UN Security Council Resolution 1540 sets out the obligations of all UN Member States to implement or purchase effective measures against chemical, nuclear or biological weapons, their means of delivery or related materials by non-State actors. This includes measures to prevent the spread of chemical, nuclear or biological weapons. The Federal Constitution of Brazil stipulates that the power to conclude treaties is delegated to the President of Brazil and that these treaties must be approved by the Brazilian Congress (Articles 84, clause VIII and 49, clause I). In practice, this has been interpreted as leaving the executive branch free to negotiate and sign a treaty, but that its ratification by the president requires the prior approval of Congress. In addition, the Supreme Federal Court has ruled that a treaty must be incorporated into national law after its ratification and entry into force by a presidential decree published in the Federal Register for it to be valid in Brazil and applicable by the Brazilian authorities. An essential part of the treaty conception is that the signing of a treaty implies the recognition that the other party is a sovereign State and that the agreement in question is enforceable under international law. Therefore, nations can be very cautious when it comes to calling an agreement a treaty. For example, in the United States, interstate agreements are pacts, and agreements between states and the federal government or between government agencies are declarations of intent. Contracts sometimes contain provisions on self-development, which means that the contract is automatically terminated when certain defined conditions are met.
Some contracts are intended to be only temporarily binding on the parties and expire at a certain time. Other contracts may terminate themselves if the contract is to exist only under certain conditions.  The Court held that contracts are subject to constitutional scrutiny and occupy the same hierarchical position as ordinary legislation (leis ordinárias or “ordinary laws” in Portuguese). A recent 2008 decision of Brazil`s Supreme Court changed this somewhat by declaring that treaties containing human rights provisions have a higher status than ordinary legislation and subject only to the constitution itself. In addition, the 45. Amendment that human rights treaties approved by Congress through a special process occupy the same hierarchical position as a constitutional amendment. The hierarchical position of the Treaties in relation to national legislation is relevant to the discussion of whether and how national legislation can repeal the former and vice versa. Australia`s constitution allows the executive government to conclude treaties, but the practice is that treaties are tabled in both houses of parliament at least 15 days before they are signed. Treaties are considered the source of Australian law, but sometimes require the enactment of an Act of Parliament, depending on the type. Contracts are administered and maintained by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, which has pointed out that “the general position in Australian law is that contracts to which Australia has adhered, with the exception of those that end a state of war, are not directly and automatically incorporated into Australian law.