CARICOM Non-Intervention and Intervention

• Author: Cedric Grant
• Profession: Professor
• Pages: 43-65

43

CARICOM: Non-Intervention and Intervention

International and Regional Norms

The principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of states has

been a cornerstone of international law and an important desideratum of

state practice. States have traditionally held this principle dearly. The

principle is enshrined in the Charter of United Nations (UN Charter), Article

2.7 which states inter alia “Nothing contained in the present Charter should

authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially

within the domestic jurisdiction of any state…” Further, there are numerous

United Nations (UN) resolutions which reaffirm this principle and call for its

observance by states. The best known is the Declaration on the Inadmissibility

of Intervention and Interference in the Internal Affairs of States (Declaration

of Non-Intervention), which was adopted in 1981. This state centric approach

to the ordering of international relations and for the observance of fundamental

rights and freedom in a state contends that there can be no legitimacy for

intervention in order to restore these rights when they are violated or abridged

(Grant, 2004, p ).

There has been, however, an erosion of the old Westphalian view contained

in the UN Charter and resolutions. In the place of the classical state-to-state

diplomacy there now exists the view that there is a limit to the insistence on

CARICOM: NON-INTERVENTION AND

INTERVENTION1

22

22

2Professor Cedric Grant

1. This paper forms part of a report on ‘Governance in the Caribbean Community’

prepared by Professor Cedric Grant for the United Nations Development Fund,

December 2004.

44 Interview, Border and Maritime Issues in CARICOM

the prerogatives of the sovereign state and the emphasis on the conduct of

state behavior within its borders as its sole concern. Globalization or the

increase in transnational relations has contributed significantly to the

redefining of the concept of sovereignty and non-intervention. This

phenomenon is increasingly ignoring territorial borders and is occurring

well beyond state control. Multilateral financial institutions now routinely

impinge on the affairs of the sovereign state by attaching conditionalites to

their loans.

In the political realm, the new perspective is upheld for a two-fold purpose.

It is used to compel or influence states to improve their behavior in their

external policy and in their internal policy towards their own citizens. These

were the rationale invoked in the case of the Tanzanian intervention in Uganda

at a time when the principle of non-intervention was still being zealously

safeguarded. The OAS efforts to influence the behavior of President Fujamori

of Peru ultimately led to his abandoning office.

In 2002, the International Commission on Intervention and State

Sovereignty was established to examine the dilemma existing between these

complex and contrasting concepts: state sovereignty and the right to intervene.

The Commission recommended that the international community adopt the

concept of the “responsibility to protect” civilians rather than pursue “this

right to intervene” in exceptional circumstances as the UN Charter also

permits. In addition, the report emphasized the need to create preventive

models that could prevent situations from becoming uncontrollable (UN ICISS

Report, 2002).

Enchantment with the principle of non-interference and claims about its

erosion are elements of a puzzle. Lesser control over what happens inside

their borders has made governments more sensitive to, and interested in

preserving state sovereignty. While it could be argued that sovereignty and

non-interference have become less important for nation–states, similarly, it

could be contended that the opposite is true.

Implications for CARICOM

CARICOM countries adopted the state centric approach with the

consequent insistence on non-interference and non-intervention as an

international norm. Guyana, supported by other CARICOM countries, was

instrumental in the formulation and adoption of the Declaration on Non-

Intervention (Forde,1990 ); (Jackson 2003:49).