| I. | Substantive International Law - First Part |
| 7. | LAW OF TREATIES |
| 7.2. | Treatymaking Capacity |
¤
Maritime Delimitation and Territorial
Questions between Qatar and Bahrain,
Jurisdiction and Admissibility,
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1995, p. 6
[p. 46 D.O. Oda] 15. Whether the adoption by the participants of the
minutes of a multilateral meeting can constitute an international agreement on
the part of one participating State in its relations with any other
participating State may well be arguable.
In fact, while the three Foreign Ministers, in attestation of the agreement
reached, did sign the Minutes of the meeting (i.e., the agreed record of the
discussion that had taken place during that tripartite meeting), in my view,
they certainly did so without the slightest idea that they were signing a
tripartite treaty or convention. It is clear from the statement made by the
Foreign Minister of Bahrain on 21 May 1992 and subsequently presented to the
Court, that at least the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bahrain never thought
that he was signing an international agreement (Counter-Memorial of Bahrain,
Ann. I.25).
Given what we know of "the preparatory work of the treaty and the
circumstances of its conclusion" which, according to the Vienna Convention
on the Law of Treaties (Art. 32) are to be used as supplementary means of
interpretation of a treaty, and given the way in which those "circumstances"
are reflected in the statement made by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of
Bahrain, these Minutes cannot be interpreted as falling within the category of "treaties
and conventions in force" which specially provide for certain matters to be
referred to the Court for a decision by means of a unilateral
application under Article 36, paragraph l, of the Statute.
