Full Text Available
Note: Clicking the button above will open the full text document at the original institutional repository in a new window.
Framing Indeterminacy: A Critique of Discretion in the VCLT Framework
This thesis critically examines the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), with a focus on Articles 31 and 32, arguing that these provisions are fundamentally indeterminate. While intended to establish a structured framework for treaty interpretation, their vagueness allows for a broad spe...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis |
| Published: |
AUC Knowledge Fountain
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Tags: |
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1867613425418371072 |
|---|---|
| access_status_str | Open Access |
| author | Fayad, Abdelrahman |
| author_browse | Fayad, Abdelrahman |
| author_facet | Fayad, Abdelrahman |
| author_sort | Fayad, Abdelrahman |
| collection | Thesis |
| description | This thesis critically examines the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), with a focus on Articles 31 and 32, arguing that these provisions are fundamentally indeterminate. While intended to establish a structured framework for treaty interpretation, their vagueness allows for a broad spectrum of discretionary judicial interpretations. Courts can invoke textual, subjective, and teleological approaches, all while claiming adherence to the VCLT rules of interpretation, leading to inconsistent and potentially biased judgments. By examining cases before and after the VCLT's adoption, this research demonstrates that the interpretative methods codified by the VCLT existed long before its adoption, adding little beyond formalizing these approaches. Moreover, the lack of a clear hierarchical structure between Articles 31 and 32, or within Article 31 itself, creates further ambiguity in application. Also, the paper delves into the theoretical foundations underpinning these interpretative approaches, analyzing the rationale behind their adoption by various scholars. Through this exploration, the thesis illuminates the competing ideologies that shape the methodologies of treaty interpretation, offering examples and metaphors to clarify these concepts. The indeterminacy of Articles 31 and 32 of VCLT, while offering flexibility, also risks turning the interpretative process into a subjective exercise that blurs the line between interpreting law and creating it. By exposing these flaws, the thesis highlights the limitations of the VCLT framework and calls for greater clarity to ensure consistency and fairness in international treaty interpretation. |
| format | Thesis |
| id | oai:fount.aucegypt.edu:etds-3599 |
| institution | American University in Cairo (Egypt) |
| last_indexed | 2026-06-10T12:35:56.457Z |
| license_str | Not specified — see source repository |
| provenance_str_mv | Harvested via OAI-PMH from AUC Knowledge Fountain — bepress |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| publishDateRange | 2025 |
| publishDateSort | 2025 |
| publisher | AUC Knowledge Fountain |
| publisherStr | AUC Knowledge Fountain |
| record_format | dspace |
| source_str | AUC Knowledge Fountain — bepress |
| spelling | oai:fount.aucegypt.edu:etds-3599 Framing Indeterminacy: A Critique of Discretion in the VCLT Framework Fayad, Abdelrahman This thesis critically examines the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), with a focus on Articles 31 and 32, arguing that these provisions are fundamentally indeterminate. While intended to establish a structured framework for treaty interpretation, their vagueness allows for a broad spectrum of discretionary judicial interpretations. Courts can invoke textual, subjective, and teleological approaches, all while claiming adherence to the VCLT rules of interpretation, leading to inconsistent and potentially biased judgments. By examining cases before and after the VCLT's adoption, this research demonstrates that the interpretative methods codified by the VCLT existed long before its adoption, adding little beyond formalizing these approaches. Moreover, the lack of a clear hierarchical structure between Articles 31 and 32, or within Article 31 itself, creates further ambiguity in application. Also, the paper delves into the theoretical foundations underpinning these interpretative approaches, analyzing the rationale behind their adoption by various scholars. Through this exploration, the thesis illuminates the competing ideologies that shape the methodologies of treaty interpretation, offering examples and metaphors to clarify these concepts. The indeterminacy of Articles 31 and 32 of VCLT, while offering flexibility, also risks turning the interpretative process into a subjective exercise that blurs the line between interpreting law and creating it. By exposing these flaws, the thesis highlights the limitations of the VCLT framework and calls for greater clarity to ensure consistency and fairness in international treaty interpretation. 2025-06-18T07:00:00Z thesis application/pdf https://fount.aucegypt.edu/etds/2549 https://fount.aucegypt.edu/context/etds/article/3599/viewcontent/abdelrahman_mostafa_fayad_thesis.pdf Theses and Dissertations AUC Knowledge Fountain Indeterminacy in VCLT Shortfalls of Article 31 and 32 of VCLT Interpretation of International Treaties Theories of Interpretation Textualism vs. Intentionalism Textualism Approach Subjectivism Approach Teleological Approach Pre-VCLT and Post-VCLT Cases Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Critiques Judges Jurisprudence Law Other Law |
| spellingShingle | Indeterminacy in VCLT Shortfalls of Article 31 and 32 of VCLT Interpretation of International Treaties Theories of Interpretation Textualism vs. Intentionalism Textualism Approach Subjectivism Approach Teleological Approach Pre-VCLT and Post-VCLT Cases Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Critiques Judges Jurisprudence Law Other Law Fayad, Abdelrahman Framing Indeterminacy: A Critique of Discretion in the VCLT Framework |
| title | Framing Indeterminacy: A Critique of Discretion in the VCLT Framework |
| title_full | Framing Indeterminacy: A Critique of Discretion in the VCLT Framework |
| title_fullStr | Framing Indeterminacy: A Critique of Discretion in the VCLT Framework |
| title_full_unstemmed | Framing Indeterminacy: A Critique of Discretion in the VCLT Framework |
| title_short | Framing Indeterminacy: A Critique of Discretion in the VCLT Framework |
| title_sort | framing indeterminacy a critique of discretion in the vclt framework |
| topic | Indeterminacy in VCLT Shortfalls of Article 31 and 32 of VCLT Interpretation of International Treaties Theories of Interpretation Textualism vs. Intentionalism Textualism Approach Subjectivism Approach Teleological Approach Pre-VCLT and Post-VCLT Cases Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Critiques Judges Jurisprudence Law Other Law |
| url | https://fount.aucegypt.edu/etds/2549 https://fount.aucegypt.edu/context/etds/article/3599/viewcontent/abdelrahman_mostafa_fayad_thesis.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT fayadabdelrahman framingindeterminacyacritiqueofdiscretioninthevcltframework |