The obligations of signatory states of an international treaty: from good faith to international obligation

Abstract

THE NATURE OF THE OBLIGATIONS IMPOSED ON A STATE WHICH SIGNS AN INTERNATIONAL TREATY IS ONE OF THE MOST DISCUSSED TOPICS IN INTERNATIONAL DEBATES. THIS IS DUE TO THE FACT THAT MANY STATES HAVE ADOPTED THE PRACTICE OF SIGNING INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS IN ORDER TO SATISFY POLITICAL DEMANDS, BUT WITHOUT THE INTENTION OF RATIFYING THEM, WHEN THEY WOULD ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR COMPLYING WITH TREATY CONTENT. THE AIM OF THIS ARTICLE IS TO ANALYSE THE DEGREE AND IMPORTANCE OF SUCH OBLIGATIONS CONCERNING BOTH TREATIES AND EXECUTIVE AGREEMENTS. TO THIS END, AN CONTENT ANALYSIS, WHOSE POINT OF DEPARTURE WAS THE TEXT OF THE VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES WAS UTILIZED. THE INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE TEXT WERE CARRIED OUT FOLLOWING GRAMMATICAL, HISTORICAL, TELEOLOGICAL AND PRACTICAL CRITERIA AND WERE BASED PRINCIPALLY ON DEBATES ORGANISED BY THE INTERNATIONAL LAW COMMISSION PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION OF THE VIENNA CONVENTION, AS WELL AS THE ACADEMIC LITERATURE. FINALLY, IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE SIGNING OF A TREATY HAS BEEN OF GROWING IMPORTANCE REGARDING THE INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS OF A STATE, RANGING FROM AN OBLIGATION OF GOOD FAITH IN THE CASE OF TREATIES TO FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR COMPLYING WITH THE CONTENT OF AN EXECUTIVE AGREEMENT, WHICH DOMINATES THE INTERNATIONAL AND BRAZILIAN ARENA.