Bilateral and multilateral international treaties are the most frequently employed instruments used to create a stable system and to establish mutual cooperation in the international community. An [international] treaty is defined in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (the “Vienna Convention”) as “…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”. In view of the fact that an international treaty always represents the consensus of two or more equal parties resulting from negotiations, contrary to, inter alia, statutes in national legal systems (laws of national origin), the text of the treaty embodies the outcome of such negotiations and reflects the mutual compromises. This, however, often introduces a varying degree of vagueness into the wording of the international treaty.
That in turn results in ambiguities and differing views on the interpretation thereof. It comes as no surprise that States endeavour to prevent such complications. The article of professor Belohlavek thus strives to describe the potential means of avoiding future disputes regarding the interpretation of treaties, and to present examples illustrating the fact that the unclear codification of interpretation rules may result in divergent interpretations in the international community.