administration from Namibia immediately.”64 It further contended that member states are obligated to “recognize the illegality of South Africa’s presence in Namibia […] and to refrain from any acts […] implying recognition of the legality of, or lending support or assistance to, such presence and administration.”65 Similarly, the ICJ Advisory Opinion on the case of Western Sahara stipulated that “the existence, at the time of Spanish colonization, of […] legal ties of allegiance between the Sultan of Morocco and some of the tribes living in the territory of Western Sahara” does not affect “the application of General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) in the decolonization of Western Sahara and, in particular, of the principle of self-determination […] of the […] peoples of the Territory.”66 2.5. Critique of the Decolonization Legal Framework and its Application The resolutions in the case of South Africa were effective in as much as the international community’s political will allowed for. This is evidenced by two factors: (1) the effectiveness of these resolutions was only realized almost two decades later when the international community mobilized against apartheid and political will was triggered due to the shifting political environment, and (2) decolonization is not yet fully realized in South Africa, almost three decades post the ‘end’ of apartheid, due to the partial and incomplete application of UN mechanisms and international law. Regrettably, “the tragedy for the Third World is that the mechanisms used by international law to achieve decolonization were also the mechanisms 64 Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (ICJ Advisory Opinion) 1970, para 133 <https:// www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/53/053-19710621-ADV-01-00-EN.pdf> accessed 5 April 2023. 65 Ibid. 66 Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders: Western Sahara (ICJ Advisory Opinion) 1975, paras 161 & 162 <https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/61/061-19751016ADV-01-00-EN.pdf> accessed 5 April 2023. 18