Europos tautų apsisprendimo teisės įgyvendinimas XXI amžiuje

LTŠiame straipsnyje analizuojami tautų apsisprendimo laisvės ir teritorinio vientisumo principai, samprata, kurie glaudžiai tarpusavyje sąveikauja realizuojant tautų teisę į apsisprendimą kuriant naują nepriklausomą valstybę. Taip pat aptariamos tokios sąvokos kaip etninės ir tautinės mažumos ir analizuojami tautų apsisprendimo teisės Kosove, Škotijoje, Katalonijoje, Kryme, Luhanske ir Donecke atvejai. Straipsnio tikslas – išsiaiškinti, kuomet tautų apsisprendimo teisė yra legitimi ir kokį vaidmenį atlieka tarptautinė teisė įgyvendinant šį principą.

ENThe aim of the article is to reveal the definitions of nations self-determination and territorial integrity principles in the field of the international law. This article provides the analysis of such cases as Kosovo, Scotland, Catalonia, Crimea, Lugansk and Donetsk. The purpose is to show how differently international principles can be understood and implemented in different parts of the Europe. Therefore, in the article described all mentioned situations and discussed when implementation of nations self-determination principle is legal. In addition, the article tells about the differences between national and international laws interpreting mentioned principles. First of all, the Kosovo situation, as it was mentioned above, was adjudged by the International Court of Justice as legal. However, it is only advisory opinion, which means that it is not obligatory for all countries to recognize Kosovo but most of European Union countries admitted that Kosovo is an independent country. Secondly, the article describes the Scotland situation which is completely different from Kosovo due to the fact that the United Kingdom accepts the choice of Scotland and it was mentioned in Edinburgh Agreements.Thirdly, the legal referendum was held in Catalonia as in Scotlandin. Catalans are the nation which has the right of self determination because they have their own language, history, traditions and would like to create an independent country. However, the government of Spain does not tolerate the right of catalans and the Spanish Constitutional Court declared that Catalonia‘s referendum which was held in 2014 was anticonstutional. The last situation that was described in the article – Crimea, Lugansk and Donetsk. These three situations are quite similar because non of them cannot held a referendum and have not got a right of selfdetermination due to the fact that they are not applicable in accordance with international law. These situations are Russian Federation‘s occupation. To sum up, all mentioned situations are different and each one should be considered according to national and international laws.