The Estrada Doctrine

The Question of Legitimacy: Kenya's Recognition Policy of Governments under Moi during the Cold War – Eastern Africa Countries (1978-1990)

“…Thus, this made the Kenyan government recognize Idi Amin's government as an effective government rather than that of Milton Obote (Munene, 1997). During the cold war, Kenya, like many other states, adopted the Estrada Doctrine on recognition The Estrada Doctrine pre-supposes the automatic recognition of governments at all circumstances (Jessup, 1931). It attempts thus to lay down a clean test for recognition in all circumstances excluding political considerations and exigencies of State and is thus unrealistic, particularly where there are competing governments.…”

“…Europe was divided into armed camps whereas the other parts of the world placed under security alliances with some remaining non-aligned. All these developments led to the continents of Asia, Latin America and even Africa to forge forward for the Estrada Doctrine (Jessup, 1931), which generally accepted governments as they came and needed international attention. Recognition of States only was the order of the day in the 1970's while granting or withholding recognition to new governments was overlooked.…”

7. Statehood, Self-determination, and Recognition

“…47 There are two particular difficulties. To begin with, it is clear that recognition of another state will have certain legal implications: it implies, at the very least, a commitment to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the state it has recognized and will also have a range of domestic legal consequences as might concern the recognition of its law and legal transactions occurring within its the ÔEstrada DoctrineÕ the effect of which was to recommend the recognition of all effective governments irrespective of the means by which they came to power (Jessup, 1931). However, it was inevitable that there would always be question of interpretation in cases in which two (or more) rival governments found themselves competing for power.…”

8. Statehood, Self-Determination, and Recognition

“…To begin with, it is clear that recognition of another state will have certain legal implications: it implies, at the very least, a commitment to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the state it has recognized and will also have a range of domestic legal consequences as might concern the recognition of its law and legal transactions occurring within its jurisdiction. By the same token, it is almost universally held that recognition will not necessarily imply a willingness to enter into diplomatic relations with that other state effective governments irrespective of the means by which they came to power (Jessup, 1931). However, it was inevitable that there would always be question of interpretation in cases in which two (or more) rival governments found themselves competing for power.…”