Dr. Nguyen Thi Hoang Anh
Deputy Director
Department of International Law and Treaties
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
1. Significance of the formulation of the Law on conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties
1.1. The needs for formulation of the Law
The Ordinance on conclusion and implementation of treaties was enacted on August 20, 1998 (the 1998 Ordinance), has laid down a fundamental legal basis for state bodies to uniformly implement procedures on the conclusion and implementation of treaties, taking advantage of international cooperation and promoting increasing development of the relations between Vietnam and the world community, national industrialization, modernization, and Vietnam’s integration into the world economy.
Since the effective date of the 1998 Ordinance, Vietnam has concluded or acceded to about 1,000 treaties (including about 300 treaties concluded in the names of ministries or agencies). Experience gained during five years of implementation of the 1998 Ordinance has caused several issues to arise, requiring the 1998 Ordinance to be upgraded into the Law on conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties.
In considering the historical development of the Constitution of Vietnam, we realize that, following the promulgation of a new Constitution or the revision of the existing Constitution, a new ordinance stipulating the conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties must be enacted. The first ordinance of this kind, the 1989 Ordinance, was enacted nine years after the promulgation of the 1980 Constitution. The 1998 Ordinance was enacted six years after the promulgation of the 1992 Constitution, and the revised 1992 Constitution, in particular, includes provisions on the competence of the National Assembly, the President and the Government to make decisions on the conclusion of or accession to treaties which are different from the provisions of the 1998 Ordinance.
The practice of conclusion of or accession to treaties during the past years shows that the provisions of the revised Constitution have increasingly been applied instead of the provisions of the 1998 Ordinance regarding the competence to make decision on the conclusion of or accession to treaties. For such reasons, it is indispensable to formulate a new legal document which conforms with the Constitution.
In addition, a provision concerning the conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties, though stipulated widely in many legal documents and applied for years, has not been endorsed as a principle, that is: “In case this legal document has a provision different from provisions of an treaty concluded or acceded to by the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, the provisions of such treaty shall be applied.” Such a provision can be found in many of Vietnam’s legal documents, such as laws, ordinances, decrees and even circulars.
Another important issue is that Vietnam became a party to the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (the 1969 Vienna Convention) on November 9, 2001. That fact plays an important and decisive role in the formulation of a new legal document on the conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties. As a party to the 1969 Vienna Convention, Vietnam is liable to observe and implement the provisions of the Convention. It is important to evaluate the compatibility between existing legal provisions on conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties and the provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention. Most notably, certain provisions of the Convention relating to international commitments of Vietnam have not been codified in legal documents of Vietnam on the conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties. Such provisions include Article 26, which states: “every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith,” and Article 27, which states: “a party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.”
Furthermore, provisions of existing legislation on conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties are inadequate, lacking specificity and consistency. Certain provisions of existing legislation on conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties are not in conformity with international law and practice, such as provisions regarding treaties concluded in the names of ministries, ministerial agencies, governmental agencies or the People’s Supreme Court or People’s Supreme Procuracy.
As regards external affairs, the requirements of international integration and participation in economic trade institutions in the world, including the World Trade Organization, also demand adequate provisions of domestic legislation to ensure the implementation of the international commitments of Vietnam.
The foregoing are essential reasons for the formulation of the Law on conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties to replace the 1998 Ordinance on conclusion and implementation of treaties.
1.2. Guiding viewpoints in formulation of the Law
Like other important draft laws and codes, this draft Law must institutionalize the guidelines and policies of the Party, as well as the goals and policies of the State. As this draft Law is related to national interests, as well as the relationship between Vietnam and foreign countries and international organizations, it is important that this draft Law must manifest foreign policies of our State following the motto: Vietnam is ready to be a friend and trusted partner of all countries in the international community.
Furthermore, at an international level, this draft Law must specify principles of the conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties in conformity with fundamental principles of international law, especially principles of respect for national independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity; non-interference into each other’s affairs; equality; and mutual benefits. At the national level, the draft Law must specify the principle that the conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties must be in conformity with the Constitution.
In terms of inheriting existing legislation, this draft Law must retain valid contents of the 1998 Ordinance and existing legal documents relating to the conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties.
This draft Law must contain concrete and consistent provisions in order to meet the demand for further enhancing the management responsibility of competent State agencies in the conclusion, accession to and implementation of international treaties of Vietnam, and protecting the rights and interests of Vietnam.
Particularly at the international level, this draft Law must codify international commitements arising from the 1969 Vienna Convention to which Vietnam is a party and ensure consistency between the provisions of the draft Law and the contents of commitments under the Convention, especially the principle of pacta sunt servanda.
In terms of effectiveness and enforcement, the draft Law must link the process of conclusion of or accession to treaties to the process of implementation of treaties by establishing a mechanism of coordination among competent state agencies to formulate a long-term or annual plan for the conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties, as well as dissemination, comprehensive review, and supervision of the implementation of such treaties. Plans for the conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties must be linked to plans for formulation of legal documents by the National Assembly and its Standing Committee, in order to ensure that treaties in force with respect to Vietnam are effectively implemented.
2. THE PROCESS OF FORMULATION OF THE DRAFT LAW
In implementing the XIth National Assembly’s Resolution No. 21/2003/QH11 dated November 26, 2003, on the 2004 law- and ordinance-making program, pursuant to the Prime Minister’s Decision No. 35/2003/QD-TTg dated March 6, 2003 on designation of agencies to assume the prime responsibility for, and agencies to
coordinate in, formulating laws and ordinances during the term of the XIth National Assembly (2002 -2007) and the year 2003 and having been designated by the Prime Minister, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs established the Drafting Committee of the Law, which is composed of representatives from the Office of the National Assembly, the President’s Office, the Government Office, the Ministry of Justice,
the People’s Supreme Court, the People’s Supreme Procuracy, the Ministry of Planning and Investment, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Trade, the State Bank and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The Drafting Committee has reviewed five years of implementation of the 1998 Ordinance on conclusion and implementation of treaties; held meetings and seminars to gather opinions from concerned agencies and organizations; and organized studies on the regulations and practices of foreign countries and international organizations on conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties to serve the formulation of the draft Law.
The draft Law has been formulated, revised and improved on the basis of opinions from agencies and organizations, appraisal by the Ministry of Justice, opinions of Government members, and opinions of the National Assembly Standing Committee and the verifying body (the Committee of Foreign Affairs of the National Assembly). The draft Law has been formulated on the basis of the spirit of renovation of lawmaking methods: excluding from the draft Law those contents that are provided for in other specilized legal documents, such as issues of state management, dealing with violations, rewards, inspection, claims and accusations. To avoid being a “framework law,” the draft Law has been formulated with detailed provisions that can be implemented promptly after the Law becomes effective.
In accordance with procedures provided for in the revised Law on Promulgation of Legal Documents, the draft Law was submitted to the National Assembly at its sixth session in late 2004 for lawmakers to consider and express their opinions and will be submitted to the National Assembly at its seventh session in 2005 for adoption.
The draft Law raises issues that have been controversial during the process of gathering comments. Some major outstanding legal issues are as follows:
3.1. Name of the Law
Resolution No. 21/2003/QH11 of the XIth National Assembly, dated November 26, 2003, setting the 2004 lawmaking program, refers to the Law as the “Law on conclusion and implementation of treaties.”
However, in the process of commenting on the draft Law, many suggested adding the word “accession” after the word “conclusion,” and accordingly the Law would be named “Law on conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties” in order to include the act of accession to treaties as embodied in the revised 1992 Convention as a separate legal act outside the scope of the conclusion of treaties.
Under the 1998 Ordinance, the term “conclusion” embraces the act of “accession.” Under the 1992 Constitution, the term “conclusion or participation” were often used. However, under the revised 1992 Constitution, the term “conclusion or accession” are often used. And such term is always used in newly promulgated legal documents.
In such circumstances, at paragraph 9, Article 2 of the draft Law, the term “accession” is defined as a legal act taken by the National Assembly, the President or the Government to consent to the binding of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam to a multilateral treaty which Vietnam has not signed within the period in which the treaty was open for signature, irrespective of whether the treaty has entered into force.
Furthermore, accession to international treaties constitutes part of the major contents of this draft Law. Therefore, this Law should be styled the Law on conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties.
However, it was also suggested that this Law should have a short name such as the Law on treaties or the Law on treaties of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (in accordance with the 1969 Vienna Convention). There have been several opinions about this issue. Some National Assembly deputies noted that there is international law on treaties and therefore there should not be a Law of Vietnam on treaties. Furthermore, it is impossible to assume that the term “the Socialist Republic of Vietnam” is to supplement the word “treaties” as treaties are not only of Vietnam. Subsequently, all comments essentially agreed upon the name of the present draft Law, i.e., Law on conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties.
3.2. Scope of application of the Law
There have been two sets of opinions on the scope of application of this Law. The first set of opinions assumes that this Law only applies to two types of treaties in accordance with the Constitution (i.e., treaties in the name of the State and treaties in the name of the Government). The second set of opinions assume that the respective provisions of the 1998 Ordinance should be retained, meaning that, apart from treaties in the name of the State and treaties in the name of the Government, this Law should apply to international agreements concluded in the names of ministries, ministerial level agencies, Governmental agencies, the People’s Supreme Court and the People’s Supreme Procuracy (branches).
The approach of the first set of opinions which assumes that this Law should not regulate international agreements concluded by ministries or branches in the names of respective ministries or branches stems from the provisions of existing legislation of Vietnam as well as international practice.
In accordance with the revised 1992 Convention (paragraph 13 of Article 84, paragraph 10 of Article 103 and paragraph 8 of Article 112), as well as related provisions of the Law on organization of the National Assembly, the Law on organization of the Government, the Law on organization of the People’s Court and the Law on organization of the People’s Procuracy, there are only two types of treaties, i.e. treaties in the name of the State and treaties in the name of the Government, but no treaties in the names of ministries or the People’s Supreme Court or the People’s Supreme Procuracy. Furthermore, if one applies the general principle embodied in almost existing legal documents such as laws and ordinances, that treaties shall prevail in case of conflicts between treaties and domestic legislation, the results are that in many cases certain provisions of treaties concluded in the names of ministries or branches shall likely prevail over relevant provisions of specific law or ordinance or government’s decree whenever such domestic legal provisions are in conflict with provisions of treaties in the names of ministries or branches. Such results undermine the consistency and stability of the legal system, the primary instrument of the State in governing and administering the country.
Practice shows that treaties concluded at the recommendations of ministries or branches during the past years are of two types: first, international agreements on cooperation containing important commitments in the fields of defense, security or relating to state budget, etc., that are also international agreements in the name of the State or in the name of the Government, concluded by ministries or branches authorized by the State or the Government; second, international agreements on cooperation within the scope of competence of ministries or branches, such as exchange of friendly visits, exchange of information, cooperation on staff training, etc. Thus, ministries and branches have so far only concluded bilateral treaties in the names of ministries or branches, and there has been no case in which any ministry or branch has acceded to multilateral treaties in the name of a ministry or branch.
In accordance with international law and practice, paragraph a, Article 2 of the 1969 Vienna Convention clearly stipulates that a treaty means 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 accordance with such definition, in order to have the validity of a treaty, an agreement has to meet the following criteria:
- A treaty is an international agreement: i.e., the internationality of such agreement is reflected in the fact that there must be at least two states participating in the process of making and concluding such agreement. The Constitutions, laws and practice of some states distinguish treaties concluded among states (treaties in the name of the State, in accordance with Vietnam’s legislation) and treaties concluded among Governments (treaties in the name of the Government, in accordance with Vietnam’s legislation). Treaties may also be classified as bilateral treaties and multilateral treaties, regional treaties and universal treaties, “open treaties” that are open for signature and accession by all states or “closed treaties” to which only some specific states may become parties.
- Treaties must be concluded by states or other subjects of international law (international organizations, etc.). An agreement concluded between one side being a state and the other side being a company or an individual without the capacity to represent a state does not constitute a treaty. The State or the Government is a legal entity, but the State or the Government itself cannot perform the act of signing. The persons who can perform such act are heads of States, heads of Governments and other persons authorized to perform such act, including heads of ministries or state agencies. Therefore, in some countries treaties are called as treaties concluded among heads of states, heads of governments and heads of ministries or branches.
- Treaties must be agreed in written form. The 1969 Vienna Convention does not apply to oral agreements (not in written form) between states, but this does not affect the legal force of such agreements. With the development of communication technology, the text of a treaty may not only be typed or printed but also transmitted electronically by telegram, facsimile or e-mail.
- Treaties must be governed by international law. This requirement reaffirms that an international agreement concluded among subjects of international law must give rise to commitments and obligations governed by international law. Therefore, the intention of contracting parties must be clearly expressed if they intend to be committed to any specific rights or obligations under a treaty or only declare in such terms that “the two parties took note of the following points…” A great number of international agreements are concluded every year; however, not all of them constitute treaties. Such international agreements may be named “gentlemen’s agreements”, “non-binding agreements”, “de facto agreements” or “non-legally binding agreements.” Most such agreements usually are styled “memorandum of understanding.”
However, there have been some cases where states have still committed to specific obligations in a memorandum. This underscores the fact that the designation or the name of an agreement between contracting parties shall not determine whether such agreement constitutes a treaty or only an international agreement. The decisive factor is from whom such commitments arise within such agreement (whether from the State or the Government, ministries or branches).
Therefore, international agreements concluded in the names of ministries or branches constitute treaties. However, legislation and practice of conclusion or accession to treaties in many countries do not recognize ministries and branches as subjects competent to conclude or accede to treaties.
In fact, legislation and practice of foreign countries show that, many countries, including developing Asian nations such as Brunei, Indonesia, the Philippines, Myanmar and developed countries such as France, Belgium, Australia, Austria, Germany, Canada and eastern European countries such as the Czech Republic and Bulgaria do not recognize that international agreements concluded in the names of ministries or branches constitute treaties. In the United States, only international agreements ratified by the US Congress constitute treaties. At present, treaties in the names of ministries and branches are provided for only in a few countries such as Russia (the Law of 1995), China (the Law of 1990), and the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea (the Law of 1999).
Furthermore, in state practice of conclusion of treaties, there has been no case where a ministry or branch acceded to a multilateral treaty. This is in conformity with the principle that treaties are acceded to by subjects of international law, in accordance with the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, to which Vietnam is a party.
Taking into account the legislation and practice of Vietnam, as well as international law and practice, international agreements concluded in the names of ministries or branches of Vietnam and ministries or branches of foreign countries should no longer be considered treaties and therefore should not be regulated under this Law. If Vietnam’s legislation continues to recognize that international agreements concluded in the names of ministries and branches constitute treaties, then possible legal consequences may be that such an agreement may raise the state responsibility of Vietnam (obligation of the State and the Government of Vietnam to implement such agreements) while the same agreement only raises responsibility of the respective foreign country’s ministry or branch that concludes such agreement. Therefore, in case the foreign contracting party commits an act of violation, the Vietnamese party shall not have the right to invoke the responsibility of the respective Government or State. That fact shall fundamentally violate the principle of equality of subjects who conclude a treaty.
In short, the draft Law should stipulate that only international agreements in the name of the State or in the name of the Government constitute treaties. This is in conformity with existing legislation and practice of Vietnam as well as international law and practice.
3.3. Linkage between treaties and domestic legislation
In the practice of Vietnam, a great number of legal documents include similar provisions stating that: In case any treaty concluded or acceded to by Vietnam stipulates differently from the provisions of this legal document on the same matter, the provisions of such treaty shall apply. There has been no trouble arising from the application of such provisions.
Many commentators agree that, in order to avoid repeating such provision in every legal document, this draft Law shall stipulate at paragraph 1 of Article 6 that: In case a legal document and a treaty to which the Socialist Republic of Vietnam is a party stipulates differently on the same subject matter, the provisions of the treaty shall apply. This provision refers only to “treaties to which the Socialist Republic of Vietnam is a party” but not to “treaties concluded or acceded to by Vietnam.” This provision stems from the fact that a treaty concluded or acceded to by a state shall not promptly enter into force (if it is subject to the requirement of completion of treaty procedures such as exchange of instruments of ratification, or pending the entry into force of the treaty as provided for in the treaty itself) or may be terminated (in accordance with the provisions of the treaty or any agreement among the parties), and does not or no longer gives rise to obligations of Vietnam to implement such treaty.
The aforesaid provision of the draft Law only solves one major issue – application of treaties in cases of conflict between the provisions of any treaties and related provisions of domestic legislation. However, it does not provide a solution to address possible conflicts between treaties and new legal documents under the drafting process. A solution to this matter is provided for in paragraph 2 Article 6 of the draft Law: The promulgation of legal documents shall not impede the implementation of treaties to which the Socialist Republic of Vietnam is a party.
3.4. Principles of conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties
The draft Law provides six major principles that must be observed in the process of recommending the negotiation, signing of or accession to treaties:
1. Fundamental principles of international law;
2. Conformity with the provisions of the Constitution of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam;
3. Conformity with national interests and foreign policies of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam;
4. Conformity between treaties in the name of the Government and treaties in the name of the State;
5. A treaty containing provision(s) contrary to or not yet provided for in any legal documents promulgated by the National Assembly or the National Assembly Standing Committee or a treaty the implementation of which requires amendment, supplementation, annulment or promulgation of any legal documents of the National Assembly or the National Assembly Standing Committee shall be submitted to the National Assembly Standing Committee for consideration before the negotiation, signing of or accession to such treaty. In case of recommendation on negotiation, signing of or accession to a treaty containing any provision(s) contrary to any legal documents promulgated by the National Assembly, the National Assembly Standing Committee shall report to the National Assembly for consideration.
6. The Socialist Republic of Vietnam fully observes treaties to which the Socialist Republic of Vietnam is a party and requests other parties to treaties fully observe such treaties.
3.5. Application of treaties, incorporation of treaties into domestic legislation
In the process of drafting the Law, most commentators agreed that the Law should include provisions on the application of treaties and the incorporation of treaties into domestic legislation.
However, the revised 1992 Constitution, as well as the Law on promulgation of legal documents enacted in 1996 and revised in 2001 and the 1998 Ordinance on conclusion and implementation of treaties, contain no provision relating to the application of treaties and the incorporation of treaties into Vietnam’s legislation in general. In the practical ratification of treaties, four resolutions of the National Assembly on ratification of four treaties, namely the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the 2000 Bilateral Trade Agreement between Vietnam and the United States, the 1999 Treaty on demarcation of land boundaries between Vietnam and China, and the 2000 Agreement on delimitation of the boundaries between Vietnam and China in the Gulf of Tonkin, clearly set out the duties of the Government to formulate legal documents that implement the treaty commitments of Vietnam.
Therefore, in practice, there are cases in which the highest lawmaking authority - the National Assembly – has made decisions concerning the “incorporation” or domestic legalization of international commitments of Vietnam. However, most opinions in the process of drafting this Law assumed that this Law would not include a rigid provision which requires the incorporation of every treaty into domestic legislation in every case, but would set out a flexible provision in the following direction: in case a treaty in force with respect to Vietnam may be directly applicable then it shall be directly applicable to agencies, organizations and individuals in accordance with decisions made by the National Assembly, the President or the Government at the time of making the decision on the signing, ratification, approval of or accession to such treaty.
Paragraph 3, Article 6 of the draft Law further stipulates that in cases in which it is impossible to apply directly some provisions of a treaty in force with respect to the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, the competent state authorities at the time of making the decision on the signing, ratification, approval of or accession to such treaty, shall decide or make recommendations on the amendment, supplementation, annulment or promulgation of legal documents to implement such treaty.
3.6. Status of treaties in the legal system of Vietnam
The revised 1992 Constitution, as well as the Law on promulgation of legal documents enacted in 1996 and revised in 2001 and the 1998 Ordinance on conclusion and implementation of treaties, contain no provision defining the status and rank of treaties in the legal system of Vietnam in general and particularly in the legislation on conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties, although a great number of legal documents (laws, ordinances, etc.) contain similar provisions relating to the status of treaties, such as: “In case any treaty concluded or acceded to by the Socialist Republic of Vietnam stipulates otherwise, then the provisions of such treaty shall apply.” In the process of drafting this Law, some opinions proposed that the draft Law should clearly define the status of treaties as equal to that of the laws of Vietnam.
However, in most opinions, including that of the author, the draft Law should not provide for the status of treaties in the legal system of Vietnam. Study of legislation and practice in the world shows that some states clearly define the status of treaties in the domestic legal system, but the status of treaties in the domestic legal system is defined in their Constitutions, such as the Constitutions of Russia, China, France, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Argentina and the Philippines.
In Vietnam, the Constitution, as well as the Law on promulgation of legal documents, does not stipulate the status of treaties in the national legal system. Nevertheless, some assume that the assertion of the status of treaties means that treaties constitute part of the national legal system and therefore not only the State and the Government but all organizations and individuals shall have to observe and implement treaties. On that basis, the Courts shall also have to apply treaties in the process of judging cases brought before them.
3.7. Treaties containing provision(s) contrary to or not yet provided for in any legal documents promulgated by the National Assembly or the National Assembly Standing Committee
Perpetuating the provisions of the 1998 Ordinance on conclusion and implementation of treaties, the draft Law stipulates that a treaty containing provision(s) contrary to or not yet provided for in any legal documents promulgated by the National Assembly or the National Assembly Standing Committee or a treaty the implementation of which requires the amendment, annulment or promulgation of any legal documents of the National Assembly or the National Assembly Standing Committee, shall be submitted to the National Assembly Standing Committee for consideration before the negotiation, signing of or accession to such treaty. In case of recommendation of negotiation, signing of or accession to a treaty containing any provision(s) contrary to any legal documents promulgated by the National Assembly, the National Assembly Standing Committee shall report to the National Assembly for consideration.
3.8. Evaluation of treaties
The draft Law contains specific provisions on the competence and procedures for the evaluation of treaties in accordance with the practice of evaluation during the past years in Vietnam, as existing legal documents such as the Constitution, the Law on organization of the National Assembly, the Law on organization of the Government, regulations on the activities of bodies of the National Assembly, and the Law on promulgation of legal documents do not contain any provisions on procedures for evaluation of treaties. Therefore, this draft Law should clearly stipulate the procedures for treaty evaluation in order to lay down a legal basis for carrying out treaty evaluation.
3.9. Supervision of the conclusion, accession to or implementation of treaties
On the basis of perpetuating related provisions of the 1998 Ordinance on conclusion and implementation of treaties, the draft Law stipules in detail the competence and procedures for the National Assembly, the National Assembly Standing Committee, the Nationality Council, various Committees of the National Assembly, delegations of National Assembly deputies and National Assembly deputies to supervise the conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties because such issues are not provided for in the Law on organization of the National Assembly, the Law on supervising activities of the National Assembly or in regulations on activities of different bodies of the National Assembly. However, such provisions in the draft Law must be in conformity with the contents, competence and principles of supervising activities as provided for in the Law on supervising activities of the National Assembly.
The draft Law stipulates clearly the responsibility of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in examining recommendations on negotiations, signing of and accession to treaties to ensure conformity between such treaties and foreign policies of Vietnam and the implementation of treaties in force with respect to Vietnam. Under the Law, the Government exercises unified state management over the conclusion, accession to and implementation of treaties and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is responsible for assisting the Government in exercising state management over this field.
3.11. Appraisal of treaties
The draft Law expressly stipulates that before being submitted to the Government, a treaty must be appraised by the Ministry of Justice or an appraising committee on the conformity between the treaty and the Constitution, the degree of conformity between the treaty and domestic legal documents, the possibility of direct application of the whole or part of the treaty, and the requirement for amendment, annulment or promulgation of legal documents to implement such treaty.-