That means that there are no legal obligations imposed on a signatory State or regional integration organization immediately after the treaty is signed.
However, by signing the Convention or Optional Protocol, States or regional integration organizations indicate their intention to take steps to be bound by the treaty at a later date. Signing also creates an obligation, in the period between signing and ratification or consent to be bound, to refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of the treaty.
Heads of State, Heads of Government or Ministers for Foreign Affairs are empowered to sign a treaty on behalf of a State without having to produce full powers to that effect. Other representatives intending to sign a treaty must have the appropriate full powers, issued by one of the above authorities, which expressly authorize signing the Convention or Optional Protocol by a named representative. In order to become a party to the Convention and the Optional Protocol, a State must demonstrate, through a concrete act, its willingness to undertake the legal rights and obligations contained in these two instruments.
In other words, it must express its consent to be bound by the Convention and the Optional Protocol. Under the Convention and the Optional Protocol, States may express their consent to be bound in several ways:.
Consent to be bound by the Convention and the Optional Protocol is the act whereby States demonstrate their willingness to undertake the legal obligations under the instruments. The Convention and the Optional Protocol both provide for States to express their consent to be bound by signature, subject to ratification. Upon ratification at the international level, the State becomes legally bound by the treaty.
Ratification at the international level should not be confused with ratification at the national level. At the national level, the State might have to ratify the treaty in accordance with its own constitutional or legal provisions before it expresses consent to be bound internationally. For example, the constitution might require parliament to consider the terms of the Convention and decide on ratification prior to any action at the international level that would indicate that the State consents to be bound by the treaty.
That is why ratification at the international level is still necessary, regardless of national procedures. A State or regional integration organization may also express its consent to be bound by the Convention or the Optional Protocol by depositing an instrument of accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Accession has the same legal effect as ratification; however, unlike ratification, which must be preceded by signing to create binding legal obligations under international law, accession requires only one step, namely, depositing the instrument of accession.
Signing also creates an obligation, in the period between signing and consent to be bound, to refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of the treaty. When a State wishes to ratify or accede to the Convention or Optional Protocol, or a regional integration organization wishes formally to confirm or accede, the State or regional integration organization must execute an instrument of ratification, formal confirmation or accession, signed by the Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs.
The instrument of ratification, formal confirmation or accession becomes effective only when the State or regional integration organization deposits it with the Secretary-General of the United Nations at United Nations Headquarters in New York. States or regional integration organizations should deliver such instruments to the Treaty Section of the United Nations to ensure the action is promptly processed.
See contact details for the Treaty Section above. This will help ensure that the instrument is promptly processed.
Parliaments have a key role to play in the ratification process. While a representative of the executive — Head of State, Head of Government or the Minister for Foreign Affairs — signs and ratifies treaties, in most countries, the ultimate decision on ratification rests with parliament, which must approve ratification.
The term "declaration" is used for various international instruments. However, declarations are not always legally binding. The term is often deliberately chosen to indicate that the parties do not intend to create binding obligations but merely want to declare certain aspirations. An example is the Rio Declaration. Declarations can however also be treaties in the generic sense intended to be binding at international law. It is therefore necessary to establish in each individual case whether the parties intended to create binding obligations.
Ascertaining the intention of the parties can often be a difficult task. Some instruments entitled "declarations" were not originally intended to have binding force, but their provisions may have reflected customary international law or may have gained binding character as customary law at a later stage.
Such was the case with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Declarations that are intended to have binding effects could be classified as follows:. When the treaty is not subject to ratification, acceptance or approval, "definitive signature" establishes the consent of the state to be bound by the treaty. Most bilateral treaties dealing with more routine and less politicized matters are brought into force by definitive signature, without recourse to the procedure of ratification.
After a treaty has been concluded, the written instruments, which provide formal evidence of consent to be bound, and also reservations and declarations, are placed in the custody of a depositary.
Unless the treaty provides otherwise, the deposit of the instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession establishes the consent of a state to be bound by the treaty. For treaties with a small number of parties, the depositary will usually be the government of the state on whose territory the treaty was signed.
Sometimes various states are chosen as depositaries. Multilateral treaties usually designate an international organization or the Secretary-General of the United Nations as depositaries. The depositary must accept all notifications and documents related to the treaty, examine whether all formal requirements are met, deposit them, register the treaty and notify all relevant acts to the parties concerned.
Typically, the provisions of the treaty determine the date on which the treaty enters into force. Where the treaty does not specify a date, there is a presumption that the treaty is intended to come into force as soon as all the negotiating states have consented to be bound by the treaty. Bilateral treaties may provide for their entry into force on a particular date, upon the day of their last signature, upon exchange of the instruments of ratification or upon the exchange of notifications.
In cases where multilateral treaties are involved, it is common to provide for a fixed number of states to express their consent for entry into force.
Some treaties provide for additional conditions to be satisfied, e. The treaty may also provide for an additional time period to elapse after the required number of countries have expressed their consent or the conditions have been satisfied.
A treaty enters into force for those states which gave the required consent. A treaty may also provide that, upon certain conditions having been met, it shall come into force provisionally.
The basic characteristic of this procedure is that the signatures do appear not on one letter or note but on two separate letters or notes. The agreement therefore lies in the exchange of both letters or notes, each of the parties having in their possession one letter or note signed by the representative of the other party.
In practice, the second letter or note, usually the letter or note in response, will typically reproduce the text of the first. In a bilateral treaty, letters or notes may also be exchanged to indicate that all necessary domestic procedures have been completed. An "exchange of notes" is a record of a routine agreement, that has many similarities with the private law contract.
The agreement consists of the exchange of two documents, each of the parties being in the possession of the one signed by the representative of the other. Under the usual procedure, the accepting State repeats the text of the offering State to record its assent. The signatories of the letters may be government Ministers, diplomats or departmental heads. The technique of exchange of notes is frequently resorted to, either because of its speedy procedure, or, sometimes, to avoid the process of legislative approval.
Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs are considered as representing their state for the purpose of all acts relating to the conclusion of a treaty and do not need to present full powers. Heads of diplomatic missions do not need to present full powers for the purpose of adopting the text of a treaty between the accrediting state and the state to which they are accredited.
Likewise, representatives accredited by states to an international conference or to an international organization or one of its organs do not need to present full powers for the purpose of adopting the text of a treaty in that conference, organization or organ. The term "modification" refers to the variation of certain treaty provisions only as between particular parties of a treaty, while in their relation to the other parties the original treaty provisions remain applicable.
However, this expression of intent in itself is not binding. Once the treaty has been signed, each state will deal with it according to its own national procedures. In the Netherlands, parliamentary approval is required. This is called ratification. The treaty is now officially binding on the state.
0コメント