Manufacturing Territorial Integrity with the International Court of Justice: The Somaliland-Puntland Dispute and Uti Possidetis

Washington University Global Studies Law Review Volume 11 Issue 4 Global Nuclear Energy Law and Regulatory Symposium 2012 Manufacturing Territorial Integrity with the International Court of Justice: The Somaliland-Puntland Dispute and Uti Possidetis Michael Farrell Washington University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_globalstudies Part of the Courts Commons, and the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Michael Farrell, Manufacturing Territorial Integrity with the International Court of Justice: The SomalilandPuntland Dispute and Uti Possidetis, 11 WASH. U. GLOBAL STUD. L. REV. 817 (2012), https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_globalstudies/vol11/iss4/3 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Global Studies Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact . MANUFACTURING TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY WITH THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE: THE SOMALILAND-PUNTLAND DISPUTE AND UTI POSSIDETIS INTRODUCTION “[T]he bias [in] existing law is towards stability, the status quo, and the present effective possession; the tendency of international courts is to let sleeping dogs lie. This is right, for the stability of territorial boundaries must always be the ultimate aim.”1 This sentiment asserted by Professor Jennings is certainly valid regarding internationally recognized nationstates.2 In other cases, however, international courts must “devise a legal regime” to solve border disputes among unrecognized territories,3 commonly referred to as “de facto states” or “quasi-states.”4 Yet, quasistates are currently unable to procure declarative judgments from the institution that traditionally governs border disputes, the International Court of Justice (“ICJ”).5 Somaliland, being a quasi-state, is therefore unable to petition the ICJ for a resolution to its border dispute with Puntland.6 The international community, however, has a demonstrated interest in resolving this quarrel,7 as Somaliland and Puntland are fairly stable bourgeoning 1. R.Y. JENNINGS, THE ACQUISITION OF TERRITORY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW 70 (1963). 2. “[I]n a properly ordered society, territorial boundaries will be among the most stable of all institutions.” Id. 3. “It is in [disputed frontiers] that international law needs to extend its influence and sway, and in order to do that it will be necessary to devise legal regimes sufficiently flexible to permit of the adjustments to shifting patterns of international power that may be needed for a long time to come.” Id. 4. See infra notes 57–62 and accompanying text. 5. See infra notes 63–68 and accompanying text. 6. See infra notes 129–33. 7. The United States has recently increased aid to Somaliland and Puntland for employment, development, and infrastructure. Hussein Yusuf, America looks to Puntland and Somaliland, THE DAILY STAR (Oct. 14, 2010), http://www.dailystar.com.lb/Opinion/Commentary/Oct/14/Americalooks-to-Puntland-and-Somaliland.ashx#axzz2GHA1BrFp (“[T]his policy change allows the United States . . . to provide a foundation for long-lasting change through . . . infrastructure, economic development and security.”). The Somaliland president has also been invited to visit the United States in order to strengthen international relations between the two governments. US Government Officially Invites Somaliland President, SOMALILAND PRESS (Dec. 28, 2010), http://somalilandpress.com/usgovernment-officially-invites-somaliland-president-19609 (‘“The President [of Somalia] has accepted the invitation from the US government and that the visit will be fixed at jointly agreed date.”’). Finally, Somaliland, Ethiopia and China have recently negotiated several economic agreements to facilitate oil and gas trading between the nations. Somaliland, Ethiopia and China to Sign Trilateral Deals, SOMALILAND PRESS (Aug. 14, 2011), http://somalilandpress.com/somaliland-ethiopia-and- 817 Washington University Open Scholarship 818 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY GLOBAL STUDIES LAW REVIEW [VOL. 11:817 democracies, while their “parent state,” Somalia, exists in utter disarray.8 Somalia’s internal government has been consistently marred with severe corruption,9 resulting in an austere lack of international credibility10 and pervasive bouts of civil violence.11 This Note argues that the most logical resolution to the clashes between Somaliland and Puntland can be found in the ICJ’s legal mechanisms for solving international border disputes, most notably uti possidetis.12 The Court’s jurisprudence can be applied to render a temporary ruling on the location of Somaliland’s frontier, with the prospect of stabilizing the disputed territory until a permanent solution is developed for co-existence with a federalized Somalia. Part I of this Note will begin by exploring the territorial history of Somalia. Part II will introduce quasi-states and their treatment within the international community. Part III will detail the legal regime used by the ICJ to solve border disputes, specifically the doctrine of uti possidetis. Finally, Part IV will apply the ICJ’s border-resolving mechanisms to the Somaliland-Puntland dispute. china-to-sign-trilateral-deals-23306 (“[S]omaliland, Ethiopia and China are expected to sign trilateral agreements on gas, oil and logistic deals in the days ahead.”); see also infra note 10. 8. The Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs stated: “We think that [Somaliland and Puntland] have been zones of relative political and civil stability, and we think they will, in fact, be a bulwark against extremism and radicalism that might emerge from [southern Somalia].” SOMALIA: Somaliland and Puntland to Cooperate on Security, INTEGRATED REG’L INFO. NETWORK (Sept. 28, 2010), http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportID=90607. Due to military conflict in the Sool region of Somalia, “Somaliland and Puntland risk the loss of their most important asset—their relative peacefulness in comparison with the situation in the south of Somalia, particularly in Mogadishu.” Markus V. Hoehne, Puntland and Somaliland Clashing in Northern Somalia: Who Cuts the Gordian Knot?, SOC. SCI. RESEARCH COUNCIL 1 (Nov. 7, 2007), http://hornofafrica.ssrc.org/Hoehne. 9. Maro Silva, Somalia: State Failure, Piracy, and the Challenge to International Law, 50 VA. J. INT’L L. 553, 558 (2010) (“[T]he only defining characteristics of the Somali government are corruption and criminality.”). 10. Most recently, on February 3, 2011, Somalia’s parliament voted to extend its self-imposed mandate to run Somalia. This unilateral decision has spurred international dissent from the United Nations, United States, and the United Kingdom. See Alex Thurston, Somalia Transitional Parliament Extends Term Three Years, Prompting Criticism, CHRISTIAN SCI. MONITOR (Feb. (...truncated)