Relations between countries are regulated through treaties. Cancellation of obligations under them is called "denunciation". What is it and how is this procedure carried out?
International treaty
To understand
what denunciation of a treaty is, we first examine the concept of an international agreement. An agreement concluded between states or other
subjects of international law, regulated by the norms of this branch of law, is called an international treaty.
It must be executed in writing, may consist of one or more documents. Its essence is certain obligations undertaken by the parties, or general rules of behavior for all. In this case, the official document may be called in completely different ways: the convention, the charter, and the agreement. Entry into force of the declared obligations may occur immediately after the signing of the document, or after its ratification, or after conducting mutual procedures. All this is indicated in the text of the agreement. It also contains the conditions under which the contract loses its legal force. For example, the expiration of its term or the terms of denunciation of the agreement.
Denunciation concept
The state’s refusal of its obligations during the conclusion of the contract is called “denunciation”. What does this mean in practice and how is it implemented? First, denunciation should be provided for by the text of the agreement. Secondly, violation of the terms of its conduct may be a good reason for invalidating the procedure. Thirdly, a unilateral withdrawal from the
terms of the contract without legal grounds is not
denunciation at all
. What is this Cancellation is a unilateral violation of the terms of the agreement and the withdrawal of obligations under it. The cancellation is provided by international law only in cases where the obligations were assumed by the predecessor of the state or in case of violation of the terms by the other party. Otherwise, this act is considered unlawful.
Denunciation procedure
The procedure for the conduct of the act of denunciation must comply with international law or those provisions that are directly specified in the terminated agreement. So, it can be indications of the form and time when the denunciation will be held. What does this mean in practice? Advance written notice to the partner of the termination of the contract on the grounds specified in it. For example, changes in the conditions or circumstances of the implementation of the articles of the agreement, expiration of the terms. Only when these conditions are fulfilled does the denunciation of the international treaty take place. This is a completely legitimate act, not violating the agreement, but carried out in its execution. It should be noted that a number of international treaties have been identified for which denunciation is not provided for at all.
Article 56 of the Vienna Convention
In 1968, Vienna adopted the Convention on the Law of Treaties. It is interesting in the 56th article, which considers cases of unilateral termination of the agreement, if it is not provided for in the text. This is just one principle, but it is widely interpreted by lawyers. So, if the conditions of termination are not specified in the contract, but the intention was intended, then unilateral denunciation is permissible. That this makes it possible to unilaterally withdraw from the contract is understandable, but how to evaluate the wording of possible intentions and how to apply this principle in practice? It turns out a rather vague criterion, which is difficult to use and justify in most cases. It provides a legal loophole for withdrawing from most treaties.
Denunciation of the agreement on the Russian fleet in Ukraine
In 1997, the heads of Russia and Ukraine signed an agreement that the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation will be located in Crimea, on the territory of Ukraine. During the presidency of Dmitry Medvedev in Kharkov, bilateral agreements were also adopted on paying Ukraine for the use of naval bases and extending the stay of the Russian military in the Crimea for a quarter century after 2017, when the 1997 agreement expires.
The Ukrainian parliament has repeatedly raised the issue of denouncing an agreement on this issue, but each time the decision was postponed. After the annexation of Crimea to the Russian Federation, the Russian side already raised the issue of terminating the agreement. The argument is a change in the conditions for the fulfillment of obligations. Since the Crimean peninsula is now part of Russia, it should not pay Ukraine for the stay of its fleet. The Russian government sent a statement to the Ukrainian side. Denunciation of this agreement is necessary for Russia, as it hopes for the return of eleven billion dollars in court. It was for this amount that Ukraine received discounts on energy resources due to the fact that the parties planned the stay of the Russian fleet in Crimea after 2017 for a long period. The Ukrainian side considers it illegal to denounce the above agreements and intends to seek protection in international courts.