Interpretation is part and parcel of every juridical endeavour. In international law, the law and methods pertaining to the process of interpretation continue to vex international legal theory and practice; in fact, increasingly so. The provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) on treaty interpretation reflect three premises which can have broader implications for the practice of interpretation in international law. First, they reinforce the idea that interpretation is, or at least can be, a formal process based on legal rules.Second, this process determines the content of rules that are ‘in force’ and is thus legally and analytically distinct from the processes of identification, modification, amendment, and termination of rules. Third, these legal rules can have a general scope of application in the sense that they can apply regardless of the nature or subject-matter of the rule to be interpreted and irrespective of who performs the interpretation. That is to say, the VCLT envisages the possibility of a law of interpretation that forms essentially ‘a unity’

International law, like any other legal system, must ensure legal certainty. This task is all the more important for international law in light of the constant criticism advanced towards the nature of this legal system. One of the key tools to ensure legal certainty is a consistent and coherent application of rules based on a method of interpretation, where that method serves as the backbone of a judgement. The legal system and an act of application of a specific rule gain persuasiveness and legitimacy where the use of the method of interpretation of a rule is consistent from one case to another. Judges are the guarantors of the resilience of law in the sense that it is in their power to ensure its impartial and uniform application, which in turn counters allegations of inefficiency or bias of that system of law. All these considerations about the systemic features of interpretation and the role of judges as interpreters play toward at least a perception of the rule of law in the legal system. Therefore, the general rule of interpretation of international law is a central element in the international rule of law.