Separatist Regimes And Positive Human Rights Obligations

Abstract

This article explores the complex issue of positive human rights obligations in territories affected by separatist movements. Using case studies such as Crimea and Guantanamo Bay, the article examines the responsibility of de jure states versus de facto controlling entities in ensuring human rights. It delves into international law principles like jurisdiction, statehood, and sovereignty to propose two theories: the Effective Control Theory, which attributes primary responsibility to states exercising actual control, and the Existent Sovereign Theory, which maintains residual obligations for de jure sovereigns. The article argues against the feasibility of attributing extraterritorial human rights obligations in these contexts, emphasizing the necessity of preventing legal voids that undermine human rights protections. Ultimately, it highlights how international courts strive to balance legal principles and practical realities to uphold human rights, influencing the broader discourse on statehood and the status of human rights in international law.

Keywords: Positive Human Rights Obligations, Human Rights Treaties, Sovereignty, Statehood, Jurisdiction, State Responsibility, International Law, Existent Sovereign Theory, Effective Control Theory, Separatist Regimes