ijalr

Trending: Call for Papers Volume 3 | Issue 2: International Journal of Advanced Legal Research [ISSN: 2582-7340]

Conflict Between State’s Sovereignty And International Intervention: Un’s Silence On Article 370

INTRODUCTION

Article 370 dealt with the special status of Jammu and Kashmir. This article was mentioned in Part XXI of the Indian Constitution titled ‘ Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions’. There had been several disputes related to this article. Our country called this state as POK, which meant Pakistan occupied Kashmir and the very same was a shoot towards India by Pakistan by calling it India Occupied Kashmir. But on 5th August our government repealed its special status including the limited economy. The government took action to cut off the communication line from Kashmir’s valley and it also gave public much freedom to access reservation, right to education and right to information. Many nationalists celebrated it as a victory of the nation and it became a D- day also. Our President of India issued an order for its revocation by overruling the Presidential order of 1954.

Before discussing about the conflict between state’s sovereignty and international intervention it is very crucial for us to discuss about state’s sovereignty, international intervention.

STATE’S SOVEREIGNTY

This term is an idea of International Law. We cannot think about the basic concept of this term without International Law. Generally, the term ‘sovereignty’ means ‘supreme’ and it has a crucial role in political and legal property of any state.

B.L.Manelis said that, “ Sovereignty should be considered as a social phenomenon, which is so closely connected with the state , its role in international relations and the regularities of its development”. It is very crucial for us to understand that the term ‘state’ is very different from the term ‘government’. It is also not related to the term ‘nation’. These both are so different concepts and contain many variations in both legal and political aspect. The state is a concept which describes a lot about the legal power.

We can take an instance also. As, India is a sovereign state whereas Jammu and Kashmir is a part of it. Sovereign means Supremacy which an independent state contains. So, India is a sovereign state, and the decision of the government to abrogate Article 370 was the part of the supremacy which it had shown.

INTERNATIONAL INTERVENTION

The meaning of intervention is designed by keeping in mind some moral and legal concepts. It is basically linked to the term ‘State Sovereignty’. As, the Cold War ended it also emphasised UN Charter to permit International Intervention in states where domestic jurisdiction breaks down and where human security is denied. As, it is very well connected to state’s sovereignty, so it also emphasises a lot upon the juridical power of the state. It also describes the juridical status of state by linking it to the right of the state to determine its status.

CONFLICT BETWEEN STATE SOVEREIGNTY AND INTERNATIONAL INTERVENTION ON ARTICLE 370

The UN Charter led the people to discuss a lot about self-determination. As, we all know self-determination means that people should have the right to create their own political and cultural identity. The term ‘self-determination’ is an ideology of UN. It is also very clearly stated in Article 1 and Article 2 that nothing contained in the present UN Charter shall authorise the UN to intervene in matters that are essentially within the jurisdiction of any state. The people who seeked the self- determination resided in that particular state and it resulted into a conflict between the traits of self-determination and state territorial integrity. The movement of self- determination resulted into a huge conflict. The tension existed at a huge peak between the principles of self- determination and the state sovereignty which was totally inherited within the UN. If we take an instance of Jammu and Kashmir, we will get to know the fact that how the principle of territorial integrity prevailed over the principle of self- determination.

The norm of state sovereignty stood widely on two principles. The first one is of the non-interference, which meant that a state should be free of external forces to conduct their own internal affairs. This principle opposed any kind of interference. The second one is the principle of territorial integrity that is the borders of state are sacrosanct and its boundaries are not subjected to make many differences. Due to these two different concepts there always been a dispute.

UN’S SILENCE ON ARTICLE 370

If we talk about other countries also such as China and America, every country was muted. Many of the countries responded positively to India’s decision for abrogating Article 370 except Pakistan. The abrogation of Article 370 was a notable step taken by our Prime Minister Shree Narendra Modi. Donald Trump, the president of United States also said that it is a matter to be silent upon. Trump compared this matter to that of an explosive. He said that Kashmir is a place where the Muslim and Hindus have a burning dispute. He called Kashmir to be a very complicated place where Hindus and Muslims cannot get along so great.

The United Nations Security Council had also shown a lukewarm attitude. It has not called any formal meeting and believed that this issue can be bilaterally resolved. The decision to scrap the article 370 is not questionable as it is not wrong. It is fully constitutional and not against an international treaty. It was also said it is not against any domestic law. Hence, no public statement in opposition to this abrogation was considered.

CONCLUSION

Indeed, the abrogation of Article 370 is right from each and every aspect. Earlier, it had some special provisions. But, our union government took a notable step and abrogated the article 370. It resulted into many disputes such as the conflict between state’s sovereignty and international intervention. The reason behind it was the UN’s silence.

The state’s sovereignty prevailed there. As we all know that India is a sovereign state and hence it can exercise its powers. This issue did not need any interference of international bodies. The decision of the government was purely constitutional and was not against any international treaty. Hence, the step was notable and the day of abrogation is celebrated as the D-day of our country.

This blog is written by Palak Tripathi a student at C.M.P. Degree College, University of Allahabad, Prayagraj


REFERENCES

https://theprint.in/opinion/on-article-370-india-hasnt-violated-any-international-treaty-thats-why-world-wont-react/272429/

https://frontline.thehindu.com/cover-story/article29382230.ece

https://www.e-ir.info/2020/05/29/the-case-of-un-involvement-in-jammu-and-kashmir/

https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/State+sovereignty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_state

https://www.eolss.net/Sample-Chapters/C14/E1-35-04-03.pdf

https://www.gmu.edu/programs/icar/ijps/vol6_2/Conteh-Morgan.htm

 

 

 

6 thoughts on “Conflict Between State’s Sovereignty And International Intervention: Un’s Silence On Article 370”

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *