RA NA speaker: peace treaty and agreement mean the same

PanARMENIAN.Net - There is no legal distinction between a peace treaty and a peace agreement, Armenian parliament speaker Alen Simonyan said.

“Anyone attempting to engage in a professional debate or open one on this issue should remember that when I make a public statement, I always have at least one or two solid arguments or pieces of evidence to back it up. So, is there a legal difference between a peace treaty and a peace agreement? Naturally, no. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties confirms this,” Simonyan said, according to Panorama.am .

“What are treaties and international agreements? The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties defines a treaty as an 'international agreement concluded between states in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation.’”

Simonyan insisted that international legal documents can have different names.

“Treaties may be called by various names, including international conventions, international agreements, covenants, final acts, charters, memorandums of understanding (MOUs), protocols, pacts, accords, and constitutions of international organizations. Typically, these different names have no legal significance under international law—meaning the title of the document does not determine whether it constitutes a treaty.

“Treaties can be bilateral (between two parties) or multilateral (among multiple parties), and they are generally binding only on the signatories. An agreement 'enters into force' when the conditions specified for its entry into force are met. Bilateral treaties typically enter into force on the date both parties agree to apply them,” he added.

Previously, the document was referred to as a peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan. However, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs later called it an agreement, leading to differing interpretations.