Withdrawal of Recognition

Withdrawal of recognition refers to the act by which a State revokes or terminates its previous recognition of another State or Government. It is particularly relevant where the circumstances that led to recognition have fundamentally changed, such as the collapse of a Government, emergence of a competing authority, or disappearance of the recognised entity.

Withdrawal of recognition must be distinguished from the change of diplomatic relations. A State may sever diplomatic relations without necessarily withdrawing recognition.

Meaning of Withdrawal of Recognition

Recognition is not necessarily an irreversible political act. In appropriate circumstances, a State may change its position and withdraw or modify its recognition.

Withdrawal may concern:

• recognition of a Government;
• recognition of a State;
• recognition of a particular legal or territorial situation.

The practical importance of withdrawal is generally greater in relation to Governments than States.

Withdrawal of Recognition of Governments

Withdrawal of recognition of a Government occurs when a State no longer accepts a particular authority as the Government representing another State.

This may happen where:

• the Government loses effective control;
• another authority takes control;
• the Government ceases to function;
• a competing Government becomes established;
• circumstances fundamentally change.

The State itself normally continues to exist.

Thus:

Government loses recognition → State continues

Withdrawal of Recognition of States

Withdrawal of recognition of a State is considerably more complex.

Where a State has already established the objective characteristics of Statehood, a unilateral withdrawal of recognition by one State does not necessarily mean that the recognised entity ceases to exist as a State.

Under the declaratory approach:

Recognition ≠ Creation of Statehood

Therefore:

Withdrawal of Recognition ≠ Automatic Extinction of Statehood

Grounds for Withdrawal of Recognition

Withdrawal may become relevant where there is a fundamental change in circumstances.

Possible situations include:

• collapse of the recognised Government;
• loss of effective control;
• replacement by another Government;
• disappearance of the recognised entity;
• merger with another State;
• dissolution;
• emergence of a competing authority;
• fundamental change in the legal status of the entity.

Loss of Effective Control

Effective control is particularly relevant to recognition of Governments.

If a recognised Government loses control of the State and another authority establishes effective control, the recognising State may reconsider its recognition.

For example:

Government A → Loses effective control

↓

Government B → Establishes effective control

↓

State considers whether to recognise Government B

The State itself does not necessarily disappear.

Change of Government

A change of Government does not automatically require withdrawal of recognition of the State.

The State’s international legal identity normally continues.

The issue is whether the recognising State continues to recognise the previous Government or recognises the new authority.

Therefore:

Change of Government is different from change of Statehood.

Withdrawal and De Facto Recognition

Withdrawal is generally considered easier in relation to de facto recognition because de facto recognition is traditionally more provisional and associated with uncertainty.

If the factual circumstances change significantly, the recognising State may alter its position.

Withdrawal and De Jure Recognition

De jure recognition represents fuller and more definite recognition.

It is therefore traditionally regarded as more difficult to withdraw.

However, de jure recognition should not be treated as absolutely irreversible in every circumstance.

The consequences depend upon:

• the circumstances;
• the nature of the recognition;
• subsequent events;
• the conduct of the recognising State;
• applicable International Law.

Withdrawal of Recognition vs Severance of Diplomatic Relations

These concepts are distinct.

Withdrawal of Recognition

The State changes its legal or political position concerning the status of the recognised entity.

Severance of Diplomatic Relations

The State terminates or suspends diplomatic relations with another State or Government.

A State may sever diplomatic relations while continuing to recognise the State or Government.

Therefore:

Severance of Diplomatic Relations ≠ Automatically Withdrawal of Recognition

Withdrawal of Recognition vs Non-Recognition

Withdrawal of Recognition

Recognition was previously granted and is subsequently withdrawn.

Non-Recognition

The State refuses to recognise the entity in the first place.

Thus:

Recognition → Withdrawal

is different from:

No Recognition → Continued Non-Recognition

Withdrawal of Recognition and Government in Exile

A Government in exile may continue to receive recognition even after losing effective control over its territory.

If another authority becomes established, States may reconsider their position.

The decision may depend upon:

• continuing constitutional legitimacy;
• international recognition;
• effectiveness;
• circumstances surrounding the change of power.

Withdrawal and Competing Governments

Where two authorities claim to be the Government of the same State, recognition may shift from one authority to another.

For example:

Government A → Previously recognised

↓

Government B → Emerges and establishes authority

↓

State withdraws recognition from A

↓

State recognises B

The State remains the same throughout this process.

Withdrawal and State Succession

If a State becomes extinct through:

• dissolution;
• merger;
• incorporation;

the issue may no longer be simply one of withdrawal of recognition.

Instead, questions of State succession arise.

Recognition may change because the international legal entity itself has changed.

Withdrawal and Unlawful Situations

Recognition may be reconsidered where the recognised status was connected with a situation that subsequently becomes unlawful or fundamentally changes.

However, withdrawal cannot be treated as a general mechanism for determining Statehood.

The legality of the underlying situation must be assessed independently.

Legal Effects of Withdrawal

The consequences of withdrawal may include:

• termination or reduction of diplomatic relations;
• refusal to accept representatives of the former Government;
• changes concerning control of State property;
• changes in treatment before domestic courts;
• alteration of official relations;
• recognition of another authority.

The precise effects depend upon the domestic and international law applicable to the situation.

Effect on State Property

Withdrawal of recognition of a Government may affect which authority is treated as entitled to control State property located abroad.

This may concern:

• bank accounts;
• diplomatic premises;
• government assets;
• State archives;
• other property belonging to the State.

Domestic courts may need to determine which authority is recognised as representing the State.

Effect on Diplomatic Representatives

Where recognition of a Government is withdrawn, the recognising State may cease treating representatives appointed by that Government as representatives of the State.

If another Government is recognised, diplomatic representation may be transferred accordingly.

Effect on International Obligations

Withdrawal of recognition of a Government does not normally terminate the international obligations of the State.

The State remains the same international legal person.

Therefore:

Government changes → State obligations generally continue

This is an important consequence of the distinction between State and Government.

Effect on Treaties

A change in recognition of a Government does not automatically terminate treaties concluded by the State.

International obligations generally belong to the State rather than to a particular Government.

Questions concerning treaty continuity must therefore be considered separately under the applicable rules of treaty law and State succession.

Withdrawal and Domestic Courts

Withdrawal of recognition may have important consequences before domestic courts.

Courts may need to determine:

• which Government represents the State;
• who controls State property;
• whether acts of the former Government continue to receive legal effect;
• which authority can bring proceedings on behalf of the State.

The executive’s position on recognition may be particularly important in domestic legal systems.

Important Cases

Tinoco Arbitration, 1923

The Tinoco Arbitration is important for understanding recognition and the legal consequences of changes in governmental authority.

The tribunal considered the actual authority exercised by the Tinoco regime and the significance of recognition by other States.

The case demonstrates that the absence of recognition does not automatically eliminate the legal consequences of governmental acts.

Luther v. Sagor, 1921

The case demonstrates the importance of governmental recognition in determining the treatment of foreign governmental acts and property before domestic courts.

Carl Zeiss Stiftung v Rayner & Keeler Ltd, 1967

The case illustrates the importance of recognition and governmental status in determining the treatment of foreign governmental acts before domestic courts.

Withdrawal of Recognition and Recognition of a New Government

Withdrawal may occur together with recognition of a successor authority.

For example:

Government A

↓

Loses control

↓

Government B establishes control

↓

Recognition of A withdrawn

↓

Government B recognised

This does not amount to the creation of a new State.

Common Confusions

Does withdrawal of recognition mean the State has ceased to exist?

Not necessarily. Under the declaratory approach, withdrawal by one State does not automatically extinguish Statehood.

Does withdrawal of recognition of a Government extinguish the State?

No. Recognition of a Government concerns the authority representing an existing State.

Is withdrawal the same as breaking diplomatic relations?

No. Diplomatic relations may be severed while recognition continues.

Is de facto recognition easier to withdraw?

Traditionally, yes. De facto recognition is more provisional and uncertain.

Is de jure recognition impossible to withdraw?

No. It is generally more stable, but its withdrawal may still occur depending upon the circumstances.

Does a change of Government automatically require withdrawal of recognition?

No. A new Government may come to power through a normal constitutional process without creating an issue of disputed recognition.

Does withdrawal terminate treaties of the State?

No. A change in recognition of a Government does not automatically terminate the State’s treaty obligations.

Withdrawal of Recognition at a Glance

Point	Position
Meaning	Revocation of previously granted recognition
Most relevant to	Governments
State recognition	Withdrawal does not automatically extinguish Statehood
Main reason	Fundamental change in circumstances
Effective control	Important for Government recognition
De facto recognition	Traditionally easier to withdraw
De jure recognition	Generally more stable
Diplomatic relations	May be severed independently
State obligations	Generally continue
State succession	Relevant where the State itself disappears
Important case	Tinoco Arbitration

Quick Revision

• Withdrawal of recognition means revoking previously granted recognition.
• It is particularly important in relation to Governments.
• A State may withdraw recognition when the recognised Government:
  • loses effective control;
  • ceases to function;
  • is replaced by another authority;
  • loses its claim to represent the State.
• Withdrawal of recognition of a Government does not extinguish the State.
• Withdrawal of recognition of a State by one State does not automatically terminate the State’s Statehood.
• Under the declaratory approach, recognition does not create Statehood.
• De facto recognition is traditionally easier to withdraw because it is more provisional.
• De jure recognition is generally more stable and definite.
• Withdrawal of recognition is different from severance of diplomatic relations.
• A State may sever diplomatic relations without withdrawing recognition.
• Withdrawal may affect:
  • diplomatic representation;
  • State property;
  • domestic proceedings;
  • official relations.
• A change in recognition of a Government does not normally terminate the State’s international obligations.
• Treaties of the State do not automatically terminate because recognition of a Government changes.
• Tinoco Arbitration is important for the relationship between recognition and governmental authority.
• Luther v. Sagor and Carl Zeiss demonstrate the domestic significance of governmental recognition.
• The essential distinction is:

Withdrawal of recognition changes a State’s acceptance of a previously recognised State or Government; it does not automatically extinguish the State or terminate its international obligations.

Conclusion

Withdrawal of recognition refers to the revocation or alteration of previously granted recognition. It is particularly significant in relation to Governments where a recognised authority loses effective control, is replaced by another authority or ceases to function. Withdrawal of recognition of a Government does not normally affect the continued existence of the State or its international legal obligations. Similarly, withdrawal of recognition by an individual State does not automatically extinguish the Statehood of the recognised entity. De facto recognition is traditionally more provisional and therefore easier to reconsider, while de jure recognition represents a more stable form of acceptance. Withdrawal must also be distinguished from severance of diplomatic relations, since diplomatic relations may be terminated without withdrawing recognition. The concept therefore demonstrates the important distinction between the continuity of the State and changes in the Government representing it.