Sunday, November 28, 2010

Further "self-executing"


The March 29th, 2008 blog entry 'Medellin' looked at 'Medellin v Texas' and noted the apparent difference between "self-executing" and "non self-executing" treaties. An article at Opinio Juris, 'A Head-Spinning Self-Execution Story' discusses the issue of self-execution (and related confusion) through the prism of two defense trade treaties agreed to with the United Kingdom and Australia...

In both of these cases language was inserted into the treaty preamble texts declaring them to be self-executing. However when the Senate took up the ratification of the two treaties it declared them non self-executing notwithstanding the included language. Given that in Medellin the Supreme Court looked to the language of the relevant treaty to determine if it was self-executing or not, this would seem to raise a number of questions and this is discussed in the article...

No comments:

Post a Comment

 
back to top