Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qlrfm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T11:10:03.545Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Use of the Term “Acceptance” in United Nations Treaty Practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2017

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1950

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Article XXI reads as follows:

“1. This Constitution shall be open to acceptance by the nations specified in Annex I.

“2. The instruments of acceptance shall be transmitted by each government to the United Nations Interim Commission on Food and Agriculture, which shall notify their receipt to the governments of the nations specified in Annex I. Acceptance may be notified to the Interim Commission through a diplomatic representative, in which case the instrument of acceptance must be transmitted to the Commission as soon as possible thereafter.

‘ 3. Upon the receipt by the Interim Commission of twenty notifications of acceptance the Interim Commission shall arrange for this Constitution to be signed in a single copy by the diplomatic representatives, duly authorized thereto, of the nations who shall have notified their acceptance, and upon being so signed on behalf of not less than twenty of the nations specified in Annex I this Constitution shall come into force immediately.

“4. Acceptance the notification of which is received after the entry into force of this Constitution shall become effective upon receipt by the Interim Commission or the Organization.”

2 For example, Art. 6 of the Instrument for the Amendment of the Constitution of the International Labor Organization signed Nov. 7, 1945, provides for “acceptances” as alternative to “ratifications” (IT. N. Treaty Series, Vol. 2, p. 22); Art. V. of the Agreement for the establishment of a Provisional Maritime Consultative Council, adopted Oct. 30, 1946 (loo. tit., Vol. 11, p. 112); Art. XXVI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, adopted Oct. 30, 1947, provides for its acceptance by governments signatory to the Final Act of the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee of the U.N. Conference on Trade and Employment; Art. 103 of the Havana Charter for an International Trade Organization, drawn up by the TJ.N. Conference on Trade and Employment in March, 1948, provides that “The government of each State accepting this Charter shall deposit an instrument of acceptance with the Secretary General of the United Nations. ...” The term “acceptance” is, however, not used in the Convention on International Civil Aviation (1944), in the International Telecommunications Convention (1947), or in the Convention of the World Meteorological Organization (1947), all of which provide for signature and ratification. The revised Postal Union Convention (1948) provides for “new adhesions” (Art. 3).

3 Examples of this formula may be found in the following instruments: Art. IV of the Protocol Amending the International Convention relating to Economic Statistics (1928), signed at Paris Dec. 9, 1948 (U.N. Treaty Series, Vol. 20, p. 229); Art. XV (b) of the Convention of the International Institute of the Hylean Amazon, adopted at Iquito, Peru, May 10, 1948; Art. 57 of the Convention on the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization, signed at Geneva March 6, 1948; Art. 4 of the Protocol Amending the Agreement for the Suppression of the Circulation of Obscene Publications, adopted by the General Assembly Dec. 3, 1948, and signed at Lake Success May 4, 1949; Art. 4 of the Protocol Amending the International Agreement for the Suppression of the White Slave Traffic, adopted by the General Assembly Dec. 3, 1948, and signed at Lake Success May 4, 1949.

4 See the statement by the Assistant Secretary General in charge of the Legal De-partment, General Assembly, 3rd Sess., Pt. I, Official Becords, Sixth Committee, 90th meeting, p. 284.

5 No distinction is made here between “accession” and “adhesion” or “adherence.” The term as used does not apply to “accession ad referendum” which was employed to a certain extent in multipartite treaties under the League of Nations. See Comment on Article 12, Harvard Beseareh Draft Convention on the Law of Treaties, this Jouenal, Supp., Vol. 29 (1935), p. 812.

6 The Harvard Eesearch draft (op. cit., p. 812) confines the use of the term “accession” to formal acceptance “by a State on behalf of which a treaty has not been signed or ratified.” The practice of providing for accession by all states instead of the traditional procedure of signature and ratification by the original parties on the one hand, and of accession by non-signatory states on the other, began with the General Act for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, adopted on Sept. 26, 1928, by the League Assembly. McNair in Law of Treaties, p. 102, described this procedure as “an unusual employment of the procedure and terminology of accession.” For summary of the discussion in the League Assembly, see Harvard Research, loo. cit,, pp. 816 and 825. The Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations adopted by the General Assembly on Feb. 13, 1946, and the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies adopted on Nov. 21, 1947, followed the same practice.

7 Cf. remarks on the standard formula made by Dr. Durward V. Sandifer, U. S. representative to the International Health Conference, at its 13th plenary meeting July 17, 1946: “The United States is particularly interested in that procedure… . We tried very carefully to draft this statement here so that the word ‘acceptance’ would be broader than its connotation and would include ratification, but would also make possible a less formal instrument of approval. If you use the word ‘ratification,’ the difficulty is that it has a very definite significance in international law, and it would require a formal instrument of ratification, which would affect the constitutional procedures of approval in a number of countries.” U.N. Doc. E/H/P.Y.13; summarized in World Health Organization, Official Beeords, No. 2, p. 75.

8 Examples of this variation may be found in the following instruments: Art. 79 of the Constitution of the World Health Organization, signed at New York July 22, 1946 (U.N. Treaty Series, Vol. 14, p. 185); Art. 1 of the Constitution of the International Refugee Organization, opened for signature Dee. 15, 1946 (loc. cit., Vol. 18, p. 3); Art. 6 of the Protocol concerning the International Office of Public Health, signed at New York July 22, 1946 (loc. cit., Vol. 9, p. 3); Art. VI of the Protocol Amending the Agreements, Conventions and Protocols on Narcotic Drugs, adopted by the General Assembly Oct. 8, 1948, signed at Lake Success Dec. 11, 1946.

9 For example, at the International Health Conference, 1946, which adopted the Constitution of the World Health Organization, the draft drawn up by the Drafting Subcommittee of the Committee on Legal Questions followed the standard formula. (See U.N. Doc. E/H/L/W.25, July 10, 1946.) This standard formula was approved by the full Committee at its 18th meeting on July 15, 1946. (See U.N. Doc. E/H/L/W.30.) It was also adopted by the Conference at the 13th plenary meeting on July 17, 1946. (See World Health Organization, Official Records, No. 2, pp. 74-76.) However, in the final text of the Constitution which was put to the vote and adopted at the 17th plenary meeting on July 22, 1946, the variant formula was introduced and the word “acceptance” in the two places had been substituted by “approval.” (Ibid., p. 93, and Art. 79 on p. 109; also U.N. Doc. E/H/P.V.17.) How and when the variation from the original formula was brought about, available official records of the Conference do not show. It may be noted that the Conference had constituted a Central Drafting Committee which was advised by a “legal panel” and which held a series of meetings from July 13 to 21, 1946. (See U.N. Doc. E/H/P.V.17, p. 2.) Whether the variation was introduced by this Committee, the records do not reveal.

10 Cf. the comment on Art. 12(a) of the Harvard Research Draft Convention on the Law of Treaties, loc. cit., p. 822, concerning the suggested distinction between “adhesion” (accession ad referendum) and “accession” (accession property speaking).

11 General Assembly, 3rd Sess., Pt. I, Official Records, Sixth Committee, 88th meeting, p. 261.

12 Ibid., 90th meeting, p. 284.

13 Ibid,, 91st meeting, p. 296.

14 Ibid., p. 297.

15 General Assembly, 4th Sess., Official Records, Sixth Committee, 200th meeting, p. 398.

16 U.N. Doc. A/C.6/L.66.

17 U.N. Doc. A/C.6/L.94.

18 The General Assembly decided that this draft convention should not be open to signature until the work on the Draft Convention on Freedom of Information was completed. See Resolutions 277 (IV) and 313 (IV).

19 It may be added that “acceptance” was not used in the Convention on Road Traffic drafted by the United Nations Conference on Road and Motor Transport, Sept. 16, 1949 (Doc. E/Conf.8/47).

20 General Assembly, 4th Sess., Official Records, Sixth Committee, 201st meeting, p. 400.

21 Ibid.