Conflicts between Environmental Agreements

An Exploration of a Code of Conduct for Responsible Scientific Research Involving Geoengineering: Introduction, Draft Articles and Commentaries

“…Wolfrum and Matz explain that 'mechanisms for the exchange of information constitute the most important form of cooperation' for promoting collaboration and coordination between treaty organs. 617 They furthermore point out that information exchange provides opportunities for harmonisation between different agreements: if data forwarded by States to treaty bodies in accordance with their reporting obligations and other implementation information was made available through a 'common exchange mechanism' then 'this would be an important step towards building the foundation necessary for a comprehensive harmonisation of implementation policies and the avoidance of conflicts between agreements.' 618 This conclusion is important in the context of emergent policy-and law-making on geoengineering, given that the issue potentially falls within the regulatory scope of several treaties (not just environmental) and international organisations.…”

“…A harmonising code of conduct of this type could help to avoid legal fragmentation and regime conflicts as international regulation develops, while promoting an integrated understanding of the interrelationship between international laws, which is a fundamental element of the concept of sustainable development. 619 The provision of information as called for in paragraph 1, draft Article 18 may not be enough 'without more' 620 and therefore paragraph 4 calls for a mechanism that promotes and facilitates information exchange. As noted in the commentaries above, the duty of international cooperation encompasses obligations related to exchange information on scientific and technical matters and about environmental threats.…”

6 Climate change and biodiversity

“…One could not ignore the resistance of some parties to improve connections between the two regimes. They originate in both the fear to pollute CBD discussions importing UNFCC difficulties and blocages and the feeling of losing sovereignty by importing concepts or rules from the CBD 64 in particular knowing that important States like the United States are not parties to the CBD.…”

U.S. Bilateral Non-Surrender Agreements and Article 98 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court: An Exercise in the Law of Treaties

“…148 Others have proposed a qualified test to give clearer contours to the term, submitting that treaties deal with different subject-matters where the similarity between them is not plainly evident. 149 However, the majority of scholars appears to construe the ordinary meaning of the term "relating to the same subject-matter" to be that a conflict or incompatibility between individual provisions of a treaty exist. 150 In the case at hand, both the ICC Statute as well as the non-surrender agreements evidently concern the same subject-matter: the question under what circumstances a person may be surrendered to the custody of the ICC.…”