International law clauses in the constitutions of northeast and southeast Asian states: a comparative study

Article 7 (1) of the 2004 Constitution of Afghanistan reads that “The state shall observe the United Nations Charter, interstate agreements, as well as international treaties to which [r]

A COMPARATIVE STUDY

Prof Lijiang Zhu 1∗

Abstract

The sixteen Constitutions of the northeast and southeast Asia offers proper samples to examine the three types of international law clauses in the Constitutions because the region of northeast and southeast Asia is a mini world in terms of political systems, economic development, religion, culture, and legal system This survey shows that the Constitutions of this region generally have treaty-making clauses, but only a few Constitutions simultaneously have treaty or international status clause and/or treaty or international law based foreign policy clause This finding further show that the Constitutions of this region are basically conservative and unfriendly to international law clauses, and the extent of incorporation of international law clauses into the Constitutions in this region largely has some connection with the political systems of the Constitutions

Key words: International Law; Constitution; Northeast Asia; Southeast Asia

I Introduction

The relationship between international law and municipal law is a classical topic for international lawyers This topic has been explored by international law academic for more than one century Since the end of the Second World War, with the increasing incorporation of international law clauses in the newly amended or adopted Constitutions in particular in the European States, the topic of how Constitutions incorporate international law became to be concerned by international academia2 In the 1980s, the Italian professor Antonio Cassese presented a lecture on international law in modern Constitutions at the Hague Academy of International Law3, greatly pushing forward the topic to

be one of the cutting-edged researches of international law In the 1990s, with the end of Cold

1 Professor, Vice Dean, School of International Law, China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing, China LL.B (Peking); LL.M (Lund, Sweden); Ph.D (Peking); Vice Secretary-General of the Chinese Society of International

Law; Vice Editor-in-Chief of the Chinese Yearbook of International Law Email: zhu.lijiang@163.com The research

for this article was supported by the “Program for Young Innovative Research Team at China University of Political Science and Law” (programme no 19CXTD09).

2 Jonkheer H F van Panhuys, “The Netherlands Constitution and International Law”, American Journal of International

Law, Vol 47, No 4, 1953.

3 Antonio Cassese, “Modern Constitutions and International Law”, Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of

International Law, Vol 192, 1985.

War and the rapid incorporation of international law clauses in the new Constitutions of the newly independent States of Soviet Union and the former east European socialist States, a second wave of incorporation of international law clauses emerged1 In the beginning of the 21st Century, many new Constitutions of the newly independent States, including East Timor, Kosovo, and South Sudan and the new regimes of democratic transition, including Afghanistan, Iraq, Nepal, Myanmar, Sri Lanka incorporate international law clauses to some extent This phenomenon may be qualified as a third wave of incorporation

Due to the overlapping governed relations between international law and Constitutions, international law has an extremely intimate relation with Constitutions Both regulates the relationship between the State and the individuals Therefore, it is very common that many Constitutions contain various provisions on treaty-making, declaration of war, extradition and asylum, protection of aliens, and protection of nationals abroad All these matters are the subject matters of many international law treaties and general international law However, these kinds of provisions in Constitutions are not the “international law clauses in the Constitutions” in the sense of this paper The expression

of “international law clauses” in the Constitutions in this paper is very narrow It only refers to the articles or paragraphs of a Constitution which clearly mention the term of “treaty”, “customary international law”, “general international law” or simply “international law” In other words, any article or paragraph in a Constitution without clear mention of these terms will not be considered as the “international law clauses” in the Constitutions, even if it may have a counterpart in a treaty or general international law

The purpose of this paper is to make a comparative survey of the international law clauses

in the Constitutions of northeast and southeast Asian States in order to see whether there is any interesting finding of this topic Part II will answer the question why this paper focuses on the northeast and southeast Asian States Part III examines the categories of international law clauses in the Constitutions Part IV presents the formulations of categories of international law clauses in the Constitutions in a global context Part V focuses on the formulations of categories of international law clauses in the Constitutions of northeast and southeast Asian States Part VI concludes this paper by presenting some tentative findings of the research Due to the limitation of pages, this paper does not

attempt to explore the reasons for the status quo of incorporation of international law clauses in the

Constitutions of northeast and southeast Asian States It does not attempt to make any comment on

the rightness or the wrongfulness of the status quo of the incorporation of international law clauses in

the Constitutions of northeast and southeast Asian States, either It needs to be noted that this paper

is only a survey of the international law clauses in the Constitutions in this region in a paper work, it does not look into the actual implementation of international law obligations in these States, which is totally another thing In many States where the Constitutions do not have a treaty or international law status clause, ratified treaties or general international law still constitute a part of the national legal system and can be directly applied in the courts2

1 Vladlen S Vereshchetin, “New Constitutions and the Old Problem of the Relationship between International Law and

National Law”, European Journal of International Law, Vol 7, No.1, 1996.

2 For example, although the Chinese Constitution does not have a treaty status clause, many ratified treaties constitute

a part of Chinese law and can be directly applied in Chinese courts, see Wang Tieya, “International Law in China:

Historical and Contemporary Perspectives”, RCADI 221 (1991-II): 328; Jia Bing Bing, “A Synthesis of the Notion of

Sovereignty and the Ideal of the Rule of Law: Reflections on the Contemporary Chinese Approach to International

II Why does this paper focus on northeast and southeast Asian States?

There are 16 sovereign States in the region of northeast and southeast Asia In northeast Asia, five sovereign States are located They are the People’s Republic of China, Japan, South Korea, North Korea and Mongolia The Republic of China in Taiwan is not calculated in this paper as Taiwan is

a part of Chinese territory in international law.1 Hong Kong and Macau are not calculated in this paper as they are two special administrative regions of the People’s Republic of China In southeast Asia eleven States are located They are ten ASEAN member States (Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Myanmar, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Brunei, and the Philippines) and East Timor The reason why I focus on the Constitutions of northeast and southeast Asian States is because in this region, you can find diverse sovereign States in terms of political systems, economic development, religion, civilization, legal system, military power, territory and population size While some States are socialist States, many are capitalist States While some States are developed States, many are developing States Some States are Islamic States, some are Buddhist States, some are catholic States, and some are even atheistic States While some States have a common law system, many have a civil law system While many are middle-sized or small States, some have a very vast territory and a large population Therefore, the region of northeast and southeast Asia is like a mini-world To examine the international law clauses in the Constitutions of this region will give a glance of such clauses

in the world Constitutions More importantly, the European international legal system based on the notion of equality of State sovereignty in the Westphalian Treaty in the 17th Century reached this region very lately, in particular northeast Asia Northeast Asia is the last region to be incorporated into the international legal system based on the Westphalian principles It was only at the turn of the

20th Century that northeast Asian States, in particular the Qing China Empire, eventually accepted the notion of equality of State sovereignty after the failure of bitter wars with western great powers Interestingly, all 16 States in this region have written Constitutions Furthermore, the Constitutions

in this region were adopted in the 1940s, the 1950s, the 1980s, and even the 21st Century, this further gives a chance to examine whether the international law clauses in the Constitutions are affected by the year of adoption All in all, this paper argues that the diversity of the Constitutions in this region offers a good chance to examine the international law clauses in the Constitutions

III What international law clauses in the Constitutions will be examined in this paper?

International law does not only regulate the relations between sovereign States, but also the relations between States and intergovernmental organizations, the relations between inter-governmental

Law”, German Yearbook of International Law 53 (2010): 11–64; Bjorn Ahl, “The Application of International Treaties

in China”, Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht Beiträge zum ausländischen öffentichen Recht und Völkerrecht, Bd 207 (Contributions to Foreign Public Law and International Law, vol 207) (Dordrecht: Springer, 2009): 355–67; esp 364; Li Zhaojie, “The Effect of Treaties in the Municipal Law of the People’s

Republic of China”, Asian Yearbook of International Law 4 (1994): 197; Xue Hanqin and Qian Jin, “International Treaties in the Chinese Domestic Legal System”, Chinese Journal of International Law 8, no 2 (2009): 300; Lijiang Zhu, “Treaties in the Chinese Legal Order: Discourses, Debates and Developments”, China: An International Journal,

Vol 17, No 4, 2019, p 152

1 James R Crawford, The Creation of States in International Law, Second Edition, Oxford University Press, 2007, p

219 (“The conclusion must be that Taiwan is not a State because it still has not unequivocally asserted its separation from China and is not recognized as a State distinct from China”).

organizations, and even the relations between States, intergovernmental organizations and individuals The main sources of international law as embodied in the Statute of the International Court of Justice are treaties, customary international law and general principles of law International law may be also found in other sources, including the resolutions of international organizations, or unilateral declaration capable of creating legal obligations.1 Treaties are the main source of international law.2

A treaty is “an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation”3, or “an international agreement governed by international law and concluded in written form: (i) between one or more States and one or more international organizations; or (ii) between international organizations, whether that agreement is embodied in

a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation”4 Every treaty in force is binding upon the State parties and must be performed by them in good faith5

A State can become a party to a treaty by expressing its consent to be bound including signature, exchange of instruments constituting a treaty, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, or any other means if so agreed6 Unlike a treaty, customary international law is unwritten international law

In order to find a rule of customary international law, the international judges or arbitrators have to find “evidence of a general practice accepted as law”7 To determine the existence and content of a rule of customary international law, it is necessary to ascertain whether there is a general practice that

is accepted as law (opinio juris)8 Unlike a treaty, a rule of customary international law has binding force upon all subjects of international law, except a persistent objector9 Furthermore, unlike a treaty,

it is not necessary for a State to express its consent to be bound including signature, exchange of instruments constituting a treaty, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, or any other means

if so agreed “General principles of law” is also an independent source of international law10 Although

in the academia of international law, there have been debates on the definition of “general principles

of law”, the majority academic view supported by the international jurisprudence is that “general principles of law” derived from national legal systems and formed within the international legal system11 In theory, “general principles of law” binds upon all subjects of international law without

1 Regarding unilateral declarations of States capable of creating legal obligations as an independent international law source, see Guiding Principles Applicable to Unilateral Declarations of States Capable of Creating Legal Obligations, Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its Fifty-eighth Session (2006), A/CN.4/577.

2 Article 38 (1) (a) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice.

3 Article 2 (1) (a) of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1155 UNTS 331.

4 Article 2 (1) (a) of the 1986 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations

or between International Organizations.

5 Article 26 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

6 Article 11 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

7 Article 38 (1) (b) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice

8 Conclusion 2, UN International Law Commission, Identification of Customary International Law, 20 December 2018,

A/RES/73/203

9 “Where a State has objected to a rule of customary international law while that rule was in the process of formation, the rule is not opposable to the State concerned for so long as it maintains its objection.” Conclusion 15, para.1, UN International Law Commission, Identification of Customary International Law, 20 December 2018, A/RES/73/203.

10 Article 38 (1) (c) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice.

11 Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Special Rapporteur, UN International Law Commission, First Report on General

Principles of Law, 5 April 2019, A/CN.4/732, p 56.

exceptions Like customary international law, “general principles of law” needs not to be signed, ratified, acceded to or accepted by sovereign States While the customary international law may be sometimes also known as “general international law”, the expression of “general international law” in many Constitutions refers to “customary international law” and “general principles of law”

By and large, the international law clauses in the Constitutions can be categorized into three types The first type of international law clauses in the Constitutions is treaty-making clauses This type of international law clauses addresses the powers of making treaties in various organs of State The second type of international law clauses in the Constitutions is a treaty or international law status clauses This type of international clause addresses the issues, whether the ratified treaties is a part of the national legal system, what is the ranking of the ratified treaties in the national legal system, and whether the ratified treaties are directly applicable in the national courts The third type of international law clauses in the Constitutions is the treaty or international law based foreign policy clauses This type of international law clause addresses the question whether the State adopts a policy to develop foreign relations on the basis of the treaty or international law These three types of international law clauses in the Constitutions are the most common and important international law clauses in the Constitutions

IV How do the Constitutions provide these three types of international law clauses in a global context?

This part attempts to examine the three types of international law clauses in the Constitutions

in a global context Since there have been thousands of Constitutions of all States in history and at present, this part does not attempt to exhaust the examination of all Constitutions in history or in the present The survey of this part is mainly based on the Constitutions in present, and the texts of the Constitutions are mainly based on the www.constituteproject.org

a Treaty-making Clause

The US Constitution is the first Constitution contains the treaty-making clauses in the world According to Article II, Section II, Paragraph 2, the President “shall have Power, by and with the

Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur (emphasis added)” Subsequent to the US Constitution, many Constitutions contain

treaty-making clauses In fact, the treat-treaty-making clauses are the most common international law clauses in the Constitution in the world

b Treaty or International Law Status Clause

The US Constitution is also the first Constitution contains the treaty or international law status clauses in the world According to Article VI, Paragraph 2, “This Constitution, and the Laws of

the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall

be made, under the Authority of the United States (emphasis added), shall be the supreme Law of

the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding” Furthermore, according to Article III, Section

2 Paragraph 1, the judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this

Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority (emphasis added) It is evident from these articles that the ratified treaties constitute a part

of the US law, and they are applicable in the US courts However, the Constitution does not specify

the ranking of the ratified treaties in the US law, but case law shows that the ratified treaties are inferior to the US Constitution and has the same ranking as the federal statutes1 Furthermore, the US case law also makes the distinction between the self-executing treaties and the non-self-executing treaties2 The reason why the US Constitution was so friendly to treaties is mainly because the US,

as newly independent nation from the then great power, the British Empire, justified the legitimacy

of independence from the law of nations and sought assistance from other European nations such as France and Spain in realizing the independence3

Afterwards, many Constitutions contain treaty or international law status clauses, in particular the Constitutions adopted after the Second World War and after the ending of the Cold War While many Constitutions declare that the ratified treaties constitute a part of the national legal system, some Constitutions even recognize that general international law also constitutes a part of the national legal system4 While many Constitutions provide that the ratified treaties are inferior to the Constitution, some Constitutions say that the ratified human rights treaties are supplementary to the Constitution

or the bench for the interpretation of the Constitution5 The majority of Constitutions provide that the ratified treaties are superior to the parliamentary laws, and the minority of Constitutions provide the ratified treaties have the same ranking as the parliamentary laws6 A minority of Constitutions provide that the ratified treaties are directly applicable in national courts, and customary or general international law is a part of national law7

c Treaty or International Law Based Foreign Policy Clause

Immediately after the US Constitution, the 1791 French Constitution sets out the relations of the French nation with foreign nations in Title VI It provides that “The French nation renounces the undertaking of any war with a view of making conquests, and it will never use its forces against

1 Head Money Cases, 112 US 580, 599 (1884); Whitney v Robertson, 124 US 190, 194 (1887); Chae Chan Ping v U.S.,

130 US 581, 599 (1889), see also Sean D Murphy, United States Practice in International Law, Vol 1, 1999-2001,

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002, p 5.

2 Yuji Iwasawa, “The Doctrine of Self-Executing Treaties in the United States: A Critical Analysis”, Virginia Journal of

International Law, Vol 26, No 3, 1986, p 627.

3 Mark Weston Janis, America and the Law of Nations 1776-1939, Oxford University Press, 2010, p 36.

4 Article 28 (1) of the 1975 Constitution of Greece, Article 8 (1) of the 1976 Constitution of Portugal, Article 15 (4)

of the 1993 Constitution of Russia, Article 232 of the 1996 Constitution of South Africa, Article 9 (1) of the 2002 Constitution of East Timor, Article 9 (1) of the 2009 Constitution of Austria, Article 2 (5) of the 2010 Constitution of Kenya

5 Article 16 (1) of the 1990 Constitution of Verde Cape, Article 154A of the 1980 Constitution of Guiana, Article 46 of the 1987 Constitution of Nicaragua, Article 5 of the 1988 Constitution of Brazil, Article 27 of the 2005 Constitution

of Sudan, Article 410 of the 2009 Constitution of Bolivia, Article 9 of the 2011 Constitution of South Sudan

6 Article 7 of the 1949 Constitution of Costa Rica, Article 11 (4) of the 1980 Constitution of Verde Cape, Article 90 (5) of the 1982 Constitution of Turkey, Article 46 of the 1985 Constitution of Guatemala, Article 45 of the 1972 Constitution of Cameroon, Article 147 of the 1990 Constitution of Benin, Article 221 of the 1996 Constitution of Chad, Article 87 of the 2000 Constitution of Cote D’Ivoire, Article 215 of the 2005 Constitution of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Article 137 of the 2010 Constitution of Madagascar, Article 94 of the 2016 Constitution of the Central African Republic

7 Article 10 (1) of the 1947 Constitution of Italy, Article 25 of the 1949 Constitution of Germany, Article 6 (2) of the

1995 Constitution of Georgia, Article 194 of the 2006 Constitution of Seychelles, Article 6 of the 2008 Constitution

of Turkmenistan

the liberty of any people” This is actually the first time that a Constitution speaks out the attitude

of a sovereign State towards foreign relations, although this article does not explicitly mention

“international law” or “treaties” The similar Constitutions in this regard were the 1919 Weimar Constitution of Germany and the 1924 Constitution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics The Preamble of the 1919 Weimar Constitution reads that the adoption of this Constitution is “to renew and strengthen its Reich in liberty and justice, to serve people inward and outward and to promote social progress” The 1924 Constitution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics provides the fundamental principles of carrying out foreign relations on the basis of the nature of foreign States in its preamble, “in the camp of capitalism: national hate and inequality, colonial slavery and chauvinism, national oppression and massacres, brutalities and imperialistic wars”, and “in the camp of socialism: reciprocal confidence and peace, national liberty and equality, the pacific co-existence and fraternal collabouration of peoples.” The first Constitution, which provides that” international law” is clearly considered to be a guiding principle of establishing and developing foreign relations is the 1931 Constitution of the Second Spanish Republic Article 7 of that Constitution reads that “El Estado

español acatará las normas universales del Derecho internacional (emphasis added), incorporándolas

a su derecho positivo” (“The Spanish State will abide by the universal rules of international law (emphasis added), incorporating them into its positive right”).

Since then, many States have provided in their Constitutions that they wish to establish and develop foreign relations with other sovereign States on the basis of “international law” This is particularly evident in the Constitutions after 1945 For example, Article 51 of the Indian Constitution requires the Republic to promote international peace and security, and reads that “the State shall

endeavour to… (c) foster respect for international law (emphasis added) and treaty obligations in

the dealings of organised peoples with one another…” Since the end of the Cold War in the 1990s, many newly independent States from the Soviet Union and the new governments of East European States provide in their Constitutions that they will establish and develop foreign relations on the basis

of international law, while at the same time their Constitutions also provide the status of international law in their domestic legal framework1

In the 21st century, the new governments of several States after regime transition adopted new Constitutions in which international law is also mentioned Article 7 (1) of the 2004 Constitution of Afghanistan reads that “The state shall observe the United Nations Charter, interstate agreements, as

well as international treaties to which Afghanistan has joined (emphasis added), and the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights.” Article 8 of the 2005 Constitution of Iraq reads that “Iraq shall observe the principles of good neighbourliness, adhere to the principle of noninterference in the internal affairs of other states, seek to settle disputes by peaceful means, establish relations on the basis of

mutual interests and reciprocity, and respect its international obligations (emphasis added).” Article

27 (15) of the 1978 Constitution of Sri Lanka with 2015 Amendments reads that “The State shall promote international peace, security and cooperation, and the establishment of a just and equitable

international economic and social order and shall endeavour to foster respect for international law and treaty obligations (emphasis added) in dealings among nations.” Article 51 (m) (1) of the 2015

Constitution of Nepal provides that it is a state policy to pursue “an independent foreign policy

1 Article 135 of the Constitution of Lithuania, Article 9 of the Constitution of Armenia, Article 8 of the Constitution of Kazakhstan, Article 11 of the Constitution of Tajikistan, Article 6 of the Constitution of Turkmenistan.

considering the national interest to be of utmost importance, on the basis of the UN Charter,

non-alignment, principle of Panchasheel, international law (emphasis added) and universal norms, and

by remaining active to defend the sovereignty, indivisibility, national independence and national interest”

V How do the Constitutions of northeast and southeast Asian States provide the three types

of international law clauses?

This part will present the international law clauses in the Constitutions of the northeast and southeast Asian States

The Constitution of the People’s Republic of China was adopted in 1982, the latest amendment was adopted in 2018 This Constitution contains treaty-making clauses Article 67 reads that “The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress exercises the following functions and powers:

…… (14) To decide on the ratification and abrogation of treaties and important agreements concluded with foreign states.” Article 81 reads that “The President of the People’s Republic of China, on behalf

of the People’s Republic of China, ……in pursuance of decisions of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, ……ratifies and abrogates treaties and important agreements concluded with foreign states.” Article 89 reads that “The State Council exercises the following functions and powers: …… (9) To conduct foreign affairs and conclude treaties and agreements with foreign states.” It does not contain a treaty or international law status clause It does not contain a treaty or international law based foreign policy clause The Preamble reads that “The future of China is closely linked to the future of the world China consistently carries out an independent foreign policy, and adheres to the five principles of mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence, to the path of peaceful development, and to the reciprocal, win-win, and open strategy

in developing diplomatic relations and economic and cultural exchanges with other countries and promoting the building of a community with a shared future for mankind.” However, this paragraph does not mention “treaty” or “international law” clearly

The Constitution of Japan was adopted in 1946 The Japanese Constitution has treaty-making clauses Article 61 reads that “The second paragraph of the preceding article applies also to the Diet approval required for the conclusion of treaties.” Article 60 (2) reads that “Upon consideration of the budget, when the House of Councillors makes a decision different from that of the House of Representatives, and when no agreement can be reached even through a joint committee of both Houses, provided for by law, or in the case of failure by the House of Councillors to take final action within thirty days, the period of recess excluded, after the receipt of the budget passed by the House

of Representatives, the decision of the House of Representatives shall be the decision of the Diet.”

The Japanese Constitution further has a treaty status clause Article 98 (2) reads that “The treaties concluded (emphasis added) by Japan and established laws of nations shall be faithfully observed.” It

does not have a treaty or international law based foreign policy clause Although Article 9 reads that

“Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes”, this article is not a treaty or international based foreign policy clause, because

it does not mention “treaty” or “international law” clearly

The Constitution of South Korea was adopted in 1948 The latest amendment was adopted in

1987 It contains treaty-making clauses Article 60 (1) reads that “The National Assembly shall have the right to consent to the conclusion and ratification of treaties pertaining to mutual assistance or mutual security; treaties concerning important international organizations; treaties of friendship, trade and navigation; treaties pertaining to any restriction in sovereignty; peace treaties; treaties which will burden the State or people with an important financial obligation; or treaties related to legislative matters.” It further has a treaty and international law status clause Article 6 (1) reads that

“Treaties duly concluded and promulgated (emphasis added) in accordance with the Constitution and the generally recognized rules of international law (emphasis added) shall have the same effect as the

domestic laws of the Republic of Korea.” It does not have a treaty or international law based foreign policy clause Although Article 5 (1) reads that “The Republic of Korea shall endeavour to maintain international peace and shall renounce all aggressive wars”, this article is not a treaty or international based foreign policy clause, because it does not mention “treaty” or “international law” clearly

The Constitution of North Korea was adopted in 1972 The latest amendment was adopted in

1998 It has treaty-making clauses Article 91 reads that “The Supreme People’s Assembly has the authority to: decide on the ratification or abrogation of treaties submitted to the Supreme People’s Assembly.” Article 125 reads that “The Cabinet has duties and authority to:… 11 conclude treaties with foreign countries and conduct external activities.” It does not have a treaty or international law status clause It does not have a treaty or international law based foreign policy clause Although Article 17 reads that “Independence, peace, and solidarity are the basic ideals of the foreign policy and the principles of external activities of the DPRK The State shall establish diplomatic as well as political, economic and cultural relations with all friendly countries, on principles of complete equality, independence, mutual respect, non-interference in each other’s affairs and mutual benefit The State shall promote unity with the world public defending peoples who oppose all forms of aggression and interference and fight for their countries’ independence and national and class emancipation”, this article is not a treaty or international based foreign policy clause, because it does not mention “treaty”

or “international law” clearly

The Constitution of Mongolia was adopted in 1992 The latest amendment was adopted in

2001 It has treaty-making clauses Article 25 reads that “The State Great Hural (Parliament) may consider at its own initiative any issue pertaining to domestic and foreign policies of the State, and the following matters within its exclusive prerogative shall be vested therein and decided upon: ……

15 Ratify or annul international instruments to which Mongolia is a Party, and to establish and sever diplomatic relations with foreign states, as submitted by the Government (Cabinet).” Article 33 (1) reads that “The President shall exercise the following prerogative powers: …… 4 Represent the State with full authority in foreign relations, and, in concurrence with the State Great Hural (Parliament),

to conclude international treaties on behalf of Mongolia.” Article 38 (2) reads that “The Government (Cabinet) shall enforce the laws of the State, and in accordance with its common functions of managing the economic, social and cultural system shall exercise the following powers: …… 9 Conclude and implement international treaties to which Mongolia is a Party with the concurrence

of and for subsequent ratification by the State Great Hural (Parliament), as well as to conclude and abrogate inter-governmental agreements.” It further has treaty status clauses Article 10 (2) reads

that “Mongolia shall enforce and fulfil in good faith its obligations under the international treaties (emphasis added) to which it is a Party.” Article 10 (3) reads that “The international treaties to which

Mongolia is a Party, shall become effective as domestic legislation, upon the entry into force of the laws on their ratification or accession.” Finally, it has international law based foreign policy clause Article 10 (1) reads that “Mongolia shall adhere to the universally recognized norms and principles

of international law (emphasis added), and shall pursue a peaceful foreign policy.”

The Constitution of Vietnam was adopted in 1992 The latest amendment was adopted in 2013

It has treaty-making clauses Article 70 reads that “The National Assembly has the following duties and powers: ……14 To decide on fundamental policies in external relations; to ratify or nullify international treaties with respect to war and peace; national sovereignty; membership of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam in important international and regional organisations; international treaties on human rights, citizens’ fundamental rights and duties and other international treaties inconsistent with the laws and resolutions taken by the National Assembly.” Article 88 reads that

“The State President has the following duties and powers: ……6 …… to decide on negotiation and conclusion of international treaties in the name of the State; to submit to the National Assembly international treaties for ratification and termination as provided by clause 14 of Article 70; to decide

on ratification, accession to or termination of other international treaties in the name of the State.” Article 96 reads that “The Government has the following tasks and powers: …… 7 To negotiate and conclude international treaties in the name of the State as delegated by the State President; to negotiate, sign, ratify and accede to international treaties in the name of the Government, except the international treaties proposed to the National Assembly for approval as provided by clause 14 of Article 70 and to protect the interests of the State, the legitimate interests of Vietnamese organisations and citizens in foreign countries” Article 98 reads that “The Prime Minister has the following duties and powers: …… 5 To decide and direct the negotiation of and to direct the conclusion and joining of international treaties within the duties and authorities of the Government; to organise the implementation of international treaties in which the Socialist Republic of Vietnam is a member.”

It does not have treaty or international law status clause It has a treaty based foreign policy clause Article 12 reads that “The Socialist Republic of Vietnam consistently carries out a diplomatic policy

of independence, autonomy, peace, friendship, cooperation and development; seeks multilateral and diversified relations and actively seeks international integration and cooperation on the basis of respect for each other’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, equality and mutual interest; conforms to the Charter of the United Nations

and international treaties (emphasis added) in which the Socialist Republic of Vietnam is a member;

a friend, reliable partner and responsible member of the international community for the sake of national interests and contributes to the cause of peace, national independence, democracy and social progress in the world.”

The Constitution of Laos was adopted in 1991 The latest amendment was adopted in 2003

It has treaty-making clauses Article 53 reads that “The National Assembly has the following rights and duties: ……11 To decide on the ratification of or [withdraw from] treaties and agreements signed with foreign countries in accordance with the laws.” Article 67 reads that “The President of the State has the following rights and duties: …… 13 To issue the ratification of or [secession from] treaties and agreements signed with foreign countries.” Article 70 reads that “The government has the following rights and duties: …… 8 To sign treaties and agreements with foreign countries and guide their implementation.” It does not have a treaty or international law status clause It does not have a treaty or international law based foreign policy clauses, either Although Article 12 reads that “The