ABSTRACT

LEGITIMACY OF INTERIM GOVERNMENTS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW

The role of international law in political communication in the practice of interim governance is
it seeks to develop a clearer understanding of the value of membership of an international human
rights treaty regime for assessments of the legitimacy of interim governance arrangements. The
paper has a particular focus on the case of Afghanistan. It has three main parts. The first part
considers the way in which assessments of the legitimacy of interim governments are structured
(it argues for legitimacy of promises to be added to the established two part schema of origin and
exercise). The second part examines key considerations relevant for the extent to which political
communication rights exert constraint on the discretion of interim governments. The third part
examines three modalities by which the strength of political communication rights as a source of
constraint might be strengthened: UN SC resolution, peace agreement, and aid agreement. A key
argument is that membership of an international human rights regime with political
communication rights is a reason to take more seriously the promises of interim governments to
pursue democracy, as it provides a platform for international scrutiny of the efforts that are made
to move towards democratic governance. However, it is further contended that in practice the
law appears to be too easily overlooked by both interim governments and the international actors
that keep them in authority.

The identity of an interim government and its capacity to govern can be greatly influenced by
international actors (third states and international organisations). Key ways in which this
influence is exerted include a mixture of direct and indirect involvement in negotiations, legal
recognition of governmental status, and provision of military, technical, administrative, and
financial, resources. Interim governance that is dependent on international actors raises major
legitimacy questions, especially from the perspective of the principle of self-determination. This
is because the establishment and continuation of authority based on international involvement
interrupts the connection between the population and the government. It is also because the
decisions of interim governments can have significant implications for how post-conflict
reconstruction (and with it the future of the state and its population) unfolds.

NAME: L.RADHA KRISHNA

ROLL NO: 2016055

SECTION: A

SUBJECT: PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW