Explainer

What self-determination means in different contexts

Self-determination is a legal and political principle whose consequences depend on context. It is not an automatic right to secede.

2 min read · updated 15 September 2026

The core texts

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that all peoples have the right of self-determination, by which they freely determine their political status and pursue their development, and it requires states — including those administering non-self-governing territories — to promote and respect that right.[1][2]

The UN General Assembly’s 1970 Friendly Relations Declaration lists independence, free association, integration or any other freely determined status as ways of implementing self-determination.[3]

Decolonisation

UN texts apply self-determination most directly to colonial and other non-self-governing territories. The 1960 Declaration on decolonisation called for immediate steps to transfer powers to the peoples of such territories, and the 1970 Declaration treats a colony as having a status separate from the administering state until its people have exercised self-determination.[4][5]

Courts have applied this. In 2019 the International Court of Justice found that the decolonisation of Mauritius had not been lawfully completed and treated the territorial integrity of a non-self-governing territory as part of customary law; in 1975 it found that historical ties claimed over Western Sahara did not displace self-determination.[6][7]

Inside existing states

The same texts also protect the territorial integrity of states. The 1960 Declaration rejects attempts to disrupt a country’s national unity, and the 1970 Declaration says self-determination does not authorise dismembering states whose governments represent the whole people without discrimination.[8][9]

Domestic courts have drawn on this. The Supreme Court of Canada found no right of unilateral secession for Quebec in international law because Quebec was not a colonial or oppressed people.[10] The UK Supreme Court held in 2022 that the international right was not in issue in the Scottish referendum reference.[11]

What a declaration does and does not decide

In 2010 the International Court of Justice concluded that Kosovo’s declaration of independence did not violate international law, but it expressly did not decide whether international law gives a positive right to declare independence.[12]

Sources for this page

Each number marks a specific claim. Notes give the source, its locator and how it relates to the claim.

  1. 1.

    Claim: Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that all peoples have the right of self-determination, by virtue of which they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

    • United Nations General Assembly, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (United Nations Treaty Series, vol. 999, Adopted 1966; registered 23 March 1976) link, art. 1(1), p. 173. Source record
  2. 2.

    Claim: The Covenant requires its parties, including those administering Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, to promote and respect the right of self-determination in conformity with the UN Charter.

    • United Nations General Assembly, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (United Nations Treaty Series, vol. 999, Adopted 1966; registered 23 March 1976) link, art. 1(3), p. 173. Source record
  3. 3.

    Claim: The 1970 Friendly Relations Declaration lists the establishment of a sovereign and independent State, free association or integration with an independent State, or any other political status freely determined by a people as modes of implementing self-determination.

    • United Nations General Assembly, General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV): Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (United Nations, 24 October 1970) link, annex, principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples. Source record
  4. 4.

    Claim: Resolution 1514 (XV) of 1960 declared that all peoples have the right to self-determination and that immediate steps should be taken in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories to transfer all powers to their peoples in accordance with their freely expressed will.

    • United Nations General Assembly, General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV): Declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples (United Nations, 14 December 1960) link, paras. 2 and 5. Source record
  5. 5.

    Claim: The Declaration states that a colony or other Non-Self-Governing Territory has a status separate and distinct from the territory of the administering State until its people have exercised self-determination.

    • United Nations General Assembly, General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV): Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (United Nations, 24 October 1970) link, annex, principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples. Source record
  6. 6.

    Claim: In its 2019 advisory opinion on the Chagos Archipelago, the International Court of Justice found that the decolonisation of Mauritius was not lawfully completed, and that State practice and opinio juris confirmed the customary character of the right to territorial integrity of a non-self-governing territory as a corollary of self-determination.

    • International Court of Justice, Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965: advisory opinion (case overview) (International Court of Justice) link, case overview. Source record
  7. 7.

    Claim: In 1975 the International Court of Justice found no tie of territorial sovereignty between Western Sahara and Morocco or the Mauritanian entity of a kind that might affect the application of self-determination.

    • International Court of Justice, Western Sahara: advisory opinion (case overview) (International Court of Justice) link, case overview. Source record
  8. 8.

    Claim: The same declaration states that any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.

    • United Nations General Assembly, General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV): Declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples (United Nations, 14 December 1960) link, para. 6. Source record
  9. 9.

    Claim: It also provides that nothing in that principle authorises or encourages action that would dismember or impair the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign States conducting themselves in compliance with equal rights and self-determination and possessed of a government representing the whole people without distinction as to race, creed or colour.

    • United Nations General Assembly, General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV): Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (United Nations, 24 October 1970) link, annex, principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples. Source record
  10. 10.

    Claim: The Supreme Court of Canada found no right of unilateral secession for Quebec in international law, concluding that Quebec did not meet the threshold of a colonial or oppressed people.

    • Supreme Court of Canada, Reference re Secession of Quebec (Supreme Court of Canada, 20 August 1998) link, paras. 137–139, at p. 287; para. 154, at p. 295. Source record
  11. 11.

    Claim: In 2022 the UK Supreme Court rejected an argument based on the international right to self-determination in the Scottish referendum reference, holding that the right was not in issue.

    • Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, Reference by the Lord Advocate of devolution issues under paragraph 34 of Schedule 6 to the Scotland Act 1998 (Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, 23 November 2022) link, paras. 84–90. Source record
  12. 12.

    Claim: In its 2010 advisory opinion the International Court of Justice concluded that Kosovo’s declaration of independence of 17 February 2008 did not violate international law, while stating that it did not need to decide whether international law conferred a positive entitlement to declare independence.

    • International Court of Justice, Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in respect of Kosovo: advisory opinion (case overview) (International Court of Justice) link, case overview. Source record

Source note

Show in the notes list