Abstract
The Preamble of the VCLT introduces the Convention’s core elements (3rd and 8th recital) and builds a bridge between the law of treaties and the principles of the UN Charter (4th, 5th, 6th and 7th recital). With a typical solemn intonation (1st, 2nd, 7th recital), the Preamble spotlights the Convention’s general objects and purposes as well as the UN Charter’s objectives and principles in order to support the interpretation of single treaty provisions (→ Art 31 MN 45, 50). By referring to core objectives and principles of the UN Charter (4th, 5th, 6th and 7th recital), the Preamble incorporates them into the Convention’s own framework in order to avoid conflicts between the treaty regime and the obligations flowing for the UN Charter (cf Art 103 UN Charter).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Cf MM Mbengue Preamble in MPEPIL (2008) MN 9.
- 2.
ICJ Rights of Nationals of the United States of America in Morocco (France v United States) [1952] ICJ Rep 176, 184.
- 3.
UNCLOT I 7 para 7; see also the statements by the representatives of Ecuador, Romania and Uruguay UNCLOT II 170 para 22, 171 para 29, 171 para 33.
- 4.
UN Doc A/CONF.39/L.4, UNCLOT III 263.
- 5.
UN Doc A/CONF.39/L.5, UNCLOT III 263.
- 6.
The amendment submitted by Ecuador (UN Doc A/CONF.39/L.44, UNCLOT III 271) introduced the phrase “principles of free consent and” to the 3rd recital; the amendment submitted by Sweden (UN Doc. A/CONF.39/L.43, UNCLOT III 271) added the phrase “and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law” to the 4th recital; the amendment submitted by Costa Rica and the Netherlands (UN Doc A/CONF.39/L.42 and Add.1, UNCLOT III 271) added the phrase “and of universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all” to the 6th recital; finally the amendment submitted by Switzerland (8th recital UN Doc A/CONF.39/L.45, UNCLOT III 271) was accepted with a slight but significant modification: the Swiss proposal originally included the words “which have not been expressly regulated by the provisions of the present Convention” (emphasis added).
- 7.
UNCLOT II 178 para 31.
- 8.
See the statement by the representative of Romania UNCLOT II 171 para 29.
- 9.
On the history of international treaties, see A Truyol y Serra Geschichte der Staatsverträge und Völkerrecht in R Marcic et al (eds) Festschrift Verdross (1971) 512; A Altman The Role of ‘Historical Prologue’ in the Hittite Vassal Treaties: An Early Experiment in Securing Treaty Compliance (2004) 6 Journal of the History of International Law 43.
- 10.
HWA Thirlway International Customary Law and Codification (1972).
- 11.
See on the pros and cons of putting the draft through the process of a diplomatic conference SR Crawford Fourth Report on State Responsibility, UN Doc A/CN.4/517, paras 22–23.
- 12.
DD Caron The ILC Articles on State Responsibility: The Paradoxical Relationship Between Form and Authority (2002) 96 AJIL 857.
- 13.
SR Waldock proposed to include the principles in the Preamble so as to demonstrate their importance [1966-I/2] YbILC 32, 37 para 71.
- 14.
The Ecuadorian amendment (UN Doc A/CONF.39/L.44, UNCLOT III 271) added the phrase “principles of free consent and”; The representative of Iraq interpreted the principle as a component of the notion of good faith, UNCLOT II 174 para 67.
- 15.
UN Doc A/CONF.39/L.43, UNCLOT III 271; see also the statement by the representative of Sweden UNCLOT II 170 para 19.
- 16.
RB Bilder International Third Party Dispute Settlement (1989) 17 Denver Journal of International Law and Politics 471, 474.
- 17.
A Brehio Good Offices of the Secretary-General as Preventive Measures (1998) 30 New York University JILP 589, 612.
- 18.
M Matsushita/TJ Schoenbaum/PC Mavroidis The World Trade Organization: Law, Practice, and Policy (2006) 115.
- 19.
Cf EJ Powell/SM Mitchell The International Court of Justice and the World’s Three Legal Systems (2007) 69 Journal of Politics 397. Very few universal agreements commit States Parties to obligatory judicial dispute settlement. Examples include the 1966 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Art 22) 660 UNTS 195, with 173 parties but altogether 25 reservations to Art 22; for the VCLT, see Art 66.
- 20.
Or ‘compulsory opinion clauses’; see the comprehensive study on ‘decisive advisory opinion clauses’ of C Dominicé Request of Advisory Opinions in Contentious Cases? in L Boisson de Chazournes et al (eds) International Organizations and International Dispute Settlement: Trends and Prospects (2002) 91–103; the ICJ has stressed that the decisive advisory opinion clause does not change the nature of the advisory opinion, ie it will not assume the nature of a judgment: ICJ Difference Relating to Immunity from Legal Process of a Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights (Advisory Opinion) [1999] ICJ Rep 62, para 25. If, however, the legal question is specific to the dispute, the opinion rendered by the court de facto has the legal effects of a judgment for the parties to the dispute, including the res iudicata authority flowing exclusively from the contractual clause: cf G Bacot Réflexion sur les clauses qui rendent obligatoires les avis consultatifs de la CPJI et de la CIJ (1980) 84 RGDIP 1027, 1060 et seq.
- 21.
SA Ghias International Judicial Lawmaking: A Theoretical and Political Analysis of the WTO Appellate Body (2006) 24 Berkeley JIL 534.
- 22.
For a definition of ‘international arbitration’, see the 1899 and 1907 Hague Conventions for Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, Arts 15 and 37 respectively.
- 23.
S Verosta Die Vertragsrechtskonferenz der Vereinten Nationen 1968/1969 und die Wiener Konvention über das Recht der Verträge (1969) 29 ZaöRV 654, 655.
- 24.
This phrase was introduced by Costa Rica and the Netherlands, UN Doc A/CONF.39/L.42 and Add.1, UNCLOT III 271.
- 25.
UN Doc A/CONF.39/L.45, UNCLOT III 271; the Swiss proposal originally included the words “which have not been expressly regulated by the provisions of the present Convention” (emphasis added), which was criticized as too far-reaching and as a limitation of the Convention’s scope, see the statement by the representative of Iraq UNCLOT II 174 para 68.
- 26.
See eg the preambles of the 1899 Hague Convention with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land, the 1907 Hague Convention Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
- 27.
For a different understanding, see the statement by the representative of Poland UNCLOT II 176 para 13; see also the Swiss amendment UN Doc A/CONF.39/L.45, UNCLOT III 271.
- 28.
See the statements by the representatives of Uruguay and Spain UNCLOT II 172, 173.
Selected Bibliography
MM Mbengue Preamble in MPEPIL (2008).
P You Le Préambule des traités internationaux (1941).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dörr, O., Schmalenbach, K. (2012). Preamble. In: Dörr, O., Schmalenbach, K. (eds) Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19291-3_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19291-3_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-19290-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-19291-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)