Conference: The Law of Treaties as Applied to Private International Law

On May 5-6, 2023, a conference on "The Law of Treaties as Applied to Private International Law" will take place at the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore in Milan. The conference is jointly organized by the European Association of Private International Law and the Italian Society of International and EU Law. Program and registration are here.

Zrilic: Armed Conflicts and the Law of Treaties: Recent Developments and Reappraisal of the Doctrine in Light of the Wars in Syria and Ukraine

Jure Zrilic (City, Univ. of London – Law) has posted Armed Conflicts and the Law of Treaties: Recent Developments and Reappraisal of the Doctrine in Light of the Wars in Syria and Ukraine (Japanese Yearbook of Internaitonal Law). Here’s the abstract:

For a long time, the effect of armed conflicts on treaties has been one of the most controversial areas of international law. The International Law Commission’s (ILC) attempt to strike a balance between treaty stability, on the one hand, and realities of armed conflict which may necessitate termination or suspension of some treaties in whole or in part, on the other hand, resulted in the 2011 Draft Articles on the Effects of Armed Conflicts on Treaties. This paper is the first to examine the recent practice of actual and possible invocations of the doctrine on the effects of armed conflicts on treaties in the context of wars in Syria and Ukraine. While one of the objectives of the ILC Draft Articles was to bring more clarity to this difficult topic, it is questionable whether this has been achieved. The paper argues that many provisions of the Draft Articles, reflecting the ILC’s desire to progressively develop international law, are still heavily contested and ambiguous, and that this has started to reflect in the case law of international tribunals and state practice. Consequently, this may deter states from engaging with the doctrine on the effects of armed conflict on treaties and the Draft Articles in the future.

Hohmann: Treaty Documents – Materialising International Legal Agreement

Jessie M. Hohmann (Univ. of Technology Sydney) has posted Treaty Documents – Materialising International Legal Agreement (in Law’s Documents: Materiality, Authority, Aesthetics, Katherine Biber, Trish Luker, & Priya Vaughan eds., 2022). Here's the abstract:

According to international law, the essence of a treaty consists not in any record, document or other tangible form; rather, the treaty rests in the agreement between parties. In disputes over a treaty, argument will turn on what the parties intended. While words written on a treaty document will be mobilised to support a party’s position, the document does not itself constitute the treaty. What, then, do the forms and materiality of treaty documents tell us, and why should we focus on them? These material objects – treaty documents – manifest and constitute law, and legal relations and intentions precede their creation, as well as infusing their forms. This chapter will reflect on the relationship between treaties and their documented form: from the scrawls of explorer-treaty makers like Stanley in the Congo, which according to King Leopold of Belgium’s instructions, ‘in a couple of articles must grant us everything’; to treaties recorded in Wampum, a communication and diplomatic technology of the Indigenous Peoples on the east coast of what is now called North America; to the modern multilateral treaty. In doing so, it will shine a light on how material forms embody and manifest legal agreement; the universal pretensions of international law; and the imprint of European colonial dominance which is etched into their material forms.

Shirlow & Gore: The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties in Investor-State Disputes: History, Evolution and Future

Esmé Shirlow (Australian National Univ. - Law) & Kiran Nasir Gore (George Washington Univ. - Law) have published The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties in Investor-State Disputes: History, Evolution and Future (Wolters Kluwer 2022). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties in Investor-State Disputes: History, Evolution and Future is the first consolidated analysis of how the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) has informed the interpretation, application and development of international investment law and the resolution of investor-State disputes. Over the past several decades, the VCLT – the ‘treaty on treaties’ – has achieved a rich and nuanced track record of influence in international investment law, including in the context of investment treaty arbitration. This book demonstrates how approaches to key issues of treaty law in investment treaty arbitration diverge or converge from the VCLT and approaches of other international courts, as well as the lessons that investment treaty arbitration could derive from – or even offer for – the interpretation and application of the VCLT rules in other settings.

Online Talk: Çalı on "The Gender of Treaty Withdrawal: Lessons from the Istanbul Convention"

On September 30, 2022, the Minerva LAW Network will host an online talk by Başak Çalı (Hertie School) on "The Gender of Treaty Withdrawal: Lessons from the Istanbul Convention." Details are here.

Avi-Yonah: Sunt Pacta Servanda? The Problem of Tax Treaty Overrides

Reuven S. Avi-Yonah (Univ. of Michigan - Law) has posted Sunt Pacta Servanda? The Problem of Tax Treaty Overrides. Here's the abstract:

Under Article 26 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, pacta sunt servanda is defined as: “[e]very treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith”. Article 27 of this Convention (“Internal law and observance of treaties”) provides that “[a] party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.” However, even though the US recognises the VCLT as binding customary international law (CIL), it has long persisted in overriding tax treaties by domestic legislation, because the US Supreme Court has held that under the US Constitution a later statute can override an earlier treaty. This US position has been roundly condemned , for example, by the OECD. But in recent years, more countries have decided that they can in fact override tax treaties, including countries that generally treat international law as superior to domestic law (for example, Germany) as well as countries that do not (for example,Australia). This development raises doubts as to whether the VCLT position can still be considered as CIL. In the meantime, ironically, since 2001 the US has found itself unable to override tax treaties explicitly because of a combination of partisan polarisation and its unique parliamentary procedures.

Pascale & Tonolo: The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: The Role of the Treaty on Treaties in Contemporary International Law

Giuseppe Pascale (Università degli Studi di Trieste - Law) & Sara Tonolo (Università degli Studi di Trieste - Law) have published The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: The Role of the Treaty on Treaties in Contemporary International Law (Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane 2022). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

A multitude of scholarly writings in many languages concern the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT). Nevertheless, uncertainties and difficulties can be still identified when trying to understand whether and to what extent the VCLT is still central in international law and if it fits into the current international legal scenario. Such uncertainties and difficulties have resulted in the writing of this book. Hence, the chapters here collected aim at untangling the yarns of some open issues and at filling some gaps in order to ultimately establish whether at present the VCLT continues to have a role in international law. The main perspective is that of public international law. However, some room is reserved to problems stemming from the relationship between the VCLT and EU Law. The VCLT is also observed through the lens of private international law.

Couveinhes Matsumoto & Nollez-Goldbach: La dénonciation des traités – Techniques et politiques

Florian Couveinhes Matsumoto (Ecole normale supérieure) & Raphaëlle Nollez-Goldbach (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique) have published La dénonciation des traités – Techniques et politiques : Actes de la 5ème journée de droit international de l'ENS (Pedone 2022). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

Advertisement

Depuis 2016-2017, la dénonciation des traités s’est imposée comme un sujet crucial. Si cette question est devenue centrale, c’est en raison de la dénonciation « politique » des Droits international et européens, dont les débouchés « juridiques » les plus évidents ont été le Brexit ainsi qu’une avalanche d’actes de rejet divers de la part de l’administration Trump. Depuis cette période, les manifestations de méfiance à l’endroit des instruments et institutions internationaux et européens se sont multipliées et diversifiées. Cet ouvrage, issu des actes de la 5ème Journée de Droit international de l’ENS en témoigne, mais suggère également l’existence d’un clivage politique entre deux types de rejet du Droit international : certains apparaissent comme une manière, pour des gouvernements à tendance autoritaire ou pour des juridictions nationales « conservatrices », de se soustraire à des institutions internationales elles-mêmes jugées autoritaires, dogmatiques ou biaisées, ou à des règles conventionnelles et surtout dérivées jugées trop intrusives ou trop libérales ; d’autres au contraire consistent ou résultent de critiques populaires, associatives et syndicales de traités excessivement façonnés par des lobbies, contournant l’autorité des parlements et accroissant les inégalités ou la pollution au lieu de faire face sérieusement aux défis écologiques, sociaux et sanitaires actuels.

Advertisement

Dans les deux cas, ces « dénonciations », prises ici au sens large, témoignent d’une fragilisation du lien de confiance unissant les États, en particulier les États occidentaux, et le Droit international. Néanmoins, elles font signe à la fois vers le fond du problème, celui d’un déficit démocratique grandissant des Droits international et européens à l’origine de leur contestation et de difficultés d’exécution, et vers sa solution la plus durablement efficace : une démocratisation globale de ces Droits et avant tout des procédures nationales d’engagement et de désengagement conventionnels.

Morelli: Withdrawal from Multilateral Treaties

Antonio Morelli has published Withdrawal from Multilateral Treaties (Brill | Nijhoff 2021). Here's the abstract:

This monograph is the first comprehensive and systematic legal analysis of withdrawal in the context of the international law of treaties. It examines the political and legal framework around treaty making and treaty maintenance to explain how withdrawal evolved over time and suggests solutions for addressing and improving conditions for orderly withdrawal.

Fox: Old and New Peace Agreements

Gregory H. Fox (Wayne State Univ. - Law) has posted Old and New Peace Agreements (Seton Hall Law Review, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

Advertisement

What should international law make of peace agreements? In the Nineteenth Century, when treaties regularly ended inter-state armed conflicts (IACs), the answer was easy. Peace agreements were binding treaties whose terms could be freely dictated by the winning side. Peace agreements also signaled that a series of rules specific to wartime were no longer operable. Contemporary peace agreements share neither of these characteristics. This is because they largely end non-international armed conflicts (NIACs). Agreements between governments and rebels do not meet the definition of a binding treaty. And IAC agreements’ signaling function has long passed into obsolescence. How then, if at all, do new NIAC peace agreements engage with international law?

This article argues that international law has become critical to their genesis in two respects. First, the agreements parallel international law’s concern with governance issues by restructuring domestic institutions. Their governance focus is the logical consequence of international law’s refusal to “resolve” NIACs through large-scale and violent changes to national borders or demographic profiles. Former combatants must live with each other and NIAC agreements seek to structure their peaceful co-existence.

Second, all stages of NIAC agreements have become heavily multilateralized. International actors wield incentives and sanctions from the onset of conflict through the agreements’ implementation. In so doing, they radically expand the factors militating toward a peace settlement. These added factors, especially those providing a “credible commitment” of enforcing the agreement, reconfigure the parties’ incentives as to whether or not a negotiated end to conflict will serve their interests.

Conference: ILA British Branch Spring Conference 2021 (Reminder)

The International Law Association British Branch's 2021 Spring Conference will take place online on April 23, 2021, hosted by Queen Mary, University of London. The theme is: "Synergy between the Law of Treaties and the Law of International Responsibility: So Far Apart but Still So Close." The program is here. Registration is here.

Xiouri: The Breach of a Treaty: State Responses in International Law

Maria Xiouri (Univ. of Bedfordshire - Law) has published The Breach of a Treaty: State Responses in International Law (Brill | Nijhoff 2021). Here's the abstract:

In The Breach of a Treaty: State Responses in International Law, Maria Xiouri examines the relationship between responses to the breach of a treaty according to the law of treaties and the law of State responsibility, namely, between the termination of the treaty or the suspension of its operation and countermeasures.

Based on extensive analysis of State practice, the relevant legal instruments, international case law and literature, the book critically examines the concept of responses to the breach of a treaty, their legal regime and their operation in practice. It focuses on suspension of the operation of a treaty and countermeasures, challenging the prevailing view that there is a clear distinction between them, and argues that the former has been effectively superseded by the latter.

Comstock: Committed to Rights: UN Human Rights Treaties and Legal Paths for Commitment and Compliance

Audrey L. Comstock (Arizona State Univ. - Political Science) has published Committed to Rights: UN Human Rights Treaties and Legal Paths for Commitment and Compliance (Cambridge Univ. Press 2021). Here's the abstract:

International treaties are the primary means for codifying global human rights standards. However, nation-states are able to make their own choices in how to legally commit to human rights treaties. A state commits to a treaty through four commitment acts: signature, ratification, accession, and succession. These acts signify diverging legal paths with distinct contexts and mechanisms for rights change reflecting legalization, negotiation, sovereignty, and domestic constraints. How a state moves through these actions determines how, when, and to what extent it will comply with the human rights treaties it commits to. Using legal, archival, and quantitative analysis this important book shows that disentangling legal paths to commitment reveals distinct and significant compliance outcomes. Legal context matters for human rights and has important implications for the conceptualization of treaty commitment, the consideration of non-binding commitment, and an optimistic outlook for the impact of human rights treaties.

Henrich: Vertragsgewohnheitsrecht und Parlamentsbeteiligung: Verfassungsrechtliche Probleme informeller Vertragsänderungen im Völkerrecht

Christina Henrich has published Vertragsgewohnheitsrecht und Parlamentsbeteiligung: Verfassungsrechtliche Probleme informeller Vertragsänderungen im Völkerrecht (Mohr Siebeck 2020). Here's the abstract:

Angesichts weltpolitischer Veränderungen, die sich in völkerrechtlichen Vertragstexten nicht unmittelbar umsetzen lassen, haben sich verschiedene Mechanismen herausgebildet, die den völkerrechtlichen Vertrag dennoch aktuell halten. Neben evolutiver Auslegung können inhaltliche Veränderungen in Verträgen durch die Herausbildung von Vertragsgewohnheitsrecht erfolgen. Diese Mechanismen zu erläutern und voneinander abzugrenzen steht im Zentrum der völkerrechtlichen Analyse. Aus verfassungsrechtlicher Sicht stellt sich dann die Frage nach der Parlamentsbeteiligung. Hier schwelt ein Kompetenzkonflikt zwischen Exekutive und Legislative im Bereich der auswärtigen Gewalt, den Christina Henrich zugunsten des Parlaments und unter Berücksichtigung des Gewaltenteilungskonzepts des Grundgesetzes auflöst. Anschließend überträgt sie die gewonnenen Erkenntnisse auf den Entstehungsprozess von Völkergewohnheitsrecht.

Helfer: Rethinking Derogations from Human Rights Treaties

Laurence R. Helfer (Duke Univ. - Law; Univ. of Copenhagen - iCourts) has posted Rethinking Derogations from Human Rights Treaties (American Journal of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

Numerous governments have responded to the COVID-19 pandemic by declaring states of emergency and restricting individual liberties protected by international law. However, many more states have adopted emergency measures than have formally derogated from human rights conventions. This Editorial Comment critically evaluates the existing system of human rights treaty derogations. It analyzes the system’s many problems, identifies recent developments that have exacerbated these problems, and proposes a range of reforms in five areas—embeddedness, engagement, information, timing, and scope.

Hodson & Maher: The Transformation of EU Treaty Making: The Rise of Parliaments, Referendums and Courts since 1950

Dermot Hodson (Birkbeck, Univ. of London) & Imelda Maher (Univ. College Dublin) have published The Transformation of EU Treaty Making: The Rise of Parliaments, Referendums and Courts since 1950 (Cambridge Univ. Press 2020). Here's the abstract:

Treaty making is a site of struggle between those who claim the authority to speak and act on the international stage. The European Union (EU) is an important test case in this respect because the manner in which the Union and its member states make treaties has shifted significantly over the last six decades. Drawing insights from EU law, comparative constitutionalism and international relations, this book shows how and why parliaments, the people and courts have entered a domain once dominated by governments. It presents qualitative and quantitative evidence on the importance of public trust and political tactics in explaining this transformation of EU treaty making and challenges the idea that EU treaties are too rigid. Analysing legal developments in the EU and each of its member states, this will be essential reading for those who wish to understand the EU's controversial experiment in treaty making and its wider significance.

Schäfer: Treaty Overriding: Ein Beitrag zur verfassungsrechtlichen Zulässigkeit abkommensüberschreibender Bundesgesetze

Martin Schäfer has published Treaty Overriding: Ein Beitrag zur verfassungsrechtlichen Zulässigkeit abkommensüberschreibender Bundesgesetze (Mohr Siebeck 2020). Here's the abstract:

Wie verhält sich das deutsche Verfassungsrecht zu der Frage, ob der Bundestag bei seiner gesetzgeberischen Tätigkeit an völkerrechtliche Verträge gebunden ist? Martin Schäfer untersucht dies und zeigt, wie »freundlich« sich das Grundgesetz gegenüber dem Völkerrecht verhält. Wie verträgt sich eine etwaige Bindung des Gesetzgebers an völkerrechtliche Verträge mit seiner durch das Demokratieprinzip verbürgten Freiheit, in der Vergangenheit getroffene Entscheidungen zurückzunehmen oder zu ändern? Der Autor erörtert, welchen Rang dabei völkerrechtliche Verträge in der deutschen Normenpyramide einnehmen und welche Rückschlüsse die Organkompetenzverteilung im Bereich der auswärtigen Gewalt auf die Frage zulässt, ob das sog. Treaty Overriding verfassungsrechtlich zulässig ist.

Fitzmaurice & Merkouris: Treaties in Motion: The Evolution of Treaties from Formation to Termination

Malgosia Fitzmaurice (Queen Mary Univ. of London - Law) & Panos Merkouris (Rijksuniversiteit Groningen - Law) have published Treaties in Motion: The Evolution of Treaties from Formation to Termination (Cambridge Univ. Press 2020). Here's the abstract:

The law of treaties is in constant motion, understood not only as locomotion, but also as motion through time and as change. Thus, kinesis and stasis, two sides of the same concept of 'motion', are the central themes of Treaties in Motion. The concept of motion adopted in this book is based on the philosophy of Aristotle. He identified six types of motion: creation (genesis), increase (auxesis), diminution (meiosis), alteration (alloiosis), destruction (phthora), and change of place (kata topon metabole), which has been amended by the authors to change in space-time (kata topon kai chronon metavole) to reflect our modern scientific understanding of time as a dimension through which motion and change occurs. Each chapter's analysis proceeds by focusing on a specific area of a treaty's 'life-cycle', where each type of motion shines through and is described through three different frames of reference: treaties, the Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties, and customary law.

Galbraith: Rejoining Treaties

Jean Galbraith (Univ. of Pennsylvania - Law) has posted Rejoining Treaties (Virginia Law Review, Vol. 106, p. 73, 2020). Here's the abstract:

Historical practice supports the conclusion that the President can unilaterally withdraw the United States from treaties which an earlier President joined with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate, at least as long as this withdrawal is consistent with international law. This Article considers a further question that to date is deeply underexplored. This is: does the original Senate resolution of advice and consent to a treaty remain effective even after a President has withdrawn the United States from a treaty? I argue that the answer to this question is yes, except in certain limited circumstances. This answer in turn has important consequences. It means that, as a matter of U.S. domestic law, a future President can rejoin treaties without needing to return to the Senate for advice and consent. The Article concludes by situating this claim within a broader account of the distribution of foreign affairs powers.

Forlati, Mbengue, & McGarry: The Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Judgment and Its Contribution to the Development of International Law

Serena Forlati (Univ. of Ferrara - Law), Makane Moïse Mbengue (Univ. of Geneva - Law), & Brian McGarry (Leiden Univ. - Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies) have published The Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Judgment and Its Contribution to the Development of International Law (Brill | Nijhoff 2020). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

The Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Judgment is among the most influential pronouncements of the International Court of Justice. While the Court took an unusual approach to settling this dispute, it also adopted important stances on a number of complex issues of sustainable development and delicate problems of ‘general’ international law. It significantly contributed to the elucidation and consolidation of many rules pertaining to the law of treaties, the law of international responsibility, and their mutual relationship. The Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Judgment and its Contribution to the Development of International Law offers a comprehensive analysis of both the management of this case and the substantive legal issues at stake. It also reappraises the Court’s findings in light of subsequent developments in the international legal order, focusing on the role of the ‘World Court’ in fostering such developments.