New york: The Republic of Cyprus urged for clear terminology and criteria for non-legally binding International Instruments during the UN 6th Committee on the Report of the International Law Commission (ILC).
According to Cyprus News Agency, the Cypriot representative, Theodoulos Pittakis, addressed the Committee with a focus on Chapter IX concerning non-legally binding international agreements. He welcomed the work of Special Rapporteur Mathias Forteau and emphasized the importance of distinguishing treaties from non-binding instruments.
Cyprus aligned itself with the statement made by the European Union, reaffirming its appreciation for the ILC’s work, which it sees as crucial in international relations. Pittakis reiterated that the intention of the parties, as reflected in the document’s content and form, is central to assessing its legal nature.
However, Cyprus expressed reservations about the draft’s terminology. It refrains from using ‘international agreements’ to describe documents not intended to create legal rights or obligations under international law, warning that this usage could be misleading. Instead, Cyprus endorsed the use of ‘instrument’ as a more appropriate term, provided it is clearly defined to exclude unilateral acts.
Pittakis supported the Rapporteur’s view that the study should focus solely on written international instruments, excluding non-binding provisions in treaties, resolutions, and unilateral acts. Cyprus stressed that the study should be limited to instruments that would qualify as treaties if not for their non-binding nature.
Cyprus agreed that a document can be politically binding without being legally binding and noted its domestic practice of conducting a case-by-case legal assessment by the Law Office of the Republic. This assessment determines the instrument’s nature, evaluates its compatibility with the Constitution and national legislation, and conducts a comprehensive legal risk assessment.
On the criteria of intent, Cyprus concurred that the intention of the parties is the primary criterion but noted that an express statement of intent is not necessarily decisive. It endorsed the Rapporteur’s suggestion to add ‘generally’ before ‘sufficient’ in Draft conclusion 6 to reflect broader practice, and supported identifying objective indicators to determine legal nature when intent is not explicitly stated.
Referring to national practice, the representative highlighted that Cyprus has issued its own practical manual based on accepted jurisprudence and doctrine on treaty law, clarifying that legally non-binding instruments should not contain provisions or language creating legally binding rights and obligations.
In conclusion, Cyprus congratulated the ILC and the Special Rapporteur for their exemplary work and expressed readiness to engage further once the third report and draft conclusions on distinguishing treaties from non-binding instruments are finalized.