On the recordApril 24, 1997
I believe that most lawyers will agree with me that what they learned in law school was that the specific provisions of the contract always prevail over a general statement at the beginning of the contract. There are a lot of rules of instruction. Later provisions generally govern over previous provisions on the theory that you later describe your intent, fully cognizant of what existed before. The same thing is true with specific provisions of the contract, and that is why article I is called, not 'CWC article I,' but rather 'general article.' 'Article I, General Obligations.' Then article II is definitions, and after that are the specifics. This is the reason why the Australia Group itself issued a statement right after this convention was entered into undertaking to review, in light of the implementation of the convention, the measures that they take to 'prevent the spread of chemical substances and equipment for purposes contrary to the objectives of the convention with the aim of removing such measures for the benefit of states parties to the convention acting in full compliance with the obligations under the convention.'
Source
govinfo.gov




