Scottish Government’s White Paper on Independence and in parliamentary committee reports, which essentially concluded that would be determined by negotiation in good ‘they faith’ during the transitional process of secession. The publicly-available professional guidance that was to the protagonists reinforced this approach. Whilst Crawford and Boyle had not been retained to advise on matters related to property and debt, the thrust of their advice on international personality (the ‘continuation versus succession’ problem) and membership of international organisations centred on the role of in good faith’ and rejected foreordained legal outcomes. Consequently, ‘negotiations the impression was that international law had little incisive to say about the myriad problems arising out of succession; by emphasising negotiation in good faith, international law was rather concerned with civilizing’ the political process by channelling it to some ‘gently orderliness. Whilst the Opinion denied a role for the Vienna Conventions on the key question of succession to membership of international organisations and the ILC had shunted aside the topic at the outset of its codification project, the negative approach of Article 4(a) VCSST has ironically acquired a modicum of authority. It precludes automatic succession to membership save where (expressly) provided for in the rules of the organisation, largely following a consistent (the SFRY/FRY controversy aside) body of UN practice requiring a successor to accede to membership. With the notable exceptions of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, this practice has become the orthodoxy; this is unsurprising, as the rule is a relative rather than a prescriptive one and thus, insofar as the of succession’ is concerned, not a rule at all. ‘law Yet, the negative outcome of the Scottish independence referendum, in which polarised positions were adopted by the Scottish Government and the British Government concerning the key issues of EU membership and the currency, has not put paid to
Scottish Government’s White Paper on Independence and in parliamentary committee reports, which essentially concluded that ‘they would be determined by negotiation in good faith’ during the transitional process of secession. The publicly-available professional guidance that was to the protagonists reinforced this approach. Whilst Crawford and Boyle had not been retained to advise on matters related to property and debt, the thrust of their advice on international personality (the ‘continuation versus succession’ problem) and membership of international organisations centred on the role of ‘negotiations in good faith’ and rejected foreordained legal outcomes. Consequently, the impression was that international law had little incisive to say about the myriad problems arising out of succession; by emphasising negotiation in good faith, international law was rather concerned with ‘gently civilizing’ the political process by channelling it to some orderliness. Whilst the Opinion denied a role for the Vienna Conventions on the key question of succession to membership of international organisations and the ILC had shunted aside the topic at the outset of its codification project, the negative approach of Article 4(a) VCSST has ironically acquired a modicum of authority. It precludes automatic succession to membership save where (expressly) provided for in the rules of the organisation, largely following a consistent (the SFRY/FRY controversy aside) body of UN practice requiring a successor to accede to membership. With the notable exceptions of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, this practice has become the orthodoxy; this is unsurprising, as the rule is a relative rather than a prescriptive one and thus, insofar as the ‘law of succession’ is concerned, not a rule at all. Yet, the negative outcome of the Scottish independence referendum, in which polarised positions were adopted by the Scottish Government and the British Government concerning the key issues of EU membership and the currency, has not put paid to
EJIL%20Submission%20-%20Codifying%20the%20Law%20of%20State%20Succession%20-%20Main%20Document%20with%20Title%20Page.docx