Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Entry into force

Entry into force is the procedural stage in treaty law whereby an international agreement transitions from a preparatory phase to one of binding legal obligation for the consenting states or international organizations, typically triggered by the fulfillment of stipulated conditions such as the exchange or deposit of instruments of ratification, accession, or approval by a minimum threshold of parties.^[1] This mechanism ensures that treaties do not impose enforceable duties until requisite domestic approvals are secured and mutual commitments are confirmed, as codified in Article 24 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which provides that "a treaty enters into force in such manner and upon such terms as it may provide."^[2] For multilateral instruments, entry into force often hinges on achieving a specified number of ratifications—such as the 35 required for the Vienna Convention itself, which occurred on January 27, 1980—after which subsequent adherents become bound upon their own completion of formalities.^[2]^[3] Prior to this point, states may engage in provisional application to facilitate early implementation without full legal commitment, though such arrangements remain exceptional and non-prejudicial to final entry.^[4] The process underscores the consensual foundation of international obligations, distinguishing treaties from unilateral declarations and mitigating risks of premature enforcement amid varying national ratification timelines.^[5]

Conceptual Foundations

Definition and Legal Effects

Entry into force denotes the precise moment when a legal instrument—such as a treaty, statute, regulation, or constitutional amendment—acquires binding force and operative effect, thereby imposing rights and obligations on the relevant parties or jurisdictions.^[6] This transition from negotiation or enactment to enforceability is typically stipulated within the instrument itself, ensuring predictability and consent-based activation.^[1] Absent explicit provisions, default mechanisms apply, such as mutual agreement among negotiating entities or, for treaties, consent by all parties as per customary international law. In the international context, entry into force activates the treaty's provisions under Article 24 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), rendering it binding solely on states that have expressed consent to be bound, often through ratification, accession, or signature subject to ratification.^[7]^[1] Legally, this triggers the doctrine of pacta sunt servanda, obligating parties to perform in good faith, with breaches potentially leading to state responsibility, countermeasures, or dispute settlement mechanisms outlined in the treaty.^[7] For multilateral treaties, entry into force may occur upon reaching a threshold number of ratifications, as specified (e.g., the Vienna Convention itself entered into force on January 27, 1980, after 35 ratifications). Prior to this point, the instrument lacks enforceability, though provisional application may occur if agreed.^[1] Domestically, entry into force (or "commencement") for legislation marks the shift from formal adoption to practical applicability, often set by the statute's text, a specified future date, or executive proclamation to allow preparatory implementation.^[8] Upon commencement, the law integrates into the national legal order, enabling judicial enforcement, administrative application, and citizen compliance, with retroactivity rare absent explicit provision to uphold rule-of-law principles.^[9] This effect supersedes prior inconsistent norms within the jurisdiction's hierarchy (e.g., statutes prevailing over regulations), though constitutional limits may constrain.^[10] In federal systems, it may require harmonization across subnational entities, ensuring uniform obligations post-activation.^[9]

Preconditions and Mechanisms

The preconditions for the entry into force of a legal instrument generally encompass the fulfillment of procedural formalities, including authentication or adoption of the text, expression of consent to be bound where required, and any conditions explicitly stipulated within the instrument itself, such as a threshold number of ratifications or accessions for multilateral agreements.^[2]^[11] In the absence of such specified conditions, entry into force may default to the completion of basic consent by relevant parties, ensuring that obligations only bind those who have affirmatively agreed.^[2] These preconditions serve to confirm mutual commitment and prevent premature enforceability, reflecting the principle of pacta sunt servanda while allowing flexibility based on the instrument's terms.^[11] Mechanisms triggering entry into force vary by context but typically involve depositary functions, notifications, or proclamations to operationalize effectiveness. For international treaties, mechanisms include the deposit of instruments of ratification, acceptance, or accession with a designated depositary—often the UN Secretary-General—who verifies compliance and issues notifications to states parties, as outlined in treaty provisions and customary practice.^[11] Article 24 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969) formalizes this by providing that treaties enter into force upon the date and in the manner specified therein or, failing agreement, upon consent from all negotiating states; for subsequent consenting states, effectiveness applies from the date of their consent unless otherwise stated.^[2] Provisional application may also serve as an interim mechanism pending definitive entry, if expressly provided, to facilitate early implementation without full binding force.^[11] In domestic settings, mechanisms for statutes often hinge on legislative passage followed by executive assent—such as presidential signature or royal assent—after which the law takes effect immediately unless deferred by its own terms to a specified date, proclamation, or subordinate regulation.^[12]^[13] Publication in an official gazette or equivalent bulletin commonly acts as a notifying mechanism, providing public notice and, in some jurisdictions, a precondition for enforceability against unaware parties.^[14] These processes ensure transparency and allow for orderly transition, with defaults to the assent date preventing indefinite suspension where no alternative is designated.^[12]

International Applications

Treaties and the Vienna Convention

The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), adopted by the United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties on 22 May 1969 and opened for signature the following day, establishes a comprehensive framework for the formation, interpretation, and termination of treaties between states, including provisions on their entry into force.^[15] The Convention entered into force on 27 January 1980, thirty days after the deposit of the thirty-fifth instrument of ratification or accession, as stipulated in its own Article 84.^[2] Although binding only on states parties, many of its rules, including those on entry into force, reflect and codify pre-existing customary international law, influencing treaty practice universally.^[16] Article 24 of the VCLT governs the entry into force of treaties. Under paragraph 1, a treaty enters into force in the manner and on the date specified in its text or as agreed by the negotiating states, providing primary flexibility to accommodate the intentions of the parties.^[2] This default approach is predominant in practice; for instance, multilateral treaties often condition entry into force on ratification or accession by a minimum number of states, such as the 35 required for the VCLT itself or the 50 for the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in 1994.^[15] Bilateral treaties may enter into force upon the exchange of instruments of ratification or simply upon signature if not subject to further domestic approval. In the absence of any provision in the treaty or subsequent agreement among negotiating states, Article 24(2) mandates that the treaty enters into force once consent to be bound has been established for all negotiating states.^[2] Consent is typically expressed through signature, ratification, acceptance, approval, or accession, depending on the treaty's requirements (per Articles 11–15 of the VCLT). This residual rule ensures completeness but is seldom invoked for multilateral instruments, as requiring universal consent would often prevent entry into force altogether; instead, treaties explicitly set lower thresholds to enable partial operation among initial parties while remaining open to later adherents. Article 25 addresses provisional application, allowing a treaty to take effect temporarily pending full entry into force if the treaty provides for it or if negotiating states agree.^[2] Such provisional regimes bind participating states to treaty obligations during the interim, subject to termination if the treaty fails to enter into force within a specified or agreed period, or upon notice. This mechanism facilitates early implementation in urgent contexts, such as arms control or trade agreements, but does not alter the formal entry into force under Article 24. Once entered into force, treaties impose binding obligations on parties under the principle of pacta sunt servanda (Article 26), with non-retroactivity to acts predating entry (Article 28).^[2] Entry into force under the VCLT applies prospectively to treaties concluded after its adoption, but its customary elements extend to earlier instruments and non-parties, as affirmed by state practice and judicial decisions like those of the International Court of Justice. Variations may arise from reservations (Articles 19–23), which can affect participation but not the core timing of entry into force for consenting states.^[2]

International Organizations and Customary Law

The constituent instruments of international organizations, such as charters or treaties establishing their structure and powers, enter into force in accordance with provisions specified therein, typically requiring ratification or accession by a designated number of states.^[17] For instance, the United Nations Charter, signed on 26 June 1945, entered into force on 24 October 1945 upon ratification by the five permanent members of the Security Council (China, France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and a majority of other signatories, totaling 51 original members.^[18] Similarly, the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) applies to such instruments, stipulating under Article 24 that entry into force occurs as provided by the treaty or, absent specification, upon consent to be bound by all negotiating states.^[2] The 1986 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations extends these principles to agreements involving organizations, mirroring VCLT Article 24 for entry into force mechanisms, but it has not yet entered into force itself, requiring 35 ratifications and having received only 31 as of recent records.^[19] Once in force, an organization's constituent instrument binds member states that have consented, enabling the organization to exercise powers like treaty-making, though explicit powers may be added post-entry via amendments.^[20] In contrast, customary international law lacks a discrete "entry into force" akin to treaties, emerging instead through persistent state practice accepted as legally obligatory (opinio juris), without requiring formal ratification or a fixed commencement date.^[21] It binds all states, including those persistently objecting during formation, and continues to apply even alongside treaties on unregulated matters, as affirmed in International Law Commission conclusions.^[21] Practices by international organizations may contribute to custom formation, but the law's binding effect arises gradually from widespread acceptance rather than an organizational charter's activation.^[22]

Domestic Applications

Legislation and Statutory Instruments

In domestic legal systems, primary legislation such as statutes or acts enters into force upon formal enactment, typically marked by royal assent, presidential signature, or equivalent executive approval, though the precise timing often depends on explicit provisions within the law itself.^[23] Unless otherwise specified, many jurisdictions apply a default rule that the statute takes effect immediately or at the close of the day of enactment to avoid retrospective application and ensure certainty.^[24] For instance, in the United Kingdom, the Interpretation Act 1978 establishes that Acts passed after its commencement come into operation on the day they receive Royal Assent, absent any contrary indication in the text, which promotes prompt enforceability while allowing flexibility for preparatory periods. This default can be overridden by clauses specifying future dates, phased implementation, or activation through subordinate measures, reflecting practical needs like regulatory alignment or administrative readiness.^[25] Statutory instruments, as delegated or secondary legislation, derive their authority from enabling provisions in primary acts and enter into force according to terms outlined in the instrument or the parent statute.^[26] In the UK, these instruments—governed by the Statutory Instruments Act 1946—frequently commence on the date of making by the responsible minister, particularly for urgent matters, though a convention urges a 21-day delay before laying before Parliament to enable scrutiny.^[27] Procedures vary: "made negative" instruments take effect immediately but face potential annulment within 40 sitting days if Parliament objects; "made affirmative" ones may provisionally operate for limited periods (e.g., 28 days) pending explicit approval, ensuring accountability without undue delay.^[28] Commencement orders, a common form of statutory instrument, are used to activate sections of primary legislation, allowing governments to sequence implementation based on resource availability or policy priorities.^[26] These mechanisms balance legislative intent with administrative feasibility, but deviations occur across jurisdictions; for example, U.S. federal regulations under the Administrative Procedure Act generally become effective no sooner than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, unless agencies demonstrate good cause for earlier action to address emergencies or minor technical updates. Such rules prevent abrupt disruptions while enabling responsive governance, with empirical evidence from implementation delays highlighting risks of non-commencement leading to legal uncertainty or ineffective policy delivery.^[25]

Executive and Constitutional Instruments

Executive instruments, such as presidential or ministerial orders, decrees, and regulations, derive their authority from enabling statutes or inherent executive powers and generally enter into force upon issuance, signing, or official publication, unless the instrument specifies a deferred commencement date or conditions precedent. In the United States, for example, presidential executive orders typically become effective immediately upon the president's signature, enabling swift implementation of policy directives within the executive branch, though some may include delayed effective dates for administrative preparation or public notice.^[29]^[30] This immediacy contrasts with primary legislation, allowing executives to respond rapidly to emergent needs, but such instruments remain subject to judicial review for consistency with higher law.^[31] In parliamentary systems like the United Kingdom, executive-issued statutory instruments—secondary legislation made under powers delegated by Acts of Parliament—commence on the date stipulated in the instrument itself, via a separate commencement order, or automatically upon laying before Parliament, with publication in the official gazette serving as constructive notice.^[32] Commencement orders, themselves statutory instruments, activate provisions of primary Acts and must align with the parent statute's framework, ensuring delegated powers do not exceed legislative intent. Failure to specify commencement defaults to the instrument's making date in some cases, though practices vary to accommodate transitional periods.^[33] Constitutional instruments, primarily amendments or foundational revisions, enter into force only after fulfilling rigorous, multi-stage ratification procedures designed to reflect broad consensus and prevent hasty alterations to supreme law. These processes often require supermajorities in legislative bodies, state approvals, or popular referenda, culminating in official certification or promulgation to bind all branches of government. In the United States, under Article V of the Constitution, an amendment proposed by Congress becomes operative upon ratification by three-fourths of the states (either legislatures or conventions), with the Archivist of the United States issuing a formal certification that triggers nationwide enforceability, as occurred with the 27th Amendment on May 7, 1992, following state ratifications spanning over two centuries.^[34] This certification marks the point of entry into force, integrating the amendment seamlessly into the constitutional text without further legislative action.^[35] Across jurisdictions, constitutional entry into force emphasizes finality post-ratification to avoid interim legal vacuums, though provisional effects may arise in federations during ratification phases; for instance, some amendments include self-executing clauses for immediate partial application upon proposal. Empirical variations highlight sovereignty safeguards, with rigid procedures in written constitutions minimizing executive overreach compared to more flexible amendment paths in unwritten systems.^[36]

National Practices and Variations

United Kingdom

The entry into force of primary legislation in the United Kingdom occurs at the end of the day on which the Act receives Royal Assent from the monarch, unless the Act itself provides otherwise. This default rule, codified in section 4 of the Interpretation Act 1978, applies to Acts passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom, ensuring immediate effect for provisions not subject to delayed commencement. However, most modern Acts include specific commencement clauses that defer entry into force for some or all provisions, often until a date appointed by the responsible government minister via secondary legislation, such as a commencement order or regulations. This mechanism allows time for preparation, consultation, or alignment with related measures, with over 80% of provisions in recent Acts typically commencing by order rather than immediately. Secondary legislation, including statutory instruments, enters into force on the date specified in the instrument itself, which may be the date of making, a future date, or upon laying before Parliament. Under the Statutory Instruments Act 1946, negative resolution instruments take effect unless annulled within 40 days of laying, while affirmative instruments require explicit parliamentary approval prior to entry into force. Devolved legislatures, such as the Scottish Parliament or Senedd Cymru, follow analogous processes for their primary Acts, with Royal Assent (or equivalent royal approval) triggering default entry into force, subject to commencement provisions tailored to regional competencies under the Scotland Act 1998, Government of Wales Act 2006, and Northern Ireland Act 1998. For instance, Scottish Acts commence at the end of the day of Royal Assent unless otherwise stated, mirroring Westminster practice. International treaties enter into force for the United Kingdom through a dualist framework, where ratification by the executive imposes international obligations but does not automatically alter domestic law without parliamentary incorporation via statute. Signature indicates intent, but full entry into force typically follows ratification by the Secretary of State, after the treaty has been laid before Parliament for 21 sitting days under section 20 of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, allowing scrutiny unless urgency justifies waiver. The treaty's own terms dictate the precise timing post-ratification, often requiring a deposit of instruments with a depository like the United Nations; for example, the UK ratified the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons on 27 November 1968, with entry into force occurring on that date per its provisions. Domestic effect for treaties implicating rights or obligations necessitates primary legislation, such as the Human Rights Act 1998 incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights, which entered into force on 2 October 2000 after receiving Royal Assent on 9 November 1998. Post-Brexit, retained EU law under the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 entered into force domestically on "IP completion day" (31 December 2020 at 11:00 p.m. GMT), with subsequent amendments via statutory instruments. Executive instruments, such as Orders in Council, enter into force upon signature by the monarch on advice from ministers, often used for treaty implementation or prerogative powers, though subject to parliamentary control where statutorily required. Variations arise in reserved versus devolved matters; for instance, international relations remain reserved to Westminster, preventing devolved administrations from independent treaty ratification. Empirical data from the UK Treaty Series indicates that between 2010 and 2023, approximately 1,200 treaties were ratified, with average entry-into-force delays of 3-6 months post-laying, reflecting procedural safeguards against hasty commitments. This system prioritizes parliamentary sovereignty, contrasting with monist jurisdictions where treaties bind domestically upon ratification alone.

Netherlands

In the Netherlands, international treaties enter into force domestically following parliamentary approval by the States General, as required by Article 91 of the Constitution, which prohibits the Kingdom from being bound by treaties without such prior consent.^[37] This approval process involves the government submitting the treaty for review, after which ratification occurs if consented to, aligning the state's international obligations with the treaty's specified conditions, such as the deposit of instruments of ratification.^[38] Upon entry into force internationally, treaties are published in the Tractatenblad (Treaty Series) to ensure transparency and domestic applicability; self-executing provisions gain direct effect in national law, superseding conflicting domestic statutes unless the treaty requires implementing legislation.^[39] Provisional application of treaties is permissible but exceptional, requiring the government to justify it in explanatory memoranda to Parliament due to the binding nature of such steps.^[40] For domestic legislation, Acts of Parliament enter into force only after publication in the Staatsblad (Bulletin of Acts and Decrees), as mandated by Article 88 of the Constitution, which delegates regulation of publication and entry procedures to an Act of Parliament while prohibiting effectiveness prior to official announcement.^[37] The legislative process culminates in approval by both the House of Representatives and Senate, followed by royal assent and ministerial signature; the entry date is then set by royal decree, typically effective from 1 January or a specified future date to allow preparation, though immediate effect is possible in urgent cases.^[41] This framework ensures legal certainty, with non-publication rendering acts unenforceable, and aligns with the Netherlands' dualist tendencies for non-self-executing international obligations, where treaties may necessitate amendments to national laws for full compliance.^[42]

United States

The entry into force of treaties in the United States requires presidential negotiation and signing, followed by Senate advice and consent via a two-thirds majority vote of senators present.^[43] Upon Senate approval, the President may ratify the treaty by executing an instrument of ratification and exchanging it with the other party or parties, after which the treaty enters into force according to its terms—typically upon such exchange or a specified date—and the President issues a proclamation declaring its domestic effect.^[44]^[45] This process ensures that only agreements receiving supermajority legislative backing bind the nation internationally and domestically as supreme law under Article VI of the Constitution, equivalent in status to federal statutes but subordinate to the Constitution itself.^[46] Treaties that are self-executing—those providing clear rules directly applicable without further legislation—take immediate domestic effect upon entry into force, preempting conflicting state laws and earlier federal statutes under the Supremacy Clause.^[47] Non-self-executing treaties, however, require implementing legislation from Congress to have enforceable domestic legal force, as determined by the Supreme Court in cases like Medellín v. Texas (2008), which held that mere Senate ratification does not automatically confer judicially enforceable rights absent explicit intent or congressional action.^[47]^[48] The State Department maintains an annual Treaties in Force publication listing agreements currently binding on the United States, reflecting only those that have completed this ratification and entry process as of January 1 each year.^[49] In contrast, executive agreements—concluded by the President alone or with congressional authorization—bypass Senate treaty procedures and enter into force upon presidential signature or as otherwise specified, without requiring two-thirds consent.^[50] Their domestic effect mirrors that of treaties: self-executing ones bind as federal law, while others depend on statutory implementation, though sole executive agreements may face constitutional limits if they infringe on congressional powers.^[51] This dual-track approach allows flexibility but has led to debates over circumvention of Senate oversight, with presidents increasingly favoring executive agreements; for instance, over 90% of U.S. international commitments since World War II have used this mechanism rather than formal treaties.^[43] For domestic legislation, statutes enter into force upon presidential signature (or congressional override of a veto), typically effective immediately unless a delayed date is specified in the text, as seen in acts like the Affordable Care Act (effective variably from March 23, 2010, onward per section provisions). This contrasts with treaty processes by lacking a dedicated supermajority hurdle, reflecting the Constitution's separation of legislative and treaty powers.^[46]

Challenges and Debates

Ratification Delays and Sovereignty Concerns

Ratification processes for international treaties frequently encounter delays due to mandatory domestic legislative scrutiny, which can span years or decades as parliaments evaluate compatibility with national constitutions and policies. These delays are exacerbated by sovereignty concerns, where states hesitate to commit to obligations that might subordinate domestic authority to international tribunals, resource-sharing regimes, or enforcement mechanisms lacking direct national oversight. For example, under Article 14 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, consent to be bound requires ratification for treaties subject to it, but internal approval hurdles—such as supermajority votes or referenda—allow time for assessing risks like policy lock-in or fiscal burdens without recourse. Such pauses serve a first-principles function of aligning international commitments with causal domestic priorities, though critics from internationalist perspectives argue they erode global cooperation.^[52] A prominent case is the United States' non-ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), negotiated in 1982 and amended in 1994 to address earlier objections. Despite U.S. recognition of much of UNCLOS as customary law, Senate opposition persists over provisions establishing the International Seabed Authority (ISA), which opponents contend could redistribute deep-sea mineral revenues from U.S. firms to a global commons, effectively ceding resource sovereignty without equivalent military exemptions.^[53]^[54] The U.S. signed the 1994 Implementation Agreement but has withheld full ratification since 1982, prioritizing unilateral extended continental shelf claims over ISA jurisdiction.^[55] Likewise, the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), opened for signature on September 24, 1996, remains unratified by the U.S., one of eight Annex 2 states blocking its entry into force. Signed by President Clinton, the treaty faced Senate rejection in 1999 (48-50 vote) amid concerns that intrusive verification inspections and bans on nuclear testing undermine sovereign control over weapons modernization and deterrence reliability, potentially weakening U.S. strategic autonomy against adversaries like China and Russia.^[56]^[57] As of November 2024, no subsequent administration has secured the required two-thirds Senate consent, reflecting persistent debates on whether such treaties constrain verifiable national security imperatives more than they advance non-proliferation.^[58] These delays highlight broader tensions: while international bodies like the UN advocate swift ratifications to enforce treaty efficacy, empirical patterns show non-ratifying states often secure advantages through customary adherence without binding constraints, as seen in U.S. influence over maritime norms absent UNCLOS membership.^[59] Sovereignty-focused holdouts, substantiated by institutional analyses, counter that rushed entries risk irreversible commitments, as evidenced by the 40-year U.S. delay in ratifying the 1948 Genocide Convention (finalized November 4, 1988, after reservations preserving federalism).^[60] Opponents of delays, often from academia or NGOs with noted ideological tilts toward supranationalism, frame resistance as isolationism, yet causal evidence from treaty outcomes underscores ratification's role in safeguarding against overreach, such as potential ICC jurisdiction under the Rome Statute, which the U.S. unsigned in 2002 after initial 2000 signature due to fears of extraterritorial prosecution eroding prosecutorial sovereignty.^[61]

Provisional Application and Empirical Critiques

Provisional application permits states to implement a treaty or its provisions prior to formal ratification, as codified in Article 25 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), which entered into force on January 27, 1980.^[2] Under this provision, such application occurs either by explicit agreement among negotiating states or as stipulated in the treaty itself, extending to the entire instrument or specific parts, and remains voluntary without creating an obligation to ratify.^[62] The mechanism terminates upon ratification, rejection, or unilateral notice by the provisionally applying state, distinguishing it from binding interim obligations under VCLT Article 18, which prohibit acts defeating a treaty's object and purpose during signature-to-ratification delays.^[63] In practice, provisional application facilitates early cooperation in areas requiring prompt action, such as trade or energy regimes. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), applied provisionally from 1947 until the World Trade Organization's establishment in 1995, exemplifies success in stabilizing multilateral commerce without immediate full ratification across participants.^[64] Similarly, the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), signed in 1994, has been provisionally applied by numerous states, enabling interim investment protections and energy transit rules; arbitral tribunals in the Yukos v. Russia cases (2005–2014) upheld Russia's provisional obligations under ECT Article 45, enforcing claims worth billions despite Russia's later denunciation.^[65] ^[66] These instances demonstrate provisional application's role in fostering compliance and economic stability, with over 50 states employing it in modern investment treaties as of 2021.^[67] Empirical critiques highlight inconsistencies and risks, drawn from arbitral outcomes and state behaviors rather than large-scale quantitative studies. In the Yukos disputes, Russia's provisional adherence yielded short-term investment inflows but culminated in withdrawal and liability exceeding $50 billion, illustrating how domestic constitutional barriers—such as parliamentary approval requirements—can undermine continuity, as Russia invoked incompatibility under ECT Article 45(2) yet lost on jurisdictional grounds.^[65] ^[66] Case analyses reveal provisional application often succeeds in low-stakes technical agreements but falters in high-value pacts, with states terminating unilaterally in approximately 10–15% of documented investment treaty invocations since 1990, per tribunal records, due to perceived sovereignty erosions or ratification failures.^[68] Critics, including International Law Commission rapporteurs, argue this voluntarism incentivizes "provisionalism" as a low-commitment entry point, potentially delaying full entry into force and enabling strategic non-performance, as evidenced by partial applications in EU mixed agreements where only non-exclusive competences are provisionally enforced.^[69] ^[70] Such patterns underscore causal vulnerabilities: provisional regimes correlate with higher dispute rates in politically sensitive domains, prioritizing expediency over durable consent.^[71]

References

[1]
Glossary of terms relating to Treaty actions - UNTC
Bilateral treaties may provide for their entry into force on a particular date, upon the day of their last signature, upon exchange of the instruments of ...
[2]
[PDF] Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)
Jan 27, 1980 · When a State objecting to a reservation has not opposed the entry into force of the treaty between itself and the reserving State, the ...
[3]
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)
Mar 14, 2023 · Its entry into force required 35 ratifications and happened on 27 January 1980 (Treaties, Conclusion and Entry into Force). The delay in entry ...
[4]
[PDF] Guide to Provisional Application of Treaties
A treaty or a part of a treaty is applied provisionally pending its entry into force between the States or international organizations concerned, if the ...Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
[5]
[PDF] Understanding International Law - United Nations Treaty Collection
It can do this in various ways, defined by the terms of the relevant treaty. ... become a party and thus be bound by the treaty upon its entry into force.
[6]
What is Entry into Force? - EUCLID Treaty
The concept of “entry into force” refers to the moment when a treaty begins to have legal effect for the parties involved. This process is governed by customary ...
[7]
Entry into force (Chapter 9) - Modern Treaty Law and Practice
When a treaty has entered into force, it binds only those states which have consented to be bound by it.
[8]
Entry into force Definition | Legal Glossary - LexisNexis
Date on which an EU act takes effect which is the date specified in it or, in the absence of such date, the twentieth day following that of its official.
[9]
The Relationship Between Treaties and Domestic Law | Australian ...
Nov 6, 2003 · As a general policy, the necessary legislation is put in place prior to the entry into force of a treaty for Australia. This ensures that ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[10]
https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1620&context=facpubs
[11]
[PDF] Treaty Handbook
The provisions of the treaty determine the moment of its entry into force. This may be a date specified in the treaty or a date on which a specified number ...Missing: preconditions | Show results with:preconditions
[12]
Coming into Force of Federal Legislation: A Practical Guide - HillNotes
Oct 4, 2022 · If no explicit provision on the coming into force exists, the Act comes into force by default on the day it receives Royal Assent.Missing: preconditions | Show results with:preconditions
[13]
Researching Legislation: Commencement of Acts - Resource guides
Oct 13, 2025 · An Act commences into law once it has received the Royal Assent. · An Act (or specific sections of an Act) commences into law on a set date. · An ...Missing: preconditions entry
[14]
Commencement and repeal of laws | Financial Institutions Legal ...
Jun 7, 2016 · The Interpretation Act 1957 explains when laws commence and what happens when a law is repealed.Commencement And Repeal Of... · Commencement Of Laws · Notification In Gazette Of...Missing: preconditions | Show results with:preconditions<|separator|>
[15]
1 . Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties - UNTC
However, Portugal does not object to the entry into force of the remaining of the Convention between the Portuguese Republic and such a State and considers that ...
[16]
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties - State.gov
The United States signed the treaty on April 24, 1970. The U.S. Senate has not given its advice and consent to the treaty. The United States considers many of ...
[17]
UN Charter | United Nations
It was signed on 26 June 1945, in San Francisco, at the conclusion of the United Nations Conference on International Organization, and came into force on 24 ...
[18]
United Nations Charter (full text)
All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
[19]
[PDF] How and Why International Law Binds International Organizations
11. Thirty-five states must become parties before the VCLT-IO enters into force; so far, only thirty- one have done so. See ...
[20]
https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e467
[21]
[PDF] Draft conclusions on identification of customary international law ...
Even where there is a treaty in force, the rules of customary international law continue to govern questions not regulated by the treaty and continue to apply ...
[22]
[PDF] International Organizations and the Creation of Customary ...
As a starting point, there is no doubt that states can – and have – empowered inter- national organizations to make international law by entering into treaties.
[23]
What is an Act of Parliament?
An Act may come into force immediately, on a specific future date, or in stages. You can find out when an Act is due to come into force by looking at a section ...
[24]
Acts of Parliament created in the 2024-26 Session
Acts of Parliament come into effect at midnight following Royal Assent, unless a date is specified within the Act.
[25]
Coming into force - UK Parliament
Although a bill, draft measure or statutory instrument may become law on a particular day, it may not have legal effect until sometime later. In these cases ...
[26]
Understanding Legislation
An act can therefore come into force by way of a Statutory Instrument called a 'Commencement Order' or 'Commencement Regulation'.
[27]
Coronavirus Statutory Instruments Dashboard, 2020-2022
Apr 9, 2020 · A Statutory Instrument (SI) may come into effect immediately after it has been made. However, there is a convention – 'the 21-day rule' – by ...What Powers Were Used By... · Rapid Amendment, Repeat... · Making And Addressing...
[28]
Statutory instruments procedure in the House of Commons
They generally pass through the Commons under one of two procedures, affirmative or negative. The procedure an SI follows is determined by its parent Act.
[29]
What Is an Executive Order and How Does it Work? | American Civil ...
Feb 4, 2025 · Some executive orders take effect as soon as the president signs the order. But many other orders do not have any impact until a government ...
[30]
How Do Presidential Executive Orders Work? | Super Lawyers
Sep 24, 2025 · Many executive orders take effect immediately upon being signed by the President, especially when they address urgent matters or national ...
[31]
Executive Orders | Legal Information Institute - Law.Cornell.Edu
Executive Orders of the President of the United States are declarations with the force of law, which can take effect without the intervention of Congress.
[32]
Help - Legislation.gov.uk
The commencement of a piece of legislation may be determined by a provision of the legislation itself, referred to as the 'commencement provision', or it may be ...
[33]
[PDF] Statutory Instruments - UK Parliament
Statutory Instruments are just as much a part of the law of the land ... Commencement orders (or appointed day orders) are a form of Statutory Instrument.
[34]
Constitutional Amendment Process | National Archives
Aug 15, 2016 · The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the ...
[35]
Constitution of the United States - Senate.gov
Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United ...
[36]
Requirements for Constitutional Amendments - ConstitutionNet
One common way to amend the constitution is to increase the threshold of consent within parliament compared to ordinary legislature.
[37]
Netherlands 1814 (rev. 2008) Constitution
The publication and entry into force of Acts of Parliament shall be regulated by Act of Parliament. They shall not enter into force before they have been ...
[38]
The difference between signing and ratification | Treaties
In the Netherlands, treaties require parliamentary approval. If parliament gives its approval, ratification will follow. Signing: agreement between national ...Missing: constitutional | Show results with:constitutional
[39]
Help for the Treaty Database | Overheid.nl
The Treaties Division of the Legal Affairs Department carries out the procedures for approving and publishing treaties: formulation, signature, coordination of ...
[40]
[PDF] Netherlands - Provisional application of treaties
Under the applicable approval procedures, the Government is required to justify its decision to apply a treaty provisionally in the explanatory memorandum.
[41]
How an Act becomes law | Overheid.nl
It entered into force on 1 June 1996. The Act, all related official documents and records of parliamentary debates can be found (in Dutch) on the government ...
[42]
Obligations when a treaty enters force - Government.nl
A state binds itself to a treaty by ratifying it. In many cases the state will be required to amend national legislation to comply with a treaty.
[43]
About Treaties - U.S. Senate
In recent decades, presidents have frequently entered the United States into international agreements without the advice and consent of the Senate. These are ...
[44]
Treaty Procedures - United States Department of State
Find information about U.S. Government procedures regarding the negotiation, conclusion, and entry into force of treaties and other international ...
[45]
U.S. Treaties & Agreements - The Process - Duke Law School
President proclaims entry into force. Outline of the Agreement Making Process. Secretary of State authorizes negotiation. U.S. representatives negotiate.
[46]
ArtII.S2.C2.1.1 Overview of President's Treaty-Making Power
It is the President who then 'ratifies,' or makes, the treaty by signing an instrument of ratification and then arranging for the deposit or exchange of the ...
[47]
International Law and Agreements: Their Effect upon U.S. Law
Jul 13, 2023 · Self-executing treaties have a status equal to federal statutes, superior to U.S. state laws and inferior to the Constitution. Depending on ...
[48]
ArtII.S2.C2.1.9 Effect of Treaties on the Constitution
While treaties may preempt contradictory state law and supplant earlier-in-time federal legislation, the treaty power is not so broad as to override the ...
[49]
Treaties in Force - United States Department of State
The Treaties in Force publication lists treaties and agreements currently in force for the United States. It is published annually.
[50]
Treaty or Executive Agreement? - Georgetown Law Research Guides
Sep 12, 2025 · Only if the Senate ratifies a treaty by a two-thirds majority may the treaty enter into force.
[51]
International Agreements and U.S. Law | ASIL
Treaties and other international agreements are subject to the Bill of Rights. Congress may supersede a prior inconsistent treaty or Congressional-Executive ...<|separator|>
[52]
On International Treaties, the United States Refuses to Play Ball
Jan 7, 2022 · Partisan divides in the U.S. Senate made ratification difficult, and the treaty was voted down fifty-one to forty-eight, angering many world ...
[53]
Advancing the National Interests of the United States: Ratification of ...
May 25, 2012 · The final, and currently most prominent, argument against ratification surrounds sovereignty. Opponents say that, by limiting itself to a 200 ...
[54]
Ratifying UN Law of the Sea Treaty Would Harm U.S. Sovereignty ...
Oct 19, 2011 · The United States of America should not ratify the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), known as the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST).Missing: delay | Show results with:delay
[55]
A Case for the United States' Ratification of UNCLOS - The Diplomatist
May 2, 2020 · One historical argument against the US not ratifying the UNCLOS was that the convention violated U.S. sovereignty and gave too much power to ...<|separator|>
[56]
The Status of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: Signatories and ...
Although Russia ratified the CTBT in 2000, it withdrew its ratification of the CTBT in 2023 to "mirror" the posture of the United States; as a treaty signatory, ...
[57]
CTBT: Annex 2 States - State.gov
There are eight Annex 2 States that have yet to ratify the Treaty - China, Egypt, Iran, Israel, and the United States of America, which have signed the Treaty, ...
[58]
The logic for US ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban ...
Mar 7, 2024 · The treaty is manifestly in the US national interest, as it would prevent other nuclear weapons states from advancing their nuclear knowledge ...
[59]
International treaties have mostly failed to produce their intended ...
International treaties have mostly failed to produce their intended effects except for international trade and financial laws and treaties with enforcement ...
[60]
With U.N. Treaties, There Are Two Ways to Look at Sovereignty
Dec 6, 2012 · And sovereignty arguments prevented the U.S. from ratifying the 1948 Genocide Convention for nearly four decades. Although the U.S. government ...Missing: delays | Show results with:delays
[61]
Key Treaties That Threaten American Sovereignty, Which the ...
These will likely include treaties on human rights, environmental agreements, arms control agreements, and the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Senate ...
[62]
Provisional Application of Treaty - Jus Mundi
Jun 19, 2025 · The possibility and the principles governing provisional application are addressed in Article 25 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties ...
[63]
DECIPHERING INTERIM OBLIGATIONS UNDER ARTICLES 18 ...
Nov 12, 2024 · Under both Articles 18 and 25 of the VCLT, a State can terminate the provisional application of a treaty and its duty not to defeat the object ...<|separator|>
[64]
Provisional Application of Treaties and domestic constitutional ...
The most well known of the treaties that has been provisionally applied in the past is the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. We include reference to one ...
[65]
[PDF] Provisional Application of the Energy Charter Treaty: The Yukos ...
Jun 1, 2007 · The success of the. PPA illustrates the potential that the provisional application of treaties has in creating stable international trade and ...
[66]
The Yukos Interim Awards on Jurisdiction and Admissibility Confirms ...
Aug 3, 2010 · The awards confirm that Russia is bound to provisionally apply the ECT as provided under Article 45 of that Treaty, in conformity with established principles ...
[67]
Treaties, Provisional Application - Oxford Public International Law
Provisional application of treaties is a common practice, although it raises some procedural and technical complications in comparison to application of a ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[68]
Provisional Application of Treaties: Critical Assessment of the Rule ...
Sep 3, 2014 · The aim of this article is to explore the concept of provisional application of treaties within the meaning of the Vienna Convention on the Law ...Missing: empirical critiques
[69]
[PDF] Gómez-Robledo, The Provisional Application of Treaties
In broad terms, the main objective was to shed light on a provision contained in Article 25 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), which ...
[70]
[PDF] May 2018 THE PROVISIONAL APPLICATION OF THE EU'S MIXED ...
May 25, 2018 · Examples of treaty clauses providing for partial provisional application may be found in the. EU's recent association agreements. For the ...Missing: successes | Show results with:successes
[71]
(PDF) Provisional Application of Treaties - Critical Assessment of the ...
The aim of this article is to explore the concept of provisional application of treaties within the meaning of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties ( ...