It can be said that the principle of PSNR, in contrast with other State practices (bilateral treaty agreement with foreign investors, environmental obligations, obligation of customary international laws, etc.) has brought to a situation in which it can only be presumed the existence of a very vague principle of PSNR. It only gives the general right of a state to manage and control its natural resources and that it has the duty to make its people benefited from the exploitation of such resources. Then the obvious question comes why the principle was introduced and welcomed by United Nations. The answer is probably, the term was introduced to persuade those tormenting nations undergoing the phase of decolonization to fight with their limited resources to cope up with world’s advance economy. But, that era of decolonization is gone. Moreover, the concept is becoming shrinking due to the State interdependence with others for technological benefit, sharing common resources or for protecting the environment globally. It is also evident that, while in the past emphasis has been placed on the States rights aspect of PSNR, it is now time for a shift in focus to duties flowing from this right. The development of PSNR has trended to focus on the formulation of rights in the earlier periods, but balance with duties has been increasingly created by stipulating that PSNR be exercised for national development and well-being of the people. It is even addressed in the resolution of PSNR that the term ‘sovereignty’ refers not to the absolute sense of the term, but rather to governmental control and authority over the resources in the exercise of the well being of the people of the state c o n c e rn e d .To wrap up, it can rightly be said that the concept of State oriented sovereignty is gradually transforming into mankind oriented sovereignty around the globe.
Source:
http://journal.library.du.ac.bd/index.php?journal=DULJ&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=1641&path%5B%5D=1549
