Constitutional Competence for Conclusion and Enactment of International Treaties
Constitutional Competence for Conclusion and Enactment of International Treaties

Summary/Abstract: Questions of international relations rarely found its place in constitutions because it was considered that the foreign policy represents the freedoms of acting which does not bear legal limitations. However, when the politics was submitted to certain legal rules it was considered that it belongs to in the exclusive jurisdiction of a state in which other states and international community are not allowed to interfere. Today this standpoint is in a large measure changed, but has not been completely abandoned. Turning point are four French revolutionary Constitutions in which one can find provisions about the ratification of international conventions. This example was followed by the other state among which Serbia and Yugoslavia . In constitutions of European states in XIX and XX century one can notice enough similarities in respect of many solutions among which are conclusions of international conventions. The widened jurisdiction of republics sets up the question of executions of international conventions. Constitutions usually pass or arrange indirectly this question. Therefore one should often start from the content of international conventions and obligations the state. International law imposes obligations only to a state and makes it responsible for the non-fulfillment of international obligations regardless it internal organization. Key words: International law, constitutional charter, how to conclude international treaty, council of minister, human rights, international treaty implementation, international organization, international treaty conclusion, legal act, national law, legal system, how to ratify international treaty, Vienna convention, head of a state, foreign policy, national assembly, state representation.

• Details
• Contents