Belilos V. Switzerland Case Study
This statement introduces an approach that goes further than the wording of the article, because they introduce two different groups of reservations. The first one is reservations that seek to exclude certain provisions of a treaty. The second group is reservations that seek to exclude or modify the legal effect of the treaty as a whole, with respect to certain specific aspects. In other words, it is possible to have a reservation that does not reserve against "certain provisions". A state can reserve against "certain specific aspects" of a treaty.
Common for the two groups drawn up in this statement, is that they both seek to limit the legal effect for “certain provisions” or “certain specific aspects”. The first group is when States for …show more content…
Even though the Convention on the European Convention on Human Rights separates from other human rights treaties because it has its own judicial body, looking at their case law for guidance can still be useful.
In the Belilos v. Switzerland case, the Court decided that a interpretative declaration was to be treated like a reservation. Further, because of article 64 § 1 of the Convenetion, that requires "precision and clarity" , the reservation in question fell short of the rule that "reservations must not be of a general character". The Court also explains that an invalid reservation "is meant in particular a reservation couched in terms that are too vague or broad for it to be possible to determine their exact meaning and scope."
logical that the same approach should be taken in regards to reservations after the VCLT- it is within the object and purpose of making reservations being able to determine their meaning and …show more content…
Switzerland case, the first material requirement of a reservation is that it can only reserve against certain specific aspect. By specific aspects we mean that you have to specify what parts of the treaty you are reserving against. This in a way so that it is possible to understand the meaning and the scope of the reservation. If this is not possible, the specification requirement is not satisfied.
3.3. Reservations relating to internal law – the requirement that the internal law has to be in force
A lot of the countries that has acceded to CEDAW has made reservations. Most of them concern specific articles. Many of the countries with Islamic traditions, has made reservations regarding Sharia law that are of a more general character. This is common for other human rights treaties as well.
However, there seems to be one important difference in Brunei Darussalam's reservation to CEDAW. Countries like Oman has made a similar reservation concerning Sharia law and Islamic traditions, but the difference lies in the fact that they are reserving with regards to laws “in force”. This raises another important
Common for the two groups drawn up in this statement, is that they both seek to limit the legal effect for “certain provisions” or “certain specific aspects”. The first group is when States for …show more content…
Even though the Convention on the European Convention on Human Rights separates from other human rights treaties because it has its own judicial body, looking at their case law for guidance can still be useful.
In the Belilos v. Switzerland case, the Court decided that a interpretative declaration was to be treated like a reservation. Further, because of article 64 § 1 of the Convenetion, that requires "precision and clarity" , the reservation in question fell short of the rule that "reservations must not be of a general character". The Court also explains that an invalid reservation "is meant in particular a reservation couched in terms that are too vague or broad for it to be possible to determine their exact meaning and scope."
logical that the same approach should be taken in regards to reservations after the VCLT- it is within the object and purpose of making reservations being able to determine their meaning and …show more content…
Switzerland case, the first material requirement of a reservation is that it can only reserve against certain specific aspect. By specific aspects we mean that you have to specify what parts of the treaty you are reserving against. This in a way so that it is possible to understand the meaning and the scope of the reservation. If this is not possible, the specification requirement is not satisfied.
3.3. Reservations relating to internal law – the requirement that the internal law has to be in force
A lot of the countries that has acceded to CEDAW has made reservations. Most of them concern specific articles. Many of the countries with Islamic traditions, has made reservations regarding Sharia law that are of a more general character. This is common for other human rights treaties as well.
However, there seems to be one important difference in Brunei Darussalam's reservation to CEDAW. Countries like Oman has made a similar reservation concerning Sharia law and Islamic traditions, but the difference lies in the fact that they are reserving with regards to laws “in force”. This raises another important