International courts and arbitrators are often called upon to resolve key disputes over interpretations of the contract. In order to determine its importance, these judicial bodies can examine for themselves the preparatory work for the negotiation and development of the treaty as well as the final contract signed. An essential part of treaty drafting is that the signing of a treaty implies recognition, that the other party is a sovereign state and that the agreement, considered to be under international law, is applicable. Therefore, nations can be very cautious when it comes to qualifying a treaty agreement. In the United States, for example, interstate agreements are pacts and agreements between states and the federal government or between government authorities are statements of intent. A contract is an official and explicit written agreement that states use to engage legally. [8] A treaty is an official document that expresses agreement in words; It is also the objective result of a solemn event that recognizes the parties and their defined relationships. The publication of a contract does not require academic accreditation or interdisciplinary background knowledge. The Tribunal found that treaties are subject to constitutional control and occupy the same hierarchical position as ordinary legislation (leis ordinrias, or “ordinary laws” in Portuguese). A recent ruling by Brazil`s Supreme Court in 2008 changed this situation somewhat by finding that treaties containing human rights provisions have a higher status than ordinary legislation, subject to the Constitution itself. In addition, the 45th Amendment to the Constitution provides for human rights treaties, approved by Congress as part of a specific procedure, the same hierarchical position as a constitutional amendment.

The hierarchical position of the treaties with regard to national legislation is important for the debate on whether and how the former can cancel and vice versa. In the United States, the term “treaty” has a different, more limited legal meaning than in international law. U.S. legislation distinguishes what it calls “treaties” from “executive agreements” that are either “executive agreements of Congress” or “single executive agreements.” Classes are all treatises of international law in the same way; they differ only in U.S. domestic law. UN Security Council Resolution 1540 requires all UN member states to impose effective measures against chemical, nuclear or biological weapons, their means of delivery or their related materials by non-state actors. It also includes measures to prevent the proliferation of chemical, nuclear or biological weapons. Contracts can be compared in bulk with contracts, as the parties are willing to make binding commitments to each other. [4] [5] Treaties differ considerably in content and complexity and can address many issues such as territorial boundaries, trade and trade, political alliances and much more.

II. The reality of international application and compliance Popular ideas of a binding international agreement are wrongly assumed that the binding nature of the commitment to effective implementation by States will be implemented and will therefore be equated with the effectiveness of the agreement.