National security exceptions clauses in treaties have been receiving heightened attention recently as states are increasingly referring to these provisions to deviate from existing treaty obligations. As disputes increase, jurisprudence on national se...
National security exceptions clauses in treaties have been receiving heightened attention recently as states are increasingly referring to these provisions to deviate from existing treaty obligations. As disputes increase, jurisprudence on national security exceptions is also being developed and accumulated. States are looking at national security exceptions with keen interest and from a new perspective. This phenomenon is being observed in a variety of treaties. There is a particular provision in national security exceptions clauses that has been sidelined mostly and neglected sometimes in these discussions. This provision is what is called the “refusal to furnish information” clause. It uses broad language without much qualifications or conditions. The level of discretion and leeway accorded to an invoking state is arguably much higher than that granted by other provisions in national security exceptions. As such, this provision can permit a state to refuse to provide any information to any entity in any proceeding. This means this provision could effectively nullify other obligations in the already controversial national security exceptions clauses as well as other ordinary provisions of a treaty. Notably, its invocation could even derail dispute settlement proceedings at international courts. A review of the drafting history of this provision indicates that careful thought has not necessarily been given to its introduction and wording. Nor has there been sufficient debate to date to clarify and tame this provision. The robust attention given to national security exceptions these days indicates that the “refusal to furnish information” provision will be invoked more actively, considering its usefulness in blocking any discussion relating to a treaty. Existing and future treaties need to revisit this provision to ensure it does not become a source of conflict or a carte blanche for a treaty violation.