The principle under consideration, as if completing the presentation of the basic principles of international law, originated and for a long time acted as the principle of compliance with international treaties - pacta sunt servanda ("treaties must be respected").

In the modern period, it has turned from a customary legal norm into a contractual norm, and its content has significantly changed and enriched.

The preamble of the UN Charter speaks of the determination of the peoples "to create conditions under which justice and respect for obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be observed", and in paragraph 2 of Art. 2, the obligation of the members of the UN to conscientiously fulfill the obligations assumed under the Charter is fixed, "in order to ensure to all of them in the aggregate the rights and advantages arising from membership in the membership of the Organization."

An important step in the contractual consolidation of this principle was the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969. It notes that "the principle of free consent and good faith and the rule of pacta sunt servanda have received universal recognition." In Art. 26 establishes: "Each valid agreement is binding on its participants and must be fulfilled by them in good faith."

This principle was described in detail in the Declaration on Principles of International Law of 1970, in the Final Act of the CSCE in 1975 and in other documents.

The meaning of this principle lies in the fact that it is a universal and cardinal norm recognized by all states, expressing the legal obligation of states and other entities to comply with and fulfill the obligations assumed in accordance with the UN Charter, arising from generally recognized principles and norms. international law and corresponding international treaties and other sources of international law.

Principle conscientious performance international obligations serves as a criterion for the legitimacy of the activities of states in international and domestic relations. It acts as a condition for the stability and effectiveness of the international legal order, consistent with the legal order of all states.

With the help of this principle, the subjects of international law receive a legal basis to mutually demand from other participants in international communication the fulfillment of the conditions associated with the use of certain rights and the performance of relevant duties. This principle makes it possible to distinguish lawful activity from illegal, prohibited. In this aspect, it is clearly manifested as a peremptory norm of international law. This principle, as it were, warns the states about the inadmissibility of deviation in the treaties they conclude from the cardinal provisions of international law, expressing the fundamental interests of the entire international community, and emphasizes the preventive function of the norms of jus cogens. The principle of conscientious observance of international obligations, linking peremptory norms into a single system of international legal prescriptions, is their integral part. However, if individual norms of jus cogens can be replaced by others on the basis of an agreement between states, then such a replacement is impossible in relation to this principle: its abolition would mean the elimination of all international law.

In developing this principle, it was envisaged that in exercising their sovereign rights, including the right to determine their own laws and regulations, participating States would be consistent with their legal obligations under international law.

The essential features of the principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations are the inadmissibility of arbitrary unilateral renunciation of the undertaken obligations and legal liability for violation of international obligations, which occurs in the event of refusal to fulfill them or other actions (or inaction) of a party to the contract that are illegal. Violation of international obligations raises the question of responsibility not only for deviation from the agreement, but also for infringement on the very principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations.

L.M. CHURKINA, lawyer The article considers the formation of the principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations, the role of the principle in the process of compliance with international treaties, as well as in the course of monitoring the fulfillment of such obligations, including monitoring the execution of decisions of international courts.

This article was copied from https://www.site


UDC 340.132.8

Pages in the magazine: 21-24

L.M. CHURKINA,

The formation of the principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations, the role of the principle in the process of compliance with international treaties, as well as in the course of monitoring the implementation of such obligations, including monitoring the implementation of decisions of international courts, are considered.

Keywords: principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations, control over the execution of decisions of international courts.

The Role of the Principle of Fulfillment in Good Faith of Obligations under the International Law

The author of the article considers the development of the principle of fulfillment in good faith of international obligations in compliance of an international treaty, and also in the course of the control for fulfillment of international obligations, including the control for execution of international judgments.

Keywords: principle of good faith fulfillment of international obligations, monitoring of implementation of decisions of international courts.

Relations between states in different historical periods were formed and regulated differently. The development of economic, political and cultural ties stimulated the strengthening of relations and led to the conclusion of bilateral agreements. International agreements gradually acquired more and more importance. However, a mutually beneficial agreement was of great value when strictly observed by the participants.

The principle of conscientious observance of international obligations has become the main guarantor of the strict implementation of the signed agreements. The most important step for the general recognition of this principle was the London Conference of 1871, dedicated to the revision of the Paris Peace Treaty of 1856. The European powers recognized as an essential principle of international law that no power can either release itself from the obligations of the treaty or change its provisions otherwise than with the consent of the contracting parties, reached by friendly agreement. This decision, in fact, for the first time fixed on international level the principle of conscientious fulfillment of obligations, which was interpreted as the principle "contracts must be respected".

Over time, the principle of faithful performance of international obligations has received a more definite interpretation. Paragraph 2 of Art. 1 of the Charter of the League of Nations provided for the condition under which states could become members of the League: to provide valid guarantees of their sincere intention to comply with international obligations.

The inclusion of the principle of fulfillment in good faith of obligations under international law in the text of the UN Charter was of decisive importance for universal acceptance. In the preamble and in Art. 4 of the UN Charter speaks of the determination of peoples “to create conditions under which justice and respect for obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be observed”, and paragraph 2 of Art. 2 establishes the obligation of the members of the United Nations to fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed under the Charter, "in order to secure to them all in the aggregate the rights and advantages arising from membership in the membership of the Organization."

Later, the principle was reflected in Art. 26 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which states that “every treaty in force is binding on the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith”.

The principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations is specified in the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the UN Charter, as well as in final act Conferences on Security and Cooperation in Europe 1975. In particular, it is emphasized that each state is obliged to fulfill in good faith the obligations arising both from the generally recognized principles and norms of international law, and from international treaties valid in accordance with the generally recognized principles and norms of international law.

In international legal practice, various legal mechanisms are used to increase the effectiveness of the principle of conscientious observance of international obligations. Among them are the creation and activities of special international bodies exercising control over the implementation of international legal norms.

As practice shows, states themselves enshrine in international agreements provisions on monitoring the fulfillment of their obligations through the application different forms and methods international control facilitating the verification of compliance by states with international legal obligations and the adoption of measures for their implementation.

As G.A. Osipov, the voluntariness of control should be understood in the sense that states, as sovereign participants in international communication, themselves agree with certain international legal norms. However, when these norms are agreed upon and enshrined in an agreement that has entered into force, its provisions, including those on control, are legally binding on all participating States.

International control over the implementation of treaty norms is carried out by the collective efforts of states with the help of international organizations and includes a system of measures aimed at verifying the accuracy of compliance with the international legal obligations of states, identifying possible violations and ensuring the fulfillment of international obligations under an international treaty. This is possible only with the effective assistance of the states themselves. The state in this aspect can be considered as a controlled structure, whose activities are aimed at the voluntary implementation of international treaties on its territory.

Under international treaties, States parties undertake to undertake a wide range of actions in relation to their domestic life, including the adoption of legislative or other domestic measures that may be necessary for the implementation of the rights and obligations enshrined in international agreements.

The state itself also determines effective ways to control the fulfillment of its international obligations. Domestic control functions are implemented government bodies, officials and other entities and are fixed by the relevant laws.

According to Art. 31 of the Federal Law of July 15, 1995 No. 101-FZ “On International Treaties Russian Federation”(hereinafter referred to as the Law on International Treaties), international treaties of the Russian Federation are subject to conscientious implementation in accordance with the terms of the international treaties themselves, the norms of international law, the Constitution of the Russian Federation and this law, other acts of the legislation of the Russian Federation.

Article 32 of the Law on International Treaties, as well as Art. 21 of the Federal Constitutional Law of December 17, 1997 No. 2-FKZ "On the Government of the Russian Federation" provides that the President of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Russian Federation take measures aimed at ensuring the implementation of international treaties. The federal executive authorities must ensure the fulfillment of the obligations of the state.

In accordance with paragraph 4 of Art. 32 of the Law on International Treaties and clause 1 of Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated March 12, 1996 No. 375 “On the coordinating role of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation in pursuing a unified foreign policy line of the Russian Federation” The Russian Foreign Ministry exercises general control over the fulfillment of the international obligations of the Russian Federation.

Forms and methods of internal state control can be established both by legislative and executive bodies state power. Federal Law No. 138-FZ of 05.11.1997 “On the Ratification of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of chemical weapons and on its destruction” provides that the fulfillment of the obligations of the Russian Federation arising from the Convention is ensured by the federal state authorities, state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation within the limits of their powers. According to this law, the President of the Russian Federation determines the main directions of the policy of the Russian Federation in the field of chemical disarmament, the measures necessary to ensure the safety of citizens and the protection of environment during the destruction of chemical weapons in accordance with the Convention, as well as measures to control their implementation. Moreover, this law contains provisions on the obligations of the Government of the Russian Federation and Federal Assembly to ensure the fulfillment of obligations under the Convention.

As a result of the implementation of national control, the state has the right to bring to justice those guilty of non-fulfillment of international obligations. For example, in accordance with Art. 40 of the Federal Law of December 17, 1998 No. 191-FZ "On the exclusive economic zone Russian Federation" officials, citizens and legal entities for violation of this law and international treaties of the Russian Federation, they are held liable in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation.

Thus, the current Russian legislation contains provisions on ensuring the international obligations of the Russian Federation and on monitoring the fulfillment of these obligations in various areas.

In national law, judicial control acts as one of the forms of state control. In international law, the resolution by international judicial bodies of disputes arising in connection with the fulfillment of international obligations refers to the methods of international control. The possibility of considering a dispute in an international judicial institution follows directly from the provisions of an international treaty. Many universal multilateral conventions contain provisions for recourse to international Court UN. These include the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of ​​12/10/1982, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change of 05/03/1992, the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer of 03/22/1985, etc.

The International Court of Justice makes a decision that is binding on the basis of the principle of good faith fulfillment of international obligations. If the court determines that the state did not act in good faith in fulfilling its contractual obligations, abused the rights granted under the contract, it can make a decision indicating the need to fulfill obligations under the contract. The requirements of the court are also based on the principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations.

On the one hand, international courts issue law enforcement acts, on the other hand, they act as a mechanism for monitoring the fulfillment by states of international obligations, thereby contributing to the implementation of the principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations. Consequently, international judicial institutions are engaged in the implementation of obligations that arise from international legal acts.

As a result of the consideration of disputes by international courts and the issuance of a decision between the parties, new legal relations arise, new international legal obligations aimed at the execution of a court decision. Their legal obligation derives from the provisions of international treaties concluded by the parties in which they have accepted the jurisdiction of the court. At the same time, in connection with the emergence of new legal obligations related to the execution of decisions of an international judicial institution, the problem of monitoring the implementation of these obligations arises. Non-execution of decisions of international courts by states entails an appeal to control bodies, specially created international organizations, the absence of which can lead to a violation of the principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations. For the International Court of Justice, such a body is the Security Council, for the Inter-American Court of Human Rights - the General Assembly of the Organization of American States, for the EU Court - the European Parliament, for the European Court of Human Rights - the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.

For the Russian Federation special interest has the control mechanism of the European Court of Human Rights. In accordance with Art. 46 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the parties undertake to comply with the final judgments of the court in cases in which they are parties. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe oversee the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.

The State is under an obligation to enforce the judgment, but it is free to choose the means of enforcement. The control functions of states are assigned to the bodies of legislative and executive power. Thus, by virtue of articles 79 and 87 of the Dutch Constitution, permanent advisory bodies on matters of legislation and government controlled and the States General of the Netherlands have a supervisory function at the national level for the implementation of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.

In some member states of the Council of Europe, the mechanism of control (judicial, parliamentary and executive) over the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights is provided for at the legislative level. In Ukraine, it is regulated by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Regulations of the European Court of Human Rights, the laws of Ukraine "On the execution of decisions and the application of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights", "On Enforcement Proceedings", the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, the Code of Administrative legal proceedings of Ukraine and some other normative legal acts. At the same time, the main normative legal act- the law "On the execution of decisions and the application of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights" - has no analogues in other states parties to the Convention. Article 11 of this law authorizes the representative body to exercise control and receive from the bodies that are responsible for the implementation side events of an individual nature, provided for in the decision of the European Court of Human Rights on a friendly settlement, information on the progress and consequences of the implementation of such measures, as well as to make submissions to the Prime Minister of Ukraine regarding the implementation of additional measures of an individual nature. The Government Commissioner for European Court Affairs must submit a report on the state of execution of decisions, to whom, in turn, the Department of State Enforcement Service is obliged to provide relevant information.

In 2006, Italy passed a law giving the Prime Minister and Parliament a special function to oversee the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. The law obliges the Prime Minister to monitor the actions of the Cabinet on the execution of European Court judgments against Italy, and also provides for the preparation of an annual report on the implementation of European Court judgments by Italy and its submission to the country's parliament.

The practice of exercising control functions by Parliament in the United Kingdom is interesting. Since March 2006, the practice of annual reports on the implementation of European Court judgments against the country has been applied in this state. Reports are prepared by the Joint Human Rights Committee and submitted to Parliament, where they are analyzed and recommendations made by the committee are put to a vote. As a result, a decision is made to approve the recommendations and apply them in practice, or to reject them.

In the Russian Federation, the process of exercising control over the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights has not been regulated. This leads to the lack of an objective and prompt analysis of the rulings issued against Russia in the authorities, which, in turn, entails a significant delay in the adoption of general measures and an increase in the number of complaints from Russian citizens.

The urgent adoption of the law “On the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the Russian Federation” or the empowerment of the Commissioner of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights with control functions can contribute to a decrease in the number of complaints and decisions. Possibly the creation special service under the Ministry of Justice of Russia would help to improve the situation with respect to the fulfillment by Russia of international obligations taken upon joining the Council of Europe and ratifying the Convention. Control can also be exercised through existing supervisory mechanisms and institutions - such as the prosecutor's office or the presidiums of federal courts.

Particularly noteworthy are proposals concerning control within prosecutor's supervision for the fulfillment of international obligations. Part 4 Art. 15 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation proclaimed the universally recognized principles and norms of international law, as well as international treaties of Russia, as an integral part of its legal system. Paragraph 1 of Art. 5 of the Law on International Treaties repeats this provision. In accordance with Art. 21 of the Federal Law of January 17, 1992 No. 2202-1 "On the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation", the Prosecutor's Office supervises the implementation of laws and, accordingly, international treaties. Thus, the prosecutor's office is obliged to control the fulfillment of the international obligations of the Russian Federation. However, the limits and procedure for supervision by the prosecutor's office of the fulfillment of international obligations, including the execution of judgments of the European Court, are not specifically defined. This leads to the fact that the prosecutor's office is not able to provide effective control over the execution of such decisions.

Obviously, control should be carried out both at the international and domestic levels in accordance with the principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations. This principle is directly related to the activities of the states themselves on international arena, as well as to the control bodies they create, exercising control within the country with national means.

Bibliography

1 See: Peace Treaty between the Allied and Associated Powers and Germany (together with the “Statute of the League of Nations”, “Charter of the International Labor Organization”, “Protocol”) of June 28, 1919 // Treaty of Versailles. - M., 1925.

2 See: Charter of the United Nations // Collection of existing treaties, agreements and conventions concluded by the USSR with foreign countries. Issue. XII. 1956. S. 14-47.

3 See: Vienna Convention on the Law of International Treaties // Collection of International Treaties of the USSR. Issue. XLII. 1988. S. 171-197.

4 See: Collection of current treaties, agreements and conventions concluded by the USSR with foreign states. Issue. XXXI. 1977, pp. 544-589.

5 See: Osipov G.A. International legal problems of arms control and disarmament control. - M., 1989. S. 18.

Share this article with colleagues:

This principle arose at the same time as international law and was known as the principle that "treaties must be respected" (pacta sunt servanda).

The content of the principle is set out in the 1970 Declaration, which confirms its importance for the maintenance of peace and security. The hierarchy of obligations and thus the norms from which they arise are emphasized. The Charter of the United Nations is placed at the highest level. As is known, the Charter provides for the primacy of obligations arising from it in case of conflict with other obligations of states (Article 103). The Declaration went further, defining that the principle of fulfillment of obligations in good faith applies only to those obligations that are accepted in accordance with the Charter.

In addition to the above provisions, the CSCE Final Act of 1975 specifically stipulates important point that, in exercising their sovereign rights, including the right to determine their own laws and regulations, States must comply with their obligations under international law. This provision reflected the growing importance of the interaction between international and domestic law of states.

The principle under consideration is closely related to the principle of good faith.<*>. This principle governs the processes of creation and implementation of norms. The judgments of the International Court of Justice in nuclear testing states: "One of the basic principles governing the creation and enforcement of legal obligations, whatever their source, is the principle of good faith." Russian legislation. IN federal law"On International Treaties of the Russian Federation" of 1995 states: "The Russian Federation stands for strict observance of treaty and customary norms, reaffirms its commitment fundamental principle international law - the principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations"

The principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations- one of the oldest functional principles systems of international law. It can be said that the entire international legal order rests on it. The UN Charter (para. 5, article 2), which is referred to as the source of the principle, provides only part of its content, namely, it requires states to comply with the obligations arising from membership in the UN, and for non-member states, only obligations arising from the principles of the Charter UN.

The principle was most fully expressed in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969 and in Art. 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, which refers to the equality of written and customary rules. At present, practice and doctrine are unanimous in that the principle protects all norms of international law, regardless of the form of their objectification.


Thus, the object of protection of the principle of conscientious observance of international obligations is the relations of states and other subjects of international law in connection with the creation, operation and termination of international treaties and customs.

States, other subjects of international law have the right to demand compliance with international law treaties and customs; receive the benefits arising from participation in them and the protection necessary for the implementation of the prescriptions laid down in them; provide assistance to states whose rights have been violated; in some cases, stipulated by international law, states may unilaterally terminate or modify obligations arising from a treaty or custom.

The obligations of states, conditioned by this principle, are mutual respect for each other's legal personality in the field of international rule-making; in recognizing the primacy of obligations under international law over national law; in bringing national legislation in line with the international obligations assumed; in resolving disputes arising in the process of concluding and applying treaties and customs, only by peaceful means.

This principle is protected by such international mechanisms as institutional and arbitration (arbitration) courts, mutual consultations, etc. Actions considered as a violation of the principle, at least in relation to international treaties, are listed in the mentioned Vienna Convention of 1969 and consist in exerting pressure on the participants in the negotiation process - bribery or other means of coercion, on the states - through the threat or use of force, deliberate violation of the provisions of a treaty that has entered into force, or the commission of such actions in relation to a treaty that has not entered into force, which destroy the object or purpose of the treaty.

At the heart of this principle lies the norm of rasta]ipg zeguapea, which has been known since ancient times (meaning that agreements must be respected). Article 2 of the UN Charter speaks of the obligation of UN members to comply with their obligations. This principle was enshrined in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the 1970 Declaration, the 1975 Helsinki Final Act of the CSCE and other documents.

14. The concept of subjects of international public law.

The subjects of international law are the bearers of international rights and obligations arising from international treaties and international customs. This property is called legal personality.

Any subject of international law has legal capacity, capacity to act and tortiousness.

The legal capacity of a subject of international law means his ability to have legal rights and responsibilities.

The legal capacity of a subject of international law is the acquisition and exercise by the subject independently, by his actions of rights and obligations. Subjects of international law bear independent responsibility for their actions, i.e. have tortiousness.

The following can be distinguished signs of subjects of international law:

1) the ability to act independently, to
dependent exercise of international rights and is obliged
news;

2) the fact of participation or the possibility of participation in international
native legal relations;

3) participation status, i.e. specific nature of participation
in international legal relations.

Subject of modern international law- it is a real or potential subject of international legal relations, which has international rights and obligations, certain norms of international law and is able to bear international legal responsibility.

Types of subjects of international law:

1) a state with sovereignty;

2) nations and peoples fighting for independence;

3) international universal organizations;

4) state-like organizations.

15. State as a subject of international public law

States are the initial and main subjects of international law, which determined its emergence and development. The state, unlike other subjects of international law, has a universal legal personality that does not depend on the will of other subjects. Even an unrecognized state has the right to defend its territorial integrity and independence, to govern the population in its territory.

The first attempt to codify the international legal features of the state was made in the 1933 Inter-American Convention on the Rights and Duties of the State.

State features are:

Sovereignty;

Territory;

Population;

The determining role of states is explained by their sovereignty - the ability to independently exercise foreign policy in the international arena and power over the population of its territory. This implies the equal legal personality of all states.

The state is a subject of international law since its inception. Its legal personality is not limited by time and the largest in scope. States can conclude treaties on any subject and at their own discretion. They develop the norms of international law, contributing to their progressive development, ensure their implementation and terminate these norms.

States create new subjects of international law (international organizations). They determine the content of the object of international legal regulation, contributing to its expansion by including issues that previously belonged to their internal competence (for example, human rights).

16. Legal personality of peoples and nations.

A nation, or people (a general term referring to a multinational population), is a relatively new subject of international law, recognized as a result of the principle of self-determination of peoples enshrined in the UN Charter. The right of the people to self-determination, according to the 1970 Declaration, means the right to freely, without any outside interference, determine their political status and carry out economic, social and cultural development.

Political status is understood as either the creation of a state if the nation did not have one, or the accession or unification with another state. If there is a state within the framework of a federation or confederation, the nation can withdraw from their composition.

Not all nations and peoples can be recognized as subjects of international law, but only those of them that are really fighting for their independence and have created authorities and administrations that are able to represent the interests of the entire nation, people in international relations.

Thus, the legal personality of the nation is closely connected with the achievement of self-determination of the state. It manifests itself in the conclusion of agreements with other states on assistance, participation in the activities of international organizations as an observer.

17. Legal personality of international organizations.

International intergovernmental organizations are derivative subjects of international law. They are called derivative entities because they are created by states by concluding an agreement - a constituent act, which is the charter of the organization. The scope of legal personality, as well as its provision, depends on the will of the founding states and is enshrined in the charter of an international organization. Therefore, the scope of legal personality of international organizations is not the same, it is determined by the constituent documents of the international organization. The United Nations has the largest amount of legal personality. Its members are 185 states. The Republic of Belarus is one of the 50 founding states of the UN, having signed its Charter at the San Francisco Conference in 1945.

The legitimacy of any international organization is determined by the conformity of its statutory principles with the principles of the UN Charter. In the event of a conflict between the state's international obligations under the UN Charter, priority is given to the UN Charter.

The legal personality of an international organization exists regardless of the will of the member states, even if its constituent documents do not expressly state that an international organization has legal personality, and a special one at that, i.e. limited by the goals of the organization and its charter.

As a subject of international law, any international intergovernmental organization has the right to conclude agreements, but only on issues stipulated by the UN Charter, to have representation in member states (for example, the UN office in the Republic of Belarus).

Thus, an international (interstate) organization is an association of states created on the basis of an international treaty to fulfill certain goals, having an appropriate system of bodies, having rights and obligations that are different from the rights and obligations of member states, and established in accordance with international law.

18. Legal personality of state-like entities.

State-like formations are endowed with a certain amount of rights and obligations, act as participants in international communication, and have sovereignty.

Examples of state-like entities include free cities (Jerusalem, Danzig, West Berlin), whose status was determined by an international agreement or a resolution of the UN General Assembly (for Jerusalem). Such cities had the right to conclude international treaties and were subject only to international law. These subjects were characterized by demilitarization and neutralization.

The state-like entity is the Vatican, established on the basis of the Lateran Treaty in 1929. It participates in a number of international organizations and conferences, and is headed by the head of the Catholic Church - the Pope.

19. International legal personality of individuals

The problem of recognizing an individual as a subject of international law is debatable, in many ways controversial. Some authors deny the legal personality of an individual, while others recognize for him certain qualities of a subject of international law.

Thus, A. Ferdross (Austria) believes that “individuals, in principle, are not subjects of international law, since international law protects the interests of individuals, however, it does not directly endow rights and obligations. individuals, but only of the state of which they are citizens” 2 . Other experts believe that an individual can only be a subject of international legal relations. “Individuals, being under the rule of the state, do not act in the international arena on their own behalf as subjects of international law,” writes V. M. Shurshalov. “All international treaties and agreements on the protection of the individual, fundamental human rights and freedoms are concluded by states, and therefore specific the rights and obligations arising from these agreements are for States, not for individuals. Individuals are under the protection of their state, and those norms of international law that are aimed at protecting fundamental human rights and freedoms are mainly implemented through states” 1 . In his opinion, according to the current norms of international law, an individual sometimes acts as a subject of specific legal relations, although he is not a subject of international law 2 .

As early as the beginning of the 20th century. approximately the same position was held by F. F. Marten. Individual individuals, he wrote, are not subjects of international law, but have in the field international relations certain rights that arise from: 1) the human person, taken by itself; 2) the status of these persons as citizens of the state 3 .

The authors of the seven-volume "Course of International Law" refer the individual to the second category of subjects of international law. In their opinion, individuals, “having a certain rather limited range of rights and obligations under international law, do not themselves directly participate in the process of creating norms of international law” 4 .

The English international lawyer J. Brownlie takes a controversial position on this issue. On the one hand, he rightly believes that there is a general rule according to which individual cannot be a subject of international law, and in certain contexts the individual acts as a subject of law in the international plane. However, according to J. Brownlie, “it would be useless to classify an individual as a subject of international law, since this would imply that he has rights that do not actually exist, and would not eliminate the need to distinguish between an individual and other types of subjects of international rights" 5 .

A more balanced position is taken by E. Arechaga (Uruguay), according to whom, “there is nothing in the very structure of the international legal order that could prevent states from granting individuals certain rights arising directly from any international treaty, or providing for them any That international funds protection" 1 .

L. Oppenheim noted back in 1947 that “although states are normal subjects of international law, they can consider individuals and other persons as directly endowed with international rights and obligations and, within these limits, make them subjects of international law.” Further, he clarifies his opinion as follows: “The persons involved in piracy were subject to the rules established primarily not by the domestic law of various states, but by international law” 2 .

Japanese professor Sh. Oda believes that “after the First World War, a new concept was formulated, according to which individuals can be liable for violations against international peace and law and order, and they can be prosecuted and punished according to the international procedure” 3 .

Professor of Oxford University Antonio Cassis believes that, in accordance with modern international law, individuals are inherent in the international legal status. Individuals have limited legal personality (in this sense, they can be put on a par with other, apart from states, subjects of international law: rebels, international organizations and national liberation movements) 4 .

Of the Russian international lawyers, the most consistent opponent of the recognition of the legal personality of an individual is S. V. Chernichenko. The individual "does not and cannot possess any element international legal personality", he considers 5 . According to S. V. Chernichenko, an individual “cannot be “introduced into the rank” of subjects of international law by concluding agreements that allow direct appeals of individuals to international bodies” 6 As noted above (§ 1 of this chapter), subjects of international law must: first, to be real (active, acting) participants in international relations; secondly, to have international rights and obligations; thirdly, to participate in the creation of norms of international law; fourthly, to have the authority to ensure the implementation of international law.

Currently, the rights and obligations of individuals or states in relation to individuals are enshrined in many international treaties. The most important of these are the Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field of 1949; Geneva Convention on the Treatment of Prisoners of War of 1949; Geneva Convention for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, 1949; Charter of the International Military Tribunal 1945; Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948; Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948; Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery, 1956; Convention on the Political Rights of Women, 1952; Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1966; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966; Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1984; numerous conventions endorsed by the ILO 1 . For example, Art. 6 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 states: "Everyone, wherever he may be, has the right to recognition of his legal personality."

From regional treaties, we note the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 and 11 protocols to it; CIS Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1995. There are similar conventions in other regions of the world.

These treaties establish the rights and obligations of individuals as participants in international legal relations, grant the individual the right to appeal to international judicial institutions with a complaint against the actions of subjects of international law, determine the legal status of certain categories of individuals (refugees, women, children, migrants, national minorities, etc.). .).

The international rights of individuals, arising from the generally recognized principles and norms of international law, are enshrined in approximately 20 multilateral and a number of bilateral treaties.

For example, according to Art. 4 of the Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery, 1956, a slave who has taken refuge on a ship of a state party to this Convention, 1p50 GSh, becomes free. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 1966 recognizes the right of every person to: a) participation in cultural life; b) use of the results of scientific progress and their practical application; c) enjoying the protection of moral and material interests arising in connection with any scientific, literary or artistic works of which he is the author.

In accordance with Art. 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966, the right to life is the inalienable right of every person. This right is protected by law. No one can be arbitrarily deprived of life. Thus, in this article, international law guarantees the individual the right to life. Article 9 of the Covenant guarantees the individual the right to liberty and security of person. Anyone who has been a victim of unlawful arrest or detention is entitled to enforceable compensation. According to Art. 16 Every person, wherever he may be, has the right to recognition of his legal personality.

The 1995 CIS Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms states: “Every person, wherever he is, has the right to recognition of his legal personality” (Article 23).

The International Court of Justice, in its decision of June 27, 2001 in the case of the Lagrand brothers v. USA, noted that the violation of Art. 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Agreements of 1963 by the United States constitutes a violation of the individual rights of the Lagrand brothers 1 .

The Russian Federation recognizes and guarantees the rights and freedoms of man and citizen in accordance with generally recognized principles and norms of international law(Article 17 of the Constitution).

The question of the legal personality of individuals is enshrined in bilateral treaties of the Russian Federation. For example, in Art. Article 11 of the 1993 Treaty of Friendly Relations and Cooperation between the Russian Federation and Mongolia states that the parties will do their best to expand contacts between the citizens of both states. Approximately the same rate

enshrined in the Treaty of Friendly Relations and Cooperation between the RSFSR and the Republic of Hungary in 1991

1. International responsibility of individuals. The Charter of the International Military Tribunal of 1945 recognizes the individual as the subject of international legal responsibility. According to Art. 6 leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices who participated in the formulation or implementation of a general plan or conspiracy aimed at committing crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity, are responsible for all actions committed by any persons with a view to the implementation of such a plan. The official position of the defendants, their position as heads of state or responsible officials of various government departments should not be considered as a basis for exemption from liability or mitigation of punishment (Article 7). The fact that the defendant acted at the behest of the government or the order of his superior does not relieve him of liability (art. 8).

Under the 1968 War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity Convention, in the event of the commission of any crime, namely war crimes and crimes against humanity, whether or not committed during war or V Peaceful time, as defined in the Charter of the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal, no statute of limitations applies.

The subjects of responsibility are representatives of public authorities and private persons who act as perpetrators of these crimes or accomplices in such crimes or directly incite others to commit such crimes, or participate in a conspiracy to commit such crimes, regardless of their degree of completion, as well as representatives public authorities allowing them to be committed (Article 2).

The Convention obliges States parties to take all necessary domestic measures, legislative or otherwise, aimed at in accordance with international law create all conditions for the extradition of persons referred to in Art. 2 of this convention.

The individual is subject to international legal responsibility, and under the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, persons who commit genocide or any other act (for example, complicity in genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide) are punished regardless of whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, officials, or private individuals Persons accused of committing genocide and other such acts should be tried by the competent court of the state in whose territory the act was committed, or by an international criminal court. Such a court may be established by the States Parties to the Convention or the UN.

2. Giving an individual the right to appeal to an international
other judicial institutions. According to Art. 25 European Convention
on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950, any person or
a group of persons has the right to send a petition to the European Commission
on human rights. Such a petition must contain persuasive
evidence that these individuals are victims of violations
respective State party to the Convention of their
rights. Applications are deposited Secretary General
Council of Europe 1 . The Commission may consider the case
niyu only after, in accordance with generally recognized
international law exhausted all internal
means of protection and only within six months from the date of adoption
final internal decision.

According to Art. 190 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of ​​1982, an individual has the right to sue a state party to the Convention and demand that the case be heard by the Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

The individual's right to appeal to international judicial bodies is recognized in the constitutions of many states. In particular, paragraph 3 of Art. 46 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation states: everyone has the right, in accordance with the international treaties of the Russian Federation, to apply to international bodies for the protection of human rights and freedoms, if all available domestic means have been exhausted legal protection(Article 46).

3. Determination of the legal status of certain categories of individuals
dov. According to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, personal
The status of a refugee is determined by the laws of the country of his domicile or,
if he does not have one, the laws of his country of residence. Kon
vention secures the right of refugees to work for hire, the choice
professions, freedom of movement, etc.

international convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, 1990 states that every migrant worker and every family member everywhere has the right to recognition of his legal personality. This, of course, is primarily about the recognition of international legal personality, since according to Art. 35 of the Convention, states must not interfere with the international migration of workers and members of their families.

International law also determines the legal status of a married woman, a child, and other categories of individuals.

The above examples give grounds to assume that states, for a number of problems (even a few), endow individuals with the qualities of international legal personality. The volume of such legal personality, no doubt, will grow and expand, because each historical epoch gives rise to its own subject of international law.

For a long time, only states were the only full-fledged subjects of international law. In the XX century. new subjects - intergovernmental organizations, as well as nations and peoples fighting for their independence. In the 21st century the scope of the legal personality of individuals will be expanded, the legal personality of other collective entities (for example, international non-governmental entities, transnational corporations, church associations) will be recognized.

Opponents of recognizing an individual as a subject of international law as the main argument in support of their position refer to the fact that individuals cannot conclude international public law treaties and thus cannot participate in the creation of international law norms. Indeed, this is a fact. But in any area of ​​law, its subjects have inadequate rights and obligations. For example, in international law, treaty capacity is fully inherent only in sovereign states. Other entities - intergovernmental organizations, state-like entities, and nations and peoples fighting for independence - have limited contractual capacity.

As Prince E.N. Trubetskoy noted, anyone who is able to have rights is called a subject of law, regardless of whether he actually uses them or not 1 .

Individuals have international rights and obligations, as well as the ability to provide (for example, through international judiciary) fulfillment by subjects of international law of international legal norms. This is quite enough to recognize in an individual the qualities of a subject of international law

20. The concept of recognition And its legal consequences.

International legal recognition- it is a unilateral voluntary act of the state in which it states that it recognizes the emergence of a new subject and intends to maintain official relations with it.

The history of international relations knows cases of immediate recognition of new states and governments, as well as stubborn refusals to recognize it. For example, the United States was recognized in the 18th century. France at a time when they had not yet completely freed themselves from dependence on England. The Republic of Panama was recognized by the United States in 1903 literally two weeks after its formation. The Soviet government was recognized by the United States only in 1933, that is, 16 years after its formation.

Recognition usually takes the form of a state or group of states addressing the government of the emerging state and declaring the extent and nature of its relationship with the newly emerged state. Such a statement, as a rule, is accompanied by an expression of a desire to establish diplomatic relations with the recognized state and to exchange representations. For example, in a telegram from the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR to the Prime Minister of Kenya dated December 11, 1963, it was noted that the Soviet government “solemnly declares its recognition of Kenya as an independent and sovereign state and expresses its readiness to establish diplomatic relations with it and exchange diplomatic missions at the level of embassies ".

In principle, a declaration of the establishment of diplomatic relations is the classical form of recognition of a state, even if the proposal for the establishment of such relations does not contain a declaration of official recognition.

Recognition does not create a new subject of international law. It can be complete, final and official. This kind of recognition is called the recognition of her ^re. An inconclusive confession is called ye gasto.

Confession be Gaso (actual) takes place in those cases when the recognizing state does not have confidence in the strength of the recognized subject of international law, and also when he (the subject) considers himself a temporary entity. This type of recognition can be implemented, for example, through the participation of recognized entities in international conferences, multilateral treaties, international organizations. For example, there are states in the UN that do not recognize each other, but this does not prevent them from participating normally in its work. As a rule, the recognition of s!e Gasto does not entail the establishment of diplomatic relations. Trade, financial and other relations are established between states, but there is no exchange of diplomatic missions.

Since the recognition of an unemployed is temporary, it may be withdrawn if the missing conditions required for recognition are not met. The withdrawal of recognition takes place when recognizing ye. ("the yoke of a rival government that managed to win a strong position, or when recognizing the sovereignty of a state that has annexed another state. For example, Great Britain took back in 1938 the recognition of Ethiopia (Abyssinia) as an independent state in connection with the recognition<1е ]иге аннексию этой страны Италией.

Confession ye dogge (official) is expressed in official acts, for example, in resolutions of intergovernmental organizations, final documents of international conferences, in government statements, in joint communiqués of states, etc. This type of recognition is realized, as a rule, by establishing diplomatic relations, concluding agreements on political , economic, cultural and other issues.

In the practice of recognizing states, there were many cases where the form of recognition was directly indicated in the application for recognition. For example, the British note of February 2, 1924, noted that the British government still recognizes the government of the USSR within the territory of the former Russian Empire, which is subject to its authority. Moreover, this note emphasized that "the recognition of the Soviet Government of Russia automatically brings into force all the agreements concluded between the two countries before the Russian revolution, with the exception of those whose term has formally expired."

Recognition ah Nos is a temporary or one-time recognition, recognition for a given case, a given purpose.

State recognition. According to D. I. Feldman, the recognition of the state is at the same time a kind of offer to establish legal relations with the recognized state. Nevertheless, in principle, recognition is a political act of two states - recognizing and being recognized 1 . In the science of international law, the following two theories have been formulated to explain the role and significance of the recognition of states.

21. Types of recognition

Distinguish between the recognition of states and the recognition of governments.

For state recognition There are two theories: constitutive and declarative. The first proceeds from the fact that only recognition makes a state a subject of international law. According to the second, most recognized, recognition only states the emergence of a new state and facilitates contacts with it.

There is no obligation to recognize a state, but prolonged non-recognition can seriously complicate relations between states. Recognition can be explicit (the government's declaration of recognition of the state), but sometimes it can be seen in certain actions - for example, in a proposal to establish diplomatic relations.

There are two forms of state recognition: de jure and de facto.

De jure recognition is complete, final, entails the establishment of diplomatic relations.

De facto recognition does not entail the establishment of diplomatic relations, is an expression of uncertainty that this subject will exist for a long time.

Government Recognition is a voluntary act of the government of an already recognized state, indicating that it, firstly, considers the government of another state capable of representing this state and, secondly, intends to maintain official relations with it. Government recognition can be either complete and final or temporary, limited by certain conditions.

De jure recognition of the new government is expressed in the declaration and such recognition; it is retroactive.

De facto recognition does not mean full recognition of the competence of individual authorities; it can be expressed in the signing of agreements of a temporary or limited nature.

22. The concept of succession

succession- this is the transfer of rights and obligations as a result of the change of one state by another in bearing responsibility for the international relations of a territory. For example, the unification of Germany, the separation of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia from the USSR in 1991, the collapse of the USSR, etc. In all these cases, the question arises of the impact of changes on international obligations, the fate of property, or, in other words, succession.

Under the auspices of the UN, two conventions on succession have been adopted: the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States in Respect of Treaties of 1978 and the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States in Respect of State Property, State Archives and Public Debts of 1983 (hereinafter referred to as the 1983 Convention). Both of these conventions did not become effective, however, they are actually applied without even gaining the required number of ratifications.

23. Succession in respect of international treaties.

The succession does not concern treaties that established boundaries and their regime, as well as obligations regarding the use of any territory established in favor of a foreign state.

When a part of the territory passes from one state to another, the principle of mobility of treaty boundaries, according to which the boundaries of the treaty are reduced or expanded along with the boundaries of the state. The exceptions are those treaties that are directly related to the ceded territory. This also applies to membership in the UN. As for the state formed on the seceded territory, when deciding on the obligations of the new state under the treaties of the predecessor state, political factors play an important role, but traditionally the new state does not bear obligations under the treaties of the predecessor state.

24. Succession in relation to state property.

Main rules on succession in relation to state property are contained in the 1983 Convention. These rules apply only to state property of the predecessor state. The succession regime does not apply to the rights and obligations of individuals and legal entities.

With regard to compensation for property passing to the successor state, the transfer of ownership should take place without compensation, unless otherwise agreed by the states concerned or provided for by a decision of the relevant international body (Article 11 of the 1983 Convention). At the same time, the 1983 Convention stipulates that its provisions are without prejudice to any question of just satisfaction between the predecessor State and the successor State which may arise as a result of succession in the division of a State or the separation of part of its territory from it.

The rules of succession establish a different regime for the transfer of movable and immovable property. When states unite, all state property of the predecessor states passes to the successor state. When a state is divided and two or more successor states are formed on its territory:

Preceding state immovable property
nika passes to that successor state, on terri
the torii of which it is located;

Immovable property located outside
lamy of the predecessor state, passes to the state
successor states, as specified in the 1983 Convention,
"in fair shares";

movable property of the predecessor state
ka related to its activities in relation to the territories,
which are the object of succession, proceeds to the
the respective successor State; other movable property
the succession passes to the successors "in equal shares". In the case of the transfer of part of the territory of one state to another, the transfer of state property is regulated by an agreement between these states.

The provisions on succession in relation to state property do not apply in respect of nuclear weapons, which are also such property.

25.Succession in relation to state archives.

Concerning state archives, then the 1983 Convention provides for the obligation of the predecessor State to take measures to prevent damage or destruction of archives that pass to the successor State. The succession does not apply to archives which are located in the territory of the predecessor State but belong to a third State under the internal law of the predecessor State (Article 24 of the 1983 Convention). When the states unite and form one successor state, the state archives of the predecessor states pass to it. When a state is divided, when several successor states arise in its place, a part of the archives of the predecessor state, which must be located on the territory of the successor state for the normal administration of this territory, passes to this state. Another part of the archives, which is directly related to its territory, also passes to him.

When a part of its territory is separated from the state, on which a new state is formed, a part of the archives of the predecessor state, which for the purposes of the normal administration of the separated territory should be located on this territory, passes to the successor state. Similar rules apply when a seceding part of a state merges with another state. By agreement between the predecessor State and the successor State, other rules of succession may be established with regard to State archives, but this should not violate the right of the peoples of these States to development and information about their history and cultural heritage.

26. Succession in respect of public debts.

The 1983 Convention also governs the succession of States in respect of government debts. Succession, except in special cases, does not prejudice the rights of those who provided the loan. When states unite and form one successor state, the state debts of the predecessor states pass to it.

When the state is divided into several parts, and unless the successor states agree otherwise, the state debt passes to them in an equitable share, taking into account the property, rights and interests that pass to them in connection with the state debt. A similar rule, in the absence of an agreement, applies when a part of the territory of a state is separated and a successor state is formed on it, or when a part of the territory that has seceded is united with another state, and also when part of the territory is transferred from one state to another.

27. Succession in respect of nationality of natural persons

Succession of States in respect of the nationality of natural persons. As the New Zealand jurist O'Connell rightly notes, "the consequences of a change in sovereignty for the citizenship of the inhabitants (of the territory affected by the succession) are one of the most difficult problems in the field of legal rules on the succession of the state" 1 .

The issue of nationality in the case of succession of states requires the development and adoption of a universal convention. Although nationality is mainly governed by the internal law of a state, it is directly related to the international legal order. It is no coincidence that on May 14, 1997, the Council of Europe adopted the European Convention on Nationality, which contains, in particular, provisions relating to the loss and acquisition of nationality in cases of succession of states. Another body of the Council of Europe - the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) - adopted in September 1996 a Declaration on the effects of state succession on the citizenship of natural persons.

The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights was the first international document that enshrines "the right of every person to a citizenship." The 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child recognize the right of every child to acquire a nationality.

The UN International Law Commission has developed a "Draft Articles on the Nationality of Individuals in Connection with the Succession of States". The main provisions of this document are as follows.

Any person who, on the date of the succession of States, had the nationality of the predecessor State, regardless of the manner in which that nationality was acquired, is entitled to the nationality of at least one of the affected States. It does not matter whether they acquired the nationality of the predecessor State by birth, by virtue of the principle D13 oI (rights of the soil) or by virtue of the santii (right of blood), either by naturalization, or even as a result of a previous succession of states.

Affected States shall take all appropriate measures to prevent persons who, on the date of the succession of States, had the nationality of the predecessor State from becoming stateless as a result of such succession. Every international treaty transfer of territory should include provisions to ensure that no person becomes stateless as a result of such transfer.

Each State is under an obligation, without undue delay, to enact legislation relating to nationality and other related matters arising from the succession of States. This was precisely the situation in the case of the emergence of a number of newly independent states. For example, simultaneously with the division of Czechoslovakia, the Czech Republic on December 29, 1992 adopted the Law on the Acquisition and Loss of Citizenship, and Croatia, with the declaration of its independence on June 28, 1991, adopted the Law on Citizenship.

The granting of nationality in connection with the succession of states takes place on the date of the succession of states. The same applies to the acquisition of nationality as a result of the exercise of an option if, between the date of the succession of States and the date of exercise of such option, the persons concerned would have become stateless. The successor State is not required to grant its nationality to affected persons if they have their habitual residence in another State and also have the nationality of that or any other State. The successor State shall not grant its nationality to affected persons who have their habitual residence in another State against the will of the affected persons, unless they would otherwise become stateless.

When the acquisition or loss of nationality in connection with the succession of States affects the unity of the family, the States concerned shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the family remains united or is reunited. In the post-World War I treaties, the general policy was to ensure that the members of any family acquired the same nationality as the head of the family, whether the latter acquired it automatically or by option. The principle of family unity, for example, was enshrined in Art. 37, 85, 91, 116 and 113 of the Peace Treaty between the Allied and Associated Powers and Germany of 1919; Art. 78-82 of the Peace Treaty between the Allied and Associated Powers and Austria, 1919; Art. 9 of the Tartu Peace Treaty of December 11, 1920 regarding the cession of the Petsamo region by Russia to Finland; Art. 21 and 31-36 of the Lausanne Treaty of 1923

When part or parts of the territory of a State secede from that State and form one or more successor States while the predecessor State continues to exist, the successor State shall grant its nationality to: (a) the persons concerned who have their habitual residence in its territory; b) having a proper legal connection with the administrative-territorial unit of the predecessor state, which became part of that successor state.

The principle of habitual residence was applied in the creation of the free city of Danzig (Article 105 of the Versailles Peace Treaty of 1919) and the dismemberment of the Austro-Hungarian Empire (Article 70 of the Saint-Germain Peace Treaty of 1919). It was later applied when Bangladesh separated from Pakistan in 1971, and also when Ukraine (Article 2 of the Law on Citizenship of Ukraine of 1991) and Belarus (Article 2 of the Law on Citizenship of the Republic of Belarus of 1991) became independent after the collapse of the USSR. The place of birth criterion was applied in the case of the secession of Eritrea from Ethiopia in 1993.

28. Law of international treaties, its sources and codification.

Law of international treaties - This is a branch of international law, which is a set of international legal norms that regulate the relations of subjects of international law regarding the conclusion, execution and termination of international treaties.

The main sources of the law of international treaties are the conventions developed by the International Law Commission of the United Nations:

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
1969;

Vienna Convention on the Succession of States with respect to
shenii international treaties of 1978;

United Nations Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States
gifts and international organizations 1986

The term "international treaty"

According to the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the term "treaty" means an international agreement concluded between States in writing and governed by international law, whether such agreement is contained in one instrument, two or more related instruments, and also regardless of its specific name.

The Law of the Republic of Belarus dated October 23, 1991 No. 1188-KhP "On International Treaties of the Republic of Belarus" (as amended by the Law dated November 15, 2004 \ g d 331-3 defines an international treaty of the Republic of Belarus as an interstate, intergovernmental or international treaty of interdepartmental nature, concluded in writing by the Republic of Belarus with a foreign state (foreign states) and (or) with an international organization (international organizations), which is governed by international law, regardless of whether the agreement is contained in one document or in several related documents, and also regardless of its specific name and method of conclusion (treaty, agreement, convention, decision, pact, protocol, exchange of letters or notes, etc.).

29. The procedure for concluding contracts.

The conclusion of an international treaty consists of two stages:

1) coordination of wills regarding the text of the treaty;

2) agreement of wills regarding the obligation to
dialect.

First stage the conclusion of a bilateral treaty consists of negotiations between the parties and reaching agreement on the developed text, and when concluding a multilateral treaty, this stage consists of the development and adoption of the text of the treaty by an international conference or body of an international organization.

To participate in the negotiations, the representative must have the authority. Without the need to present credentials, they are considered to represent their state:

a) heads of state, heads of government and ministers
foreign affairs - for the purpose of performing all acts relating to
seeking to conclude an agreement;

b) heads of diplomatic missions - in order to
adoption of the text of the treaty between the accrediting State
stvom and the state in which they are accredited;

c) representatives authorized by states before
put them at an international conference or in an international
home organization, or in one of its bodies - in order to
adoption of the text of the treaty at such a conference, at such
organization or such body.

Once the text of the treaty has been agreed upon and adopted, it becomes necessary to somehow fix that this text is final and not subject to change by the delegates. The procedure by which the adopted text of a treaty is declared final is called establishing the authenticity of the text. This is a special sub-stage in the conclusion of an international treaty, since any government, before assuming obligations under the treaty, must know exactly what its final content is. The procedure for establishing the authenticity of the text is determined either in the text itself or by agreement between the contracting states. Currently, the following forms of establishing the authenticity of the text of international treaties are used: initialing, inclusion of the text of the treaty in the final act of the international conference at which it was adopted, inclusion of the text of the treaty in the resolution of the international organization, etc. In addition, if after the adoption of the text of the international treaty there is its signing, the conclusion of the contract, as it were, bypasses the stage of establishing the authenticity of the text.

initialing - this is the establishment of the authenticity of the text of the treaty by the initials of the authorized contracting states as evidence that this agreed text of the treaty is final. Initialing can only apply to individual articles and is usually used when concluding bilateral treaties. Since it is essentially not a signing, since it does not express the consent of the state to be bound by an international treaty, special powers are not required for this procedure. Its purpose is to be evidence of the final agreement on the text of an international treaty. After the initialing, the text cannot be changed even by agreement between the delegates. Initialing avoids possible disputes and misunderstandings regarding the final wording of the provisions of the treaty. This is also its importance. But the initialing does not replace the signing of the treaty.

Second stage conclusion of an international treaty consists of individual actions of states, which, depending on the terms of a specific treaty, may be different.

The consent of a State to be bound by a treaty may be expressed by signing the treaty, exchanging the documents constituting the treaty, ratifying the treaty, accepting it, approving it, acceding to it, or in any other way agreed upon by the parties.

Signing an agreement depending on the terms of the agreement, it can be the completion of the process of its conclusion (if the agreement enters into force from the moment of signing) or one of the stages of conclusion (if the agreement requires ratification or approval). Ratification - it is an act of approval of the treaty by one of the highest bodies of the state, which expresses consent to be bound by the treaty. Mandatory ratification is subject to treaties that provide for it or in respect of which the corresponding intention of the parties is otherwise established. approval, acceptance those treaties are subject to which the parties have provided for this procedure and which are not subject to ratification. Accession - it is an act of consent to be bound by a treaty already concluded by other states. The possibility of accession must be provided for in the agreement itself or agreed with its participants.

30. Form and structure of the contract.

The form of the contract (oral or written) is chosen by the parties, but the written form is dominant.

An international treaty can be called differently: convention, agreement, pact, exchange of notes.

The contract consists of three parts:

preamble(contains an indication of the motives and objectives of the contract);

main part(defines the subject of the contract, the rights and obligations of the parties);

final part(establishes the procedure for the entry into force of the treaty and its duration).

The language of the agreement is determined by the parties. Usually these are the languages ​​of both contracting parties and one more - neutral. Treaties may also be concluded in the official languages ​​of the UN. The so-called alternate rule: in any enumeration of the contracting states, their representatives, capitals, the first place should always be the state (representative, etc.) that owns this copy of the agreement, which includes texts in both languages.

31. Duration of the contract.

In international law, the principle “treaties must be respected” operates, according to which a party to a treaty must not only comply with this treaty, but also not conclude new ones that contradict an already concluded one. Failure to comply with this principle can lead to international legal responsibility.

The parties may not invoke their internal law to justify non-performance of the contract.

As for the validity of the treaty in time and space, according to the terms, the agreements are divided into fixed-term, indefinite, indefinite-term, and according to the scope in space - into universal (can apply to states of the whole world) and regional (assuming the participation of states of one region).

  • III. Philosophy requires a science that determines the possibility, principles and scope of all a priori knowledge.
  • IV. Write-off, change in the value of the estimated liability
  • Lt;question>What principles should be followed during standardization?
  • V. All theoretical sciences based on reason contain a priori synthetic judgments as principles

    • The principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations is one of the fundamental imperative principles of modern international law. Originated in the form of international legal custom pacta sunt servanda on early stages development of statehood, and is currently reflected in numerous bilateral and multilateral international agreements.

    As a universally recognized norm of behavior of subjects, this principle is enshrined in the UN Charter, the preamble of which emphasizes the determination of UN members to create conditions under which justice and respect for obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be observed. According to paragraph 2 of Art. 2 of the Charter, all Members of the United Nations shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed under this Charter in order to secure to them all collectively the rights and benefits arising from membership in the membership of the Organization. The development of international law clearly confirms the universal character of P.d.w.m.o. According to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969, each treaty in force is binding on its parties and must be performed by them in good faith. A party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as an excuse for its non-performance of a treaty. Scope of P.d.m.o. expanded markedly in last years which was reflected in the wording of the relevant international legal documents. Thus, according to the Declaration on the Principles of International Law of 1970, each state is obliged to fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by it in accordance with the UN Charter, the obligations arising from the generally recognized norms and principles of international law, as well as. obligations arising from international treaties valid in accordance with generally recognized principles and norms of international law. The authors of the Declaration sought to emphasize the need for conscientious observance, first of all, of those obligations that are covered by the notion of “generally recognized principles and norms of international law” or follow from them. Different legal and socio-cultural systems have their own understanding of good faith, which directly affects the observance by states commitments made. The concept of good faith has been enshrined in a large number of international treaties, resolutions of the UN General Assembly, in declarations of states, etc. However, it should be recognized that determining the exact legal content of the concept of good faith in real situations can be difficult. It seems that the legal content of good faith should be derived from the text of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, mainly the sections "Application of Treaties" (Articles 28-30) and "Interpretation of Treaties" (Articles 31-33). The application of the provisions of the treaty is largely determined by its interpretation. From this point of view, it can be assumed that the application of the treaty, which is interpreted in good faith (in accordance with the usual meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context, and also in the light of the object and purpose of the treaty), will be conscientious. P.d.w.m.o. only applies to valid agreements. This means that the principle in question applies only to international treaties concluded voluntarily and on the basis of equality. Any unequal international treaty, first of all, violates the sovereignty of the state and, as such, violates the UN Charter, since the United Nations is based on the principle sovereign equality all its members, who, in turn, assumed the obligation to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples. It should be considered generally accepted that any treaty that is contrary to the UN Charter is null and void, and no state can invoke such a treaty or enjoy its benefits.