Article 32 Recourse may be had to supplementary means of interpretation, including the preparatory work of the treaty and the circumstances of its conclusion, in order to confirm the meaning resulting from the application of article 31, or to determine the meaning when the application according to article 31: (a) (b) Leaves the meaning ambiguous or obscure, or Leads to a result which is manifestly absurd or unreasonable.” 14. Over and above the ordinary meaning of terms prescribed by Article 31(1) of the Vienna Convention, Article 31(4) makes provision for special meanings of terms in a treaty if it is established that the special meaning was the intention of the parties thereto. In addition, Article 32 provides for recourse to supplementary means of interpretation, including the preparatory work of a treaty, in order to confirm the ordinary meaning of the terms thereof as prescribed by Article 31(1). In the instant case, although the ILC Articles are not a treaty in the strict legal sense, they are codified customary international law, the interpretation of which would be aptly guided by the principles advanced in Articles 31(4) and 32 of the Vienna Convention. The Commentaries establish the intention of the framers of the ILC Articles and, in so far as they accrue to the draft Articles, would constitute preparatory work to the ILC Articles. They are, therefore, legally recognized supplementary means of interpretation of the said Articles. Indeed, numerous international courts and arbitral tribunals do invariably refer to the Commentaries on the ILC Articles for a determination of State responsibility. See Phillips Petroleum Co. Iran vs. Islamic Republic of Iran, Award No. 326-10913-2, Iran-United States Claims Tribunal REFERENCE No. 10 OF 2013 Page 8