Chapter 2 Flashcards
summarize north korea goes nuclear case
Comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty (CTBT) prohibited all nuclear tests in the international community in 1996. However, in 1998 India and Pakistan conducted nuclear tests, tension reduced due to international pressure. In 1999 U.S. Senate refused to approve the CTBT but continued to pledge not to conduct future nuclear tests. In 2006 North Korea tested its first nuclear device and continued its tests despite condemnation.
what is the principle of pacta sunt servanda?
Latin for “agreements must be kept”: the legal principle that “Every treaty in force
is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith.”
how do states negotiate treaties? what kinds of actors are involved in this process?
A study group made of policymakers and scholars create a report that assesses relevant legal issues and makes recommendations. states are usually the main actors in treating negotiations but sometimes NGOs and other private actors also participate. Multilateral negotiations are supervised by an international organization
what are the steps for a state to join a treaty?
- negotiating and preparatory work
- collecting signatures and ratification
- entry into force when threshold of members have been met
- document depository - official recipient for multilateral agreements - usually UN secretary general
- accession (ratification after EIF)+succession (for countries that did not exist)
what legal obligations does a state face if it signs a treaty but does not ratify it?
signature alone does not fully bind a state to a treaty but can create interim legal obligations; states can escape this obligation if they make it clear that they don’t want to join; signature is not meaningless because states have unsigning treaties.
when are treaties invalid?
treaties can be invalid if it is based on fraud corruption or coercion including the threat or use of force; the treaty can also be invalid if it relies on a significant error
what criteria are used to determine if a reservation is valid?
Object and purpose test; VCLT allows the state to make a reservation unless it is incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty
Which actors interpret treaties? Why do these actors sometimes disagree on the meaning of a treaty (i.e. why is interpretation necessary)?
States frequently debate the meaning of international treaties; at the domestic level states employ international lawyers to interpret treaties; domestic courts also interpret international treaties; multinational corporations rely on international lawyers to interpret treaties; individuals, NGOs, international organizations, and international courts interpret treaties. There are ambiguous aspects of old treaties which is why it must be interpreted (ex. the differences in languages)
What tools are used to interpret treaties?
The most important tool of legal interpretation is the treaty text, the second tool for interpretation is Travaux préparatoires, the third tool is subsequent agreements that help define a treaties meaning, the fourth tool is other international agreements that are written either before or after the treaty in question, the 5th tool is subsequent practice of states to interpret a treaty, the final tool is prior judicial rulings and academic scholarship.
Describe the three different methods of interpretation.
Objective method focuses on the basic meaning of the treaty; uses dictionary definitions; what would an ordinary person believe that the treaty says?
Subjective method looks beyond the text to determine subjective intent of states; argues that states communicate their intentions in many different ways; considers preparatory work, economic political context of negotiations, and the state’s public statements
teleological method emphasizes the object and purpose of the treaty; asks how can the treaty be interpreted to best achieve the original objective of the treaty
What are the competing perspectives on the timing of interpretation?
Original interpretation believes that interpreters should seek original meaning and try to understand what parties meant at the time of conclusion of the treaty whereas evolutionary interpretation believes that interpreters should determine the treaty’s meaning when an issue of interpretation arises
What are the competing perspective on the breadth of interpretation?
The narrow interpretation believes that international rules should be interpreted narrowly to minimize the restraints on states whereas the broad interpretation argues that legal rules should be interpreted broadly so that law is more effective and achieving what it wants to achieve
What are the various methods states use to exit from treaties?
Exit clauses that specify how a state may leave a treaty
states consenting to a party exiting a treaty
if another state has committed a material breach a state may exit from a treaty
if a state can no longer perform its obligations it can exit a treaty
if economic or political circumstances have changed for this state they can use it as an excuse or justification to break their treaty promises and leave
What is acceptance of law (opinio juris)?
Latin for “acceptance as law”; second component of customary international law: states
must accept that a rule is legally binding
What is a peremptory norm (jus cogens)?
according to the VCLT, “a norm accepted and recognized by the international community of states as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character”
what is accession?
the process by which a state joins a treaty that it did not sign
what is acquiescence?
tacit support for state practice as reflected by inaction
what is active protest?
physical or verbal acts that demonstrate that a state disagrees with a particular asserted rule
what is the chronological paradox?
conceptual problem that underlies the creation of CIL: a belief in law is necessary for CIL, but how can states hold such beliefs before law exists?
what is Contra bono mores?
Latin for “against good morals”; reason sometimes provided for the claim that a
treaty is invalid because it conflicts with natural law
what are default rules?
rules that can be changed by parties to a contract
what is derogation?
decision by a pair or group of states to exempt themselves from a norm in their relations with one another
