Exemples d'utilisation de Simple interpretative en Anglais et leurs traductions en Français
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Clearly, simple interpretative declarations did not require confirmation.
Support was expressed for the distinction drawn by the Special Rapporteur between conditional and simple interpretative declarations.
Similarly, simple interpretative declarations can be modified at any time draft.
Fulfilment of this requirement is also necessary in order for a simple interpretative declaration to have the effects provided for in guideline 1.5.3.
However, the matter was complicated by the existence not only of conditional interpretative declarations but also of simple interpretative declarations.
Thus, restrictions on the admissibility of simple interpretative declarations may only derive from the treaty itself.
With regard to draft guideline 2.4.1,there was no reason in principle why the draft guidelines should stipulate which persons were entitled to make simple interpretative declarations.
Nevertheless, there was an exception to that: simple interpretative declarations to which draft guideline 1.5.3 applied.
In cases of a simple interpretative declaration, however, the mere fact of proposing an interpretation which is not in accordance with the provisions of the treaty in no way changes the declaring State's position with regard to the treaty.
Several States felt that the latter were closer to reservations than to simple interpretative declarations, while others insisted that the two concepts were different.
This means that a simple interpretative declaration is not prohibited, or that its formulation is not time-limited, unless the treaty in question contains special rules in that regard translated for the report.
The method indicated in draft guideline 1.3.1 can be transposed to the distinction between simple interpretative declarations and conditional interpretative declarations.
In view of the effects that simple interpretative declarations could produce, pursuant to draft guideline 1.5.3, draft guideline 2.4.2 could remain unchanged.
Since estoppel was entirely alien tothe law of treaties, there was no justification for including simple interpretative declarations in the framework of the draft articles on reservations to treaties.
Ideally, they should disregard simple interpretative declarations, except in draft guidelines 1.2 and 1.2.1, which could be combined in a single text to be renumbered 1.2 and entitled"Interpretative declarations.
Draft guideline 1.3.1 would then apply onlyto conditional interpretative declarations, and the commentary to it would point to the inadvisability of distinguishing between simple interpretative declarations and reservations.
The same could not be said, however, of a simple interpretative declaration, which could certainly produce legal effects, but only through estoppel.
Consequently, in accordance with guidelines 1.2 and 2.4.3, both the party to the treaty which had formulated the reservation andany other party thereto should be able to formulate a simple interpretative declaration concerning the reservation at any time unless to do so was prohibited by the treaty.
It should be noted, however,that in order for a simple interpretative declaration to constitute a reservation"in disguise" and, consequently, to fall within the scope of the guidelines, it must be formulated in writing.
However, it now seems fairly obvious that the legal regime of conditional interpretative declarations would be infinitely closer to that of reservations than would the rules applicable to simple interpretative declarations, which essentially fall under the“general rule of interpretation” codified in article 31 of the 1969 and 1986 Vienna Conventions.
But it may also be true for simple interpretative declarations which may, in principle, be formulated at any time, either because the treaty itself sets the period in which they can be made or because of circumstances surrounding their formulation.
The current text of paragraph(a)should therefore be replaced by:"A statement which appears to be a simple interpretative declaration concerning a reservation but which purports to exclude or modify the legal effect of the treaty.
Unlike the modification of simple interpretative declarations, the modification of conditional interpretative declarations was similar to a late formulation, which could be established only if it did not encounter the opposition of any one of the other parties.
According to draft guideline 2.5.12,States can withdraw simple interpretative declarations whenever they want, provided that that is done by a competent authority.
The commentary should explain that simple interpretative declarations could have legal effects only in the context of draft guideline 1.5.3, and that because of the marked differences between conditional interpretative declarations and reservations a distinction was drawn between them in draft guideline 1.3.
Such a declaration was much closer to a reservation than a simple interpretative declaration, and the temporal element was therefore essential, which it was not for simple interpretative declarations.
International law knows no limits to the formulation of a simple interpretative declaration since treaties, regardless of the hierarchical place of their provisions in international law, are in principle interpreted in a decentralized manner and, for the entire period of their existence, must be applied and consequently interpreted.
Firstly, this could be an opportunity to recall that a simple interpretative declaration may in principle be formulated at any time-- which none of the draft guidelines adopted so far currently do, other than draft guideline 1.2, which does so by omission, since it does not introduce any time element into the definition of interpretative declarations.
Since the rules relating to the modification of a simple interpretative declaration are the same as those relating to their formulation, the Special Rapporteur suggested that it would probably be enough to make slight changes in the text of and the commentaries to draft guidelines 2.4.3 and 2.4.6(which have already been adopted) so that they combine the formulation and the modification of interpretative declarations.