(English below) Më 22 korrik 2010, Gjykata Ndërkombëtare e Drejtësisë vendosi se shpallja e pavarësisë së Kosovës nuk cenon të drejtën ndërkombëtare. Këtu po ndaj një fragment prej një punimi bashkautorial, ku shpjegojmë të drejtën e popullit për të vendosë fatin e vet:
Në përpjekje për të minuar shtetësinë e Kosovës, Serbia arriti t’ia parashtrojë çështjen Gjykatës Ndërkombëtare të Drejtësisë. Parashtresa fillestare pyeste nëse Kosova ka të drejtë të ndahet. Por GjND-ja e riformuloi pyetjen, siç i lejohet me statut, për të gjetur nëse Deklarata e Pavarësisë e Kosovës shkel rregullat e së drejtës ndërkombëtare. Gjykata vendosi se nuk i shkel. Dy aspekte kyçe të mendimit këshillues të GjND-së meritojnë vëmendjen tonë.
Së pari, e drejta ndërkombëtare gjithmonë kishte qenë asnjanëse sa i përket themelimit dhe zhdukjes së shteteve. Përjashtime ekzistojnë për përdorimin e paligjshëm të forcës, gjenocidin, aparteidin ose shkelje të tjera të normave jus cogens. Por rasti nuk ishte i tillë kur Kosova shpalli mëvetësinë më 2008, andaj GjND-ja nuk gjeti shkelje të së drejtës ndërkombëtare. Po të kishte vendosur ndryshe, mbijetesa e Kosovës si shtet do të ishte në pikëpyetje.
Së dyti, GjND-ja njohu joshprehimisht Deklaratën si ushtrim të pushtetit kushtetutëbërës të popullit. Akti i 2008-ës u miratua jashtë rendit juridik të vendosur nga UNMIK-u, dhe themeloi në vend të tij një rend të ri juridik të mbështetur në vullnetin e lirë të popullit. Ndonëse GjND-ja nuk zë ngoje konceptin pouvoir constituant, mendimi i saj diskuton fare qartë një vendim të popullit për të përcaktuar të ardhmen e vet politike. Ky është thelbi i pushtetit kushtetutëbërës, i cili i përket popullit. Të tjerët nuk mund ta anulojnë Deklaratën e Pavarësisë së Kosovës. Por u takon sovranëve të tjerë të vendosin nëse do ta njohin Kosovën si shtet. Shumica dërrmuese tashmë e ka njohur.
***
On July 22, 2010, the International Court of Justice ruled that Kosova’s declaration of independence did not violate international law. Here, I’ll share an excerpt of a coauthored article where I explain the power of the people to decide their own fate:
In an effort to undermine Kosovo’s statehood, Serbia succeeded in referring the matter to the International Court of Justice. The referral initially asked whether Kosovo had the right to secede. But the ICJ reframed the question, as allowed by its statute, to inquire whether Kosovo’s Declaration of Independence violated the rules of international law. It held that it did not. Two key aspects deserve our attention here.
Firstly, international law had always remained neutral on the formation and disappearance of states. Exceptions exist for the illegal use of force, genocide,apartheid, or other violations of jus cogens norms. Such was not the case with Kosovo when it declared its independence in 2008, hence the ICJ found no violation of international law. Had it ruled otherwise, Kosovo’s survival would have been at stake.
Secondly, the ICJ implicitly acknowledged the Declaration as an exercise ofthe people’s constituent power. The 2008 act took place outside of the legal order set up by the UN administration, and established instead a new legal order based on the free will of the people. While the ICJ does not mention pouvoir constituant, the discussion is clearly about a decision of the people to determine their political future. This is the essence of constituent power, which belongs to the people. Others may not annul Kosovo’s Declaration of Independence. But it is up to other sovereigns to decide whether they wish to recognize Kosovo as a state. The overwhelming majority has already done so.
***
I’ll also share bits from the separate opinion of the Honorable Judge Trindade, who summarized the reasons that led to Kosovo’s statehood in 2008:
166. [… T]he forcible removal, in 1989, by the Serbian authorities, of Kosovo’s autonomy led to the humanitarian catastrophe, which reached the point of highest tension in 1998-1999. During this catastrophe, grave and successive violations of human rights and of international humanitarian law occurred, including mass killings, war crimes, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, massive refugee flows and forcible displacement of large segments of the population. Over 1.5 million Kosovar Albanians were forcibly expelled from their homes.
167. There were systematic and widespread violations of human rights, including torture and rape, forced disappearance of persons, abductions, indiscriminate attacks on women, targeting of children, taking of hostages, arbitrary arrests, summary and extrajudicial executions; by the hands of Serbian forces and paramilitaries. There also occurred destruction of property, looting of homes by the police, burning of crops — all highly organized and systematic.
168. State-sanctioned discrimination took place in the workplace, in labour relations, in public health, and in education. The basic needs of the population were no longer met, as a result of State-sanctioned discrimination. The judicial system failed to work, and total impunity prevailed. Systematic and gross violations of the rights of workers in Kosovo occurred (as from 1990) in flagrant violation of the fundamental principle of equality and non-discrimination, and in further breach of the rule of law. As violence breeds violence, as from the mid-nineties KLA violence was added to the context of social disruption in Kosovo. The State-planned widespread oppression created an atmosphere of terror, and led to the adoption of resolution 1244 (1999) of the Security Council, so as to address the pressing daily needs of the ʻpeople’ or ʻpopulation’ of Kosovo.
Judge Trindade concluded that:
239. […] States exist for human beings and not vice-versa. Contemporary international law is no longer indifferent to the fate of the population, the most precious constitutive element of statehood. The advent of international organizations, transcending the old inter-State dimension, has helped to put an end to the reversal of the ends of the State. This distortion led States to regard themselves as final repositories of human freedom, and to treat individuals as means rather than as ends in themselves, with all the disastrous consequences which ensued therefrom. The expansion of international legal personality entailed the expansion of international accountability.
240. States transformed into machines of oppression and destruction ceased to be States in the eyes of their victimized population. Thrown into lawlessness, their victims sought refuge and survival elsewhere, in the jus gentium, in the law of nations, and, in our times, in the Law of the United Nations. I dare to nourish the hope that the conclusion of the present Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice will mark the closing chapter of yet another long episode of the timeless saga of humankind in search of emancipation from tyranny and systematic oppression.
***
Enver Hasani & Getoar Mjeku, International(ized) Constitutional Court: Kosovo’s Transfer of Judicial Sovereignty, Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law, vol. 13, issue 4, 373–402, f. 379; shqip: Gjykata kushtetuese e ndërkombëtarizuar: Bartja e sovranitetit gjyqësor në rastin e Kosovës, E drejta/Law nr. 1–4/2019, 7–35, f. 12–13. Në rrjet: Në rrjet: https://ssrn.com/
Foto: Sir Michael Wood, KCMG, anëtar i Odës së Avokatëve të Anglisë dhe i Komisionit të së Drejtës Ndërkombëtare, paraqitet para GjND-së në emër të autorëve të deklaratës së pavarësisë (Frank van Beek/Capital Photos, 2009)
Shkurtegëza për këtë postim: https://pli.si/2ONcScI
