Most international treaties envision a scenario in which the member states will have dispute both in the interpretation as well as in the application of the provisions of such treaties. Therefore, the international treaties make provision of mechanisms through which such disputes can be resolved amicably among the member states. This analysis explores the dispute resolution mechanism of four international treaties and compares the resolution mechanism outlined in the four treaties. The four treaties under analysis include the International Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the Protocols Thereto, Criminal Law Convention on Corruption, United Nations Convention against Corruption and Treaty on European Union on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests.
The International Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the Protocols Thereto is an international treaty that was signed during United Nation’s General Assembly held in Italy in 2000. This international treaty sought to enlist the support of member stated in the fight against transnational organized crime. The treaty is important because it highlights the seriousness with which the member states place on transnational organized crime and a collective resolve to deal with such transnational organized crimes. The Criminal Law Convention on Corruption is an international treaty in which the member states of the European Council agreed to criminalize certain corrupt practices within their respective jurisdictions. This treaty is equally important as it addresses itself to major economic crimes that hinder territorial and regional development. The United Nations Convention against Corruption and Treaty on European Union addresses issues of corruption among member states. This treaty is important because it addresses the specific aspects of dealing with corruption such as prevention, asset recovery and international cooperation among others. Lastly, Treaty on European Union, on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests was established to preserve the economic interests of the European Union member states as well as the interests of the European Union Taxpayers.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Each of the four treaties identified above makes provision for a mechanism for resolving disputes among member states that may arise due to the interpretation of the provisions of the treaty and in the implementation of such provisions. Despite the areas of similarity, a significant difference exists in the framework within which they resolve disputes. The International Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the Protocols Thereto encourages member states to resolve any disputes arising from the interpretation of its provision through negotiation. This international treaty further allows the disputing members to seek aberration if they are unable to agree within a reasonable time. The treaty further allows any of the disputing parties to seek the intervention of the international court of justice where they are not able to agree on the mode of arbitration.
Unlike in the case of the International Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the Protocols Thereto treaty, the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption outlines a clear arbitration body for member states that disagree on interpretation and application of the protocol. Under this treaty, the European Convention on Criminal Problems is mandated to carry out arbitration among member states that have disputes. Besides, this treaty equally recommends peaceful negotiation as the first step in dispute resolution. It also recommends the use of the International Court of justice where negotiation and other arbitration measures fail to work.
The United Nations Convention against Corruption provides a framework that is largely similar to the frameworks of the two treaties discussed above. Like the above international treaties, this treaty also recommends peaceful negotiation among the disputing member states as the first step of solving disputes arising from the interpretation as well as the application of this international treaty. It further recommends the use of arbitration and the international court of justice in cases where negotiation cannot resolve the dispute within a reasonable time. The major deviation of the framework of dispute settlement outlined in this treaty is that it allows member states not to be bound by the requirements to seek arbitration as well as the international court of justice when assenting to this international treaty. However, such member states can reconsider their stand and hence be bound by arbitration or international court of justice if they wish to do so in future.
Treaty on European Union concerning the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests largely deviates from the former treaties discussed above in the sense that it does not recommend peaceful negotiation as the first step in addressing disputes arising from interpretation as well as the application of this international treaty. On the contrary, this treaty requires the member states to report any dispute they may have in the explanation and application of the provisions of the treaty to the council at the initial stages of such disputes. Where the council is unable to provide arbitration within a reasonable time, this treaty then requires the disputing member states to approach the criminal court of justice.
In summary, several themes run through the dispute resolution mechanisms outlined in the different treaties discussed above. Except for the Treaty on European Union protecting the European Communities’ financial interests, the rest of the treaties discussed uphold the importance of negotiation in settling disputes. Moreover, all the four treaties require their member states to approach the international court of justice as a last resort in settling such disputes.
