File #2510: "2018_Book_PatternsOfTreatyInterpretation.pdf"
Text
1|Acknowledgments|7
1|Contents|9
1|Table of Cases|14
2|I.C.J.|14
2|ECtHR|18
2|WTO|20
2|ICC|22
2|IACtHR|23
2|ITLOS|23
1|Chapter 1: Introduction|24
2|References|34
1|Chapter 2: Does Proliferation of International Judicial Bodies Lead to the Fragmentation of International Law?|37
2|2.1 Introduction|37
2|2.2 Proliferation|39
3|2.2.1 What Is an `International Judicial Body´?|40
3|2.2.2 Defining `Proliferation´|42
3|2.2.3 Implications of the Proliferation of International Judicial Bodies: Positive Aspects|43
2|2.3 Fragmentation|47
3|2.3.1 Understanding the `Fragmentation of International Law´|48
4|2.3.1.1 Defining `International Law´|49
4|2.3.1.2 Unity of International Law|63
3|2.3.2 Implications of the Proliferation of Judicial Bodies: The `Fragmentation´ Issue|70
4|2.3.2.1 Defining `Fragmentation´|70
4|2.3.2.2 Theories That Advocate a Restrained Fear for `Fragmentation of International Law´|72
3|2.3.3 `Fragmentation´: Viewed as a Problem|74
3|2.3.4 Is `Fragmentation´ Imminent?|76
4|2.3.4.1 Forum Shopping|76
4|2.3.4.2 Is the Fear of `Fragmentation´ Really Justified?|78
5|2.3.4.2.1 Lex Generalis/Lex Specialis|79
5|2.3.4.2.2 `Self-Contained´ Regime Versus Lex Generalis|83
2|2.4 Conclusions|95
2|References|96
2|Documents|100
1|Chapter 3: Treaty Interpretation|101
2|3.1 Introduction|101
2|3.2 `Interpretation´ and `Treaty Interpretation´ in the Scholarship|103
2|3.3 Treaty Interpretation: Doctrinal Development Prior to the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties|115
3|3.3.1 Early Views on Treaty Interpretation|115
3|3.3.2 Formulation of the Rules of Treaty Interpretation in the ILC Drafts and Subsequently in the Text of Articles 31, 32 and ...|124
4|3.3.2.1 Principles of Interpretation as Reflected in the Various Approaches to Treaty Interpretation|124
5|3.3.2.1.1 Towards a General Agreement as to the Principle Governing the Process of Interpretation|125
6|The 1935 Draft of the Harvard Research in International Law|126
6|The Resolution Adopted by the Institute of International Law in 1956|127
6|The Draft Articles of the Third Report on the Law of Treaties|128
5|3.3.2.1.2 Resort to Secondary Sources as Reflected in the Various Approaches to Interpretation|134
4|3.3.2.2 The International Law Commission´s Final Draft on Treaty Interpretation|139
2|3.4 The `General Rule of Interpretation´ as Codified in Articles 31-33 of the 1969 VCLT: Scholarship Review|144
3|3.4.1 Article 31 of the VCLT|144
3|3.4.2 Article 32 of the VCLT|153
3|3.4.3 Article 33 of VCLT|155
3|3.4.4 Summary Articles 31-33 of VCLT|158
2|3.5 Conclusions|160
2|References|162
2|Documents|164
1|Chapter 4: PCIJ/ICJ Practice on Treaty Interpretation|166
2|4.1 Introduction|166
2|4.2 Background and Case Selection|168
3|4.2.1 Historical Background|168
3|4.2.2 Scope of the Analysis and Methodology|172
2|4.3 Pre-VCLT Treaty Interpretation at the PCIJ/ICJ: Scholarship and Case Analysis|174
3|4.3.1 The Predominance of the Textualist Approach: But Not the Sole Approach|175
4|4.3.1.1 Textualist Approach?|175
4|4.3.1.2 Textualist or Holistic Approach?|179
4|4.3.1.3 Restrictive, Textualist Approach?|183
4|4.3.1.4 Different Approach on Textual Silence?|189
4|4.3.1.5 Reliance on the `Ordinary Meaning´ and/or `Travaux Preparatoire´ Rules?|192
4|4.3.1.6 Explicit Reliance on the `Travaux Preparatoire´ and `Any Instrument Related to the Treaty´ Rules|196
4|4.3.1.7 Reliance Not Only on Rules but Also on Principles: An Emphasis on the `Object and Purpose´ Rule; `Good Faith´ and `Ut ...|200
4|4.3.1.8 Emphasis on the `Context´ Rule|203
2|4.4 Post-VCLT Treaty Interpretation at the ICJ: Case Analysis and Scholarship|207
3|4.4.1 Reliance on the VCLT Rules|208
4|4.4.1.1 VCLT as Embodiment of Custom?|208
4|4.4.1.2 Emphasis on the `Object and Purpose´ Rule|212
4|4.4.1.3 Reliance on the `Context of the Treaty´ and `Good Faith´ Rules|216
4|4.4.1.4 Clear Holistic Approach and Emphasis on the `Ut Res Magis Valeat Quam Pereat´ Principle|219
4|4.4.1.5 Clear Holistic Approach and Emphasis on the `Object and Purpose´ and `Context of the Treaty´ Rules|223
4|4.4.1.6 Reliance on the `Supplementary Means´ and Emphasis on the `Ordinary Meaning´ Rule|228
2|4.5 Conclusions|231
2|References|235
2|Documents|237
1|Chapter 5: Treaty Interpretation at the European Court of Human Rights|238
2|5.1 Introduction|238
2|5.2 Human Rights Background and Specific Characteristics of Human Rights Treaties|239
2|5.3 Case Law Analysis and Scholarship|247
3|5.3.1 Scope of the Analysis and Methodology|247
3|5.3.2 Pre-VCLT Interpretative Approaches|249
4|5.3.2.1 Reliance on Rules of Interpretation?|249
4|5.3.2.2 Reliance on Customary Rules, Principles and the Convention´s `Special Character´|254
3|5.3.3 Post-VCLT Interpretative Approaches|256
4|5.3.3.1 Broader Implications of International Law|256
4|5.3.3.2 Reliance on the Vienna Convention´s Formulation and/or Autonomous Rules?|261
5|5.3.3.2.1 Clear Holistic Approach and Emphasis on the `Object and Purpose´ and `Living Instrument´ Rules|264
5|5.3.3.2.2 Reliance on the `Travaux Preparatoire´ and `Margin of Appreciation´ Rules|269
4|5.3.3.3 VCLT as Embodiment of Custom|273
4|5.3.3.4 Consistency in Approaching VCLT Customary Rules?|281
4|5.3.3.5 Interplay of Lex Specialis/Lex Generalis? Reliance on the Convention´s `Law-Making Character´|285
4|5.3.3.6 Complementarity of Practice and Reliance on the ICJ´s Methods/Techniques of Interpretation and `Living Instrument´|290
4|5.3.3.7 Deviance from Customary Rules of Interpretation?|295
2|5.4 Conclusions|300
2|References|305
2|Documents|307
1|Chapter 6: Treaty Interpretation at the World Trade Organization|308
2|6.1 Introduction|308
2|6.2 GATT/WTO Treaty Interpretation Background|309
2|6.3 Case Law Analysis and Scholarship|313
3|6.3.1 Scope of the Analysis|313
3|6.3.2 Methodology|316
3|6.3.3 Reliance on Customary Rules and/or Autonomous Techniques of Interpretation Before the DSU?|316
4|6.3.3.1 Rules of Interpretation Before the DSU|317
3|6.3.4 The VCLT as an Embodiment of Custom?|321
4|6.3.4.1 Comparative Approaches Between the Appellate Body and Panel (Prior to the WTO) on the Same Provision: Article XX (g)|323
5|6.3.4.1.1 The Appellate Body´s Approach|324
5|6.3.4.1.2 The Panel´s Approach Prior to the WTO´s Specific Adoption of the Customary Rules of Treaty Interpretation in Article...|328
3|6.3.5 The Complementarity of Practice and Reliance on ICJ Techniques|332
4|6.3.5.1 Reliance on the `Relevant Rules of International Law´ and `Evolutionary Interpretation´|333
3|6.3.6 Reliance on the VCLT Rules, ICJ´s Practice and Also Principles|340
4|6.3.6.1 Clear Holistic Approach and Emphasis on the `Object and Purpose´ Rule|343
4|6.3.6.2 Clear Holistic Approach and Emphasis on the `Ut Res Magis Valeat Quam Pereat´ Principle|347
4|6.3.6.3 Clear Holistic Approach and Emphasis on the `Ordinary Meaning´ and `Context of the Whole Treaty´ Rules|352
4|6.3.6.4 Emphasis on the `Good Faith´ and `Intention´ Elements|355
4|6.3.6.5 Reliance on the `Supplementary Means´ Rule|360
4|6.3.6.6 Compliance with or Deviance from the VCLT?|364
2|6.4 Conclusions|370
2|References|376
2|Documents|378
1|Chapter 7: Conclusions|379
2|7.1 Consistency in Interpretative Practices|380
2|7.2 Deviation in Interpretative Practices|384
2|7.3 Treaty Interpretation as a Tool for Harmonisation?|388
2|7.4 Treaty Interpretation and the Fragmentation of International Law? Broader Dimensions|391
2|References|395
2|Document|397
1|Bibliography|398
2|Documents|409
1|Contents|9
1|Table of Cases|14
2|I.C.J.|14
2|ECtHR|18
2|WTO|20
2|ICC|22
2|IACtHR|23
2|ITLOS|23
1|Chapter 1: Introduction|24
2|References|34
1|Chapter 2: Does Proliferation of International Judicial Bodies Lead to the Fragmentation of International Law?|37
2|2.1 Introduction|37
2|2.2 Proliferation|39
3|2.2.1 What Is an `International Judicial Body´?|40
3|2.2.2 Defining `Proliferation´|42
3|2.2.3 Implications of the Proliferation of International Judicial Bodies: Positive Aspects|43
2|2.3 Fragmentation|47
3|2.3.1 Understanding the `Fragmentation of International Law´|48
4|2.3.1.1 Defining `International Law´|49
4|2.3.1.2 Unity of International Law|63
3|2.3.2 Implications of the Proliferation of Judicial Bodies: The `Fragmentation´ Issue|70
4|2.3.2.1 Defining `Fragmentation´|70
4|2.3.2.2 Theories That Advocate a Restrained Fear for `Fragmentation of International Law´|72
3|2.3.3 `Fragmentation´: Viewed as a Problem|74
3|2.3.4 Is `Fragmentation´ Imminent?|76
4|2.3.4.1 Forum Shopping|76
4|2.3.4.2 Is the Fear of `Fragmentation´ Really Justified?|78
5|2.3.4.2.1 Lex Generalis/Lex Specialis|79
5|2.3.4.2.2 `Self-Contained´ Regime Versus Lex Generalis|83
2|2.4 Conclusions|95
2|References|96
2|Documents|100
1|Chapter 3: Treaty Interpretation|101
2|3.1 Introduction|101
2|3.2 `Interpretation´ and `Treaty Interpretation´ in the Scholarship|103
2|3.3 Treaty Interpretation: Doctrinal Development Prior to the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties|115
3|3.3.1 Early Views on Treaty Interpretation|115
3|3.3.2 Formulation of the Rules of Treaty Interpretation in the ILC Drafts and Subsequently in the Text of Articles 31, 32 and ...|124
4|3.3.2.1 Principles of Interpretation as Reflected in the Various Approaches to Treaty Interpretation|124
5|3.3.2.1.1 Towards a General Agreement as to the Principle Governing the Process of Interpretation|125
6|The 1935 Draft of the Harvard Research in International Law|126
6|The Resolution Adopted by the Institute of International Law in 1956|127
6|The Draft Articles of the Third Report on the Law of Treaties|128
5|3.3.2.1.2 Resort to Secondary Sources as Reflected in the Various Approaches to Interpretation|134
4|3.3.2.2 The International Law Commission´s Final Draft on Treaty Interpretation|139
2|3.4 The `General Rule of Interpretation´ as Codified in Articles 31-33 of the 1969 VCLT: Scholarship Review|144
3|3.4.1 Article 31 of the VCLT|144
3|3.4.2 Article 32 of the VCLT|153
3|3.4.3 Article 33 of VCLT|155
3|3.4.4 Summary Articles 31-33 of VCLT|158
2|3.5 Conclusions|160
2|References|162
2|Documents|164
1|Chapter 4: PCIJ/ICJ Practice on Treaty Interpretation|166
2|4.1 Introduction|166
2|4.2 Background and Case Selection|168
3|4.2.1 Historical Background|168
3|4.2.2 Scope of the Analysis and Methodology|172
2|4.3 Pre-VCLT Treaty Interpretation at the PCIJ/ICJ: Scholarship and Case Analysis|174
3|4.3.1 The Predominance of the Textualist Approach: But Not the Sole Approach|175
4|4.3.1.1 Textualist Approach?|175
4|4.3.1.2 Textualist or Holistic Approach?|179
4|4.3.1.3 Restrictive, Textualist Approach?|183
4|4.3.1.4 Different Approach on Textual Silence?|189
4|4.3.1.5 Reliance on the `Ordinary Meaning´ and/or `Travaux Preparatoire´ Rules?|192
4|4.3.1.6 Explicit Reliance on the `Travaux Preparatoire´ and `Any Instrument Related to the Treaty´ Rules|196
4|4.3.1.7 Reliance Not Only on Rules but Also on Principles: An Emphasis on the `Object and Purpose´ Rule; `Good Faith´ and `Ut ...|200
4|4.3.1.8 Emphasis on the `Context´ Rule|203
2|4.4 Post-VCLT Treaty Interpretation at the ICJ: Case Analysis and Scholarship|207
3|4.4.1 Reliance on the VCLT Rules|208
4|4.4.1.1 VCLT as Embodiment of Custom?|208
4|4.4.1.2 Emphasis on the `Object and Purpose´ Rule|212
4|4.4.1.3 Reliance on the `Context of the Treaty´ and `Good Faith´ Rules|216
4|4.4.1.4 Clear Holistic Approach and Emphasis on the `Ut Res Magis Valeat Quam Pereat´ Principle|219
4|4.4.1.5 Clear Holistic Approach and Emphasis on the `Object and Purpose´ and `Context of the Treaty´ Rules|223
4|4.4.1.6 Reliance on the `Supplementary Means´ and Emphasis on the `Ordinary Meaning´ Rule|228
2|4.5 Conclusions|231
2|References|235
2|Documents|237
1|Chapter 5: Treaty Interpretation at the European Court of Human Rights|238
2|5.1 Introduction|238
2|5.2 Human Rights Background and Specific Characteristics of Human Rights Treaties|239
2|5.3 Case Law Analysis and Scholarship|247
3|5.3.1 Scope of the Analysis and Methodology|247
3|5.3.2 Pre-VCLT Interpretative Approaches|249
4|5.3.2.1 Reliance on Rules of Interpretation?|249
4|5.3.2.2 Reliance on Customary Rules, Principles and the Convention´s `Special Character´|254
3|5.3.3 Post-VCLT Interpretative Approaches|256
4|5.3.3.1 Broader Implications of International Law|256
4|5.3.3.2 Reliance on the Vienna Convention´s Formulation and/or Autonomous Rules?|261
5|5.3.3.2.1 Clear Holistic Approach and Emphasis on the `Object and Purpose´ and `Living Instrument´ Rules|264
5|5.3.3.2.2 Reliance on the `Travaux Preparatoire´ and `Margin of Appreciation´ Rules|269
4|5.3.3.3 VCLT as Embodiment of Custom|273
4|5.3.3.4 Consistency in Approaching VCLT Customary Rules?|281
4|5.3.3.5 Interplay of Lex Specialis/Lex Generalis? Reliance on the Convention´s `Law-Making Character´|285
4|5.3.3.6 Complementarity of Practice and Reliance on the ICJ´s Methods/Techniques of Interpretation and `Living Instrument´|290
4|5.3.3.7 Deviance from Customary Rules of Interpretation?|295
2|5.4 Conclusions|300
2|References|305
2|Documents|307
1|Chapter 6: Treaty Interpretation at the World Trade Organization|308
2|6.1 Introduction|308
2|6.2 GATT/WTO Treaty Interpretation Background|309
2|6.3 Case Law Analysis and Scholarship|313
3|6.3.1 Scope of the Analysis|313
3|6.3.2 Methodology|316
3|6.3.3 Reliance on Customary Rules and/or Autonomous Techniques of Interpretation Before the DSU?|316
4|6.3.3.1 Rules of Interpretation Before the DSU|317
3|6.3.4 The VCLT as an Embodiment of Custom?|321
4|6.3.4.1 Comparative Approaches Between the Appellate Body and Panel (Prior to the WTO) on the Same Provision: Article XX (g)|323
5|6.3.4.1.1 The Appellate Body´s Approach|324
5|6.3.4.1.2 The Panel´s Approach Prior to the WTO´s Specific Adoption of the Customary Rules of Treaty Interpretation in Article...|328
3|6.3.5 The Complementarity of Practice and Reliance on ICJ Techniques|332
4|6.3.5.1 Reliance on the `Relevant Rules of International Law´ and `Evolutionary Interpretation´|333
3|6.3.6 Reliance on the VCLT Rules, ICJ´s Practice and Also Principles|340
4|6.3.6.1 Clear Holistic Approach and Emphasis on the `Object and Purpose´ Rule|343
4|6.3.6.2 Clear Holistic Approach and Emphasis on the `Ut Res Magis Valeat Quam Pereat´ Principle|347
4|6.3.6.3 Clear Holistic Approach and Emphasis on the `Ordinary Meaning´ and `Context of the Whole Treaty´ Rules|352
4|6.3.6.4 Emphasis on the `Good Faith´ and `Intention´ Elements|355
4|6.3.6.5 Reliance on the `Supplementary Means´ Rule|360
4|6.3.6.6 Compliance with or Deviance from the VCLT?|364
2|6.4 Conclusions|370
2|References|376
2|Documents|378
1|Chapter 7: Conclusions|379
2|7.1 Consistency in Interpretative Practices|380
2|7.2 Deviation in Interpretative Practices|384
2|7.3 Treaty Interpretation as a Tool for Harmonisation?|388
2|7.4 Treaty Interpretation and the Fragmentation of International Law? Broader Dimensions|391
2|References|395
2|Document|397
1|Bibliography|398
2|Documents|409