Legal personality of international (intergovernmental) organizations and state-like entities. International legal personality of other participants in international relations (TNCs, INGOs, individuals, humanity), including state-like institutions
To the category of derived subjects international law It is customary to refer to special political-religious or political-territorial units that, on the basis of an international act or international recognition, have a relatively independent international legal status.
Such political-religious and political-territorial units in international law are called state-like entities.
State-like entities (quasi-states) - special kind subjects of international law that have some characteristics (features) of states, but are not such in the generally accepted sense.
They are endowed with the appropriate scope of rights and obligations and thereby become subjects of international law.
K.K. Hasanov identifies the following characteristics of state-like entities:
1) territory;
2) permanent population;
3) citizenship;
4) legislative bodies;
5) government;
6) international treaties.
The question arises: why are state-like entities not among the primary ones?
The answer to this question is given by R.M. Valeev: state-like entities do not have such a property as sovereignty, since, firstly, their population is not a people, but a part of a nation or representatives of various nations; secondly, their international legal capacity is severely limited; they do not have real independence in the international sphere. The emergence of such entities is based on international acts (treaties).
In the historical aspect, state-like entities include the “free cities”, West Berlin, and currently the most striking examples are the Vatican and the Order of Malta.
The Free City is a self-governing political entity, which has been granted international legal status by an international treaty, allowing it to participate mainly in economic, administrative and cultural international legal relations.
The creation of a free city, as historical experience shows, is usually the result of a settlement controversial issue about its belonging to one state or another.
In 1815, to resolve contradictions between the great powers, the Treaty of Vienna declared Krakow a free city under the auspices of Russia, Austria and Prussia. In 1919, they tried to resolve the dispute between Germany and Poland regarding Danzig (Gdansk) by granting it the status of a free city under the guarantee of the League of Nations. The city's external relations were carried out by Poland.
To resolve the claims of Italy and Yugoslavia regarding Trieste, the Statute of the Free Territory of Trieste was developed. The territory had to have a constitution, citizenship, a people's assembly, and a government. At the same time, the constitution and government activities had to comply with the Statute, i.e. international legal act. In 1954, Italy and Yugoslavia divided the territory of Trieste between themselves.
state-like entity international law
Therefore, the highest legal act for it, as mentioned above, is an international treaty, which determines the special international legal personality of the city.
West Berlin had a unique international legal status in accordance with the Quadripartite Agreement of the USSR, Great Britain, the USA and France of September 3, 1971. These states retained the special rights they assumed after the surrender of Nazi Germany, and then in the conditions of the existence of two German states rights and responsibilities in relation to West Berlin, which maintained official relations with the GDR and the Federal Republic of Germany. The GDR government entered into a number of agreements with the West Berlin Senate. The German government represented the interests of West Berlin in international organizations and at conferences, and provided consular services to its permanent residents. The USSR established a consulate general in West Berlin. Due to the reunification of Germany, formalized by the Treaty of the Final Settlement concerning Germany of 12 September 1990, the rights and responsibilities of the Four Powers regarding West Berlin ceased as it became part of the unified Federal Republic of Germany.
The question of the international legal personality of the Vatican and the Order of Malta has a certain specificity. We will consider them in more detail in the following paragraphs of this chapter.
Thus, state-like entities should be classified as derivative subjects of international law, since their legal personality is the result of the intentions and activities of primary subjects of international law.
GPO is a special political-religious, historical or political-territorial unit, which, on the basis of an international act or international recognition, has a relatively independent international legal status. General terms (general concepts) for denoting civil defense are free cities or free territories, free territories or zones.
GPOs are full-fledged subjects of international law; they receive their international legal personality by the direct expression of the will of states. These are self-governing entities that have been granted international legal status on the basis of a treaty. GPO has the right to participate in international public legal relations. The highest legal act for a GPO is an international treaty or an act of an international organization, which determines its special international legal personality.
The creation of the state public organization is predetermined by objective factors international order. Typically this is one of the most effective ways freezing territorial claims. Essentially, the GPO is a kind of state with limited legal capacity. May have its own constitution, government bodies, armed forces (but exclusively of a defensive nature). The creators of the GPO usually develop a mechanism for monitoring compliance with its status. On international level The GPO is represented either by the state concerned or by an international organization. Such representation is not obligatory - GPO has the right to independently participate in the conclusion of international agreements, exchange official representations with other states, and make international claims. In international organizations and international conferences usually have observer status.
In old international law there were quite a few a large number of free cities with special international status: Venice, Novgorod, Pskov, Hamburg, Krakow. Modern international law shows a tendency to narrow the range of such subjects. In 1918–1945 The free city of Danzig (now Gdansk), a disputed territory between Poland and Germany, had the status of a civil defense organization. Danzig received GPO status in order to freeze territorial claims in accordance with the provisions of the Versailles-Washington treaty system. In 1945, following the results of World War II, it was transferred to Poland.
In 1947–1954 The free territory of Trieste had the status of a state settlement - the subject of territorial disputes between Italy and Yugoslavia. Created on the basis of the Peace Treaty with Italy in 1947. Was under the protection of the UN Security Council. In 1954 it was peacefully divided between Italy and Yugoslavia.
In 1945–1990 West Berlin had a unique special international legal status (based on the Agreement between Great Britain, the USSR, the USA and France in 1971). These states had special rights and bore special responsibilities regarding the status of West Berlin. The German government represented the interests of West Berlin in international organizations and at international conferences, and provided consular services to its citizens. In 1990, after the reunification of Germany, the 1971 Agreement was terminated, since West Berlin became part of the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany.
In 1947, a UN General Assembly resolution was adopted that provided for a free city regime for Jerusalem, but this decision has not been implemented to this day. In 2005, the Vatican called global community Grant Jerusalem special status as a city under international protection.
Currently, the main GPO with a specific international legal status is the Vatican (Holy See). The Vatican is a city-state, residence, administrative center catholic church. It has been recognized as a city-state and a subject of international law since 1929 (based on the Treaty with Italy). It has a specific international legal personality - this is the legal personality of the Holy See, and not the Catholic Church as a whole.
The Vatican has almost all the external attributes of a state - territory, population, citizenship, and has its own authorities and administration. However, this is not a state in the sense of a social mechanism for managing society. This is the administrative center of the Catholic Church. The Vatican maintains diplomatic relations with more than 80 countries of the world (including the Russian Federation). The Vatican has observer status at the UN and is a member of many specialized institutions UN (IAEA, ILO, UPU, FAO, UNESCO). Participates in many universal multilateral conventions and bilateral treaties with states (concordats - agreements on the status of the Catholic Church in any state).
A Vatican passport is equivalent to a diplomatic one. To receive it, you need to become a cardinal or legate of the Pope. Citizens of the Vatican either live and work permanently in the Vatican itself, or are abroad on a diplomatic mission on Catholic Church affairs. The privilege of being a citizen of the Vatican depends on a direct and permanent relationship with the Papacy. When communication is interrupted, Vatican citizenship is lost. Only one person cannot break this connection until his death: the Pope. He has passport number one, he is the absolute ruler of the Vatican State and the sole authority of the Catholic Church.
The Holy See actively participates in international life and in the struggle for human rights. In 1965 it was adopted Nostra Aetate– Declaration of the Vatican renouncing the accusation that Jews are responsible for the crucifixion of Christ. In 2005, the head of Israel visited the Vatican, and in 2006, the Pope returned to Israel. At the VII Conference on the Revision of the Non-Proliferation Treaty nuclear weapons(2005) The Vatican's Permanent Representative to the UN noted that countries with nuclear weapons are not complying with their commitments to complete disarmament; The clandestine production of nuclear weapons is growing, which risks falling into the hands of terrorists.
The Order of Malta is another active GPO in modern world. This is an official historical and religious formation with internationally recognized charitable functions. The Order of Malta, first called the Order of San Juan, was created in 1050 in Palestine to assist travelers visiting the Holy Land. After the expulsion of the crusaders in 1187, the Knights of Malta were forced to wander around the Mediterranean countries until the Spanish monarch gave them the island of Malta. The Order of Malta was recognized as a subject of international law and sovereign at international congresses in Aachen in 1818, in Verona in 1822, and in negotiations with Greece in 1823–1828. and with Italy in 1912–1922. The official purpose of the Order of Malta is charitable and historical and archival activities. It has diplomatic relations with more than 80 countries of the world (including Russia). Pope Benedict XVI is a member of the Order of Malta.
The Order currently consists of six Grand Priories: in Rome, Venice, Sicily, Austria, Bohemia and England; three sub-priorities (united Silesia and Rhine-Westphalia, Ireland and Spain) and 54 national associations and order organizations (including in Russia). The Order has more than 10 thousand members and carries out more than 150 projects in 35 countries. Under the Grand Master of the Order, an Auxiliary Commission was created for the provision of medical and humanitarian aid. Several hundred hospitals of the Order are located throughout the world (the Order is one of the largest hospital organizations). It has observer status at the UN. Representatives of the Order participate in the work of the EU Commission, Council of Europe, UNESCO, FAO, IATA, UNIDO and others international organizations.
In 2004, an agreement was signed between the government of the Republic of Malta and the Sovereign Order of Malta to provide the Order with one of the fortresses on the territory of Malta as an extraterritorial headquarters. Having received its own territory, the Order of Malta became the smallest city-state in the world (after the Vatican).
State-like entities are not typical subjects of international law, since their number is unstable and there are often situations where such entities are absent in the international arena. However, this does not exclude the possibility of the emergence of new civil rights organizations in the modern world, primarily for the purpose of peaceful resolution of territorial disputes. It seems that at present it is advisable to give such a status to the Southern Kuril Islands.
International organizations
Only international intergovernmental organizations are classified as derivative (secondary) subjects of international law. Non-governmental international organizations do not have 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 constituent document.
International organizations are often recognized as having the right to “implied powers,” i.e., those that the organization has the right to exercise in order to implement its statutory functions, but which are not spelled out in the charter. This concept can be accepted if it implies the agreement of the organization's members.
In addition to intergovernmental organizations, subjects of international law may also be other international bodies. 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 has such international legal personality as is necessary to carry out the goals and objectives within its competence.
Nations (peoples) fighting for independence
If a nation (people) begins a struggle for independence and creates liberation bodies that effectively exercise management and control over a significant part of the people and territory, ensure compliance with the norms of international law during the struggle, and also represent the people in the international arena, then it can be recognized as a /d legal personality.
The belligerent party is National Committee"Fighting France", later - the French National Liberation Committee, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).
State-like entities
The Vatican (Holy See) is a state-like entity.
The Vatican State is a special entity created in accordance with the Lateran Treaty between Italy and the Holy See of February 11, 1929 and endowed with certain 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 authority as an independent leadership center of the Catholic Church, uniting all Catholics of the world and actively participating in world politics.
It is with the Vatican (Holy See), and not with the city state, that the Vatican maintains diplomatic and official relations 165 countries of the world, including the Russian Federation (since 1990) and almost all CIS countries. The Vatican participates in many bilateral and multilateral international agreements. Has official observer status at the UN, UNESCO, FAO, and is a member of the OSCE. Vatican concludes special international agreements- concordats that regulate the relationship of the Catholic Church with government authorities, has ambassadors in many countries called nuncios.
In the international legal literature one can find the statement that the Sovereign Military Order of St. has a certain international legal personality. 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 in 1844, where its rights as a sovereign entity and international legal personality were confirmed. Currently, the Order maintains official and diplomatic relations with 81 states, including the Russian Federation, is represented as an observer at the UN, and also has its official representatives at UNESCO, FAO, International Committee 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, in essence, 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” rather than “sovereign”.
Therefore, the Order of Malta is not considered a subject of international law, despite such attributes of statehood as maintaining diplomatic relations and possessing 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 consequence of the unsettled territorial claims of various countries against each other. It was this category that historically included the Free City of Krakow (1815-1846), the Free State of Danzig (now Gdansk) (1920-1939), and in post-war period Free Territory of Trieste (1947-1954) and, to a certain extent, 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 subjects of the Russian Federation are embodied in the Federal Law of January 4, 1999 “On the coordination of international foreign economic relations of subjects Russian Federation" First of all, the constitutional right of the subjects of the Russian Federation, within the powers granted to them, to carry out international and foreign economic relations has been confirmed and specified, i.e. the right to relations that go beyond the domestic framework. Subjects have the right to maintain connections with subjects of foreign federal states, administrative-territorial entities of foreign states, and with the consent of the Government of the Russian Federation - with bodies state power foreign states. The right to participate in the activities of international organizations within the framework of bodies created specifically for this purpose is also provided. Relations between entities and 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, subjects 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 counterparties - with members (subjects) of foreign federal states and with administrative-territorial units of unitary countries. At the same time, the practice of relations with central authorities of foreign states remains.
At the same time, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, in its ruling dated June 27, 2000, confirmed its legal position that “a republic cannot be a subject of international law as a sovereign state and a participant in relevant interstate relations...”. When interpreting this provision, it is permissible to focus specifically on the denial of the sovereign status of the republic, which means the recognition and implementation of international and foreign economic relations (ties) not based on sovereignty with certain counterparties specified in the Federal Law of January 4, 1999.
Individuals
Some textbooks abroad and in Russia state that the subjects of MP are individuals. The human rights situation is usually cited as an argument. The imperative norms of the MP enshrine all fundamental human rights. International human rights courts have been established. Every person with a connection to a violation of his rights can now file a complaint international Court a complaint against one's own state.
In fact, all international legal acts on human rights issues regulate this issue not directly, but through interstate cooperation. International instruments establish the rights and obligations of states as subjects of international law, and only then states provide or are obliged to ensure the corresponding rights in their domestic law.
Human rights are one example of how modern international law concentrates on regulating not the actual behavior of the subjects of international law, but on internal legal regimes. In this case, on the domestic legal regime concerning human rights. International law norms are increasingly influencing the internal legal regimes of states, be it in the economic, financial or constitutional, administrative, and criminal spheres.
That is why it can be argued that the subject of regulation through MP are two large groups interstate relations: a) relations between the subjects of international business regarding their behavior in the international system; b) relations between small business entities 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 the strengthening of the mutual interweaving of MP and internal law under the primacy of MP. The unity of domestic law and international law is called Global Law.
Only if we look at any legal problem in the light of Global Law (i.e., a complex of domestic and international law), can we assume that the subjects of Global Law are both public persons and private individuals.
Individuals can be recognized as an individual entrepreneur if only the states themselves recognize them as such. However, there are no international acts on the basis of which one could draw a conclusion about the international legal personality of individuals. Recognizing 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 Global Law.
A manifestation of Global Law can be considered, for example, the presence in international law of an individual’s criminal liability 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 the mediation of states.
The state becomes a subject of the international enterprise from the moment of its inception (ipso facto – due to the fact of its existence).
Features of the state as a subject of MP:
1) sovereignty, absolutely sovereign states No;
2) immunity - exemption from jurisdiction, applies to the state, its bodies, state property, and officials abroad. The state itself decides the issue of the scope of immunity; it can refuse in whole or in some part.
Concepts:
Absolute immunity – applies to all actions of the state;
Relative immunity - only for those actions that the state carries out as a sovereign, as a bearer of power. When the state acts as a private person, immunity does not apply (USA, South Africa, Singapore, UK). There are a number of international treaties adhering to this concept: the European Convention on State Immunity, the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to the Immunity of Merchant Ships.
Types of immunities:
a) Judicial immunity - the immunity of one state from another without its consent; prohibition of the use of measures to secure a claim, prohibition of forced execution court decision;
b) Immunity of state property - inviolability of property, prohibition of seizure, seizure, foreclosure;
c) Fiscal (tax) - state activities abroad are not subject to taxes or fees, except those that represent a fee for any service.
3) population - all persons who live in the territory of the state and are subject to its jurisdiction.
4) territory - in the MP it is considered as part of the geographical space, the significance of the state territory: the material basis for the existence of the population; scope of state law. The state territory includes land, subsoil, water space ( inland waters, archipelagic waters, territorial sea), air space over land and water. Limits are delineated state borders. Exist state territories with international regimes, for example, Spitsbergen is the territory of Norway.
5) the presence of a system of bodies responsible for the international relations of the state (external relations bodies).
External relations bodies:
a) domestic:
States provided for by the constitution: head of state, parliament, government;
States not provided for by the constitution: the department of foreign affairs, other bodies (for example, the ministry of foreign economic relations), bodies created to carry out certain international obligations– for example, NCB Interpol;
b) foreign:
Permanent: diplomatic missions, consular offices, trade and other special missions (for example, tourist), missions to international organizations (permanent missions or observer missions);
Temporary: special missions, delegations to conferences, meetings.
A special question of the MP is whether members of federal states are subjects of the MP? in particular, are they subjects of the Russian Federation?
An analysis of Russian legislation (Federal Law “On International Treaties of the Russian Federation”, “On the Coordination of International and Foreign Economic Relations of the Subjects of the Russian Federation”) allows us to draw a number of conclusions:
Subjects of the Russian Federation may enter into international agreements, but these agreements are not international treaties; and these agreements cannot be concluded without the permission of the Federation.
The Federation agrees on an international treaty with a subject of the Russian Federation if the agreement affects the territory of the subject, but the subject does not have a veto right.
Entities can be members of international organizations, but only those that allow membership of non-sovereign entities.
Thus, the subjects of the Russian Federation are not subjects of the MP.
35. State-like entities are subjects of international law.
State-like entities- derived subjects of international law. This term is a generalized concept, since it applies not only to cities, but also to certain areas. G.p.o. are created on the basis of an international treaty or a decision of an international organization and represent a kind of state with limited legal capacity. They have their own constitution or act of a similar nature, supreme state bodies, and citizenship. G.p.o. is, as a rule, demilitarized and neutralized. There are political-territorial (Danzig, Gdansk, West Berlin) and religious-territorial state-like entities (Vatican, Order of Malta). Currently, there are only religious-territorial state-like entities. Such entities have territory and sovereignty; have their own citizenship, legislative assembly, government, international treaties. Most often, such formations are temporary in nature and arise as a consequence of the unsettled territorial claims of various countries against each other.
What is common to political-territorial entities of this kind is that in almost all cases they were created on the basis of international agreements, usually 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 regulations, and have limited armed forces 1 .
Ö These are free cities in the past (Venice, Novgorod, Hamburg, etc.) or in modern times (Danzig).
Ö West Berlin had a special status after the Second World War (before the unification of Germany in 1990).
Ö State-like subjects of international law include Vatican. It is the administrative center of the Catholic Church led by the Pope, a “city state” within the Italian capital of Rome. The Vatican has diplomatic relations with many states in various parts of the world (including Russia), permanent observers at the UN and some other international organizations, and takes part in international conferences of states. Legal status The Vatican is determined by special agreements with Italy in 1984.
Some political-territorial entities 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 entities most resemble mini-states and have almost all the characteristics of a state, they are called “state-like formations.”
The legal capacity of free cities was determined by relevant international treaties. Thus, according to the provisions of the Vienna Treaty of 1815, Krakow (1815-1846) was declared a free city. 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 of 1947, the creation of the Free Territory of Trieste was envisaged, which, however, was never created.
West Berlin (1971-1990) enjoyed a special status granted by the 1971 Quadripartite Agreement on West Berlin. 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 powers were transferred, for example, the publication 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 protected by German consular officials.
The Vatican is a city state located within the capital of Italy - Rome. Here is the residence of the head of the Catholic Church - the Pope. Legal status Vatican City is defined by the Lateran Agreements, signed between the Italian State and the Holy See on February 11, 1929, which are essentially 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 (the Vatican also has a representative office in Russia), headed by papal nuncios (ambassadors), participates in international organizations, conferences, signs international treaties, etc.
The Order of Malta is a religious formation with administrative center in Rome. The Order of Malta actively participates in international relations, concludes treaties, exchanges representations with states, and has observer missions to the UN, UNESCO and a number of other international organizations *.
International legal status of the 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 as having the right to act in international relations within the framework established by federal legislation.
The German Constitution, for example, provides that the states, with the consent of the federal government, can enter into treaties with foreign states. Norms of similar content are enshrined in the law of some other federal states. Currently, the states of the Federal Republic of Germany, the provinces of Canada, the states of the USA, the states of Australia and other entities, which in this regard are recognized as subjects of international law, are actively participating in international relations.
International activity subjects of foreign federations is developing in the following main directions: concluding international agreements; opening representative offices in other countries; participation in the activities of some international organizations.
The question arises: Are there any rules in international law on the international legal personality of the subjects of the federation?
As is known, the most important element 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 emergence.
Issues of conclusion, execution and termination of treaties by states are regulated primarily by the Vienna Convention on the Law of International Treaties of 1969. Neither the 1969 Convention nor other international documents provide for the possibility of independent conclusion of international treaties by constituent entities 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 a state and a large foreign enterprise are not such. In order to be a subject of the law of international treaties, it is not enough to be a party to one or another 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 constituent entities of the Russian Federation.
International legal status of the subjects of the Russian Federation
As is known, the Constitution of the USSR of 1977 recognized the Union republics as subjects of international law. Ukraine and Belarus were members of the UN , participated in many international treaties. Less active participants in international relations were other union republics, whose constitutions provided for the possibility of concluding international treaties and exchanging representations with foreign states. With the collapse of the USSR, the former Soviet republics acquired full international legal personality, and the problem of their status as independent subjects of international law disappeared.
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) entities. This problem acquired particular significance with the adoption of the new Constitution of the Russian Federation in 1993 and the conclusion of the Federal Treaty. Today, some constituent entities of the Russian Federation declared their international legal personality.
Subjects of the Russian Federation are trying to act independently in international relations, enter into agreements with subjects of foreign federations and administrative-territorial units, exchange representations with them and enshrine the corresponding provisions in their legislation. The Charter of the Voronezh Region of 1995, for example, recognizes that the organizational and legal forms of international relations of the region are those generally accepted in international practice, with the exception of treaties (agreements) at the interstate level. Taking part in international and foreign economic relations independently or with other constituent entities of the Russian Federation, the Voronezh region opens representative offices on the territory of foreign states to represent the interests of the region, which operate in accordance with the legislation of the host country.
The regulations 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 Charter Voronezh region 1995 establishes that international treaties of the Voronezh region are part of the legal system of the region. Norms of similar content are fixed in Art. 6 of the Charter Sverdlovsk region 1994, art. 45 of the Charter (Basic Law) of the Stavropol Territory 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, some constituent entities of the Russian Federation have adopted regulations governing the procedure for concluding, executing and terminating contracts, for example, the law of the Tyumen region “On international agreements of the Tyumen region and agreements of the Tyumen region with constituent entities of the Russian Federation” was adopted in 1995. The law of the Voronezh region “On legal normative acts of the Voronezh region" of 1995 establishes (Article 17) that the state authorities of the region have the right to conclude agreements, which are normative legal acts, with the state authorities of the Russian Federation, with the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, with foreign states on issues that represent their common, mutual interest.
However, statements by subjects of the Russian Federation about their international contractual legal capacity do not mean, in my deep conviction, the presence of this legal quality in reality. An analysis of the relevant legislation is required.
Federal legislation does not yet address this issue.
According to the Constitution of the Russian Federation (clause “o”, part 1, article 72), coordination of international and foreign economic relations of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation is the joint responsibility of the Russian Federation and the constituent entities of the Federation. However, the Constitution does not directly speak about the possibility of constituent entities of the Russian Federation to conclude agreements that would be international treaties. The Federative Treaty does not contain such norms.
The Federal Law “On International Treaties of the Russian Federation” of 1995 also places the conclusion of international treaties of the Russian Federation under the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation. It has been established that international treaties of the Russian Federation affecting issues within the jurisdiction of the constituent entities of the Federation are concluded in agreement with the relevant bodies of the constituent entities. At the same time, the main provisions of agreements affecting issues of joint jurisdiction must be sent for proposals to the relevant bodies of the subject of the federation, which, however, do not have the right to veto the conclusion of an agreement. The 1995 law says nothing about agreements between 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” of July 21, 1994 establishes rules on verifying the constitutionality of international treaties of the constituent entities of the Federation, although such a procedure is provided for in relation to international treaties of the Russian Federation.
As for the practice of exchanging representations with subjects of foreign federations, this quality is not the main one in the characteristics of 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 with any government 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 constituent entities of the Russian Federation in international organizations. It is known that the charters of some international organizations (UNESCO, WHO, etc.) allow the membership of entities that are not independent states. However, firstly, membership in these organizations of subjects of the Russian Federation has not yet been formalized, and, secondly, this feature, as already mentioned, is far from the most important in the characteristics of subjects of international law.
Considering 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, the tendency for the development of their legal personality and their registration as subjects of international law is obvious. In my opinion, this issue requires resolution in federal legislation.
