Principle of Territorial Integrity

Definition:
Territorial integrity is the principle under international law that nation-states should not attempt to
promote secessionist movements or to promote border changes in other nation-states. Conversely it states
that imposition by force of a border change is an act of aggression.
In recent years there has been tension between this principle and the concept of humanitarian
intervention under Article 73.b of the United Nations Charter "to develop self-government, to take due
account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of
their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples
and their varying stages of advancement."
History of territorial integrity
As far back as we have records, there have been political units claiming a definite territory. Intrusion into
this territory was an act of war, and normally settled by battle. There were also sometimes several layers
of authority, with units waging war on each other while both recognising some higher authority.
Mediaeval barons would fight private wars while still acknowledging the same king. This was also the
case in the Spring and Autumn Period in ancient China, when the Eastern Zhou Dynasty were nominal
rulers.
Supporters of concept of Westphalian sovereignty consider that the modern idea of territorial integrity
began with the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. This is disputed.
The League of Nations was intended to uphold territorial integrity and other principles of international
law. It did condemn theItalian invasion of Ethiopia. It broadly supported the Chinese Republic over the
creation of Manchukuo in Manchuria and eastern Inner Mongolia. Most historians say that the League
was discredited by its failure to make these judgements effective.
With the formation of the United Nations (UN) and, later, such organizations as the Conference on
Security and Cooperation in Europe (now Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe),
territorial integrity became a part of international resolutions. The Helsinki Final Act dealt with both the
inviolability of frontiers and the territorial integrity of States, among other things.
http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Territorial_integrity.html
Introduction / Definition:
The principle of territorial integrity is an important part of the international legal order and is enshrined
in the Charter of the United Nations, in particular in Article 2, paragraph 4[1] (the prohibition of the use
of force), as well as in other important texts, including those on self-determination. The concept includes
the inviolability of the territory of the State, including territory under the effective control and possession
of a State. The International Court has held that the scope of the principle of territorial integrity is
confined to the sphere of relations between States.[2]

[1] International Court of Justice, Accordance with international law of the unilateral Declaration of
Independence of Kosovo, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports (2010), para. 80.
[2] Ibid.
Historical Evolution:
The concept of territorial integrity, if not the term, is as old as the sovereign State. It is one of the rights
inherent in sovereignty and independence. Its chief importance lies in the field of the international law on
the use of force (the jus ad bellum). Until the development of the general prohibition on the use of force
in the first half of the Twentieth Century the territorial integrity of States was only very imperfectly
protected by international law. Various pacific uses of force were subject to limitations imposed by
international law, and the Covenant of the League of Nations imposed procedural restraints. But it was
only with the Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928 that States renounced war as an instrument of national policy.
In the wake of fhe Second World War, the United Nations Charter of 1945 the imposed a general
prohibition on the use of force except where authorized by the Security Council, subject to the inherent
right of self-defence (see Waldock).
Theoretical Implications:
The notion of territorial integrity is fundamental to the Westphalian State system, and underlies the
contemporary rules of international law on the use of force, as embodied in the Charter of the United
Nations and customary international law. Many now challenge this view of the world. The increasing
importance of international human rights law, including the right of self-determination, has - it is often
suggested - made this view outmoded. Yet such views are essentially of a political nature, and as a matter
of law it is difficult to discern any weakening of the principle of territorial integrity. For example, it was
concern for territorial integrity and the stability of borders that led the Organization of African Unity
(now the African Union) to insist upon the maintenance of the colonial borders as at independence.
Indeed, international law still affords a central place to territorial integrity, even in the context of selfdetermination.
Some would even go so far as to suggest that in an age of globalization the principle of territorial integrity
no longer has the importance it once has. This is a view propounded chiefly by international relations
experts. Few international lawyers would agree; the International Court has recently reaffirmed that the
principle is an important part of the international legal order.[1]
Article 2.4 of the Charter of the United Nations provides All Members shall refrain in their
international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political
independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
The principle in Article 2.4, and with it the concept of territorial integrity, is repeated and elaborated on in

important declarations of the UN General Assembly, including the Friendly Relations Declaration of 1970
and the Definition of Aggression of 1974. The words against the territorial integrity and political
independence of any state were inserted into Article 2.4 of the Charter at the San Francisco Conference
in 1945 in order to emphasise the importance of not infringing on territorial integrity and political
independence; and they cannot be interpreted (as is occasionally suggested) as limiting the non-use of
force principle embodied in the Charter.
It is important to note that the concept of prohibition of the use of force, which reflects the territorial
integrity principle, protects territory under a States effective control and possession, not only that over
which it has de jure title[2]. The fact that sovereignty over a piece of territory is disputed in no way
entitles a State to use force to recover territory which it claims; to do so would infringe the territorial
integrity of the State in control of the disputed territory. Force may not be used as a means of settling
international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers (Friendly
Relations Declaration).
The territorial integrity of a State may be infringed by incursion by the armed forces of another State into
its airspace and, where they exist, internal waters and (except in exercise of navigational rights)
archipelagic waters and territorial sea. But it may also be infringed indirectly, such as by organizing or
encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands [] for incursion into the territory of
another State (Friendly Relations Declaration), as well supporting and arming insurgents (acts of civil
strife or terrorist acts, in the words of the Friendly Relations Declaration). Territorial integrity may also
be infringed by allowing cross-border marches by organized groups of private persons.
The significance of the principle of territorial integrity is underlined by the fact that, in both the UN
General Assemblys 1974 Definition of Aggression (UNGA res. 3314 (XXIX)) and the definition of
crime of aggression adopted by the 2010 Review Conference of the Rome Statue of the International
Criminal Court (Res. RC/Res.6), aggression or act of aggression means the use of armed force
against inter alia the territorial integrity of another State.
[1] International Court of Justice, Accordance with international law of the unilateral Declaration of
Independence of Kosovo, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports (2010), para. 80.
[2] Effective control and possession is protected through the prohibition of the use of force and not
through the principle of territorial integrity (see Oscar Schachter).
Practical Applications:
One potential inroad into the notion of territorial integrity is the development of responsibility to
protect, but this too is more a matter of policy than a legal concept. It is still too early to assess the status

or impact of this notion. The UN General Assembly, in paragraph 139 of the Summit Outcome Document
(resolution 60/1 of September 2005), meeting at the level of Heads of State and Government, affirmed
that we are prepared to take collective action, in a timely and decisive manner, through the Security
Council, in accordance with the Charter, including Chapter VII, on a case-by-case basis and in
cooperation with relevant regional organizations as appropriate, should peaceful means be inadequate and
national authorities are manifestly failing to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic
cleansing and crimes against humanity. The notion has subsequently been under continuing
consideration by the UN General Assembly, and has been recalled in GA resolutions and by the Security
Council. The UN Secretary General has appointed a Special Adviser, and submitted a series of reports
beginning in 2009.
There is a certain tension between the right of self-determination and the territorial integrity of States. In
the Friendly Relations Declaration, the seventh paragraph under the heading The principle of equal rights
and self-determination of peoples (the so-called safeguard clause) provides that Nothing in the
foregoing paragraphs 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 accordance with the principle of equal rights and selfdetermination 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. The following paragraph
states categorically that [e]very State shall refrain from any action aimed at the partial or total disruption
of the national unity or territorial integrity of any other State or country[MGK/KDM2]. This tension was
much discussed in the Kosovo case, but the International Court did not find it necessary to resolve the
matter.[1]
A parallel principle of territorial integrity exists in the context of self-determination. In its resolution 1514
(XV), the UN General Assembly declared that [a]ny attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the
national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the Purposes and Principles of
the United Nations. And, as noted above, this is reflected in the Friendly Relations Declarations
reference to the territorial integrity of any State or country.
[1] International Court of Justice, Accordance with international law of the unilateral Declaration of
Independence of Kosovo, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports (2010), paras. 82-83.
References / Further Reading:
Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Territories and Peoples (United Nations
resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960)

Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among
States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (United Nations General Assembly resolution
2625 (XXV) of 24 October 1970)
Definition of Aggression, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in resolution 3314 (XXIX) of
14 December 1974
H M Waldock, The Regulation of the Use of Force by Individual States in International Law, 81Hague
Recueil 1952, 415
Blay, Territorial Integrity and Political Independence, in: Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public
International Law (with further references)
http://pesd.princeton.edu/?q=node/271

UN CHARTER
Article 2
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance
with the following Principles.
1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall
fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that
international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against
the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner
inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
5. All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with
the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United
Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.
6. The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in
accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international
peace and security.
7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters
which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to
submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the
application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.

CHAPTER XI: DECLARATION REGARDING NON-SELF-GOVERNING

TERRITORIES
Article 73
Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories
whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the
interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation
to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present
Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and, to this end:
a.
to ensure, with due respect for the culture of the peoples concerned, their political, economic,
social, and educational advancement, their just treatment, and their protection against abuses;
b. to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and
to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the
particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of
advancement;
c. to further international peace and security;
d. to promote constructive measures of development, to encourage research, and to co-operate
with one another and, when and where appropriate, with specialized international bodies with a
view to the practical achievement of the social, economic, and scientific purposes set forth in
this Article; and
e. to transmit regularly to the Secretary-General for information purposes, subject to such
limitation as security and constitutional considerations may require, statistical and other
information of a technical nature relating to economic, social, and educational conditions in the
territories for which they are respectively responsible other than those territories to which
Chapters XII and XIII apply.

Article 74
Members of the United Nations also agree that their policy in respect of the territories to which this
Chapter applies, no less than in respect of their metropolitan areas, must be based on the general
principle of good-neighbourliness, due account being taken of the interests and well-being of the rest of
the world, in social, economic, and commercial matters.