Yes, Feigun expressed its consent to be bound by the TESTY by signing and ratifying the treaty.

According to Article 11 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the consent of a state
to be bound by a treaty must be expressed in writing and is manifested by signature, ratification,
acceptance, approval, or accession. Feigun signed and ratified the TESTY, which means that it
expressed its consent to be bound by the treaty.

The fact that Feigun withheld notice to the United Nations and Astoria of its effort to ratify the treaty
does not affect its expression of consent. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties does not
require notification of ratification, and the fact that a state fails to give such notification does not
affect the entry into force of the treaty or its binding nature on that state.

In the case of Fisheries Jurisdiction (Spain v. Canada), the International Court of Justice stated that
"an exchange of instruments constituting a treaty does not require that the consent of the parties to
be bound be communicated to the other party." Therefore, Feigun's failure to notify the United
Nations and Astoria of its ratification does not affect its expression of consent to be bound by the
TESTY.

TESTY would become binding on the parties 30 days after the first party ratified the treaty, as stated
in Article 20 of the treaty. In this case, Astoria ratified the treaty on the same day as the text got
adopted, which means that the treaty would enter into force 30 days after that, i.e., on January 10,
2023.

Feigun signed and ratified the treaty, which means that it expressed its consent to be bound by the
treaty. Therefore, TESTY would become binding on Feigun on January 10, 2023, the same date as it
enters into force.

It is important to note that, in general, a treaty is binding only on the parties that have expressed
their consent to be bound by it. In this case, both Astoria and Feigun have expressed their consent to
be bound by the treaty, and thus the treaty would be binding on both of them. Other states would
not be bound by the treaty unless they later expressed their consent to be bound by it through
signature, ratification, acceptance, approval, or accession.
Based on the information provided, it appears that Feigun did express its consent to be bound by the
TESTY by signing and ratifying the treaty. However, Feigun's failure to notify the United Nations and
Astoria of their ratification may create some legal issues.

Under Article 11 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a treaty must be signed and
ratified by a state in accordance with its constitutional procedures to be legally binding on that state.
Feigun's signing and ratification of the TESTY suggest that they have gone through the necessary
constitutional procedures to express their consent to be bound by the treaty.

However, under Article 18 of the Vienna Convention, a state is not bound by a treaty unless it has
expressly consented to be bound by it. While Feigun's signing and ratification of the TESTY constitute
express consent to be bound by the treaty, their failure to notify the other parties of their effort may
create some ambiguity regarding their intentions. This ambiguity may result in legal disputes if
Feigun tries to avoid their obligations under the treaty in the future.

In the case of Eastern Greenland, the International Court of Justice held that a state's failure to notify
the other parties of their ratification of a treaty does not affect the validity of the treaty or the state's
obligations under it. However, the court also noted that a failure to notify could create uncertainty
and affect the interpretation and application of the treaty.

Therefore, while Feigun did express its consent to be bound by the TESTY by signing and ratifying it,
their failure to notify the other parties may create some legal uncertainty regarding their intentions
and obligations under the treaty.