On Interpretation of Treaties—Did Mimansa Rules Reach Europe?

ules for interpretation of treaties have been a happy hunting ground for learned speculators. Since 1922 with the inauguration of the Permanent Court of International Justice rules have been hammered out by world’s judges.  Traditional Canon of Interpretation Treaties have been found recognized among the nations of antiquity. That treaties were made in a solemn manner “by the name of God Almighty” impressed on the parties that agreements must be kept — PACTA SUNT SERVANDA.  Disputes arising from legal or quasi-legal relationship have constituted one of the causes of Wars. This class of disputes between nations can be brought under  Interpretation of TREATIES, Contractual Rights and Duties, Definitions of Boundaries, Delicts. Quarried from Roman Digest Vattel, a Swiss international publicist, published his canons of interpretation of treaties in 1758. Pothier’s work on ‘Obligations’ appeared in 1761. Pothier lays down twelve rules of Construction of TREATIES very similar to those of VATTEL. It was no accident as both of them had quarried out of the Roman Digest.  Vattel’s rules have been elaborated by Phillimore and they have crept into all text-books of International Law as fifteen rules.  The rules of interpretation are like the “tools of a carpenter or sculptor. Comparatively simple, their value depends greatly on the care and skill with which they are applied” Howe: Studies in the Civil Law, p. 229.  Mimamsa Rules of Interpretation The striking similarity of the four principal rules of interpretation laid down by JAIMINI, the Hindu Sage, who on all accepted authority lived prior to 650 A.D., and the principles found laid down by European lawyers as Vattel remains yet to be explained by scholars. Sastry and Gupta: Lectures on Jurisprudence, II Ed., p. 89.  The Mimamsa rule of (sic) (Sruthi) corresponds to the Latin maxim ‘Ita Scriptum Est.’ This is the rule of literal construction. The ‘Linga’ rule tallies with the rule that the natural and ordinary meaning is the popular meaning unless the term has acquired a technical meaning. The VAKYA rule corresponds to the ‘grammatical’ Rule of Interpretation. The PRAKARANA rule tallies with the rule of ‘logical’ interpretation of European lawyers. Three Theories Three conceivable modes of explaining this Singular Similarity are as hereunder  It reached Rome from India. India copied from Rome. Both of them have been derived from a third. The third theory lacks any historical basis.  There was commercial contact between Rome and ancient India.  Dr. Ganganatha Jha assigns JAIMINI a date prior to fifth century B.C. If that be so, it may have reached Rome from India.  The second theory is untenable as Jaimini’s time was anterior to the period of classical jurists in Rome.  That the Caravan has generally proceeded from East to West is the general cultural march.

Author Name: Prof. K. R. R. Sastry