Caprivians are denied the right to self-determination
Many conflicts around the world today are between the central government of a given state and ethnic groups within that state. The ethnic groups demand independence or autonomous rule, while the government refuses to concede to such demands. How should the international community treat this kind of forced oppression. The Caprivians understand that they are caught up in a dilemma.
The genesis of the principle of self-determination as a concept in international relations can be traced to after the World War 1. However, there are two important points that need to be realised here. One is the idea of international guarantee to self-determination. The other is the nature of self-determination as a social contract. The principle of self-determination was conceived as a notion of global governance to guarantee those Nation States who did not have the power themselves to become independent.
Secession is an act of breaking away in our case from a state and creating another one but realising the reality of the two territories with its own geographical and sovereign borders. Therefore, it could be said that secession is a variation of self-determination, and that the right to secede is part of the right to self-determination. We have no problem in mentioning that one which we believe is another means of getting to the point of destination. In reality, actual cases where the right to secession was advocated as right to self-determination concurrently, though have been denied in some cases it succeeded in other cases.
We should understand that the right to self-determination, as asserted in the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and in the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, provides a substantial portion of the intellectual undermining for the protection of individual human rights. It presents the notion that individuals are guaranteed the right to decide their own paths in life without undue burdens by the state. However, the term self-determination also holds more specific meanings that may be controversial in the context of others.