Conferences of the Parties (COPs) are intergovernmental meetings established by treaties to review and promote the implementation of their provisions. The literature on COPs is limited and almost exclusively based on multilateral environmental agreements. The article departs from this scholarship to show that COPs are now present in different areas of international law and to discuss some of the ways in which these bodies influence the conventions that establish them. In particular, it considers how COPs affect the content and the implementation of their parent treaties. The article focuses on the bodies established by four treaties selected as case studies: the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control; the Convention for the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions; the Convention on Cluster Munitions; and the United Nations Convention against Corruption. Based on the examination of the normative decisions adopted by these organs, the article argues that COPs’ activities (i) specify and develop the content of their parent treaties by setting procedural and substantive standards that states parties must meet to comply with their obligations; and (ii) support the implementation of their parent treaties by seeking to strengthen their social and political position, facilitating the adoption of measures by states parties. COPs pursue this second goal by building momentum in favour of the implementation of their treaties, stigmatizing their adversaries, and connecting their conventions with established international legal narratives.

Human rights — Treaties — Scope of application — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 1 — Jurisdiction — Events in Crimea — Whether Russian Federation exercising jurisdiction over Crimea — Nature of jurisdiction under Article 1 of Convention — Territoriality principle — Whether facts complained of falling within jurisdiction of Russian Federation within meaning of Article 1 of Convention — Whether Russian Federation exercising effective control over Crimea during relevant period — Evidence — Military presence, strength and conduct — Whether Russian Federation adopting administrative practice of human rights violations in Crimea — Whether Russian Federation violating Articles 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 14 of Convention, and Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 1 and Article 2 of Protocol No 4 to Convention — Complaints of administrative practice during relevant period in violation of Convention provisions — Whether admissible

Treaties — Ratification — Interpretation — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 1 — Concept of jurisdiction — Meaning of jurisdiction in public international law — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 — Article 29 — Presumption jurisdiction exercised normally throughout State’s territory — Whether any assertion of change to status of Crimea by States upon ratification of European Convention — Whether Russian Federation having jurisdiction over Crimea — Assumption that nature of jurisdiction not territorial

International tribunals — European Court of Human Rights — Jurisdiction — Scope of case — Temporal scope of complaints — Whether interim measure to be lifted — Subject matter of dispute — Whether issue of legality, as matter of international law, of Crimea’s purported integration into Russian Federation constituting subject matter of dispute — Whether issues raised legal — Whether political aspects depriving questions of their legal character — Preliminary issues — Whether Russian Federation complying with any obligation under Article 1 of Convention — Preliminary objections — Whether application lacking requirements of genuine application — Whether Russian Federation’s preliminary objection of incompatibility ratione loci to be dismissed — Whether Court having competence under Article 19 of Convention — Whether preliminary objection of non-exhaustion of domestic remedies to be dismissed — Whether facts complained of falling within jurisdiction of Russian Federation within meaning of Article 1 of Convention — Whether Court having competence under Article 19 of Convention — Admissibility of complaints

Evidence before international courts and tribunals — European Court of Human Rights — Assessment of evidence — Approach to evidence — Types of evidence examined — Principles of assessment — Burden of proof — Standard of proof — As to alleged existence of an “administrative practice” — As to jurisdictional issues — Examination of admissibility of complaints in inter-State case

International Court of Justice — Jurisdiction — Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights, 1955 between Iran and the United States of America (“1955 Treaty”) — Article XXI of the 1955 Treaty — Jurisdiction ratione materiae — Whether real issue in dispute concerning the 1955 Treaty — Whether Iran’s claims actually concerning the decision of United States of America to withdraw from the JCPOA — Whether possible for a State’s conduct to breach more than one legal instrument at the same time — Effect of Iran’s invocation of the compromissory clause under the 1955 Treaty on the dispute settlement mechanism of the JCPOA — Whether the 1955 Treaty covering measures relating to trade between Iran and third countries — Interpretation of Articles IV, V, VII, VIII, IX and X of the 1955 Treaty — Territorial scope of certain provisions of the 1955 Treaty — Link between determination of the content of third country measures — Merits of the case

International Court of Justice — Admissibility of Iran’s application — Abuse of process — Exceptional circumstances — Whether exceptional circumstances could justify finding that Iran’s application was an abuse of process — Whether Iran’s application could lead to Iran gaining an illegitimate advantage — Whether a claim based on a valid title of jurisdiction could be an abuse of process

Treaties — Interpretation — Application — Article XX(1)(b) and (d) of the 1955 Treaty — Measures relating to fissionable materials — Essential security interests — Whether objections under Article XX(1)(b) and (d) preliminary in character — Connection between Article XX(1)(b) and (d) and the examination at the merits stage

Economics, trade and finance — Economic sanctions — Sanctions imposed by the United States of America against Iran — Territorial extent — Whether capable of affecting rights under the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights, 1955, between Iran and the United States of America — Jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice — Admissibility of application of Iran

Damages — Compensatory damages — Damages awarded to victims of State-sponsored terrorism — Availability of foreign State-owned property for attachment in aid of execution of judgment for damages — Assets of central bank — Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 1976 — Section 1610 — Exceptions to immunity of State-owned property from attachment in aid of execution — Section 1611 — Assets of central bank immune from attachment in aid of execution — Terrorism Risk Insurance Act 2002 — Section 201(a) — Assets of terrorist party to be made available in aid of execution or attachment — Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act 2012 — Blocked assets of Government of Iran to be made available to the plaintiffs — Whether Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act 2012 violating United States Constitution

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights, 1955 — Effect in municipal law — Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act 2012 — Whether United States statute violating 1955 Treaty

State immunity — Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 1976 — Terrorism exception to State immunity — Whether foreign State-owned property immune from attachment in aid of execution of judgment for damages — Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 1976 — Terrorism Risk Insurance Act 2002 — Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act 2012 — Whether United States municipal law removing immunity of Iranian State property constitutional

Terrorism — State-sponsored terrorism — Damages — Ability of victims of State-sponsored terrorism to receive compensatory damages — State immunity — Ability of victims of State-sponsored terrorism to turn over State-owned property in aid of execution of judgment for compensatory damages

Treaties — Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights, 1955 — Effect in municipal law — Relationship between treaty and municipal law — Alleged conflict between treaty and municipal statute — Whether United States statute violating 1955 Treaty — The law of the United States

Aliens — Asylum claim — Refusal of asylum — Refusal of asylum overturned — Article 1F(c) of Refugee Convention, 1951 — Article 12(2)(c) of European Council Directive 2004/83 — Whether asylum seeker guilty of acts contrary to purposes and principles of United Nations — Whether conviction as member of leadership of terrorist organization sufficient — Whether commission or instigation of terrorist act required — Terrorism

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Refugee Convention, 1951 — European Union law — European Council Directive 2004/83/EC — Framework Decision 2002/475 — United Nations — Relevant Security Council resolutions — Meaning of acts contrary to purposes and principles of United Nations

Treaties — Interpretation — Refugee Convention, 1951 — Article 1F(c) of Refugee Convention, 1951 — Principles and purposes of United Nations — Whether participation in terrorist group contrary to principles and purposes of United Nations — Meaning and scope — Relevant Security Council resolutions — Resolution 1624 — Resolution 1377 — Resolution 2178

Terrorism — United Nations — Meaning of acts contrary to purposes and principles of United Nations — Whether participation in terrorist group constituting acts contrary to principles and purposes of United Nations — Exclusion clause — Article 1F(c) of Refugee Convention, 1951 — Article 12(2)(c) of European Council Directive 2004/83 — Whether acts contrary to principles and purposes of United Nations confined to terrorist offences defined in Article 1(1) of Framework Decision 2002/475 — The law of the European Union

States — Recognition — Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (“TRNC”) — Whether TRNC a Member State for purposes of European Council Regulation No 2201/2003

Jurisdiction — Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus — Whether TRNC capable of being a country of habitual residence for determining jurisdiction in care proceedings — Whether child can retain habitual residence when parent deported from country — Effect of having no place of habitual residence

Treaties — Interpretation — Application — Protocol No 10 of the 2003 Act of Accession of Cyprus to European Union — Effect of suspension of acquis communautaire to the TRNC — The law of England

Diplomatic relations — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 (“VCDR”) — Article 1(i) — Definition of “premises of the mission” — Circumstances under which a building may acquire status of “premises of the mission” under Article 1(i) of VCDR — Whether consent of receiving State necessary for a property to become “premises of the mission” pursuant to Article 1(i) of VCDR

Treaties — Interpretation — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Article 1(i) — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 (“VCLT”) — Customary rules of treaty interpretation — Ordinary meaning — Context — Comparison with VCDR provisions concerning the treatment of diplomatic personnel — Object and purpose — Relevance of VCDR’s preamble to determining its object and purpose — VCDR founded on mutuality and respect between sovereign equals — Whether State practice in relation to the recognition of diplomatic status of premises amounting to subsequent practice within meaning of Article 31(3)(b) of VCLT — Article 1(i) of VCDR requiring the actual use of a building for it to qualify as “premises of the mission” — A receiving State may object to the sending State’s designation of “premises of the mission” — Objection had to be timely, non-arbitrary and non-discriminatory

Diplomatic relations — Diplomats — Diplomats’ children — Serious concerns about welfare of children — Immunity — Immunity from civil proceedings — Whether diplomatic immunity preventing local authority from seeking interim care orders — Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964 — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Whether diplomatic immunity subject to prohibition on torture and inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment

Human rights — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 3 — Inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment — Human Rights Act 1998 — Diplomatic immunity — Relationship between prohibition on torture and inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment and diplomatic immunity — Whether diplomatic immunity preventing local authority from seeking interim care order — Whether failure to protect children a breach of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether taking action to protect children a breach of Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Declaration of incompatibility

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964 — Diplomatic immunity — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 — Serious concerns about welfare of diplomat’s children — Relationship between diplomatic immunity and human rights — Whether Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964 and Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 incompatible with Human Rights Act 1998 and European Convention on Human Rights, 1950

Treaties — Interpretation — Context and purpose — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 disturbed by provisions of United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 — Whether conflict between Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 and European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — The law of England

International organizations — Immunity from jurisdiction — International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (“IBRD”) — IBRD Articles of Association — Agreement between Austria, IBRD, International Finance Corporation and Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency Regarding the Establishment of Liaison Offices in Vienna, 2011 — Relevance of dispute settlement provisions in treaties for questions of immunity of international organizations — Implicit waiver — Obligation to pay court fees in civil proceedings — Treaty interpretation — Treaty authenticated in several languages — Whether Article VII Section 9 of IBRD Articles of Agreement and Article 10(3) of Establishment Agreement providing for an exemption to pay court fees — Whether Austrian authorities having jurisdiction over matter

Treaties — Interpretation — Agreement between Austria, IBRD, International Finance Corporation and Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency Regarding the Establishment of Liaison Offices in Vienna, 2011 (“Establishment Agreement”) — Dispute settlement provisions — Relevance for questions of immunity of international organizations — Treaty authenticated in several languages — Meaning of terms — Whether Article VII Section 9 of IBRD Articles of Agreement and Article 10(3) of Establishment Agreement providing for an exemption to pay court fees — The law of Austria