SELF-DETERMINATION AND SECESSION IN CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACIES A study of the Spanish case
COMITÉ CIENTÍFICO DE LA EDITORIAL TIRANT LO BLANCH María José Añón Roig
Marta Lorente Sariñena
Ana Cañizares Laso
Javier de Lucas Martín
Jorge A. Cerdio Herrán
Víctor Moreno Catena
Catedrática de Filosofía del Derecho de la Universidad de Valencia Catedrática de Derecho Civil de la Universidad de Málaga Catedrático de Teoría y Filosofía de Derecho. Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México
José Ramón Cossío Díaz
Ministro en retiro de la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación y miembro de El Colegio Nacional
María Luisa Cuerda Arnau
Catedrática de Derecho Penal de la Universidad Jaume I de Castellón
Manuel Díaz Martínez
Catedrático de Derecho Procesal de la UNED
Carmen Domínguez Hidalgo
Catedrática de Derecho Civil de la Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
Eduardo Ferrer Mac-Gregor Poisot Juez de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos Investigador del Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas de la UNAM
Owen Fiss
Catedrático emérito de Teoría del Derecho de la Universidad de Yale (EEUU)
José Antonio García-Cruces González Catedrático de Derecho Mercantil de la UNED
Catedrática de Historia del Derecho de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Catedrático de Filosofía del Derecho y Filosofía Política de la Universidad de Valencia Catedrático de Derecho Procesal de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Francisco Muñoz Conde
Catedrático de Derecho Penal de la Universidad Pablo de Olavide de Sevilla
Angelika Nussberger
Catedrática de Derecho Constitucional e Internacional en la Universidad de Colonia (Alemania). Miembro de la Comisión de Venecia
Héctor Olasolo Alonso
Catedrático de Derecho Internacional de la Universidad del Rosario (Colombia) y Presidente del Instituto Ibero-Americano de La Haya (Holanda)
Luciano Parejo Alfonso
Catedrático de Derecho Administrativo de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Consuelo Ramón Chornet
Catedrática de Derecho Internacional Público y Relaciones Internacionales de la Universidad de Valencia
Tomás Sala Franco
Catedrático de Derecho del Trabajo y de la Seguridad Social de la Universidad de Valencia
José Luis González Cussac
Ignacio Sancho Gargallo
Luis López Guerra
Elisa Speckmann Guerra
Catedrático de Derecho Penal de la Universidad de Valencia
Catedrático de Derecho Constitucional de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Ángel M. López y López
Catedrático de Derecho Civil de la Universidad de Sevilla
Magistrado de la Sala Primera (Civil) del Tribunal Supremo de España Directora del Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas de la UNAM
Ruth Zimmerling
Catedrática de Ciencia Política de la Universidad de Mainz (Alemania)
Fueron miembros de este Comité: Emilio Beltrán Sánchez, Rosario Valpuesta Fernández y Tomás S. Vives Antón Procedimiento de selección de originales, ver página web: www.tirant.net/index.php/editorial/procedimiento-de-seleccion-de-originales
SELFDETERMINATION AND SECESSION IN CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACIES A study of the Spanish case
Gaspar González Represa
Proyecto ProyExcel_00457 financiado por
Proyecto PID2021-126875OB-I00R financiado por
tirant lo blanch Valencia, 2023
Copyright ® 2023 Todos los derechos reservados. Ni la totalidad ni parte de este libro puede reproducirse o transmitirse por ningún procedimiento electrónico o mecánico, incluyendo fotocopia, grabación magnética, o cualquier almacenamiento de información y sistema de recuperación sin permiso escrito de los autores y del editor. En caso de erratas y actualizaciones, la Editorial Tirant lo Blanch publicará la pertinente corrección en la página web www.tirant.com. La aceptación de la presentes obra ha tenido en consideración la evaluación y calificación sobresaliente cum laude otorgada por los expertos componentes del tribunal calificador de la tesis doctoral que ahora se publica, cumpliendo con el criterio correspondiente de los revisores externos y ofreciendo la calidad debida a la presente obra. Esta publicación es parte del proyecto de excelencia “La génesis de nuevos derechos fundamentales en España en el marco del constitucionalismo global (IUSGÉNESIS)”, ProyExcel_00457 del Plan Andaluz de Investigación, Desarrollo e Innovación (PAIDI 2020) - Convocatoria 2021, Consejería de Universidad, Investigación e Innovación de la Junta de Andalucía, y del proyecto de I+D+i “La génesis de nuevos derechos fundamentales en el constitucionalismo global” PID2021-126875OBI00R, financiado por MCIN/ AEI/10.13039/501100011033/ “FEDER Una manera de hacer Europa”.
© Gaspar González Represa © TIRANT LO BLANCH EDITA: TIRANT LO BLANCH C/ Artes Gráficas, 14 - 46010 - Valencia TELFS.: 96/361 00 48 - 50 FAX: 96/369 41 51 Email: tlb@tirant.com www.tirant.com Librería virtual: www.tirant.es DEPÓSITO LEGAL: V-3283-2023 ISBN: 978-84-1169-815-3 MAQUETA: Dissset Ediciones Si tiene alguna queja o sugerencia, envíenos un mail a: atencioncliente@tirant.com. En caso de no ser atendida su sugerencia, por favor, lea en www.tirant.net/index. php/empresa/politicas-de-empresa nuestro procedimiento de quejas. Responsabilidad Social Corporativa: http://www.tirant.net/Docs/RSCTirant.pdf
A mis padres
La inspiración existe, pero tiene que encontrarte trabajando (Pablo Ruiz Picasso)
Índice
Foreword......................................................................................... Introduction....................................................................................
13 17
PART I. THE INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE CONTEXT Chapter I. The right to self-determination of peoples under international law.............................................................................................
39
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................
39
1. THE PRINCIPLE OF NATIONALITIES AND THE NATION-STATE. THE EQUIVALENCE BETWEEN POLITICAL AND CULTURAL COMMUNITY..........................................................................................
42
2. FROM THE PRINCIPLE OF NATIONALITIES TO THE PRINCIPLE OF SELF-DETERMINATION OF PEOPLES: THE FOURTEEN POINTS OF WILSON AND THE TREATY OF VERSAILLES..............
58
3. THE PRINCIPLE OF SELF-DETERMINATION OF PEOPLES WITHIN THE UNITED NATIONS AFTER WORLD WAR II. THE POSITIVATION OF THE RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION........ 3.1. The positivation of the right to self-determination of peoples during the decolonization period. Colonial territories as the subjects of the right.......................................................................................... 3.2. The new and ambiguous evolution of the right to self-determination and the secessionist cases. The codification of the principle of territorial integrity................................................................................ 4. SECESSION-REMEDY EPISODES. THE LAST STAGE IN THE EVOLUTION OF THE RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION....................
67 68 76 80
5. THE TWOFOLD NATURE OF THE RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION OF PEOPLES........................................................................... 5.1. Self-determination as a right of peoples: the objective and subjective scopes......................................................................................... 5.1.1. The objective scope of self-determination....................... 5.1.2. The subjective scope of self-determination...................... 5.2. Self-determination as a duty of a third state: the principle of noninterference in the internal affairs of states......................................
101
RECAPITULATION....................................................................................
106
89 90 91 97
10
Índice
Chapter II. The right to secede in comparative constitutional law.............
111
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................
111
1. THE PHENOMENON OF SECESSION AND ITS LEGAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT................................................................................. 1.1. Distinction between remedial secession and democratic secession.......... 1.2. The existence of a right to secede..................................................... 1.2.1. Abstention from international law.................................... 1.2.2. The turn of constitutional law. A global overview of the world´s constitutions................................................... 2. THE TWO HISTORICAL MODELS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF A RIGHT TO SECEDE IN CASE OF AMBIGUITY IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL TEXT................................................................................... 2.1. The traditional United States model and the compact theory during the American Civil War................................................................ 2.2. The constitutional fit of secession. The new model launched by the Supreme Court of Canada............................................................. 2.2.1. … and that the United Kingdom followed with Scotland..................................................................................... 3. THE REGULATION OF A RIGHT TO SECEDE AND ITS CLASH WITH DEMOCRATIC CONSTITUTIONALISM AND THE RULE OF LAW.................................................................................................... 3.1. Is it possible to constitutionalize a right to secede?............................. 3.1.1. Secession and its accomplishment in constitutionalism. The due respect for the constitutional principles and its meta-constitutional nature.................................... 3.2. Is it advisable to constitutionalize a right to secede?.......................... 3.2.1. Suitability of legalizing democratic secession. The conflict between the rule of law and democratic legitimacy on the secession initiative........................................ 4. THE CONSTITUTIONAL PATH FOR DEMOCRATIC SECESSION. THE COLLECTIVE DEMOCRATIC WILL........................................... 4.1. Democratic stimulus in favour of secession that prompts the negotiations on the constitutional accommodation of secession or the exercise of a right to secede........................................................................ 4.2. Theory of the two agreements for a triple consent in the regulated procedure for secession.................................................................. RECAPITULATION....................................................................................
115 115 124 124 130
145 148 161 176
188 191 191 207 207 225 226 236 249
11
Índice
PART II. SECESSION UNDER SPANISH CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Chapter III. Attempts to find a legal channel for secession.......................
261
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................
261
1. THE ATTEMPTS BY THE LEHENDAKARI IBARRETXE..................... 1.1. The Plan Ibarretxe. The amendment of the Basque Statute of Autonomy rejected by Congress.............................................................. 1.2. The Basque consultation law 9/2008.............................................
264
2. EL PROCÈS............................................................................................. 2.1. The 2006 amendment of the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia.......... 2.2. The first independence query on 9 November 2014........................... 2.3. The disconnection laws, the referendum on 1 October 2017 and the UDI...........................................................................................
274 274 278
RECAPITULATION....................................................................................
295
Chapter IV. The actuality of the constitution. The existence of legal channels for secession.....................................................................
301
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................
301
1. THE FEASIBILITY OF THE REMEDIAL-SECESSION IN SPAIN....... 1.1. On the grounds of serious violations of fundamental rights................ 1.1.1. Protection of rights, constitutionalism and rule of law. Guarantees for rights in the Spanish Constitution.......... 1.1.2. Violations of rights alleged by the independence movements............................................................................... 1.2. On the grounds of an infringement of the internal self-determination of an AC.................................................................................... 1.2.1. Internal self-determination in a constitutional democracy and its configuration in Spain................................. 1.2.2. Infringements of internal self-determination alleged by the independence movements.....................................
302 307
2. THE CONSTITUTIONAL SCHEME CHOICE ON DEMOCRATIC SECESSION. THE IMPLICIT PROHIBITION OF SECESSION.......... 2.1. Independence movements in Spain as episodes of democratic secession.. 2.2. The Spanish constitutional scheme on democratic secession of substate entities................................................................................ 3. THE RIGHT TO DECIDE. THE PROHIBITION OF CONSULTING ON SECESSION...................................................................................... 3.1. The scope of the right to decide provided by the independence movements.........................................................................................
264 270
286
308 313 322 323 329 339 340 348 358 359
12
Índice 3.2. Constitutionality of the scope provided to the right to decide................
365
RECAPITULATION....................................................................................
372
Chapter V. The potentiality of the constitution. Prospects of a legal channel for secession..................................................................................
377
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................
377
1. IS IT POSSIBLE TO RECOGNISE A RIGHT TO SECEDE UNDER SPANISH CONSTITUTIONAL LAW?....................................................
380
2. WHEN IS IT ADVISABLE TO RECOGNISE A RIGHT TO SECEDE UNDER SPANISH CONSTITUTIONAL LAW?.....................................
397
3. THE CONSTITUTIONAL PATH FOR DEMOCRATIC SECESSION UNDER SPANISH CONSTITUTIONAL LAW......................................
412
RECAPITULATION....................................................................................
422
Conclusions..................................................................................... References........................................................................................
427 445
Foreword This book examines secession from the perspective of constitutional law. It explores how democracies regulate, or do not regulate secession, the latter being the prevailing option. Moreover, it considers the circumstances in which it would be advisable to do so, and proposes some rules to be followed in such a case. The book contains a wealth of reflections on one of the most controversial constitutional issues of our time, not only in Spain, the country whose experience clearly inspired its author, but also in the rest of Europe and the wider world. The first time I heard Gaspar González Represa talk about secession, was in June 2016 when I chaired the examining board that assessed the final project for his bachelor's degree at the University of Malaga. The project focused on whether an independence referendum could be held in Catalonia under the Spanish constitution. I had met him shortly before on the recommendation of the colleague who had supervised his work. At my office in the Faculty of Law, he explained why, in his opinion, secession in Spain was a subject worthy of a doctoral thesis, and asked me to supervise it. Having already read his work, I decided to wait until after the oral defence of his final project before making a decision. Gaspar gave a remarkable presentation. He argued, on sound legal grounds, that there could be no constitutional justification for an issue of such grave importance to Spain's territorial integrity to be decided by only one part of Spain's national sovereignty, which according to the Constitution “is vested in the Spanish people”, but rather that it should be decided by all. He concluded his presentation by acknowledging that his work left important legal issues unresolved that deserved to be studied in greater depth, and reminded the examining board that he would be very happy to do so if the opportunity arose. Teaching young graduates wishing to pursue an academic career is a risky decision, both for the student and for the tutor.
14
Ángel Rodríguez
Enthusiasm is a good starting point, but other factors are also essential, including the method, discipline, and all the qualities needed for a long-term challenge. Of course, you only know whether the student has these qualities once you are involved in the task. Having worked with Gaspar for more than six years, there is no doubt in my mind that he has them. After graduating, he obtained a Master’s degree in Constitutional Law and received a scholarship from the Italian government to write his doctoral thesis, which he then went on to successfully defend. This book, with a few minor corrections, is the result of his doctoral research. The thesis, which I supervised together with professor Daniela Bifulco, earned him a PhD in Law from both the University of Málaga, Spain and the University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Italy. A few months after Gaspar began his thesis, what at the time seemed to be just a theoretical question, became a reality. Despite being banned, an independence referendum was held in Catalonia in October 2017, and the call for independence by the Catalan authorities and pro-independence political forces was heard around the world, as scenes of police clashing with people queuing in front of clandestine polling stations were broadcast around the world. Both in Catalonia and in Spain as a whole, independence split public opinion. Needless to say, the same happened in the legal academy. There was a proliferation of works for and against independence, many of which pointed out that the same words were often used in confusing, even contradictory, ways. For example, using “self-determination” and “secession” as legal synonyms, despite the fact that the former is governed by international law and the latter by domestic constitutional law. Or the granting of legal status to alleged new rights, which are the subject of political debate but highly controversial from a legal point of view, such as the so called “right to decide” on which some political parties based the holding of the referendum. As well as a lucid legal analysis of these and other terms, and the way they interact with each other, this book suggests inter-
Foreword
15
esting legal ways of dealing with secession in democratic states, should the question arise in the political arena. Far from attempting to encapsulate the complexity of secessionism, which must always be understood in the light of the historical, social and legal particularities of each country, the author instead proposes a thought-provoking theory based on the formula of “two agreements for a triple consent” to regulate a secession procedure. Although inspired by the Spanish case, it is intended to be applicable in any democratic state faced with this problem. It is to be hoped that this book by Gaspar González Represa will help to clarify the legal debate on this issue, and it is quite possible that the legal clarifications may even help the political process. It is definitely a book worthy of your attention.
ÁNGEL RODRÍGUEZ
Full Professor of Constitutional Law University of Malaga
Introduction The study of the independence of sub-state entities breaking away from democratic, constitutional states in this research was sparked by this issue's importance in today's international political arena. Today, independence movements exist across Europe, although those in the old nation-states hog the international limelight. An example of the existence and importance of independence movements in contemporary Europe is Scotland. On 28 June 2022, the Scottish government published the Scottish Independence Referendum Bill proposing 19 October 2023 as the date for a new independence vote. This constituted the launch of a new campaign that aimed to hold a second Scottish independence referendum in barely a decade. However, the roots of this attempt at independence go back to 23 June 2016, when the Brexit referendum resulted in a large difference in votes by the constituent countries of the United Kingdom. Since then, the Scottish independence movement has taken advantage of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union (“EU”), stressing Scotland´s desire for a future in the EU. On 23 November 2022, a request for the unilateral holding of an independence referendum was rejected by the UK Supreme Court, and the vote is opposed by the British government. So the 2023 Scottish independence vote will presumably not take place. I happened to be in Scotland as a visiting researcher for a six-month research stay at the University of Edinburgh when the Scottish government officially announced its plan to hold a second referendum and the Supreme Court rejected it. The opportunity to work on my research at this university at that time was extremely valuable. After four and a half years of doctoral research and having done my dissertation defence in May 2022, there was no better scenario in which to draft this monograph. On 21 February 2022, just two days before I submitted this dissertation at the doctoral student offices of the Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, the President of the Russian Federation,
18
Gaspar González Represa
Vladimir Putin, recognized the independence of the Donetsk and Luhansk territories. This political decision led to a major armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine, with the claims of these separatist territories in eastern Ukraine at the very heart of the ongoing conflict. Some decades ago, the independence of Ukraine from the USSR marked the birth of an ethnically diverse state as a large ethnic Russian population remained within Ukraine in the Donetsk and Luhansk territories. These territories in the Donbas region proclaimed themselves independent republics and sovereign states in 2014, albeit without international recognition. Since then, there have been constant conflicts in eastern Ukraine with local militias formed by pro-Russian rebels claiming the independence of these separatist, self-proclaimed republics. In addition to this conflict, in 2014, Russian troops invaded the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea, unilaterally declaring its independence and de facto annexation to the Russian Federation. In September 2020, when I was halfway through my doctoral course, the second Nagorno-Karabakh War between Azerbaijan and Armenia broke out. The Nagorno-Karabakh separatist region, internationally recognized as a territory of Azerbaijan, held an independence referendum and issued a unilateral declaration of independence in 1991. Like the Donetsk and Luhansk territories, Nagorno-Karabakh grounded its secessionist aspirations on its significantly different ethnic make-up compared to the parent state it was part of, given the Armenian ethnic majority living in Nagorno-Karabakh. Its independence would presumably have allowed annexation to the state with which it shared the same ethnic group, Armenia. However, the self-declared Nagorno-Karabakh Republic lacked international recognition and thus continued to be considered a territory under Azerbaijan sovereignty, the status quo since the first war with Armenia in the early 1990s. The second war over Nagorno-Karabakh territory came to an end in November 2020 with a ceasefire agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia.
Introduction
19
In February 2020, a few months before the second Nagorno-Karabakh War, I took part in the seminar Nuevos Horizontes del Derecho Constitucional held by the Fundación Manuel Giménez Abad. At this seminar, I outlined my progress in the first two years of doctoral research to an examination board in a lecture entitled Secesión en España (Secession in Spain). At that time, shortly before the outset of the Covid-19 pandemic, independence of sub-state entities was the number one political problem in Spain and one of the greatest concerns for Spanish society. The prominent role of this issue in the political, social and academic life of Spain in the previous years was demonstrated to me during those times by the great interest of many colleagues in my research topic. Certainly, independence of sub-state entities was a public issue of enormous importance and interest in my home country, something I was aware of long before starting this research though. One year after the start of my PhD course, I attended the Winter School on Federalism and Governance held by the University of Innsbruck and Eurac Research in February 2019. Its seminar programme focused on the relationship between federalism, democracy and the rule of law and the integration of ethnic and national minorities in federal states. One of the main points discussed was when federal states fail to integrate existing minorities in their territories. This lack of integration can lead to the rise of separatist claims from these minority groups dissatisfied in their current state and which regard secession as the only way to change their situation. During those days, I learned that secession remains a highly topical issue, not only in my home country but throughout the world. Although each independence movement has different characteristics due to the unique socio-political history of each state, I grasped that certain elements were common to all of them. Thus, the problem of a deficient integration of minorities in federal or decentralized states and the consequent emergence of independence movements exists or could exist in many countries around the world and frequently features common traits, which are worth analysing.
20
Gaspar González Represa
Having underlined that secession of sub-state entities remains a major issue on the international political scene today, we may also speak of its great historical importance. The maintenance of the territorial integrity of states has historically been an extremely conflictive issue that continues to generate new armed conflicts. In fact, all European states at some point over the last century have had to deal with independence movements within their territories1. In Europe, the twentieth century was marked by numerous independence processes, political fragmentations, ethnic self-determination attempts and territorial disputes. In the second half of the twentieth century in Africa, there were countless secessions, self-determination efforts of ethnic groups and colonial emancipations. Colonial emancipations played a leading role in the history of the Americas throughout the nineteenth century, and secessionism has been a major issue in recent decades. Quebec nationalism in Canada and the holding of two independence referendums in the Province of Quebec at the end of the twentieth century is one of the most internationally known independence movements and a crucial source of inspiration for many others. Even in the United States, independence movements have made a modest appearance in the political arena in recent years, albeit with little political relevance. In February 2018, I moved to Italy for the start of my PhD course at the Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli. A few weeks later, I attended the seminar Ritornano le picole patria? Autodeterminazione territoriale, secessionismo, referendum (Are small nations reappearing? Territorial self-determination, secessionism and referendum). That series of lectures introduced me to many terms I would become very familiar with in the coming years: self-determination, sovereignty, revolution, secession, independence, nation, people, state, democracy, autonomy, constitutional1
Coppieters, B., “Secessionist Conflicts in Europe”, in Harrison Doyle, D. (Ed.): Secession as an International Phenomenon: From America´s Civil War to Contemporary Separatist Movements, Georgia, University of Georgia Press, p. 237-238.