See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/311581450

Sovereignty in International Law

Article · March 2015

CITATIONS READS

7 10,143

1 author:

Jana Maftei
Universitatea Danubius Galati
61 PUBLICATIONS   31 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Gastrodiplomatie View project

Diplomatie, Protocol and Etiquette View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jana Maftei on 15 December 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ACTA UNIVERSITATIS DANUBIUS Vol. 11, no. 1/2015

Sovereignty in International Law

1
Jana MAFTEI

Abstract: We aimed at highlighting in this paper, after analyzing the transformations that took place
in the international society, the importance of a particularly sensitive and current topic for public
international law, namely the sovereignty. A political and legal concept at the same time, the state
sovereignty remains permanently into the attention of researchers in an attempt to determine its role
in international relations governed by the international law. The concept of sovereignty is complex, it
can be analyzed in terms of the national law, but as a member of international society, a State
participates in international relations on the basis of sovereign equality principle, which causes
another meaning of sovereignty, which completes the one specific to the internal life. We have
analyzed the evolution of the concept of sovereignty and we have identified the causes that led to
changes in its characteristics, in order to predict the tendencies in its development. We have
highlighted the aspects of the exercise of sovereignty as a result of limiting the powers of state in the
favor of international bodies. In preparing this article we have used as research methods the analysis
of the problems generated by mentioned subject with reference to the doctrinal views expressed in
specialized papers, documentary research, and interpretation of legal norms in the field.
Keywords: sovereign state; independency; international law; globalization, BioPower

1. Introductory Remarks
The concept of sovereignty is complex: in terms of internal law, the state appears
as a sovereign power, as political organization of society, undermining different
bodies (authorities) with specific legislative, executive, jurisdictional powers;
within the international society in each country it participates in the international
relations on the basis of sovereign equality, which causes another meaning of
sovereignty, which complements the one specific to the internal life.

1
Associate Professor, PhD, “Danubius” University of Galati, Faculty of Law, Romania, Address: 3
Galati Blvd, Galati, Romania, tel: +40372 361 102, fax: +40372 361 290. Corresponding author:
[email protected].

AUDJ, vol. 11, no. 1/2015, pp. 54-65

54
 JURIDICA

For the international legal order, the sovereignty is a constituent element of state
and the international personality requires that the public power is independent,
which grants the quality of sovereign state. Sovereignty is generally considered,
that general feature of the state, which represents the state supremacy and
independence of state power in expressing and achieving the governors’ will as
general will, compulsory for the whole society. (Anghel, 2002, p. 107)
In 1928, the arbitrator Max Huber1 said in the Palmas Island Deal (USA vs.
Netherlands): “Sovereignty in the relations between States signifies independence;
Independence in regard to a portion of the globe is the right to exercise therein, to
the exclusion of any other State, the functions of a State. The development of the
national organization of States during the last few centuries and, as a corollary,
the development of international law, have established this principle of the
exclusive competence of the State in regard to its own territory in such a way as to
make it the point of departure in settling most questions that concern international
relations.”2
State Sovereignty is the quality of state power “to be supreme in relation to any
other existing social power within its territorial limits and independence compared
to the power of any state or international body, the quality being expressed in the
State's right to determine freely, without any interference from the outside, the
purpose of his activities internally and externally, the fundamental tasks, which it
has to fulfill and the necessary means to achieve them, respecting the sovereignty
of other states and international law provisions.” (Vrabie, 1995, p. 69)
Sovereignty can be seen from the international and domestic point of view, in
political and legal terms (Hauriou & Gicquel, 1980, p. 132), aiming at explaining
the need to limit state sovereignty or limitation of powers, in favor of international
bodies (Puşcă, 1999, p. 161).
In the State’s definition formulated by Max Weber, it includes three conventional
elements: territory, people and soveregnity, considering that the abstract term of
soveregnity presupposes the state’s monopoly to use force. (Newton & van Deth,
2010, p. 22)

1
Max Huber, a prominent figure in the international circles, has played a leading role in organizing
the international justice (Thürer, 2007)
2
Case concerning sovereignty Palmas Island in the Palmas Island Deal, April 4, 1928, RSA, vol. II,
p. 838. http://legal.un.org/riaa/cases/vol_II/829-871.pdf.
55
ACTA UNIVERSITATIS DANUBIUS Vol. 11, no. 1/2015

Carl Schmitt explains the essence of sovereignty in the following terms: the
sovereign produces and guarantees the situation as a whole. It has a monopoly on
the latest decisions. Herein it lies the essence of sovereignty that must be correctly
legally defined, not as monopoly of coercion or to lead, but the monopoly to
decide. (Schmitt, 1985, p. 5 et seq.)
In terms of international relations it requires the existence of competing
sovereignty, which results in “legal equality of sovereignty” as the saying “some
freedoms stop where the freedom of others begins” (Jean-Paul Sartre, apud Chilea,
2007, p. 79); every state has the same sovereign power in international relations
management.

2. The Emergence and Evolution of the Sovereignty Concept

It is considered that the first known definition of sovereignty appears in Justinian's
Digest in the following wording: “Liberi populus externus is qui nullius alterius
populi potestatis est subiectus.”1 (Alexe, 2009, p. 152)
In the Romanian specialized literature the emergence sovereignty is put into the
equation along with the emergence of states. Grigore Geamănu, for example, stated
that sovereignty appears as an institution “from the moment the states begin to
exist” (1967, p. 39). Another author considers similarly that “sovereignty appeared
with state power, as a feature, under the conditions of the decomposition of gentile
society and the creation of the state.” (Moca, 1983, p. 123) And in the foreign
literature authors considered in the same sense, stating that the issue of sovereignty
occurred when there were at least two states near one another, in an attempt to
maintain independently of one another.” (Korowicz, 1961, p. 43)
However, there are authors who believe that we can speak of sovereignty, broadly
in terms of ancient Greek ancient state or the Roman State, considering that the
name of the concept2 appeared only later on. (Aurescu, 2003, pp. 15-17)
P. Negulescu stated that the concept of sovereignty appears in the 15 th century for
designating the position of the king in the feudal hierarchy and it comes from
Vulgar Latin, the preposition super (above), from which arose the adjective
superanus and the noun supremitas, which means the situation a man who, in terms

1
It is free in the outside that people which is not submitted to the power of another people.
2
E. N. von Kleffens states that this word is first mentioned in a map dated around 1000 (von Kleffens
1953, p. 9).
56
 JURIDICA

of hierarchy, has no one above him, he is not subordinated to anyone. (Negulescu

1927, p. 95)
In the Middle Ages the concept of sovereignty will record important developments.
Jean Bodin, in his Les six livres de la Republique (1576)/Six books on the Republic
(1576) defines sovereignty as summa potetas, which recognizes no other higher
authority. In the conception of Bodin, sovereignty is absolute, perpetual,
indivisible, inalienable and imprescriptible (Alexe, 2009, pp. 152-153). Jean Bodin
believes that “sovereignty is the absolute and perpetual power of a Republic, which
the Latins call majestatem/Majesty [...] Sovereignty is not limited, nor in power,
nor in content, nor in time.” (Jacobsen, 2000, pp. 179 -181)
The beginning of the modern era marks a change of system, after the peace treaties
of Westphalia, ending the War of 30 years (1618-1648), in order to ensure the
lasting peace in Europe, it is established that the main international actor is the
State-nation, endowed with absolute sovereignty. This element will allow common
approaches both from the representatives of jus-naturalism (especially Hugo
Grotius) and of positivist doctrine in an attempt to clarify important notions in
defining the concept of sovereignty relative to the principle of sovereign equality,
an equal right recognized to all these international actors, for the non-interference
in the internal policies of other states, for the territorial independence of states.
In the paper Der Kampf ums Recht (The struggle of Law), Jhering shows explicitly
the right as political force (Jhering 1991, p. 2), the object of struggle for collective
interests and for power, the state is simply limited of only its will. (Alexe, 2009, p.
153) Any sovereignty is offensive, according to a Romanian author (Nastasie,
2012, p. 49).
The doctrine of the social contract and sovereignty of the people has been the basis
of the first bourgeois constitutional acts. The end of the 18th century brought new
developments in the concepts related to sovereignty. State sovereignty turns into
national sovereignty, the attributes of sovereignty are transferred from the monarch
to the nation and the people. The expression of this trend is illustrated eloquently
by the American States Declaration of Independence (1776) and the Declaration of
the Rights of Man and Citizen, and the constitutions of France during the
revolution (1991-1793) (Miga-Besteliu, 1998, p. 85). Article 3 of the Declaration
of the Rights of Man and Citizen expresses the idea of national sovereignty for the
first time: “The source of all sovereignty resides essentially in the nation. Nobody,
no individual can exercice authority that does not explicity proceed from it”. The
57
ACTA UNIVERSITATIS DANUBIUS Vol. 11, no. 1/2015

National sovereignty principle was taken by the French Constitution of 1791 stated
in article 1 that sovereignty is indivisible, inalienable and impresciptible.
Sovereignity belongs to the nation; no group of people, no any individual may
assume the exercice of the sovereignty.
The 20th century will mark the evolution of the concept of sovereignty, the
transition from classical senses considered more lenient interpretations, more
flexible, with emphasis given by the interstate cooperation, of respecting the
international obligations assumed by the States as international actors. In the first
half of the 20th century, many authors already were talking about relative
sovereignty of the state. Pasquale Fiore shows that a state can operate without the
interference of other countries, but within the limits set by international law.
Furthermore, Jean Delvaux stated in 1935, that maintaining the principle of
sovereignty is incompatible with the international law; on the contrary, with the
limits set by international law, the sovereignty does no longer mean arbitrary
power and without reservations (Aurescu, 2003, p. 60).
In the period after the World War it considerably develops negative conceptions of
sovereignty, the motivation being that sovereignty in the classical sense made
possible the abuse of power and the war. Some authors go so far as to challenge the
legal personality of the state and therefore also its ability to have rights and
obligations (Leon Duguit, Gaston Jeze and others).
Depending on their political goals and the two major totalitarian systems of the 20 th
century, nationalism, socialism and communism had specific approach on
sovereignty. (Alexe, 2009, p. 154)
We see that over time, the sovereignty was seen as incompatible with the
international law, finding fundamental contradictions between his absolute
character-building and the need of establishing the international legality. After
1945, with the adoption of relevant documents in this matter underlying the
international legal order, it seems that they managed to reconcile the state
sovereignty and ensuring the international legality. (Alexe, 2009, p. 154) The
collaboration between states is achieved according to principles where respecting
the sovereignty occupies an important place (Vrabie, 1995, p. 72). This principle is
established among several international documents with universal value:
- the UNO Declaration on the principles of international law concerning the
friendly and cooperation relations between the States, Session XXV, 1970;
- the CSCE Final Act of Helsinki, 1975;
58
 JURIDICA

- Charter of the United Nations.

The United Nations Declaration of 1970, for example, stated that the main
constitutive elements of sovereignty are the following: all states are equal in legal
terms; each State enjoys the inherent rights in full sovereignty; every state has the
right to freely choose and develop its political, social, economic and cultural
system; every state has an obligation to respect the personality of other states;
territorial integrity and political independence of the State are inviolable; each is
required to discharge in full and in good faith its international obligations and to
live in peace with others.
The principle of sovereign equality is present as the basis for cooperation of UN
member states, under article 2, paragraph 1 of the Charter.
According to the Declaration of Helsinki, all states have the same rights and
international obligations.
We note that by virtue of its sovereignty, the state has not only rights but also
duties under the international law, which limits the potential for abuse of power,
both internally and in international relations.
Under the sovereignty, any state benefits from: the right to international personality
(the quality of a subject of international law); the right of the State of being
respected the territorial integrity and the right to self-defense; the state's right to
freely determine its political and social system, and to use its natural riches, to
establish its system of economic, cultural and legislation; the state's right to freely
conduct its relations with other states; State's right to participate in international
conferences, to international organizations and international treaties; the state’s
active and passive right of legation.1
Correspondingly, there are the following obligations: to respect the sovereignty of
other states; to respect the international personality of other states; to fulfill in good
faith its international obligations.

1
P. Negulescu stated that the sovereign state has the following prerogatives: the right of legislative
initiative, the right to police, the right to establish taxes, the right to distribute justice, the right to
expropriation for public utility, the right to compel citizens to military service, the right to coin
money, the right to take property without the owner and, finally, the right of authentication
(Negulescu, 1927, p. 116).
59
ACTA UNIVERSITATIS DANUBIUS Vol. 11, no. 1/2015

3. Sovereignty in Contemporary International Law

Strengthening the contemporary international law rests on a few fundamental
concepts, one of which is undoubtedly the national sovereignty. Mazilu appreciated
that, in the contemporary international law, “the political and legal basis of the
international personality of the state is its sovereignty. It belongs to all states,
regardless of size, power, stage of development (...). The most important feature of
the state power is the sovereignty, which requires supremacy internally and
independence externally.” (Mazilu, 2001, p. 130)
But the challenges posed by globalization phenomenon create challenges in terms
of the viability of states as political-legal entities, but also as the stability of the
international legal order, which was based on the national sovereignty of states.
The emergence of international organizations as actors in international relations
governed by international law and the exercise of sovereignty by States within
international organizations gives us a new dimension to this concept, outlined by
the competition between nation-state and organizational entities. Even if, for
example, article 2 § 1 of the UN Charter states that the organization is founded on
the principle of sovereign equality of Member States, and in the preamble of the
North Atlantic Treaty there are also mentioned the objectives and principles of the
United Nations Charter, therefore implicitly the principle of sovereign equality, by
expressing the agreement to be part of these organizations through numerous
treaties and conventions concluded later, the Member delegate, in fact, part of the
competences towards organization, which represents a restriction, even if it is
deliberate of the attributes of the sovereignty. Profound debates generated by the
European construction, the recent changes relative to the sovereignty from the
European integration perspective revealed the existence of a process of
reconsideration of the sovereignty of the Member States, in terms of transfer of
sovereignty to the European Union, but also to local communities. (Antonescu,
2009, p. 640) From this perspective it becomes even more obvious the difference in
opinions of the authors who consider the sovereignty as a sum of powers (G.
Scelle, Ch, Rousseau) and those considering that sovereignty cannot be shared (von
Kleffens), which urge us to reflection. The European Union is an international
organization in the classic sense of the concept, or as stated by Sabine Saurugger
“Europe is neither state, nor international organization, nor an empire.”
(Saurugger, 2009, pp. 319-320) Anghel appreciated that the originality of this
organization consists of substantial elements of suprastatal, where state sovereignty

60
 JURIDICA

is “burdened with commitments and impaired” compared to the situation of their

membership to other organizations, this suprastatal being acquired through the
transfer of sovereignty from the Member States having as effect “a clear limitation
of sovereignty of the Member States” (Anghel, 2010, p. 2 et seq.). Referring to
Romania’s condition of membership of these organizations, Maliţa firmly said that
“Romania has ceded its sovereignty.” (Maliţa, 2014)
Sovereign state crisis and the devaluation of national borders is revealed also by
the fighting against some phenomena such as terrorism, which transcends state
borders; the actions against terrorist groups exclude the unilateral action of states,
the dimension of the phenomenon requiring a comprehensive approach, joint action
within international cooperation and in the limits of international regulations.
Currently, the international system of states faces the competition between states
and secessionist entities, claiming the right to sovereignty and independence. In
such a situation there is state failure holder to exercise authority in the separatist
area, which is what is causing its disruption and insecurity. Correspondingly, the
secessionist entity will develop and strengthen the national sovereignty as de facto
state. (Bakelite, Bartmann, & Srebnik, 2004)
Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence in 2008, from Serbia, was
regarded as a violation of state sovereignty of territorial independence. The status
recognition of more than 100 states, members of the UN, EU or NATO, was
regarded as an encouragement for the secessionist movements. Although Romania
has not recognized Kosovo as an independent state, it is important to remember
that the European Parliament encourages Romania “to proceed to the recognition
of Kosovo”, stressing that it “will facilitate the further normalization of the
relations between Belgrade and Pristina”. Recently the Prime Minister of Albania,
Edi Rama, required Romania the recognition of Kosovo as an independent state,
arguing that this problem will ensure the regional security and it will soften some
“frustration tendencies and other neighboring countries.” (Mihai, 2015)
The effects of this international situation did not fail to appear. Although initially
condemned the action of Kosovo, Russia has reconsidered its position and
considered Kosovo a precedent in the international law, thus justifying its
interventionist policy to protect the rights of the ethnic Russians outside the
Russian state and it was involved in the creation of the separatist republics of South
Ossetia and Abkhazia. (Summers, 2011, p. 51) The annexation process of Crimea
to the Russian Federation, following the referendum of 16 March 2014 has sparked

61
ACTA UNIVERSITATIS DANUBIUS Vol. 11, no. 1/2015

much controversy and it was considered an illegal annexation. NATO Secretary

General ruled unequivocally on the illegitimacy: “Russia's military aggression in
Ukraine is in blatant breach of its international commitments and it is a violation
of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity” (Rasmussen, 2014). And the
European Union has qualified the Russian intervention as illegal and it imposed
sanctions to Russia.
The situation created by Russia's expansionist policy, by applying the international
sanctions has led to tensioning the geopolitical climate in the area, and the overall
political climate. That happened while other countries have agreed to solve
territorial disputes through political and diplomatic use or international jurisdiction.
“The Hague process and its result is a model of peaceful settlement of international
disputes by peaceful means in the wider Black Sea region and its neighboring. It is
an area (...) with no shortage of conflicts and tensions, from the ongoing maritime
boundaries in the Caspian Sea, the Adriatic and the Mediterranean, to the frozen
conflicts and disputes regarding the international minorities and energy.”
(Purcărea, 2014)
A territorial litigation between the Czech Republic and Poland dating from 1950 is
about to be solved still peacefully (Day, 2015), the Czech party expressing its
intention to relinquish to a part of the territory in the favor of the Polish one, for the
purpose of developing good neighborly relations.
This is the way in which the foreign policy of a state is articulated as one of the
dimensions in which national sovereignty is best expressed i.e. the foreign policy
of a state. (Cioabă, 2004, p. 436)
In a paper published in the early beginning to 21st century, Michael Hardt and
Antonio Negri bring into discussion an approach that reveals a new form of
sovereignty, which the authors call generically Empire (Hardt & Negri, 2000, p. xi)
in the context of a new global political order, which is not the result of the
interaction between states, but it results within states and even of individuals.
Inspired by Michael Foucault, the two authors propose a new concept, “BioPower”,
the bio-political nature of a new paradigm of power, as a “form of power that
regulates social life from its interior, following it, interpreting it, absorbing it, and
rearticulating it.” (Hardt & Negri, 2000, pp. 23-24)

62
 JURIDICA

4. Conclusion
It is considered a fundamental element of the existence of the state or the legitimate
source of the authority within a state and even a “modern myth which was often
violated in the international practice” (Nastase & Mătieş, p. 8), the sovereign
equality of states remains the binder that coordinates the other rules and principles
of contemporary international law and it “directs and organizes peace structures as
a whole, in the sense of maintaining and developing peaceful relations in the
world” (Mazilu, 2001, p. 185). The concept of sovereignty has developed with
states and evolution of international relations and it had to adapt to frequent
challenges arising from different levels: sub-national, transnational, supranational
and global.

5. References
Alexe, A. (2009). Sfârșitul lumii libere/ The End of the free world. Bucharest: Aldo Press.
Anghel, I. M. (2002). Subiectele de drept internațional/The subjects of international law. Bucharest:
Lumina Lex.
Anghel, I. M. (2010). Suveranitatea statelor membre ale Uniunii Europene/European Union`s
Member States Sovereignty. Analele Universității “Constantin Brâncuși” din Târgu Jiu, Seria Științe
Juridice/Annals of “Constantin Brancusi” University of Targu Jiu, Legal Sciences Series, No. 2, pp.
19-48.
Antonescu, M. V. (2009). Institutiile Uniunii Europene in perioada post-Nisa: o perspectiva de drept
constitutional/The European Union institutions in the post-Nice period: a constitutional law
perspective. Iasi: Lumen.
Aurescu, B. (2003). Noua suveranitate. Între realitate şi necesitate politică în sistemul internaţional
contemporan/New sovereignty. Between reality and political necessity in the international
contemporary system. Bucharest: All Beck.
Bacheli, T., Bartmann, B., & Srebnik, H. (2004). De Facto States: The Quest for Sovereignty.
London: Routledge.
Chilea, D. (2007). Drept internațional public/ Public International Law. Hamangiu: Bucharest.
Cioaba, A. (2004). Doctrine politice in Romania secolului XX/Political Doctrines in the Romania of
the 20th century. Bucharest: Ed. Inst. de Teorie Sociala.
Day, M. (2015, March 2015). Czech Republic to hand over 900 acres of territory to Poland in border
dispute . Retrieved March 15, 2015, from The Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/czechrepublic/11452364/Czech-Republic-to-
hand-over-900-acres-of-territory-to-Poland-in-border-dispute.html
Geamănu, G. (1967). Principiile fundamentale ale dreptului internaţional/The fundamental principles
of international law. Bucharest: Editura Didactică şi Pedagogică.

63
ACTA UNIVERSITATIS DANUBIUS Vol. 11, no. 1/2015

Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2000). Empire. Cambridge, Massachusetts & London, England: Harvard
University Press.
Hauriou, A., & Gicquel, J. (1980). Droit constitutionnel et institutions politiques, septième
éd./Constitutional law and political institutions, 7th ed. Paris: Editions Montchrestien.
acobsen, M. C. (2000). Jean Bodin et le dilemme de la philosophie politique moderne. Etudes
romanes/ Jean Bodin and the dilemma of modern political philosophy. Roman Studies, vol. 48.
University of Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press.
Jhering, R. v. (1991). The Struggle for Law, transled by Lalor, John J. New York: Legal Classics
Library.
Korowicz, M.-S. (1961). Organisations internationales et souveranite des Etats Membres/
international Organizations et sovereignty of the Member States. Paris: Editions A. Pedone.
Malița, M. (2014, 11 19). România și-a cedat suveranitatea/Romania has ceded its sovereignty.
Retrieved 03 15, 2015, from Q-magazine: http://qmagazine.ro/cultura/mircea-malita-romania-si-a-
cedat-suveranitatea/
Mazilu, D. (2001). Dreptul internațional public/Public international law, vol. I. Bucharest: Lumina
Lex.
Miga-Besteliu, R. (1998). Drept international: introducere in dreptul international
public/International law: introduction to public international law. Bucharest: ALL.
Mihai, C. (2015, March 11). MEDIAFAX. Retrieved March 15, 2015, Parlamentul European
încurajează cinci state membre, printre care şi România, să recunoască Kosovo/The European
Parliament encourages five Member States, including Romania, to recognize Kosovo.
http://www.mediafax.ro/externe/parlamentul-european-incurajeaza-cinci-state-membre-printre-care-
si-romania-sa-recunoasca-kosovo-13968645.
Moca, G. (1983). Dreptul internaţional/International law. Bucharest: Editura Politica.
Năstase, D., & Mătieș, M. (n.d.). Viitorul suveranităţii naţionale a României în perspectiva integrării
europene/The future of national sovereignty of Romania in the European integration perspective.
Retrieved March 15, 2015 from http://leader.viitorul.org/:
http://leader.viitorul.org/public/568/ro/suveranitatea_romaniei%20in_ue.pdf.
Nastasie, G. N. (2012). Jurnal filosofic, 1994-2007/Philosophical journal, 1994-2007. Melilla: Forum
Filos fico de Melilla.
Negulescu, P. (1927). Curs de drept constituțional român/Course of Romanian constitutional law.
Bucharest.
Newton, K., & van Deth, J. W. (2010). Foundations of Comparative Politics: Democracies of the
Modern World. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press..
Purcărea, D. (2014, February 3). Aurescu (MAE): Procesul de la Haga - model de soluționare a
diferendelor internațioanle pe cale pașnică/ The Hague trial – a model of peaceful settlement of the
international dispute. Retrieved March 15, 2015, from AGERPRES:
http://www.agerpres.ro/politica/2014/02/03/aurescu-mae-procesul-de-la-haga-model-de-solutionare-
a-diferendelor-internatioanle-pe-cale-pasnica-11-45-17.
Puşcă, B. (1999). Drept constituţional şi instituţii politice/Constitutional law and political
institutions. Braila: Editura Evrika.

64
 JURIDICA

Rasmussen, A. F. (2014, March 19). “Why NATO Matters to America”, Speech by NATO Secretary
General Anders Fogh Rasmussen at the Brookings Institution. Retrieved March 15, 2015, from
NATO: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_108087.htm?selectedLocale=ru.
Saurugger, S. (2009). Theorie et de l'integration concepts européenne/Theory and concepts of
European integration. Paris: Presse de Science Po.
Schmitt, C. (1985). Political Theology. Four Chapter on the Concept of Sovereignty, translation by
George Schwab. Massachusett, London: The MIT Press Cambridge.
Summers, J. (2011). Kosovo, a Precedent?: The Declaration of Independence, the Advisory Opinion
and Implications for Statehood, Self-Determination and Minority Rights. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff
Publishers.
Thürer, D. (2007). Max Huber: A Portrait in Outline , 69-80. European Journal of International Law,
Volume 18, Issue 1, 69-80.
von Kleffens, E. (1953). Soverereignity in International Law, in R.C.A.D.I., vol. 82.
Vrabie, G. (1995). Drept constituţional şi instituţii politice contemporane/Constitutional law and
contemporary political institutions. Iasi: TEAM.

65

View publication stats