id stringlengths 24 24 | title stringlengths 3 59 | context stringlengths 151 3.71k | question stringlengths 12 217 | answers dict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
56f6ff4c3d8e2e1400e37324 | Treaty | Since the late 19th century, most treaties have followed a fairly consistent format. A treaty typically begins with a preamble describing the contracting parties and their joint objectives in executing the treaty, as well as summarizing any underlying events (such as a war). Modern preambles are sometimes structured as a single very long sentence formatted into multiple paragraphs for readability, in which each of the paragraphs begins with a verb (desiring, recognizing, having, and so on). | Why are long sentences in a modern preamble formatted into multiple paragraphs? | {
"text": [
"readability"
],
"answer_start": [
388
]
} |
56f6ff4c3d8e2e1400e37325 | Treaty | Since the late 19th century, most treaties have followed a fairly consistent format. A treaty typically begins with a preamble describing the contracting parties and their joint objectives in executing the treaty, as well as summarizing any underlying events (such as a war). Modern preambles are sometimes structured as a single very long sentence formatted into multiple paragraphs for readability, in which each of the paragraphs begins with a verb (desiring, recognizing, having, and so on). | Each paragraph of a modern preamble typically begins with which part of speech? | {
"text": [
"a verb"
],
"answer_start": [
445
]
} |
56f6ff4c3d8e2e1400e37326 | Treaty | Since the late 19th century, most treaties have followed a fairly consistent format. A treaty typically begins with a preamble describing the contracting parties and their joint objectives in executing the treaty, as well as summarizing any underlying events (such as a war). Modern preambles are sometimes structured as a single very long sentence formatted into multiple paragraphs for readability, in which each of the paragraphs begins with a verb (desiring, recognizing, having, and so on). | In addition to describing the parties and their joint objectives, what else does a modern preamble typically summarize? | {
"text": [
"any underlying events (such as a war)"
],
"answer_start": [
237
]
} |
56f7046d711bf01900a448e2 | Treaty | The contracting parties' full names or sovereign titles are often included in the preamble, along with the full names and titles of their representatives, and a boilerplate clause about how their representatives have communicated (or exchanged) their full powers (i.e., the official documents appointing them to act on behalf of their respective states) and found them in good or proper form. | What term describes a common clause in a treaty stating that the representatives of the parties have communicated their full powers? | {
"text": [
"boilerplate"
],
"answer_start": [
161
]
} |
56f7046d711bf01900a448e3 | Treaty | The contracting parties' full names or sovereign titles are often included in the preamble, along with the full names and titles of their representatives, and a boilerplate clause about how their representatives have communicated (or exchanged) their full powers (i.e., the official documents appointing them to act on behalf of their respective states) and found them in good or proper form. | What are the official documents appointing a party's representative to act on their behalf? | {
"text": [
"full powers"
],
"answer_start": [
251
]
} |
56f7046d711bf01900a448e4 | Treaty | The contracting parties' full names or sovereign titles are often included in the preamble, along with the full names and titles of their representatives, and a boilerplate clause about how their representatives have communicated (or exchanged) their full powers (i.e., the official documents appointing them to act on behalf of their respective states) and found them in good or proper form. | In addition to their full names, what else is included in the preamble that identifies the parties to a treaty? | {
"text": [
"sovereign titles"
],
"answer_start": [
39
]
} |
56f7046d711bf01900a448e5 | Treaty | The contracting parties' full names or sovereign titles are often included in the preamble, along with the full names and titles of their representatives, and a boilerplate clause about how their representatives have communicated (or exchanged) their full powers (i.e., the official documents appointing them to act on behalf of their respective states) and found them in good or proper form. | How must the full powers of a parties' representatives be found in order to enter into a treaty? | {
"text": [
"in good or proper form."
],
"answer_start": [
369
]
} |
56f7046d711bf01900a448e6 | Treaty | The contracting parties' full names or sovereign titles are often included in the preamble, along with the full names and titles of their representatives, and a boilerplate clause about how their representatives have communicated (or exchanged) their full powers (i.e., the official documents appointing them to act on behalf of their respective states) and found them in good or proper form. | Who else besides the parties themselves is typically identified in the preamble to a treaty? | {
"text": [
"their representatives"
],
"answer_start": [
132
]
} |
56f705ac711bf01900a448ec | Treaty | After the preamble comes numbered articles, which contain the substance of the parties' actual agreement. Each article heading usually encompasses a paragraph. A long treaty may further group articles under chapter headings. | What follows the preamble in a treaty? | {
"text": [
"numbered articles"
],
"answer_start": [
25
]
} |
56f705ac711bf01900a448ed | Treaty | After the preamble comes numbered articles, which contain the substance of the parties' actual agreement. Each article heading usually encompasses a paragraph. A long treaty may further group articles under chapter headings. | What is contained in the numbered articles of a treaty? | {
"text": [
"the substance of the parties' actual agreement"
],
"answer_start": [
58
]
} |
56f705ac711bf01900a448ee | Treaty | After the preamble comes numbered articles, which contain the substance of the parties' actual agreement. Each article heading usually encompasses a paragraph. A long treaty may further group articles under chapter headings. | What does each article heading usually encompass? | {
"text": [
"a paragraph"
],
"answer_start": [
147
]
} |
56f705ac711bf01900a448ef | Treaty | After the preamble comes numbered articles, which contain the substance of the parties' actual agreement. Each article heading usually encompasses a paragraph. A long treaty may further group articles under chapter headings. | How might the articles in a long treaty be grouped? | {
"text": [
"under chapter headings"
],
"answer_start": [
201
]
} |
56f705ac711bf01900a448f0 | Treaty | After the preamble comes numbered articles, which contain the substance of the parties' actual agreement. Each article heading usually encompasses a paragraph. A long treaty may further group articles under chapter headings. | The numbered articles of a treaty may be grouped by chapter heading in what kind of treaty? | {
"text": [
"A long treaty"
],
"answer_start": [
160
]
} |
56f7083a711bf01900a448f6 | Treaty | Modern treaties, regardless of subject matter, usually contain articles governing where the final authentic copies of the treaty will be deposited and how any subsequent disputes as to their interpretation will be peacefully resolved. | What type of resolution to disputes is typically outlined in a treaty? | {
"text": [
"peaceful"
],
"answer_start": [
214
]
} |
56f7083a711bf01900a448f7 | Treaty | Modern treaties, regardless of subject matter, usually contain articles governing where the final authentic copies of the treaty will be deposited and how any subsequent disputes as to their interpretation will be peacefully resolved. | Which section of a treaty typically contains information about the whereabouts of the final authentic copies of a treaty? | {
"text": [
"articles"
],
"answer_start": [
63
]
} |
56f7083a711bf01900a448f8 | Treaty | Modern treaties, regardless of subject matter, usually contain articles governing where the final authentic copies of the treaty will be deposited and how any subsequent disputes as to their interpretation will be peacefully resolved. | Parties to a treaty might have disputes about what aspect of the articles of a treaty? | {
"text": [
"their interpretation"
],
"answer_start": [
185
]
} |
56f7083a711bf01900a448f9 | Treaty | Modern treaties, regardless of subject matter, usually contain articles governing where the final authentic copies of the treaty will be deposited and how any subsequent disputes as to their interpretation will be peacefully resolved. | Which copies of a treaty have their locations outlined in most modern treaties? | {
"text": [
"the final authentic copies"
],
"answer_start": [
88
]
} |
56f7083a711bf01900a448fa | Treaty | Modern treaties, regardless of subject matter, usually contain articles governing where the final authentic copies of the treaty will be deposited and how any subsequent disputes as to their interpretation will be peacefully resolved. | Modern treaties typically outline the procedures for the peaceful resolution of what? | {
"text": [
"disputes"
],
"answer_start": [
170
]
} |
56f709cd711bf01900a44900 | Treaty | The end of a treaty, the eschatocol (or closing protocol), is often signaled by a clause like "in witness whereof" or "in faith whereof," the parties have affixed their signatures, followed by the words "DONE at," then the site(s) of the treaty's execution and the date(s) of its execution. The date is typically written in its most formal, longest possible form. For example, the Charter of the United Nations was "DONE at the city of San Francisco the twenty-sixth day of June, one thousand nine hundred and forty-five." If the treaty is executed in multiple copies in different languages, that fact is always noted, and is followed by a stipulation that the versions in different languages are equally authentic. | What is the formal name for the closing protocol of a treaty? | {
"text": [
"the eschatocol"
],
"answer_start": [
21
]
} |
56f709cd711bf01900a44901 | Treaty | The end of a treaty, the eschatocol (or closing protocol), is often signaled by a clause like "in witness whereof" or "in faith whereof," the parties have affixed their signatures, followed by the words "DONE at," then the site(s) of the treaty's execution and the date(s) of its execution. The date is typically written in its most formal, longest possible form. For example, the Charter of the United Nations was "DONE at the city of San Francisco the twenty-sixth day of June, one thousand nine hundred and forty-five." If the treaty is executed in multiple copies in different languages, that fact is always noted, and is followed by a stipulation that the versions in different languages are equally authentic. | What typically follows the signatures in a treaty? | {
"text": [
"the site(s) of the treaty's execution and the date(s)"
],
"answer_start": [
219
]
} |
56f709cd711bf01900a44902 | Treaty | The end of a treaty, the eschatocol (or closing protocol), is often signaled by a clause like "in witness whereof" or "in faith whereof," the parties have affixed their signatures, followed by the words "DONE at," then the site(s) of the treaty's execution and the date(s) of its execution. The date is typically written in its most formal, longest possible form. For example, the Charter of the United Nations was "DONE at the city of San Francisco the twenty-sixth day of June, one thousand nine hundred and forty-five." If the treaty is executed in multiple copies in different languages, that fact is always noted, and is followed by a stipulation that the versions in different languages are equally authentic. | How is the date typically written in a treaty? | {
"text": [
"its most formal, longest possible form"
],
"answer_start": [
324
]
} |
56f709cd711bf01900a44903 | Treaty | The end of a treaty, the eschatocol (or closing protocol), is often signaled by a clause like "in witness whereof" or "in faith whereof," the parties have affixed their signatures, followed by the words "DONE at," then the site(s) of the treaty's execution and the date(s) of its execution. The date is typically written in its most formal, longest possible form. For example, the Charter of the United Nations was "DONE at the city of San Francisco the twenty-sixth day of June, one thousand nine hundred and forty-five." If the treaty is executed in multiple copies in different languages, that fact is always noted, and is followed by a stipulation that the versions in different languages are equally authentic. | What is the nature of the different versions of a treaty executed in multiple languages? | {
"text": [
"equally authentic"
],
"answer_start": [
697
]
} |
56f709cd711bf01900a44904 | Treaty | The end of a treaty, the eschatocol (or closing protocol), is often signaled by a clause like "in witness whereof" or "in faith whereof," the parties have affixed their signatures, followed by the words "DONE at," then the site(s) of the treaty's execution and the date(s) of its execution. The date is typically written in its most formal, longest possible form. For example, the Charter of the United Nations was "DONE at the city of San Francisco the twenty-sixth day of June, one thousand nine hundred and forty-five." If the treaty is executed in multiple copies in different languages, that fact is always noted, and is followed by a stipulation that the versions in different languages are equally authentic. | A clause like "in witness whereof" or "in faith whereof" typically signals what in a treaty? | {
"text": [
"The end"
],
"answer_start": [
0
]
} |
56f715cc711bf01900a44928 | Treaty | The signatures of the parties' representatives follow at the very end. When the text of a treaty is later reprinted, such as in a collection of treaties currently in effect, an editor will often append the dates on which the respective parties ratified the treaty and on which it came into effect for each party. | Whose signatures appear at the very end of a treaty? | {
"text": [
"the parties' representatives"
],
"answer_start": [
18
]
} |
56f715cc711bf01900a44929 | Treaty | The signatures of the parties' representatives follow at the very end. When the text of a treaty is later reprinted, such as in a collection of treaties currently in effect, an editor will often append the dates on which the respective parties ratified the treaty and on which it came into effect for each party. | Where might the text of a treaty be reprinted? | {
"text": [
"in a collection of treaties currently in effect"
],
"answer_start": [
125
]
} |
56f715cc711bf01900a4492a | Treaty | The signatures of the parties' representatives follow at the very end. When the text of a treaty is later reprinted, such as in a collection of treaties currently in effect, an editor will often append the dates on which the respective parties ratified the treaty and on which it came into effect for each party. | Who, upon reprinting, will often append the dates on which the treaty was ratified and came into effect? | {
"text": [
"an editor"
],
"answer_start": [
174
]
} |
56f715cc711bf01900a4492b | Treaty | The signatures of the parties' representatives follow at the very end. When the text of a treaty is later reprinted, such as in a collection of treaties currently in effect, an editor will often append the dates on which the respective parties ratified the treaty and on which it came into effect for each party. | Each party must have done what in order for the treaty to come into effect? | {
"text": [
"ratified the treaty"
],
"answer_start": [
244
]
} |
56f715cc711bf01900a4492c | Treaty | The signatures of the parties' representatives follow at the very end. When the text of a treaty is later reprinted, such as in a collection of treaties currently in effect, an editor will often append the dates on which the respective parties ratified the treaty and on which it came into effect for each party. | Even if signed and ratified on the same date, the treaty might have done what on different dates? | {
"text": [
"came into effect"
],
"answer_start": [
280
]
} |
56f71740711bf01900a44932 | Treaty | Bilateral treaties are concluded between two states or entities. It is possible, however, for a bilateral treaty to have more than two parties; consider for instance the bilateral treaties between Switzerland and the European Union (EU) following the Swiss rejection of the European Economic Area agreement. Each of these treaties has seventeen parties. These however are still bilateral, not multilateral, treaties. The parties are divided into two groups, the Swiss ("on the one part") and the EU and its member states ("on the other part"). The treaty establishes rights and obligations between the Swiss and the EU and the member states severally—it does not establish any rights and obligations amongst the EU and its member states.[citation needed] | Bilateral treaties are concluded between how many states or entities? | {
"text": [
"two"
],
"answer_start": [
41
]
} |
56f71740711bf01900a44933 | Treaty | Bilateral treaties are concluded between two states or entities. It is possible, however, for a bilateral treaty to have more than two parties; consider for instance the bilateral treaties between Switzerland and the European Union (EU) following the Swiss rejection of the European Economic Area agreement. Each of these treaties has seventeen parties. These however are still bilateral, not multilateral, treaties. The parties are divided into two groups, the Swiss ("on the one part") and the EU and its member states ("on the other part"). The treaty establishes rights and obligations between the Swiss and the EU and the member states severally—it does not establish any rights and obligations amongst the EU and its member states.[citation needed] | Is it possible for a bilateral treaty to have more than two parties? | {
"text": [
"It is possible"
],
"answer_start": [
65
]
} |
56f71740711bf01900a44934 | Treaty | Bilateral treaties are concluded between two states or entities. It is possible, however, for a bilateral treaty to have more than two parties; consider for instance the bilateral treaties between Switzerland and the European Union (EU) following the Swiss rejection of the European Economic Area agreement. Each of these treaties has seventeen parties. These however are still bilateral, not multilateral, treaties. The parties are divided into two groups, the Swiss ("on the one part") and the EU and its member states ("on the other part"). The treaty establishes rights and obligations between the Swiss and the EU and the member states severally—it does not establish any rights and obligations amongst the EU and its member states.[citation needed] | The bilateral treaties between Switzerland and the European Union followed the Swiss rejection of what? | {
"text": [
"the European Economic Area agreement"
],
"answer_start": [
270
]
} |
56f71740711bf01900a44935 | Treaty | Bilateral treaties are concluded between two states or entities. It is possible, however, for a bilateral treaty to have more than two parties; consider for instance the bilateral treaties between Switzerland and the European Union (EU) following the Swiss rejection of the European Economic Area agreement. Each of these treaties has seventeen parties. These however are still bilateral, not multilateral, treaties. The parties are divided into two groups, the Swiss ("on the one part") and the EU and its member states ("on the other part"). The treaty establishes rights and obligations between the Swiss and the EU and the member states severally—it does not establish any rights and obligations amongst the EU and its member states.[citation needed] | Does the bilateral treaty between Switzerland and the European Union establish rights or obligations amongst the EU and its member states? | {
"text": [
"it does not"
],
"answer_start": [
651
]
} |
56f71740711bf01900a44936 | Treaty | Bilateral treaties are concluded between two states or entities. It is possible, however, for a bilateral treaty to have more than two parties; consider for instance the bilateral treaties between Switzerland and the European Union (EU) following the Swiss rejection of the European Economic Area agreement. Each of these treaties has seventeen parties. These however are still bilateral, not multilateral, treaties. The parties are divided into two groups, the Swiss ("on the one part") and the EU and its member states ("on the other part"). The treaty establishes rights and obligations between the Swiss and the EU and the member states severally—it does not establish any rights and obligations amongst the EU and its member states.[citation needed] | The treaty between Switzerland and the European Union is an example of what kind of treaty? | {
"text": [
"bilateral"
],
"answer_start": [
170
]
} |
56f7188d711bf01900a44950 | Treaty | A multilateral treaty is concluded among several countries. The agreement establishes rights and obligations between each party and every other party. Multilateral treaties are often regional.[citation needed] Treaties of "mutual guarantee" are international compacts, e.g., the Treaty of Locarno which guarantees each signatory against attack from another. | What is a treaty concluded among several countries? | {
"text": [
"A multilateral treaty"
],
"answer_start": [
0
]
} |
56f7188d711bf01900a44951 | Treaty | A multilateral treaty is concluded among several countries. The agreement establishes rights and obligations between each party and every other party. Multilateral treaties are often regional.[citation needed] Treaties of "mutual guarantee" are international compacts, e.g., the Treaty of Locarno which guarantees each signatory against attack from another. | Between which parties does a multilateral treaty establish rights and obligations? | {
"text": [
"each party and every other party"
],
"answer_start": [
117
]
} |
56f7188d711bf01900a44952 | Treaty | A multilateral treaty is concluded among several countries. The agreement establishes rights and obligations between each party and every other party. Multilateral treaties are often regional.[citation needed] Treaties of "mutual guarantee" are international compacts, e.g., the Treaty of Locarno which guarantees each signatory against attack from another. | The Treaty of Locarno guarantees each signatory against what from another signatory? | {
"text": [
"attack"
],
"answer_start": [
337
]
} |
56f7188d711bf01900a44953 | Treaty | A multilateral treaty is concluded among several countries. The agreement establishes rights and obligations between each party and every other party. Multilateral treaties are often regional.[citation needed] Treaties of "mutual guarantee" are international compacts, e.g., the Treaty of Locarno which guarantees each signatory against attack from another. | What type of treaty is a mutual guarantee? | {
"text": [
"international compacts"
],
"answer_start": [
245
]
} |
56f7188d711bf01900a44954 | Treaty | A multilateral treaty is concluded among several countries. The agreement establishes rights and obligations between each party and every other party. Multilateral treaties are often regional.[citation needed] Treaties of "mutual guarantee" are international compacts, e.g., the Treaty of Locarno which guarantees each signatory against attack from another. | Multilateral treaties are often entered into by countries that share the same what? | {
"text": [
"region"
],
"answer_start": [
183
]
} |
56f719c23d8e2e1400e37350 | Treaty | Reservations are essentially caveats to a state's acceptance of a treaty. Reservations are unilateral statements purporting to exclude or to modify the legal obligation and its effects on the reserving state. These must be included at the time of signing or ratification, i.e. "a party cannot add a reservation after it has already joined a treaty". | What are caveats to a state's acceptance of a treaty? | {
"text": [
"Reservations"
],
"answer_start": [
0
]
} |
56f719c23d8e2e1400e37351 | Treaty | Reservations are essentially caveats to a state's acceptance of a treaty. Reservations are unilateral statements purporting to exclude or to modify the legal obligation and its effects on the reserving state. These must be included at the time of signing or ratification, i.e. "a party cannot add a reservation after it has already joined a treaty". | What are unilateral statements purporting to exclude or to modify the legal obligation and its effects on a state? | {
"text": [
"Reservations"
],
"answer_start": [
74
]
} |
56f719c23d8e2e1400e37352 | Treaty | Reservations are essentially caveats to a state's acceptance of a treaty. Reservations are unilateral statements purporting to exclude or to modify the legal obligation and its effects on the reserving state. These must be included at the time of signing or ratification, i.e. "a party cannot add a reservation after it has already joined a treaty". | When must reservations be included in a treaty? | {
"text": [
"at the time of signing or ratification"
],
"answer_start": [
232
]
} |
56f719c23d8e2e1400e37353 | Treaty | Reservations are essentially caveats to a state's acceptance of a treaty. Reservations are unilateral statements purporting to exclude or to modify the legal obligation and its effects on the reserving state. These must be included at the time of signing or ratification, i.e. "a party cannot add a reservation after it has already joined a treaty". | What are parties to a treaty forbidden to do after they have already joined a treaty? | {
"text": [
"add a reservation"
],
"answer_start": [
293
]
} |
56f719c23d8e2e1400e37354 | Treaty | Reservations are essentially caveats to a state's acceptance of a treaty. Reservations are unilateral statements purporting to exclude or to modify the legal obligation and its effects on the reserving state. These must be included at the time of signing or ratification, i.e. "a party cannot add a reservation after it has already joined a treaty". | A reserving party to a treaty may include a statement that attempts to do what to its legal obligations or their effects? | {
"text": [
"exclude or to modify"
],
"answer_start": [
127
]
} |
56f71cd0711bf01900a44986 | Treaty | Originally, international law was unaccepting of treaty reservations, rejecting them unless all parties to the treaty accepted the same reservations. However, in the interest of encouraging the largest number of states to join treaties, a more permissive rule regarding reservations has emerged. While some treaties still expressly forbid any reservations, they are now generally permitted to the extent that they are not inconsistent with the goals and purposes of the treaty. | A more permissive rule regarding what emerged to encourage the largest number of states to join treaties? | {
"text": [
"reservations"
],
"answer_start": [
270
]
} |
56f71cd0711bf01900a44987 | Treaty | Originally, international law was unaccepting of treaty reservations, rejecting them unless all parties to the treaty accepted the same reservations. However, in the interest of encouraging the largest number of states to join treaties, a more permissive rule regarding reservations has emerged. While some treaties still expressly forbid any reservations, they are now generally permitted to the extent that they are not inconsistent with the goals and purposes of the treaty. | Reservations are generally permitted so long as they are not what? | {
"text": [
"inconsistent with the goals and purposes of the treaty"
],
"answer_start": [
422
]
} |
56f71cd0711bf01900a44988 | Treaty | Originally, international law was unaccepting of treaty reservations, rejecting them unless all parties to the treaty accepted the same reservations. However, in the interest of encouraging the largest number of states to join treaties, a more permissive rule regarding reservations has emerged. While some treaties still expressly forbid any reservations, they are now generally permitted to the extent that they are not inconsistent with the goals and purposes of the treaty. | How did international law originally respond to treaty reservations? | {
"text": [
"rejecting them"
],
"answer_start": [
70
]
} |
56f71cd0711bf01900a44989 | Treaty | Originally, international law was unaccepting of treaty reservations, rejecting them unless all parties to the treaty accepted the same reservations. However, in the interest of encouraging the largest number of states to join treaties, a more permissive rule regarding reservations has emerged. While some treaties still expressly forbid any reservations, they are now generally permitted to the extent that they are not inconsistent with the goals and purposes of the treaty. | Originally reservations were rejected under international law unless which parties of the treaty accepted them? | {
"text": [
"all parties"
],
"answer_start": [
92
]
} |
56f71cd0711bf01900a4498a | Treaty | Originally, international law was unaccepting of treaty reservations, rejecting them unless all parties to the treaty accepted the same reservations. However, in the interest of encouraging the largest number of states to join treaties, a more permissive rule regarding reservations has emerged. While some treaties still expressly forbid any reservations, they are now generally permitted to the extent that they are not inconsistent with the goals and purposes of the treaty. | Because they are generally accepted under international law, a treaty must forbid reservations in what manner to prevent their adoption? | {
"text": [
"expressly"
],
"answer_start": [
322
]
} |
56f71ecf711bf01900a449a5 | Treaty | When a state limits its treaty obligations through reservations, other states party to that treaty have the option to accept those reservations, object to them, or object and oppose them. If the state accepts them (or fails to act at all), both the reserving state and the accepting state are relieved of the reserved legal obligation as concerns their legal obligations to each other (accepting the reservation does not change the accepting state's legal obligations as concerns other parties to the treaty). If the state opposes, the parts of the treaty affected by the reservation drop out completely and no longer create any legal obligations on the reserving and accepting state, again only as concerns each other. Finally, if the state objects and opposes, there are no legal obligations under that treaty between those two state parties whatsoever. The objecting and opposing state essentially refuses to acknowledge the reserving state is a party to the treaty at all. | Who remains unaffected when a party's reservation is accepted by a second party? | {
"text": [
"other parties to the treaty"
],
"answer_start": [
480
]
} |
56f71ecf711bf01900a449a6 | Treaty | When a state limits its treaty obligations through reservations, other states party to that treaty have the option to accept those reservations, object to them, or object and oppose them. If the state accepts them (or fails to act at all), both the reserving state and the accepting state are relieved of the reserved legal obligation as concerns their legal obligations to each other (accepting the reservation does not change the accepting state's legal obligations as concerns other parties to the treaty). If the state opposes, the parts of the treaty affected by the reservation drop out completely and no longer create any legal obligations on the reserving and accepting state, again only as concerns each other. Finally, if the state objects and opposes, there are no legal obligations under that treaty between those two state parties whatsoever. The objecting and opposing state essentially refuses to acknowledge the reserving state is a party to the treaty at all. | What happens to the parts of the treaty affected by a rejected reservation as they concern the reserving and rejecting parties? | {
"text": [
"drop out completely"
],
"answer_start": [
584
]
} |
56f71ecf711bf01900a449a7 | Treaty | When a state limits its treaty obligations through reservations, other states party to that treaty have the option to accept those reservations, object to them, or object and oppose them. If the state accepts them (or fails to act at all), both the reserving state and the accepting state are relieved of the reserved legal obligation as concerns their legal obligations to each other (accepting the reservation does not change the accepting state's legal obligations as concerns other parties to the treaty). If the state opposes, the parts of the treaty affected by the reservation drop out completely and no longer create any legal obligations on the reserving and accepting state, again only as concerns each other. Finally, if the state objects and opposes, there are no legal obligations under that treaty between those two state parties whatsoever. The objecting and opposing state essentially refuses to acknowledge the reserving state is a party to the treaty at all. | What legal obligations exist between two state parties if one objects and opposes the other's reservations? | {
"text": [
"no legal obligations"
],
"answer_start": [
773
]
} |
56f71ecf711bf01900a449a8 | Treaty | When a state limits its treaty obligations through reservations, other states party to that treaty have the option to accept those reservations, object to them, or object and oppose them. If the state accepts them (or fails to act at all), both the reserving state and the accepting state are relieved of the reserved legal obligation as concerns their legal obligations to each other (accepting the reservation does not change the accepting state's legal obligations as concerns other parties to the treaty). If the state opposes, the parts of the treaty affected by the reservation drop out completely and no longer create any legal obligations on the reserving and accepting state, again only as concerns each other. Finally, if the state objects and opposes, there are no legal obligations under that treaty between those two state parties whatsoever. The objecting and opposing state essentially refuses to acknowledge the reserving state is a party to the treaty at all. | If a state party objects and opposes another state's reservations it essentially refuses to acknowledge what? | {
"text": [
"the reserving state is a party to the treaty"
],
"answer_start": [
924
]
} |
56f720ed711bf01900a449b8 | Treaty | There are three ways an existing treaty can be amended. First, formal amendment requires State parties to the treaty to go through the ratification process all over again. The re-negotiation of treaty provisions can be long and protracted, and often some parties to the original treaty will not become parties to the amended treaty. When determining the legal obligations of states, one party to the original treaty and one a party to the amended treaty, the states will only be bound by the terms they both agreed upon. Treaties can also be amended informally by the treaty executive council when the changes are only procedural, technical change in customary international law can also amend a treaty, where state behavior evinces a new interpretation of the legal obligations under the treaty. Minor corrections to a treaty may be adopted by a procès-verbal; but a procès-verbal is generally reserved for changes to rectify obvious errors in the text adopted, i.e. where the text adopted does not correctly reflect the intention of the parties adopting it. | How many ways are there to amend an existing treaty? | {
"text": [
"three"
],
"answer_start": [
10
]
} |
56f720ed711bf01900a449b9 | Treaty | There are three ways an existing treaty can be amended. First, formal amendment requires State parties to the treaty to go through the ratification process all over again. The re-negotiation of treaty provisions can be long and protracted, and often some parties to the original treaty will not become parties to the amended treaty. When determining the legal obligations of states, one party to the original treaty and one a party to the amended treaty, the states will only be bound by the terms they both agreed upon. Treaties can also be amended informally by the treaty executive council when the changes are only procedural, technical change in customary international law can also amend a treaty, where state behavior evinces a new interpretation of the legal obligations under the treaty. Minor corrections to a treaty may be adopted by a procès-verbal; but a procès-verbal is generally reserved for changes to rectify obvious errors in the text adopted, i.e. where the text adopted does not correctly reflect the intention of the parties adopting it. | What must state parties to a treaty repeat to adopt a formal amendment to the treaty? | {
"text": [
"the ratification process"
],
"answer_start": [
131
]
} |
56f720ed711bf01900a449ba | Treaty | There are three ways an existing treaty can be amended. First, formal amendment requires State parties to the treaty to go through the ratification process all over again. The re-negotiation of treaty provisions can be long and protracted, and often some parties to the original treaty will not become parties to the amended treaty. When determining the legal obligations of states, one party to the original treaty and one a party to the amended treaty, the states will only be bound by the terms they both agreed upon. Treaties can also be amended informally by the treaty executive council when the changes are only procedural, technical change in customary international law can also amend a treaty, where state behavior evinces a new interpretation of the legal obligations under the treaty. Minor corrections to a treaty may be adopted by a procès-verbal; but a procès-verbal is generally reserved for changes to rectify obvious errors in the text adopted, i.e. where the text adopted does not correctly reflect the intention of the parties adopting it. | What amendment process is generally reserved for changes that rectify obvious errors in the text? | {
"text": [
"a procès-verbal"
],
"answer_start": [
866
]
} |
56f720ed711bf01900a449bb | Treaty | There are three ways an existing treaty can be amended. First, formal amendment requires State parties to the treaty to go through the ratification process all over again. The re-negotiation of treaty provisions can be long and protracted, and often some parties to the original treaty will not become parties to the amended treaty. When determining the legal obligations of states, one party to the original treaty and one a party to the amended treaty, the states will only be bound by the terms they both agreed upon. Treaties can also be amended informally by the treaty executive council when the changes are only procedural, technical change in customary international law can also amend a treaty, where state behavior evinces a new interpretation of the legal obligations under the treaty. Minor corrections to a treaty may be adopted by a procès-verbal; but a procès-verbal is generally reserved for changes to rectify obvious errors in the text adopted, i.e. where the text adopted does not correctly reflect the intention of the parties adopting it. | Parties to an original treaty and an amended treaty are bound to what terms? | {
"text": [
"the terms they both agreed upon"
],
"answer_start": [
488
]
} |
56f722b5711bf01900a449cc | Treaty | In international law and international relations, a protocol is generally a treaty or international agreement that supplements a previous treaty or international agreement. A protocol can amend the previous treaty, or add additional provisions. Parties to the earlier agreement are not required to adopt the protocol. Sometimes this is made clearer by calling it an "optional protocol", especially where many parties to the first agreement do not support the protocol. | What is a treaty that supplements a previous treaty in international law? | {
"text": [
"a protocol"
],
"answer_start": [
50
]
} |
56f722b5711bf01900a449cd | Treaty | In international law and international relations, a protocol is generally a treaty or international agreement that supplements a previous treaty or international agreement. A protocol can amend the previous treaty, or add additional provisions. Parties to the earlier agreement are not required to adopt the protocol. Sometimes this is made clearer by calling it an "optional protocol", especially where many parties to the first agreement do not support the protocol. | A protocol may either amend a previous treaty or do what? | {
"text": [
"add additional provisions"
],
"answer_start": [
218
]
} |
56f722b5711bf01900a449ce | Treaty | In international law and international relations, a protocol is generally a treaty or international agreement that supplements a previous treaty or international agreement. A protocol can amend the previous treaty, or add additional provisions. Parties to the earlier agreement are not required to adopt the protocol. Sometimes this is made clearer by calling it an "optional protocol", especially where many parties to the first agreement do not support the protocol. | Do parties to a treaty have an obligation to adopt a later protocol? | {
"text": [
"not required"
],
"answer_start": [
282
]
} |
56f722b5711bf01900a449cf | Treaty | In international law and international relations, a protocol is generally a treaty or international agreement that supplements a previous treaty or international agreement. A protocol can amend the previous treaty, or add additional provisions. Parties to the earlier agreement are not required to adopt the protocol. Sometimes this is made clearer by calling it an "optional protocol", especially where many parties to the first agreement do not support the protocol. | What do we sometimes call an agreement that supplements a treaty especially when few parties to the treaty support the protocol? | {
"text": [
"an \"optional protocol\""
],
"answer_start": [
363
]
} |
56f722b5711bf01900a449d0 | Treaty | In international law and international relations, a protocol is generally a treaty or international agreement that supplements a previous treaty or international agreement. A protocol can amend the previous treaty, or add additional provisions. Parties to the earlier agreement are not required to adopt the protocol. Sometimes this is made clearer by calling it an "optional protocol", especially where many parties to the first agreement do not support the protocol. | A protocol may add additional provisions to a treaty or else do what? | {
"text": [
"amend the previous treaty"
],
"answer_start": [
188
]
} |
56f72eb0711bf01900a44a2c | Treaty | Some examples: the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) established a framework for the development of binding greenhouse gas emission limits, while the Kyoto Protocol contained the specific provisions and regulations later agreed upon. | The Kyoto Protocol is associated with what treaty? | {
"text": [
"United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change"
],
"answer_start": [
19
]
} |
56f72eb0711bf01900a44a2d | Treaty | Some examples: the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) established a framework for the development of binding greenhouse gas emission limits, while the Kyoto Protocol contained the specific provisions and regulations later agreed upon. | The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was supplemented by what protocol? | {
"text": [
"the Kyoto Protocol"
],
"answer_start": [
175
]
} |
56f72eb0711bf01900a44a2e | Treaty | Some examples: the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) established a framework for the development of binding greenhouse gas emission limits, while the Kyoto Protocol contained the specific provisions and regulations later agreed upon. | The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change established a framework for the development of what? | {
"text": [
"binding greenhouse gas emission limits"
],
"answer_start": [
129
]
} |
56f72eb0711bf01900a44a2f | Treaty | Some examples: the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) established a framework for the development of binding greenhouse gas emission limits, while the Kyoto Protocol contained the specific provisions and regulations later agreed upon. | While the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change established a framework for developing greenhouse gas emission limits, the Kyoto Protocol contained what? | {
"text": [
"the specific provisions and regulations later agreed upon"
],
"answer_start": [
204
]
} |
56f72eb0711bf01900a44a30 | Treaty | Some examples: the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) established a framework for the development of binding greenhouse gas emission limits, while the Kyoto Protocol contained the specific provisions and regulations later agreed upon. | The agreement that contained specific provisions related to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is an example of what agreement that supplements a treaty? | {
"text": [
"Protocol"
],
"answer_start": [
185
]
} |
56f730303d8e2e1400e37412 | Treaty | Treaties may be seen as 'self-executing', in that merely becoming a party puts the treaty and all of its obligations in action. Other treaties may be non-self-executing and require 'implementing legislation'—a change in the domestic law of a state party that will direct or enable it to fulfill treaty obligations. An example of a treaty requiring such legislation would be one mandating local prosecution by a party for particular crimes. | A treaty that puts all of its obligations in action simply by becoming a party to it is known as what? | {
"text": [
"self-executing"
],
"answer_start": [
25
]
} |
56f730303d8e2e1400e37413 | Treaty | Treaties may be seen as 'self-executing', in that merely becoming a party puts the treaty and all of its obligations in action. Other treaties may be non-self-executing and require 'implementing legislation'—a change in the domestic law of a state party that will direct or enable it to fulfill treaty obligations. An example of a treaty requiring such legislation would be one mandating local prosecution by a party for particular crimes. | What do non-self-executing treaties typically require from a party to enable it to fulfill its obligations? | {
"text": [
"implementing legislation"
],
"answer_start": [
182
]
} |
56f730303d8e2e1400e37414 | Treaty | Treaties may be seen as 'self-executing', in that merely becoming a party puts the treaty and all of its obligations in action. Other treaties may be non-self-executing and require 'implementing legislation'—a change in the domestic law of a state party that will direct or enable it to fulfill treaty obligations. An example of a treaty requiring such legislation would be one mandating local prosecution by a party for particular crimes. | What is "implementing legislation" that is required by a party to a treaty to enable it to fulfill its obligations under the treaty? | {
"text": [
"a change in the domestic law of a state party"
],
"answer_start": [
208
]
} |
56f730303d8e2e1400e37415 | Treaty | Treaties may be seen as 'self-executing', in that merely becoming a party puts the treaty and all of its obligations in action. Other treaties may be non-self-executing and require 'implementing legislation'—a change in the domestic law of a state party that will direct or enable it to fulfill treaty obligations. An example of a treaty requiring such legislation would be one mandating local prosecution by a party for particular crimes. | A treaty requiring local prosecution by a party for particular crimes is an example of which type of treaty? | {
"text": [
"non-self-executing"
],
"answer_start": [
150
]
} |
56f730303d8e2e1400e37416 | Treaty | Treaties may be seen as 'self-executing', in that merely becoming a party puts the treaty and all of its obligations in action. Other treaties may be non-self-executing and require 'implementing legislation'—a change in the domestic law of a state party that will direct or enable it to fulfill treaty obligations. An example of a treaty requiring such legislation would be one mandating local prosecution by a party for particular crimes. | Signing a self-executing treaty automatically does what for a party? | {
"text": [
"puts the treaty and all of its obligations in action"
],
"answer_start": [
74
]
} |
56f731ca711bf01900a44a50 | Treaty | The division between the two is often not clear and is often politicized in disagreements within a government over a treaty, since a non-self-executing treaty cannot be acted on without the proper change in domestic law. If a treaty requires implementing legislation, a state may be in default of its obligations by the failure of its legislature to pass the necessary domestic laws. | What type of treaty cannot be acted on without the proper change in domestic law? | {
"text": [
"a non-self-executing treaty"
],
"answer_start": [
131
]
} |
56f731ca711bf01900a44a51 | Treaty | The division between the two is often not clear and is often politicized in disagreements within a government over a treaty, since a non-self-executing treaty cannot be acted on without the proper change in domestic law. If a treaty requires implementing legislation, a state may be in default of its obligations by the failure of its legislature to pass the necessary domestic laws. | A state party may be in default of its obligations under a non-self-executing treaty if its legislature fails to do what? | {
"text": [
"pass the necessary domestic laws"
],
"answer_start": [
350
]
} |
56f731ca711bf01900a44a52 | Treaty | The division between the two is often not clear and is often politicized in disagreements within a government over a treaty, since a non-self-executing treaty cannot be acted on without the proper change in domestic law. If a treaty requires implementing legislation, a state may be in default of its obligations by the failure of its legislature to pass the necessary domestic laws. | What institution of a party to a treaty must act to fulfill the party's obligations under a non-self-executing treaty? | {
"text": [
"its legislature"
],
"answer_start": [
331
]
} |
56f731ca711bf01900a44a53 | Treaty | The division between the two is often not clear and is often politicized in disagreements within a government over a treaty, since a non-self-executing treaty cannot be acted on without the proper change in domestic law. If a treaty requires implementing legislation, a state may be in default of its obligations by the failure of its legislature to pass the necessary domestic laws. | The often unclear division between a self-executing treaty and a non-self-executing treaty can lead to a treaty being what if disagreements exist within a party? | {
"text": [
"politicized"
],
"answer_start": [
61
]
} |
56f731ca711bf01900a44a54 | Treaty | The division between the two is often not clear and is often politicized in disagreements within a government over a treaty, since a non-self-executing treaty cannot be acted on without the proper change in domestic law. If a treaty requires implementing legislation, a state may be in default of its obligations by the failure of its legislature to pass the necessary domestic laws. | A treaty may be politicized due to disagreements within a party because the division between a self-executing treaty and a non-self-executing treaty can often be described as what? | {
"text": [
"not clear"
],
"answer_start": [
38
]
} |
56f733273d8e2e1400e3744c | Treaty | The language of treaties, like that of any law or contract, must be interpreted when the wording does not seem clear or it is not immediately apparent how it should be applied in a perhaps unforeseen circumstance. The Vienna Convention states that treaties are to be interpreted "in good faith" according to the "ordinary meaning given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose." International legal experts also often invoke the 'principle of maximum effectiveness,' which interprets treaty language as having the fullest force and effect possible to establish obligations between the parties. | What principle is often invoked by legal experts when interpreting the language of treaties? | {
"text": [
"principle of maximum effectiveness"
],
"answer_start": [
476
]
} |
56f733273d8e2e1400e3744d | Treaty | The language of treaties, like that of any law or contract, must be interpreted when the wording does not seem clear or it is not immediately apparent how it should be applied in a perhaps unforeseen circumstance. The Vienna Convention states that treaties are to be interpreted "in good faith" according to the "ordinary meaning given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose." International legal experts also often invoke the 'principle of maximum effectiveness,' which interprets treaty language as having the fullest force and effect possible to establish obligations between the parties. | The principle of maximum effectiveness interprets the language of treaties as having what effect to establish obligations between parties? | {
"text": [
"the fullest force and effect"
],
"answer_start": [
556
]
} |
56f733273d8e2e1400e3744e | Treaty | The language of treaties, like that of any law or contract, must be interpreted when the wording does not seem clear or it is not immediately apparent how it should be applied in a perhaps unforeseen circumstance. The Vienna Convention states that treaties are to be interpreted "in good faith" according to the "ordinary meaning given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose." International legal experts also often invoke the 'principle of maximum effectiveness,' which interprets treaty language as having the fullest force and effect possible to establish obligations between the parties. | What states that treaties are to be interpreted "in good faith" according to the "ordinary meaning given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in light of its object and purpose?" | {
"text": [
"The Vienna Convention"
],
"answer_start": [
214
]
} |
56f733273d8e2e1400e3744f | Treaty | The language of treaties, like that of any law or contract, must be interpreted when the wording does not seem clear or it is not immediately apparent how it should be applied in a perhaps unforeseen circumstance. The Vienna Convention states that treaties are to be interpreted "in good faith" according to the "ordinary meaning given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose." International legal experts also often invoke the 'principle of maximum effectiveness,' which interprets treaty language as having the fullest force and effect possible to establish obligations between the parties. | What property of treaties must often be interpreted when it's not clear? | {
"text": [
"The language"
],
"answer_start": [
0
]
} |
56f733273d8e2e1400e37450 | Treaty | The language of treaties, like that of any law or contract, must be interpreted when the wording does not seem clear or it is not immediately apparent how it should be applied in a perhaps unforeseen circumstance. The Vienna Convention states that treaties are to be interpreted "in good faith" according to the "ordinary meaning given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose." International legal experts also often invoke the 'principle of maximum effectiveness,' which interprets treaty language as having the fullest force and effect possible to establish obligations between the parties. | Besides unclear language what might also arise that necessitates the interpretation of the language of a treaty? | {
"text": [
"a perhaps unforeseen circumstance"
],
"answer_start": [
179
]
} |
56f734e03d8e2e1400e3746a | Treaty | No one party to a treaty can impose its particular interpretation of the treaty upon the other parties. Consent may be implied, however, if the other parties fail to explicitly disavow that initially unilateral interpretation, particularly if that state has acted upon its view of the treaty without complaint. Consent by all parties to the treaty to a particular interpretation has the legal effect of adding another clause to the treaty – this is commonly called an 'authentic interpretation'. | No one party to a treaty can do what to the other parties? | {
"text": [
"impose its particular interpretation of the treaty"
],
"answer_start": [
29
]
} |
56f734e03d8e2e1400e3746b | Treaty | No one party to a treaty can impose its particular interpretation of the treaty upon the other parties. Consent may be implied, however, if the other parties fail to explicitly disavow that initially unilateral interpretation, particularly if that state has acted upon its view of the treaty without complaint. Consent by all parties to the treaty to a particular interpretation has the legal effect of adding another clause to the treaty – this is commonly called an 'authentic interpretation'. | What may be implied of other parties fail to explicitly disavow a party's initially unilateral interpretation of a treaty? | {
"text": [
"Consent"
],
"answer_start": [
104
]
} |
56f734e03d8e2e1400e3746c | Treaty | No one party to a treaty can impose its particular interpretation of the treaty upon the other parties. Consent may be implied, however, if the other parties fail to explicitly disavow that initially unilateral interpretation, particularly if that state has acted upon its view of the treaty without complaint. Consent by all parties to the treaty to a particular interpretation has the legal effect of adding another clause to the treaty – this is commonly called an 'authentic interpretation'. | Consent for a party's unilateral interpretation of a treaty may be implied if that state has acted upon its view of the treat without what from another party? | {
"text": [
"complaint"
],
"answer_start": [
300
]
} |
56f734e03d8e2e1400e3746d | Treaty | No one party to a treaty can impose its particular interpretation of the treaty upon the other parties. Consent may be implied, however, if the other parties fail to explicitly disavow that initially unilateral interpretation, particularly if that state has acted upon its view of the treaty without complaint. Consent by all parties to the treaty to a particular interpretation has the legal effect of adding another clause to the treaty – this is commonly called an 'authentic interpretation'. | Consent by all parties to a treaty to a particular interpretation of the treaty has what legal effect? | {
"text": [
"adding another clause to the treaty"
],
"answer_start": [
403
]
} |
56f734e03d8e2e1400e3746e | Treaty | No one party to a treaty can impose its particular interpretation of the treaty upon the other parties. Consent may be implied, however, if the other parties fail to explicitly disavow that initially unilateral interpretation, particularly if that state has acted upon its view of the treaty without complaint. Consent by all parties to the treaty to a particular interpretation has the legal effect of adding another clause to the treaty – this is commonly called an 'authentic interpretation'. | The legal effect of adding another clause to a treaty that occurs when all parties to a treaty consent to a particular interpretation of the treaty is commonly known as what? | {
"text": [
"an 'authentic interpretation'"
],
"answer_start": [
465
]
} |
56f736513d8e2e1400e3747c | Treaty | International tribunals and arbiters are often called upon to resolve substantial disputes over treaty interpretations. To establish the meaning in context, these judicial bodies may review the preparatory work from the negotiation and drafting of the treaty as well as the final, signed treaty itself. | What are international tribunals and arbiters often called upon to resolve in regards to treaties? | {
"text": [
"substantial disputes over treaty interpretations"
],
"answer_start": [
70
]
} |
56f736513d8e2e1400e3747d | Treaty | International tribunals and arbiters are often called upon to resolve substantial disputes over treaty interpretations. To establish the meaning in context, these judicial bodies may review the preparatory work from the negotiation and drafting of the treaty as well as the final, signed treaty itself. | What judicial bodies might be called upon to resolve disputes pertaining to the interpretation of treaties? | {
"text": [
"International tribunals and arbiters"
],
"answer_start": [
0
]
} |
56f736513d8e2e1400e3747f | Treaty | International tribunals and arbiters are often called upon to resolve substantial disputes over treaty interpretations. To establish the meaning in context, these judicial bodies may review the preparatory work from the negotiation and drafting of the treaty as well as the final, signed treaty itself. | For what purpose might an international tribunal review the preparatory work from the negotiation and drafting of a treaty? | {
"text": [
"To establish the meaning in context"
],
"answer_start": [
120
]
} |
56f736513d8e2e1400e37480 | Treaty | International tribunals and arbiters are often called upon to resolve substantial disputes over treaty interpretations. To establish the meaning in context, these judicial bodies may review the preparatory work from the negotiation and drafting of the treaty as well as the final, signed treaty itself. | In addition to the preparatory work from the drafting and negotiation of a treaty, what might arbiters review when resolving a dispute over the interpretation of a treaty? | {
"text": [
"the final, signed treaty itself"
],
"answer_start": [
270
]
} |
56f7379e711bf01900a44a76 | Treaty | One significant part of treaty making is that signing a treaty implies recognition that the other side is a sovereign state and that the agreement being considered is enforceable under international law. Hence, nations can be very careful about terming an agreement to be a treaty. For example, within the United States, agreements between states are compacts and agreements between states and the federal government or between agencies of the government are memoranda of understanding. | What are agreements between states within the United States called? | {
"text": [
"compacts"
],
"answer_start": [
351
]
} |
56f7379e711bf01900a44a77 | Treaty | One significant part of treaty making is that signing a treaty implies recognition that the other side is a sovereign state and that the agreement being considered is enforceable under international law. Hence, nations can be very careful about terming an agreement to be a treaty. For example, within the United States, agreements between states are compacts and agreements between states and the federal government or between agencies of the government are memoranda of understanding. | What are agreements between states and the federal government called within the United States? | {
"text": [
"memoranda of understanding"
],
"answer_start": [
459
]
} |
56f7379e711bf01900a44a78 | Treaty | One significant part of treaty making is that signing a treaty implies recognition that the other side is a sovereign state and that the agreement being considered is enforceable under international law. Hence, nations can be very careful about terming an agreement to be a treaty. For example, within the United States, agreements between states are compacts and agreements between states and the federal government or between agencies of the government are memoranda of understanding. | In the United States, what are agreements between agencies of the federal government called? | {
"text": [
"memoranda of understanding"
],
"answer_start": [
459
]
} |
56f7379e711bf01900a44a79 | Treaty | One significant part of treaty making is that signing a treaty implies recognition that the other side is a sovereign state and that the agreement being considered is enforceable under international law. Hence, nations can be very careful about terming an agreement to be a treaty. For example, within the United States, agreements between states are compacts and agreements between states and the federal government or between agencies of the government are memoranda of understanding. | Nations can be careful about terming an agreement a treaty because it has the effect of recognizing that the other side is a what? | {
"text": [
"a sovereign state"
],
"answer_start": [
106
]
} |
56f7379e711bf01900a44a7a | Treaty | One significant part of treaty making is that signing a treaty implies recognition that the other side is a sovereign state and that the agreement being considered is enforceable under international law. Hence, nations can be very careful about terming an agreement to be a treaty. For example, within the United States, agreements between states are compacts and agreements between states and the federal government or between agencies of the government are memoranda of understanding. | Under what do all parties to a treaty recognize the provisions of the treaty are enforceable? | {
"text": [
"international law"
],
"answer_start": [
185
]
} |
56f739203d8e2e1400e3749a | Treaty | Another situation can occur when one party wishes to create an obligation under international law, but the other party does not. This factor has been at work with respect to discussions between North Korea and the United States over security guarantees and nuclear proliferation. | Parties to a treaty may disagree over a desire to create an obligation under what? | {
"text": [
"international law"
],
"answer_start": [
80
]
} |
56f739203d8e2e1400e3749b | Treaty | Another situation can occur when one party wishes to create an obligation under international law, but the other party does not. This factor has been at work with respect to discussions between North Korea and the United States over security guarantees and nuclear proliferation. | Discussions between what two countries have been influence by one party's desire to create an obligation under international law? | {
"text": [
"North Korea and the United States"
],
"answer_start": [
194
]
} |
56f739203d8e2e1400e3749c | Treaty | Another situation can occur when one party wishes to create an obligation under international law, but the other party does not. This factor has been at work with respect to discussions between North Korea and the United States over security guarantees and nuclear proliferation. | Discussion between North Korea and the United States have been influenced by one party's desire to create obligations under international law with respect to what two topics? | {
"text": [
"security guarantees and nuclear proliferation"
],
"answer_start": [
233
]
} |
56f739203d8e2e1400e3749d | Treaty | Another situation can occur when one party wishes to create an obligation under international law, but the other party does not. This factor has been at work with respect to discussions between North Korea and the United States over security guarantees and nuclear proliferation. | North Korea and the United States have been characterized by a disagreement over one parties desire to create what with respect to security guarantees and nuclear proliferation? | {
"text": [
"to create an obligation under international law"
],
"answer_start": [
50
]
} |
56f73afcaef2371900625a19 | Treaty | The terminology can also be confusing because a treaty may and usually is named something other than a treaty, such as a convention, protocol, or simply agreement. Conversely some legal documents such as the Treaty of Waitangi are internationally considered to be documents under domestic law. | What is the Treaty of Waitangi internationally considered to be? | {
"text": [
"documents under domestic law"
],
"answer_start": [
264
]
} |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.