Treaties Ladies

Question 1

What convention talks about treaties?

Answer 1

The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Art. 19-23

Question 2

What are some reasons we are entered into treaties?

Answer 2

➢	Forming military and political alliances
➢	Peace Making
➢	Creating new states
➢	Exchanging territory
➢	Controlling international violence

Question 3

What is a treaty?

Answer 3

• A treaty is an international agreement concluded between states in written form and governed by international law

Question 4

Explain how US law works in relation to treaties

Answer 4

• Every state has its own internal law for determining which organs of government are empowered to make a treaty binding on the state
➢ In the US the executive branch negotiates and signs treaties but the Senate gives consent and advice and votes on the treaty by a 2/3 vote
• Then the president must ratify the treaty but he doesn’t have to
• Remember executive agreements don’t require senate consent

Question 5

What are some of the differences between treaties and customary international law

Answer 5

➢ Treaties are written customary law
➢ Treaties can modify cust. Int law or codify it.
➢ Treaties apply to those why sign it and ratify it.
• Consent is important in treaties
➢ Difficult to come to consensus in treaty.
➢ Treaties have specific terms and rules set out for violation of the rules
➢ Reservations are allowed in a treaty
➢ Judiciary can’t overturn a treaty but it can be overturned by statute

Question 6

What are reservations?

Answer 6

Things you make to ensure you have a table on time at dinner.

a unilateral statement, however phrased or named, made by a state, when signing, ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to a treaty, whereby it purports to exclude or modify the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty in the application to that state

Question 7

What kind of reservations are not cool?

Answer 7

reservations that change the purpose or object of the treaty

If you do this, you may not actually be found to be a party to the treaty

Question 8

What happens if there are reservations in a bi-lateral treaty?

Answer 8

the non-reserving party may either agree to the reservation, say they want to negotiate, or declare themselves not bound by the treaty

Question 9

Why do we allow parties to make reservations?

Answer 9

➢ Because some places are soooo good to eat everyone wants to go there

We allow people to make reservations because we want to attract as many parties to the treaty as possible BUT we don’t want to dilute the meaning

Question 10

Give me a short summary of Eastern Greenland Case

Answer 10

a representative for a country who has the power to enter into treaties can speak for the country and bind it to the treaty (the Danish Prime Minister fucked up)

Question 11

What is the main jist of The Reservations to the Genocide Convention Case?

Answer 11

➢ What is the legal status of reservations to the treaty?
➢ The most important thing to remember is that states may make reservations but only if it is in line with the object and purpose of the treaty itself
• It then says that it will allow each party to the treaty to decide what the object and purpose of the treaty is

Question 12

What was the purpose of the Genocide Convention?

Answer 12

➢ The Genocide Convention was intended to be universal in scope (apply to as many states as possible), “genocide is a crime under international law” involving the denial of the right of existence of entire human groups, a denial which shocks the conscience of mankind and results in great losses to humanity, and which is contrary to the moral law and to the spirit and aims of the United Nations

Question 13

Why might some small reservations been ok to the Genocide Convention? How do small reservations work with relation to parties to the convention?

Answer 13

➢ It wants to apply to as many states as possible, so some small reservations should not completely overrule a state’s participation but its is also true that there was never a goal to sacrifice the object of the Convention to secure as many participants as possible
➢ A state which has made a reservation to the Convention that has been objected to by one or more parties but not by others can be regarded as being a party to the convention if the reservation is compatible with the object and purpose of the Convention

Question 14

What if parties to the Convention object to the reservation?

Answer 14

➢ If the parties to the Convention object to the reservation bc it considers it incompatible with the object and purpose then it can consider the reserving state not a party to the Convention

Question 15

What is the argument that reservations to the Genocide Convention should not be allowed at all? (This is policy)

Answer 15

➢ But isn’t this so important that it should be applied in its fullest- it would be better to lose as a party to the Convention a state which insists in the face of objections on modification of the terms
• IT is unique and should be regarded as a whole!!!

Question 16

What is the important issue in Medellin?

Answer 16

When is a treaty self-executing and when is it not? Do you need specific language for it to be binding without further action?

Was the ICJ enforceable at state level?

Does the ICJ trump default state rules?

Question 17

What happened in Medellin?

Answer 17

Mexican nations that were imprisoned in the United states were not told of their right to assistance by consular staff from their country

A case was brought before the ICJ under the name Avena–>they said the Mexican nationals needed to have their cases reconsidered

Bush says, US courts you should apply the Avena decision, but the court says fuck off

Question 18

What role did the Vienna Convention play in Medellin?

Answer 18

The Vienna Convention, which the US ratified, included the Optional Protocol, which states that the proper venue for resolution of disputes arising under the Vienna Convention and cites the ICJ as the principal organ of the UN who will decide such disputes- (i.e. the Avena decision)

Question 19

What did the court say about applying the decision in Avena to state court in Texas?

Answer 19

This is an issue of semantics-
➢ The court says that the US can agree to submit to jurisdiction without being bound by the decision, the court reads this as agreeing to undertake to comply with the ICJ but that it does not say you MUST comply with the ICJ
• IT means that states should take future action to implement the decision
➢ The President can’t force the courts to do anything, he is acting outside the zone of his power, he can only enforce the laws not make the laws

International treaty is not self-executing and does not automatically become law unless Congress takes some further action- here Congress never made further action

Question 20

Give a brief timeline of events concerning the Vienna Convention, ICJ, Optional Protocol and what each is about

Answer 20

US ratifies the Vienna Convention and the Optional Protocol in 1969

Optional Protocol says The ICJ is the judicial organ of the UN- the ICJ Statute states procedures for cases brought before it–>UN members may submit to general jurisdiction of ICJ on questions arising under treaty or general international law OR consent to specific ICJ jurisdiction

1985- US withdraws from the general jurisdiction but consents to specific jurisdiction

2005- After Avena is decided, US withdraws from specific jurisdiction

Question 21

What does the Dissent say in Medellin?

Answer 21

There are lot of other treaties the US enters that don’t have specific language saying they are self-executing
• The Optional Protocol bears the title “Compulsory Settlement of Disputes” thereby emphasizing the mandatory and binding nature of the procedures it sets forth →the supremacy clause has long been held to be interpreted to mean ICJ decisions rendered pursuant to provisions for binding adjudication must be domestically legally binding
• BC the Protocol lists the ICJ as the compulsory arbiter then the decision of the arbiter should be binding

Question 22

Who is to decide the object and purpose of the treaty?

Answer 22

The individual state that objects determines the object and purpose.