Lietuvos suvereniteto galiojimo problema Klaipėdos krašte NuolatinioTarptautinio Teisingumo Teismo sprendimo kontekste

Abstract

One of the most important tasks for the state of Lithuania, reestablished in 1918, was to fix the borders with the neighbouring countries and to regain the lost ethnic lands. Lithuania regained the Klaipėda Region only after the 1923 Uprising. Lithuania granted the autonomy to the Region on the basis of the 1924 Paris Convention. The autonomy of the Region was established in the Convention and the Klaipėda Region Statute. Differences in the opinion of the signatories of the Klaipėda Region Convention emerged when implementing the provisions of autonomy in practice.
The article deals with the problem of Lithuania’s sovereignty in respect of the Klaipėda Region, taking into consideration a decision of the Permanent Court of International Justice (August 11, 1932). At the beginning, the historical development of the Region is surveyed. It is stated that the requirements of the state of Lithuania to transfer the Klaipėda Region, based on the ethnic principle and the right of the nations for self-determination, were lawful.
The second part of the article considers the cession of the Region. It is stated that separation of Klaipėda Region from Germany was lawful and was enforced by the Peace Treaty of Versailles (Art. 99). The sovereignty of the Region until the solution of the issue on the status of the state of Lithuania was passed over to the disposition of the Allied Powers. The actions of the state of Lithuania and the Lithuanians from the Klaipėda Region and the Uprising in 1923 are evaluated as the reintegration of the territory.
Further in the article the autonomy of the Klaipėda Region is characterized and the legal evaluation of autonomy is given.
The last part of the article is dedicated to a decision of the Permanent Court of International Justice in the case related to the interpretation of the Klaipėda Region Statute. The Court decision is evaluated as achieved by mutual concession, having approved Lithuania’s sovereignty in respect of Klaipėda Region. The Court rejected the consideration of the Klaipėda Region Statute as a constitutional act of the state of Lithuania, but it did not deny such nature of the act. The Court, basing on the general principles, as the essence of autonomy, recognized the right of the Government of Lithuania in exclusive cases when the important interests of Lithuania are violated to recall the Chairperson of the Regional Directory, and this right was evaluated as the necessary condition for implementation of sovereignty. Thus the Court decision just approved the sovereignty of Lithuania and the ensuing rights.