Introduction
Mongolia, a landlocked nation in Central Asia, holds a unique position in the international community due to its historical legacy, geopolitical environment, and evolving legal framework. As a state that transitioned from a socialist system to a democratic constitutional order in the early 1990s, Mongolia’s approach to international relations, particularly its treaty-making process, reflects a blend of historical influences and modern governance principles. This article examines Mongolia’s treaty-making process within its constitutional framework, explores its international commitments, and evaluates how treaties are integrated into its domestic legal system. It further analyzes Mongolia’s stance on the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) of 1969 and discusses the implications of this position for other states seeking to engage with Mongolia in international agreements. Through this analysis, the article aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of Mongolia’s legal mechanisms for treaty-making and their broader implications in international law.
Constitutional Framework for Treaty-Making in Mongolia
The Constitution of Mongolia, adopted on January 13, 1992, after the democratic transition from a socialist state, serves as the supreme legal document governing the country’s political, legal, and international relations framework. It establishes the principles and mechanisms through which Mongolia engages with the international community, including the process of entering into treaties. Several specific articles in the Constitution delineate the roles and responsibilities of state organs in the treaty-making process, ensuring a structured and legally grounded approach to international commitments.
Article 10 of the Constitution is central to understanding Mongolia’s approach to international law and treaties. It states that “Mongolia adheres to the universally recognized norms and principles of international law and pursues a peaceful foreign policy” (Constitution of Mongolia, 1992, Art. 10.1). This provision underscores Mongolia’s commitment to international legal norms and sets the foundation for its treaty-making activities as an extension of its peaceful foreign policy objectives. Furthermore, Article 10.2 explicitly provides that “Mongolia shall fulfill in good faith its obligations under international treaties to which it is a party” (Constitution of Mongolia, 1992, Art. 10.2). This clause reflects a constitutional duty to honor treaty commitments, establishing a legal basis for the binding nature of international agreements within the domestic sphere.
The procedural aspects of treaty-making are further elaborated in Article 25 and Article 38 of the Constitution, which define the roles of the State Great Hural (the Parliament) and the President in the process. According to Article 25.1(7), the State Great Hural holds the authority to “ratify or denounce international treaties and agreements that require parliamentary approval as provided by law” (Constitution of Mongolia, 1992, Art. 25.1(7)). This provision indicates that the Parliament plays a critical role in the formal acceptance or rejection of treaties, ensuring legislative oversight over international commitments. The specific treaties requiring such approval are typically those with significant legal, political, or economic implications, as determined by subsequent laws or regulations.
Complementing the Parliament’s role, the President of Mongolia is vested with powers related to foreign policy under Article 33.1(1), which includes the authority to “represent the State in foreign relations and, in consultation with the State Great Hural, conclude international treaties on behalf of Mongolia” (Constitution of Mongolia, 1992, Art. 33.1(1)). This provision illustrates a shared responsibility between the executive and legislative branches, where the President negotiates and concludes treaties, but often requires parliamentary consent for ratification, reflecting a system of checks and balances in treaty-making.
Additionally, the Constitution indirectly provides for judicial oversight through Article 50, which establishes the judiciary’s role in ensuring compliance with the Constitution and laws of Mongolia. While not explicitly mentioned in the context of treaties, this article implies that the courts may have a role in interpreting treaty obligations should they conflict with domestic laws or constitutional provisions (Constitution of Mongolia, 1992, Art. 50). This framework demonstrates that Mongolia’s treaty-making process is a collaborative effort among multiple branches of government, ensuring accountability and adherence to constitutional principles.
In practice, the process generally begins with negotiations conducted by the executive branch, often through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, under the President’s leadership. Once an agreement is reached, the treaty is submitted to the State Great Hural for ratification if required by law. Following ratification, the treaty is formally concluded through the President’s signature or another designated authority, binding Mongolia under international law. This multi-tiered process ensures that international commitments align with national interests and constitutional mandates.
Monist or Dualist Approach: Integration of Treaties into National Law
One of the critical aspects of a state’s approach to international law is whether it adopts a monist or dualist perspective regarding the relationship between international and domestic legal systems. In a monist system, international law is directly applicable within the domestic legal order without the need for separate legislative action, often taking precedence over domestic law. In contrast, a dualist system views international and domestic law as separate, requiring explicit legislative incorporation for treaties to have domestic legal effect.
Mongolia’s legal system exhibits characteristics of a dualist approach, although with nuances that suggest a partial alignment with monist principles. Article 10.3 of the Constitution provides a clear indication of this framework: “International treaties to which Mongolia is a party shall become effective as domestic legislation upon the entry into force by the procedure stipulated by the treaty or by law” (Constitution of Mongolia, 1992, Art. 10.3). This provision suggests that while treaties can have the status of domestic law, their integration into the national legal system is conditional upon formal procedures, such as ratification or additional legislative action, aligning with dualist principles.
In practice, this means that for a treaty to be enforceable within Mongolia’s domestic courts or to directly affect the rights and obligations of individuals, it must be incorporated through an act of the State Great Hural or other legal mechanisms as stipulated by national law. Without such incorporation, a treaty may bind Mongolia at the international level but lack direct applicability in domestic legal proceedings. This dualist tendency is further reinforced by the absence of a constitutional provision granting automatic precedence to international treaties over conflicting domestic laws, a hallmark of many monist systems.
However, elements of monism are evident in the constitutional commitment to fulfilling international obligations in good faith, as per Article 10.2, and in judicial practices where courts have occasionally recognized international legal norms, particularly in human rights cases, without explicit legislative incorporation. For instance, Mongolia’s adherence to international human rights treaties, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), has sometimes been invoked in domestic judicial decisions, reflecting a pragmatic approach to international law (Batbold, 2015). Nevertheless, the predominant legal practice and constitutional text support a dualist interpretation, where formal incorporation remains a prerequisite for the full domestic effect of treaties.
The dualist approach in Mongolia has significant implications for how treaties are translated into national law. After ratification, treaties may require the enactment of implementing legislation to align domestic legal frameworks with international obligations. For example, environmental treaties or trade agreements often necessitate amendments to existing laws or the creation of new regulatory frameworks to ensure compliance. This process can be time-consuming and subject to political and legislative priorities, potentially delaying the practical implementation of treaty commitments. Despite these challenges, the dualist framework ensures that international commitments are thoroughly vetted within the domestic context, maintaining national sovereignty over legal integration.
Mongolia and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969
The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) of 1969 is a cornerstone of international law, codifying customary norms and principles governing the formation, interpretation, application, and termination of treaties. It provides a comprehensive framework for states to engage in treaty-making, ensuring clarity and predictability in international agreements. Given its significance, a state’s relationship with the VCLT often indicates its approach to treaty obligations and informs other states about procedural and legal expectations when entering into agreements.
Mongolia is not a party to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969. According to the records of the United Nations Treaty Collection, Mongolia has neither signed nor ratified the VCLT as of the most recent updates available (United Nations Treaty Collection, 2023). This status means that Mongolia is not formally bound by the specific provisions of the VCLT. However, it is crucial to note that many of the VCLT’s provisions reflect customary international law, which is binding on all states regardless of their participation in the Convention. As stated in Article 10.1 of the Mongolian Constitution, the country adheres to “universally recognized norms and principles of international law,” which would include customary rules codified in the VCLT, such as those concerning treaty formation, good faith, and pacta sunt servanda (the principle that agreements must be kept) (Constitution of Mongolia, 1992, Art. 10.1).
Mongolia’s non-party status to the VCLT does not necessarily impede its ability to engage in treaty-making or to honor international commitments. The country has entered into numerous bilateral and multilateral agreements, covering areas such as trade, environmental protection, and human rights, demonstrating a practical adherence to international legal standards. For instance, Mongolia is a party to significant multilateral treaties such as the United Nations Charter and various human rights instruments, indicating its integration into the global legal order despite its position on the VCLT (Chuluunbaatar, 2018).
For other states seeking to enter into treaties with Mongolia, the absence of formal adherence to the VCLT suggests that they should rely on customary international law and Mongolia’s constitutional commitments when negotiating agreements. Key principles such as the requirement for ratification by the State Great Hural for certain treaties (as per Article 25.1(7)) should be anticipated in the treaty-making process. Additionally, other states should be aware that Mongolia’s dualist approach may result in delays or specific procedural requirements for the domestic implementation of treaty obligations. Engaging with Mongolia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and understanding its domestic legal processes will be essential for ensuring that treaties are effectively concluded and implemented.
Moreover, Mongolia’s non-party status to the VCLT may serve as a reminder to other states that treaty-making practices are not solely dependent on formal accession to international conventions but also on a state’s constitutional framework and commitment to customary international law. States like Mongolia demonstrate that treaty-making can be conducted effectively through national legal mechanisms and adherence to broadly accepted principles, even without participation in codifying instruments like the VCLT. This perspective could encourage flexibility and adaptability in international negotiations, particularly with states that prioritize national sovereignty and customized legal approaches over universal frameworks.
Challenges and Opportunities in Mongolia’s Treaty-Making Process
While Mongolia’s constitutional framework provides a structured approach to treaty-making, several challenges remain in ensuring effective integration and implementation of international commitments. One significant challenge is the dualist nature of its legal system, which can lead to inconsistencies or delays in translating treaty obligations into enforceable domestic law. The requirement for legislative action to incorporate treaties often depends on political will and prioritization within the State Great Hural, which may not always align with the urgency of international commitments. For instance, complex multilateral agreements on environmental issues or trade may face prolonged delays in implementation due to the need for comprehensive legal reforms (Enkhsaikhan, 2020).
Additionally, Mongolia’s geopolitical position as a landlocked state between two major powers, Russia and China, introduces unique considerations in its treaty-making strategy. The need to balance national interests with regional dynamics often influences the scope and terms of international agreements. While the Constitution emphasizes a peaceful foreign policy, external pressures can complicate negotiations and the subsequent domestic acceptance of treaties. This geopolitical reality underscores the importance of a robust and transparent treaty-making process that can withstand external influences while safeguarding national sovereignty.
Despite these challenges, Mongolia’s treaty-making framework offers significant opportunities for enhancing its role in the international community. The constitutional commitment to international law and peaceful foreign policy positions Mongolia as a reliable partner in global affairs. By continuing to refine its procedural mechanisms for treaty ratification and implementation, Mongolia can strengthen its capacity to engage in complex multilateral agreements, particularly in areas such as sustainable development, human rights, and regional security. Furthermore, leveraging customary international law, as reflected in its non-party engagement with the principles of the VCLT, allows Mongolia to maintain flexibility in its treaty practices while adhering to global norms.
Conclusion
Mongolia’s treaty-making process, embedded within its constitutional framework, reflects a carefully balanced system that prioritizes national sovereignty while embracing international commitments. The roles of the State Great Hural and the President, as outlined in Articles 25 and 33 of the Constitution, ensure a collaborative approach to treaty negotiation and ratification, fostering accountability and legislative oversight. The predominantly dualist nature of Mongolia’s legal system, as evidenced by Article 10.3, requires formal incorporation of treaties into domestic law, which can pose implementation challenges but also safeguards national control over international obligations.
Although Mongolia is not a party to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969, its adherence to customary international law and constitutional principles enables effective participation in the global legal order. This position offers valuable insights for other states, demonstrating that treaty-making can be conducted successfully through national legal frameworks and commitment to universally recognized norms, even without formal accession to codifying conventions. For states engaging with Mongolia, understanding its constitutional processes, dualist approach, and reliance on customary law will be crucial for fostering successful treaty relationships.
In moving forward, Mongolia has the opportunity to address existing challenges in its treaty-making process by enhancing legislative efficiency and public awareness of international commitments. By doing so, it can further solidify its reputation as a committed and reliable partner in international affairs, contributing to global cooperation and legal harmony. This analysis of Mongolia’s treaty-making framework not only highlights the intricacies of its legal system but also underscores the broader potential for diverse approaches to international law within the global community.
References
- Batbold, A. (2015). Mongolia’s Engagement with International Human Rights Law. Asian Journal of International Law, 5(2), 123-140.
- Chuluunbaatar, G. (2018). Mongolia in the International Legal System: Challenges and Prospects. Journal of Mongolian Studies, 12(1), 45-67.
- Constitution of Mongolia. (1992). Adopted on January 13, 1992. Ulaanbaatar: State Great Hural of Mongolia.
- Enkhsaikhan, J. (2020). Treaty Implementation in Mongolia: Legal and Political Dimensions. International Relations of Mongolia, 8(3), 89-105.
- United Nations Treaty Collection. (2023). Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969: Status of Treaties. Retrieved from United Nations online database.
