WSP11122 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

41 Q Co/.) Con r.g benefit the prOVISlOn .was inserted."' The phrases "from any and all sources" and "waters of the said river, what- ever their origin" were inserted in the 1944 treaty at the instance of the United States and it would appear there is reason for the application of the rule of interpretation re- ferred to. A second rule of interpretation which would seem to ap- ply is that requiring a treaty to be interpreted in the con- text of customary international law so as not to derogate from such rules.G2 The following portion of this opinion deals with such rights as may exist under customary inter- national law. . B. APART FROM THE 1944 TREATY The present portion of this opinion deals with the ques- tion whether the United States is responsible, apart from the 1944 treaty, for the discharge into the Gila River and thence into the Colorado of highly saline groundwaters from the Wellton-Mohawk project which causes injury to lower users. Otherwise stated, do rights exist under cus- tomary international law in the sense that if the question above stated were presented to an international tribunal it would hold the United States responsible' G3 . 01 E.g., The Lusitania Cases, Decisions and Opinions, Mixed Claims Com- mission-United States and Germany 17, 31; Wcitzcnhoffer v. Germany, Roumano.Gcl'mau Mixed AI'bitI'ul Tribunal, Ann. Dig. of Public International Law Oases (10213-26) 3G6. See I Lautorpaeht, Oppenheim's International Law (8th cd. 1955) 954; V,Hackworth, Digest of International Law 230; Crandall, Treaties-Theil' Making and Enforcement (2d ed. 1916) 401. 62 E.g., Lake Lanoux (France-Spain), Decision of the Arbitral Tribunal, 53 ArneI'. J. of Int'} Law 156, 160, 165 (1959); Sambiaggio Case, Opinion of Ralston, Umpire, Italian-Venezuelan Commission, Venezuelan Arbitrations of 1903, 666, 688-89. See I I.Jnuterpacht, Oppenheim's, International Law (8th ed. 1955) 951; V Hackw.orth, Digest of International IJaw 230. 03 Customary international law, in so far as it applies to the contracting parties, may be abrogated or modifierI by treaty. See Bishop, International Law, Cases and Materials (2d. cd. 1962)' 31, citing- as authority, Tho S.S. Wimbledon, P.C.I.J., Ser. A, No.1, 29-30 (1923). It appears, however, that such an effect will not be implied but must be set f.orth precisely. The 1944 treaty does llot by its torms permit the pollution of waters so that such waters are injurious for use. ) ''''~~'':-~<Ti'