Open Library - an open library of educational information. International legal personality of state-like organizations Modern state-like entities include

International legal personality of other participants in international relations (TNCs, INGOs, individuals, humanity), including state-like entities

Legal personality of state-like entities

In international law, in accordance with interstate treaties in the past and at present, a special international legal status is granted to some political-territorial (state-like) entities. In accordance with such international treaties, these entities are endowed with certain rights and obligations and thus become subjects of international legal regulation. Their international legal personality is determined by the fact that they are capable of exercising established legal rights and obligations independently, independently of states and other subjects of international legal communication. The relevant international legal capacity is determined by the provisions of the said treaties and, in some cases, customary law. These include:

• 1) free cities. In the past, they had a special international legal status. Thus, according to the Vienna Treaty of 1815, Krakow was proclaimed a "free, independent and completely neutralized" city (it existed until 1846). The Versailles Peace Treaty of 1919 established a special international legal status for the "free state" of Danzig (1920–1939). The 1947 peace treaty with Italy provided for the formation of the "Free Territory of Trieste" (practically it was not formed; parts of it became part of Italy and Yugoslavia);
• 2) West Berlin - also had a special international legal status. The main international legal act that regulated its international legal status was the quadripartite agreement between the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France dated 03.09.197 i. According to the agreement, the western sectors of the city were united into a special political entity with their own authorities (the Senate, the prosecutor's office, etc.), to which part of the state powers were transferred. A number of powers were exercised by the allied authorities of the victorious powers. The interests of the population of the city in international relations were represented and defended by consular officials of the FRG. The status of West Berlin ended in 1990;
• 3) Vatican - the residence of the head of the Catholic Church (the Pope) in a special area of ​​​​Rome, sometimes called the city-state. Its legal status is determined by the 1984 agreement between Italy and the "Holy See". The Vatican maintains external relations with many states, in particular with Catholic countries; he establishes his permanent representations in them, headed by papal nuncios or legates. The Vatican participates in many international conferences and is a party to many international agreements. In addition, it is a member of a number of universal international organizations (UPU, IAEA, ITU, etc.), has permanent observers at the UN, ILO, UNESCO and some other organizations.

The problem of the international legal personality of an individual

For a long time, domestic science denied the quality of international legal personality to individuals. The situation changed during the period of "perestroika" in the USSR, when many scientists began to call for a revision of this point of view. The fact is that states, as the main subjects of international law, are increasingly creating norms aimed not only at regulating their mutual relations, but also norms addressed to other persons and entities by coordinating their wills. These norms may be addressed by INGOs, individual international bodies (commissions, committees, judicial and arbitration bodies), employees of IMGOs, i.e. individuals and entities that do not themselves have the ability to create norms of international law.

Although most of the norms aimed at influencing the legal status of the individual are directly addressed to states and oblige them to provide individuals with a certain set of rights and freedoms, in some cases related to the activities of international human rights bodies, international legal norms determine the rights and duties of the individual directly.

Of course, the situation is more complicated with the international legal personality of individuals in relation to international documents in the field of human rights in cases where the individual cannot directly speak before international bodies.

Of course, most often the norms of international law aimed at regulating the behavior of individuals or legal entities - subjects of domestic law, do not apply to them directly, but indirectly by the norms of national law. However, in a number of cases, rights and obligations under international law are directly vested in persons and entities that do not have the ability to create norms of international law.

In fact, the circle of persons and entities that are the subject of international law depends on what definition of the subject of international law is given. If the subjects of international law are defined as "formations independent of each other, not subordinate in the field of international relations to any political authority, having the legal ability to independently exercise the rights and obligations established by international law", then individuals and legal entities, as well as INGOs do not have the quality of international legal personality. If, however, as subjects of international law we consider all persons and entities - bearers of rights and obligations directly by virtue of the norms of international law, then it will be necessary to recognize individuals, including employees of the MMPO, a certain circle of legal entities, INGOs, various international bodies as subjects of international law.

Most likely, in international law we should talk about two categories of subjects. The first group includes those who have rights and obligations directly arising from the norms of international law, and are themselves directly involved in the creation of these norms, in ensuring their observance. First of all, these are states, as well as peoples and nations exercising their right to self-determination, MMPO. The second category includes individuals, INGOs, a number of international economic associations (IChO), international bodies (commissions, committees, judicial and arbitration bodies). They, having a certain rather limited range of rights and obligations under international law, do not themselves directly participate in the process of creating the norms of international law.

• International law: textbook / ed. G. I. Tunkina. M., 1982. S. 82.

A state-like formation is a rather complex and exceptional phenomenon of an international legal nature, still poorly studied by the domestic science of international law. Educational literature contains very little information about this unique phenomenon, and specialized literature only touches on certain aspects of individual state-like entities. There are no separate monographs or dissertations devoted to the concept, international legal personality and other issues of the status of state-like entities in Russia.

Special political-territorial formations (sometimes they are called state-like) can participate in international relations, which have internal self-government and, to various extents, international legal personality.

Most often, such formations are temporary in nature and arise as a result of the unsettled territorial claims of various countries to each other.

What is common for political-territorial formations of this kind is that in almost all cases they were created on the basis of international agreements, as a rule, peace treaties. Such agreements endowed them with a certain international legal personality, provided for an independent constitutional structure, a system of government bodies, the right to issue normative acts, and have limited armed forces.

These, in particular, are the free cities and the Vatican.

A free city is a state-city that has internal self-government and some international legal personality. One of the first such cities was Veliky Novgorod. The Hanseatic cities were also among the free cities (the Hanseatic League included Lubeck, Hamburg, Bremen, Rostock, Danzig, Riga, Derpt, Revel, Amsterdam, Kennigsberg, Kiel, Stralsund and others - a total of 50 cities).

In the XIX and XX centuries. the status of free cities was determined by international legal acts or resolutions of the League of Nations and the UN General Assembly and other organizations. For example, the status of Krakow was established in Art. 4 of the Russian-Austrian treaty, in Art. 2 of the Russian-Prussian treaty, in the additional Austro-Russian-Prussian treaty of May 3, 1815; in Art. 6-10 of the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna, June 9, 1815; in the Free City Constitution of 1815/1833. Subsequently, by an agreement of November 6, 1846, concluded by Austria, Prussia and Russia, the status of Krakow was changed and it became part of Austria.

The status of the Free City of Danzig (now Gdansk) was defined in Art. 100-108 of the Versailles Peace Treaty of June 28, 1919, in the Polish-Danzig Convention of November 9, 1920 and in a number of other agreements (for example, in the agreement of October 24, 1921 and in the decisions of the High Commissioner of the League of Nations, subsequently recognized Polish government).

The scope of international legal personality of free cities was determined by international agreements and constitutions of such cities. The latter were not states or trust territories, but occupied, as it were, an intermediate position. Free cities did not have full self-government. However, they were subject only to international law. For residents of free cities, a special citizenship was created. Many cities had the right to conclude international treaties and join intergovernmental organizations. The guarantors of the status of free cities were either a group of states or international organizations (the League of Nations, the UN, etc.). An integral feature of a free city is its demilitarization and neutralization.

West Berlin had a special international legal status. After the end of the Second World War, as a result of the split of Germany, two sovereign states were formed: the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic, as well as a special political and territorial unit - West Berlin.

The government of the USSR, in agreement with the government of the GDR, in 1958 proposed to give West Berlin, located on the territory of the GDR, the status of a demilitarized free city capable of performing international functions under the guarantee of four powers: Great Britain, the USSR, the USA and France.

The international legal status of West Berlin was determined by the Quadripartite Agreement, signed by the governments of Great Britain, the USSR, the USA and France on September 3, 1971. In accordance with this document, West Berlin had a unique international legal status. The state-political structure of West Berlin was determined by the Constitution, which entered into force on October 1, 1950. The international legal personality of West Berlin was of a limited nature. The city had its own diplomatic and consular corps, accredited to the respective authorities of the US, British and French governments. The USSR, with the consent of the governments of these countries, established the Consulate General. West Berlin had the right to participate in international negotiations, conclude agreements regarding communications, the telegraph, regulate the travel of permanent residents to various regions of the GDR, etc. Germany represented the western sectors of Berlin in international organizations and conferences.

The special status of West Berlin was canceled in 1990. In accordance with the Treaty on the final settlement with respect to Germany of September 12, 1990, the united Germany includes the territories of the GDR, the FRG and all of Berlin.

Vatican. In 1929, on the basis of the Lateran Treaty, signed by the papal representative Gaspari and the head of the Italian government, Mussolini, the "state" of the Vatican was artificially created (the treaty was revised in 1984). The creation of the Vatican was dictated by the desire of Italian fascism in its domestic and foreign policy to enlist the active support of the Catholic Church. In the preamble of the Lateran Treaty, the international legal status of the state "Vatican City" is defined as follows: in order to ensure absolute and explicit independence of the Holy See, guaranteeing indisputable sovereignty in the international arena, the need to create a "state" of Vatican City was revealed, recognizing in relation to the Holy See its full ownership , exclusive and absolute power and sovereign jurisdiction.

The main goal of the Vatican is to create conditions for independent government for the head of the Catholic Church. At the same time, the Vatican is an independent international personality. He maintains external relations with many states, establishes his permanent missions (embassies) in these states, headed by papal nuncios or internuncios (Article 14 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961). Delegations of the Vatican participate in the work of international organizations and conferences. It is a member of a number of intergovernmental organizations (IAEA, ITU, UPU, etc.), has permanent observers at the UN, JSC, UNESCO and other organizations.

At the same time, the Vatican is not a state in the social sense as a mechanism for managing a certain society, generated by it and representing it. Rather, it can be seen as the administrative center of the Catholic Church.

According to the Basic Law (Constitution) of the Vatican, the right to represent the state belongs to the head of the Catholic Church - the pope. At the same time, it is necessary to distinguish between the agreements concluded by the pope as the head of the church on church affairs (concordats), from the secular agreements that he concludes on behalf of the state of the Vatican.

State-like entities have territory, sovereignty, have their own citizenship, legislative assembly, government, international treaties. These, in particular, are free cities, the Vatican and the Order of Malta.

free city is called a city-state with internal self-government and some international legal personality. One of the first such cities was Veliky Novgorod. In the 19th and 20th centuries the status of free cities was determined by international legal acts or resolutions of the League of Nations and the UN General Assembly and other organizations.

The scope of international legal personality of free cities was determined by international agreements and constitutions of such cities. The latter were not states or trust territories, but occupied, as it were, an intermediate position. Free cities did not have full self-government. However, they were subject only to international law. For residents of free cities, a special citizenship was created. Many cities had the right to conclude international treaties and join international organizations. The guarantors of the status of free cities were either a group of states or international organizations.

This category historically included the Free City of Krakow (1815-1846), the Free State of Danzig (now Gdansk) (1920-1939), and in the post-war period the Free Territory of Trieste (1947-1954) and, to a certain extent, West Berlin, which enjoyed a special status established in 1971 by the Quadripartite Agreement of the USSR, USA, Great Britain, France.

Vatican. In 1929, on the basis of the Lateran Treaty, signed by the papal representative Gaspari and the head of the Italian government, Mussolini, the “state” of the Vatican was artificially created. In the preamble of the Lateran Treaty, the international legal status of the state "Vatican City" is defined as follows: in order to ensure absolute and explicit independence of the Holy See, guaranteeing indisputable sovereignty in the international arena, the need to create a "state" of Vatican City was revealed, recognizing in relation to the Holy See its full ownership , exclusive and absolute power and sovereign jurisdiction.

The main goal of the Vatican is to create conditions for independent government for the head of the Catholic Church. At the same time, the Vatican is an independent international personality. He maintains external relations with many states, establishes his permanent representations (embassies) in these states, headed by papal nuncios or internuncios. Delegations of the Vatican participate in the work of international organizations and conferences. It is a member of a number of intergovernmental organizations, has permanent observers at the UN and other organizations.

According to the Basic Law (Constitution) of the Vatican, the right to represent the state belongs to the head of the Catholic Church - the pope. At the same time, it is necessary to distinguish between the agreements concluded by the pope as the head of the Catholic Church on church affairs (concordats), from the secular agreements that he concludes on behalf of the state of the Vatican.

Order of Malta. The official name is the Sovereign Military Order of the Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem, Rhodes and Malta.

After the loss of territorial sovereignty and statehood on the island of Malta in 1798, the Order, reorganized with the support of Russia, settled in Italy from 1834, where the rights of sovereign formation and international legal personality were confirmed to it. Currently, the Order maintains official and diplomatic relations with 81 states, including Russia, is represented by an observer in the UN, and also has its official representatives at UNESCO, the ICRC and the Council of Europe.

The headquarters of the Order in Rome enjoys immunity, and the head of the Order, the Grand Master, has the immunities and privileges inherent in the head of state.

6. Recognition of states: concept, grounds, forms and types.

International legal recognition- this is an act of the state, which states the emergence of a new subject of international law and with which this subject considers it appropriate to establish diplomatic and other relations based on international law.

Recognition usually takes the form of a state or group of states addressing the government of the emerging state and declaring the extent and nature of its relationship with the newly emerged state. Such a statement, as a rule, is accompanied by an expression of a desire to establish diplomatic relations with the recognized state and to exchange representations.

Recognition does not create a new subject of international law. It can be complete, final and official. This type of recognition is called de jure recognition. Inconclusive recognition is called de facto.

De facto (actual) recognition takes place in cases where the recognizing state does not have confidence in the strength of the recognized subject of international law, and also when it (the subject) considers itself a temporary entity. This type of recognition can be implemented, for example, through the participation of recognized entities in international conferences, multilateral treaties, international organizations. De facto recognition, as a rule, does not entail the establishment of diplomatic relations. Trade, financial and other relations are established between the states, but there is no exchange of diplomatic missions.

De jure (official) recognition is expressed in official acts, such as resolutions of intergovernmental organizations, final documents of international conferences, government statements, etc. This type of recognition is realized, as a rule, through the establishment of diplomatic relations, the conclusion of agreements on political, economic, cultural and other issues.

Ad-hock recognition is temporary or one-time recognition, recognition for a given occasion, a given purpose.

The grounds for the formation of a new state, which will subsequently be recognized, may be as follows: a) a social revolution that led to the replacement of one social system by another; b) the formation of states in the course of the national liberation struggle, when the peoples of the former colonial and dependent countries created independent states; c) the merger of two or more states or the separation of one state into two or more.

The recognition of a new state does not affect the rights acquired by it prior to its recognition by virtue of the laws in force. In other words, the legal consequence of international recognition is the recognition of legal force behind the laws and regulations of the recognized state.

Recognition comes from an authority competent under public law to declare recognition of the state concerned.

Types of recognition: recognition of governments, recognition as a belligerent and rebellion.

Recognition is usually addressed to the newly emerged state. But recognition can also be granted to the government of a state when it comes to power in an unconstitutional way - as a result of a civil war, a coup, etc. There are no established criteria for recognizing such governments. It is usually assumed that the recognition of the government is justified if it effectively exercises power on the territory of the state, controls the situation in the country, pursues a policy of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, respects the rights of foreigners, expresses readiness for a peaceful settlement of the conflict, if any takes place inside country, and declares its readiness to comply with international obligations.

Recognition as a belligerent and rebellion is, as it were, a preliminary recognition aimed at establishing contacts with a recognized subject. This recognition assumes that the recognizing state proceeds from the existence of a state of war and considers it necessary to observe the rules of neutrality in relation to the belligerents.

7. Succession of states: concept, sources and types.

International succession there is a transfer of rights and obligations from one subject of international law to another as a result of the emergence or cessation of the existence of a state or a change in its territory.

The question of succession arises in the following cases: a) in case of territorial changes - the disintegration of the state into two or more states; the merger of states or the entry of the territory of one state into another; b) during social revolutions; c) in determining the provisions of the mother countries and the formation of new independent states.

The successor State inherits essentially all the international rights and obligations of its predecessors. Of course, third states also inherit these rights and obligations.

Currently, the main issues of State succession are settled in two universal treaties: the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States in respect of Treaties of 1978 and the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States in respect of State Property, Public Archives and Public Debts of 1983.

Issues of succession of other subjects of international law are not regulated in detail. They are permitted on the basis of special agreements.

Types of succession:

Succession of states in relation to international treaties;

Succession in relation to state property;

Succession to State Archives;

Succession in respect of public debts.

Succession of States in relation to international treaties. According to Art. 17 of the 1978 Convention, a newly independent State may, by notification of succession, establish its status as a party to any multilateral treaty which, at the time of the succession of States, was in force in respect of the territory that was the object of the succession of States. This requirement shall not apply if it is clear from the treaty or otherwise established that the application of that treaty to a newly independent state would be inconsistent with the object and purpose of that treaty or would fundamentally change the terms of its operation. If the participation in a multilateral treaty of any other state requires the consent of all its participants, then the newly independent state can establish its status as a party to this treaty only with such consent.

By making a notification of succession, the newly independent State may - if permitted by the treaty - express its consent to be bound by only part of the treaty or choose between its various provisions.

Notice of succession to a multilateral treaty shall be made in writing.

A bilateral treaty that is the subject of a succession of states is considered to be in force between a newly independent state and another participating state when: (a) they have expressly agreed to do so, or (b) by virtue of their conduct, they must be deemed to have so agreed.

Succession to state property. The transfer of state property of the predecessor state entails the termination of the rights of this state and the emergence of the rights of the successor state to state property, which passes to the successor state. The date of transfer of state property of the predecessor state is the moment of succession of the state. As a rule, the transfer of state property occurs without compensation.

According to Art. 14 of the 1983 Vienna Convention, in the event of the transfer of a part of the territory of a state to another state, the transfer of state property from the predecessor state to the successor state is governed by an agreement between them. In the absence of such an agreement, the transfer of part of the territory of a State can be resolved in two ways: a) the immovable State property of the predecessor State located in the territory that is the object of the succession of States passes to the successor State; b) movable state property of the predecessor state related to the activities of the predecessor state in relation to the territory that is the object of succession passes to the successor state.

When two or more states unite and thereby form one successor state, the state property of the predecessor states passes to the successor state.

If the state is divided and ceases to exist and parts of the territory of the predecessor state form two or more successor states, the immovable state property of the predecessor state shall pass to the successor state in whose territory it is located. If the immovable property of the predecessor state is located outside its territory, then it passes to the successor states in fair shares. The movable State property of the predecessor State connected with the activities of the predecessor State in respect of the territories that are the object of the succession of States shall pass to the respective successor State. Other movable property shall pass to the successor states in fair shares.

Succession to State Archives. According to Art. 20 of the 1983 Vienna Convention, “Public archives of the predecessor State” is a collection of documents of any age and kind, produced or acquired by the predecessor State in the course of its activities, which, at the time of the succession of the state, belonged to the predecessor State in accordance with its internal law and were kept by it directly or under his control as archives for various purposes.

The date of transition of the state archives of the predecessor state is the moment of succession of states. The transfer of state archives takes place without compensation.

The predecessor state is under an obligation to take all measures to prevent damage to or destruction of state archives.

When the successor state is a new independent state, the archives belonging to the territory that is the object of the succession of states shall pass to the new independent state.

If two or more states merge and form one successor state, the state archives of the predecessor states shall pass to the successor state.

In the event of a division of a state into two or more successor states, and unless the respective successor states otherwise agree, part of the state archives located on the territory of that successor state shall pass to that successor state.

Succession in respect of public debts. Public debt means any financial obligation of a predecessor state towards another state, international organization or any other subject of international law, arising in accordance with international law. The date of transition of debts is the moment of succession of states.

When part of the territory of a state is transferred by that state to another state, the transfer of the public debt of the predecessor state to the successor state is governed by an agreement between them. In the absence of such an agreement, the public debt of the predecessor State passes to the successor State in an equitable share, taking into account, in particular, the property, rights and interests that pass to the successor State in connection with this public debt.

If the successor state is a newly independent state, no public debt of the predecessor state shall pass to the new independent state, unless an agreement between them provides otherwise.

When two or more states unite and thereby form one successor state, the national debt of the predecessor states passes to the successor state.

If, on the other hand, a State is divided and ceases to exist, and parts of the territory of the predecessor State form two or more successor States, and unless the successor States otherwise agree, the public debt of the predecessor State shall pass to the successor States in equitable shares, taking into account, in particular, , property, rights and interests that pass to the successor state in connection with the surrendered public debt.

Only the presence of all three of the above elements (possession of rights and obligations arising from international legal norms; existence in the form of a collective entity; direct participation in the creation of international legal norms) gives, in my opinion, reason to consider this or that entity a full-fledged subject of international law . The absence of at least one of the listed qualities in the subject does not allow us to speak about the possession of international legal personality in the exact meaning of the word.

Basic rights and obligations characterize the general international legal status of all subjects of international law. The rights and obligations inherent in subjects of a certain type (states, international organizations, etc.) form special international legal statuses for this category of subjects. The totality of the rights and obligations of a particular subject forms the individual international legal status of this subject.

Thus, the legal status of various subjects of international law is not the same, since the scope of international norms that apply to them and, accordingly, the range of international legal relations in which they participate are different.

International legal personality of states

It must be borne in mind that not all, but only a limited number of nations can (and do) have international legal personality in the proper sense of the word - nations that are not registered as states, but strive to create them in accordance with international law.

Thus, practically any nation can potentially become the subject of legal relations of self-determination. However, the right of peoples to self-determination was fixed in order to combat colonialism and its consequences, and as an anti-colonial norm, it fulfilled its task.

At present, another aspect of the right of nations to self-determination is acquiring special significance. Today we are talking about the development of a nation that has already freely determined its political status. In the current conditions, the principle of the right of nations to self-determination must be harmonized, consistent with other principles of international law and, in particular, with the principle of respect for state sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of other states. In other words, it is no longer necessary to talk about the right of all (!) nations to international legal personality, but about the right of a nation that has received its statehood to develop without outside interference.

Thus, the sovereignty of a struggling nation is characterized by the fact that it does not depend on its recognition as a subject of international law by other states; the rights of a struggling nation are protected by international law; a nation, in its own name, has the right to apply coercive measures against violators of its sovereignty.

International legal personality of international organizations

A separate group of subjects of international law is formed by international organizations. We are talking about international intergovernmental organizations, i.e. organizations created by the primary subjects of international law.

Non-governmental international organizations, such as the World Federation of Trade Unions, Amnesty International, etc., are established, as a rule, by legal entities and individuals (groups of individuals) and are public associations “with a foreign element”. The statutes of these organizations, unlike the statutes of interstate organizations, are not international treaties. True, non-governmental organizations may have a consultative international legal status in intergovernmental organizations, for example, in the UN and its specialized agencies. Thus, the Inter-Parliamentary Union has the status of the first category in the UN Economic and Social Council. However, non-governmental organizations do not have the right to create norms of international law and, therefore, cannot, unlike intergovernmental organizations, have all the elements of international legal personality.

International intergovernmental organizations do not have sovereignty, do not have their own population, their territory, other attributes of the state. They are created by sovereign entities on a contractual basis in accordance with international law and are endowed with a certain competence, fixed in the founding documents (primarily in the charter). The 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties applies to the constituent documents of international organizations.

The charter of the organization defines the goals of its formation, provides for the creation of a certain organizational structure (acting bodies), and establishes their competence. The presence of permanent organs of the organization ensures the autonomy of its will; international organizations participate in international communication on their own behalf and not on behalf of their member states. In other words, the organization has its own (albeit non-sovereign) will, different from the will of the member states. At the same time, the legal personality of the organization is functional in nature, i.e. it is limited by statutory goals and objectives. In addition, all international organizations are required to comply with the basic principles of international law, and the activities of regional international organizations must be consistent with the purposes and principles of the UN.

The fundamental rights of international organizations are as follows:

• the right to participate in the creation of international legal norms;
• the right of the organization's bodies to exercise certain powers of authority, including the right to make binding decisions;
• the right to enjoy the privileges and immunities granted to both the organization and its employees;
• the right to consider disputes between participants, and in some cases with states not participating in this organization.

International legal personality of state-like entities

Some political-territorial formations also enjoy international legal status. Among them were the so-called. Free Cities, West Berlin. This category of entities includes the Vatican and the Order of Malta. Since these formations are most like mini-states and have almost all the features of a state, they are called "state-like formations".

The legal capacity of free cities was determined by the relevant international treaties. Thus, according to the provisions of the Vienna Treaty of 1815, Krakow was declared a free city (1815-1846). According to the Versailles Peace Treaty of 1919, Danzig (1920-1939) enjoyed the status of a "free state", and in accordance with the peace treaty with Italy in 1947, the creation of the Free Territory of Trieste was envisaged, which, however, was never created.

West Berlin (1971-1990) had a special status granted by the quadripartite agreement on West Berlin in 1971. In accordance with this agreement, the western sectors of Berlin were united into a special political entity with their own authorities (Senate, prosecutor's office, court, etc.), to which some of the powers were transferred, for example, the issuance of regulations. A number of powers were exercised by the allied authorities of the victorious powers. The interests of the population of West Berlin in international relations were represented and defended by consular officials of the FRG.

The Vatican City is a city-state located within the capital of Italy, Rome. Here is the residence of the head of the Catholic Church - the Pope. The legal status of the Vatican is determined by the Lateran Agreements signed between the Italian state and the Holy See on February 11, 1929, which are basically still in force today. In accordance with this document, the Vatican enjoys certain sovereign rights: it has its own territory, legislation, citizenship, etc. The Vatican actively participates in international relations, establishes permanent missions in other states (there is also a representative office of the Vatican in Russia), headed by papal nuncios (ambassadors), participates in international organizations, in conferences, signs international treaties, etc.

The Order of Malta is a religious formation with its administrative center in Rome. The Order of Malta actively participates in international relations, concludes agreements, exchanges representations with states, has observer missions in the UN, UNESCO and a number of other international organizations.

International legal status of subjects of the federation

In international practice, as well as foreign international legal doctrine, it is recognized that the subjects of some federations are independent states, whose sovereignty is limited by joining the federation. The subjects of the federation are recognized to have the right to act in international relations within the framework established by federal legislation.

The international activity of subjects of foreign federations develops in the following main directions: the conclusion of international agreements; opening representative offices in other states; participation in the activities of some international organizations.

The question arises whether there are norms in international law on the international legal personality of subjects of the federation?

As is known, the most important element of international legal personality is contractual legal capacity. It represents the right to directly participate in the creation of international legal norms and is inherent in any subject of international law from the moment of its inception.

The issues of concluding, executing and terminating treaties by states are regulated primarily by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969. Neither the 1969 Convention nor other international documents provide for the possibility of independent conclusion of international treaties by subjects of the federation.

Generally speaking, international law does not contain a ban on the establishment of contractual relations between states and subjects of federations and subjects among themselves. However, international law does not classify these agreements as international treaties, just as contracts between the state and a large foreign enterprise are not. In order to be a subject of the law of international treaties, it is not enough to be a party to an international agreement. It is also necessary to have the legal capacity to conclude international treaties.

The question arises about the international legal status of the subjects of the Russian Federation.

International legal status of subjects of the Russian Federation

However, the processes of sovereignization that engulfed the newly independent states raised the question of the legal personality of the former national-state (autonomous republics) and administrative-territorial (regions, territories) formations. This problem acquired special significance with the adoption of the new Constitution of the Russian Federation in 1993 and the conclusion of the Federal Treaty. Today, some subjects of the Russian Federation have declared their international legal personality.

The subjects of the Russian Federation try to act independently in international relations, conclude agreements with the subjects of foreign federations and administrative-territorial units, exchange representations with them and fix the relevant provisions in their legislation. The charter of the Voronezh region of 1995, for example, recognizes that the organizational and legal forms of the region's international relations are forms generally accepted in international practice, with the exception of treaties (agreements) of the interstate level. Taking part in international and foreign economic relations on its own or with other subjects of the Russian Federation, the Voronezh Region opens representative offices on the territory of foreign states to represent the interests of the region, which act in accordance with the legislation of the host country.

The normative acts of some constituent entities of the Russian Federation provide for the possibility of them concluding international treaties on their own behalf. Yes, Art. 8 of the 1995 Charter of the Voronezh Region establishes that international treaties of the Voronezh Region are part of the region's legal system. Norms of a similar content are fixed in Art. 6 of the Charter of the Sverdlovsk Region 1994, art. 45 of the Charter (Basic Law) of the Stavropol Territory of 1994, Art. 20 of the Charter of the Irkutsk region of 1995 and other charters of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, as well as in the constitutions of the republics (Article 61 of the Constitution of the Republic of Tatarstan).

Moreover, in some constituent entities of the Russian Federation, regulations have been adopted that regulate the procedure for concluding, executing and terminating contracts, for example, the law of the Tyumen region “On international agreements of the Tyumen region and treaties of the Tyumen region with the constituent entities of the Russian Federation” was adopted in 1995. The law of the Voronezh region “On legal normative acts of the Voronezh region" 1995 establishes (Article 17) that the state authorities of the region have the right to conclude agreements that are regulatory legal acts with the state authorities of the Russian Federation, with the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, with foreign states on issues representing their common, mutual interest.

However, the statements of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation about their international contractual legal capacity do not yet mean, in my deep conviction, the existence of this legal quality in reality. It is necessary to analyze the relevant norms of legislation.

Federal legislation does not address this issue yet.

According to the Constitution of the Russian Federation (clause “o”, part 1, article 72), the coordination of international and foreign economic relations of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation belongs to the joint jurisdiction of the Russian Federation and the constituent entities of the Federation. However, the Constitution does not directly speak about the possibility of the subjects of the Russian Federation to conclude agreements that would be international treaties. The Federal Treaty does not contain such norms either.

The Federal Law "On International Treaties of the Russian Federation" of 1995 also refers the conclusion of international treaties of the Russian Federation to the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation. It has been established that the international treaties of the Russian Federation concerning issues related to the jurisdiction of the subjects of the Federation are concluded in agreement with the relevant bodies of the subjects. At the same time, the main provisions of agreements affecting issues of joint jurisdiction should be sent for submission of proposals to the relevant bodies of the subject of the federation, which, however, do not have the right to veto the conclusion of the agreement. The 1995 law does not say anything about the agreements of the subjects of the Federation.

It should also be taken into account that neither the Constitution of the Russian Federation nor the Federal Constitutional Law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation” dated July 21, 1994 fix the norms on checking the constitutionality of international treaties of the subjects of the Federation, although such a procedure is provided for international treaties of the Russian Federation.

In Art. 27 of the Federal Constitutional Law "On the Judicial System of the Russian Federation" of December 31, 1996, which establishes the competence of the constitutional (charter) courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, among the legal acts that may be the subject of consideration in these courts, international treaties of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation are also not named.

Perhaps the only norm of federal legislation that indicates that the constituent entities of the Russian Federation have elements of contractual legal capacity is contained in Art. 8 of the Federal Law "On State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activities" of 1995, according to which the subjects of the Russian Federation have the right, within their competence, to conclude agreements in the field of foreign trade relations with subjects of foreign federal states, administrative-territorial formations of foreign states.

However, the provisions on the recognition of certain elements of international legal personality for the subjects of the Russian Federation are enshrined in many treaties on the delimitation of powers.

Thus, the Treaty of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Tatarstan dated February 15, 1994 "On the delimitation of subjects of jurisdiction and mutual delegation of powers between the state authorities of the Russian Federation and the state authorities of the Republic of Tatarstan" provides that the state authorities of the Republic of Tatarstan participate in international relations, establish relations with foreign states and conclude agreements with them that do not contradict the Constitution and international obligations of the Russian Federation, the Constitution of the Republic of Tatarstan and this Treaty, participate in the activities of relevant international organizations (clause 11, article II).

In accordance with Art. 13 of the Treaty on the delimitation of jurisdiction and powers between the state authorities of the Russian Federation and the state authorities of the Sverdlovsk region of January 12, 1996. The Sverdlovsk region has the right to act as an independent participant in international and foreign economic relations, if this does not contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal laws and international treaties of the Russian Federation , conclude relevant treaties (agreements) with subjects of foreign federative states, administrative-territorial formations of foreign states, as well as ministries and departments of foreign states.

As for the practice of exchanging representations with subjects of foreign federations, this quality is not the main one in characterizing international legal personality, however, we note that neither the Constitution nor the legislation of the Russian Federation has yet regulated this issue. These representative offices are not opened on the basis of reciprocity and are accredited by any authority of a subject of a foreign federation or territorial unit. These bodies, being foreign legal entities, do not have the status of diplomatic or consular missions and are not subject to the provisions of the relevant conventions on diplomatic and consular relations.

The same can be said about the membership of the subjects of the Russian Federation in international organizations. It is known that the statutes of some international organizations (UNESCO, WHO, etc.) allow membership in them of entities that are not independent states. However, firstly, membership in these organizations of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation has not yet been formalized, and, secondly, this sign, as already mentioned, is far from the most important in characterizing the subjects of international law.

Given the above, we can draw the following conclusion: although at present the subjects of the Russian Federation do not fully possess all the elements of international legal personality, there is a tendency for the development of their legal personality and their registration as subjects of international law. In my opinion, this issue needs to be resolved in federal legislation.

International legal status of individuals

The problem of the international legal personality of individuals has a long tradition in the legal literature. Western scholars have long recognized the quality of an international legal personality for an individual, arguing their position with references to the possibility of bringing individuals to international responsibility, applying to international bodies for the protection of their rights. In addition, individuals in the countries of the European Union have the right to file claims with the European Court of Justice. After the ratification in 1998 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, individuals in Russia can also apply to the European Commission on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights.

For ideological reasons, Soviet lawyers denied for a long time that an individual had an international legal personality. However, in the late 80s. and in the domestic international legal literature, works began to appear in which individuals began to be considered as subjects of international law. At present, the number of scientists who share this point of view is constantly increasing.

In my opinion, the answer to the question whether an individual is a subject of international law depends on what characteristics this subject, in our opinion, should have.

If we consider that the subject of international law is a person who is subject to international legal norms, which these norms endow with subjective rights and obligations, then the individual is certainly a subject of international law. There are many international legal norms that can directly guide individuals (1966 Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1949 Geneva Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, Additional Protocols I and II to them 1977 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, etc.).

However, the concepts and categories of international law, as already noted, are not always identical to the concepts of domestic law. And if we believe that the subject of international law not only has the rights and obligations arising from international legal norms, but is also a collective entity, and, most importantly, takes a direct part in the creation of international law norms, then the individual is classified as a subject of international law it is forbidden.

International organizations

Only international intergovernmental organizations are derivative (secondary) subjects of international law. Non-governmental international organizations do not possess this quality.

Unlike the legal personality of states, the legal personality of international intergovernmental organizations is functional in nature, since it is limited by the competence, as well as the goals and objectives defined by the founding document.

Often, international organizations are recognized as entitled to "implied powers", i.e., those that the organization is entitled to exercise in order to implement statutory functions, but which are not spelled out in the statute. This concept can be accepted if it implies the consent of the members of the organization.

In addition to intergovernmental organizations, other international bodies may also be subjects of international law. So, in accordance with Art. 4 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court of July 17, 1998, the said court has international legal personality. Naturally, the legal personality of the International Criminal Court is limited compared to that of intergovernmental organizations. The International Criminal Court shall have such international legal personality as is necessary for the implementation of the purposes and tasks within its competence.

Nations (peoples) fighting for independence

If a nation (people) begins a struggle for independence and creates liberation organs that effectively manage and control a significant part of the people and territory, ensure compliance with the norms of the International Law during the struggle, and also represent the people in the international arena, then they can be recognized as /d legal objectivity.

The belligerent is the National Committee of the Fighting France, later the French Committee of National Liberation, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).

State-like formations

The state-like formations include the Vatican (Holy See).

The State of the Vatican is a special entity created in accordance with the Lateran Treaty between Italy and the Holy See of February 11, 1929 and endowed with some features of statehood, which means a purely formal expression of the autonomy and independence of the Vatican in world affairs.

It is now generally accepted that the Holy See is a subject of international law. It received such recognition from the international community due to its international prestige as an independent leading center of the Catholic Church, uniting all the Catholics of the world and actively participating in world politics.

It is with the Vatican (Holy See), and not with the state-city of the Vatican, that 165 countries of the world maintain diplomatic and official relations, including the Russian Federation (since 1990) and almost all CIS countries. The Vatican participates in many bilateral and multilateral international agreements. Has the status of an official observer in the UN, UNESCO, FAO, is a member of the OSCE. Vatican concludes special international treaties- concordats that regulate the relationship of the Catholic Church with state authorities, has ambassadors in many countries called nuncios.

In the international legal literature, one can come across the assertion that the Sovereign Military Order of St. John of Jerusalem, Rhodes and Malta (Order of Malta).

After the loss of territorial sovereignty and statehood on the island of Malta in 1798, the Order, reorganized with the support of Russia, settled in Italy from 1844, where its rights of sovereign formation and international legal personality were confirmed. Currently, the Order maintains official and diplomatic relations with 81 states, including the Russian Federation, is represented by an observer in the UN, and also has its official representatives at UNESCO, FAO, the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Council of Europe.

The headquarters of the Order in Rome enjoys immunity, and the head of the Order, the Grand Master, has the immunities and privileges inherent in the head of state.

However, the Order of Malta is, by its very nature, an international non-governmental organization engaged in charitable activities. The preservation of the term "sovereign" in the name of the Order is a historical anachronism, since only the state has the property of sovereignty. Rather, this term in the name of the Order of Malta from the point of view of modern international legal science means “independent” than “sovereign”.

Therefore, the Order of Malta is not considered a subject of international law, despite such attributes of statehood as the maintenance of diplomatic relations and the possession of immunities and privileges.

The history of international relations also knows other state-like entities that had internal self-government and some rights in the field of international relations. Most often, such formations are temporary in nature and arise as a result of the unsettled territorial claims of various countries to each other. This category historically included the Free City of Krakow (1815-1846), the Free State of Danzig (now Gdansk) (1920-1939), and in the post-war period the Free Territory of Trieste (1947-1954) and, to a certain extent, degree, West Berlin, which enjoyed a special status established in 1971 by a quadripartite agreement between the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France.

Subjects of federal states

Components international legal status republics, regions, territories and other constituent entities of the Russian Federation are embodied in the Federal Law of January 4, 1999 "On the coordination of international foreign economic relations of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation." First of all, the constitutional right of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, within the limits of the powers granted to them, to carry out international and foreign economic relations, that is, the right to relations that go beyond the domestic framework, is confirmed and concretized. Subjects have the right to maintain relations with subjects of foreign federative states, administrative-territorial formations of foreign states, and with the consent of the Government of the Russian Federation - with public authorities of foreign states. It also provides for the right to participate in the activities of international organizations within the framework of bodies created specifically for this purpose. Relationships of entities with foreign partners, according to the Law, can be carried out in trade and economic, scientific and technical, economic, humanitarian, cultural and other fields. In the process of this activity, the constituent entities of the Russian Federation have the right to negotiate with these foreign partners and to conclude agreements with them on the implementation of international and foreign economic relations. Such agreements are concluded primarily with equal-level contractors - with members (subjects) of foreign federal states and with administrative-territorial units of unitary countries. At the same time, the practice of interrelations with the central bodies of foreign states remains.

At the same time, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, in its decision of June 27, 2000, confirmed its legal position that "the republic cannot be a subject of international law as a sovereign state and a participant in the relevant interstate relations ...". When interpreting this provision, let us assume that the emphasis is precisely on the denial of the sovereign status of the republic, which means the recognition and implementation of international and foreign economic relations (relations) not based on sovereignty with certain counterparties specified in the Federal Law of January 4, 1999 No.

Individuals

In some textbooks abroad and in Russia, it is stated that the subjects of MT are individuals. Usually, the human rights situation is cited as an argument. The peremptory norms of the IL enshrined all fundamental human rights. International courts of human rights have been established. Every person in connection with the violation of his rights can now file a complaint against his own state with an international court.

In fact, all international legal acts on human rights issues regulate this issue not directly, but through interstate cooperation. International acts establish the rights and obligations of states as subjects of international law, and only then the states provide or are obliged to ensure the relevant rights in their internal law.

Human rights is one of the examples of how modern international law concentrates on regulating not the behavior of the subjects of international law, but on internal legal regimes. In this case, on the domestic legal regime concerning human rights. The norms of international law are increasingly affecting the internal legal regimes of states, whether in the sphere of economic, financial or constitutional, administrative, criminal.

That is why it can be argued that the subject of regulation through the MT are two large groups of interstate relations: a) relations between the subjects of the MT regarding their behavior in the international system; b) relations between the subjects of the MT regarding their internal legal regimes. And the emphasis in international legal regulation is gradually shifting to the second group of interstate relations.

Therefore, we can talk about strengthening the mutual interweaving of the MP and domestic law with the primacy of the MP. The unity of domestic law and IL is called Global Law.

Only if one looks at any legal problem in the light of Global Law (ie, a complex of domestic and international law), one can assume that the subjects of Global Law are both public persons and private persons.

Individuals can be recognized as a subject of the MP, if only the states themselves recognize them as such. However, there are no international acts on the basis of which it would be possible to draw a conclusion about the international legal personality of individuals. Recognition of an individual as a subject of international law would mean that we are already dealing with some other (non-international) law. This "other right" is the Global right.

A manifestation of Global Law can be considered, for example, the presence in the International Criminal Law of an individual for crimes against the peace and security of mankind, the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, etc. In these cases, it is recognized that international legal norms can give rise to rights and obligations for individuals directly directly and not through states.