maantveediyo sammelan

raajya ke kartavya evam adhikaaron hetu maantveediyo sammelan ek maaaintveediyo, yurugue mein December 26, 1933 ko Amreeki raajyon par saatavein sammelan ke dauraan hastaaksharit sandhi thi. is antararaashtreeya sammelan mein sanyukt raajya ke raashtrapati shri. frainklin di roojvelt evam sanyukt raashtra raajya sachiv Cordell Hull ne achhe padosi neeti ko ghoshit kiya, jo ki san raajya ke sashastr madhyavart ko antar-Amreeki ghatnaaon mein rokati thi. yeh shri roojvelt dvaara ek kootanitik prayaas tha "en:Yankee imperialism," ke pratyaksh gyaan ki disha ko palatane mein, jo ki unke poorv adhikaari theodor roojvelt dvaara chalaaya gaya tha. yeh pratha 19 raajyon dvaara hastaaksharit hai jinmein 3 kuchh aarakshan sahit hain samyukt raajya, Brazil evam peroo.[1]).

The convention sets out the definition, rights and duties of statehood. Most well-known is article 1, which sets out the four criteria for statehood that have sometimes been recognized as an accurate statement of customary international law:

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

Furthermore, the first sentence of article 3 explicitly states that "The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states." This is known as the declarative theory of statehood.

Some have questioned whether these criteria are sufficient, as they allow less-recognized entities like the Republic of China or even entirely non-recognized entities like the Principality of Sealand to claim full status as states. According to the alternative constitutive theory of statehood, a state exists only insofar as it is recognized by other states. It should not be confused with the Estrada doctrine.

There have also been attempts to further broaden the convention's definition, although they have gained less support. Founders of non-territorial micronations commonly assert that the requirement in the Montevideo Convention of a defined territory is in some way wrong-headed, for largely unspecified reasons. Some non-territorial entities, notably the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, are indeed considered subjects of international law, but these do not aspire to statehood.


The states that signed this convention are: Honduras, United States of America, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Argentina, Venezuela, Uruguay, Paraguay, Mexico, Panama, Guatemala, Brazil, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Colombia, Chile, Peru, Cuba[2]. However, as a restatement of customary international law, the Montevideo Convention merely codified existing legal norms and its principles therefore do not apply merely to the signatories, but to all subjects of international law as a whole[3].

The European Union, in the principal statement of its Badinter Committee,[4] follows the Montevideo Convention in its definition of a state: by having a territory, a population, and a political authority. The committee also found that the existence of states was a question of fact, while the recognition by other states was purely declaratory and not a determinative factor of statehood.[5]

Switzerland, although not a member of the European Union, adheres to the same principle, stating that "neither a political unit needs to be recognized to become a state, nor does a state have the obligation to recognize another one. At the same time, neither recognition is enough to create a state, nor does its absence abolish it."[6]

inhein bhi dekhein

vikisors mein maantveediyo sammelan lekh se sambandhit mool saahitya hai.
  • saarvabhaumikta
  • Dollar diplomacy


  1. List of signatories of the Montevideo Convention
  2. Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States
  3. Harris, D.J. (ed) 2004 "Cases and Materials on International Law" 6th Ed. at p. 99. Sweet and Maxwell, London
  4. The Badinter Arbitration Committee (full title), named for its chair, ruled on the question of whether the Republics of Croatia, Macedonia, and Slovenia, who had formally requested recognition by the members of the European Union and by the EU itself, had met conditions specified by the Council of Ministers of the European Community on December 16, 1991. [1]
  5. [Opinion No 1., Badinter Arbitration Committee, states that "the state is commonly defined as a community which consists of a territory and a population subject to an organized political authority; that such a state is characterized by sovereignty" and that "the effects of recognition by other states are purely declaratory."]
  6. [Switzerland's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, DFA, Directorate of International Law: "Recognition of States and Governments," 2005.]