國際法上片面宣布獨立的合法性研究:國際法院(ICJ)科索沃諮詢意見分析

Abstract

科索沃（Kosovo）面積僅一萬零八百多平方公里，人口也只有約二百萬，自1991年3月，阿爾巴尼族發表獨立宣言以來，獨立運動風起雲湧。 期間經過血腥的種族屠殺、內戰和聯合國的介入，2008年2月17日科索沃總理塔齊向國會提出獨立宣言，經國會表決通過後宣布「科索沃是一個主權獨立國家」，旋獲六十九國承認，科索沃原先之「母國」塞爾維亞（Serbia）表達嚴厲的抗議，最後提請聯合國大會處理。 國際法院（International Court of Justice,ICJ）應聯合國大會之請，針對科索沃宣布獨立問題發表諮詢意見，是項諮詢意見於2010年7月22日宣布，結論認為「2008年2月17日科索沃獨立宣言並不違反國際法」。此諮詢意見一出，美國及歐洲二十二國聲援支持；俄羅斯、中國及歐洲五國反對，至今仍有正、反不同立場之爭。 國際法學者有為此高呼這是「人民自決」與「民主」的勝利，認為國際法院對科索沃宣布獨立不違反國際法的裁定，將帶給國際上追求獨立自主的政治組織和團體法理上的依據和助力。 然國際法院提出科索沃片面宣布獨立符合國際法的諮詢意見之後，是否代表任何政治實體只要追求獨立，可在任何狀況下宣布獨立，而不違反國際法？「科索沃宣布獨立案」諮詢意見是不是如此明確地宣告了政治實體追求獨立的權利，到底該諮詢意見能帶給非國家政治實體多大的法理基礎，以追求渴望的國家獨立？ 本論文即在此問題意識下，直接探討這份國際法院針對塞爾維亞控訴科索沃宣布獨立違法，侵害其主權及領土完整，所提出之諮詢意見的具體內容，進行全盤性的解析，從國際法的角度剖析該諮詢意見，冀望從分析中，瞭解諮詢意見的解釋和個案適用範圍限制，進一步將可確認諮詢意見對於國際法上片面宣佈獨立的合法性，帶來了什麼樣的法理基礎，進而可以預估諮詢意見在相關國際法上會形成何種程度的後續影響，以耙梳出這份首次論述片面宣佈獨立個案的諮詢意見在國際法上對人民自決權、分離權與獨立運動帶來的真正意義。

Kosovo has an area of around 10,800 square kilometers and a population of only about 2 million. Since March 1991 the Kosovar Albanian issued a Declaration of Independence, the independence movement in Kosovo has been surging. After the bloody genocide, the civil war and the interference of the United Nations, on February 17, 2008, Kosovar Prime Minister Hashim Thaçi presented a declaration of independence to the National Assembly. After the vote of the National Assembly, he declared that Kosovo is a sovereign and independent State. Kosovo soon has won the recognitions from 69 States. Serbia as the former “home State” of Kosovo expressed severe protests and finally brought it to the UN General Assembly. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion on Kosovo’s declaration of independence at the request of the UN General Assembly. The advisory opinion was announced on July 22, 2010, and concluded that the adoption of the declaration of independence of 17 February 2008 did not violate any applicable rule of international law. As soon as this advisory opinion came out, 22 states including the United States and European States declared their support to the advisory opinion; on the other hand, Russia, China and five States in Europe opposed it. There are still disputes between the two sides. International law scholars have asserted that this is a victory for “the right of self-determination” and “democracy”. They believe that the decision of the ICJ to declare Kosovo’s independence does not violate international law will bring legal basis and power to the political organizations and groups which is pursuing independence. After the ICJ has declared that Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence is in accordance with international law, does it mean that any political entity can declare independence in any situation without violating international law? Whether the Kosovo Advisory Opinion has clearly declared the right of political entities to pursue independence, and whether this advisory opinion has brought the non-state political entities a sufficient legal basis to pursue the desired national independence would be the questions that this thesis would like to find out. Therefore, this thesis directly discusses the specific content of the advisory opinion, which is decided by the ICJ on Serbia’s accusation of the illegality of Kosovo’s declaration of independence and the violation of its sovereignty and territorial integrity. We try to analyze it in a comprehensive way, and discuss it from the perspective of international law. We hope to understand the explanation of the advisory opinion and the limitation of the scope of the case; and furthermore, to identify what the legal basis that the advisory opinion has brought to the legality of the unilateral declaration of independence in international law. We also try to predict the implications and consequences of the first-ever advisory opinion which discusses the unilateral declaration of independence, and what it would contribute to the true meanings of the rights of self-determination, secession, and independence movement of the people in international law.