Exam 2 - Statehood Recognition

Monevideo Convention of 1933

Article 1 defines what a state is. Must have the following qualifications:

1. Permenant Population

2. Defined Territory

3. Government

4. Capacity to enter into relations with other states

Statehood and Rec - Constitutive Theory

Entities only become states by the recognition of existing states

Statehood and Rec - Declarative Theory

• States exist as matter of fact

• Recognition only acknowledges this fact; it does not create a state

Approach to Gov Rec - Objective

Recognizing a government because it exercises effective control over a state

Approached to Gov Rec - Subjective

Recognizing a government because you like it

Estrada Doctrine

Doctrine of Mexican government, stating that they would not recognize governments because it’s unnecessary. Insulting process to other government’s sovereignty

Tinoco Claims - IL

The legal significance of recognizing governments in international law

1. De facto governments can make internationally binding decisions

2. Commitments made by de facto governments remain binding on sucessor governments

3. De facto governments do not need to conform to constitution of the prior government

Salimoff v. Standard Oil - U.S.

Provides the legal significance of defacto government recognition by the U.S.

1. Decrees made by defacto governments have force/legal legitamacy within boarders and over nationals

2. Laws enacted by defacto governments within their own boundaries, over their own people, is upheld by U.S. courts

3. Does not provide “extra-territorial effect” for defacto govs - not applicable to U.S. territories

Upright v. Mercury Business Machines - U.S.

Provides for rights of nonrecognized governments (by U.S.)

1. De facto governments can make acts within its boarders that affect the private rights of U.S. citizens

2. De facto governments do not have access to U.S. courts

3. U.S. courts will give affect to private rights (transactions between citizen’s with de facto gov’s subjects) unless

   1. Government’s transaction is contrary to public/national policy

   2. Government’s action involves expropriation, by wrongful government force, of the property of U.S. citizens

NPC of Iran v. MT Stolt Sheaf - U.S.

Examines RARE exceptions to defacto governments bringing cases to U.S. courts

1. Abscence of U.S. recognition does not necessarily bar access from U.S. courts

2. Executive branch must “evince it’s willingness” to show that it wants to permit de facto gov to bring claim in court

3. Explicit statement of interest/amicus curiae brief can “evince the willingness” of the executive branch

Defacto Government

Dejure Government

Basic Rights of Recognition of Governments - U.S.

1. Recognized governments have capacity to bring suit in U.S. courts

2. Retroactive validation of foreign government’s acts - Belmont v. U.S.

3. Validation of foreign government’s acts within U.S. territory - U.S. v Pink