AN ANALYSIS OF STATEHOOD AND RECOGNITION OF PALESTINE BY - MRS. G. UMA MAHESWARI & MR. M. GOWTHAM
AN ANALYSIS
OF STATEHOOD AND RECOGNITION OF PALESTINE
AUTHORED BY
- MRS. G. UMA MAHESWARI & MR. M. GOWTHAM,
Assistant
Professor, School of Law,
Vels
Institute of Science and Technology and Advanced Studies, VISTAS.
Abstract
In the international arena, State
Recognition is a process of accepting or acknowledging a sovereignty and
independence of new state by the existing state in the international community.
Sovereign states constitute the principal units of the international society.
States are endowed with inherent rights and obligations under international
law. Although they are difficult to define, a state is normally able to control
its own government, enact laws that advance its objectives, offer services to
its citizens, exercise jurisdiction over its borders, have equal legal status
with other states, and defend itself against armed threats. Along with these
rights some responsibilities to uphold human rights and fundamental freedoms,
avoid meddling in the internal or external affairs of other states, resolve
conflicts with other states peacefully, and fulfil treaty and other
international law-related duties. The general requirements for establishing a
state are outlined in the 1933 Montevideo Convention. These include having a
permanent population and a defined territory, yet an entity's ability to
maintain its borders may still be necessary for it to qualify as a state. An
efficient government is another aspect of statehood. And lastly the state must
be able to maintain mutual relation with the other existing state and
international organisations. Our Earth is a creation of God with many complex
and controversial geopolitical areas. One of such area contains the state of
Palestine. A lot of painful effort and struggle involved in the emergence of
Palestine as a state, in making itself eligible for statehood and Recognition.
The path the Palestine crossed to build the statehood and its recognition as a
state within the purview of international law, by other existing states has
been discussed in this paper.
Key Words: State
Recognition, Legal effects of Recognition, Montevideo Convention, Oslo Accords,
Statehood of Palestine, Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Historical
background of Palestine State, Non-Observer Status.
INTRODUCTION
The states in the international
community are not static and unchanging. One state may disintegrate and new
state may form due to the insurgent or belligerent activities. Staes may also
unite with other states to form a new state. These transformations raise a
question amidst other states which formerly had relationship with the displaced
governments that whether or not to engage in relations with the new states. The
existing states in the international arena has to decide about the recognition
of the newly formed state. Recognition is important for a state as it is
fundamental to the International Legal order, particularly for maintaining
diplomatic relationship with other states. As a core entity in international
law Sovereign states can enjoy inherent rights and perform its corelative
obligations only when it gets recognition. The recognition can be refused if it
is without strict legal justification. Basically “Recognition” means
“Ratification, confirmation or acknowledgment”. An act of recognition under
International Law can be considered as an independent act of existing statehood
community. The acknowledgement by actors of international arena, that a new
state has acquired international personality is said to be Recognition. On
being recognised, the states have to be ready to undergo the consequences which
is happening domestically and also in the international plane. Recognition
sometimes becomes purely political rather legal. In the history, Palestine as a state started
claiming the recognition of their state and the United Nations membership
amidst the burning crisis between Israel and Palestine on the other hand their
right to self-determination. Palestine strongly started on focussing to stand
as an Individual State by getting the recognition in the international ground rather
focussing on conflicts and negotiations with Israel. Their right of claiming
membership in United Nations was strongly objected by United States, Israel and
their allied countries. Though the Palestine has got the membership of United
Nations violating the concept of unilateralism and peace agreements with
Israel. This paper explores about the concept of State Recognition, its legal
effects, the continues struggle of Palestine for State recognition from past to
position it as a state in international arena and the recent developments.
RECOGNITION OF STATE
Under International Law, the
essentials to be possessed by an entity to get recognised as a State according
to Article 1of Montevideo Convention 1933 are the state should have a permanent
population, definite territory, Government, capacity to enter into relations
with other states. Basically, there are two theories of Recognition is under
International Law. They are Constitutive theory and Declaratory theory.
Constitutive theory states that act of recognition alone can create a new state
and awards it a legal personality. Recognition by other existing states through
their will and consent may alone establishes a new state in international
community as subjects of International Law. Declaratory theory states that
States are existing even before the recognition by other existing states, once
they fulfil the elements of statehood that is by virtue of factual situation.
The act of recognition is only a mere acknowledgement. Declaratory or
evidentiary theory always prevail over constitutive theory. Once a question
arises as to the date of the existence of new state the date when the
recognising state signs a treaty with the newly recognised state will not be
considered rather the material date is the date when the requirements of
statehood was first fulfilled. Recognition of Government is different from
recognition of state, that is acknowledging a group of people to act as a
competent organ of state and to represent them in international arena.
Recognition may be implied in some
situations. The inference is made from circumstances that indicates to
establish formal relations with new state or government. A country may
recognise another country’s existence by maintaining diplomatic relations,
establishing trade relations, receiving or sending officials, respecting their
borders and aiding the new state. One of the instances from the history which reveals
us about the implied recognition was during 1972 United States and China signed
Shanghai agreement which acknowledged the one China policy without explicitly
recognising Peoples democratic of China. By signing the diplomatic document
United States impliedly recognised the existence of China. Sometimes a State
may recognise one state based on conditions, generally the newly recognised
state has to fulfil the obligation which they undertake in return of
Recognition. Recognition of South Sudan by Sudan in 2011 was done only after
agreeing to a wide-ranging peace agreement and border demarcation. Conditional
recognition can also act as a tool for promoting peaceful resolution of
conflicts. Collective recognition is a recognition by means of international
decision which signifies the importance of international community. That is
recognition simultaneously made by multiple states through a joint statement or
collective action which demonstrates the international consensus and facilitate
diplomatic relations international cooperation. During 1992, the European
community collectively recognised Croatia and Slovenia’s independence from
Yugoslavia.
Recognition of a state can be done in
two forms under international law. One of the forms is Defacto Recognition,
that is an entity is actually independent but it has not acquired sufficient
stability and has not complied other requirements of recognition then the state
may be recognised defacto. The recognition is true in fact but it is not
legitimately authorized. Somaliland declared independence from Somalia in 1991,
but tis status is not recognised by the international community. Other form is Dejure Recognition, that is
when a State possess all the requirement of statehood and if it is capable of
becoming a member of international community then the state may be recognised
Defacto. The reasonable assurance of stability has to be given by the State and
they should be ready to perform their international obligations. This is true
form of recognition and it is legitimately authorised. Recognition dejure once
done cannot be withdrawn. If it is defacto recognition then the states can
withdraw it or they can make the defacto recognition as dejure.
LEGAL EFFECTS OF RECOGNITION
The states recognised dejure are
eligible for entering into treaties and agreements with other existing states
in the international arena. They can form alliances with other states and also,
they can enter into formal commercial and diplomatic relations. The country
which is recognised dejure possibly can file suits against other countries and
they can enjoy the state immunity from the jurisdiction of other countries. The sovereignty and territorial integrity are
acknowledged and the safety of the territory and also human rights of the
individuals are very much guaranteed. Recognition also defences protection of
country’s property and assets in foreign countries. Recognition legitimised a
government’s authority and control over their territory. They can also easily take aid from other
countries. Any individual who belonged to the state which is recognised dejure
can easily travel all along the world as their nationality and citizenship are definite.
The state which is recognised can become a member of United Nations and also to
other international organisations. Once recognised countries will come under
the purview of international law and its obligations. Recognition enables the
state to participate in global affairs. Recognition established a country’s
status and rights in the international community.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND BUILDING OF
PALESTINE STATEHOOD
Palestine and Israel were the
ancestral homeland of many ancient religions and civilisations. The region
plays a major role in Abrahamic religions which includes Judaism, Christianity
and Islam. Apart from its cultural and religious significance abundant
scriptural sites and landmarks located in this region. Ancient civilisations
such as Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece and Roman empire shaped that area of the
world. Till the end of first world war from 16th century the region
was under the rule of Ottoman Empire. The governance, administration and
demography of this region had a greater impact when it was under Ottoman
Empire. Determining territorial limits and establishing statehood have always
been difficult and contentious processes. Significant rise in nationalism was witnessed during
19th and 20th century in both Israel and Palestine. The
political ideology of nationalism emerged as a powerful tool and it inspires
various people around the world to fight for establishment of independent
nation-states. The origins of nationalist sentiment can be traced back to
historical, geopolitical and religious factors in case of Israel and Palestine.
Establishment of Jewish homeland in Palestine was encouraged by the Zionist
movement. This movement gained more support from the people as the movement was
against discrimination and persecution. This movement stressed the importance
of returning Jewish back to their ancestral homelands and about Jewish national
identity. The Basal program formed during first Zionist Congress called for
establishment of national home for Jewish people in Palestine, which created
the tensions with existing Arab population in Palestine. After the
disintegration of Ottoman Empire, the League of Nations which was an
international organization, established in 1920 with the goals of preserving
world peace and encouraging national cooperation played a vital role in
awarding the Palestine Mandate. During the twentieth century, the history of
the region was greatly influenced by the British government in Palestine.
Palestine was under British supervision in terms of its political, economic,
and social development from 1917 until 1948. Established in 1922, the Palestine
mandate gave the United Kingdom authority over Palestine, which included the
territories of the Palestinians and modern-day Israel. The mandate said that it
was the duty of the United Kingdom to create the favourable circumstances
required for the creation of a “Jewish National Home” which laid the groundwork
for the State of Israel's eventual formation. In this declaration, Britain made
it clear that it was in favour of the Jewish people having a national home in
Palestine. The League of Nations gave the British mandate in 1922 with the
intention of carrying out this goal and protecting the rights of the existing
Arab nationals.
But there was also debate concerning
the League's execution of the Palestine Mandate. The majority of Palestine's
native Arab people considered the creation of a Jewish state as a threat to
their own aspirations as a nation. Eventually, rival claims to the land caused
significant turmoil and conflict as a result of this mindset. Because of this,
even though the League aimed to promote stability and allow for
self-determination, there were unforeseen due to the region’s essential
complexity. On the fear of losing their land on account of Jewish migration
Palestine Nationalism emerged. This nationalist feeling among the resident
Arabs of Palestine emerged earlier during the Ottoman period itself when
Ottoman policies favoured Jewish immigrations. The establishment of Zionist
institutions and Jewish settlements threatened the native Arabs. In a
determination to safeguard their land and culture Palestinians began to
mobilise and proclaim their own national identity.
During World War II, the Arab and
Jewish communities put pressure on the British administration. The Arabs pushed
for a halt to Jewish immigration, while the Zionist organization asked Britain
for additional assistance in their struggle for a Jewish homeland. Prolonged tensions
between the two parties and the British peaked in 1947 when the British announced
their intention to withdraw from Palestine. The British withdrawal made it
possible to partition Palestine and create the State of Israel in 1948, even if
the question of Palestinian independence remained unresolved. The British
administration's position in Palestine is still having an impact on the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which is still one of the most protracted and
contentious in the region. Tensions have persisted in recent years in a number
of manifestations, including as political disorder, internal attacks, and
violent altercations between Israeli security personnel and Palestinians. One
persistent point of disagreement is the question of Jewish settlements in the
occupied lands, which are unlawful according to international law. Many people
believe that these settlements are an infringement on Palestinian territory
that will make it harder for the Palestine to establish a Sovereign State. After
the British Mandate expired during 1948, an independent State of Israel was
established unilaterally and immediately the Israel state was recognised by the
United States and Soviet Union. The Jewish people’s right to create a State is
mentioned in the Israeli Declaration of Independence was stated under United
Nations General Assembly Resolution 181.
Following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, Egypt and Jordan took over the remaining parts of Gaza and the West Bank, while Israel retained sovereignty over much of the land awarded to the Arab state under the terms of the Partition Plan, including West Jerusalem. Because of the war so many Palestinians displaced from their own land. The so-called "Green Lines" was established when Israel, Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria signed the Armistice Agreement later in 1949. As the geographical makeup of the Palestinian state was being discussed, boundaries also emerged as one of the major unsolved challenges. A further historical event that warrants consideration is the establishment of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in 1964 as the administration of the Palestinian people, following an Arab League-sponsored summit held in Jerusalem. The majority of the Arab League states quickly endorsed it and awarded the PLO a seat in the group. During 1967, Israel launched a six-day war, a series of pre-emptive attacks against Egyptian airfields followed by mobilisation of troops. This played a significant role in awakening Palestine nationalism because of a brief but fierce conflict in which Israel used its obvious military advantage, Israel overran Jordan for control of the West Bank and Egypt for control of the Gaza Strip. Following Israel's victory over Syria, all of the holy sites in Jerusalem were taken over, and the Golan Heights were now under Israeli control. The 1948 and 1967 wars, which produced some of the fundamental issues for peace negotiations, had a profound impact on all the events that transpired through the battle. Resolved issues in the peace negotiations include Palestinian refugees, Jerusalem control, and reciprocal statehood recognition. These issues continue to be the major dialogue points.
As the UN's representative for
Palestinian Arabs, the PLO was given observer status in 1974. In a resolution
passed on November 22, 1974, the General Assembly invited the PLO to attend its
meetings as an observer. For Palestinians, this was a significant development
since it demonstrated UN support for a protracted, nonviolent resolution to the
conflict. In addition, the General Assembly upheld the Palestinian people's
fundamental rights, including the rights to national independence, sovereignty,
and self-determination. The years that followed were marked by political unrest
and fruitless diplomatic attempts. During 1987, after twenty years of
occupation of Israel in Gaza strip and West Bank led to the uprising of
Palestinians which has shaken the Palestine and led to the killing of thousands
of Palestinians. During 1991, negotiation process started and a peace
conference on the Middle-East held in Madrid. However, the discussions remained
challenging, particularly when it came to the ultimate borders, Jerusalem, the
future status of Palestine, Israeli settlements, and Palestinian refugees. Concurrent
with the efforts of the working groups, covert Israeli-Palestinian negotiations
in Oslo during the summer of 1993 produced a significant development. The DOP,
or Declaration of Principles, was signed by Israel and the PLO. The PLO
formally embraced United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution, pledged to
combat terrorism, and acknowledged Israel's right to exist. Israel at last
acknowledged the PLO as a valid negotiation partner. The DOP demanded that
Israel leave a region in the West Bank and Gaza Strip that was not specifically
mentioned, as well as the establishment of the Palestinian Authority (PA), a
five-year interim self-government entity in the areas that Israel promised to
return to Palestinian sovereignty in Gaza and the West Bank. The most
challenging issues, including Jerusalem, Palestinian refugees, Jewish
settlements, and defined borders, were to have been resolved in final status
negotiations during the course of these five-year negotiations. In order to put
the Oslo Accords into effect, the two parties also negotiated the Oslo II
agreement in September 1995 and the Gaza-Jericho accord in May 1994. Oslo peace
process also failed as both the sides failed to comply with the agreement. President
Clinton sponsored the most recent effort to reach a consensus on a two-state
solution in 2000 at Camp David. He put up a plan outlining the contours of a
final agreement, but major disagreements persisted regarding all of the most
crucial topics discussed, most notably the status of Jerusalem and the
Palestinian refugees. In 2003, both the parties accepted the “Road map to
peace” formed by United Nations, United States, Russia and European Union. Sadly,
after Hamas won the Palestinian parliamentary elections in 2006, hostilities
flared up again. Israel began a string of robust military operations in Gaza
against Hamas, which sparked widespread criticism from the international
community. Through international mediation, a ceasefire deal was reached by
February 2009, although the violent activities persisted. The past few years
have been marked by a deadlock in the advancement of negotiations. The past few
years have been marked by a deadlock in the advancement of negotiations. As of
the internal issues are concerned, status quo is being maintained in Israel and
Palestine. Israel is using the existing circumstances to maintain its
discriminatory policies against Palestinians and to expand Jewish settlement in
the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Supported by donors and the
"international community," the Palestinian Authority and its secular
leadership found their legitimacy severely damaged by certain aspects of the
state-building plan. Before Israel agreed to any particular demands made by the
Palestinians, the Palestinian leadership had to publicly lose all of its
negotiating leverage. Before Israel acknowledged any real Palestinian rights,
much less a Palestinian state, it had to, among other things, ensure Israeli
security, recognize Israel, and pledge itself to the two-state solution.
MONTIVIDEO CONVENTION ON STATEHOOD
AND PALESTINE
Palestine’s path to statehood has
been complex and changing. Mostly Palestine’s efforts have been focussed on
diplomatic and political means to achieve recognition. Palestine’s statehood is
based on international law, which includes the Right to self-determination and
territorial integrity. The element of statehood are definite territory, defined
population, able government and capacity to enter into relations with other
states. There is always a debate over Palestine's fulfilment of this definite state
territory concept. The vast majority of the international community, including
the United Nations and the European Union, recognizes the "Green
Lines" as the legitimate division between Palestinian and Israeli
territory, with the former including the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and East
Jerusalem. Palestine has established its borders, even though the majority of
them are contested with Israel. Although much of Palestine's borders are in
dispute with Israel, the country has nonetheless determined its boundaries. The
international community has agreed since the Oslo Accords that Israel and
Palestine should start negotiations over the border dispute. Furthermore, it is
evident from reading the Palestinian Declaration of Independence that the PLO
intended for the Gaza Strip and West Bank to form the boundaries of a
Palestinian state, with East Jerusalem serving as its capital. Even though other
states having similar territorial conflicts, doesn't stop them from being
states. Therefore, Palestine has a defined area under the terms of the
Palestinian Authority, even if Israel keeps up its military presence at the
borders and continues to construct settlements that prevent the Palestinians
from exercising effective authority over land.
The criteria that the population as
per the requirement of statehood is also fulfilled by the Palestine people. The
Palestinian people are unquestionably living in the country. Since the
beginning of time, they have lived inside its borders and have shared a same
culture, identity, and customs. Examples of this include speaking the same
language and having comparable customs and habits, all of which point to a
common identity. Furthermore, there has never been any international doubt
expressed about the existence of the Palestinian people. The mandate took into
account the fact that there existed a Palestinian population and was motivated
by the desire to protect that population's right to self-determination. The
whole international community accepted the presence of a group of people with
common ancestry. As of the population of Palestine estimated up to 5.60 million
and the criteria of population is evidently fulfilled.
The existence of an efficient
government listed in Montevideo, and it is a more complicated matter for
Palestinian authority to meet this requirement. It seems helpful to summarize
the governmental framework and the many parties involved in the administration
of the occupied Palestine territory before assessing the degree of fulfilment
of this requirement in the instance of Palestine. The PLO was founded in 1964
with the intention of representing the Palestinian people. Ten years after its
founding, the United Nations General Assembly and the Arab League acknowledged
it as the only authorized representative of the Palestinian people and United
Nations granted Palestine a non-member observer status. The Palestinian
Declaration of Independence was adopted in 1988 by the PLO's legislative body,
the Palestinian National Council (PNC). Yasser Arafat, the PLO's chairman,
announced it and also took on the role of Palestine's first president. During
the 1993 Oslo Accords negotiations with Israel, Arafat and the PLO represented
the Palestinians diplomatically. They contributed to the formation of the Palestine
Authority; an interim five-year entity tasked with managing Palestinian issues
within the occupied Palestine territory. PLO is handling negotiations; many
political parties were there in PLO but Fatah dominated. Later during 1990, the
primacy of Fatah was challenged by Hamas. In March 2005, following Arafat's
death and the election of Mahmoud Abbas as PA President, Hamas and Fatah come
to an agreement in Cairo whereby the former pledged to stop terrorism against
Israel. Unexpectedly, Hamas emerged victorious in the 2006 legislative
elections, securing the majority of seats in the Palestinian Legislative
Council. Because of disagreements over the political platform, Fatah and other
factions declined to take part in the new administration.
Following the escalation of
hostilities between the two groups at the start of 2007, a deal was struck in
Mecca that resulted in the establishment of a government of national unity.
Sadly, it was destroyed by yet another wave of violence that allowed Hamas to assume control of Gaza strip while Fatah was having control over West Bank. Though political conflicts existed the governmental functions was performed in Palestine under Abbas and a great progress has been made with respect to democratic process.
Sadly, it was destroyed by yet another wave of violence that allowed Hamas to assume control of Gaza strip while Fatah was having control over West Bank. Though political conflicts existed the governmental functions was performed in Palestine under Abbas and a great progress has been made with respect to democratic process.
Regarding the final requirement, it
is generally agreed upon that an entity cannot be classified as a state if it
is incapable of forming relationships with other states. The DOP, which states
that the PA will not have any authority or responsibility in the area of
foreign affairs, is cited by those who support the notion that Palestine does
not meet this requirement. In practise PLO was agreed to conclude international
agreements with states and international organisations. For the benefit of PA.
Based on that it can be concluded that PA is having capacity to enter into
relationship with state and international organisations although that is
exercise through PLO. The PLO and PA are not strictly different from one
another. States and international organizations occasionally refer to PA and
others to PLO when dealing with the Palestinian Authority. In practice, both
uphold an operational network of diplomatic ties in addition to taking part in
a variety of international organizations with varying membership statuses (from
observer to associate or affiliate). Currently, 137 states have granted
Palestine bilateral recognition, and more lately, several European governments
have started to legally recognize Palestine. In numerous nations, it also formed general
delegations, embassies, and missions as a sign of its capacity to engage in
diplomatic relations with other states.
Altogether, Palestine satisfies the
Montevideo criteria's basic conditions for statehood. There is sufficient
evidence to support Palestinian statehood in the sense of the Montevideo
criteria, even though it could be argued that some of them are only partially
fulfilled due to internal political issues and a lack of total control over its
borders and territory. The Palestinian authorities have worked hard to secure
both bilateral and multilateral recognition from the international world.
COLLECTIVE RECOGNITION
Acknowledgement by multiple states
and international organisation which can be expressed through joint statements
or declarations, United Nations resolutions, diplomatic recognition,
multilateral treaties which legitimizes a particular state is collective
recognition. As in the case of Palestine first attempt for full membership of
Palestine in United Nations was first made by PLO during 1974 when PLO was
granted the status of non-observer entity. And PLO was invited to represent
Palestine people and it was being invited to participate in plenary meetings of
General Assembly. A great deal of effort has gone into ratifying numerous
international agreements and treaties as well as obtaining participation in
international organizations including the International Criminal Court (ICC), United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), and United
Nations (UN). This is not entirely new, as the PLO made multiple attempts in
its early years to join regional organizations, particularly those in the Arab
world. It joined the Arab League in 1976, was admitted to the Organization of
Islamic Cooperation in 1969, and was granted membership in the UN Economic and
Social Commission for Western Asia the following year.
Palestine submitted application
during 2011 for United Nations membership to the United States Secretary
General. As of now, 145 of the 193 member states of United Nations admitted
Palestine as a Sovereign State. Palestine’s status as a non-member observer
state allows it to participate in all United Nations Proceedings, except for
voting on draft resolutions and decisions in the Security Council, General
Assembly and its six main committees. Palestine has proved by all means that it
is having the capacity of statehood
CONCLUSION
Attempt has been made to ascertain
whether Palestine is recognized by the international community as a state in
this paper. It can be a challenge to determine when an entity qualifies as a
state due to the interplay between legal and political factors, statehood and
recognition are topics that are highly contentious and contested. Palestine is
one another instance of how international law is frequently insufficient. According
to the declaratory theory of Recognition, Palestine is a state since it
satisfies every requirement set forth in Montevideo Convention. Those who
supported the constitutive theory maintain that a state's legal existence as a
component of the international system is constituted by the recognition of
other members of the system, despite the widely held belief that recognition by
other states does not determine whether an entity is a state under
international law. Effectiveness of the Palestinian strategy for recognition
from all angles is examined in order to assess whether Palestine qualifies as a
state under the constitutive theory. The Palestinian authorities have made some
headway in their efforts to secure the recognition of the major number of
states on a bilateral basis. Since 1988, Declaration of Independence, till now
the state of Palestine has been formally recognized by 145 states. While it is
true that a small number of European and Western nations took this action, the
issue here is more one of geopolitical interests tied to the conflict with
Israel than of these states' unwillingness to acknowledge the legitimacy of
Palestine. Multilaterally, Palestinian initiatives yielded even more favourable
outcomes. Palestine is a part of numerous significant regional associations,
including the Islamic Cooperation Organization and the Arab League.
After gaining full membership in
UNESCO in October 2011, Palestine was promoted to non-member observer state
status in the UN a year and a few months later. This entailed the UN formally
recognizing the state of Palestine and reaffirming that the US's status as a
permanent member with veto power in the Security Council is the only thing standing
in the way of Palestinians' full UN membership. Lastly, the way that the
Palestinians have approached international tribunals like the ICJ and, more
importantly, the ICC, provides additional support for the arguments made in
this study. Because it may put Israel above international justice, the
Palestinians' admission to the ICC in 2015 is a significant turning point in
their history. In summary, even if we use the constitutive theory as a point of
reference, Palestine is a state because it has received a high degree of
bilateral and multilateral recognition, particularly from the UN, and because
its attempts to function as a state within the international system were
largely successful. After taking into account each of these factors, it is concluded
that Palestine qualifies as a state for both declaratory and constitutive
purposes. It is incorrect for those who associate the establishment of a
Palestinian state with the settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,
since these two are separate issues. In national and international sphere, Palestine
is a state and there is no reason to deny that.
PRIMARY SOURCE
1. United Nations General Assembly
Resolutions
SECONDARY SOURCE
1. I.A. Shearer, Starke’s International
Law, Eleventh Edition, Oxford University Press, 1994.
2. Dr H. O. Agarwal, International Law
& Human Rights, Sixteenth edition, Central Law Agency, 2009.
3. Dr S.K. Kapoor, International Law and
Human Rights, Twenty First Edition, Central Law Agency, 2017.
4. Malcolm N. Shaw, International Law,
Seventh Edition, Cambridge University Press, 2016
TERTIORY SOURCES
3. https://www.academia.edu/26177089/Palestinian_State_Formation_since_the_Signing_of_the_Oslo_Accords