Taking International Law Seriously? Interpretation of the 1998 Belfast/Good Friday Agreement in the Context of Article 2(1) of the Windsor Framework.

IF 1.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Oxford Journal of Legal Studies Pub Date : 2026-02-02 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.1093/ojls/gqag006
Katie A Johnston
{"title":"Taking International Law Seriously? Interpretation of the 1998 Belfast/Good Friday Agreement in the Context of Article 2(1) of the Windsor Framework.","authors":"Katie A Johnston","doi":"10.1093/ojls/gqag006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article analyses the approach of the Northern Ireland courts to interpretation of the 1998 Belfast/Good Friday Agreement in the context of the 'no diminution of rights' obligation in article 2(1) of the Windsor Framework. It advances an alternative approach to the interpretation of the 1998 Agreement that is consistent with international law and provides a more robust basis for rights protection. The article sets out the sources of the rules of treaty interpretation in international law and their application in article 2(1) cases, and analyses the nature of the multi-party agreement part of the 1998 Agreement. It is argued that the multi-party agreement is neither a free-standing treaty nor an integral part of a treaty, and the rules of treaty interpretation do not apply to that instrument. The multi-party agreement, including its Rights, Safeguards and Equality of Opportunity part, should nevertheless be interpreted using a 'generous and purposive' approach. In accordance with existing precedents in UK constitutional law, the multi-party agreement should be interpreted generously and purposively due to its nature as a constitution for Northern Ireland.</p>","PeriodicalId":47225,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Journal of Legal Studies","volume":"46 2","pages":"414-443"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13312958/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Journal of Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqag006","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article analyses the approach of the Northern Ireland courts to interpretation of the 1998 Belfast/Good Friday Agreement in the context of the 'no diminution of rights' obligation in article 2(1) of the Windsor Framework. It advances an alternative approach to the interpretation of the 1998 Agreement that is consistent with international law and provides a more robust basis for rights protection. The article sets out the sources of the rules of treaty interpretation in international law and their application in article 2(1) cases, and analyses the nature of the multi-party agreement part of the 1998 Agreement. It is argued that the multi-party agreement is neither a free-standing treaty nor an integral part of a treaty, and the rules of treaty interpretation do not apply to that instrument. The multi-party agreement, including its Rights, Safeguards and Equality of Opportunity part, should nevertheless be interpreted using a 'generous and purposive' approach. In accordance with existing precedents in UK constitutional law, the multi-party agreement should be interpreted generously and purposively due to its nature as a constitution for Northern Ireland.

认真对待国际法?在温莎框架第2(1)条的背景下解释1998年贝尔法斯特/耶稣受难日协议。
本文分析了北爱尔兰法院在《温莎框架》第2(1)条“不减损权利”义务的背景下解释1998年贝尔法斯特/耶稣受难日协议的方法。它提出了解释1998年《协定》的另一种方法,这种方法符合国际法,并为权利保护提供了更有力的基础。本文阐述了国际法条约解释规则的渊源及其在第2条第(1)款案例中的适用,并分析了1998年《协定》中多方协议部分的性质。有人认为,多边协定既不是一项独立的条约,也不是条约的组成部分,条约解释规则不适用于该文书。然而,多方协议,包括其权利、保障和机会平等部分,应该用“慷慨和有目的”的方法来解释。根据英国宪法现有先例,多党协议作为北爱尔兰宪法的性质,应予以慷慨和有目的性的解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
8.30%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: The Oxford Journal of Legal Studies is published on behalf of the Faculty of Law in the University of Oxford. It is designed to encourage interest in all matters relating to law, with an emphasis on matters of theory and on broad issues arising from the relationship of law to other disciplines. No topic of legal interest is excluded from consideration. In addition to traditional questions of legal interest, the following are all within the purview of the journal: comparative and international law, the law of the European Community, legal history and philosophy, and interdisciplinary material in areas of relevance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书