§ 3. The principle of justice (individualization) and the principle of economic criminal reprisal

The principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations, which has come down to us from ancient times, is one of the basic principles of international law. Among the ancient Romans, it was expressed by the formula pacta sunt servanda - "agreements must be kept". In paragraph 2 of Art. 2 of the UN Charter stipulates that the member states of the UN are obliged to fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed under the UN Charter, i.e. international obligations must not only be observed, but conscientiously fulfill their requirements. Despite the fact that the above provision of the UN Charter literally applies only to UN members and obligations under the Charter of this organization, it is customary in international law to interpret broadly and refer to all subjects of international law, as well as all types of international obligations. These obligations may arise from general and special international treaties, international custom, from binding decisions international bodies and organizations (for example, the International Court of Justice, the UN Security Council, etc.).

The concept of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations is enshrined in many treaties, resolutions General Assembly UN, decisions of the International Court of Justice, in declarations of states. However, from a legal point of view, the most important international acts, in addition to the UN Charter, which fixes this principle, are the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969 and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations of 1986. Article 26 of the 1969 Convention establishes: "Each international treaty in force is binding on its participants and must be carried out by them in good faith." Further in this Convention it is said: "A participant (of the agreement. - V.K., L.T.) cannot refer to the provisions of his internal law as an excuse for not fulfilling the agreement" (Article 27). This rule is aimed at prohibiting the unilateral arbitrary refusal to fulfill obligations under the contract. The 1969 Convention also emphasizes that an international treaty must be interpreted in good faith (Article 31), of course, with a view to its conscientious implementation. Because without correct understanding the content of the treaty, one can hardly count on its conscientious application.

States as the main subjects of international law have many obligations arising for them from various international agreements. According to Art. 103 of the UN Charter, for states, the obligations under this Charter are preferable, i.e. if there are contradictions between statutory obligations and obligations under other international treaties, the former must be fulfilled. Today, it is also widely recognized that states and other subjects of international law should not enter into transactions between themselves that contradict the UN Charter.

For modern stage development of international law in the implementation of the principle of good faith in the fulfillment of international obligations important role also plays an internal aspect of this process. This means that states should make every effort to harmonize domestic legislation and practice in its application in accordance with international obligations. This need is noted in many OSCE and Council of Europe documents.

Principle of peaceful settlement of disputes

One of the novelties of modern international law is the principle of peaceful settlement of disputes between states. Classical international law did not know such a principle, so war was considered a legitimate means to an end. foreign policy states, although certain steps towards the implementation of the norm on the peaceful settlement of disputes were made by the international community in the late XIX - early XX centuries. The Peace Conference in The Hague in 1899 began the period modern history adjudication of international disputes. Various delegations put forward proposals for the establishment of a permanent international court. On October 29, 1899, the conference adopted the Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, which codified the law and practice of good offices, mediation and arbitration, and also provided for the establishment of a Permanent Court of Arbitration. The Second Peace Conference, which was held in The Hague in 1907, revised this convention, retaining and strengthening the new court. In the end, 47 States acceded to the 1899 Convention and the 1907 Convention, or both at the same time.

So, in Art. 2 of the Hague Convention on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes of 1907 stated that states "before resorting to arms" should "recourse, as far as circumstances permit," to peaceful means of good offices and mediation. "However, as noted International Court UN in the decision in the Norwegian Loan case of July 6, 1957, - the purpose of the said agreement, namely the second Hague Convention of 1907 on the limitation of the use of force in the collection of debts under contracts, is not to introduce compulsory arbitration; the only obligation imposed by the Convention is that a State cannot resort to force without first attempting to resort to arbitration."

The Charter of the League of Nations fixed the provision on the obligatory recourse of states to peaceful means of resolving disputes that "may entail a rupture." At the same time, this document did not completely exclude war from the means of state policy.

A significant step in the formation of such a principle was made in 1928 by the conclusion of a multilateral agreement - the Treaty of Paris on the renunciation of war as a weapon. national policy(Briand-Kellogg Pact). The pact proclaimed the rule of renunciation of war as a means of settling international disputes and as an instrument of national policy, and also recognized the need to resolve any disputes by peaceful means.

However, the principle of peaceful settlement of disputes was first enshrined in paragraph. From Art. 2 of the UN Charter: "All Members of the United Nations shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means so as not to endanger international peace and security and justice." Subsequently, this principle was confirmed in the charters and documents of regional organizations (the League of Arab States, the Organization of American States, the Organization of African Unity, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, etc.), in the resolutions of the UN General Assembly, in particular in the Declaration on the Principles of International Law 1970

The essence of this principle is reduced to the obligation of states to resolve any international disputes that threaten international peace or not threatened, global and regional, vital and secondary, exclusively by peaceful means. The procedure and specific means for the peaceful resolution of international disputes in accordance with the UN Charter are left to the discretion of states. Most often, states resort to diplomatic negotiations in order to resolve an international dispute. If it is not possible to resolve an international dispute by one means, another (or others) should be used. In particular, international judicial and arbitration bodies, regional organizations can be involved in resolving international disputes. Thus, within the OSCE there is a certain regulatory framework for the peaceful resolution of international disputes - the Convention on Conciliation and Arbitration within the CSCE of 1992. This convention provides for such conciliation mechanisms as the Conciliation Commission, the Arbitration Tribunal for the consideration of disputes and the Court of Conciliation and Arbitration. Moreover, this document contains a large list of mandatory and optional procedures to be chosen by the parties to the dispute to resolve a specific international dispute, taking into account its specifics.

The development of statehood and the conclusion of agreements between them led to the formation of legal customs. With the improvement in this area, the principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations was developed.

General concepts

The foundations of interaction between countries began to take shape at the stage of formation government systems. Serious progress in the issue of relations in the field of legal international agreements occurred in the twentieth century. This is due primarily to world wars and, as a result, changes in the international political arena.

But the first significant breakthrough was made as early as 1871 during the London Conference. It was then that the participating countries consolidated the principle of the impossibility to unilaterally release themselves from their obligations to implement the international treaty that they signed. This can be done only with the consent of the parties in the course of a friendly agreement.

If earlier such a principle was related to customary legal norms, now it is to contractual ones. In accordance with it, states voluntarily undertake obligations to fulfill in good faith the clauses of international agreements in which they participate. If they have a need to establish domestic laws and regulations, then these must be consistent with state obligations in the field of international law. That is, the principle plays the role of a kind of guarantor of legal stability within a number of countries.

The foundations of the principle are enshrined in the preamble of the UN Charter, which spells out the obligation of all members of the Organization to take a responsible approach to fulfilling the obligations assumed under the Charter. If countries participate in other international agreements, the terms of which conflict with the main document of the UN, then preemption attached to the statute.

The effectiveness of the introduction of the principle is expressed in the following:

• The involved entities receive an individual legal basis to require other participants to comply with the norms prescribed in international agreements.
• Activities within legal frameworks receive protection from illegal acts.
• Legislative guidelines different countries woven into unified norms of an imperative nature.

International obligations must be fulfilled in good faith, otherwise it will entail negative consequences

In case of violation of these obligations, liability is assumed. And this means that punishment will follow not only for a specific offense, but also for a departure from the above norms.

Legal basis

In addition to the UN Charter, the main provisions relating to good faith performance have been recorded in the following documents:

• Vienna Convention, which was concluded in May 1969 (Article 26). According to this act all existing international treaties are binding on the participants.
• Declaration on the Fundamental Principles of Law, adopted in September 1970 at the plenary session of the UN General Assembly.

If we talk, for example, about Russia, then the norms for the implementation of international agreements are enshrined in Federal Law No. 101, adopted in 1995. And their implementation is controlled by the Russian Federal authorities, personally by the President of the country and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

General international control is expressed in the fact that it must be provided by all participating States through the creation of special supervisory bodies.

Parties to obligations

The subjects of international legal relations are entities that have an independent status and are endowed with rights and obligations in this area. These parties include:

• State formations.
• Interstate structures.
• Peoples and nations that are in the process of becoming independent and creating their own state.

The need for conscientious fulfillment of obligations is interpreted by law

To become a complete party international legal personality must have the following features:

• The party must be a collective entity.
• The subject necessarily has the rights and obligations that are a consequence of the existence of international legal norms.
• He is directly involved in the creation of international legal acts.

If at least one of the above signs is absent, this means that one cannot speak of full international legal personality.

Subject Responsibilities

Analyzing the main principles presented above for the conscientious fulfillment of obligations under international law, we can single out the most obvious obligations of the participating parties:

• Implementation of the norms of adopted international agreements accurately and without delay.
• Control over the comprehensive fulfillment of obligations by other entities.
• Direct participation in the adoption of legislative acts in the international sphere.

The principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations arose in the form of international legal custom pacta sunt servanda on early stages development of statehood, and is currently reflected in numerous bilateral and multilateral international agreements.

As a universally recognized norm of behavior of subjects, this principle is enshrined in the UN Charter, the preamble of which emphasizes the determination of UN members "to create conditions under which justice and respect for obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be observed." According to paragraph 2 of Art. 2 of the Charter, "All Members of the United Nations shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed under this Charter, in order to secure to them in their entirety the rights and benefits arising from membership in the membership of the Organization."

The development of international law clearly confirms the universal nature of the principle in question. According to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, "every treaty in force is binding on the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith." Moreover, "a party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as an excuse for its non-performance of a treaty".

The scope of the principle under consideration has been noticeably expanded in last years which was reflected in the wording of the relevant international legal documents. Thus, according to the Declaration on the Principles of International Law of 1970, each state is obliged to fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by it in accordance with the UN Charter, obligations arising from generally recognized norms and principles of international law, as well as obligations arising from international treaties valid in accordance with generally recognized principles. and norms of international law.

The authors of the declaration sought to emphasize the need for faithful observance, first of all, of those obligations that are covered by the notion of "generally recognized principles and norms of international law" or follow from them.

In the Declaration of Principles of the 1975 CSCE Final Act, the participating States agreed "to fulfill in good faith their obligations under international law, both those obligations arising from generally recognized principles and norms of international law, and those obligations arising from treaties or other agreements consistent with international law. of which they are members."

Obligations "under international law" are certainly broader than obligations "following from the universally recognized principles and norms of international law." Moreover, in recent years States have adopted, in particular at the regional level, important instruments which, strictly speaking, do not represent their obligations "under international law", but which they nonetheless intend to comply with strictly.

For Europe, these are documents adopted within the framework of the Helsinki process. The Final Document of the Vienna Meeting of Representatives of the CSCE Participating States states that they "reaffirmed their determination to fully implement, unilaterally, bilaterally and multilaterally, all the provisions of the Final Act and other documents of the CSCE."

Different legal and socio-cultural systems have their own understanding of good faith, which directly affects the observance by states of their obligations. The concept of good faith has been enshrined in a large number of international treaties, resolutions of the UN General Assembly, in declarations of states, etc. However, it should be recognized that determining the exact legal content of the concept of good faith in real situations can be difficult.

It seems that the legal content of good faith should be derived from the text of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, mainly the sections "Application of Treaties" (Article 2830) and "Interpretation of Treaties" (Article 3133). The application of the provisions of the treaty is largely determined by its interpretation. From this point of view, it is logical to assume that the application of the treaty, which is construed in good faith (in accordance with the usual meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context, and also in the light of the object and purpose of the treaty), will be in good faith.

The principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations applies only to valid agreements. This means that the principle in question applies only to international treaties concluded voluntarily and on the basis of equality.

Any unequal international treaty first of all violates the sovereignty of the state and as such violates the UN Charter, since the United Nations is "founded on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members", which, in turn, have undertaken to "develop friendly relations among nations on the basis of respect principle of equality and self-determination of peoples".

It should be considered generally accepted that any treaty that is contrary to the UN Charter is null and void, and no state can invoke such a treaty or enjoy its benefits. This provision is in line with Art. 103 of the Charter. In addition, any treaty cannot be contrary to a peremptory norm of international law, as defined in Art. 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Recent legal and political-legal documents increasingly point to the link between the duty of conscientious observance of international treaties and the internal rule-making of states. In particular, the participants in the Vienna Meeting agreed in the 1989 Outcome Document to "ensure that their laws, regulations, practices and policies are consistent with their obligations under international law and are harmonized with the provisions of the Declaration of Principles and other CSCE commitments."

Formulas of this kind testify to the expansion of the scope of application of the principle of conscientious observance of international obligations.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Established in 1945 at the London Conference. Its Charter came into force on November 4, 1946. Since December 1946, UNESCO has been a specialized agency of the United Nations. The headquarters is located in Paris (France). sovereign equality inviolability border

UNESCO aims to promote peace and security through the development international cooperation in the field of education, science and culture, the use of the media, the further development of public education and the dissemination of science and culture.

The supreme body is the General Conference, consisting of representatives of all member states and convened in regular sessions once every two years. It determines the policy and general direction of the organization, approves its programs and budget, elects members of the Executive Board and other bodies, appoints the general director, and resolves other issues.

The Executive Board is the main governing body of UNESCO between sessions of the General Conference. It consists of representatives of 51 states, elected for four years on the basis of equitable geographical distribution (10 country seats Western Europe, North America and Israel; 4 country locations of Eastern Europe; 9 places of the country Latin America and the Caribbean; 8 places countries of Asia and the basin Pacific Ocean; 20 places African countries and Arab states). UNESCO's constitution requires that representatives be appointed persons competent in the arts, literature, science, education and dissemination of knowledge, and possessing the necessary experience and authority.

Administrative and technical functions are performed by the Secretariat, headed by the Director General, appointed for six years.

This principle is special: it contains the source of the legal force of the entire MT. International law is based on the principle of conscientious fulfillment of obligations with all its grounds and every norm.

The principle entered international law from Roman law as a custom "pacta sunt servanda"  "contracts must be observed."

Subsequently, it was consolidated and developed in many international acts:

 in the preamble to the Statute of the League of Nations;

 the UN Charter (preamble, art. 2, 103);

 Statute of the International Court of Justice (Article 38);

 Declaration on the principles of MP;

 Final Act of the CSCE;

 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969 (preamble, art. 26, 31, 46);

 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations of 1986, etc.

According to the Declaration on the Principles of MP, this principle includes the duty in good faith meet commitments:

a) arising from the norms and principles of the MP;

b) arising from international treaties;

c) adopted in accordance with the UN Charter.

The principle of "pacta sunt servanda" ("contracts must be observed") is thus only part of the principle of good faith performance. At the same time, it remains an independent  branch  principle international treaty law.

If obligations from treaties conflict with obligations under the UN Charter, the obligations under the UN Charter shall prevail.

It should be borne in mind that international obligations may arise from certain acts international organizations , from the unilateral acts of the subjects of the MP.

An integral part of the principle of conscientious fulfillment of obligations is the principle conscientiousness. It means that states must honestly, accurately and responsibly approach the application and choice of IL norms, treat the interests of partners and the entire international community with understanding, taking into account the actual circumstances, the letter and spirit of the law, and not allow abuse of the law.

States should not enter into obligations that conflict with obligations already in place towards third countries.

The internal law of the states must be coordinated, harmonized with the obligations under the international law. States are not entitled to invoke their own legislation to justify the failure to comply with international obligations.

From the Law on International Treaties

Russian Federation" 1995

…The Russian Federation stands for strict observance of treaty and customary norms, reaffirms its commitment to the fundamental principle of international law  the principle of conscientious fulfillment of international obligations…

If the obligations under the MP are not fulfilled or are performed in bad faith, sanctions must follow, liability should arise (provided that there are no circumstances exonerating from liability).

The principle of fulfillment of international legal obligations in good faith is closely related to the principle reciprocity. If the state violates its obligations under some IL norm, then it should not claim the rights that follow from the norm.

The denial to the state that violated the norm of the right arising from this norm is the most common sanction (reprisal) for offense .

In 2005, some Ukrainian officials announced a possible unilateral revision (in the direction of deterioration) of the conditions for the presence of the Russian navy in the city of Sevastopol on the Black Sea. These conditions are contained in the Russian-Ukrainian agreement, which, among other things, recognized the border between the countries.

A unilateral revision by Ukraine of the conditions for the presence of the Russian fleet in the Black Sea can (and should) entail a revision of the borders, bearing in mind that Sevastopol and Crimea are primordially Russian territories.

The question of the fate (return) of Sevastopol and Crimea to our country should also be raised in the event that Ukraine enters into NATO and/or EU .