Julian Wyatt (2019): intertemporal linguistics in international law: beyond contemporaneous and evolutionary treaty interpretation

Intertemporal treaty interpretation has undergone decades of discussion with few consensuses being reached. In this background, interdisciplinary analysis has come to the stage and injects innovation into treaty interpretation. According to Julian Wyatt’s Intertemporal Linguistics in International Law: Beyond Contemporaneous and Evolutionary Treaty Interpretation, treaty terms can be divided according to semantic features with temporal sense-intention (TSI) examined, based on which one can figure out whether dynamic or static interpretation shall be applied. It offers systematic guidelines and new solutions to intertemporal treaty interpretation, which is conducive to promoting international rule of law.

Inter-regime conversations: What barriers persist for individuals in international law?

Individuals have long occupied a precarious position within international law. Historically, conceived as the relation between states, international law rarely saw a need to consider individual claims; it was, instead, the role of states to bring claims on behalf of their nationals. As international law has become increasingly fragmented, however, globalization has thrust the individual onto the international legal plane. Within this landscape, we briefly consider individuals’ claims across three separate international regimes: (i) the International Court of Justice, (ii) investment treaties, and (iii) the World Trade Organization. We find that barriers for individuals’ recognition as rights holders persist across each. First, jurisdictional barriers remain fundamentally problematic for recognizing individuals’ claims. Second, the longstanding focus on treaty interpretation techniques has yielded little, if any, demonstrable impact on recognizing individuals’ rights. Third, mere reliance on reflecting human rights values, rather than specific and concrete structural reforms, has proven incompatible with realizing individuals’ rights within these three systems. Individuals qua rights holders have, rather acutely, recently experienced deeply troubling human rights violations on several fronts. Fundamentally, international law must protect human rights. This moment invites us to consider the systems on the international legal plane for individuals to seek such remedy and what barriers must be addressed to further such efforts.

“Or any other similar criteria”: Towards advancing the protection of LGBTQI detainees against discrimination and sexual and gender-based violence during non-international armed conflict

Discrimination and sexual and gender-based violence committed against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex (LGBTQI) detainees remains one of the most pressing contemporary humanitarian challenges. This article focuses on the interpretation of the phrase “or any other similar criteria” as contained in Article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions, upon which adverse distinction is prohibited, in order to qualify sexual orientation and gender identity as prohibited grounds of adverse distinction. The interpretation of “or any other similar criteria” will be embarked upon by employing the general rule of treaty interpretation provided for in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, so as to qualify sexual orientation and gender identity as “any other similar criteria” and ultimately to realize the protection of LGBTQI detainees against discrimination and sexual and gender-based violence during non-international armed conflict.

Legal justifications for gender parity on the bench of the International Court of Justice: An argument for evolutive interpretation of Article 9 of the ICJ Statute

The UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council should amend their rules of procedure to create gender parity on the bench of the International Court of Justice. Only 3.7 per cent of all judges on the ICJ have been women. The UN Charter, ICJ Statute, and long-standing practice of the Court underscore the importance of representation, but the focus has been on geographical representation. Using the law of international organizations, combined with the law of treaty interpretation and international human rights law, this article argues that Article 9 of the ICJ Statute should be interpreted to include a requirement of gender parity. Established practice, subsequent practice, and the UN’s multi-decade gender parity in staffing policy establish an evolutive interpretation of what is required to fulfil equality at the UN and the ICJ. The nomination and election procedures for ICJ judges are sufficiently flexible to facilitate this interpretation.

The Right to a Fair Trial under Article 14 of the ICCPR

This is the companion book to The Right to a Fair Trial in International Law. As we observe in that book, understanding the right to a fair trial may require reference not only to its interpretation by courts, treaty bodies, special rapporteurs, experts, and scholars, but also to the preparatory work of the treaty (travaux préparatoires) and the circumstances of its conclusion. The travaux are a supplementary means of interpretation, used to confirm the meaning resulting from the application of principles of treaty interpretation or to determine the meaning when the interpretation ‘leaves the meaning ambiguous or obscure; or leads to a result which is manifestly absurd or unreasonable’. For this reason, each chapter of The Right to a Fair Trial in International Law contains detailed analysis of the relevant treaty provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), including the travaux. More than 50 years have passed since the ICCPR was opened for signature. The right to a fair trial remains one of the most fundamental rights, and its promotion and protection is as vital as ever. For more than a half-century, the ICCPR has been interpreted by international and regional human rights bodies as well as national courts, legislators, practitioners and academics. Its terms and basic tenets are reflected in national constitutions and laws and the statutes of international criminal courts. Different views on what is conveyed by the treaty’s language are inevitable. It is hoped that this publication will assist with understanding what the drafters intended.

Jus Cogens: Problem of the Role in Treaty Interpretation

Due to their specific legal nature, the jus cogens rules occupy a special place and have conceptual significance in international law system in the vein that their non-compliance may, in fact, sabotage foundations of the international legal system based on states consent. Since the entry into force of the VCLT, jus cogens concept in international law has moved closer to international legal practice. A paradoxical situation exists - jus cogens concept in international law is generally accepted, there is also a normatively established definition of such a rule, but its specific framework and content remain unclear. The ICJ has repeatedly addressed the issue of jus cogens norms, but a detailed concept on jus cogens has not been formed. It is analyzed that the problem of establishing jus cogens is difficult to solve in abstractio. The reason lies not only in the absence of a single official list of norms jus cogens – the criteria for including norms in such a list are not defined. Opinions of representatives of the doctrine and the international judiciary on this issue differ significantly. Addressing the problem of the role and significance of jus cogens, general international law imperative rules, for the observance and interpretation of treaties, it should be noted that treaties are to be interpreted in a format compatible with the imperative norms. The considerations presented in the research indicate a special, if not decisive, role in the observance of jus cogens in treaties interpretation.Keywords: International Law; VCLT; Treaties; Imperative Rules Jus Cogens: Masalah Peran dalam Interpretasi Perjanjian AbstrakAturan Jus Cogens menempati tempat khusus dan memiliki makna konseptual dalam sistem hukum internasional dikarenakan sifat hukumnya yang spesifik, selain karena ketidakpatuhannya dapat menyabot fondasi sistem hukum internasional berdasarkan persetujuan negara. Sejak berlakunya VCLT, konsep Jus Cogens dalam hukum internasional semakin mendekati praktik hukum internasional. Situasi paradoks terjadi - konsep Jus Cogens dalam hukum internasional diterima secara umum. Ada juga definisi yang ditetapkan secara normatif dari aturan semacam itu, tetapi kerangka kerja dan isinya yang spesifik masih belum jelas. ICJ telah berulang kali membahas masalah norma Jus Cogens, tetapi konsep rinci tentang Jus Cogens belum terbentuk. Dianalisis bahwa masalah pembentukan Jus Cogens sulit dipecahkan secara abstrak. Alasannya tidak hanya terletak pada tidak adanya satu daftar resmi norma Jus Cogens – kriteria untuk memasukkan norma dalam daftar tersebut tidak didefinisikan. Pendapat perwakilan doktrin dan peradilan internasional tentang masalah ini berbeda secara signifikan. Mengatasi masalah peran dan pentingnya Jus Cogens, aturan umum hukum internasional imperatif, untuk ketaatan dan interpretasi perjanjian. Perlu dicatat bahwa perjanjian harus ditafsirkan dalam format yang kompatibel dengan norma-norma imperatif. Pertimbangan yang disajikan dalam penelitian ini menunjukkan peran khusus, jika tidak menentukan, dalam ketaatan Jus Cogens dalam interpretasi perjanjian.Kata kunci: Hukum Internasional; VCLT; Perjanjian; Aturan Imperatif Jus Cogens: Проблема Роли В Толковании Договора Aннотация Нормы jus cogens вследствие своей специфической правовой природы занимают особое место, имеют концептуальное значение в системе международного права в том смысле, что их несоблюдение может фактически подорвать основы международной правовой системы, которая опирается на согласие государств. Со времени своего включения в Венскую конвенцию о праве международных договоров 1969 г., концепция международного права jus cogens подошла к международной юридической практике. Доказано, что имеет место парадокс – концепция jus cogens в международном праве общепринятая, также существует нормативно-закрепленное понятие такой нормы, при этом ее рамки и содержание остаются неточными. МС ООН неоднократно касался проблематики норм jus cogens, однако не дал системного видения данного вопроса. Проблему определения jus cogens решить in abstracto сложно. Причина не только в отсутствии единого официального перечня норм jus cogens – не определены критерии включения норм в такой перечень. Мнения представителей доктрины и международного судейского корпуса по этому поводу существенно различаются. Приведенные в исследовании соображения свидетельствуют об особой, если не решающей, роли jus cogens в процессе интерпретации международных договоров.Ключевые слова: Jus cogens, международное право, интерпретация международных договоров, ВКПМД

Invoking International Environmental Norms Through Treaty Interpretation

This article analyses the way in which international tribunals considering treaty- based disputes incorporate extraneous environmental principles through the use of interpretative mechanisms. Increasingly prominent in the international sphere, this approach allows States bringing claims under historical treaties to adopt and enforce contemporary understandings of environmental obligations. This article pursues an extensive survey of cases exhibiting this process, focusing on the interpretative techniques used; the extent to which the tribunals allowed for environmental arguments; and the basis, and use, of environmental norms. These results facilitate a comparative analysis, which concludes that tribunals’ choices regarding each of these features ultimately depends on the underlying treaty’s relationship with intertemporal law. This article thus provides a guide as to how States may effectively enforce environmental obligations, even absent explicit environmental enforcement mechanisms.

Additional Protocol II: Elevating the minimum threshold of intensity?

This paper examines the notion of intensity in the context of common Article 3 and Additional Protocol II (AP II) to the Geneva Conventions in order to establish whether AP II demands a different intensity threshold from the minimum threshold of intensity contemplated in common Article 3. The paper considers the question of whether the inclusion of the term “sustained” in the phrase “sustained and concerted military operations” intrinsic to the threshold in Article 1(1) of AP II introduces a temporal requirement in addition to mere protracted armed violence. The paper argues that the inclusion of the term “sustained” in Article 1(1) of AP II potentially demands prolonged protracted armed violence. The research aims to contribute to the existing literature on the notion of intensity demanded by the scope of application inherent in AP II through an interrogation of the phrase “sustained” military operations by employing the rules of treaty interpretation and by examining relevant case law and scholarly debate. In this way, the author hopes to contribute towards filling a lacuna with regard to the minimum threshold for intensity in the context of treaty law concerned with the classification of non-international armed conflicts.