This article is about the collective usage "the people". For the collective usage "a people", seeEthnic group. For a general population, seeCommon people. For humans as a species, seeHuman. For other uses, seePeople (disambiguation).
Chapter One, Article One of theCharter of the United Nations states that "peoples" have the right toself-determination.[2] Though the mere status as peoples and the right to self-determination, as for example in the case ofIndigenous peoples (peoples, as in all groups of indigenous people, not merely all indigenous persons as inindigenous people),[clarification needed] does not automatically provide forindependentsovereignty and thereforesecession.[3][4] Indeed, judgeIvor Jennings identified the inherent problems in the right of "peoples" to self-determination, as it requires pre-defining a said "people".[5]
Constitutional
Both theRoman Republic and theRoman Empire used theLatin termSenatus Populusque Romanus, (the Senate and People of Rome). This term was fixed abbreviated (SPQR) to Roman legionary standards, and even after theRoman Emperors achieved a state of total personalautocracy, they continued to wield their power in the name of the Senate and People of Rome.
Incriminal law, in certain jurisdictions, criminal prosecutions are brought in the name ofthe People. Several U.S. states, includingCalifornia,Illinois, andNew York, use this style.[6] Citations outside the jurisdictions in question usually substitute the name of the state for the words "the People" in the case captions.[7] Four states —Massachusetts,Virginia,Pennsylvania, andKentucky — refer to themselves astheCommonwealth in case captions and legal process. Other states, such asIndiana, typically refer to themselves asthe State in case captions and legal process. Outside the United States, criminal trials inIreland and thePhilippines are prosecuted in the name of the people of their respective states.
The political theory underlying this format is that criminal prosecutions are brought in the name of thesovereign; thus, in theseU.S. states, the "people" are judged to be the sovereign, even as in theUnited Kingdom and other dependencies of theBritish Crown, criminal prosecutions are typically brought in the name ofthe Crown. "The people" identifies the entire body of thecitizens of a jurisdiction invested with political power or gathered for political purposes.[8]
Shaw, Malcolm Nathan (2003).International law. Cambridge University Press. p. 178.Article 1 of theMontevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States, 1 lays down the most widely accepted formulation of the criteria of statehood in international law. It notes that the state as an international person should possess the following qualifications: '(a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with other states'
Jasentuliyana, Nandasiri, ed. (1995).Perspectives on international law. Kluwer Law International. p. 20.So far as States are concerned, the traditional definitions provided for in the Montevideo Convention remain generally accepted.
^Mayall, James (2013). "International Society, State Sovereignty, and National Self-Determination". In Breuilly, John (ed.).The Oxford Handbook of the History of Nationalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 542.ISBN978-0-19-876820-3.
^See, e.g.,California v. Anderson 6 Cal. 3d 628; 493 P.2d 880; 100 Cal. Rptr. 152; 1972 Cal. LEXIS 154 (1972)
