In February and March 2014, Ukraine was literally overrun by a chain of events that eventually led to Crimea's incorporation into Russian territory. Crimean and Russian authorities jointly used the internal conflict in Ukraine to deprive the Ukrainian government of its control over Crimea, to hold a so-called referendum, and to declare Crimea's independence. On the day after independence was declared, Russia formally recognized Crimea as an independent state,2 and the Crimean parliament requested Russia to admit Crimea to the Russian Federation.3 Soon after that, the accession treaty was signed, and, within a few more days, all Russian constitutional requirements for Crimea's accession to the Russian Federation were fulfilled.4 All parties to the conflict refer to international law to justify their positions. The Crimean authorities and Russia claim that Russia had a legal basis for intervening and that Crimea had the right to secede from Ukraine. Most states, however, reject these claims. Thus, three questions are presented: Was Crimea's secession lawful under international law? To what extent has Russia violated international law? And what is Crimea's status? This article addresses these questions. Part 1 briefly describes the relevant circumstances and events leading to Crimea's secession. Part 2 reviews the legal obligations between Ukraine and Russia concerning territorial integrity and the prohibition against the use and threat of force. Parts 3 and 4 discuss the legality of Russia's intervention in Crimea and the legality of Crimea's secession from Ukraine, respectively. Part 5 concludes this article by answering the questions it raises.
The European Commission's open consultations of stakeholders are a central mechanism of the attempt to practice participatory governance at the European level and to open the political process to contributions from the societal sphere. This paper analyses the current practice of open consultations as one important operationalisation of participatory governance and as an implementation of Article 11 of the Treaty of the European Union ( TEU). It asks whether consultations can be a means to give voice to the citizens and to increase the legitimacy of European institutions. The paper presents an empirical analysis of the field of participants in the consultations. A main finding is that business and industry organisations dominate the consultative process while the participation of citizens and not-for-profit organisations is generally weak.The paper explores to which extent the consultations can, considering the empirical findings, be seen as a suitable way for direct or representative citizen participation.
Jürgen Habermas's discourse theory of law has shaped debates on what we consider to be legitimate law. This contribution will firstly identify the Zeitgeist in which discourse theory emerged. Secondly, it points out the emancipatory potential of law that discourse theory has helped us to understand, both on a domestic and a transnational level. Thirdly, the paper turns to discuss two recent challenges for the discourse theory of law, namely (a) the realities of social power that undermine and contradict its promises, and (b) the rise of populism, which places the core normative assumptions of discourse theory in doubt.
No abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.