This article traces the evolution of the concept of self-determination from the end of World War I, through the era of decolonization, to the present day when it has become embedded in the human rights framework and, in limited circumstances, is used to justify secession. Various national and international cases are examined in analyzing the jurisprudence of self-determination, as well as the new European standards for State recognition after secession. The concept of autonomy is also examined as possibly providing a solution for disaffected minority groups within a greater territorial unit. The article then applies the self-determination and autonomy frameworks to Tibet and examines possible solutions for assessing Tibet’s international status.
The question of conflict of jurisdictions between courts and arbitral tribunals not merely constitutes a purely theoretical issue, but it also has significance in the legal practice. When many countries show allowance to arbitration and support its development to the greatest extent, few courts in China fail to tackle the relationships between arbitration and courts. By means of an analysis of possible conflict of the jur isdictions between courts and arbitral tribunals, this article pleas for a supportive attitude of courts with respect to arbitration, so as to reduce the impact of courts’ judicial supervision on the due arbitration proceeding. In-depth theoretical discussions will develop on the principle of “competence-competence” and its application in China, justifying the conclusion that the essence of this principle is to have disputes between parties in arbitration agreements solved within the arbitration system and thereby to respect the parties’ decision to submit to arbitration.