PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

November 7, 2015
Is PIL a true law?
Two views: (depends on how it is perceived)
1. Positivist: (law is imposed by a higher authority) NO, it is not a true law.
How about the UN? Is it not a higher political government?
- No, because UN is not sovereign. If UN is sovereign, there would no longer be
a sovereignty of the State.
- UN will only be binding if consented by State-members.
Ex: The jurisdiction of ICJ is dependent on the consent of the State.
Compulsory v. Voluntary jurisdiction of ICJ
2. Binding or not: Yes, it is a true law.
Why do States obey international law?
1. Fear of sanctions: psychological/afraid to be punished
Ex: Russia,
2. Self-interest: advantages and rewards (with regard to stronger States)
3. Norms: norms undeniably proper and binding (jus cogens)
Ex: Genocide is universally knwon as a wrongful act and should be punished.
Art. 53 (Vienna Convention).
4. Acculturation theory: States have been used to obeying jus cogens and it has become a
culture
PIL has a HORIZONTAL legal system.
- dealing with co-equal states
Reparation for Injuries case 1949
What happened in this case?
What was the issue?
Resolution?
November 20, 2015
Definition of Public International Law
Traditional (JL Brierly): It is a body of rules and principles of action which are binding
upon civilized states in their relations to one another
Modern (GH Hackworth): It is that branch of public law which relates the relations of
states and other entities which have been granted an international personality.
Post-modern or Contemporary Definition: (Sec. 101, Restatement of the Law by the
American...): rules and principles of general application dealing with the conduct of

states and of international organizations and with their relations inter se, as well as with
some of their relations with persons, whether natural or juridical.
Example:
What is the role of the government?
- In both 1935 and 1973 Const: Role of govt is to protect the State.
(Utilitarianism)
- 1987: Role of the government is to protect the people.
- When we began making international organizations, like UN and similar
organizations on various fields (like trade) like GATT, WTO, etc. ; as a redefinition which
is now the Modern view.
- PIL is now more concerned on individuals.
- UN called all states to decolonize territories, because it has contributed to the continued
resistance of people which leads to no peace.
Decolonization
Gave options to colonized states:
- part of mother state
- be new state
- be annexed to another state
Right to self-determination
- recognizing a territory where they have different culture, etc.
- customary international law
Two types of armed conflict (Akehusrt)
International
- between states; governed by Art. 3 of 4th Geneva Conventions
- combatants have rights as prisoners of war
- regular armed force and national liberation movements (exercising right to selfdetermination) ;in one territory
Non-intl
- conflict confined in one territory between two armed groups
- governed by municipal law
Are persons subjects of international law?
- It depends on the context. Persons can be subject in certain cases; one circumstance is
when the right of a person to self-determination is in question.
- People are OBJECTS of international law.
Diplomatic protection (espousal of claim)- which refers to the right of a state to intervene
diplomatically or to raise an international claim on behalf of its nationals against another
state.
Ex:
When Phil. lawfully admitted a foreigner, Philippines has the obligation to treat

him just and fair (minimum standard of treatment). This is also applicable to foreign
corporations. The moment, either by deliberate act or omissions, we fail to accord the
fair and just treatment to the international, it can be a basis for charging Phil for
committing an internationally wrongful act (telling State that your are responsible
under international law). The offense committed is not towards the foreigner but
against the country or state where the foreigner belongs.
In this case, only the State can file a case against the Phil because it is the only
one who has INTERNATIONAL LEGAL PERSONALITY. The foreigner will only
be the OBJECTS.
Public v. Private International Law
- Public: governs activities of states and other intl persons/entities in relation to each
other. It governs intl persons inter se.
- Private: governs activities of individuals, corporations and other private entities when
they cross natl borders and in controversies involving foreign element. It resolves
conflicts of laws.
History of PIL
1625- Hugo Grotius (Father of Public Intl Law) published On the Law of War and
Peace, Mare Liberum the freedom of the seas in 1609
- helped in the formation of UNCLOS
1648- Treaty of Westphalia (Spain, Roman Empire, etc.)
- in every territory, the authority of that territory is sovereign
- conception of sovereignty
- principle of co-equality
16th- 17th Centuries were the classical age of public international law
1789- birth of term internationa law by J. Bentham
1863- Lieber Code (Lincolns General Order No. 100 or the the Lieber Instructions),
the first document that governs conduct of war
- influential in the writing of the Geneva Conventions
- resolving conflict considering rights of humanity
1899- Permanent of Court of Arbitration
1907- Hague and Geneva Conventions (there were four Geneva Conventions in 1949)
- Geneva conventions: governs conduct of war
1922-1946- PCIJ of the League of Nations, then replaced by the ICJ of the UN
1948- creation of Intl Law Commission tasked to codify international law
19th -20th centuries- the increase in global trade, armed conflict, environmental
deterioration in a worldwide scale, awareness of human rights violations, rapid and vast
increases in international transportation and a boom in global communications saw the
importance and usefulness of PIL, which at this time began establish new and modern
areas in international law (trade and investment, technology, human rights,
environment, space, etc.)

Why have ILC?

- Intl law commission, at the time they codified, they underwent preparatory works.
Whats the use of codification of preparatory works?
- to guide in the enforcement.
- Art. 38, ILC offers persuasive effects on decisions
Three Regimes/Divisions of PIL
Law of Peace
- Law of Treaties
- Law of the Sea
-Diplomatic Relations, etc.
The Laws of War
- Jus ad Bellum (legality of engaging in war)
- when may a state lawfully engage in war; when may a state use of force
- whether it is justifiable for a state to engage in war
- Jus in Bello (legality of conduct of war)
- there is already armed conflict, what law governs the belligerents?
The Law of Neutrality
- governs the conduct of states not engaged in war
- how should other countries behave when they are not involved in war?
Is the Laws of War applicable during war?
Tom: Reparation to Damages Case, Paquete Habana, Nicaragua case (focus on Sources of
Intl law), North Sea case
November 21, 2012
Characterization of PIL
- Concensus, rather than command.
- Problems which arise:
- formation of intl law
- instilling compliance to states
- enforcement
Doctrine of self-help
- in the form of either:
Retorsion- lawful act which is designed to injure the wrongdoing state
- for example, cutting off economic aid
Reprisal
Basic Characteristics of PIL
1. PIL is a horizontal legal system (billiard ball theory)

2. PIL lacks supreme authority (there is no legislature, no executive branch and no system
of courts), except to the extent that states may have subjected themselves certain
compulsory processes and consequences under treaties an conventions;
3. Self-help, unlike in domestic sphere applying... (same p.1)
Sources (Formal or Material) of PIL
Formal - how international law is created or established
- appear to embody the constitutional mechanism for identifying law
Ex: Treaty, formal if it was done by agreement
Material sources- incorporate the essence or subject-matter of the regulations.
Ex: Treaty, if State is party to torture convention because agreed and that is in
the subject matter of the convention
Why look into the formal and material source?
- legitimacy of the norm on how it is created, its acceptability as binding
- Formal: how the law is formed
- Material: substance of the law
Article 38 (1), Statute of ICJ
Primary:
a) international conventions
b) International custom
c) General principles of law
Subsidiary:
d) judicial decisions and teachings of the most highly qualified publicists
Article 38(1) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice15 provides:
The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with international law such disputes
as are submitted to it, shall apply:
(a) international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules
expressly recognized by the contesting States;
(b) international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law;
(c) the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations;
(d) judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of
the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law
Why classify into primary or subsidiary?
- To know what to apply first in making advisory opinions, resolving conflicts, etc.
- Can be viewed in many ways.
- law-creating processes v. Law-determining (Schwarzenberger)
- overlapping sources (Shaw)
- Hierarchy of sources? (see travaux preparatoires)

It is also true that the Charter, as shown by the travaux prparatories,

originally did not attach as much significance to the promotion and protection of
human rights as to the maintenance of international peace and security (p 220,
Akehurst)
On hierarchy:
- Intent: treaty should prevail over customary
- Uniformity and Binding effect (how expansive): customary over treaty (except
persistent objectors)
- jus cogens: universal character
Judicial decisions- can also include domestic judicial decisions
Raul Pangalanan- one of the justices of the international criminal court; Filipino
International conventions/Treaties
- whether general or particular and establishing rules expressly recognized by the
contesting States
- The term convention includes (and actually means) treaty
- Other terms: agreement, pact, understanding, protocol, charter, ...
- name depends on the reason or subject matter of the treaty or convention
- charter: creation of organization
- statute: creates a court
- Law-making treaties vs. contract treaties?
What is the Rome Statute?
- created the international criminal court
- before, there are only ad hoc courts
Relationship of convention and customary international law
- depends on how expansive the treaty is; problem, is when a customary norm is
abandoned in a treaty binding by many states (or majority)
1940s, UN charter--- non-violence, prohibition of the use of force for acquisition of
territories.
Seatwork: Sources of PIL
December 3, 2015
May a State validly exempt itself from the application of a customary intl law? Are all
states, therefore, bound by all norms of customary intl law? Is there such as thing as
majority rule in intl law?
-

Bar exam:
What is the persistent dissenter doctrine? Or the persistent objector Doctrine?
- what is required is that its more than non-practice of the norm. It should be that:
1. At the inception of that customary intl law, or when it started to develop as intl
law, the objector must already objected or expressed it dissent from that time; not when it
has already emerged.
2. Objection must be consistent.
3. Objection must be categorical.
Anglo Norwegian Fisheries case ()
Key principle:
A state, that from the outset consistently objects to a particular practice, is not bound
by any rule of alleged customary intl law which may arise from the practice. (Persistent
objector doctrine)
ICJ:
In any event, the ten-mile rule would appear to be inapplicable as against Norway,
inasmuch as she has always opposed any attempt to apply it to the Norwegian coast.
Fisheries Jurisdiction Case (UK v Iceland, ICJ Reports)
Key principle:
Art. 62 of the Vienna COnvention on the Law of Treaties, relating to termination of a
treaty...
Legality of Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons Case
Key principles:
1. General Assembly resolutions may show the formation of opinio juris. Even if they are
not legally binding, they may sometimes have normative value.
2. A State is barred to do an act only when it is so prohibited under atreaty or customary
intl law. Restriction to states sovereignty is not presumed. (see Lotus case)
When can sovereignty be stopped?
1. Conventional intl law
2. Customary intl law prohibiting doing a particular act
Lotus case
- no customary intl law, nor conventional, PCIJ cannot rule that Turkey is barred from
hearing the case against the French officers.
ICJ Opinion and Voting:
- Unanimous, on the principle that there is in neither customary nor conventional intl law
any specific authorization of the threat or use of nuclear weapons;
- 11-3, on the principle that there is in neither customary nor conventional intl law any

comprehensive and universal prohibition of the threat or use of nuclear weapons as such;
as such- depending on how it is to be used
- Unanimous, on the principle that a threat or use of force by means of nuclear weapons
that is contrary to Art. 2, par. 4 (but does not fall under Art. 51) of UN chapter and that
fails to meet all the reqts of Art. 51, is unlawful.;
- Art 2, par. 4, prohibits the use of force against ... However, that prohibition deals
with an exception: collective self-defense.
- Unanimous, on the principle that a threat or use of nuclear weapons should also be
compatible with the reqts of the intl law applicable to armed conflict and IHL as well as
specific obligations under treaties dealing with nuclear weapons;
- 7-7, on the principle that while the threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be
contrary to the rules of IHL in armed conflict, the COurt cannot conclude definitively
whether it would be lawful or unlawful in an extreme circumstance of self-defense, in
which the very survival of the State would be at stake;
Why cant they ban nuclear use altogether?
- because there can be instances when nuclear weapons may be used and may
give a positive effect in the long-term.
Bar (possible): What is the status of nuclear weapons in international law?
What is an accelerated customary intl law?
- Unanimous, on the principle that there exists an obligation to pursue in good faith
efforts towards nuclear disarmament.
Key principles
1. Restriction upon the independence or sovereignty of states cannot be presumed
2. Jurisdiction is territorial but intl law does not prohibit a state from exercising
jurisdiction in its own territory over a case relating to acts which have taken place abroad;
3. No definite rule of customary intl law regarding collision cases in the high seas (note:
there are some rules now on collision cases in the high seas under UNCLOS III of
1982)What about abstention by some states to exercise of criminal jurisdiction for crimes
committed abroad, does it offer evidence that such practice of abstention is obligatory?
Subjective territorial jurisdiction
Objective territorial jurisdiction
Effects doctrine
- acts committed abroad, if effects of criminal acts are felt in a particular state
What is the normative value of states abstention?
- must also include that the abstention is with the belief that it was obligatory to abstain
that customary intl law
- abstention adds to proposition that state could not practice jurisdiction ...
- more on opinio juris

Turkey: france is bound to respect the nor,

France: I dont think it is a norm because a lot of states abstents over that belief
Collision cases (applicable now):
1. Flag state
2. Nationality of defendant
*English Rule / French Rule- not applicable in collision on high seas
What if the ships involved are military ships?
- this will be governed by a different provision in the convention
Sources of PIL:
Article 38 (1), Statute of ICJ
Primary:
d) international conventions
e) International custom
f) General principles of law
Subsidiary:
d) judicial decisions and teachings of the most highly qualified publicists
General Principles of Law
- principles of law, orginating from domestic jurisdiction
- recognized by civilized (peace-loving) nations;
- norms developed through state practice
- exercised at domestic level, transposed and applied by the ICJ in various cases and other
tribunals
- Aimed at providing solutions to controversies where treaty law or customary law
provides no guidance;
- Law can refer to both international law and municipal law elevated as
international
Ex: estoppel, good faith, exhaustion of local remedies, prescription, etc.
Akehurst: preparatory works of Statutes of ICj, they did not intend that these 3 shall be
treated in heirarchical form. The intention was to find a solution where there may be a
gap in the law where there is neither conventional or customary intl law. These laws can
be seen in ...
Barcelona Traction case:
Key principle
- In the absence of applicable intl law cognizance must be given to the relevant
institutions of domestic law, otherwise, the ICJ would lose touch with reality, particularly
as there are no corresponding institutions of intl law to which the Court could make
reference.

Q: What general principle of law was applied in this case?

- Canada did not exercise diplomatic protection so they asked Belgium (nationality of
most stockholders) to sue Spain.
Issue: WON Belgium has the personality
Ruling:
In the field of diplomatic...
December 11, 2015
General principles of law
- travaux preparatoires, this general principles of law has the purpose of filling the gaps
- non liquit: principle of law will be applied in the absence of clear or conventional
customary of intl law (related to equitable principles)
Barcelona Traction case
What principle of law?
- since the injury was against the corp, and becaue at the domestic level, there was an
understanding that corp has distinct personality; the injury of corp is different from injury
of stockholders.
- So Belgium cannot exercise diplomatic protection
- Principle of law at domestic law, transmused to international law
River Meuse case
- Meuse is a common river.
- Clean-hands doctrine
Soft law
- what makes a soft law not legally binding is: it is only meant to guide states in
legislation, incoming up with their own laws
Ex: UDHR - Bill of Rights, in Phil.
- The emergence of soft law also has to do with the fact that states in agreement
frequently do not (yet) wish to bind themselves legally, but nevertheless wish to adopt
and test certain rules and principles before they become law.
- It is sometimes argued more generally that particular non-binding instruments or
documents or non-binding provisions in treaties form a special category that may be
termed soft law.
Other Possible Sources of PIL
- Acts of International Organizations
- Soft law
- Equity (Justice)
Ex aequo et bono- equity overrides all other rules
Equity v. Ex aequo et bono

- equity, parties need not consent, regardless of consent of parties (non liquit)
- latter, application may not be actually fair for parties, apply equity and they will be
fine with it
Bar: What is soft law? How do you distinguish t from hard law?
What is the normative value of soft law?
Non self-executing laws
Jimenez case:
Custom v. Usage/Comity
Custom is a practice that states believe themselves to be under a legal obligation to
follow. (ex: State immunity)
Usage or comity is a practice that states generally follow w/o believing themselves
legally bound by it (ex: alternat)
Alternat- method of signing a treaty where each rep will bring a copy to bring to the State
and ask chief of state to ratify it; out of convenience
Hierarchy of Sources of PIL
- travaux preparatoires: Primary and Subsidiary sources only
- Art. 53 of VCLT, one source is not to be treated as always superior to the other. The
sources of intl law are not therefore arranged in a strict hierarchy.
Which should prevail, treaty or CIL?
Guidelines in determining which source prevails:
- Jus cogens
- lex posterior derogat priori
- lex posterior generalis non derogat priori speciali
- lex specialis derogat legi generali
- Consider Desuetude (mutual rejection by the parties of a treaty usually due to the
emergence of new norm)
- Bernhardt: If there is a clear conflict, treaties prevail over custom and custom prevails
over general...
If CIL
- it is all encompassing
- even if States do not like CIL, it will still be binding unless persistent objector doctrine
(3 requirements)
One way of changing CIL:
- treaty or convention
- adhere to it for long time
Non-derogable: applicable at all times and in all conditions
- it stands true even if it is war time, peace time

Ex: Genocide, Torture

*At war time, there are still possibility that killing is valid, as long as it complies the
standards.
Belligerent- participants of war or armed conflict
How is Jus cogens related to Erga Omnes norm?
- see notes
Erga omnes inter partes: applied to specific state
Ex: 1970 Cultural Property Convention, for stolen properties and such is found in
state member of the convention, that state is reqd to repatriate the property to the country
of origin.
Bar: Distinguish erga omnes with erga omnes inter partes.
Philippine Practice
- Sec. 2, Art. II, Constitution
- Incorporation clause v. Transformation
positive act: SC decisions, legislations
- Sec. 21, Art. 7, Senate concurs in ratification of treaties
2 principles of making intl law part of municipal law. In the Phil., which principle is
observed?
Kuroda v Jalandoni
- see notes
USA v. Guinto
- see notes
- par in parem, non habet imperium
- juri imperii v juri gestionis:
- important in contracts
- ex contractu, there is State immunity (?)
Consider ICSID in State Immunity
- International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes: allowing foreign investors
to directly initiate a suit for arbitration or conciliation involving disputes against states.
- As an intl agreement, states have therefore waived their immunity from suit the cases
covered by the ICSID. The ICSID rule, however requires double consent. The
arbitration case will be filed in acc arbitral bodies, not in domestic courts.
Reyes v. Bagatsing
- see notes

Holy See v. Rosario

- see notes
TREATIES
- treaty law vs. law of treaties
- treaty law: substantive content of treaties
- law of treaties: body of rules that apply to all treaties,
- For purposes of application of VCLT, a treaty means an international agreement...
(Art. 2)
May the rules found in the VCLT be applied in the following?
A. Dispute involving a treaty bet State A and the IMF- World Bank. Yes
B. Dispute involving a 1960 treaty bet State A and State B. Yes
C. Dispute involving a 1995 treaty bet State A and State B which are not parties to the
VCLT. Yes
- Depends on the rule.
Elements of a treaty (VCLT):
1. Codified
2.
December 16, 2015
Q: What is the difference between a signatory from a party to a treaty? (p. 36 on
reviewer)
Q: Distinguish signature from ratification.
Q: Distinguish Treaty Law from Law of Treaties
Q: Distinguish cpncluded treaty from treaty entered into force
Signatory v. Party
1. As to meaning (Entry into force)
- Signatory: signed (not necessarily bound, it may be subject to domestic ratification)
Why ratify?
(a) Opportunity to inquire into scope of authority on treaty signed by
representative. (for President)
(b) Enables State to ponder further whether or not it will be bound by the treaty.
Ex: US on Rome Statute, Senate conducted several debates and prevailing
sentiment was:
Provisions on: compulsory surrender of criminal found in your territory
- US, after 2 years, withdrew from Rome Statute
- Party: already bound into the treaty
Ex: The text of the treaty provides: This treaty, after having been signed by all
States, upon submission of the 20th State, will entry into force.
2. As to obligation
- Signatory: not yet bound by the substantive content of the treaty

Art. 18. All negotiating States are bound to refrain from doing acts that will defeat
the purpose of the treaty.
Opinion: Codified (Art.18); Principle: negotiating in good faith
What is the threshold of defeating the purpose of the treaty?
Oust (?)- acts that make the State incapable of doing its obligations in the treaty.
Example of act not necessarily defeating: Kyoto Protocol, State signatory
increased gas emissions instead of reducing.
Formation of Treaties
1. Proposal to draft a treaty
2. Negotiation and drafting of terms
3. Adoption and Authentication of the text of the treaty by the negotiating States
4. Signature/expression of consent to be bound by the treaty by the individual State
5. Ratification of the treaty by the individual states
6. Exchange of instruments of ratification and entry into force of the treaty
7. Accession to the treaty by states wishing to join after its entry into force, if any.
What NGO initiated Geneva Convention?
- International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)
What is the importance of Negotiation?
- To know the intent of the parties.
What is the importance of Adoption and Authentication? Given you are already adopting
text of the treaty, how will you express your consent to be bound?
- Text of the treaty now governs the subsequent stages of the enforcement process.
January 8, 2016
Formation of Treaties
1. Proposal to draft a treaty
- can be done in various ways.
a) most common: A State will propose that a treaty will be drafted and results to
bilateral treaty
b) States attend conference, motion will be made to draft a treaty applicable to
particular concern
c) NGO may draft a treaty for states to consider
Ex: Geneva Conventions of 1949
Geneva Convention was initiated by ICRC
2. Negotiation and drafting of terms
What is the relevance of knowing what transpired during negotiation?
- To know and understand the meaning of particular provision of the treaty for
purposes of interpretation.
When will we need to know the intent of the parties?

Q: How are treaties to be interpreted?

- Probably, in most jurisdictions, we go by preferences. In fact, SC held that we
should start with particular approach before going into another. We should first look at
the law and interpret literally (verba legis). If there is still failure, then ratio legis est
anima.
- Art. 31 of Vienna Convention is specific.
Article 31, GENERAL RULE OF INTERPRETATION
1. A treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to
be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and
purpose.
2. The context for the purpose of the interpretation of a treaty shall comprise, in addition
to the text, including its preamble and annexes:
a) Any agreement relating to the treaty which was made between all the parties in
connexion with the conclusion of the treaty;
b) Any instrument which was made by one or more parties in connexion with the
conclusion of the treaty and accepted by the other parties as an instrument
related to the treaty.
3. There shall be taken into account, together with the context:
a) Any subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of
the treaty or the application of its provisions;
b) Any subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which establishes the
agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation;
c) Any relevant rules of international law applicable in the relations between the
parties.
4. A special meaning shall be given to a term if it is established that the parties so
intended.
- Words, Context, Object, Purpose
- Problem is when one is not compatible with the other. So, apply the RULE ON
PREFERENCE.
- Use Temple case.
- Some lean on to Textualist approach. There had been cases where ICJ will adapt the
teleological (object and purpose) approach.
- Art. 32 provides for supplementary means of interpretation of treaty.
1. This will be used if use of approaches will lead to ambiguity.
2. It will result to absurdity
a) Preparatory works
b) Contemporaneity
Article 32. SUPPLEMENTARY MEANS OF INTERPRETATION
Recourse may be had to supplementary means of interpretation, including the preparatory
work of the treaty and the circumstances of its conclusion, in order to confirm the
meaning resulting from the application of article 31, or to determine the meaning when
the interpretation according to article 31 :
(a) Leaves the meaning ambiguous or obscure; or

(b) Leads to a result which is manifestly absurd or unreasonable.

What are the supplementary means of treaty interpretation
- may be resorted to if interpretation using Art. 31 will result to ambuguity or absurdity.
- In that case, you can use the preparatory works and contemporaneity.
3. Adoption and Authentication of the text of the treaty by the negotiating States
What is the relevance of adoption of text of treaty?
X State is adopting the text of the treaty, and all other states are. How will the state
express its consent to be bound?
In this particular treaty, when will this enter into force?
Are the parties allowed to make reservations in this particular treaty?
Are third parties allowed to become third parties via accession?
What is the normative value of the text of the treaty?
- After having been adopted, the text will now govern the subsequent stages of the
enforcement process.
When will this enter into force?
- First, in accordance with text of treaty.
Ex: This treaty will entry into force after 1 year after the 60th ...
- Signature or expression of consent to be bound. Assuming that signature is considered
as a way to express consent to be bound.
- Ratification of the treaty by individual states.
IN the area of ratification, it contemplates of two kinds:
1. Domestic level
- depend on domestic law.
- In Phil., the method we use is treaty is ratified by Pres to be concurred with Senate.
- There are at least 2 important reasons for ratification in a state
1. To check whether the representative has acted only up to his authority.
2. Give state concerned and public time to reflect whether they will consent to be
bound.
2. International level
- In a bilateral treaty, ratification means exchange of instruments of ratification.
- Multilateral treaties, if parties have submitted, transmitted their instruments of
ratification to their specified Depositary.
Is accession allowed? Is reservation allowed?
- Depends on the text of the treaty.
Capacity to Enter into Treaties
- States have inherent capacity to enter into treaties (Art. 6, VCLT)
Right to Legation- right to send diplomatic missions to enter into foreign relations
- Since states are legal persons, they are represented by their agents. So, who is permitted

to represent the State?

1. He must have Full Powers (Art. 7)
Art. 2(c) "Full powers" means a document emanating from the competent
authority of a State designating a person or persons to represent the State for
negotiating, adopting or authenticating the text of a treaty, for expressing the
consent of the State to be bound by a treaty, or for accomplishing any other act
with respect to a treaty.
2. Exceptions:
i. Art. 7 (1)(b) - Apparent authority
It appears from the practice of the States concerned or from other
circumstances that their intention was to consider that person as representing
the State for such purposes and to dispense with full powers.
ii. Art 7 (2) - Implied authority
In virtue of their functions and without having to produce full powers, the
following are considered as representing their State:
(a) Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs,
for the purpose of performing all acts relating to the conclusion of a treaty;
(b) Heads of diplomatic missions, for the purpose of adopting the text of a
treaty between the accrediting State and the State to which they are
accredited;
(c) Representatives accredited by States to an international conference or to
an international organization or one of its organs, for the purpose of
adopting the text of a treaty in that conference, organization or organ.
- See Art. 8 if person is unauthorized.
Article 8. An act relating to the conclusion of a treaty performed by a person who cannot
be considered under article 7 as authorized to represent a State for that purpose is without
legal effect unless afterwards confirmed by that State.
Adoption/Authentication under VCLT
1. Adoption of the Text of a Treaty:
a) Unanimity
b) 2/3 of the states present and voting
Article 9. ADOPTION OF THE TEXT
1. The adoption of the text of a treaty takes place by the consent of all the States
participating in its drawing up except as provided in paragraph 2.
2. The adoption of the text of a treaty at an international conference takes place by the
vote of two thirds of the States present and voting, unless by the same majority they shall
decide to apply a different rule.
*Example of Progressive intl law
Q: What is the legal significance of Adoption of the text of the treaty?
- After adoption of the text, the treaty will be prepared in final form, at which point it is
usually authenticated. (See Art. 10)
Consent to be bound

Article 11.
- Ratification (Arts. 2 1b and 16)
- By Accession, a third state which did not
Q: Is the consenting State now bound by the terms or substantive provisions of the treaty?
Legal Obligations before Treaty enters into force
Article 18. OBLIGATION NOT TO DEFEAT THE OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF A
TREATY PRIOR TO ITS ENTRY INTO FORCE A State is obliged to refrain from acts
which would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty when:
(a) It has signed the treaty or has exchanged instruments constituting the treaty subject to
ratification, acceptance or approval, until it shall have made its intention clear not to
become a party to the treaty; or
(b) It has expressed its consent to be bound by the treaty, pending the entry into force of
the treaty and provided that such entry into force is not unduly delayed.
States A, B and C signed a mutual defense treaty where each state is allowed to build a
military state in every ones territory. However, the treaty has to be ratified in domestic
level. State A created a mutual defense treaty with State X. State B and C protested
stating that State A have committed acts which will defeat the object and purpose of a
treaty. Did State A commit such act?
- If X is an enemy state of B or C, it will be burdensome to State A to comply with the
previous treaty signed. Thus, such act will constitute an act which would defeat the object
and purpose of the treaty.
- If X is not an enemy state, then State A have not committed such act.
- Importance of Art. 18 is to give signatories obligations.
- Negotiating in good faith principle of international law
Problem: What particular acts constitutes such acts?
- Authors have suggested that: The act constitutes an act that would defeat the object and
purpose of the treaty when a State commits acts which would render it incapable of
performing essential provisions of the treaty.
- A State commits an internationally wrongful act when one violates:
- treaty obligation
- non-treaty obligations.
* Then, you will have to be liable for committing such internationally wrongful act
Entry into Force
As a rule: as soon as all negotiating states.. (Art. 24(2))
Problem: States A, B, C, D and E entered into a treaty. The treaty had 10 different
articles. States A, B, C and D accepted all 10 articles without reservations. State E,
however, did not agree with Art.10, so it indicated that it wished to make a reservation to

Art. 10.
1. Did State E become a party to the treaty?
- If the other state did not object, yes.
- No, if all others object.
- If one of the contracting states object,
- Genocide Reservation case: study!
- You must ask: When did this happen? Is there a compatibility?
2. Assuming that State E had become a party to the treaty, what is the treaty relationship
between State E and States A, B, C and D?
What is a reservation?
- It allows multilateral treaties to be entered into by states while having reservations on
specific provisions of the treaty.
Difference of Reservation, Understanding, Declaration
- Reservation: State will want to be exempted of specific provision/s of the treaty.
- Understanding: rules on interpretation
- Declaration: Declaring that a particular article is bound to us in a certain context.
Ex: Treaty provides that All States must adopt legislative measures on adopting the
treaty. State A makes an Understanding that legislative measures means Statutes only.
Before Genocide convention, states followed unanimity rule. To be considered a party, all
states must consent to the reservation. If one objects, he will not be considered as party.
After Genocide case, it was modified. Liberality rule was used. It is possible to have one
state object and reserving state may still be a party. This is when you check if there is
incompatibility of the reservation.
January 9, 2016
ICJ now made a more liberal approach. Such that even a state objects, the reserving state
may still be a party to the treaty depending if the reservation involves a provision which
creates incompatibility with the object and purpose of treaty of the reservation.
When will resevation be allowed?
Article 19. FORMULATION OF RESERVATIONS A State may, when signing, ratifying,
accepting, approving or acceding to a treaty, formulate a reservation unless:
(a) The reservation is prohibited by the treaty;
- Ex: Rome Statute and ICCPRC
(b) The treaty provides that only specified reservations, which do not include the
reservation in question, may be made; or
(c) In cases not falling under sub-paragraphs (a) and (b), the reservation is incompatible
with the object and purpose of the treaty.

Reservation
Art. 2 (1) (d). "Reservation" means 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 to modify the legal effect of certain provisions of the
treaty in their application to that State.
- 2011 ILC Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties:
...made by a State or an international organization...or by a State when making
notification of succession to a treaty...
Clean Slate Doctrine- Successor state is not bound by the treaties entered into by
predecessor state.
What is reservation in the Law on Treaties?
- Take note.
Reservations to the Genocide Convention Case
Q asked:
1. Can a reserving State be regarded as being a party to the convention while still
maintaining its reservation, if reservation is objected...
- Can be regarded as a party to the Convention, if the reservation is ...(See ppt)
2. Each state objecting to the reservation will or will not, on basis of its individual
appraisal within the limits of the criterion of the object and purposes of the Convention...
areservation as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention, it can in
fact consider that the reserving State is not a party to the Convention.
Why not unanimous?
Observation: VCLT should not have adapted in general terms the liberality approach
because ICJ only made such approach because the Convention involves a jus cogens
norm. Some suggested to go back to the unanimity rule if case do not involve jus cogens.
- Thus, we can argue that liberal approach can hardly ripen into customary intl law, only
if it applies to jus cogens.
What is the status of secret treaties in international law?
- Article 80 of the 1969 Convention (following article 102 of the United Nations
Charter)provides that after their entry into force, treaties should be transmitted to the
United Nations Secretariat for registration and publication. These provisions are intended
to end the practice of secret treaties, which was regarded as contributing to the outbreak
of the First World War, as well as enabling the United Nations Treaty Series, which
contains all registered treaties, to be as comprehensive as possible. (Shaw)
- Article 3 of UN Charter. For member nations only, we have agreed to treat UN Charter
as prevailing over all other treaties.
- State cannot invoke such treaties in any organs of the UN like the ICJ.

* Secret treaties- unregistered treaties; not registered or published at the Secretariat of

UN.
How to enforce?
- Depending on the treaty, so long as it does not involve any organ of UN.
Is there a rule which provides that a treaty prevails over the other?
- For member nations only, we have agreed to treat UN Charter as prevailing over all
other treaties.
Registration
Article 102 (1) of the UN Charter: every treaty entered into by any Member of the UN
after the Charter comes into force shall as soon as possible be registered with the
Secretariat and published by it.
Signatory v. Party
Meaning
Legal Obligations
Withdrawal of the treaty
Effects before entry into force
Effect of treaty after entry into force
- Pacta sunt servanda (Art 2 of UN Charter, Art 26 of VCLT)
- A party cannot invoke a provision of its domestic law to evade compliance (Art 27)
Which should prevail, international law or domestic law? Domestic law is incompatible
with treaty obligation, which will prevail?
- There are many thngs to consider:
1. Characterize what international law is in issue.
2. Idea of municipal law.
- States have diff. legal systems. Examples, for states that adhere to supremacy of
Constitution, if we pick an intl law which is GAPIL, you invoke incorporation
clause. If GAPIL contravenes Constitution, Const prevails.
- However, if it involves jus cogens, even our courts admitted in Planas v. Gil, even
our constitution may be ...if a jus cogens is involved.
Q: If it is treaty-based, not jus cogens that runs in conflict with domestic law, which
should prevail?
- This will depend on the forum. If forum is an intl tribunal like ICJ, if it is to be
resolved by this tribunal, they will invoke Art. 27 wherein International Law shall prevail.
However, if it is to be resolved by domestic court, in the case of Ichong v. Hernandez, the
law which is in conflict with must be identified. If it is Constitution then Constitution
prevails, but if it is a statute, then...SC did not say that domestic law will prevail, they
said it would depend on the law involved.
- Depending on its treshold...whether the jurisdiction adapts the monism and dualism

approach.
- Treaties do not prima facie operate retrospectively, unless a different intention appears
(Art 28)
-A treaty cannot prejudice third state without the latters express consent (Art 34, 35)
January 22, 2016
Stringent rule on reservation
- before
When reservation may not be permitted:
1. Convention does not permit reservation.
2. Reservation involves provision which under convention reservation is not allowed.
3. In any case, where reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the
convention.
Different ways by which State party to a treaty may get out of the treaty:
1. State withdraws from the treaty. (withdrawal/ renunciation)
How may a State validly withdraw from a treaty?
- pursuant to the text of the treaty, if treaty provides for withdrawal.
When State party permitted to do so?
- Normally, it is found on exit provisions in the treaty.
- In this exit provisions will provide for the period.
Ex: Upon notice of not less than 1 year.
- If there is no time provided for, if it is presumed, it will usually be 12 months
Is it still possible to withdraw without provisions?
- Yes.
1. It can be established that parties have intended the withdrawal
2. When implied
Article 56. DENUNCIATION OF OR WITHDRAWAL FROM A TREATY
CONTAINING
NO
PROVISION
REGARDING
TERMINATION,
DENUNCIATION OR WITHDRAWAL
1. A treaty which contains no provision regarding its termination and which does
not provide for denunciation or withdrawal is not subject to denunciation or
withdrawal unless:
() It is established that the parties intended to admit the possibility of denuncia
tion or withdrawal; or
(b) A right of denunciation or withdrawal may be implied by the nature of the
treaty.
2. A party shall give not less than twelve months' notice of its intention to
denounce or withdraw from a treaty under paragraph 1.
- Cutting off of diplomatic alliances/ Treaty of Alliance
- If withdrawal is done pursuant to implied, it must be done in not less than 12 months
2. State party invokes a ground that invalidates a treaty. (invalidation)

Article 46. PROVISIONS OF INTERNAL LAW REGARDING COMPETENCE TO

CONCLUDE TREATIES
1. A State may not invoke the fact that its consent to be bound by a treaty has been
expressed in violation of a provision of its internal law regarding competence to conclude
treaties as invalidating its consent unless that violation was manifest and concerned a rule
of its internal law of fundamental importance.
2. A violation is manifest if it would be objectively evident to any State conducting itself
in the matter in accordance with normal practice and in good faith.
May invocation of internal law permit a State which law relates to competence of State to
express its consent to be bound, may it be invoked to invalidate a treaty? Art. 46, VCLT
Situation: Pres of State A, expressed its consent to be bound by ratification without
first taking consent of a particular body as required in its internal laws. When State A
violates provisions of such treaty, State B said A violated the treaty. But A alleged that it
was invalidated because it failed to comply internal laws regarding competence with its
consent to be bound. (Cameroon v. Nigeria)
- Head of State, under Art. 7 of VCLT, has implied authority to ratify a treaty.
- Internal law of fundamental importance: constitutional reqts.
- Even if fundamental, it is not manifest.
- And besides, in any case, there is no obligation in intl law for state parties to take notice
of the other party to be bound by the treaty.
- One ground of invalidating consent is when a state is able to comply with 2 conditions
that may vitiate the consent of state in concluding a treaty:
1. Competence to enter into treaties is manifest.
2. If it is a fundamental law of fundamental importance.
Article 27. INTERNAL LAW AND OBSERVANCE OF TREATIES
A party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure
to perform a treaty. This rule is without prejudice to article 46.
Second ground for invalidation is error.
Article 48. ERROR
1. A State may invoke an error in a treaty as invalidating its consent to be bound by the
treaty if the error relates to a fact or situation which was assumed by that State to exist at
the time when the treaty was concluded and formed an essential basis of its consent to be
bound by the treaty.
2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply if the State in question contributed by its own conduct to
the error or if the circumstances were such as to put that State on notice of a possible
error.
3. An error relating only to the wording of the text of a treaty does not affect its validity;
article 79 then applies.
- It is hard to find error because...
- But we have general conditions for error to exist. (Art. 48)

Example: State A is developing State and State B is a developed one. In B, there is a

culture to use a particular mineral when they worship their Gods. Then came a point
when it became rare in B. State A has very rich supply of this mineral so B asked State A
to enter into a treaty where B will be allowed to exploit the minerals of A to supply for
the inhabitants practicing the religion. A, said that if only for religious practices, it is ok.
Science however discovered that the mineral can cure cancer and impotence. Production
of B multiplied to 10, lowering the supply of minerals at A and even damaging the
environment of A because B used it for commercial purposes.
Why did A agree in authorizing B to exploit its mineral resources?
- because the purpose was only for religious practices
- had A known of commercial value of mineral, it would not have allowed such
natural resources.
- party invoking error must not have contributed to error
Temple case (Cambodia v. Thailand)
Issue: Who was the rightful owner of the Temple?
- Issue was settled by a map prepared by French commission helped by Thailand. The
map suggests that such is located in Cambodia. Thailand say, we cannot use that map
because there was error in preparation of the map.
- ICJ invoked that if this was an error, Thailand cannot question because they have
participated in the preparation of the map.
- One, cannot invoke error if that State contributed by its own conduct to that error.
- You must not have any notice or knowledge of such error.
Take note of 3 elements of error:
1. Must pertain to a fact or situation assumed to be true by that State to exist at the time
when the treaty was concluded and formed an essential basis of its consent to be bound
by the treaty.
2. Such fact (no contribution...)
3. Invoking state must not be in estoppel.
Third ground for error is FRAUD and CORRUPTION. (Art. 49)
Fourth, CORRUPTION. (Art. 51)
Fifth, Jus Cogens. (Art. 53)
3. State party invokes a ground that enables it to terminate a treaty. (termination)
- By application of provision of treaty
Three fundamental grounds for termination of treaty: (NOTE)
1. Material breach (Art. 60)
2. Impossibility of performance (Art. 61)
3. Fundamental change of circumstance (Art. 62)
- rebus sic stantibus
A. Material Breach
Article 60. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF A TREATY

AS A CONSEQUENCE OF ITS BREACH

1. A material breach of a bilateral treaty by one of the parties entitles the other to invoke
the breach as a ground for terminating the treaty or suspending its operation in whole or
in part.
2. A material breach of a multilateral treaty by one of the parties entitles:
(a) The other parties by unanimous agreement to suspend the operation of the treaty in
whole or in part or to terminate it either:
(i) In the relations between themselves and the defaulting State, or
(ii) As between all the parties;
(b) A party specially affected by the breach to invoke it as a ground for suspending the
operation of the treaty in whole or in part in the relations between itself and the defaulting
State;
(c) Any party other than the defaulting State to invoke the breach as a ground for
suspending the operation of the treaty in whole or in part with respect to itself if the treaty
is of such a character that a material breach of its provisions by one party radically
changes the position of every party with respect to the further performance of its
obligations under the treaty.
3. A material breach of a treaty, for the purposes of this article, consists in:
(a) A repudiation of the treaty not sanctioned by the present Convention; or
(b) The violation of a provision essential to the accomplishment of the object or purpose
of the treaty.
4. The foregoing paragraphs are without prejudice to any provision in the treaty
applicable in the event of a breach.
5. Paragraphs 1 to 3 do not apply to provisions relating to the protection of the human
person contained in treaties of a humanitarian character, in particular to pro visions
prohibiting any form of reprisals against persons protected by such treaties.
- Withdrawal of treaty, treaty is valid. In 2nd, treaty is invalid.
- Termination, treaty is valid. Since it is valid, Art. 26 declares that State parties must
comply with treaty obligations in good faith. (pacta sunt servada)
- Grounds for termination must be taken as highly exceptional.
- Peace, Security, Stability and Friendly relations among States.
- Thus, there must be stringent rules in terminating treaties.
- Ordinary breach will not give rise to invalidation of the treaty or its termination. A
violating party may only be accused of violation in ICJ and ask for possible
reparation, restitution, compensation or other forms of satisfaction such as apology.
- If there is breach, it will constitute internationally wrongful act, but not all breaches
are grounds to terminate a treaty.
- It is also possible to suspend operation of treaty.
How can you tell that breach is material, and not just ordinary?
What is an example of repudiation sanctioned by the State?
- Hungary v. Slovakia: Question sa exam
- countermeasure
- Treaty, Hungary and Slovakia has its obligation to implement its project. (joint

investment project)
- Hungary decided to suspend it, then abandon it. Because the project was being
criticized in the country as such will pollute the Danube River.
- As a countermeasure, Slovakia diverted the flow of water.
- Termination is not automatic. There is a procedure on notification, etc.
- Hungary: Implementation of variant sea is not allowed because...
- Countermeasure has 3 elements:
1. In response to a material breach
2. Must only be as necessary to require compliance of the obligations on treaty
3. Must be proportionate
Example of repudiation of treaty permitted by intl law is COUNTERMEASURE.
* US v. Canada arbitration , twin smelting(?)
- smelting company from Canada. US sued Canada for allowing trans-boundary...
- sic uteri tu... you may enjoy your rights so as not to injure the right of others
- You cannot invoke material breach on an anticipated material breach.
Note for exam:
- Nicaragua case
- Hungary v. Slovakia case (p. 948, Shaw)
- Namibia case
- India v. Pakistan
A material breach of a treaty, for the purposes of this article, consists in: (Art. 60(4))
(b) A repudiation of the treaty not sanctioned by the present Convention; or
(b) The violation of a provision essential to the accomplishment of the object or purpose
of the treaty.
Namibia case: Repudiation not allowed by international law
- First step to maintain peace, free colonized state or decolonization. (1960 gene...)
- Apartheid
India v. Pakistan case
- No material breach
How about fundamental change of circumstance?
Article 62. FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES
1. A fundamental change of circumstances which has occurred with regard to those
existing at the time of the conclusion of a treaty, and which was not foreseen by the
parties, may not be invoked as a ground for terminating or withdrawing from the treaty
unless:
(a) The existence of those circumstances constituted an essential basis of the con sent of
the parties to be bound by the treaty; and
(b) The effect of the change is radically to transform the extent of obligations still to be
performed under the treaty.

2. A fundamental change of circumstances may not be invoked as a ground for

terminating or withdrawing from a treaty:
(a) If the treaty establishes a boundary; or
(b) If the fundamental change is the result of a breach by the party invoking it either of an
obligation under the treaty or of any other international obligation owed to any other
party to the treaty.
3. If, under the foregoing paragraphs, a party may invoke a fundamental change of
circumstances as a ground for terminating or withdrawing from a treaty it may also
invoke the change as a ground for suspending the operation of the treaty.
Fundamental change of circumstance
- highly exceptional, can only be invoked only if ...
What are the fundamental change of circumstance?
When is a change in that circumstance fundamental?
- Test is: IF state invoking such would now be required radically to perform an esentially
different obligation from that contemplated by the parties.
- Just like in Hungary case:
2nd observation: if parties find it difficult to...
Procedures in termination of Treaties
Midterms: Topic 1-4.
January 23, 2016
Art. 62 (2)
Termination of treaty is exception to pacta sunt servanda.
The ground for termination in fundamental change of circumstance have been narrowly
defiend and is invoked only in highly exceptional circumstances.
Purpose of treaty: Maintenance of peace, ...
- When a party to a treaty seeks to terminate a party to the treaty, even if there is material
breach, victim state cannot unilaterally declare treaty as having been ended, termination
is not automatic.
Procedure in termination of Treaties
Q: State A committed a material breach. You are a counsel for State B.
Section 4, VCLT
Article 65. PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED WITH RESPECT TO INVALIDITY,

TERMINATION, WITHDRAWAL FROM OR SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION

OF A TREATY
1. A party which, under the provisions of the present Convention, invokes either a defect
in its consent to be bound by a treaty or a ground for impeaching the validity of a treaty,
terminating it, withdrawing from it or suspending its operation, must notify the other
parties of its claim. The notification shall indicate the measure proposed to be taken with
respect to the treaty and the reasons therefor.
2. If, after the expiry of a period which, except in cases of special urgency, shall not be
less than three months after the receipt of the notification, no party has raised any
objection, the party making the notification may carry out in the manner provided in
article 67 the measure which it has proposed.
3. If, however, objection has been raised by any other party, the parties shall seek a
solution through the means indicated in Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations.
4. Nothing in the foregoing paragraphs shall affect the rights or obligations of the parties
under any provisions in force binding the parties with regard to the settle ment of
disputes.
5. Without prejudice to article 45, the fact that a State has not previously made the
notification prescribed in paragraph 1 shall not prevent it from making such notification
in answer to another party claiming performance of the treaty or alleging its violation.
Notification-Sommation Requirement (Procedure)
- this is a customary, except three-month period to respond to any accusation
1. Notify other parties in writing
- in WRITING, must be duly SIGNED
- If communicated by another official, he should provide for full powers
- Should state reason and the proposed measure.
Article 67. INSTRUMENTS FOR DECLARING INVALID, TERMINATING,
WITHDRAWING FROM OR SUSPENDING THE OPERATION OF A TREATY
1. The notification provided for under article 65, paragraph 1 must be made in writing.
2. Any act declaring invalid, terminating, withdrawing from or suspending the operation
of a treaty pursuant to the provisions of the treaty or of paragraphs 2 or 3 of article 65
shall be carried out through an instrument communicated to the other parties. If the
instrument is not signed by the Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for
Foreign Affairs, the representative of the State communicating it may be called upon to
produce full powers.
Who has to sign notification?
- Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs
After notification, what happens next? Sommation.
- this is done to avoid threat of peace or conflict between the parties
2. After three months, if no party has objected, treaty is already terminated.
Sommation is a very important process.
- this allows the other party to refute or explain their side.
- In this period, two things may happen and you cannot implement your proposed

measure of termination.
a) Object
b) Explain
- If the other party objects, there would be a dispute. Whenever there is dispute or
controversy, pacific means is necessary.
3. If an objection is raised, parties shall seek a solution under the UN
- Article 33(1) of the UN Charter gives a list of the usual methods of the peaceful
settlement of disputes between states in international law: negotiation, enquiry,
mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or
arrangements, or other peaceful means of their choice.
- If ICJ, parties have no choice but to submit it to ICJ
- Arbitration can choose their own judge or arbitrator.
- Advantages of arbitration
a) more legitimacy or acceptability of decisions
b) quicker resolution
- In most big contracts, there usually is found arbitration clauses.
- In the Hague, there are certain arbitrators.
4. If no solution is reached within 12 months following the date the objection was raised,
they may consent to submit the dispute to arbitration
Article 66, PROCEDURES FOR JUDICIAL SETTLEMENT, ARBITRATION AND
CONCILIATION If, under paragraph 3 of article 65, no solution has been reached within
a period of twelve months following the date on which the objection was raised, the
following procedures shall be followed:
(a) Any one of the parties to a dispute concerning the application or the interpretation of
article 53 or 64 may, by a written application, submit it to the International Court of
Justice for a decision unless the parties by common consent agree to submit the dispute to
arbitration;
(b) Any one of the parties to a dispute concerning the application or the interpreta tion of
any of the other articles in Part V of the present Convention may set in motion the
procedure specified in the Annex to the Convention by submitting a request to that effect
to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Consequences of termination of treaty
Article 69. CONSEQUENCES OF THE INVALIDITY OF A TREATY
1. A treaty the invalidity of which is established under the present Convention is void.
The provisions of a void treaty have no legal force.
2. If acts have nevertheless been performed in reliance on such a treaty:
(a) Each party may require any other party to establish as far as possible in their mutual
relations the position that would have existed if the acts had not been performed;
(b) Acts performed in good faith before the invalidity was invoked are not rendered
unlawful by reason only of the invalidity of the treaty.

3. In cases falling under articles 49, 50, 51 or 52, paragraph 2 does not apply with respect
to the party to which the fraud, the act of corruption or the coercion is imputable.
4. In the case of the invalidity of a particular State's consent to be bound by a multilateral
treaty, the foregoing rules apply in the relations between that State and the parties to the
treaty.
Article 70. CONSEQUENCES OF THE TERMINATION OF A TREATY
1. Unless the treaty otherwise provides or the parties otherwise agree, the ter mination of
a treaty under its provisions or in accordance with the present Conven tion:
(a) Releases the parties from any obligation further to perform the treaty;
(b) Does not affect any right, obligation or legal situation of the parties created through
the execution of the treaty prior to its termination.
2. If a State denounces or withdraws from a multilateral treaty, paragraph 1 applies in the
relations between that State and each of the other parties to the treaty from the date when
such denunciation or withdrawal takes effect.
Q: How are treaties to be terminated? What will be the consequencs of invalidity or
termination of treaties?
- Mutual restitution in invalidity
- Respecting rights, obligations or legal situation before termination of treaty
Midterm: Start to Law of Treaties