Diplomatic recognition in international law is a unilateral political act, with domestic and international legal consequences, whereby a state acknowledges an act or status of another state or government. Recognition can be accorded either de facto or de jure, usually by a statement of the recognizing government.
United Kingdom recognised the Soviet Union de facto in 1921, but de jure only in 1924. Another example is the state of Israel in 1948, whose government was immediately recognised de facto by the United States (and later Britain), and “one-upped” 3 days later by Soviet de jure recognition.
International Law – Concurrent De Jure-De facto Recognition. -Haile Selassie, the fugitive Emperor of Ethiopia, … the state department informed the court that Haile Selassie was still recognised as the de jure monarch of Ethiopia and that since 1936 Italy had been recognised as the de facto government of Ethiopia. [International Law. Concurrent De Jure. De Facto Recognition, Columbia Law Review, Vol. 39, No. 4 (Apr., 1939), pp. 704-711, (article consists of 8 pages)Published by: Columbia Law Review Association, Inc., Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1116537]
Recognition of governments interest both lawyers and statesmen: lawyers, because recognition is a long-standing legal instrument that has the important function of identifying major actors in the international system; and statesmen, because looseness in the rules allows them to use recognition not only to identify actors, but also to express about them or to secure concessions from them. It is possible to find influences on recognition decisions at four levels: (a) the domestic political system or the personal preference of leaders in the deciding state; (b) the relations between the deciding state and the state in which the governments has changed; (c) the nature of the regional subsystem (if both states belong o the same one; and (d) the nature of the international system. [Political Use of Recognition: The Influence of the International System, M. J. Peterson World Politics, Vol. 34, No. 3 (Apr., 1982), pp. 324-352 (article consists of 29 pages), Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press, Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2010322]
Declining audience to an ex-prime minister and throwing red carpet to an ex-monarch, fueled by BJPs pat. Rumour has it (here’s the rumour) : Analysts have been told that the day former King Gyanendra landed in Delhi, February 25, 2009, on his way to Madhya Pradesh to attend the wedding ceremony of one of his close relatives, he successfully managed to handover a secret packet to Sonia Gandhi, the President of the ruling Indian Congress. Question now could be asked as to what was inside the said packet which was sent to Sonia Gandhi straight? Our own sources in Delhi claims that the packet contained nothing other than a copy of the “agreement” signed by the then agitating Nepali leaders wherein the Nepali leaders have put their authentic signature and have stated that if the King reinstated the then dead parliament then the King’s place will remain secure whatever political changes grip the nation in the following days. This agreement was made April 21, 2006 (See).
“I am not in favor of any form of monarchy in Nepal”, told Gyanendra point blank on March 25, 2009.
Nonetheless, the Terai terrorism persists – greater Nepal theme is being advocated globally – review of 1950 Treaty is a primary agenda of the current government : diplomatic recognition gears possibilities in future, possibilities of an in-stable Terai region (a regional subsystem between two nations?). Plebiscite (referendum) has been advocated in Nepal since the premier revolution of 1950 vis-a-vis constituent assembly elections. Plebiscite provides possibilities. Moreover, an interim constitution and an interim parliament are de facto unless there is an election of the popular will and promulgation of a new constitution. The 1990 constitution and a sole functioning state organ – the judiciary (in absence of an elected popular will – dissolved in 2002 and an executive based on the legislative) have been the de facto savior.