Interpretation of International Treaties: A Journey Towards a Comparative Legal Analysis of Implementation Practices

Abstract

The relevance of the study is due to the increasing role of international treaties in domestic relations. This creates a fundamental tension between the universalist aspirations of international law and the particularism of national legal systems seeking to preserve sovereignty and constitutional identity. The conflict is localized not in the texts of treaties, but in the process of their interpretation, creating conflicts between international and national judicial authorities, which requires the harmonization of approaches and the study of the limits of mutual influence of law and order. The purpose of the article is a comprehensive analysis of the interpretation process, revealing the relationship between theoretical paradigms, codified norms and the practice of their application at the international and national levels. The tasks include: research of philosophical and methodological bases of interpretation; analysis of key provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of International Treaties of 1969 and the practice of international courts; conducting a comparative legal analysis of national models of interpretation on the example of Russia, Germany and the USA. The scientific novelty of the work lies in the application of a comprehensive, three‑level approach synthesizing philosophical and methodological, international legal (positivist) and comparative legal analysis. The research methodology connects theoretical paradigms (system analysis, historicism, phenomenology) with specific codified methods of interpretation (systemic, historical, teleological), which allows us to consider them in action using the example of judicial practice and identify the underlying causes of interpretative conflicts. The main thesis of the article is that effective and conscientious interpretation in the 21st century requires a “holistic approach”. Such an approach cannot be limited to formally following the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, but must organically take into account the constitutional imperatives and legal traditions of States. The art of interpretation consists in finding a “dynamic balance” between the need to comply with international obligations and the protection of the foundations of national law and order, which is realized through the “dialogue of the courts”.