The Right to Secession: An Antisecessionist Defence

Political Studies, 1984

Palgrave Macmillan (Springer)

‘Breaking new ground regarding the justification of secession, this book provides a novel and nuanced middle ground between two extremes: remedial right only theories which fail to take the value of self-determination seriously enough; and primary right theories which are so permissive in justifying secession as to create unacceptable incentives for strategic behavior and unacceptable risks of instability.’ –Allen Buchanan, University of Arizona, USA ‘This book offers detailed analyses of many of the practical difficulties that surround the constitutionalisation of the right to secede, while applying moral philosophical precepts with considerable subtlety in helping to inform existing institutional arrangements. In combining political theory and law in such a capacious way, it offers perhaps the most comprehensive and sophisticated account of the law and practice of secession to date.” –Stephen Tierney, University of Edinburgh, UK ‘In this book, Bossacoma challenges the prevailing views on secession, which, he contends, fail to satisfy basic moral principles widely shared in liberal democracies. His defence of a qualified right of secession combines political philosophy and institutional design in an original and persuasive way. Anyone interested in this topic must certainly read this timely book.’ –Víctor Ferreres Comella, Pompeu Fabra University, Spain, and University of Texas at Austin, USA

Constitutional Law and Politics of Secession, 2023

To build legitimate and successful secession claims and strategies, both moral and legal arguments are, and should be, important. As regards moral reasoning, a nuanced primary theory of secession with remedial features is presented. With respect to the legal field, the remedial logic of general international law is distinguished from that of constitutional law. Constitutionalizing a qualified primary right to secede is then defended with the aim of fostering multinational accommodation and, ultimately, consensual secession. Legal barriers to secede, and the legitimate ends they may have, will be analyzed. Although the legal regulation of secession is often partial and defective, legality must be taken seriously in liberal-democratic settings. Among other reasons, we will argue that this is due to legality being closely connected to feasibility and responsibility.

The following article explores an until-recently forgotten topic in political philosophy: the morality of secession. The normative theories of just secession will be explored in the text. The political conception of Allen Buchanan is explored in the case of just-cause theories, David Miller's approach for the case of national self-determination theories, and, finally, Harry Beran's suggestions for plebiscitary theories. Then, I analyze the advantages and disadvantages of all mainstream theories of secession. My conclusion is that for the contemporary liberal democratic states, the most justified approach is the one which combines the good sides of plebiscitary and national self-determination theories. I favor primary right secession because most of the contemporary state borders were drawn during undemocratic conditions and should be open to changes under democratic conditions if the majority desires them. However, I discovered that the theories of secession avoided paying attention to the third world countries where secessionist potential is far higher.

Las Torres de Lucca. International Journal of Political Philosophy , 2021

Republican theorists have paid little attention to the normative problems of secession conflicts. So far, there is no such thing as a democratic republican theory of right of secession (TRS); nor any comprehensive analysis of current TRS has ever been undertaken from a democratic republican point of view. This article tries to fill this second gap as a first step in order to fill that first one. In doing so, it shows how secession conflicts pose threats for two core democratic republican values: freedom and inclusion. The threats are, concretely, those of exclusion, blackmailing minorities, arbitrary permanent majorities, and instability. The article also shows how, due to their respective pro-unionist or pro-secessionist biases, no current TRS seems to be able to handle those threats; and briefly outlines how a democratic republican TRS, based on a non-unilateralist logic, could be developed.

Political Science

Secession and secessionists movements have proliferated since the end of the Second World War. The academic literature has extensively explored these movements from different aspects. To begin, scholars have developed several legal approaches to explain when and if so how secession should take place, resulting in debates about the normative basis and legality of self-determination. Normative and philosophical approaches have sought to establish a number of necessary preconditions for secession. States, according to some of these authors, should allow secession to happen when they believe that it is morally and practically acceptable. The political economy of secession and secessionist movements has been another key area of research. Debates among scholars in this area have focused on whether wealthy or poor regions are more or less likely to pursue secession, how the presence of oil resources may establish more opportunities for the groups to secede along with incentives for the sta...

Las Torres de Lucca- International Journal of Political Philosophy, 2021

This thesis is an essay in constitutional theory and the concept of law. Narrowly framed, the study addresses whether and to what extent constitutional law makes provision for secession. What place does secession have, or should it have, under municipal constitutional law? Of course, whether secession indeed occupies some place under a constitutional system depends very much on the text of any given constitutional document and the current body of constitutional law and norms. It suggests a factual enquiry, a matter for descriptive jurisprudence. Inasmuch as this consideration quickly gives way to a more searching enquiry, it would seem to engage aspects of political theory more so than of legal theory. The absence of specific constitutional provisions and norms regarding secession, and the practical nature of secession as state-making and -breaking lead to a not unjustifiable predilection to treat secession as a question of purely political theory. State-breaking and state-making arguably are political matters antecedent to and beyond the reach of law.

Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy, 2018

This encyclopaedia entry explores various definitions of secession in legal scholarship, normative ethics and political science. It argues that a permissive type of definition encompasses multi-disciplinary approaches to secession better than restrictive type of definition.

Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks, 2022

Pinning down the concept of secession is not an easy task, but for purposes of these remarks, we define secession as the emergence of a new state in a part of the metropolitan territory of an existing state. 1 These secessionist claims thus usually entail a clash between the right of self-determination of peoples and the principle of territorial integrity of states. Groups advancing secessionist claims tend to refer to self-determination as if it were an absolute right of peoples, 2 while governments trying to counter secession interpret territorial integrity as an absolute right of states. 3 But of course, neither right is absolute. Territorial integrity is a principle that is included in the Friendly Relations Declaration and is generally considered to reflect customary international law regulating this matter: Nothing in the foregoing paragraphs [concerning the right of self-determination] shall be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States conducting themselves in compliance with the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples as described above and thus possessed of a government representing the whole people belonging to the territory without distinction as to race, creed or colour. 4 1 Definitions of the concept of secession range from broader to more restricted approaches, with a key point of difference often being whether (or not) there was consent from the parent state. As is apparent, the editors have adopted a definition that does not require a lack of consent. Other scholars adopting this approach include, for example,