia Nazir, Historical Title, Self-Determination and the Kashmir Question, Brill Nijhoff, Leiden 2018. LUKASHUK, Igor Ivanovich, “The Principle Pacta Sunt Servanda and the Nature of Obligation under International Law”, American Journal of International Law, 83(3), 1959, p. 513-518. NAGAN, Winston P.-Aitza M. Haddad, “Sovereignty in Theory and Practice”, San Diego International Law Journal, 2012, p. 429-520. PARVEEN, Kausar, “Nature of Indian Politics Before 1947”, Center for South Asian Studies, 2013, 14, p. 130-182. REINHOLD, Stevin, “Good Faith in International Law, UCL Journal of Law and Jurisprudence, 2, 2014, p. 40-62. RUBIN, Alfred P., “The International Legal Effects of Unilateral Declarations”, American Journal of International Law, 1977, p. 1-30. SVENSSON, Ted, “A Federation of Equals? Bringing the Princely States into United India”, Stance Working Paper Series; 9, 2016, terialsHR/HR2009/DeWet/DeWetBackgroundReading1.pdf, (Date of Accession: 03.10.2019), p. 1-19. The Law Dictionary, https://dictionary.thelaw.com/allegans-contraria-non-est-audiendus/ (Date of Accession: 03.10.2019). UN Doc. A/CN.4/525, Fifth Report on Unilateral Acts of States by Victor Rodríguez Cedeño, Special Rapporteur. 54th session. UN Document, S/Agenda 250, UN Security Council 18 February 1948 250th Meeting. UN Document, S/Agenda 264, UN Security Council 8 March 1948 264th Meeting. WAGNER, ML, Jurisdiction by Estoppel in the International Court of Justice, Berkeley, https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1992&context=californialawreview, (Date of Accession: 03.10.2019). WATTS, Carl P., “British Decolonization”, Academia, https://www.academia.edu/2002497/British_Decolonization, (Date of Accession: 03.10.2019). WET, Erika de, “Holding the UN Seuciry Council Accountable for Human Rights Violations Through Domestic and Regional Courts: A Case of “Be Careful What You Wish For”, EUI, https://www.eui.eu/Documents/DepartmentsCentres/AcademyofEuropeanLaw/CourseMa WET, Erika de, “Human Rights Limitations to Economic Enforcement Measures Under Article 41 of the United Nations Charter and the Iraqi Sanctions Regime”, Leiden Journal of International Law, 14, 2011, p.277-300.