Subsequent Agreement And Subsequent Practice Under The Treaty Interpretation

Treaty interpretation plays an important role in the application of treaties and international practice.With the development of treaty interpretation theory and the increasing number of cases involved in treaties,treaty interpretations urgently require a valid interpretation method or authentic authoritative interpretation materials to define treaty interpretation.Thematic research on subsequent agreements and subsequent practice came into being.Article 31 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties has codified the rules for the interpretation of treaties and has the character of customary international law.The codification of treaty interpretation rules by the Convention helps to unify the practice of treaty interpretation by countries and international tribunals.However,because Article 31 of the Convention includes three different interpretation paths,there are too many elements to be considered in the interpretation,for example,"purpose and aim",subsequent agreement,subsequent practice,context,etc.need to be considered,leading to the state The international tribunal has a very large operating space in the practice of specific treaty interpretation,thereby increasing the uncertainty of the interpretation of the treaty to a certain extent.In order to enhance the certainty of treaty interpretation,it is particularly necessary and important to provide relevant guidelines for the specific treatyinterpretation practice of countries and international tribunals.It is in this sense that,starting in 2008,the International Law Commission began to study the issues of the "consensus agreement" and "subsequent practice" and adopted the draft conclusions on this issue in the second reading in 2018.To a large extent,this draft conclusion of the International Law Commission does clarify some important issues concerning the application of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice,provides certain predictability for the interpretation of treaties,and helps the practice of national and international tribunals.Unity and stability.Because of this,the draft conclusion has attracted great attention from scholars and countries since the second reading.Nevertheless,from the current domestic research,many scholars have studied the draft conclusion in a relatively shallow way,mainly as follows: it is easy to confuse the two;it is completely limited to the draft conclusion text and ignores the specific process of the text formation The explanation of some important words is obviously not enough.The purpose of this article,based on the process of forming the conclusions of the draft,focuses on the report submitted by the Special Rapporteur,the report of the Drafting Committee,the comments of governments,and the final draft conclusions of the National Law Commission.Key issues,so as to understand more deeply and accurately the focus of the debate encountered in the formulation of the draft conclusions,and to sort out and summarize the key issues of this type of game,so that the characteristics and connotations of subsequent agreements and subsequent practices can be individually confrontedCarry out in-depth research and deepen the accurate understanding of the two,so as to obtain some guiding conclusions and opinions.Through the research in this paper,we find that China should pay attention to the development of its own subsequent agreement and subsequent practice,pay attention to the collection and certification of the key evidence of the "agreement" recognition in the subsequent agreement,and actively express the "practical" behavior of subsequent practice to regulate bilateral The normative interpretation of multilateral treaties will enhance China’s ability to participate in the development of international relations and ultimately safeguard our national and international interests.