Recognition of States and Governments: Principles & Theories

Recognition in international law is the decisive act that determines whether a political community can participate as a sovereign state or whether a government is treated as legitimate in global affairs. State Recognition In International Law is not just symbolic. It allows states to sign treaties, send and receive ambassadors, join international organizations, and enjoy immunities.

Recognition of state in international law therefore transforms political fact into legal personality. For governments, recognition marks the difference between being treated as the lawful voice of a nation or as an illegitimate authority.

Download Recognition of States & Governments PDF Notes

Real-world cases illustrate its weight: South Sudan was widely recognized in 2011 and quickly joined the UN, while Taiwan, despite meeting the Montevideo criteria, remains excluded because major powers withhold recognition. These examples show recognition of states in international law is both a legal assessment and a political decision.

Recognition Of State In International Law: Definition

Recognition in international law is the act by which existing states acknowledge that a new entity qualifies as a state, or that a new ruling authority within an existing state is legitimate.

• Legal angle: It admits the entity into the circle of international law, granting it rights and obligations.
• Political angle: It expresses readiness to engage in formal relations, diplomacy, and cooperation.

Case Study – Palestine: More than 130 countries recognize Palestine as a state. Yet without recognition by powerful countries and UN membership, it lacks the full legal benefits of recognition. This proves that recognition of state and government often mixes law with politics.

Read also Non Governmental Organisations of UGC NET Political Science

Kelsen’s View on Recognition Under International Law

Hans Kelsen supported the declaratory view.

• A state exists once it has government, territory, and independence.
• Recognition only confirms its legal personality.

Case Study – East and West Germany: Both existed as states after WWII. State Recognition In International Law by opposing blocs only confirmed their legal status, not created it.

Essentials State Recognition in Public International Law

The Montevideo Convention (1933) sets four essentials of statehood:

• Permanent Population– A stable community of people.
• Defined Territory – A clear, although not undisputed, geographical area.
• Effective Government – A functioning authority that governs and maintains order.
• Capacity for Relations – Independence to conduct foreign affairs and sign agreements.

Case Study – Kosovo: It fulfills the Montevideo essentials but is not universally recognized. This shows recognition of state in international law is not just legal; political consent is equally decisive.

Recognition of States & Governments PDF Download

Students can download concise notes on Recognition of States and Governments in International Law for quick revision before exams.

The PDF covers:

• Meaning and essentials of recognition in international law
• Theories of recognition – Constitutive & Declaratory
• Types & modes of State Recognition In International Law with examples
• Difference between de facto and de jure recognition
• Key doctrines of recognition explained simply
• Case studies: Kosovo, Palestine, Taiwan, South Sudan, Afghanistan
• Useful for UPSC, UGC NET, and Law exams

Download Recognition of States & Governments PDF Notes

Legal Effects of Recognition of States in International Law

Recognition of a state in International Law has significant legal implications. Once an entity is recognized as a state, it acquires a series of rights, duties and immunities including:

• The capacity to establish diplomatic relations with other states
• The ability to conclude treaties and international agreements
• The enjoyment of rights and privileges associated with international statehood
• The capacity to undergo processes of state succession
• The legal standing to initiate or face legal proceedings (the right to sue and be sued)
• Eligibility to become a member of the United Nations

Read also Role Of Intergovernmental Coordination Mechanisms of UGC NET Political Science

Theories of Recognition in International Law

Recognition of a new entity as a sovereign state is an important aspect of international law. Over time, the jurists have developed different opinions on whether State Recognition In International Law merely acknowledges an existing reality or actually creates the legal status of statehood. These perspectives are reflected primarily in two theories of recognition in International Law:

• Constitutive Theory of Recognition
• Declaratory Theory of Recognition

Constitutive Theory of Recognition

The leading proponents of this theory include Oppenheim, Hegel and Anzilotti. According to the constitutive theory of Recognition, a state becomes an international legal person only when it is recognized as sovereign by existing states. Even if an entity possesses all the attributes of statehood, it does not attain the status of an international person or become subject to international law unless recognized. This theory does not claim the state does not exist in fact but maintains that legal rights and obligations under international law arise only after recognition.

Criticism of the Constitutive Theory of Recognition

The approach of Constitutive theory of Recognition has been criticized:

• It implies that until recognition occurs, a state cannot enjoy rights and duties under international law.
• It creates uncertainty when some states recognize the new entity while others refuse to do so.

Declaratory Theory of Recognition

Writers such as Wagner, Hall, Fisher and Brierly support the view of declaratory theory of recognition. Under declaratory theory of recognition reflected in Article 3 of the Montevideo Convention of 1933, the existence of a state does not depend on recognition by other states. A new state is entitled to exercise its rights and defend its independence as soon as it fulfills the basic criteria of statehood. Recognition in law is considered as simply acknowledging a status that already exists.

Criticism of the Declaratory Theory of Recognition

The Declaratory theory of Recognition has also faced criticism. It highlights that a state exists independently of recognition, in practice, international rights and obligations often depend on other states formally acknowledging the new entity. Thus, both theories of recognition in international law are sometimes seen as complementary rather than mutually exclusive.

Read also India's Negotiation Strategies In International Regimes of UGC NET Political Science

Modes of Recognition of in International Law

Recognition can take different forms showing the level of acceptance and degree of confidence existing states have in the stability and legitimacy of a new entity. Broadly, there are two main modes of recognition in international law by which a state can be recognized:

• De facto Recognition
• De jure Recognition

De facto Recognition

De facto recognition in international law is provisional and non-committal acknowledgment of a state’s existence.

• De facto recognition is granted temporarily and often viewed as the first step toward full recognition.
• It can be conditional or unconditional depending on the circumstances.
• This type of State Recognition In International Law tests whether the new state effectively controls a defined territory and government, even if its stability is uncertain.
• For example: the United Kingdom granted de facto recognition to the Soviet Union in 1921.

De jure Recognition

De jure recognition in international law is the formal and complete acknowledgment that a new state meets all requirements of statehood.

• It affirms that the state has achieved a permanent and stable government.
• Unlike de facto recognition, de jure recognition is not provisional and confers full legal status under international law.
• For Example: United Kingdom granted de jure recognition to the Soviet Union in 1924.

Download Recognition of States & Governments PDF Notes

Difference between De Facto and De Jure Recognition of States in International Law

De facto and de jure recognition differ in their nature, legal consequences and rights they confer upon the newly recognized state. The following table highlights the main points of distinction between de facto recognition and de jure recognition in international law:

Once a government is granted de facto recognition in international law, it acquires sovereign immunity and cannot be sued in the courts of the recognizing foreign state. In practice, there is no distinction between de facto and de jure recognition in this respect, as de facto recognition is treated as having retroactive effect similar to de jure recognition.

This principle has been affirmed in several cases including Bank of Ethiopia v. National Bank of Egypt & Ligouri (1937) and The Arantzazu Mendi (1939). When there is a conflict between a displaced de jure government and a newly recognized de facto government over authority within the territory, the rights and status of the de facto government are held to prevail.

Forms of Recognition of States in International Law

Recognition of a newly formed state can take different forms depending on how the existing states choose to communicate their acknowledgment. The form of recognition affects how the act is interpreted and what legal consequences follow. Generally, recognition of states in international law can be conveyed in two ways:

Express Recognition

Express recognition occurs when an existing state formally acknowledges a new state through an official declaration, statement, or notification. This can be done by issuing a public declaration, sending a formal communication or publishing an official statement. Unless the recognizing state specifies otherwise, express recognition is generally regarded as de jure recognition.

Implied Recognition

Implied recognition takes place when an existing state acknowledges a new state through conduct rather than an explicit declaration. This might involve engaging in official relations, concluding agreements or otherwise treating the entity as a sovereign state. Implied recognition does not rely on any formal statement and is inferred from the state’s actions, which can vary depending on the circumstances.

Conditional Recognition of States in International Law

Conditional recognition in international law occurs when a state is granted recognition as sovereign but only subject to fulfilling certain additional requirements beyond the usual criteria for statehood. These conditions can vary widely and may include commitments to uphold democracy, protect human rights ensure religious freedom or adhere to the rule of law . While all recognized states must satisfy the basic legal criteria of statehood, conditional recognition imposes further obligations as part of the acknowledgment process .

Conditional Recognition Criticism

Conditional recognition under public international law has faced criticism from jurists . Many argue that recognition should remain a strictly legal act based only on the objective requirements established by international law and that attaching extra conditions is inappropriate . Critics also point out that even if the recognized entity later fails to comply with the imposed conditions, the recognition itself generally remains valid and is not automatically withdrawn .

A notable example is the Palestine Liberation Organization (P.L.O.) which has been recognized by many states including India. Unlike de facto governments, governments-in-exile such as the P.L.O. often lack effective control over their claimed territory but may still be granted de jure recognition.

Withdrawal of Recognition in International Law

Recognition, once granted, is generally expected to continue but under certain circumstances, it may be withdrawn. The withdrawal of recognition in international law depends on whether the recognition was de facto or de jure and different rules and debates apply to each situation. The main aspects are as follows:

Withdrawal of De Facto Recognition

Under international law, if a state enjoying de facto recognition fails to maintain the essential elements of statehood, its recognition can be revoked. This withdrawal may be carried out by the recognizing state through a formal declaration, direct communication with the authorities of the recognized entity, or by issuing a public statement.

Withdrawal of De Jure Recognition

The revocation of de jure recognition is a highly debated and exceptional matter . While recognition is often seen as a political act, de jure recognition carries a legal character making its withdrawal rare . Some jurists argue that because it is a political decision, it can be revoked, but only under extraordinary circumstances-for example, if the recognized state loses the fundamental characteristics of statehood . Any such revocation must be made explicitly, typically through a public statement by the recognizing state.

Recognition of Government in International Law

A functioning government is a fundamental component of statehood. While governments may change periodically through regular political processes, such routine transitions do not require fresh recognition by other states. However, when a government comes to power through a revolution or an unconstitutional change, its recognition becomes necessary. Before recognizing a revolutionary government, existing states must assess whether:

• The new government effectively controls the territory and population and
• It demonstrates a willingness to uphold international obligations and responsibilities .

If these criteria are met to the satisfaction of other states, the new government may be formally recognized.

Doctrines for Recognition of Governments in International Law

Different doctrines have evolved over time to guide states in deciding whether to recognize new governments, especially those established by force . Below are some important approaches :

Tobar Doctrine: (Non-Recognition of Unconstitutional Governments)

Proposed in 1907 by Carlos Tobar, Ecuador’s Foreign Minister, this doctrine held that recognition should be given only to governments that came to power through lawful, democratic means. Widely adopted in Central America and later supported by the United States as the Wilsonian Policy, it was applied in the case of the Tinoco government of Costa Rica. However, it never gained traction outside the Americas.

Estrada Doctrine: (Recognition Based on Existence, Not Legitimacy)

Introduced in 1930 by Mexico’s Foreign Secretary, Genaro Estrada. The estrada doctrine in international law highlighted that recognition should be based purely on a government’s effective control rather than its legitimacy. It reflected principles of non-intervention and respect for self-determination, discouraging states from judging the internal affairs of others.

Stimson Doctrine: (Non-Recognition of Territorial Changes by Force)

Formulated in 1932 by the U.S. Secretary of State Henry Stimson, this doctrine declared that territorial acquisitions achieved through aggression would not be recognized. Based on the principle ex injuria jus non oritur (an unlawful act cannot create law) it influenced later international law, including the 1970 UN General Assembly declaration rejecting territorial gains by force.

In practice, the doctrine was inconsistently applied. For example, the UK eventually recognized Italy’s annexation of Ethiopia (1936) and the Soviet occupation of the Baltic States (1940). However, it was enforced when the UN Security Council refused to recognize Iraq’s annexation of Kuwait in 1990.

The Recognition Of States And Governments Under International Law

Recognition of a state concerns its existence as a sovereign unit, while recognition of government concerns which authority represents it.

• Recognition of State: Example – South Sudan in 2011.
• Recognition of Government: Example – Ongoing debate over recognizing the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Process of Recognition Under International Law

Recognition usually follows a staged process:

1. Assessment – States evaluate if criteria are met.
2. Provisional Stage – De facto recognition may be given.
3. Formal Stage – De jure recognition once legitimacy is proven.
4. Consolidation – Through treaties, diplomacy, and UN membership.

Case Study – Bangladesh: India was the first to recognize it in 1971, followed by others. By 1974, it achieved de jure recognition globally and joined the UN.

Problems of Recognition Under International Law

Recognition raises legal and political challenges:

• Partial Recognition – Kosovo and Palestine remain disputed.
• Political Bias – Recognition often depends on alliances.
• Legitimacy Crises – Revolutionary regimes struggle for acceptance.
• Doctrinal Differences – Varying regional doctrines cause inconsistency.

Case Study – Crimea (2014): Russia annexed Crimea, but most states refused recognition, citing the Stimson Doctrine against forceful acquisitions.

Download Recognition of States & Governments PDF Notes

Conclusion

Recognition of states in international law is the bridge between political fact and legal acceptance. It decides which entities join the family of nations and which governments speak for them.

Theories of recognition in international law—constitutive and declaratory—offer different perspectives, but practice often blends both. The modes of recognition, especially the shift from de facto to de jure, illustrate how states test new authorities before granting full legitimacy. Recognition of state and government remains distinct but equally vital.

Real-world examples from Kosovo and Palestine to South Sudan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan show that recognition in international law is not uniform. It reflects law, politics, and evolving doctrines. Ultimately, recognition of state and government is the cornerstone of sovereignty and legitimacy in global order.

Start your journey towards acing your government exams with Testbook. Sign up now and gain access to the best study material, expert guidance and practice tests to help you achieve your dreams!