FRANCO-COMORIANS DISPUTE ON THE ISLAND OF MAYOTTE

The unlikelihood of a settlement of the dispute Frankenstein COMORIANS ON THE ISLAND OF MAYOTTE BY THE JUDICIAL
After explaining how the unique case of Mayotte, a matter of international public law, place France in an uncomfortable position on the diplomatic front, the second part of the free-Andre Prayer opinion demonstrates why France would never want that case is decided by an international court.
The hypothesis of a settlement of the Franco-Comorian on Mayotte by an international court or arbitration "judicial" has been considered by the central government in Moroni, in 1975. But while desirable, this form of conflict Franco-Comorian seems unrealistic because France has always rejected. In this regard, several observations can be made.
First, it is a well-established principle that no independent state can not be dragged before the international court without its consent. This rule has been stated very early by international arbitration courts, from the 19th century. Thereafter, it was confirmed in the 20th century by both universal courses that have succeeded at the Peace Palace in The Hague and first by the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) in an advisory opinion on July 23 About 1923 in the case of the Statute of the Eastern Karelia. In a dictum never denied, the PCIJ said in effect that: "It is well established in international law that no State shall not be obliged to submit its disputes with other States either to mediation or arbitration, finally to be any peaceful solution process, without his consent. " It is seen - especially with the distinguished professors Patrick Dailler and Alain Pellet-that unlike the situation of individuals before the courts, "States are not subject to the jurisdiction of the Court in a case that provided they agree "(5) [2].
The dispute on Mayotte has very little chance
to be discussed inside the Peace Palace in The Hague
It is also another observation that states are reluctant to settle their territorial disputes by a third if it is prestigious-because they do not run the risk of losing their case in areas involving what they call their "honor" or their "vital interests". Indeed, cases of award of a disputed territory between two States by an international court are rare. While it is possible to cite one case occurred in the decade "90". It concerns the "Aouzou Strip" which was originally placed under the sovereignty of Chad under a treaty of friendship and good neighborliness concluded on 10 August 1955 between the French Republic and the United Kingdom of Libya. Occupied by force in 1973 and annexed by the Libyans, it has been a conflict between Chad and Libya which was decided in favor of Chad by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in a decision " Territorial dispute "dated 3 February 1994. But we must acknowledge that the territory Sahara was devoid of human populations sedentary and had no economic interest in Libya.
In this context and bearing in mind to be in total opposition with the entire international community on its singular interpretation of the right of peoples to self-determination, France - which is longer bound by the unilateral declaration and optional compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ since 10 January 1974-until further notice excludes the judicial process to settle the case . " She was convinced she would be convicted by any court or arbitration "record" that could not applying customary international law of decolonization wrought by the Third World in the second half of the twentieth century and not the design Specific that France has the setting? implement the right to external self-determination since the decision of principle made by the Constitutional Council on 30 December 1975 on the occasion of the "Self-determination of the Comoros."
One might think that France's position on this issue remain . It will never accept that the dispute between it for over thirty years in the Comoros about "the island scent of the -" be decided by an international court. This means that the dispute over Mayotte has very little chance of being debated inside the Peace Palace in The Hague. Similarly, it is unlikely that France return Mayotte in the Comoros without prior consultation of its population (II).
Andr Prayer
(5) See Patrick Daillier and Alain Pellet, Droit International Public, LGDJ Editions, Paris, 2002 895.
Source: http://www..re/article.php3?id_article=34270