with regard to the conclusion of treaties
c) The designation of treaties
As it appears from the definition of Article 2 (1)(a) of the
Nevertheless, the designation of a particular agreement indicates thepolitical importance the parties attach to it, though it cannot be considered as conclusive evidence.
With regard to bilateral agreements, the term "Treaty" suggests that the agreement so designated is considered to be of great importance. Friendship treaties, although outdated in many cases today, are an example thereof. The nowadays most utilized designation seems to be "Agreement". It is utilized so often that it is impossible to conclude from there which political value it has for the parties. The term "memorandum of agreement" is widespread, too.
With regard to multilateral agreements, the terms "Charter" or, here again, "Treaty" are chosen in general for the most important conventions as it is the case for
- the Charter of the United Nations of 1945,
- the Charter of the Organization of American States(1948),
- the Charter of the Organization of African Unity (1963)
or
- the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (1992).
In spite of its solemn title, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the
European Union, which has been proclaimed in Nice on
As to the designation of a text as "Treaty", here are some examples:
- the
- The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of nuclear Weapons (NPT - 1968) and
- the Treaty on the European Union of 1992 (as amended by the Treaty of
In most cases, multilateral treaties are called "Conventions". This is the most general designation which is also used by Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. They are often concluded under the auspices of an international organization such as
- the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 (so-called European Human Rights Convention concluded under the auspices of the Council of Europe),
- the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982)
- the Universal Copyright Convention as revised at
- UNESCO)
As in the case of bilateral treaties, the very general term "Agreement" is also frequently used for multilateral conventions. It has been used in the following examples:
- the European Agreement on continued Payment of Scholarships for Students studying abroad of 1969,
- the Agreement on a Comprehensive Political Settlement of the
- the North American Free Trade Agreement (1992).
The designation "Protocol" is usually used for legally binding agreements which are additional or complementary to main agreements or which have a supporting role.
As additional agreements they are added to the original treaties as it is the case with the Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949
As complementary agreement, they are in general already foreseen in the original convention. This technique is frequently used in environmental treaties where the protocols set out detailed provisions on the basis of an more general article in a framework agreement as it is the case of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity which has been adopted in 1999 on the basis of Article 19 (3) of the convention dating from 1992 (the Protocol has not entered ino force, yet).
Finally, As supporting agreements, they help to implement the main agreement as in the case of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966, through which access to an intergovernmental body has been given to individuals.
In the present context, it is worthwhile mentionning that on this website we have also encountered the terms
- "Statute" (Statute of the International Court of Justice,
- "Covenant" (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights)
with regard to the termination of treaties
a) By consensus
In the same way as States can conclude treaties, they can also terminate them by mutual consent. Their consent can be expressed either in the treaty itself which they had originally concluded (expiry date, denunciation clause) or thereafter (article 54), in particular through the conclusion of a later treaty aiming at achieving this very purpose (Article 59, explicit termination), or through the conclusion of a treaty relating to the same subject-matter (see Article 30 (3), implicit termination). The same rules apply for the termination as well as for the suspension of treaties (Article 57 and 59 (2)).
With regard to multlateral treaties, the Vienna Convention authorizes two or more parties to suspend the operation of treaty provisions
- temporarily and
- as between themselves alone,
as long as this does not entail a limitation of rights or obligations of the other parties (Article 58 (1); applicaton of the principle "pacta tertiis nec nocent nec prosunt").
Unless the treaty otherwise provides, the parties in question have to notify the other parties of their intention to conclude the agreement and of those provisions of the treaty the operation of which they intend to suspend (Article 58 (2)).
As a matter of course, where a treaty contains a denunciation clause, the parties can avail themselves of the possibility offered by it and withdraw from the treaty. The unilateral denunciation is not in contradiction to the principle of free consent, since the possibility of such a denunciation had been agreed upon by the parties in the treaty.
