Reply of the Republic of Cyprus to questions posed by Judges Koroma, Bennouna and
Cançado Trindade at the close of the oral proceedings

NO .32 P. 2

QUESTIONSFROMTHECOURT-WRITTEN REPLYBVTHEREPUBLJC OFCYPRUS

1. "lt has been contended that international law does not prohibit the secession of a
territory from a sovereign State.Could participants inthese proceedings address the

Court on the principles and rules of international law, ifany, which, outside the
colonial context, permit the secessionof a territory from a sovereignState without the
latter's consent?" [JudgeKoroma]

1.1. "Sovereign equality" is the fundamentar principle of public international law and
the first of the legal principles mentioned in the Charter. Aswas dedared in UN

General Assembly Resolution 2625, the principle of "sovereign equality" entails the
principles, inter alia, (a) that "each State enjoys the rights inherent in full

sovereignty' and {b) that "the territorial integrity and political independence of the

State are inviolable". Territory is an essential attribute and characteristic of
Statehood; and one of the rights inherent in the sovereignty of each and every State

is that State's prerogative to decide if and how to dispose of its territory.

1.2. The makingof a unilateral declaration of independence is by definition the act of an
entity that, immediately prior to the making of the declaration, is neither a

sovereign State nor a body (such as a government) entitled to act on behalf of a
sovereign State. That entity daims the status ofa sovereign State by the making of

the declaration.

1.3. International law does not purport to forbid an individual or group of indlviduals
from actually making such unilateral declarations - from the act of making the

proclamation. This is in contrast to the position in domestic law, which may prohibit
the makingof such declarations because they constitute offences such as treason or

crimes against the security of the State. The legal significance of a unilateral
declaration of independence is, however, regulated by international law.

1.4,The distinction drawn in the previous paragraph isessentialfy that drawn by the

Court in theAnglo-Norwegion Fisheries case:

"The delimitation of sea areas has always an international aspect; it cannot be

dependent merely upon the will of the coastal State as expressed in its municipal
law. Although it is true that the act of delimitation is necessarily a unilateral act,
because only the coastal State is competent to undertake it, the validity of the

delimitation with regard to other States depends upon international law." /0
Reports 1951, 116 at 132.

1.5. The principle of sovereign equality which lies at the heart of international law is
consistent with the absence of a prohibition in international law on the making of22. DEC 2009°-1 1:50 ... NO 6.32 P. 3

2

unilateral declarations of independence.They are reconciled, as the passage from
Anglo-Norwegian Fisheriesindicates, by holding that the making of the declaration

is necessarily a unilateral act, not prohibited by internationalaw, but _that the
unilateral act is devoid of legal effect unless it is consistent with international law.

The invalidity of a unilateral declaration of independence as a motter of
international lawthus protects the sovereign rights of a State against violations by

other States and non-State actors alike.

1.6. Accordingly, the purported secession of a territory from a sovereign State without
that State's consent is incompatible with international law and with the State's

international legal prerogative ta decide itself if and tawdispose of its territory.
Such a purported unilateral secession is, thus, not in accordance with international
law.

1.7.As was explained in its written and oral statementsbefore the Court, the Republic

of Cyprus does not consider that declarations of secession have any legal validity in
international law except in circumstances of colonial self-determinatiounless the

parent State has consented to the secession, lndeed, Cyprus considers that a
unilateral declaration of secession that purports to break up a State that has itself

emerged from colonial rule by self-determinationwould be incompatible with the
right to self-determination of the 'people' of that State.

1.8. Further, Cyprus does not consider the population of Kosovo to constitute a 'people'
for the purposes of self-determination: rather, the population of Kosovo includes

groups which constituted minorities within Serbia, entitled to the rights of
m1 norities and to human rights in accordancwith international law.

1.9.ln lighr: ofthe above, it is Cyprus' position that outside the colonial context,

international law does not permit the secession of a territoryfrom a sovereign State
without the State's consent.

2. «Est-ce que les auteurs de la déclaration unilatérale d'indépendance des institutions

provisoires d'administration autonome du Kosovo ont fait auparavant campagne, lors
de l'élection de novembre 2007 de l'assemblée des institutions provisoires
d'administration autonome du Kosovo, sur la base de leur volonté de déclarer
unilatéralement, une fois élus, l'indépendance du Kosovo,ou bien ont-ils, au moins,

présenté à leurs électeurs la déclaration unilatérale d'indépendance du Kosovo
comme l'une des alternatives de leur action futur?» [Judge Bennouna]22.DEC 2.009-115 :1 NO 6.32 P. 4

3

2.1. This question is addressed primarily to the Authors of the Declaration, and Cyprus

offers no c0mment on it.

11
3. United Nations Security Councilresolution 1244 (1999) refersin its paragraph11 (a),
to "substantial autonomy and self-government in Kosovo",taking full account of the
Rambouillet Accords.ln your understanding, what isthe meaning of this renvoito the

Rambouillet Accords? Does it have a bearing on the issues of self-determination
and/or secession?If so, what would be the prerequisites of a people's eligibility into
statehood, in the framework of the legal régime set up by Security Councilresolution

1244 (1999)? And what are the factual preconditions for the configurations of a
'people',and of its eligibility into statehood, under general international law?" [Judge
CançadoTrindade]

3.1. The significance of the reference ta the Rambouillet Accords in UNSCresolution

1244 isevident from the text of the resolution itself.

3.2. The Rambouillet Accords are mentioned four times in UNSCresolution 1244. ln

Operative paragraph 11 the Council decided that the main responsibilities of the
international civil presence included "promoting the establishment, pending a final
settlement, of substantial autonomy and self-government for Kosovo, taking full

account of annex 2 and of the Rambouillet Accords" and "facilitating a political
process designed to determine Kosovo's future status, taking into account the
Rambouillet Accords".

3.3. The third mention appears in Annex 1 to UNSC resolution 1244, which is a

statement by G-8 Foreign Ministers of general principles that they wished to be
applied in respect of Kosovo. One such principle was "A political process towards
the establishment of an interim political framework agreement providing for a

substantial self-government for Kosovo, taking full account of the Rambouillet
accords and the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia and the other countries of the region, and the

demilitarization of the KLA.,,

3.4. The fourth mention appears in Annex 2, headed "Agreement should be reached on
the foHowing principles ta move towards a resolution of the Kosovocrisis." lt reads:
"A political process towards the establishment of an interim political framework

agreement providing for substantial self-government for Kosovo,taking full account
of the Rambouillet accords and the prindples of sovereignty and territorial integrity
of the Federal Republicof Yugoslaviaand the other countries of the region, and the

demilitarization of UCK.Negotiations between the parties for a settlement should
not delay or disrupt the establishment of democratic self-governing institutions."

3.5. UNSC resolution 1244 thus defines the objective towards which the "political
process" should be directed: ie, the "substantial autonomy and self-government" of

Kosovo. "Substantial autonomy and self-government" does not mean22.oEc .oor·11s :1 NO 6.32 P. 5

4

independence. lndeed, the phrase makes no sense if applied to an independent
State. Further, the phrase was in any event directed only to the interim status of
Kosovo. Resolution 1244 said nothing about the final status of Kosovo.

3.6. UNSCresolution 1244 then indicates a number of matters of which "full account"
should be taken in the political process. The Rambouillet Accords is one;

sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the demilitarization of theare others.

3.7. The references to the Rambouillet Accords were thus directions to those involved in

the political process to take the Accords into account, and not to ignore them. The
references do not suggest that the Accords had the status of law, any more than it
suggests that ''demilitarization" was an existing legal obligation. Nor do they suggest
that the "agreement'' envisaged by Annex 2 must adopt all aspects of the Accords.

Any such suggestion would have been incompatible with the notion of an agreed
settlement.

3.8. Asto the meaning of 'people', Cyprus considers that the question is relevant onfy in

the context of self-determination for a 'people' in colonial-type situations, which is
not the case here.