Preparatory works of the international treaties and its location among the means of interpretation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35246/jols.v33i2.60Keywords:
Treaties, Preparatory works, interpretationAbstract
Preparatory works consist of all the documents preceding the conclusion of a treaty such as minutes of conferences, drafts of the treaty under negotiation and all materials which culminated in the formal conclusion of a treaty.
Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties states the general rule of interpretation include The basic rules of interpretation. Article 32 of the convention allowed the resort to the preparatory works as a Complementary mean.
This study deals with this method to clarify its Position between other means of interpretation, In jurisprudence and recourse to it by the International Court of Justice.
Downloads
References
I. محمد نصر محمد, الوافي في شرح المعاهدات الدولية في ظل احكام اتفاقية فينا لقانون المعاهدات لسنة 1969, مكتبة القانون والاقتصاد, الرياض, 2012.
II. محمد فؤاد رشاد, قواعد تفسير المعاهدات في الشريعة الاسلامية والقانون الدولي, كلية الشريعة والقانون, بنين(القاهرة), 2003.
III. عبدالواحد محمد الفار, قواعد تفسير المعاهدات الدولية, دار النهضة العربية, 1998.
ثانيا : باللغات الاجنبية
I. Beckett, Observations des members de la Commission sur Ie rapport de M. Lauterpacht, 43 Annuaire de L'institut de Droit International, (1950).
II. Brownlie, Principles Of Public International Law, 6th edition, (1979).
III. Eirik Bjorge, The Evolutionary Interpretation of Treaties, available at: https://www.ilsa.org/jessup/jessup15/.../EirikBjorgeCh3.pdf
IV. E.S. YAMBRUSIC, treaty interpretation: Theory and Reality (University Press of America), Lanharn (1987).
V. G. Fitzmaurice, The Law And Procedure Of The International Court Of Justice, (1986).
VI. Gross, Treaty Interpretation: The Proper role of an International Tribunal, proceedings of the American Society OF International Law (1969).
VII. J. KLABBERS, “International legal histories: the declining importance of travaux preparatoires in treaty interpretation?”, 50 Netherlands International Law Review (2003).
VIII. J.D. Mortenson, ‘The Travaux of Travaux: Is the Vienna Convention Hostile to Drafting History?’ 107 AJIL, (2013).
Jan Wouters and Maarten Vidal, Domestic Courts and Treaty Interpretation, Institute for International Law, Working Paper No 103 – December 2006, available at: https://www.law.kuleuven.be/iir/nl/onderzoek/wp/WP103e.pdf
IX. LAUTERPACHT, “De l’interprétation des traités”, Annuaire de l’Institut de Droit International 1950-II.
X. Lauterpacht, Some Observations on Preparatory Work in the Interpretation of Treaties, 48 HARV. L. REV. (1935).
XI. LORD McNAIR, the law of treaties ch. XXIII, (1961), p.411; Lauterpacht, Some Observations on Preparatory Work in the Interpretation of Treaties, 48 HARV. L. REV. (1935).
XII. Martin Ris, Treaty Interpretation and ICJ Recourse to Travaux Préparatoires: Towards a Proposed Amendment of Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 14 B.C. Int'l & Comp.L. Rev. 111 (1991),
http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/iclr/vol14/iss1/6
XIII. McDougal, The International Law Commission's Draft Articles Upon Interpretation: Textuality Redivivus, 61 AM. J. INT'L L. (1967).
XIV. Mehrish, Travaux Preparatoires as an Element in the Interpretation of Treaties, 11 INDIAN J. INT'L L. (1971).
XV. Mehrish, Travaux Preparatoires as an Element in the Interpretation of Treaties, 11 INDIAN J. INT'L L. (1971).
XVI. Reisman, W. Michael; Wiessner, Siegfried; and Willard, Andrew R., "The New Haven School: A Brief Introduction" (2007). Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 959. Available at:
http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/959
XVII. Richard Gardiner, The Vienna Convention Rules on Treaty Interpretation, in THE OXFORD GUIDE TO TREATIES (Duncan B. Hollis ed., (2012),.
XVIII. S. SCHWEBEL, “May preparatory work be used to correct rather than confirm the ‘clear’ meaning of a treaty provision?”, in J. MAKARCZYK , Theory of International Law at the Threshold of the 21st Century: essays in honour of Krzysztof Skubiszewski, The Hague, Kluwer Law International, (1996).
XIX. Schaffer, Current Trends in Treaty Interpretation and the South African Approach, 7 AUSTL. Y.B. INT'L L. (1981).
ثالثا: وثائق دولية
I. النظام الاساسي لمحكمة العدل الدولية
II. اتفاقية فينا لقانون المعاهدات عام 1969
III. 43 ANNUAIRE DE L'INSTITUT DE DROIT INTERNATIONAL, (1950).
IV. Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1966, vol. II.
رابعا: احكام قضائية
I. I.C.J., case concerning application of the convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide (Croatia v. Serbia), preliminary objections Judgment of 18 November (2008).
II. I.C.]., Rights of Nationals of the United States of America in Morocco (Fr. v. U.S.), (1952).
III. I.C.J., case concerning application of the convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide, (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro),judgment of 26 February 2007.
IV. I.C.]., Ambatielos Case (Greece v. U.K.), (1952) (Preliminary Objection).
V. I.C.J., maritime delimitation in the black sea (Romania v. Ukraine), judgment of 3 February 2009.
VI. I.C.]. , Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1951, (Advisory Opinion).
VII. I.C.J., Case Concerning The Continental Shelf, (Libya /Malta), Application By Italy For Permission To Intervene, Judgment Of 21 March 1984.
VIII. I.C.]., Border and Transborder Armed Actions (Nicaragua v. Honduras),(1988) (Jurisdiction of the Court and Admissibility of the Application).
IX. I.C.J., case concerning maritime dispute, (Peru v. Chile), judgment of 27 January (2014).
X. I.C.J., question of the delimitation of the continental shelf between Nicaragua and Colombia beyond 200 nautical miles from the Nicaraguan coast (Nicaragua v. Colombia) preliminary objections), (2014).
XI. I.C.J., case concerning Kasikilii/Sedudu island, judgment of 13 December 1999, (Botswana v. Namibia).
XII. I.C.J., Lagrand case, (Germany v. United states of America), Judgment of 27 June 2001.
XIII. I.C.J., case concerning application of the international convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination, (Georgia v. Russian federation), preliminary objections, judgment OF 1 April 2011.
XIV. I.C.J., Fisheries Jurisdiction (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v. Iceland), 2 February( 1973).
XV. I.C.]., Conditions of Admission of a State to Membership in the United Nations, (1948), (Advisory Opinion).
XVI. ICJ, Dissenting Opinion of Judge Alvarez, Reservations to the Convention on Genocide (Advisory Opinion) [1951] .
XVII. Permanent Court Of International Justice Case Relating To The Territorial, Jurisdiction Of The International Commission Of The River Of Oder, (1929), Series A, No. 23.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright and Licensing:
For all articles published in Journal of Legal Sciences, copyright is retained by the authors. Articles are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, meaning that anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted provided that the original published version is cited. These conditions allow for maximum use and exposure of the work.
Reproducing Published Material from other Publishers: It is absolutely essential that authors obtain permission to reproduce any published material (figures, schemes, tables or any extract of a text) which does not fall into the public domain, or for which they do not hold the copyright. Permission should be requested by the authors from the copyrightholder (usually the Publisher, please refer to the imprint of the individual publications to identify the copyrightholder).
Permission is required for: Your own works published by other Publishers and for which you did not retain copyright.
Substantial extracts from anyones' works or a series of works.
Use of Tables, Graphs, Charts, Schemes and Artworks if they are unaltered or slightly modified.
Photographs for which you do not hold copyright.
Permission is not required for: Reconstruction of your own table with data already published elsewhere. Please notice that in this case you must cite the source of the data in the form of either "Data from..." or "Adapted from...".
Reasonably short quotes are considered fair use and therefore do not require permission.
Graphs, Charts, Schemes and Artworks that are completely redrawn by the authors and significantly changed beyond recognition do not require permission.
Obtaining Permission
In order to avoid unnecessary delays in the publication process, you should start obtaining permissions as early as possible. If in any doubt about the copyright, apply for permission. Journal of Legal Sciences cannot publish material from other publications without permission.
The copyright holder may give you instructions on the form of acknowledgement to be followed; otherwise follow the style: "Reproduced with permission from [author], [book/journal title]; published by [publisher], [year].' at the end of the caption of the Table, Figure or Scheme.
