The term “subjects of international law” means: (a) an incumbent of rights and duties under international law; (b) the holder of procedural privilege of prosecuting a claim before an international tribunal; (c) the possessor of interests for which provision is made by international law; and (d) the capacity to conclude treaties with states and international organizations.

a) permanent population,

b) defined territory,

c) a government,

d) capacity to enter into relations with other States

A state that is subject to the authority of one or more states is known as “dependent state.”

When the extent of factual dependency of one state upon another is so great, it is called a “puppet state.” In the case of a puppet state, the state would not be meeting the requirement of independence, which is necessary for Statehood. One of the notorious examples of a ‘puppet’ state was the Chinese province of Manchuria, conquered by Japan in 1931.

Examples of non-self-governing territories are colonies, protectorates, trusteeship and mandate territories.

A protectorate is always the creation of a treaty. It involves a certain measure of control, and a total or partial loss of sovereignty. In many cases, it has involved the loss of control of foreign relations and the disappearance of the protected state from the community of nations

Class A comprised territories that were formerly part of the Ottoman Empire and were sufficiently advanced for their independence to be “provisionally recognized.”

The first example of an international organization is the Central Commission for Navigation on the Rhine (CCNR), which was created in 1815 by the Congress of Vienna.

Examples of universal organizations: the UN, the ILO, WHO

Examples of regional organizations: the European Union, the African Union, NAFTA, EURATOM.

Any illegal act of violence, detention, or robbery committed on a private ship for personal gain or revenge, against another ship, people, or property on the high seas. Piracy may also be committed on or against an aircraft.

The Institute of International Law defines recognition as follows:

“The recognition of a new State is the free act by which one or more States acknowledge the existence on a definite territory of a human society politically organized, independent of any other existing State, capable of observing the obligations of international law, and by which they manifest therefore their intention to consider it a member of the international community.”

There is no criterion for the recognition of a government. The only criterion is that in the opinion of the recognizing state the recognized government is willing to fulfil its international obligations and capable of representing the state, i.e., it commands the general support of the population. In other words, the government should have actual control over the state apparatus and have sufficient degree of stability. When a new state comes into existence, its recognition also covers the recognition of its government.

In the practice of states, recognition may be express or implied.

A state may convey its decision of recognition to the new entity or government through a formal announcement, which may take the form of public statement or notification or diplomatic note or a personal message sent to the new entity. This is known as express recognition.

Recognition may be inferred from the conduct of the parties involved. The act must clearly indicate that a recognizing state has a clear and inescapable intention to recognize. The intention, then, is the crucial aspect of recognition. Usually, acts indicating the intention may be bilateral or multilateral. Bilateral acts may be in the form of concluding or signing a treaty with a new entity. Multilateral acts may be through common participation in a multilateral treaty or an international conference along with the unrecognized entity.

There are two principal theories about the nature and actual import of recognition:

• Constitutive theory,
• Declaratory (evidentiary) theory

Conditional recognition implies that recognition is granted upon the fulfilment of certain stipulations in addition to the normal requirements by the recognized entity.

The act of recognition creates two-fold effects:political and legal.

• confers on the new State or re´gime a status under international law and municipal law;
• indicates the willingness of the recognizing state to initiate international relations with the recognized entity;
• provides an evidence of the Statehood of the new entity, i.e., the new entity fulfils all the required conditions of Statehood;
• recognized state becomes entitled to all the privileges of membership of the society of states;
• recognizing state entitles the new entity to conclude treaties and establish diplomatic relations with other nations;
• recognizing state bestows upon the new entity or re´gime certain rights and privileges as a sovereign state under its municipal law

The doctrine of non-recognition, commonly called the Stimson Doctrine of non-recognition, implies the withholding of recognition from new territorial titles or territorial changes brought out by use of force or through any other act of doubtful character. The idea behind the doctrine is not to reward a state for its unlawful acts.

• In case of de jure recognition, in the opinion of the recognizing state, the new state or government fulfils all the attributes essential for its effective participation in the international community, and it may grant the recognition to the latter formally.

• Under de facto recognition, in the opinion of the recognizing state, the new state or government: (i) lacks stability and permanency, or (ii) does not possess all the essentials required under international law for its effective participation in international affairs, but, in fact, it fulfils these requirements. It may grant recognition to the latter provisionally with all due reservations for the future.