STUDY MATERIAL FOR INTERNAL

CIRCULATION
COURSE & SEMESTER: 5 YEAR B.A., LL.B. VII SEMESTER

SUBJECT: PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

UNIT-II

Prepared By
Ms. Sahana Florence
Asst. Prof.
BMSCL

1|Page
 Unit-II
States as subjects of International Law: States in general; Recognition; State
territorial sovereignty.

STATE AS A SUBJECT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

The term ‘State’ is derived from the word ‘Status’ which was first used by the Tuetons. The
Greeks used the word ‘Polis’ which is translated as ‘City State’. The term state became popular
only in the 16th century.

Aristotle defined State as “A union of families and villages having for its end a perfect and
self-sufficing life by which we mean a happy and honourable life.”

Oppenheim stated that the State exists when people settle in a country under its own
sovereignty.

Salmond defined State as “A community of people which has been established for some
objectives such as internal order and external security.”

Characteristics of a State

The Montevideo convention on the rights and duties of states of 1933 did not define the term
‘State’ but it did lay down certain qualification of state. Article 1 thus said – State as a person
of International Law should possess the following qualification:
1. Permanent Population
2. Territory
3. Government
4. Sovereignty

Permanent Population
State is a community of persons. It is a human political institution. Without a population there
can be no State. Population can be more or less, but it has to be there. There are States with
very small populations like Switzerland, Canada, and there are States like China, India and
others, with very large populations. The people living in the State are the citizens of the State.
They enjoy rights and freedom as citizens as well as perform several duties towards the State.
When citizens of another State are living in the territory of the State, they are called aliens. All
the persons, citizens as well as aliens, who are living in the territory of the State are duty bound
to obey the state laws and policies. The State exercises supreme authority over them through
its government.
The basic and the most obvious requirement is population. The existence of a permanent
population is naturally required as initial evidence of the existence of a State. This requirement
suggests a stable community. Evidentially it is important, since in the absence of the physical

2|Page
basis for an organized community, it will be difficult to establish the existence of a State. The
size of the population, however, is not relevant since International Law does not specify the
minimum number of inhabitants as a requirement of statehood. Nevertheless, an acceptable
minimum number of inhabitants is required with regard to self-determination criterion.

Territory
Territory is the second essential element of the State. State is a territorial unit. Definite territory
is its essential component. A State cannot exist in the air or at sea. It is essentially a territorial
State. The size of the territory of a state can be big or small; nevertheless, it has to be a definite,
well-marked portion of territory.
States have established territorial boundaries. The size of the territory may change due to the
acquisition or secession of land through political negotiations, purchase agreements, or by
being overtaken by force such as during a war. The requirement of a permanent population is
intended to be used in association with that of territory. What is required by a defined territory
is that there must be a certain portion of land inhabited by a stable community. A defined
territory does not suggest that the territory must be fixed and the boundaries be settled since
these are not essential to the existence of a State, although in fact all modern States are
contained within territorial limits or boundaries.
The past practice shows that the existence of fully defined boundaries is not required and that
what matters is the existence of an effective political authority having control over a particular
portion of land. In 1913, Albania was recognized as a State by a number of States even though
it lacked settled boundaries, and Israel was admitted to the United Nations as a State in spite
of disputes over its existence and territorial delineation.
The existence of a particular territory over which a political authority operates is essential for
the existence of a State. For this reason, the “State of Palestine” declared in November 1988 at
the conference of Algiers was not legally regarded as a valid State since the Palestine Liberation
Organization had had no control over any part of the territory it was claiming.
The size of the territory of a State and alterations to its extent, whether by increase or decrease,
do not of themselves change the identity of that State. A State continues to exist as long as a
portion of land is retained.

Government
All states have some type of organized government. Government allows the state to establish
social order, provide public services, and to make decisions that affect the living conditions of
all people living within the territorial boundaries of the state. For a stable community to
function reasonably effectively, it needs some sort of political organization. It is required that
an effective government be created, and this political authority must be strong enough to assert
itself throughout the territory of the State without a foreign assistance. The existence of an
effective government, with some sort of centralized administrative and legislative organs,
assures the internal stability of the State, and of its ability to fulfil its international obligations.

Sovereignty
Sovereignty is the most exclusive element of State. State alone possess sovereignty. Without
sovereignty no state can exit. Some institutions can have the first three elements (Population

3|Page
Territory and Government) but not sovereignty. State has the exclusive title and prerogative to
exercise supreme power over all its people and territory. In fact, Sovereignty is the basis on
which the State regulates all aspects of the life of the people living in its territory.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

STATE RECOGNITION

Meaning and Definition of the term ‘Recognition’

Recognition is a formal acknowledgment by the existing states or family of Nations that the
new political entity which has been formed does possess all the elements of statehood i.e.,
Population, Territory, Government & Sovereignty.
According to Fenwick, Recognition is a formal acknowledgment by an existing member of the
international community of the international personality of a state or political group.
Hans Kelson says, Recognition of a state is an act by which another state acknowledges that
the political entity recognized possesses the attributes of statehood. The grant of recognition
establishes that the new state in the opinion of existing recognizing states fulfils the conditions
of statehood required by International Law. Practice of state suggest that on many occasions a
new state is not recognized by other states even if the former fulfils the essential conditions of
statehood and on some occasions, recognition is granted even if the new state does not possess
all the attributes of statehood. Thus, acknowledgment of the possession of attributes of
statehood in a state depends upon the discretion of existing state. For example: although Israel
was established in 1948, some Arab states withheld recognition.

Is Recognition A Political Act or A Legal Act?

Judge Hersch Lauter pacht considered that recognition of a State was a legal act. He said that
when the state fulfils all the essentials of statehood then it becomes the duty of other state to
recognise it. According to Starke, Lauterpacht’s view is not supported by state practice.
Acceptance of this view would mean that the new state has the right to recognized by other
states. Since International Law does not provide any such right to the new state, therefore
existing state does not have any legal duty to recognise the state. Granting or withholding
recognition depends upon the discretion of the state. Another view is that, recognition is a
political act. Recognition of a state depends upon the discretion of the state, and therefore is
optional.

Is Recognition Obligatory?

According to Judge Hersch Lauterpacht’s, when a state possesses the four essential qualities of
statehood, it becomes the duty of other state to recognise it. But in practice it is not so, it is not
obligatory for the state to recognise another state and refusal to recognise will not amount to
violation of International Law. There is generally a practice to recognise a new state though it
is not a duty.

4|Page
THEORIES OF RECOGNITION
1. Constitutive Theory
According to this theory, personality of a state is created not by fact but through
recognition by other states. In other words, an entity does not become a state by possessing
essentials attributes of statehood. But it becomes so, when it is recognised by other states. It
implies that other states constitute the personality of a state by granting recognition.
The main exponents related to this theory are Oppenheim, Hegal and Anziloti. According
to this theory, for a State to be considered as an international person, its recognition by the
existing states as a sovereign required. This theory is of the view that only after recognition a
State gets the status of an International Person and becomes a subject to International Law. So,
even if an entity possesses all the characteristics of a state, it does not get the status of an
international person unless recognized by the existing States.
This theory suffers from a number of defects which are as follows:
i. When a state comes into possession of all the attributes of statehood, it is not necessary
that its existence is recognised by other state. The timing of recognition may be different
from one state to another. Acceptance of constitutive theory would mean that a state
exists for some states which has granted recognition to it and does not exist to others
which has not granted recognition.
ii. If this theory is true, then an unrecognised should have no rights and duties. iii.
According to this theory, recognition is a legal duty on the part of the existing states.
But in practice, it is not so.
Criticism of the theory
This theory has been criticized by several jurists. Few of the criticisms of this theory are:
• This theory is criticized because unless a state is recognized by other existing states,
rights, duties and obligations of statehood community under International Law is not
applicable to it.
• This theory also leads to confusion when a new state is acknowledged and recognised
by some of the existing states and not recognized by other states.

2. Declaratory Theory
According to this theory, a state comes into existence in International Law, as soon as it
acquires all the attributes of state. Recognition is just a formal acknowledgment of the fact
that it possesses the attributes of statehood. The main exponents of the Declaratory Theory of
Statehood are Wigner, Hall, Fisher and Brierly. According to this theory, any new state is
independent of the consent by existing states. This theory has been laid down under Article 3
of the Montevideo Conference of 1933. This theory states that the existence of a new state
does not depend on being recognised by the existing state. Even before recognition by other
states, the new state has the right to defend its integrity and independence under International
law.
Criticism of the theory
The declaratory theory of statehood has also been criticized. This theory has been
criticized on the ground that this theory alone cannot be applicable for recognition of a state.
When a state having essential characteristics comes into existence as a state, it can exercise

5|Page
international rights and obligations and here comes the application of declaratory theory, but
when other states acknowledge its existence and the state gets the legal rights of recognition,
the consecutive theory comes into play.

A question arises as to which of the above two theories is correct. It is submitted that neither
of them alone is correct. The practice of states shows that recognition has elements of
constitute theory as well as that of declaratory theory. In order to answer the above question,
statehood may be distinguished into natural statehood and juridical statehood. A state comes
into existence by possessing all the essential attributes of statehood. At this moment, it
acquires natural statehood in the sense that it acquires an international personality and
possesses minimum rights of existence. For instance:
• territory cannot be considered to be no man’s land i.e., its territory cannot be invaded
or occupied;
• Other states do not have a right to overfly without permission;
• They must also refrain from subverting its domestic political system
• They must also respect the rights of the new state over the high seas and ships flying its
flag cannot be considered stateless.

FORMS OF RECOGNITION
When a newly formed state is recognized, its declaration can be made in two forms:
1. Expressed Recognition
2. Implied Recognition

1. Expressed Recognition
When an existing state recognizes a new state expressly through official declaration or
notification, it is considered to be the expressed form of recognition. Express recognition can
be made through any express or formal means such as sending or publishing declaration or
statement to the opposite party. When a state is recognized by expressed ways, it is a de jure
recognition unless provided otherwise by the recognizing state in the declaration.

2. Implied Recognition
When the existing state recognizes a newly formed state through any implied act, then it is
considered as an implied recognition. Implied recognition can be granted through any implied
means by which a current state treats the newly formed state as an international person. The
implied credit not granted through any official notification or declaration. The recognition
through implied means varies from case to case.

Types of implied recognition:

a) Unilateral acts:
When a state enters into a bilateral treaty or establishes diplomatic relations with an
unrecognised state, it may be inferred that the former has recognised the state.
b) Collective acts:

6|Page
 When an unrecognised state participates in a multilateral treaty, the other participants of
the treaty are regarded to have recognised the new state if the intention has been indicated. In
the absence of an unequivocal intention to the contrary, no recognition is implied

Conditional recognition
The grant of recognition by an existing state to a newly born state stipulated on fulfilment some
conditions in addition to the requirements of statehood is said to be conditional recognition. As
for as, the recognition is concerned it is itself conditioned with the fulfilment of the essentials
of statehood, that is to say, the new state must occupy some territory, has some population,
government and sovereignty. If these requirements have been complied with by the new state,
then that should be recognized by existing states. But as far as, the recognition is concerned it
is usually based on some political considerations. So, in the pursuance of these considerations
the existing states sometimes declare recognition but stipulated with certain other conditions
for the recognized state to be fulfilled.

MODES OF RECOGNITION

I. Defacto recognition
Defacto is factual Recognition. It is based on the factual situation. When the existing states
has a doubt on the stability of the newly formed state, then it may grant defacto recognition.
Defacto is not permanent it is temporary, provisional recognition, which can be withdrawn.
According to Lauterpacht, De facto recognition is an expression of the desire to enter
relations with the regime in power but for the time being without the usual diplomatic
courtesies. Oppenheim says that Defacto recognition is given when in the view of the
recognising state, the newly formed state though is independent and has power and control
within the territory it does not have or has not acquired sufficient stability.

II. De jure recognition

De Jure is final & permanent recognition and cannot be withdrawn. It means that the state
fulfils the requirements of statehood laid down by international law. Three conditions are
required as precedent to the grant of De jure recognition of a new State or a Government.
• A reasonable assurance of stability and performance.
• The government commands the general support of the population; and
• It is able and willing to fulfil its International obligations

De Jure recognition is conferred generally after conferring de facto recognition, or when a

particular state is in power under government. If this continues for a certain period proving its
stability and support from the people and their willingness to enter into an agreement, then this
state is De Jure recognized. In the case of Luther v. Sagar, it was held in this case that for the
purpose of giving effect to the internal acts of the recognized authority there is no distinction
between de facto and de jure.

Example of de facto and de jure recognition:

7|Page
 • One of the examples of de facto and de jure recognition is the recognition of the Soviet
Union was established in 1917. It was de facto recognised by the government of UK in
1921 but it was not given de jure recognition until 1924.
• Bangladesh was established in March 1971. India and Bhutan recognised it just after 9
months of establishment but the United States gave it legal recognition after nearly 1
year in April 1972.

The Distinction Between De Facto And De Jure Recognition

Sl. No. De facto Recognition De Jure Recognition

1. De facto recognition is a provisional De jure recognition is legal

and factual recognition. recognition.
2. De facto recognition is granted when De jure recognition is granted when
there is the fulfilment of the essentialthe state fulfils all the essential
conditions of statehood. condition of states along with
sufficient control and permanency.
3. De facto recognition is a primary step De jure recognition can be granted
towards grant of de jure recognition. either with or without grant of de facto
recognition.
4. De facto recognition can either be De jure recognition is a final and non-
conditional or non-conditional. conditional recognition
5. De facto recognition is revocable in De jure recognition is nonrevocable
nature.
6. The states recognised under this mode The state recognised under this mode
have only a few rights and obligations have the absolute right and obligations
against other states. against other states.
7. The state with de facto cannot undergo The state with de jure recognition can
state succession. under state succession.
8. The state with de facto recognition The state with de jure recognition
cannot enjoy full diplomatic enjoys full diplomatic immunities.
immunities.

Legal effects of recognition

The recognised state acquires the capacity to enter into diplomatic relations and treaties. It
acquires the right to sue in the courts of the recognising states and its diplomats can enjoy
immunity. Oppenheim says the following are the consequences of recognition:
i. It can enter into diplomatic relation and treaties.
ii. Right to sue in the court of recognising state.
iii. Immunity for itself and its property in the jurisdiction of the court of law of the state
recognising it.

8|Page
 iv. In the case of recognition of a new government to an old state the previous treaties
signed by its predecessor automatically is revived, because recognition has
retrospective effect.
v. It becomes entitled to the succession and possession of its property situated in the
territory of the recognising state.
vi. It becomes bound to respect international obligation under international law in
connection with the recognised state.

Effects of non-recognition

The effects of an unrecognised state are as follows:

i. An unrecognised state or Government is not authorised to sue in the court of the
states which has not recognised it.
ii. It cannot enter into diplomatic relations with those states which has not recognised
it.
iii. Diplomats will not enjoy immunity in states which has not recognised it.
iv. Cannot enter into treaty with states which has not recognised it.
v. Individuals of unrecognised state may be as bad as a stateless person.
vi. They are not entitled to get their property situated in the states which has not
recognised.

ARANTZAZU MENDI CASE

Principle: When there is effective control over the territory of a government of de fecto
(recognition) a foreign court can not apply its jurisdiction over its matter.

Fact: During the Spanish Civil War, the UK recognized de jure the Republican government of
Spain, but also recognized de facto the rebel government (the Nationalists). Both governments
sued in British courts to control the Spanish-flagged vessel Arantzazu Mendi, when arrived in
a British port.

Issue: whether the republican government shall have the right to possess the ship.

Decision: It was held: A de facto government has control over state assets within the territory
it controls. A de jure government has control even over state assets abroad.

Reasoning: It was held by the House of Lords that since the Nationalist was a de-facto
recognized sovereign ineffective contract over a large portion of Spain, it was immune from
the jurisdiction of the local courts of other sovereign.

Withdrawal of Recognition
1. Withdrawal of De facto recognition

9|Page
 Under international law when a state having de facto recognition fails to fulfill the
essential conditions of statehood, its recognition can be withdrawn. The recognition can
be withdrawn by the recognizing state through declaration or through communicating
with the authorities of the recognized states. The withdrawal can also be done by issuing
a public statement.
2. Withdrawal of De Jure recognition
Withdrawal of de jure recognition is a very debatable issue under the International Law.
Withdrawal of de jure recognition is a very exceptional event. If strictly interpreted, the
de jure recognition can be withdrawn. Even though the process of recognition is a
political act, de jure recognition is of legal nature. Jurists who consider de jure
recognition as a political act considers it revocable. Such revocation of de jure
recognized states can be withdrawn only when a state loses the essential characteristics
of statehood or any other exceptional circumstances. This type of revocation can be
done expressly by the recognizing state by issuing a public statement.

STATE TERRORORIAL SOVEREIGNTY

One of the important elements of statehood is territory, without territory there is no state.
Oppenhiem defined it as “portion of globe which is subjected to the sovereignty of a state”.
Territory is important because it is within that space that the state/government exercises its
authority. It is immaterial if the territory is big or small. According to Kelson, territory of the
state is a space within which the acts of the state and especially its coercive acts are allowed by
general international law to be carried out, a space within which the acts of a state may legally
be performed. The authority or the jurisdiction that the state exercises over its territory is called
territorial sovereignty. It exercises authority over this area on persons, property to the exclusion
of the other states. Territory not only includes the land but the rivers, sea and space above.
Extent of territorial sovereignty
Every state has authority over its people and property; it can make law for them and enforce it.
But to what extent does this authority extend, where does a state territory end?
The customary international law recognises the state territory as follows:
1) Land situated within the boundaries of the state recognised by international law
2) National Waters
3) The maritime coastal belt or territorial sea
4) A ship bearing the flag of the state
5) Ports
6) Airspace
7) Subsoil under earth

LAND TERRITORY: Land within its boundaries, boundary is a line which divides one state
from another. It is also called frontiers. It is very important that the state boundary is defined
otherwise there will be frequent disputes. It can either be settled by treaties or an award by
tribunals. There are two types of boundaries: Natural Boundary (rivers, mountains, forest etc)
and Artificial Boundary that is constructed for the purpose of dividing territories like wall,
posts, pillars, trenches etc. The limits of the boundaries may be marked by the state themselves

10 | P a g e
or by international agencies. Example: demarcation of boundary done between Iran & Kuwait
by a commission set up by the UN.

NATIONAL WATERS:
1. RIVERS:
Rivers within the state belongs to the state. Rivers are of four types:
i. River which starts and ends within the same state
ii. River which separates two states as boundary
iii. River which flows through two or more states – It is known as Plurilateral, Multilateral
or NonNational River
iv. Multilateral river which flows into the sea – it is called International River

CANALS
Canals are human made channels or artificial water ways for water convenience to service
water transport vehicles. Example: The Corinth Canal although is kept open to vessels, is
exclusively within the control of Greece.

STRAITS
It is naturally formed narrow passage of water connecting two seas or two other large areas of
water. All straits which are not six miles wide are part of Costal State, and those which are
more than six miles wide are called International Strait. Presently law relating to states are
codified by UN convention in the law of Sea 198
BAYS
Bay is a broad inlet of sea, where the land curves within. It is a receded coastal body of water
that directly connects to larger main body of water such as an ocean

MARITIME BELT OR TERRITORIAL SEA

Article 1 of Territorial Sea Convention provides that the sovereignty of the state extends
beyond its land territory to a part of the sea which is adjacent to the coastal state. These waters
are contained in a certain zone called the Maritime Belt or Territorial Sea. Territorial Sea
therefore maybe defined as that part of the sea which is adjacent to the coast and over which
International Law permits the coastal states to exercise sovereignty subject only to a general
right of innocent passage on the part of foreign shipping. The breadth of the territorial sea is
12 nautical miles measured from the base line

SHIP BEARING FLAG OF THE STATE

The sea is not under the authority or does not belong to any state. All nations have equal rights
of navigation over the sea at the time of peace. However, the state can exercise authority over
the high seas on the following matters:
i. Its vessel and persons on it
ii. Foreign vessel wrongfully flying its flag
iii. Right of visit and search of natural vessel
iv. Hot pursuit on open sea in peace time

11 | P a g e
v. Piracy

PORT
A port which is part of international water is fully part of state territory as land itself. Allowing
other ships in their port is an old custom and varies according to the practice of different states.
Foreign vessels entering port are subject to the local jurisdiction of the state but a vessel in
distress which has a right to seek shelter in foreign port is immune from local jurisdiction.

AIR SPACE
Air Space has been defined by the Polish jurist Prof. Berezowski as the place in which
international relations in the field of aviation develop in the space directly encircling the earth,
filled to a greater or lesser extent with air and bearing the name air space. A state has
sovereignty over the air space above its territory. It follows that the air space over the high seas
and over the unoccupied territories are absolutely free from the jurisdiction of any state.

SUBSOIL UNDER EARTH

The subsoil beneath the territorial land and water is of importance on account of telegraph and
telephone wires and also on account of the working of the mines and the building of tunnels.
Oppenheim has rightly stated that the subsoil on an unlimited depth belongs to state which
owns the territory on the surface and the territorial waters appurtenant to the territory of the
state.

ACQUISITION AND LAWS OF STATE TERRITORY

Acquisition of a territory means actuation of sovereignly over such territory. A state may
acquire the territory which may be under the sovereignty o another state or which does not
belong to any one i.e., res nullius. When a state enlarges its territory by acquisition of territory
which belongs to another state, it is called Derivation - here one state gains and other loses and
where only gain and no loss it is called Original Acquisition.

Different modes of acquisition

1. OCCUPATION
The term occupation is derived from the Roman term Occupatio which means
acquisition of res nullius. Occupation under International Law means appropriations of
a territory which does not belong to any state. Such a territory may be inhabited by
community of people which are not considered as state or may be uninhabited
Legal Statues of Eastern Greenland Case: Dispute arose between Norway and Denmark
as to the Occupation of Eastern Part of Greenland Norway, the PCIJ laid down two
elements that are important for occupation to be effective:
i. There should be animus i.e., intention on the part of the state to appropriate the
territory and establish sovereignty over it by establishing some kind of
administration over it within a reasonable time.
ii. The state should take corpus i.e., possession of that territory. There is no need
of notification of occupation to other states.

12 | P a g e
 Case of Island of Palmas: Dispute arose between USA & Netherland regarding
sovereignty over the island of Palmas. USA said that the island was discovered by
Spain and it was transferred to US under a treaty and thus the treaty must be respected
and thus US has title over it, whereas Netherland claimed that neither US nor Spain
had established effective administration over it but Netherlands had established
effective administration over it. Court held that Netherland had animus and corpus, and
thus the occupation by Netherlands was held valid.

2. ANNEXATION
Annexation means forcible acquisition of territory which belongs to one state by
another state. Here intention to appropriate it permanently has to be shown, this maybe
indicated by making some notification and the same recognized by several other
powers. If intention is not indicated, it would be termed as Military Occupation. After
the establishment of UN, this mode of acquisition has become illegal. The UN Charter
under Article 2 para 4, says that the member shall not use force against the territorial
integrity or political independence of any state. If a state acquires another territory using
force, then it will be held illegal.
Example: In August 1990, Iraq after invasion an annexation of Kuwait with the use of
force merged it with its own state. Security council held that annexation of Kuwait by
Iraq under any form and whatever pretext has no legal validity and its considered null
and void.

3. ACCRETION
Accretion is increasing of land through new formations. Example: When the sea
recedes or island rises within a river, which is totally within the territory of the same
state. Such new formation only modify the existing state territory. It may be artificial
(human work) or natural. The Anna
In 1805, during war between Great Britain and Spain, the British privateer captured the
Spanish ship Anna near the mouth of river Mississippi. When brought before British
prize court, the US claimed that vessel on the ground that she was captured within the
US Maritime Belt. Court gave judgment in the favour of US. It held that although it
appeared that capture took place more than 3 miles off the coast, the place of capture
was within 3 miles on some small mud island composed of earth and trees drifted down
toward into sea.

4. PRESCRIPTION
Acquisition of territory by an adverse holding continued for a certain length of time.
When a state exercises control over a territory continuously for a long time without any
interruption, that territory becomes part of the state. Three conditions: i. Possession
should be peaceful without interruption ii. Continuous iii. Fairly long time (No general
rule as to how long it should be)

5. CESSION

13 | P a g e
 It is transfer of sovereignty over a definite territory by one state to another. Oppenheim
defines it as a transfer of sovereignty over state territory by owner state to another state.
The two states involved is called Acquiring State and Ceding State. What’s important
here is that, both should be state and it should be effected through agreement between
them. A treaty for ceding a territory maybe concluded in two ways: i. The first maybe
the outcome of a peaceful negotiation such as sale, exchange or gift. ii. Or it may be the
result of war, culminating in peace treaty.

6. AWARD
A territory maybe acquired by state through adjudication by a judicial organ such as
ICJ or tribunals. Example: The transfer of Rann of Kutch to Pakistan in accordance
with the award of the tribunal commonly known as Kuth Award.

7. PLEBISCITE
A state may acquire a territory if the inhabitants of the given territory which to merge
with another state. This is known as Plebiscite. Example: East & West Germany were
united by Plebiscite.

8. LEASE
A state can lease its territory to another state for a certain term of years. Example: China
had leased Hong Kong to Great Britain in 1898, for a period of 99 years. During this
period Great Britain had temporary sovereignty over the part of its territory.

9. PLEDGE
A state can Pledge a part of its territory to another state as security in return for loan.
Example: The gold mines of Kolar Gold Field (KGF) was pledged to Britain.

DIFFERENT MODES OF LOSS OF STATE TERRITORY

Acquisition of a state territory by one state is a loss of state territory for another state:
1. SECESSION
In the case of Secession, a state losses a part of territory to which there is no
corresponding acquisition by another state. In such cases, the losing part after
severance, acquires new and separate personality. This will take place either peacefully
or by revolt.
Examples:
• Estonia, Lativia and Lithuania in 1991 from USSR are peaceful secession.
• Bangladesh from Pakistan, in 1971 is secession by revolt.
2. GRANT OF INDEPENDENCE
Grant of Independence by the metropolitan state to its colonies is another mode of
losing territory.
3. DERELICTION
Dereliction or Abandonment or Relinquishment is when the owner state completely
abandons its territory with the intention of withdrawing from it forever and relinquishes
sovereignty over it. Example: British’s abandonment of Island of Santa Lucia in 1687
14 | P a g e
 4. VANISHMENT
Vanishment is losing a part of territory through natural disasters. Like volcanic
eruption or earthquake.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

15 | P a g e