The Competence to Conclude Treaties in International Law and the Invalidity of Treaties within the Scope of Article 46 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

Bilge Erson Asar

Makale detayları

The Competence to Conclude Treaties in International Law and the Invalidity of Treaties within the Scope of Article 46 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

Yazarlar:

Bilge Erson Asar

Yayıncı:

Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar:

Çevre Hukuku

Dergi:

Public and Private International Law Bulletin Vol.43 Issue 2, pp.715-771

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001311468

pISSN:

2651-5377

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 The regulations governing the domestic procedures that states are to follow in their processes regarding the conclusion of a treaty represent one of the limited areas where international law intersects with domestic law. Nonetheless, the regulations in this area include various procedures. The power to conclude treaties, traditionally vested in the executive, has become a practice shared with the legislature in line with democratization processes. Constitutional courts or judicial bodies with similar powers may be able to be involved in these processes in some states. Other states even have treatyconcluding procedures that require a referendum. If a state becomes a party to an international treaty in violation these rules of domestic law, it may invoke the treatys invalidity under Article 46 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties VCLT. While this provision may seem to challenge both internationalism and constitutionalism, its practical application proves to be extremely difficult and rare. Both the complexity of states rules on treaty-making and their diverse nature further complicates the matter to the extent that a general categorization becomes challenging. The study delves into the development, scope, and limitations of the relevant provision in VCLT and analyzes why this ground of invalidity, which was one of the most controversial issues in the preparatory work of the VCLT, is highly exceptional and unlikely to succeed if invoked. In addition, this study addresses the applicability of this provision to the rules on withdrawal from treaties that are currently under discussion in academia.

 The regulations governing the domestic procedures that states are to follow in their processes regarding the conclusion of a treaty represent one of the limited areas where international law intersects with domestic law. Nonetheless, the regulations in this area include various procedures. The power to conclude treaties, traditionally vested in the executive, has become a practice shared with the legislature in line with democratization processes. Constitutional courts or judicial bodies with similar powers may be able to be involved in these processes in some states. Other states even have treatyconcluding procedures that require a referendum. If a state becomes a party to an international treaty in violation these rules of domestic law, it may invoke the treatys invalidity under Article 46 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties VCLT. While this provision may seem to challenge both internationalism and constitutionalism, its practical application proves to be extremely difficult and rare. Both the complexity of states rules on treaty-making and their diverse nature further complicates the matter to the extent that a general categorization becomes challenging. The study delves into the development, scope, and limitations of the relevant provision in VCLT and analyzes why this ground of invalidity, which was one of the most controversial issues in the preparatory work of the VCLT, is highly exceptional and unlikely to succeed if invoked. In addition, this study addresses the applicability of this provision to the rules on withdrawal from treaties that are currently under discussion in academia.

 The regulations governing the domestic procedures that states are to follow in their processes regarding the conclusion of a treaty represent one of the limited areas where international law intersects with domestic law. Nonetheless, the regulations in this area include various procedures. The power to conclude treaties, traditionally vested in the executive, has become a practice shared with the legislature in line with democratization processes. Constitutional courts or judicial bodies with similar powers may be able to be involved in these processes in some states. Other states even have treatyconcluding procedures that require a referendum. If a state becomes a party to an international treaty in violation these rules of domestic law, it may invoke the treatys invalidity under Article 46 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties VCLT. While this provision may seem to challenge both internationalism and constitutionalism, its practical application proves to be extremely difficult and rare. Both the complexity of states rules on treaty-making and their diverse nature further complicates the matter to the extent that a general categorization becomes challenging. The study delves into the development, scope, and limitations of the relevant provision in VCLT and analyzes why this ground of invalidity, which was one of the most controversial issues in the preparatory work of the VCLT, is highly exceptional and unlikely to succeed if invoked. In addition, this study addresses the applicability of this provision to the rules on withdrawal from treaties that are currently under discussion in academia.

 Devletlerin bir andlaşma ile bağlanma süreçlerinde iç hukuklarında uygulanacak usule ilişkin düzenlemeleri, uluslararası hukuk ile iç hukukun kesiştiği sınırlı alanlardan biri olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır. Bununla birlikte devletlerin bu alandaki düzenlemelerinin çeşitli usulleri içerdiği gözlenmektedir. Geleneksel olarak yürütmenin elinde olan andlaşma akdetme yetkisinin demokratikleşme süreçleriyle birlikte yasama ile paylaşılan bir uygulama halini aldığı görülmektedir. Kimi devletlerde bu süreçlere anayasa mahkemeleri veya benzer yetkiyle donatılmış yargı organlarının da dahil olması mümkün olabilir. Hatta halk oylamasından geçmesi öngörülen andlaşma akdetme usulleri de mevcuttur. İç hukukta öngörülen bu kuralların ihlal edilmesi yoluyla bir uluslararası andlaşmaya taraf olan devlet, andlaşmanın geçersizliğini 1969 Viyana Andlaşmalar Hukuku Sözleşmesinin VAHS 46. maddesine dayanarak ileri sürebilir. Uluslararasıcılık ile anayasalcılığı bağdaştırıcı bir çözüm sunar gibi gözüken bu hüküm, gerçekte son derece zor ve istisnaî bir uygulamaya sahiptir. Gerek devletlerin andlaşma akdetme konusundaki kurallarının karmaşık olması gerekse genel bir sınıflandırmayı zorlaştıracak kadar çeşitli olması, konuyu daha da çetrefilli hale getirmektedir. Bu çalışma, ilgili hükmün hazırlık çalışmaları, kapsamı ve sınırlarını ayrıntılı bir biçimde incelemektedir. Çalışmada ayrıca, VAHSnin hazırlık çalışmalarında da en tartışmalı konulardan biri olan bu geçersizlik gerekçesinin neden son derece istisnaî ve ileri sürüldüğünde başarı şansının zayıf olduğu değerlendirilmiştir. Bunların yanında, bu hükmün şu anda akademik çevrelerde tartışılmakta olan andlaşmalardan çekilmeye ilişkin kurallara benzer şekilde uygulanabilirliği de ele alınmıştır.

Makale detayları

The Competence to Conclude Treaties in International Law and the Invalidity of Treaties within the Scope of Article 46 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

Yazarlar:

Bilge Erson Asar

Yayıncı:

Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar:

Çevre Hukuku

Dergi:

Public and Private International Law Bulletin Vol.43 Issue 2, pp.715-771

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001311468

pISSN:

2651-5377

Law of Treaties

competence to conclude treaties

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

Article 46

invalidity of treaties

Article 90 of the Turkish Constitution

authorized representative

Istanbul ConventionAndlaşmalar hukuku

andlaşma akdetme yetkisi

Viyana Andlaşmalar Hukuku Sözleşmesi

madde 46

andlaşmaların geçersizliği

T.C. Anayasası madde 90

yetkili temsilci

İstanbul Sözleşmesi

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Bilge Erson Asar

Yayıncı: Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar: Çevre Hukuku

Dergi: Public and Private International Law Bulletin Vol.43 Issue 2, pp.715-771

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 12/2023

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001311468

pISSN: 2651-5377

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Bilge Erson Asar

Yayıncı:

Istanbul University

Ana Başlıklar:

Çevre Hukuku

Dergi:

Public and Private International Law Bulletin Vol.43 Issue 2, pp.715-771

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001311468

pISSN:

2651-5377