Recognition of States and Governments in the basis of international law

Recognition of States and Governments in the basis of international law

Contents
Introduction:
 History of Recognition:
 Definition of state recognition:
 Preconditions of Recognition:
 Debate over recognition:
 Is withdrawal of recognition possible?
1. Theory of recognition:
• Constitutive theory
• Declarative theory
2. The purpose of Recognition
3. Forms of recognition in International law:
• Explicit Recognition
• Implicit Recognition

4. Nature of Recognition:
• De facto and
• De jure stat
5. Case Study of recognition
6. State practices
• Recognition - U.S. policy in the recognition of states
• Recognition - U.k. policy in the recognition of states:

7. Legal Consequences of Recognition

8. Conclusion

Reference





















Introduction:
A Sovereign state is a state with a defined territory on which it exercises internal and external sovereignty, a permanent population, a government, independence from other states and powers, and the capacity to enter into relations with other sovereign states. The government of a sovereign state holds legal title to all property therein. It is also normally understood to be a state which is not dependent on, or subject to any other power or state. While in abstract terms a sovereign state can exist without being recognized by other sovereign states, unrecognized states will often find it hard to exercise full treaty-making powers and engage in diplomatic relations with other sovereign states. If want to see then we can say, A state must have some element Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States, 1933 lays down the most widely accepted formulation of the criteria of statehood in international law. It note that the state as an international person should possess the following qualifications: '(a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with other states'"
History of Recognition:
Since the late 19th century, virtually the entirety of the world's inhabitable land has been parceled up into areas with more or less definite borders claimed by various states. Earlier, quite large land areas had been either unclaimed or uninhabited, or inhabited by nomadic peoples who were not organized as states. However, even within present-day states there are vast areas of wilderness, like the Amazon Rainforest, which are uninhabited or inhabited solely or mostly by indigenous people (and some of them remain uncontested. Also, there are states which do not hold de facto control over all of their claimed territory or where this control is challenged (as in Somalia).
Currently the international community comprises more than 200 sovereign states, the vast majority of which are represented in the United Nations. These states form what international relations theorists call a system, where each state takes into account the behavior of other states when making their own calculations. From this point of view, states embedded in an international system face internal and external security and legitimating dilemmas Recently the notion of an international community has been developed to refer to a group of states who have established rules, procedures, and institutions for the conduct of their relations. In this way the foundation has been laid for international law, diplomacy, formal regimes, and organizations


Definition of state recognition:

The recognition of a state under international law is a declaration of intent by one state to acknowledge another power as a "state" within the meaning of international law. Recognition constitutes a unilateral declaration of intent. It is entirely at the discretion of any state to decide to recognize another as a subject of international law.
According to the American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy “In diplomacy, the act by which one nation acknowledges that a foreign government is legitimate and exchanges diplomats with it.The withholding of recognition is a way for one government to show its disapproval of another.”

According to the prof. L Oppenheim, in recognizing a state as a member of international community, existing states declared that in their own opinion the new state fulfill the condition statehood as required by international law.
State recognition signifies the decision of a sovereign state to treat another entity as also being a sovereign state. Recognition can be either express or implied and is usually retroactive in its effects. It doesn't necessarily signify a desire to establish or maintain diplomatic relations.
Form my personal point of view it can be said that, through recognition, the recognizing state acknowledge that the possesses the essential condition of statehood. However international law does not provide as how to these essential condition are to be determined.


Preconditions of Recognition:

The recognition of a state presupposes that it really exhibits the characteristics of a state within the meaning of international law. According to the prevailing three-element doctrine, this requires state territory, a state people and state power (i.e. a government that is effective and independent both externally and internally, as an expression of state sovereignty). Only the actual circumstances are relevant to the assessment of statehood (the "effectiveness principle").
In addition to the three elements mentioned, a state or an international organization can also set further conditions for recognition – for example compliance with the UN Charter or the observance of human rights.
If a state is recognized before all the preconditions for recognition are met (premature recognition), this is contrary to international law and legally ineffective. A state that prematurely recognizes another is in breach of the prohibition of interference in the internal affairs of a state (Art. 2 no. 4 of the Charter of the United Nations).

There is no definition that is binding on all the members of the community of nations on the criteria for statehood. In actual practice, the criteria are mainly political, not legal. L.C. Green cited the recognition of the unborn Polish and Czech states in World War I and explained that "recognition of statehood is a matter of discretion; it is open to any existing state to accept as a state any entity it wishes, regardless of the existence of territory or an established government.

Debate over recognition:
Naturally, the question has been raised weather recognition is a necessary institution, and if not, according weather it ought to be discarded either generally or in most instances. this was a view indeed of the late Richard Baxter, judge of the International Court of justice ,1979-1980,who felt that recognition caused more problems than it solved, and that its partial withdrawal would the maintenance of relations with states in which Extra constitutional changes of government were taking place
In1930, the then minister for foreign affairs of Mexico , Mr. Estrada, announced that his government would no longer issues declarations in the sense of the grants of recognition inasmuch as `such a course is an insulting practice and one which, in addition to the fact it offends the sovereignty of others nations ,implies that judgment of some sort may be passed upon the internal affairs of those nations by other government” This policy as thus announced ,has become generally known as the Estrada doctrine.



Is withdrawal of recognition possible?
Recognition De jure is final and once given cannot be withdrawn. If recognizing state observe that de Facto recognized state has failed to fulfill the demand of the people at the same time state security is deteriorated day by day then recognizing state never go for de jure recognition. But sometimes de facto recognition can be withdrawn. But it is very rare in ternational politics. At the time it should be kept in mind if once de jure proclaim towards states, it is not possible to withdrawn.
Theory of recognition:
In international law however, there are several theories of when a state should be recognized as sovereign. Here mainly I will discuss two theory of recognition.
• Constitutive theory
The constitutive theory of statehood defines a state as a person of international law if, and only if, it is recognized as sovereign by other states. This theory of recognition was developed in the 19th century. Under it, a state was sovereign if another sovereign state recognized it as such. Because of this, new states could not immediately become part of the international community or be bound by international law, and recognized nations did not have to respect international law in their dealings with them. In 1815 at the Congress of Vienna the Final Act only recognize 39 sovereign states in the European diplomatic system, and as a result it was firmly established that in future new states would have to be recognized by other states, and that meant in practice recognition by one or more of the great powers.
One of the major criticisms of this law is the confusion caused when some states recognize a new entity, but other states do not. Herschel Lauterpack, one of the theory's main proponents, suggested that it is a state's duty to grant recognition as a possible solution. However, a state may use any criteria when judging if they should give recognition and they have no obligation to use such criteria. Many states may only recognize another state if it is to their advantage.
• Declarative theory
By contrast, the "declarative" theory defines a state as a person in international law if it meets the following criteria: 1) a defined territory; 2) a permanent population; 3) a government and 4) a capacity to enter into relations with other states. According to declarative theory, an entity's statehood is independent of its recognition by other states. The declarative model was most famously expressed in the 1933 Montevideo Convention.
Article 3 of the Convention declares that statehood is independent of recognition by other states. In contrast, recognition is considered a requirement for statehood by the constitutive theory of statehood.
A similar opinion about "the conditions on which an entity constitutes a state" is expressed by the European Economic Community Opinions of the Bandits Arbitration Committee. The Basinet Arbitration Committee found that a state was defined by having a territory, a population, and a political authority.
2. According to the purpose of Recognition, state recognition can be divided in several wayes

• Recognition of state
• Recognition of government
• Recognition of liberation movement
• Recognition of government in exile.
3. Forms of recognition in International law:
• Explicit Recognition
• Implicit Recognition



• Explicit Recognition:
Express recognition can be express through Diplomatic note ,Note verbal, making treaty , parliamentary declaration etc.
• Implicit Recognition:
Implicit recognition can be expressed through making diplomatic relations, making trade and cultural treaty etc.




Recognition can be explicit or implicit (tacit). In state practice there is generally an explicit declaration of recognition, perhaps addressed to the government of the new state.
A distinction is also drawn between de jure and de facto recognition. If a state is accorded de jure recognition that means all the preconditions under international law for final and complete recognition have been fulfilled. De facto recognition has a comparatively less binding effect, because the legal relationship – though effectively in existence – is only provisional. Provisional de facto recognition for political reasons can of course be converted to de jure recognition once all the required legal preconditions have been fulfilled.
Nature of Recognition:
• De facto and
• De jure states:
Most sovereign states are states de jure and de facto (i.e. they exist both in law and in reality). However, sometimes states exist only as de jure states in that an organization is recognized as having sovereignty over and being the legitimate government of a territory over which they have no actual control. Many continental European states maintained governments-in-exile during the Second World War which continued to enjoy diplomatic relations with the Allies, notwithstanding that their countries were under Nazi occupation. A present day example is the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, which is a United Nations observe, has bi-lateral diplomatic relations with 104 states, while having no territory since 1798 and possessing only extraterritorial are since (i.e. embassies and consulates.) Other states may have sovereignty over a territory but lack international recognition, these are de facto states only. Somaliland is commonly considered to be such a state. For a list of entities that wish to be universally recognized as sovereign states, but do not have complete worldwide diplomatist recognition, see the list of states with limited recognition.
Recognition – de facto or de jure:
The territories of the Sovereign State of Israel were recognized by the USA and Russia within days, as de jure by default, through the de facto recognition given to the A) authority of the Provisional Government over those territories declared. B) later the US, through the de jure recognition of the Government of Israel set up under the authority of the Provisional Government to govern, within the declared sovereign territories.
The British did likewise but included a caveat, not recognizing any territories acquired by war by 1949 as sovereign to Israel. I.e., de jure recognition within th declarer sovereign territories.

Now I will discuss Example with case studies: It is very important to note here that, in international arena recognition is very important to deal with legal activities. Then it would clear that how recognition is important
 Case Study: A Major Pharmaceutical Company
Situation
this major pharmaceutical company wanted to build a culture of recognition where employees would be encouraged to reward each other for working to support their company priorities. In addition it wanted to recognize service anniversaries. The company had never had a formal recognition program. Employees thought of recognition as being tied to their compensation. With 21,000 employees at 24 locations, the Client saw the task of rolling out, and managing a recognition program as a major challenge.
Solution
Maritz recommended a custom web-based recognition solution on the Ascent platform. Features included Thank You cards that all employees could issue, and point-based awards which supervisors could issue. Points could be accumulated by employees for redemption on the Maritz site - Award. Service anniversary recipients also received their choice of merchandise awards, and a client-branded item. Client items were stored and fulfilled from the Maritz warehouse.
Development of the program started with a two-day working session where the Client and Maritz determined program rules and the website layout. Upon completion of the website, two flash emails were sent to communicate the program, first to supervisors only, introducing the program and asking for their attendance at an upcoming training session. A second email was sent to all employees, introducing the program, and showing them how to access the site. Then Maritz and the Client conducted ten training sessions on the program for supervisors. The presentation included training on recognition best practices, and instructions on how to use the website. Tutorials and video vignettes were included as visual aids. The sessions were a success reaching nearly 1,500 supervisors, HR reps, and administrative assistants. Materials from the training, including a supervisor’s toolkit, and the online tutorials were available for supervisors to access through the program website. The program, which is on-going, has evolved as data is gathered and analyzed.


Results
• Year-end analysis indicated 86% of employees had registered for the program against a 80% goal
• 91% of enrolled employees participated surpassing the 60% participation target
• Quarterly reviews provided the Client with actionable insights for supporting a culture of recognition

 Case Study: A Major UK Financial Institution:
Situation
The Client, a major financial institution, made the decision to try and differentiate in a very mature European banking industry by radically overhauling its customer experience. Although the strategy was set, there was significant concern about whether or not the company’s 43,000 employees would be able to live into that vision. They knew that all their new advertising and marketing would be worthless if they failed to execute against the brand promise at the front line.
Solution
The Client came to Maritz seeking help in moving the organization into the new brand vision. The solution developed by Maritz was to attack the problem in three phases: employee research, internal alignment and recognition.
Research
Maritz leveraged decades of research expertise to build the methods and models that would help the firm better understand its employees. To do this, Maritz identified several key dimensions of desirable brand personality. The results were used to help determine the current and desired “DNA” of the organization.
Internal Alignment
Aligning 43,000 individuals to a major organizational change is no small feat. Maritz first launched the program to 1,000 senior managers, who cascaded the message to 5,000 midlevel managers. The next phase evolved the DNA through 360-degree feedback, manager one-on-ones and workshops. Finally, Maritz created a one-day brand launch for all 43,000 associates in retail branches, call centers and back offices, facilitated by “Brand Champions.”
Recognition
To sustain the desired behavior beyond the initial launch, Maritz suggested a formal recognition program which would seek out and award those displaying the desired behaviors in the new brand reality.
Results
• Current accounts were up significantly after one year.
• Products per customer increased from 2.5 to 4.3.
• Employee surveys showed overall improvements in commitment, views on management and belief in the Client's products
________________________________________


 Case Study: A Leading Hospitality Company
Situation
The global frequent-guest program of this leading hospitality provider was designed to reward their best customers for their frequent visits. Located across the globe and varying widely in demographics, their most loyal guests are annually recognized during the holidays by way of a special award program. Customer complaints regarding back-orders and non-delivered rewards alerted the Client to problems with their existing award fulfillment vendor. This appeared to be a particular challenge in international markets. The Client needed a reward and fulfillment partner who could deliver appealing rewards, in a timely manner, to these high value guests. They chose to partner with Maritz based on its reputation for excellent service.
Solution
Maritz considered the demographics of the frequent guest membership and combined that input with historical redemption data and merchandising trends to develop a selection of rewards that would have the most appeal. The Client sent a targeted mailing to their guests, showing them the selection of rewards and directing them to a custom reward site, designed by Maritz, where they could order their selection. The user-friendly reward site allowed for expedited fulfillment of client orders both domestically and internationally. Maritz buyers paid close attention to inventories to prevent back-order issues and to track response to the reward offerings.
Results
• In the first year of the program Maritz efficiently handled a total of 5,452 orders.
• Customer complaints regarding back orders and non-deliveries were virtually eliminated.
• Problems with international shipping were eliminated.
• The program, now in its third year with Maritz, continues to source rewards that are fresh, appealing, and meaningful to the Clients most loyal guests
 Case Study: A National Restaurant Chain
Situation
While the Client clearly understood the relationship between engaged employees and good customer experiences, their existing recognition and rewards program was not getting the results they needed. The rewards selection did not have particular appeal to the Gen X and Gen Y staff and redemption was difficult. Managers were not pushing the program down the line. The Company faced high employee turnover resulting in high recruiting and training costs. In each of their 52 locations there were three separate groups (bar, restaurant, gaming). They needed different programs with unique goals and objectives to increase the effectiveness of each one. They asked Maritz to develop a program that was simple and easy for managers to use.
Solution
Maritz designed the Most Valuable Producer (MVP) points-bank program using their Recognition Manager platform, with multiple budgets for individual managers. The MVP program offered a wide range of awards and redemption methods more tailored to their employee demographics. The program, which took only two and a half months from agreement to launch, was supported with a heavy communications push.
Results
• The MVP program, which is ongoing, saw a significant drop in employee turnover.
• Managers embraced the opportunity to recognize employees with more than verbal praise.
• Managers and employees bonded and became more engaged.
In the Client’s own words; “Our stores and team members have been singing the praises of the MVP program
r fail to meet our expectations
________________________________________

 Case Study: A Major Casino Operator
Situation:
A key to the success of this Casino operator is its strong commitment to customer retention, and growing its customer base. Players at their Las Vegas venue accumulate points as they visit throughout the year. As a way of recognizing its most valued patrons, the Casino invites them to return at year end to take part in an annual "Gifts Extravaganza.”
The Client had seen a drop off in repeat-player interest in the event, and was concerned that the reward selections from its current vendor did not have the breadth and depth required to keep the promotion fresh.
Solution:
Based on its reputation for expertise in event planning and its broad merchandise offering, Maritz was asked to partner with the Casino to bring a new perspective to this event. Maritz started by gaining an understanding of the Casino’s business strategies and goals. It was apparent that the existing reward selection was not clearly targeted to the attendees’ demographics. Maritz recommended a strategic reward selection that would truly engage the customer base and also deliver a significant WOW factor to the event. Maritz support staff provided on-site merchandise samples and fulfillment of the rewards redeemed.
Results:
• 65 % of patrons who had attended previously said the 2006 event was better than ever
• 75% were pleased with the selection of gifts available
• Maritz dedicated staffing, and support of the event were noted by the client and the attendees
• Maritz and the Client studied post-event feedback to find ways to make the event even more appealing in 2007

 Case Study: Leading Hospitality Company
Situation
The global frequent-guest program of this leading hospitality provider was designed to reward their best customers for their frequent visits. Located across the globe and varying widely in demographics, their most loyal guests are annually recognized during the holidays by way of a special award program. Customer complaints regarding back-orders and non-delivered rewards alerted the Client to problems with their existing award fulfillment vendor. This appeared to be a particular challenge in international markets. The Client needed a reward and fulfillment partner who could deliver appealing rewards, in a timely manner, to these high value guests. They chose to partner with Maritz based on its reputation for excellent service.

Solution
Maritz considered the demographics of the frequent guest membership and combined that input with historical redemption data and merchandising trends to develop a selection of rewards that would have the most appeal. The Client sent a targeted mailing to their guests, showing them the selection of rewards and directing them to a custom reward site, designed by Maritz, where they could order their selection. The user-friendly reward site allowed for expedited fulfillment of client orders both domestically and internationally. Maritz buyers paid close attention to inventories to prevent back-order issues and to track response to the reward offerings.
Results
• In the first year of the program Maritz efficiently handled a total of 5,452 orders.
• Customer complaints regarding back orders and non-deliveries were virtually eliminated.
• Problems with international shipping were eliminated.
• The program, now in its third year with Maritz, continues to source rewards that are fresh, appealing, and meaningful to the Clients most loyal guests
 Case study:Maritz Increased Awareness of ALSA
Situation
The Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Association (ALSA) benefits ALS, more commonly referred to as Lou Gehrig’s disease. Like most cause related agencies, the ALSA generates revenue by selling “pinups” through various retailers at the point of sale. Maritz helped increase the revenue and awareness for the ALSA, while at the same time generating incremental revenue for participating retailers. The objective of the turnkey program was to increase:
• ALSA Pinup Sales
• The Public’s knowledge of the cause and efforts of the ALSA
• Incremental Revenue
Solution
Maritz developed an easy to implement program designed to motivate retail employees to sell ALSA pinups during customer transactions. By introducing pre-denominated reward cards to employees, the program could be tiered to offer multiple rewards levels and drive performance. The reward cards, a Maritz proprietary product called the exclusively (EY) card, can be used at over 150 retail, travel, catalog and online merchants. Program elements included:
• Reward vehicle: The EY card gives the participant choice and is easy to use, just like a debit card
• Store Manager incentives: To promote the program through their store and motivate their employees, store managers also received a pre-denominated EY card
• Targeted communications: Program participants were given a clear understanding of program objectives and goals with ongoing communications
• Mystery Shopping: To motivate employees to exhibit the correct behavior, ALSA volunteers posed as normal customers in various retail partner stores. Employees exhibiting the correct behavior were rewarded with an additional reward card
• Store Coupons: Retail partners attached store coupons upon ALSA pinups as a contribution to the ALSA for their efforts
• Creative Theme: “R.U.N. to defeat ALS” was a memorable acronym that helped generate the desired program behavior from all program participants.




 Case Study: A Major Casino Operator
Situation:
A key to the success of this Casino operator is its strong commitment to customer retention, and growing its customer base. Players at their Las Vegas venue accumulate points as they visit throughout the year. As a way of recognizing its most valued patrons, the Casino invites them to return at year end to take part in an annual "Gifts Extravaganza.”
The Client had seen a drop off in repeat-player interest in the event, and was concerned that the reward selections from its current vendor did not have the breadth and depth required to keep the promotion fresh.
Solution:
Based on its reputation for expertise in event planning and its broad merchandise offering, Maritz was asked to partner with the Casino to bring a new perspective to this event. Maritz started by gaining an understanding of the Casino’s business strategies and goals. It was apparent that the existing reward selection was not clearly targeted to the attendees’ demographics. Maritz recommended a strategic reward selection that would truly engage the customer base and also deliver a significant WOW factor to the event. Maritz support staff provided on-site merchandise samples and fulfillment of the rewards redeemed.
Results:
• 65 % of patrons who had attended previously said the 2006 event was better than ever
• 75% were pleased with the selection of gifts available
• Maritz dedicated staffing, and support of the event were noted by the client and the attendees
• Maritz and the Client studied post-event feedback to find ways to make the event even more appealing in 2007
 Case Study: A Large Wireless Telecommunications Provider

Situation
The Client employed a large, diverse workforce. The company had recently undergone a merger leading to a mix of legacy employees and employees from the former company. The client operated both sales incentive and recognition of top performer programs. Although post-event surveys were completed, a broad reward and recognition assessment had not been done for all participants. The Client wanted to understand the business return on their program investment. Did the programs align with business objectives? Were the employees engaged and motivated?
“The post-event surveys that we had conducted in the past told us about the event, but they didn’t tell us if we were hitting home with the program as a whole. We needed to know more,” said the Client Sponsor.
Solution
The ultimate goal was to implement the most motivating reward and recognition program to drive increased performance and maximize business results. Maritz recommended a complete review of the client’s current programs, using a comprehensive, people-driven approach with a sophisticated research component.
The program began with an electronic survey which tested the alignment of program objectives with business objectives, as well as the program’s ability to influence behavior and activity.
This was followed by a Web-based survey in which respondents viewed multiple travel program design options side-by-side, and selected the option they would work harder to earn. This choice experiment was designed to optimize travel awards to address diversity, increase motivation and move middle performers to higher levels of achievement. In order to get the most meaningful feedback Maritz recommended surveying everyone who competes for the trip, not just past winners.
Employee feedback indicated;
• that rules structures were focused more on front-line sellers leaving managers unengaged.
• that sellers and managers wanted more timely performance feedback.
• that shorter stays at sun/fun destination are preferred over longer stays elsewhere.
• that a majority of sellers favor peer recognition.
• that a more regional approach was likely to result in improved performance.
Results
• Maritz was able to present a total strategic solution. They recommended that the national sales recognition travel program be revised to focus on regional events.
• A full communication strategy and solution to support the programs was created, including more timely and enhanced messages.
• In addition, Maritz recommended changes in the design and rules structure for the overall recognition program that would make it more relevant and appealing to a broad group of participants.
 Case Study: A National Restaurant Chain
Situation
While the Client clearly understood the relationship between engaged employees and good customer experiences, their existing recognition and rewards program was not getting the results they needed. The rewards selection did not have particular appeal to the Gen X and Gen Y staff and redemption was difficult. Managers were not pushing the program down the line. The Company faced high employee turnover resulting in high recruiting and training costs. In each of their 52 locations there were three separate groups (bar, restaurant, gaming). They needed different programs with unique goals and objectives to increase the effectiveness of each one. They asked Maritz to develop a program that was simple and easy for managers to use.
Solution
Maritz designed the Most Valuable Producer (MVP) points-bank program using their Recognition Manage platform, with multiple budgets for individual managers. The MVP program offered a wide range of awards and redemption methods more tailored to their employee demographics. The program, which took only two and a half months from agreement to launch, was supported with a heavy communications push.
Results
• The MVP program, which is ongoing, saw a significant drop in employee turnover.
• Managers embraced the opportunity to recognize employees with more than verbal praise.
• Managers and employees bonded and became more engaged.
In the Client’s own words; “Our stores and team members have been singing the praises of the MVP program.”
Sometimes we have to see that,recognition is not necessary to legal consequence, here I can apply an example .
 Case: Salimoff and co. Vs Standard oil company of New York, 1933
Situation:
In this case, salimoff was a Russian citizens, he had an oil company in Russia.
After 1917 October revolution, Russian government nationalized al the industry It should be noted here that after revolution Salimoff took shelter in America. At the subsequent times, Standard Oil Company of New York, made a treaty with Russian Government regarding the issues of oil buying .According to the treaty when oil has been exporting in New York, Spinoff demanded over oil. And a case filed in Court against Russia. His argument was that, Russian declaration of nationalization was illegal, on the other hand, until that time; U.S.A did not recognized to Russia.


What was the main concern of this case?
• Can Mr. salimoff get back oil?
• Recognition is necessary or not?


Solution:
Court refused to demand the Salimoff, Court also proclaim that Standard oil company can purchase of Oil to Russia, although America did not recognized to Russia. In this aspect, it is not necessary to recognized Russia .Because of until that time Russia s activities was going on over the years .


Result:
So Standard oil company of New York can purchase/import the oil without any barrier.


State practice
State practice relating the recognition states typically falls somewhere between the declaratory and constitutive approaches International law does not require a state to recognize other states.
Recognition is often withheld when a new state is seen as illegitimate or has come about in breach of international law. Almost universal non-recognition by the international community of Rhodesia and the Turkish Republic of North Cyprus are good examples of this. In the former case, recognition was widely withheld when the White minority seized power and attempted to form a state along the lines of Apartheid South Africa. A move which the United
Nations Security Council described as the creation of an "illegal racist minority régime". In the latter case recognition was widely withheld from a state created in Northern Cyprus on land which was illegally invaded by Turkey in 1974.
Recognition - U.S. policy in the recognition of states :
For its first century, the policy of the United States was to recognize de facto governments. (Despite many military coups and dictatorial governments established in Mexico between 1823 and 1860, for example, the United States withdrew its diplomatic representatives from Mexico City only three times, and that for only short periods.) In the early twentieth century this changed somewhat as a large element of moralism motivated the administration of Woodrow Wilson. Subsequent administrations reverted to the policy of "de factoism" during the 1920s and 1930s, but the United States refused to recognize forcible changes made in the territory or governments of victims of aggression, be the offender Japan, as in the case of Manchuria, the Soviet Union with respect to the Baltic states, or Germany with respect to its conquest of western Europe during World War II. A policy of no recognition was followed toward the Baltic States until these were freed of Russian control at the end of the Cold War. The United States also obtained collective support for the policy from democratic European nations and the Latin
Until Wilson's presidency, United States practice prior to extending recognition was to eschew the question of legitimacy and to demand effectiveness and evidence of popular consent, with the element of democratic legality proved by means of free elections. Although monarchic heads of state took as an open declaration of war by the French National Convention in 1792 that it would aid those seeking to recover their liberties, Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson stated, "It accords with our principles to acknowledge any government to be rightful which is formed by the will of the people, substantially declared." By adding, however, that he would deal in certain instances with a "government de facto," he has been declared a pioneer of "de factoism."
Recognition - O.k. policy in the recognition of states:
The British waited until a political party was elected to the Government. The British then granted de jure recognition, with conditions. The territories Israel had acquired by war, outside of its declared Sovereign Boundaries, were considered to be ‘occupied’. I.e., NOT Israeli Sovereign territory.

Legal Consequence of Recognition


“Recognition is a unilateral act of a State and one that has international legal
Consequences”, for instance where State grant recognition to an entity, it accepts that they will have relations subject to international law on basis of State/State.



• Only a recognized state or government has locus standi in the UK courts
• Only a recognized state or government (or its agents), may plead immunity
• From suit. It cannot be sued without its consent.
• Only the legislative, executive or judicial acts of a recognized state or Government will be given legal effect within the United Kingdom”65 Shaw adds one more “it will be entitled to possession in the recognizing state of Property belonging to its predecessor”


• The recognized states becomes entitled to sue in the courts of the recognizing state
• In the concept of De jure recognition, diplomatic relations are establishment and thus rules of international law relating to privilege and immunities apply.
• In the international politics, act of state doctrine is being a popular doctrine. Act of state Doctrine is doctrine in one hand where a sovereign state can do anything within his territory; on the other hand, no state can do anything in this aspect.
• In practice, like claimed by declaratory theory, the political existence of a State is not bound to the recognition of other States, therefore an unrecognized State has to act comply with the international law rules.
• It means that, when the States sign an international agreement which is signed by a State they have not recognized, they will have the right to ask from that state to fulfill the responsibilities grow out of the agreement.
• After recognition, the recognizing States would respect to the rights of the new State which indicated in the International Law Commission Draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States, 1949, such as “right to independence and hence to exercise freely, right to exercise jurisdiction over its territory and over all persons, right to equality in law with every other State, right of individual or collective self-defense against armed attack”
• The participation in the international process is not the only result of recognition, at the same time the recognized State will be able to enjoy usual legal consequences of recognition such as privileges and immunities within the domestic legal order.


Here it is important to bear in mind the limits between international law and state law. Reorganization confers on the recognized state or government a status under both international law and municipal law. In this section, we shall first deal with the status under municipal law and accordingly will examine for this purpose the law and practice normally applied by Anglo –American courts.


Conclusion:


Recognition is one of the most difficult and complicated topics in international
Law. It is complicated because it involves important political results and legal effects both in international and municipal law. Political assessments always effect the recognition decision . Where the States give a decision about recognition, of course they will weigh the advantages against the disadvantages of this decision. If it is looked into the some cases relevant to recognition in international law, I think it can be understood clearly, to grant recognition completely depends on political considerations. In my point of view, recognition for a State means merely to decide that, whether it is suitable for her needs or not there are basically two theories to explicate recognition; the constitutive and the declaratory theory. The constitutive theory asserts that States and governments do not legally exist until recognized by the international community and the declaratory theory adopts that States and governments gain in the international personality when they come
into existence. I think the declaratory theory is more conformable to reason and parallel to the practice of international law and it is supported by the Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States.























BIBLIOGRAPHY


 Rashid –ur- Harun, “An introduction to international law”,(2nd. ed.Anupan Gyan Bhander press,Dhaka 1998)
 Tunkin. G.I , “An introduction to international law” ,(3th.ed.Progress publishers ,Moscow1946 )
 Brownlie, “Principles of Public International Law”, (6th . ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford 2003)

 Shaw H.S Malcolm, “ International law,(6th .ed. Cambridge university .London, 2007)
 Dr. Harris L.L.m,Ph.D, “ Cases and materials :International law”,(5th .ed. London and sweet and Maxwell 1990)
 William w.Bishop Jr,( International law :cases and materials(3th,ed Little brown :and company ,Boston)
 HILLIER, TIM (1998). SOURCEBOOK ON PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW. ROUTLEDGE.PP. 201–2.ISBN 1859410502. HTTP://BOOKS.GOOGLE.COM/BOOKS?ID=KR0SOUIX8Q8C.
 INTERNATIONALLAW,“RECOGNITION”, HTTP://WEB.WITS.AC.ZA/NR/RDONLYRES/E0A48346-CB0B-4BEC-95B1-
DD3FD4DEDD58/0/OVERHEAD15.DOC , ACCESSED ON 02 JANUARY 2011

 J.B .Stark,Introduction to international law,( 9th.ed.Butterworth and Company,London 1984)p-131
 Dr.S.K Kapoor,International law and human right,(New ed.Moulic Library,Calcutta 2008.

 Dr.Mizanur Rhaman,”International law in the changing world”(New,ed.palal publication,Dhaka 2003,)p,76-77

 Wikipedia, “ International Law en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_law




.