The severance of provisions in the treaty has long been discussed by the academy. However, their opinions were swayed by judicial decisions. Traditionally, legal experts opinioned that the integrity of the treaty is such an important factor and this element cannot be broken. Every provision is interdependent and inseparable, the whole treaty is overall compact which cannot be broken down even non-essential provision cannot be separated. However, along with the heterogeneous perspective of bilateral treaties, the change of the view on the ‘integrity’ of the treaty came. Now, Separability of Treaty is accepted both by the academy and judicial arena. Article 44 of the Vienna Convention on the Treaties cover invalidating, terminating, withdrawing, suspending of the clauses(provision). Free zones case concluded that Article 435 of the Treaty of Versailles and Annex as a “complete whole” independent of the rest of the Treaty. Also, In S.S. Wimbledon case, section VI part XII of the treaty is considered “self-contained”. Of course, the opinion of the case of the Reservations to the Genocide Conventions shows the line that essential part of the treaty and not-essential part of the treaty in question. “Utile non devet per inutile vitiari” that McNair has cited means “That which is useful or valid ought not to be vitiated by that which is superfluous or invalid.” This proverb represent Article 44 of the Vienna Convention of the Treaties.
Ⅰ. 조약규정의 완전성(integrity)과 가분성(separability)
Ⅱ. 비엔나 조약법협약 제44조
1. 조약의 가분성과 동의
2. 조약의 완전성
3. 특정한 조항을 가분하는 조건
4. 완전성에 대한 예외로써 조약의 무효사유
5. 완전성에 대한 예외로써 조약의 무효사유로 가분이 불가능한 경우
Ⅲ. 사례연구
1. Acrilicos 사건
2. Certain Norwegian Loan 사건
3. 알제리 협정(Algiers Accords)
Ⅳ. 시대변화의 반영
1. 1935년 Harvard Research Draft
2. 1963년 ILC 초안
Ⅴ. 결 론