Page 246 - The Arabian Gulf States_Neat

184 THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE ARABIAN GULF STATES
justified.1 There is, however, no definite test whether a recognition of
a revolutionary government is premature. On the other hand, it is
considered to be an indication of the existence of the new State when it
has utterly defeated the mothcr-Statc, or that the mothcr-Statc ... is
apparently incapable of bringing the revolutionary State back under its
sway.2
It may be seen from the above principles of international law on
recognition that there is no condition which requires for the validity
of the recognition of a new State the prior ‘consent’ of the parent
State. On the contrary, it has been maintained by Lauterpacht that
the formal renunciation of sovereignty by the parent State has never been
regarded as a condition of the lawfulness ol recognition. For parent States
arc naturally slow in acknowledging the independence of revolted provinces.3
The writer further elucidates this principle as follows:
On the other hand, the refusal of the mother Country to recognise such
independence is not conclusive. The legal title of the parent State is relevant
to the extent that conclusive evidence is required showing that it has been
definitely displaced and that the effectiveness of its authority does not
exceed a mere assertion of right. But once such evidence is available, the
illegality of the new State's origin from the point of view of the constitu­
tional law of the parent State is of no consequence.1
(c) Prescription: Finally, it can be maintained that Persia lost her title
to Bahrain on the ground of prescription.5 According to Bricrly,
prescription as a title to territory in international law is so vague that some
writers deny its recognition altogether. But in fact most existing frontiers
are accepted by international law simply because they existed da facto for
a long time. ... It is therefore no paradox to say that prescription is the
commonest of all titles to territory.®
It is defined as
the acquisition of sovereignty over a territory through continuous and
undisturbed exercise of sovereignty over it during such a period as is neces­
sary to create under the influence of historical development the general
I conviction that the present condition of things is in conformity with inter­
national order.7
Writers on the subject have based prescription on the theory that
the State which maintains law and order in a territory and develops it
1 Williams, Sir John Fischer, ‘Recognition’, Transactions of the Grot ins Society,
XV (1930), pp. 63-4. . . ,
2 Oppenheim, p. 129; Bricrly, pp. 132-5; Williams, ‘Recognition , op. cit.
* s^Schwarzenberger, pp. 565-6,'307-^ for distinction between ‘acquisitive’
and ‘extinctive’ prescription.
6 Briefly, p. 157. Oppenheim, p. 576.