A critical exploration of internal self-determination under international law, with particular reference to the Sri Lankan conflict

Abstract

Internal self-determination is a popular, but insufficiently researched, concept in mainstream international law scholarship. It has emerged and gained prominence as a consequence of the understanding that the right to self-determination in international law is composed of two natural and distinct dimensions, namely: the ‘internal’ (guaranteeing political and democratic freedoms to people within a State); and the ‘external’ (guaranteeing political independence from colonial rule). Traditionally understood to be promoted by the West, ‘internal’ self-determination is often regarded as a right or principle guaranteeing democratic governance to people within a State, and importantly, political autonomy for minority groups.

This thesis is a critical study which seeks to problematize the mainstream understanding of ‘internal’ self-determination. Its principal arguments are broadly three-fold: that ‘internal’ self-determination is based on an artificially constructed dichotomy of the concept of self-determination; that while both the West and the Third World have promoted ‘internal’ self-determination in different ways, its promotion by powerful actors needs to be approached with caution; and that contrary to popular perception, ‘internal’ self-determination can be problematic for minority groups, both as a distinct right or principle of international law, and as a political slogan.

These central arguments are further illustrated and substantiated by a critical and detailed examination of the protracted ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka; i.e. through a re-reading of the conflict from an ‘internal self-determination perspective. The thesis also contains brief studies of a few other cases.

This thesis proposes that ‘internal’ self-determination is yet another political expression which, contrary to the popular mainstream view, has indeterminate potential. The broader challenge is to subject ‘internal’ self-determination to constant critical scrutiny, exploring how the concept advances or retards the realization of greater equality and self-determination by peoples, when struggling within complex and hierarchically-constructed political structures. For minority peoples in protracted self-determination conflict situations, ‘internal’ self-determination is best understood as a choice arising after or upon (and not before or in the absence of) the recognition of their right to self-determination.