scholarly journals The European Union and the Law of Treaties: A Fruitful Relationship

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 721-751
Author(s):  
Paz Andrés Sáenz De Santa María

Abstract This article examines the European Union’s (EU) treaty practice from the perspective of the international law of treaties, focusing on its most significant examples. The starting point is the EU’s attitude towards the codification of treaty law involving states and international organizations. The article discusses certain terminological specificities and a few remarkable aspects, such as the frequent use of provisional application mechanisms as opposed to much less use of reservations, the contributions regarding treaty interpretation, the wide variety of clauses and the difficulties in determining the legal nature of certain texts. The study underlines that treaty law is a useful instrument for the Union and is further enriched with creative contributions; the outcome is a fruitful relationship.

Author(s):  
Brölmann Catherine

International law has generally treated questions of the legal personality and legal powers of international organizations (IOs) as a distinct subject — notably one of international institutional law. However, IOs also regularly trigger questions of treaty law and practice. Most IOs are created by treaty, and that ‘constituent instrument’ provides the necessary starting point for delimiting their functions and competences. This chapter addresses treaty interpretation in the IO context, with particular attention to the interpretation of founding or constitutive treaties of international organizations. Part I examines the interpretation of constitutive treaties and IO secondary rules. Part II looks at the role of organizations as treaty interpreters. Examples are drawn predominantly from the UN context and, to a lesser degree, the European Union.


From trade relations to greenhouse gases, from shipwrecks to cybercrime, treaties structure the rights and obligations of states, international organizations, and individuals. For centuries, treaties have regulated relations among nation states. Today, they are the dominant source of international law. Thus, being adept with treaties and international agreements is an indispensable skill for anyone engaged in international relations. This revised and updated edition provides a comprehensive guide to treaties, shedding light on the rules and practices surrounding the making, interpretation, and operation of these instruments. The chapters are designed to introduce the law of treaties and offer practical insights into how treaties actually work. Foundational issues are covered, including what treaties are and when they should be used, alongside detailed analyses of treaty formation, application, interpretation, and exit. Special issues associated with treaties involving the European Union and other international organizations are also addressed. These are complimented by a set of model treaty clauses. Real examples illustrate the approaches that treaty-makers can take on topics such as entry into force, languages, reservations, and amendments. The book thus provides an authoritative reference point for anyone studying or involved in the creation or interpretation of treaties or other forms of international agreement.


Author(s):  
Viktoriya Kuzma

This article presents the current issues in the law of international organizations and contemporary international law in general. It is pointed out that the division of international law into branches and institutions, in order to ensure the effective legal regulation of new spheres of relations, led to the emergence of autonomous legal regimes, even within one region, namely on the European continent. To date, these include European Union law and Council of Europe law. It is emphasized the features of the established legal relations between the Council of Europe and the European Union at the present stage. It is determined that, along with close cooperation between regional organizations, there is a phenomenon of fragmentation, which is accompanied by the creation of two legal regimes within the same regional subsystem, proliferation of the international legal norms, institutions, spheres and conflicts of jurisdiction between the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union. It is revealed that some aspects of fragmentation can be observed from the moment of establishing relations between the Council of Europe and the European Union, up to the modern dynamics of the functioning of the system of law of international organizations, the law of international treaties, law of human rights. Areas and types of fragmentation in relations between international intergovernmental organizations of the European continent are distinguished. One way to overcome the consequences of fragmentation in the field of human rights is highlighted, namely through the accession of the European Union to the Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950. Considerable attention has also been paid to defragmentation, which is partly reflected in the participation of the European Union in the Council of Europe’s conventions by the applying «disconnection clause». It is determined that the legal relations established between an international intergovernmental organization of the traditional type and the integration association sui generis, the CoE and the EU, but with the presence of phenomenon of fragmentation in a close strategic partnership, do not diminish their joint contribution into the development of the law of international organizations and contemporary international law in general. Key words: defragmentation; European Union; European Court of Human Rights; Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950; conflict of jurisdictions; «disconnection clause»; Council of Europe; Court of Justice of the European Union; fragmentation; sui generis.


Author(s):  
Gino Naldi ◽  
Konstantinos Magliveras

Following the 2016 referendum, the UK notified its intention to withdraw from the European Union pursuant to Article 50 TEU. Given the political and legal consequences of a much-questioned referendum and the strong opinion of many parts of British society that the UK’s membership should not be terminated, the question arose whether such a notification could be revoked unilaterally. In the absence of any mention in Article 50, expert opinion was divided. International law – that is, the law of treaties and the law of international organizations – does not appear to provide a definite answer, while state practice is rather scarce. The constituent instruments of international and regional organizations containing withdrawal clauses are also silent, except for African organizations and development/investment organizations, which invariably allow Member States to rescind withdrawal notices. As regards the EU Treaties, before the Lisbon Treaty they did not contain a withdrawal clause. In the preliminary ruling given in Wightman v. Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, which concerned whether an EU Member has the sovereign power under Article 50 to revoke unilaterally a withdrawal notice, the Court of Justice helped to clarify a critical question of EU Law but also of international law.


Author(s):  
Nicole Scicluna

This chapter evaluates global governance and how it relates to international law. It addresses the role of international organizations in processes of global governance, charting their rise from the nineteenth century onwards. Two international organizations exemplify semi-legalized governance beyond the state: the United Nations and the European Union. Sovereign states, of course, continue to play a central role in the institutions, processes, and mechanisms of global governance. The chapter then explores the extent to which a state’s power, influence, and legitimacy are affected by factors such as its domestic political arrangements and its adherence to the liberal, Western values that underpin the postwar order. It also assesses whether the proliferation of legalized and semi-legalized global governance regimes amounts to a constitutionalization of international relations.


Author(s):  
Geert De Baere

The present chapter considers the position of the European Union in other international organizations. It is based on the premise that the Union, while arguably also a federal or quasi-federal structure, is legally still itself an international organization. From the perspective of international law, that explains at least partly the complexities involved in an international organization such as the EU acquiring a status in—let alone membership of—another international organization. The term ‘status’ or ‘position’ is understood here as the influence the Union can exercise, either formally or informally, in decision-making processes in other international organizations. As an ever-increasing number of decisions having an impact on the Union’s policies originate in international organizations, its position in such fora matters.


2018 ◽  
pp. 7-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Włodzimierz MALENDOWSKI

The paper concerns an attempt to determine the status of European Union member states. It takes as its starting point the statement that the EU’s organizational structure provides for more than a confederation of states but less than a federation. At the present stage of the EU’s development a unique organization has been established that has not predecessor in the standards of international organizations. This is accompanied with a new approach to the interpretation of the nature of sovereignty of integrating European states, which is connected with intensifying processes of decomposition and the loosening of sovereign control by states over their territories and populations. States achieve their sovereign interests within the framework of international structures. They can also voluntarily restrict their sovereign rights on the basis of the commonly accepted rules and principles of international organizations. In this way they assign a comparative degree of state authorities’ competencies to these organizations. As a consequence, numerous issues that were formerly regulated by states are increasingly more often solved by means of corporate operations. This naturally leads to the states’ opening to the international environment without any threat to their sovereignty. The process of integration in Europe has not resulted in sovereignty of the European Union itself. Sovereignty remains an attribute of states. European states maintain their ability to


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-92
Author(s):  
Danuta Kabat-Rudnicka

Summary Sovereignty is a key concept in international law and international relations. First defined and discussed by Jean Bodin, sovereignty is considered to be an inherent attribute of any state. However, the changes that international society has undergone since the Treaty of Westphalia, including the emergence of different state and non-state actors vying for power and authority, have called into question the position of the state as the main actor in the modern world. This in turn has given rise to the following questions: how should the very concept of sovereignty be understood today? Given the growing importance of international organizations and regional integrational arrangements can the concept of sovereignty be extended to cover entities other than states; and in case of the European Union, what makes us think in terms of sovereignty rather than autonomy? This analysis is an attempt to apply the concept of sovereignty to contemporary international organizations. The main thesis is as follows: in the case of international organizations, especially a new type of organization, it is also legitimate to consider a narrative in terms of sovereignty, not just autonomy. The example studied here is the European Union as an international organization-cum-regional integrational arrangement.


2017 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 491-511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jed Odermatt

AbstractIn his Fourth Report on the Identification of Customary International Law (2016), Special Rapporteur Sir Michael Wood confirmed that ‘[i]n certain cases, the practice of international organizations also contributes to the expression, or creation, of rules of customary international law’. That the practice of international organizations can be relevant when identifying customary international law is relatively uncontroversial. The issue that is more debated is the extent to which the practice of international organizations as such may contribute to the development of customary international law. Using examples from the European Union's treaty practice and from the Court of Justice of the European Union, this article argues that international organizations may contribute to such practice, not only by representing the collective will of States, but as autonomous actors in their own right.


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 107-122
Author(s):  
Krzysztof Pacuła

The terms ‘characterization’ (‘classification’) and ‘exercise of characterization’ refer in particular to the efforts made to determine which conflict of law rule — and in the sense presented in this paper, also rule on jurisdiction — which is part of the law of the forum State, should be applied to the circumstances of a particular case. In relation to the norms of private international law of the European Union, the triumph of an autonomous characterization at first sight seems undeniable. The term autonomous characterization (in principle — ‘autonomous interpretation’, the case law usually does not distinguish between exercise of characterization and exercise of interpretation) has been referred to over the last fifty years in order to describe the vast majority of operations of interpretation undertaken in relation to the norms of EU private international law. The contemporary concept of characterization in private law of the European Union, although consistently referred to as ‘autonomous’, does not fully meet the criteria thereof. The papers argues that while the starting point was the autonomous characterization in its pure form (stage one), over time it partially gave way to the place of characterization according to the EU law-oriented legis fori (stage two), and finally it was enriched with new elements which gave it the form of a specific functional characterization (stage three). It is not so much about the consistency of the results of the exercises of characterization with the universal understanding of certain concepts. Exercises of characterization are carried out through the prism of their effects, so as to ensure the effectiveness of the norms of EU law (effet utile) other than rules on conflict of laws and on jurisdiction.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document