Borders without Consent: Revisiting Uti Possidetis Juris in the Sylhet Referendum of 1947
于New Zealand Yearbook of International Law OnlineSearch for other papers by A Z M Umar Faruque Siddiki in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Tamanna Aziz Tuli in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
This article asks how and why uti possidetis juris was applied, and at times set aside, during the 1947 partition of British India, with a focus on Sylhet referendum. Drawing on doctrinal analysis of ICJ jurisprudence and primary sources, this paper argues that the doctrine functioned primarily as a normative anchor for territorial stability yet was modified in specific cases through selective political interventions that sidelined minority voices. It also explores a conditional framework centred on procedural legitimacy, territorial contiguity, minority safeguards, and international oversight for evaluating when deviations from uti possidetis juris can be justified. This framework clarifies how legal doctrine and self-determination need not be mutually exclusive.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| 全部期间 | 过去一年 | 过去30天 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 摘要浏览次数 | 79 | 79 | 38 |
| 全文浏览次数 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| PDF下载次数 | 4 | 4 | 1 |
Borders without Consent: Revisiting Uti Possidetis Juris in the Sylhet Referendum of 1947
于New Zealand Yearbook of International Law OnlineSearch for other papers by A Z M Umar Faruque Siddiki in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Tamanna Aziz Tuli in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
This article asks how and why uti possidetis juris was applied, and at times set aside, during the 1947 partition of British India, with a focus on Sylhet referendum. Drawing on doctrinal analysis of ICJ jurisprudence and primary sources, this paper argues that the doctrine functioned primarily as a normative anchor for territorial stability yet was modified in specific cases through selective political interventions that sidelined minority voices. It also explores a conditional framework centred on procedural legitimacy, territorial contiguity, minority safeguards, and international oversight for evaluating when deviations from uti possidetis juris can be justified. This framework clarifies how legal doctrine and self-determination need not be mutually exclusive.
| 全部期间 | 过去一年 | 过去30天 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 摘要浏览次数 | 79 | 79 | 38 |
| 全文浏览次数 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| PDF下载次数 | 4 | 4 | 1 |
