2. INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION

New York, 7

. ENTRY INTO FORCE: 4 , in accordance with article 19.1 REGISTRATION: 12 , No. 9464. STATUS: Signatories: 85. Parties: 173. TEXT: , Treaty Series , vol. 660, p. 195. Note: The Convention was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in resolution 2106 (XX)2 of 21 .

. Ratification, Ratification, Accession(a), Accession(a), Participant3 Signature Succession(d) Participant3 Signature Succession(d) Afghanistan...... 6 Jul 1983 a Chile...... 3 Oct 1966 20 Oct 1971 Albania...... 11 May 1994 a China5,6,7...... 29 Dec 1981 a Algeria ...... 9 Dec 1966 14 Feb 1972 ...... 23 Mar 1967 2 Sep 1981 Andorra ...... 5 Aug 2002 22 Sep 2006 Comoros...... 22 Sep 2000 27 Sep 2004 Antigua and Barbuda .... 25 Oct 1988 d Congo...... 11 Jul 1988 a Argentina...... 13 Jul 1967 2 Oct 1968 Costa Rica...... 14 Mar 1966 16 Jan 1967 Armenia...... 23 Jun 1993 a Côte d'Ivoire...... 4 Jan 1973 a Australia...... 13 Oct 1966 30 Sep 1975 Croatia4 ...... 12 Oct 1992 d Austria...... 22 Jul 1969 9 May 1972 Cuba...... 7 Jun 1966 15 Feb 1972 Azerbaijan...... 16 Aug 1996 a Cyprus...... 12 Dec 1966 21 Apr 1967 Bahamas...... 5 Aug 1975 d Czech Republic8...... 22 Feb 1993 d Bahrain...... 27 Mar 1990 a Democratic Republic of Bangladesh...... 11 Jun 1979 a the Congo ...... 21 Apr 1976 a 9 Barbados ...... 8 Nov 1972 a Denmark ...... 21 Jun 1966 9 Dec 1971 Belarus ...... 7 Mar 1966 8 Apr 1969 Djibouti...... 14 Jun 2006 Belgium...... 17 Aug 1967 7 Aug 1975 Dominican Republic ..... 25 May 1983 a Belize ...... 6 Sep 2000 14 Nov 2001 ...... 22 Sep 1966 a Benin...... 2 Feb 1967 30 Nov 2001 Egypt...... 28 Sep 1966 1 Bhutan...... 26 Mar 1973 El Salvador...... 30 Nov 1979 a Bolivia...... 7 Jun 1966 22 Sep 1970 Equatorial ...... 8 Oct 2002 a Bosnia and Eritrea ...... 31 Jul 2001 a Herzegovina4 ...... 16 Jul 1993 d Estonia ...... 21 Oct 1991 a Botswana...... 20 Feb 1974 a Ethiopia...... 23 Jun 1976 a Brazil...... 7 Mar 1966 27 Mar 1968 Fiji ...... 11 Jan 1973 d Bulgaria...... 1 Jun 1966 8 Aug 1966 ...... 6 Oct 1966 14 Jul 1970 Burkina Faso ...... 18 Jul 1974 a ...... 28 Jul 1971 a Burundi ...... 1 Feb 1967 27 Oct 1977 Gabon...... 20 Sep 1966 29 Feb 1980 Cambodia ...... 12 Apr 1966 28 Nov 1983 Gambia...... 29 Dec 1978 a Cameroon...... 12 Dec 1966 24 Jun 1971 Georgia ...... 2 Jun 1999 a Canada ...... 24 Aug 1966 14 Oct 1970 Germany10 ...... 10 Feb 1967 16 Cape Verde...... 3 Oct 1979 a Ghana...... 8 Sep 1966 8 Sep 1966 Central African Greece...... 7 Mar 1966 18 Jun 1970 Republic ...... 7 Mar 1966 16 Mar 1971 Grenada...... 17 Dec 1981 Chad...... 17 Aug 1977 a Guatemala ...... 8 Sep 1967 18 Jan 1983

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 1 Ratification, Ratification, Accession(a), Accession(a), Participant3 Signature Succession(d) Participant3 Signature Succession(d) Guinea...... 24 Mar 1966 14 Mar 1977 Montenegro11 ...... 23 Oct 2006 d Guinea-Bissau...... 12 Sep 2000 Morocco...... 18 Sep 1967 18 Dec 1970 Guyana ...... 11 Dec 1968 15 Feb 1977 Mozambique ...... 18 Apr 1983 a Haiti ...... 30 Oct 1972 19 Dec 1972 Namibia12 ...... 11 Nov 1982 a Holy See...... 21 Nov 1966 1 May 1969 Nauru ...... 12 Nov 2001 Honduras...... 10 Oct 2002 a Nepal...... 30 Jan 1971 a Hungary...... 15 Sep 1966 4 May 1967 Netherlands ...... 24 Oct 1966 10 Dec 1971 Iceland...... 14 Nov 1966 13 Mar 1967 New Zealand13 ...... 25 Oct 1966 22 Nov 1972 ...... 2 Mar 1967 3 Dec 1968 Nicaragua...... 15 Feb 1978 a ...... 25 Jun 1999 a Niger ...... 14 Mar 1966 27 Apr 1967 Iran (Islamic Republic Nigeria ...... 16 Oct 1967 a of) ...... 8 Mar 1967 29 Aug 1968 Norway ...... 21 Nov 1966 6 Aug 1970 Iraq...... 18 Feb 1969 14 Jan 1970 Oman...... 2 Jan 2003 a Ireland ...... 21 Mar 1968 29 Dec 2000 Pakistan...... 19 Sep 1966 21 Sep 1966 ...... 7 Mar 1966 3 Jan 1979 Panama...... 8 Dec 1966 16 Aug 1967 Italy ...... 13 Mar 1968 5 Jan 1976 Papua New Guinea...... 27 Jan 1982 a Jamaica...... 14 Aug 1966 4 Jun 1971 Paraguay ...... 13 Sep 2000 18 Aug 2003 Japan ...... 15 Dec 1995 a Peru...... 22 Jul 1966 29 Sep 1971 Jordan...... 30 May 1974 a Philippines ...... 7 Mar 1966 15 Sep 1967 Kazakhstan...... 26 Aug 1998 a Poland ...... 7 Mar 1966 5 Dec 1968 Kenya...... 13 Sep 2001 a Portugal6...... 24 Aug 1982 a Kuwait...... 15 Oct 1968 a Qatar ...... 22 Jul 1976 a Kyrgyzstan ...... 5 Sep 1997 a Republic of Korea...... 8 Aug 1978 5 Dec 1978 Lao People's Republic of Moldova .... 26 Jan 1993 a Democratic ...... 15 Sep 1970 a Republic ...... 22 Feb 1974 a Russian Federation...... 7 Mar 1966 4 Feb 1969 Latvia ...... 14 Apr 1992 a Rwanda ...... 16 Apr 1975 a Lebanon...... 12 Nov 1971 a San Marino...... 11 Dec 2001 12 Mar 2002 Lesotho...... 4 Nov 1971 a Sao Tome and Principe . 6 Sep 2000 Liberia...... 5 Nov 1976 a Saudi Arabia ...... 23 Sep 1997 a Libyan Arab Jamahiriya ...... 3 Jul 1968 a Senegal...... 22 Jul 1968 19 Apr 1972 4 Liechtenstein...... 1 Mar 2000 a Serbia ...... 12 Mar 2001 d Lithuania ...... 8 Jun 1998 10 Dec 1998 Seychelles ...... 7 Mar 1978 a Luxembourg...... 12 Dec 1967 1 May 1978 ...... 17 Nov 1966 2 Aug 1967 8 Madagascar ...... 18 Dec 1967 7 Feb 1969 Slovakia ...... 28 May 1993 d 4 Malawi ...... 11 Jun 1996 a Slovenia ...... 6 Jul 1992 d Maldives...... 24 Apr 1984 a Solomon Islands...... 17 Mar 1982 d Mali...... 16 Jul 1974 a Somalia ...... 26 Jan 1967 26 Aug 1975 Malta ...... 5 Sep 1968 27 South Africa...... 3 Oct 1994 10 Dec 1998 Mauritania...... 21 Dec 1966 13 Dec 1988 ...... 13 Sep 1968 a Mauritius...... 30 May 1972 a Sri Lanka...... 18 Feb 1982 a Mexico ...... 1 Nov 1966 20 Feb 1975 St. Kitts and Nevis ...... 13 Oct 2006 a Monaco ...... 27 Sep 1995 a St. Lucia...... 14 Feb 1990 d Mongolia...... 3 6 Aug 1969 St. Vincent and the 9 Nov 1981 a

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 2 Ratification, Ratification, Accession(a), Accession(a), Participant3 Signature Succession(d) Participant3 Signature Succession(d) Grenadines...... Uganda...... 21 Nov 1980 a Sudan ...... 21 Mar 1977 a Ukraine ...... 7 Mar 1966 7 Mar 1969 Suriname ...... 15 Mar 1984 d United Arab Emirates ... 20 Jun 1974 a Swaziland...... 7 Apr 1969 a United Kingdom of Sweden...... 5 May 1966 6 Dec 1971 Great Britain and Northern Ireland5,14 . 11 Oct 1966 7 Mar 1969 ...... 29 Nov 1994 a United Republic of Syrian Arab Republic.... 21 Apr 1969 a Tanzania...... 27 Oct 1972 a Tajikistan...... 11 Jan 1995 a United States of Thailand ...... 28 Jan 2003 a America...... 28 Sep 1966 21 Oct 1994 The former Yugoslav Uruguay ...... 21 Feb 1967 30 Aug 1968 Republic of Uzbekistan ...... 28 Sep 1995 a Macedonia4...... 18 Jan 1994 d Venezuela (Bolivarian Timor-Leste...... 16 Apr 2003 a Republic of)...... 21 Apr 1967 10 Oct 1967 Togo...... 1 Sep 1972 a Viet Nam...... 9 Jun 1982 a Tonga ...... 16 Feb 1972 a Yemen15 ...... 18 Oct 1972 a Trinidad and Tobago..... 9 Jun 1967 4 Oct 1973 Zambia ...... 11 Oct 1968 4 Feb 1972 Tunisia ...... 12 Apr 1966 13 Jan 1967 Zimbabwe ...... 13 May 1991 a ...... 13 Oct 1972 16 Sep 2002 Turkmenistan ...... 29 Sep 1994 a

Declarations and Reservations (Unless otherwise indicated, the declarations and reservations were made upon ratification, accession or succession. For objections thereto and declarations recognizing the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, see hereinafter.)

"The Constitution of Antigua and Barbuda entrenches AFGHANISTAN and guarantees to every person in Antigua and Barbuda Reservation: the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual While acceding to the International Convention on the irrespective of race or place of origin. The Constitution Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the prescribes judicial processes to be observed in the event Democratic Republic of Afghanistan does not consider of the violation of any of these rights, whether by the state itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the or by a private individual. Acceptance of the Convention Convention since according to this article, in the event of by the Government of Antigua and Barbuda does not disagreement between two or several States Parties to the imply the acceptance of obligations going beyond the Convention on the interpretation and implementation of constitutional limits nor the acceptance of any obligations provisions of the Convention, the matters could be to introduce judicial processes beyond those provided in referred to the International Court of Justice upon the the Constitution. request of only one side. The Government of Antigua and Barbuda interprets The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, therefore, article 4 of the Convention as requiring a Party to enact states that should any disagreement emerge on the measures in the fields covered by subparagraphs (a), (b) interpretation and implementation of the Convention, the and (c) of that article only where it is considered that the matter will be referred to the International Court of need arises to enact such legislation." Justice only if all concerned parties agree with that procedure. AUSTRALIA Declaration: "The Government of Australia ... declares that Furthermore, the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan Australia is not at present in a position specifically to treat states that the provisions of articles 17 and 18 of the as offences all the matters covered by article 4 (a) of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms Convention. Acts of the kind there mentioned are of Racial Discrimination have a discriminatory nature punishable only to the extent provided by the existing against some states and therefore are not in conformity criminal law dealing with such matters as the maintenance with the principle of universality of international treaties. of public order, public mischief, assault, riot, criminal libel, conspiracy and attempts. It is the intention of the ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA Australian Government, at the first suitable moment, to seek from Parliament legislation specifically Declaration: implementing the terms of article 4 (a)."

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 3 constitutional limits nor the acceptance of any obligations to introduce judicial processes beyond those provided in AUSTRIA the Constitution. "Article 4 of the International Convention on the The Government of Barbados interprets article 4 of the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination said Convention as requiring a Party to the Convention to provides that the measures specifically described in sub- enact measures in the fields covered by sub-paragraphs paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) shall be undertaken with due (a), (b) and (c) of that article only where it is considered regard to the principles embodied in the Universal that the need arises to enact such legislation." Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of the Convention. The Republic of 17 Austria therefore considers that through such measures BELARUS the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the The Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic states that right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association the provision in article 17, paragraph 1, of the Convention may not be jeopardized. These rights are laid down in on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination articles 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human whereby a number of States are deprived of the Rights; they were reaffirmed by the General Assembly of opportunity to become Parties to the Convention is of a the United Nations when it adopted articles 19 and 21 of discriminatory nature, and hold that, in accordance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights the principle of the sovereign equality of States, the and are referred to in article 5 (d) (viii) and (ix) of the Convention should be open to participation by all present Convention." interested States without discrimination or restriction of any kind.

BAHAMAS "Firstly the Government of the Commonwealth of the BELGIUM Bahamas wishes to state its understanding of article 4 of In order to meet the requirements of article 4 of the the International Convention on the Elimination of All International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms Forms of Racial Discrimination. It interprets article 4 as of Racial Discrimination, the Kingdom of Belgium will requiring a party to the Convention to adopt further take care to adapt its legislation to the obligations it has legislative measures in the fields covered by assumed in becoming a party to the said Convention. subparagraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article only in so far The Kingdom of Belgium nevertheless wishes to as it may consider with due regard to the principles emphasize the importance which it attaches to the fact embodied in the Universal Declaration set out in article 5 that article 4 of the Convention provides that the measures of the Convention (in particular to freedom of opinion and laid down in subparagraphs (a), (b), and (c) should be expression and the right of freedom of peaceful assembly adopted with due regard to the principles embodied in the and association) that some legislative addition to, or Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights variation of existing law and practice in these fields is expressly set forth in article 5 of the Convention. The necessary for the attainment of the ends specified in Kingdom of Belgium therefore considers that the article 4. Lastly, the Constitution of the Commonwealth obligations imposed by article 4 must be reconciled with of the Bahamas entrenches and guarantees to every person the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the in the Commonwealth of the Bahamas the fundamental right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. rights and freedoms of the individual irrespective of his Those rights are proclaimed in articles 19 and 20 of the race or place of origin. The Constitution prescribes Universal Declaration of Human Rights and have been judicial process to be observed in the event of the reaffirmed in articles 19 and 21 of the International violation of any of these rights whether by the State or by Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. They have also a private individual. Acceptance of this Convention by been stated in article 5, subparagraph (d) (viii) and (ix) of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas does not imply the the said Convention. acceptance of obligations going beyond the constitutional The Kingdom of Belgium also wishes to emphasize limits nor the acceptance of any obligations to introduce the importance which it attaches to respect for the rights judicial process beyond these prescribed under the set forth in the European Convention for the Protection of Constitution." Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, especially in articles 10 and 11 dealing respectively with freedom of 16 opinion and expression and freedom of peaceful assembly BAHRAIN and association. Reservations: 18 "With reference to article 22 of the Convention, the BULGARIA Government of the State of Bahrain declares that, for the submission of any dispute in terms of this article to the The Government of the People's Republic of Bulgaria jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, the considers that the provisions of article 17, paragraph 1, express consent of all the parties to the dispute is required and article 18, paragraph 1, of the International in each case." Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial "Moreover, the accession by the State of Bahrain to Discrimination, the effect of which is to prevent sovereign the said Convention shall in no way constitute recognition States from becoming Parties to the Convention, are of a of Israel or be a cause for the establishment of any discriminatory nature. The Convention, in accordance relations of any kind therewith." with the principle of the sovereign equality of States, should be open for accession by all States without any discrimination whatsoever. BARBADOS 19 "The Constitution of Barbados entrenches and CHINA guarantees to every person in Barbados the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual irrespective of his Reservation: race or place of origin. The Constitution prescribes The People's Republic of China has reservations on judicial processes to be observed in the event of the the provisions of article 22 of the Convention and will not violation of any of these rights whether by the State or by be bound by it. (The reservation was circulated by the a private individual. Accession to the Convention does Secretary-General on 13 January 1982.) not imply the acceptance of obligations going beyond the Declaration:

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 4 The signing and ratification of the said Convention by fulfil the obligations referred to in articles 2, 3, or 5 (e) the authorities in the name of China are illegal (v), the Government of Fiji reserves the right not to and null and void. implement the aforementioned provisions of the Convention. "The Government of Fiji wishes to state its CUBA understanding of certain articles in the Convention. It Upon signature: interprets article 4 as requiring a party to the Convention The Government of the Republic of Cuba will make to adopt further legislative measures in the fields covered such reservations as it may deem appropriate if and when by sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article only in so the Convention is ratified. far as it may consider with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Upon ratification: and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of the Reservation: Convention (in particular the right to freedom of opinion The Revolutionary Government of the Republic of and expression and the right to freedom of peaceful Cuba does not accept the provision in article 22 of the assembly and association) that some legislative addition Convention to the effect that disputes between two or to or variation of existing law and practice in those fields more States Parties shall be referred to the International is necessary for the attainment of the end specified in the Court of Justice, since it considers that such disputes earlier part of Article 4. should be settled exclusively by the procedures expressly Further, the Government of Fiji interprets the provided for in the Convention or by negotiation through requirement in article 6 concerning `reparation or the diplomatic channel between the disputants. satisfaction' as being fulfilled if one or other of these Statement: forms of redress is made available and interprets This Convention, intended to eliminate all forms of `satisfaction' as including any form of redress effective to racial discrimination, should not, as it expressly does in bring the discriminatory conduct to an and. In addition it articles 17 and 18, exclude States not Members of the interprets article 20 and the other related provisions of United Nations, members of the specialized agencies or Part III of the Convention as meaning that if a reservation Parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice is not accepted the State making the reservation does not from making an effective contribution under the become a Party to the Convention. Convention, since these articles constitute in themselves a "The Government of Fiji maintains the view that form of discrimination that is at variance with the Article 15 is discriminatory in that it establishes a principles set out in the Convention; the Revolutionary procedure for the receipt of petitions relating to dependent Government of the Republic of Cuba accordingly ratifies territories whilst making no comparable provision for the Convention, but with the qualification just indicated. States without such territories."

8 21 CZECH REPUBLIC FRANCE 9 DENMARK With regard to article 4, France wishes to make it clear that it interprets the reference made therein to the 16,20 EGYPT principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and to the rights set forth in article 5 of the Convention as "The United Arab Republic does not consider itself releasing the States Parties from the obligation to enact bound by the provisions of article 22 of the Convention, anti-discrimination legislation which is incompatible with under which any dispute between two or more States the freedoms of opinion and expression and of peaceful Parties with respect to the interpretation or application of assembly and association guaranteed by those texts. the Convention is, at the request of any of the parties to With regard to article 6, France declares that the the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of question of remedy through tribunals is, as far as France Justice for decision, and it states that, in each individual is concerned, governed by the rules of ordinary law. case, the consent of all parties to such a dispute is With regard to article 15, France's accession to the necessary for referring the dispute to the International Convention may not be interpreted as implying any Court of Justice." change in its position regarding the resolution mentioned in that provision. EQUATORIAL GUINEA Reservation: GUYANA The Republic of Equatorial Guinea does not consider "The Government of the Republic of Guyana do not itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the interpret the provisions of this Convention as imposing Convention, under which any dispute between two or upon them any obligation going beyond the limits set by more States Parties with respect to the interpretation or the Constitution of Guyana or imposing upon them any application of the Convention is, at the request of any of obligation requiring the introduction of judicial processes the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the going beyond those provided under the same International Court of Justice for decision. The Republic Constitution." of Equatorial Guinea considers that, in each individual case, the consent of all parties is necessary for referring 22 the dispute to the International Court of Justice. HUNGARY "The Hungarian People's Republic considers that the FIJI provisions of article 17, paragraph 1, and of article 18, paragraph 1, of the Convention, barring accession to the The reservation and declarations formulated by the Convention by all States, are of a discriminating nature Government of the United Kingdom on behalf of Fiji are and contrary to international law. The Hungarian People's affirmed but have been redrafted in the following terms: Republic maintains its general position that multilateral "To the extent, if any, that any law relating to elections treaties of a universal character should, in conformity in Fiji may not fulfil the obligations referred to in article 5 with the principles of sovereign equality of States, be (c), that any law relating to land in Fiji which prohibits or open for accession by all States without any restricts the alienation of land by the indigenous discrimination whatever." inhabitants may not fulfil the obligations referred to in article 5 (d) (v), or that the school system of Fiji may not

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 5 23 INDIA "The Government of India declare that for reference of ISRAEL any dispute to the International Court of Justice for "The State of Israel does not consider itself bound by decision in terms of Article 22 of the International the provisions of article 22 of the said Convention." Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, the consent of all parties to the dispute is necessary in each individual case." ITALY Declaration made upon signature and confirmed upon INDONESIA ratifica- tion: Reservation: (a) The positive measures, provided for in article 4 of the Convention and specifically described in sub- "The Government of the Republic of Indonesia does paragraphs (a) and (b) of that article, designed to eradicate not consider itself bound by the provision of Article 22 all incitement to, or acts of, discrimination, are to be and takes the position that disputes relating to the interpreted, as that article provides, "with due regard to interpretation and application of the [Convention] which the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of cannot be settled through the channel provided for in the Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article said article, may be referred to the International Court of 5" of the Convention. Consequently, the obligations Justice only with the consent of all the parties to the deriving from the aforementioned article 4 are not to dispute." jeopardize the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and 16 IRAQ association which are laid down in articles 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, were Upon signature: reaffirmed by the General Assembly of the United "The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Nations when it adopted articles 19 and 21 of the Iraq hereby declares that signature for and on behalf of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Republic of Iraq of the Convention on the Elimination are referred to in articles 5 (d) (viii) and (ix) of the of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which was Convention. In fact, the Italian Government, in adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations conformity with the obligations resulting from Articles 55 on 21 December 1965, as well as approval by the Arab (c) and 56 of the Charter of the United Nations, remains States of the said Convention and entry into it by their faithful to the principle laid down in article 29 (2) of the respective governments, shall in no way signify Universal Declaration, which provides that "in the recognition of Israel or lead to entry by the Arab States exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be into such dealings with Israel as may be regulated by the subject only to such limitations as are determined by law said Convention. solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and "Furthermore, the Government of the Republic of Iraq respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article meeting the just requirements of morality, public order twenty-two of the Convention afore-mentioned and and the general welfare in a democratic society." affirms its reservation that it does not accept the (b) Effective remedies against acts of racial compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of discrimination which violate his individual rights and Justice provided for in the said article." fundamental freedoms will be assured to everyone, in Upon ratification: conformity with article 6 of the Convention, by the 1. The acceptance and ratification of the ordinary courts within the framework of their respective Convention by Iraq shall in no way signify recognition of jurisdiction. Claims for reparation for any damage Israel or be conducive to entry by Iraq into such dealings suffered as a result of acts of racial discrimination must be with Israel as are regulated by the Convention; brought against the persons responsible for the malicious 2. Iraq does not accept the provisions of article 22 or criminal acts which caused such damage. of the Convention, concerning the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. The Republic of Iraq does not consider itself to be bound by JAMAICA the provisions of article 22 of the Convention and deems "The Constitution of Jamaica entrenches and it necessary that in all cases the approval of all parties to guarantees to every person in Jamaica the fundamental the dispute be secured before the case is referred to the rights and freedoms of the individual irrespective of his International Court of Justice. race or place of origin. The Constitution prescribes judicial processes to be observed in the event of the violation of any of these rights whether by the State or by IRELAND a private individual. Ratification of the Convention by Reservation/Interpetative declaration: Jamaica does not imply the acceptance of obligations “Article 4 of the International Convention on the going beyond the constitutional limits nor the acceptance Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination of any obligation to introduce judicial processes beyond provides that the measures specifically described in sub- those prescribed under the Constitution." paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) shall be undertaken with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal JAPAN Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in Article 5 of the Convention. Ireland threfore Reservation: considers that through such measures, the right to "In applying the provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) freedom of opinion and expression and the right to of article 4 of the [said Convention] Japan fulfills the peaceful assembly and association may not be obligations under those provisions to the extent that jeopardised. These rights are laid down in Articles 19 and fulfillment of the obligations is compatible with the 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; they guarantee of the rights to freedom of assembly, were reaffirmed by the General Assembly of the association and expression and other rights under the United Nations when it adopted Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of Japan, noting the phrase `with due regard International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of are referred to in Article 5 (d)(viii) and (ix) of the present Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in Convention.” article 5 of this Convention' referred to in article 4."

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 6 the need arises to enact ‘ ad hoc ’ legislation, in addition 16 to or variation of existing law and practice to bring to an KUWAIT end any act of racial discrimination. "In acceding to the said Convention, the Government "Further, the Government of Malta interprets the of the State of Kuwait takes the view that its accession requirements in article 6 concerning `reparation or does not in any way imply recognition of Israel, nor does satisfaction' as being fulfilled if one or other of these it oblige it to apply the provisions of the Convention in forms of redress is made available and interprets respect of the said country. `satisfaction' as including any form of redress effective to "The Government of the State of Kuwait does not bring the discriminatory conduct to an end." consider itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the Convention, under which any dispute between two or more States Parties with respect to the interpretation or MONACO application of the Convention is, at the request of any Reservation regarding article 2, paragraph 1: party to the dispute, to be referred to the International Monaco reserves the right to apply its own legal Court of Justice for decision, and it states that, in each provisions concerning the admission of foreigners to the individual case, the consent of all parties to such a dispute labour market of the Principality. is necessary for referring the dispute to the International Reservation regarding article 4: Court of Justice." Monaco interprets the reference in that article to the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, LEBANON and to the rights enumerated in article 5 of the Convention The Republic of Lebanon does not consider itself as releasing States Parties from the obligation to bound by the provisions of article 22 of the Convention, promulgate repressive laws which are incompatible with under which any dispute between two or more States freedom of opinion and expression and freedom of Parties with respect to the interpretation or application of peaceful assembly and association, which are guaranteed the Convention is, at the request of any party to the by those instruments. dispute, to be referred to the International Court of Justice 24 for decision, and it states that, in each individual case, the MONGOLIA consent of all States parties to such a dispute is necessary The Mongolian People's Republic states that the for referring the dispute to the International Court of provision in article 17, paragraph 1, of the Convention Justice. whereby a number of States are deprived of the opportunity to become Parties to the Convention is of a 16 LIBYAN ARAB JAMAHIRIYA discriminatory nature, and it holds that, in accordance "(a) The Kingdom of Libya does not with the principle of the sovereign equality of States, the consider itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Convention, under which any dispute between two or Discrimination should be open to participation by all more States Parties with respect to the interpretation or interested States without discrimination or restriction of application of the Convention is, at the request of any of any kind. the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of Justice for decision, and it states MOROCCO that, in each individual case, the consent of all parties to The Kingdom of Morocco does not consider itself such a dispute is necessary for referring the dispute to the bound by the provisions of article 22 of the Convention, International Court of Justice. under which any dispute between two or more States "(b) It is understood that the accession to Parties with respect to the interpretation or application of this Convention does not mean in any way a recognition the Convention is, at the request of any of the parties to of Israel by the Government of the Kingdom of Libya. the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of Furthermore, no treaty relations will arise between the Justice for decision. The Kingdom of Morocco states Kingdom of Libya and Israel." that, in each individual case, the consent of all parties to such a dispute is necessary for referring the dispute to the MADAGASCAR International Court of Justice. The Government of the Malagasy Republic does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the MOZAMBIQUE Convention, under which any dispute between two or more States Parties with respect to the interpretation or Reservation: application of the Convention is, at the request of any of "The People's Republic of Mozambique does not the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the consider to be bound by the provision of article 22 and International Court of Justice for decision, and states that, wishes to restate that for the submission of any dispute to in each individual case, the consent of all parties to such a the International Court of Justice for decision in terms of dispute is necessary for referral of the dispute to the the said article, the consent of all parties to such a dispute International Court. is necessary in each individual case."

MALTA NEPAL Declaration made upon signature and confirmed upon "The Constitution of Nepal contains provisions for the protection of individual rights, including the right to ratifica- tion : freedom of speech and expression, the right to form "The Government of Malta wishes to state its unions and associations not motivated by party politics understanding of certain articles in the Convention. and the right to freedom of professing his/her own "It interprets article 4 as requiring a party to the religion; and nothing in the Convention shall be deemed Convention to adopt further measures in the fields to require or to authorize legislation or other action by covered by sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article Nepal incompatible with the provisions of the should it consider, with due regard to the principles Constitution of Nepal. embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights "His Majesty's Government interprets article 4 of the and the rights set forth in article 5 of the Convention, that said Convention as requiring a Party to the Convention to

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 7 26 adopt further legislative measures in the fields covered by ROMANIA sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article only insofar as His Majesty's Government may consider, with due ... regard to the principles embodied in the Universal The Council of State of the Socialist Republic of Declaration of Human Rights, that some legislative Romania declares that the provisions of articles 17 and 18 addition to, or variation of, existing law and practice in of the International Convention on the Elimination of All those fields is necessary for the attainment of the end Forms of Racial Discrimination are not in accordance specified in the earlier part of article 4. His Majesty's with the principle that multilateral treaties, the aims and Government interprets the requirement in article 6 objectives of which concern the world community as a concerning `reparation or satisfaction' as being fulfilled if whole, should be open to participation by all States. one or other of these forms of redress is made available; 17 and further interprets `satisfaction' as including any form RUSSIAN FEDERATION of redress effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to an end. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics states that the "His Majesty's Government does not consider itself provision in article 17, paragraph 1, of the Convention on bound by the provision of article 22 of the Convention the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination under which any dispute between two or more States whereby a number of States are deprived of the Parties with respect to the interpretation or application of opportunity to become Parties to the Convention is of a the Convention is, at the request of any of the parties to discriminatory nature, and hold that, in accordance with the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of the principle of the sovereign equality of States, the Justice for decision." Convention should be open to participation by all interested States without discrimination or restriction of 19 any kind. PAPUA NEW GUINEA 27 Reservation: RWANDA "The Government of Papua New Guinea interprets article 4 of the Convention as requiring a party to the SAUDI ARABIA Convention to adopt further legislative measures in the Reservations: areas covered by sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that [The Government of Saudi Arabia declares that it will] article only in so far as it may consider with due regard to implement the provisions [of the above Convention], the principles contained in the Universal Declaration set providing these do not conflict with the precepts of the out in Article 5 of the Convention that some legislative Islamic Shariah . addition to, or variation of existing law and practice, is The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia shall not be bound by necessary to give effect to the provisions of article 4. In the provisions of article (22) of this Convention, since it addition, the Constitution of Papua New Guinea considers that any dispute should be referred to the guarantees certain fundamental rights and freedoms to all International Court of Justice only with the approval of persons irrespective of their race or place of origin. The the States Parties to the dispute. Constitution also provides for judicial protection of these rights and freedoms. Acceptance of this Convention does 8 not therefore indicate the acceptance of obligations by the SLOVAKIA Government of Papua New Guinea which go beyond 28 those provided by the Constitution, nor does it indicate SPAIN the acceptance of any obligation to introduce judicial SWITZERLAND process beyond that provided by the Constitution". (The reservation was circulated by the Secretary-General on Reservation concerning article 4: 22 February 1982.) Switzerland reserves the right to take the legislative measures necessary for the implementation of article 4, 25 POLAND taking due account of freedom of opinion and freedom of association, provided for inter alia in the Universal The Polish People's Republic considers that the Declaration of Human Rights. provisions of article 17, paragraph 1, and article18, Reservation concerning article 2, paragraph 1 (a): paragraph 1, of the International Convention on the Switzerland reserves the right to apply its legal Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which provisions concerning the admission of foreigners to the make it impossible for many States to become parties to Swiss market. the said Convention, are of a discriminatory nature and are incompatible with the object and purpose of that 16 Convention. SYRIAN ARAB REPUBLIC The Polish People's Republic considers that, in 1. The accession of the Syrian Arab Republic to accordance with the principle of the sovereign equality of this Convention shall in no way signify recognition of States, the said Convention should be open for Israel or entry into a relationship with it regarding any participation by all States without any discrimination or matter regulated by the said Convention. restrictions whatsoever. 2. The Syrian Arab Republic does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the REPUBLIC OF KOREA Convention, under which any dispute between two or more States Parties with respect to the interpretation or 5 March 1997 application of the Convention is, at the request of any of "The Government of the Republic of Korea recognizes the Parties to the dispute, to be referred to the the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of International Court of Justice for decision. The Syrian Racial Discrimination to receive and consider Arab Republic states that, in each individual case, the communications from individuals or groups of individuals consent of all parties to such a dispute is necessary for within the jurisdiction of the Republic of Korea claiming referring the dispute to the International Court of Justice. to be victims of a violation by the Republic of Korea of any of the rights set forth in the said Convention." THAILAND Interpretative declaration :

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 8 "General Interpretative Declaration The Republic of Turkey does not consider itself bound The Kingdom of Thailand does not interpret and apply by Article 22 of this Convention. The explicit consent of the provisions of this Convention as imposing upon the the Republic of Turkey is necessary in each individual Kingdom of Thailand any obligation beyond the confines case before any dispute to which the Republic of Turkey of the Constitution and the laws of the Kingdom of is party concerning the interpretation or application of this Thailand. In addition, such interpretation and application Convention may be referred to the International Court of shall be limited to or consistent with the obligations under Justice." other international human rights instruments to which the Kingdom of Thailand is party. 17 Reservations UKRAINE 1. The Kingdom of Thailand interprets Article 4 of The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic states that the the Convention as requiring a party to the Convention to provision in article 17, paragraph 1, of the Convention on adopt measures in the fields covered by subparagraphs the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (a), (b) and (c) of that article only where it is considered whereby a number of States are deprived of the that the need arises to enact such legislation. opportunity to become Parties to the Convention is of a 2. The Kingdom of Thailand does not consider discriminatory nature, and hold that, in accordance with itself bound by the provisions of Article 22 of the the principle of the sovereign equality of States, the Convention." Convention should be open to participation by all interested States without discrimination or restriction of 29 any kind. TONGA 16 Reservation: UNITED ARAB EMIRATES "To the extent, [...], that any law relating to land in Tonga which prohibits or restricts the alienation of land "The accession of the United Arab Emirates to this by the indigenous inhabitants may not fulfil the Convention shall in no way amount to recognition of nor obligations referred to in article 5 (d) (v), [...], the the establishment of any treaty relations with Israel." Kingdom of Tonga reserves the right not to apply the Convention to Tonga. UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN Declaration: IRELAND "Secondly, the Kingdom of Tonga wishes to state its understanding of certain articles in the Convention. It Upon signature: interprets article 4 as requiring a party to the Convention Subject to the following reservation and interpretative to adopt further legislative measures in the fields covered statements: by sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article only in so "First, in the present circumstances deriving from the far as it may consider with due regard to the principles usurpation of power in by the illegal régime, the embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights United Kingdom must sign subject to a reservation of the and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of the right not to apply the Convention to Rhodesia unless and Convention (in particular the right to freedom of opinion until the United Kingdom informs the Secretary-General and expression and the right to freedom of peaceful of the United Nations that it is in a position to ensure that assembly and association) that some legislative addition the obligations imposed by the Convention in respect of to or variation of existing law and practice in those fields that territory can be fully implemented. is necessary for the attainment of the end specified in the "Secondly, the United Kingdom wishes to state its earlier part of article 4. Further, the Kingdom of Tonga under- standing of certain articles in the Convention. It interprets the requirement in article 6 concerning interprets article 4 as requiring a party to the Convention `reparation or satisfaction' as being fulfilled if one or to adopt further legislative measures in the fields covered other of these forms of redress is made available and by sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article only in so interprets `satisfaction' as including any form of redress far as it may consider with due regard to the principles effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to an end. In embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights addition it interprets article 20 and the other related and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of the provisions of Part III of the Convention as meaning that if Convention (in particular the right to freedom of opinion a reservation is not accepted the State making the and expression and the right to freedom of peaceful reservation does not become a Party to the Convention. assembly and association) that some legislative addition "Lastly, the Kingdom of Tonga maintains its position to or variation of existing law and practice in those fields in regard to article 15. In its view this article is is necessary for the attainment of the end specified in the discriminatory in that it establishes a procedure for the earlier part of article 4. Further, the United Kingdom receipt of petitions relating to dependent territories while interprets the requirement in article 6 concerning making no comparable provision for States without such `reparation or satisfaction' as being fulfilled if one or territories. Moreover, the article purports to establish other of these forms of redress is made available and arocedure applicable to the dependent territories of States interprets `satisfaction' as including any form of redress whether or not those States have become parties to the effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to an end. In Convention. His Majesty's Government have decided that addition it interprets article 20 and the other related the Kingdom of Tonga should accede to the Convention, provisions of Part III of the Convention as meaning that if these objections notwithstanding because of the a reservation is not accepted the State making the importance they attach to the Convention as a whole." reservation does not become a Party to the Convention. "Lastly, the United Kingdom maintains its position in regard to article 15. In its view this article is TURKEY discriminatory in that it establishes arocedure for the Declarations and reservation: receipt of petitions relating to dependent territories while "The Republic of Turkey declares that it will making no comparable provision for States without such implement the provisions of this Convention only to the territories. Moreover, the article purports to establish a States Parties with which it has diplomatic relations. procedure applicable to the dependent territories of States The Republic of Turkey declares that this Convention whether or not those States have become parties to the is ratified exclusively with regard to the national territory Convention. Her Majesty's Government have decided where the Constitution and the legal and administrative that the United Kingdom should sign the Convention, order of the Republic of Turkey are applied.

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 9 these objections notwithstanding, because of the specific consent of the United States is required in each importance they attach to the Convention as a whole." case. Upon ratification: II. The Senate's advice and consent is "First, the reservation and interpretative statements subject to the following understanding, which shall apply made by the United Kingdom at the time of signature of to the obligations of the United States under this the Convention are maintained. Convention: "Secondly, the United Kingdom does not regard the That the United States understands that this Commonwealth Immigrants Acts, 1962 and 1968, or their Convention shall be implemented by the Federal application, as involving any racial discrimination within Government to the extent that it exercises jurisdiction the meaning of paragraph 1 of article 1, or any other over the matters covered therein, and otherwise by the provision of the Convention, and fully reserves its right to state and local governments. To the extent that state and continue to apply those Acts. local governments exercise jurisdiction over such matters, "Lastly, to the extent if any, that any law relating to the Federal Government shall, as necessary, take election in Fiji may not fulfil the obligations referred to in appropriate measures to ensure the fulfilment of this article 5 (c), that any law relating to land in Fiji which Convention. prohibits or restricts the alienation of land by the III. The Senate's advice and consent is indigenous inhabitants may not fulfil the obligations subject to the following declaration: referred to in article 5 (d) (v), or that the school system of That the United States declares that the provisions of Fiji may not fulfil the obligations referred to in articles 2, the Convention are not self-executing." 3 or 5 (e) (v), the United Kingdom reserves the right not 19 to apply the Convention to Fiji." VIET NAM

Declaration: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (1) The Government of the Socialist Republic of Upon signature: Viet Nam declares that the provisions of article 17 (1) and "The Constitution of the United States contains of article 18 (1) of the Convention whereby a number of provisions for the protection of individual rights, such as States are deprived of the opportunity of becoming Parties the right of free speech, and nothing in the Convention to the said Convention are of a discriminatory nature and shall be deemed to require or to authorize legislation or it considers that, in accordance with the principle of the other action by the United States of America incompatible sovereign equality of States, the Convention should be with the provisions of the Constitution of the United open to participation by all States without discrimination States of America." or restriction of any kind. Upon ratification: Reservation: "I. The Senate's advice and consent is (2) The Government of the Socialist Republic of subject to the following reservations: Viet Nam does not consider itself bound by the provisions (1) That the Constitution and laws of the of article 22 of the Convention and holds that, for any United States contain extensive protections of individual dispute with regard to the interpretation or application of freedom of speech, expression and association. the Convention to be brought before the International Accordingly, the United States does not accept any Court of Justice, the consent of all parties to the dispute is obligation under this Convention, in particular under necessary. (The reservation was circulated by the articles 4 and 7, to restrict those rights, through the Secretary-General on 10 August 1982.) adoption of legislation or any other measures, to the 15,16 extent that they are protected by the Constitution and laws YEMEN of the United States. (2) That the Constitution and laws of the "The accession of the People's Democratic Republic of United States establish extensive protections against Yemen to this Convention shall in no way signify discrimination, reaching significant areas of non- recognition of Israel or entry into a relationship with it governmental activity. Individual privacy and freedom regarding any matter regulated by the said Convention. from governmental interference in private conduct, "The People's Democratic Republic of Yemen does however, are also recognized as among the fundamental not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 22 values which shape our free and democratic society. The of the Convention, under which any dispute between two United States understands that the identification of the or more States Parties with respect to the interpretation or rights protected under the Convention by reference in application of the Convention is, at the request of any of article 1 to fields of `public life' reflects a similar the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the distinction between spheres of public conduct that are International Court of Justice for decision, and states that, customarily the subject of governmental regulation, and in each individual case, the consent of all parties to such a spheres of private conduct that are not. To the extent, dispute is necessary for referral of the dispute to the however, that the Convention calls for a broader International Court of Justice. regulation of private conduct, the United States does not "The People's Democratic Republic of Yemen states accept any obligation under this Convention to enact that the provisions of Article 17, paragraph 1, and Article legislation or take other measures under paragraph (1) of 18, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Elimination of article 2, subparagraphs (1) (c) and (d) of article 2, article All Forms of Racial Discrimination whereby a number of 3 and article 5 with respect to private conduct except as States are deprived of the opportunity to become Parties mandated by the Constitution and laws of the United to the Convention is of a discriminatory nature, and holds States. that, in accordance with the principle of the sovereign (3) That with reference to article 22 of the equality of States, the Convention should be opened to Convention, before any dispute to which the United States participation by all interested States without is a party may be submitted to the jurisdiction of the discrimination or restriction of any kind." International Court of Justice under this article, the

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 10 Objections (Unless otherwise indicated, the objections were made upon ratification, accession or succession.)

The farce involving the ratification of the above- AUSTRALIA mentioned International Convention by a clique 8 August 1989 representing no one mocks the norms of law and morality "In accordance with article 20 (2), Australia objects to and blasphemes the memory of millions of Kampuchean [the reservations made by Yemen] which it considers victims of the genocide committed by the Pol Pot-Ieng impermissible as being incompatible with the object and Sary régime. purpose of the Convention." BELGIUM AUSTRIA 8 August l989 19 February 1998 With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii): Arabia upon accession: These reservations are incompatible with the object "Austria is of the view that a reservation by which a and purpose of the Convention and consequently are not State limits its responsibilities under the Convention in a permitted pursuant to article 20, paragraph 2, of the general and unspecified manner creates doubts as to the Convention. commitment of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia with its obligations under the Convention, essential for the CANADA fulfilment of its objection and purpose. According to paragraph 2 of article 20 a reservation incompatible with 10 August 1989 the object and purpose of this Convention shall not be With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning permitted. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii): which they have chosen to become Parties are prepared to "The effect of these reservations would be to allow undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply racial discrimination in respect of certain of the rights with their obligations under the treaties. enumerated in Article 5. Since the objective of the Austria is further of the view that a general reservation International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of the kind made by the Government of the Kingdom of of Racial Discrimination, as stated in its Preamble, is to Saudi Arabia, which does not clearly specify the eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and provisions of the Convention to which it applies and the manifestations, the Government of Canada believes that extent of the derogation therefrom, contributes to the reservations made by the Yemen Arab Republic are undermining the basis of international treaty law. incompatible with the object and purpose of the According to international law a reservation is International Convention. Moreover, the Government of inadmissible to the extent as its application negatively Canada believes that the principle of non-discrimination affects the compliance by a State with its obligations is generally accepted and recognized in international law under the Convention essential for the fulfilment of its and therefore is binding on all states." object and purpose. Therefore, Austria cannot consider the reservation CYPRUS made by the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as admissible unless the Government of the Kingdom of 5 August 2003 Saudi Arabia, by providing additional information or With regard to the reservation made by Turkey upon through subsequent practice, ensures that the reservation ratification: is compatible with the provisions essential for the ".....the Government of the Republic of Cyprus has implementation of the object and purpose of the examined the declaration made by the Government of the Convention. Republic of Turkey to the International Convention on the This view by Austria would not preclude the entry into Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (New force in its entirety of the Convention between the York, 7 March 1966) on 16 September 2002 in respect of Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Austria.” the implementation of the provisions of the Convention only to the States Parties with which it has diplomatic BELARUS relations. In the view of the Government of the Republic of 29 December 1983 Cyprus, this declaration amounts to a reservation. This The ratification of the above-mentioned International reservation creates uncertainty as to the States Parties in Convention by the so-called "Government of Democratic respect of which Turkey is undertaking the obligations in Kampuchea"-the Pol Pot-Ieng Sary clique of hangmen the Convention. The Government of the Republic of overthrown by the Kampuchean people - is completely Cyprus therefore objects to the reservation made by the unlawful and has no legal force. There is only one State Government of the Republic of Turkey. of Kampuchea in the world-The People's Republic of This reservation or the objection to it shall not Kampuchea, recognized by a large number of countries. preclude the entry into force of the Convention between All power in this State is entirely in the hands of its only the Republic of Cyprus and the Republic of Turkey." lawful Government, the Government of the People's Republic of Kampuchea, which has the exclusive right to 8 act in the name of Kampuchea in the international arena, CZECH REPUBLIC including the right to ratify international agreements DENMARK prepared within the United Nations. 10 July 1989

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 11 With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning reservation atate cannot contract out from universally article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii): binding human rights standards. "Article 5 contains undertakings, in compliance with For the above reasons, the Government of Finland the fundamental obligations laid down in article 2 of the notes that the reservations made by Yemen are devoid of Convention, to prohibit and to eliminate racial legal effect. However, the Government of Finland does discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of not consider that this fact is an obstacle to the entry into everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or force of the Convention in respect of Yemen." national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law, 6 February 1998 notably in the enjoyment of the rights enumerated in the With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi article. Arabia upon accession: The reservations made by the Government of Yemen "The Government of Finland is of the view that this are incompatible with the object and purpose of the general reservation raises doubts as to the commitment of Convention and the reservations are consequently Saudi Arabia to the object and purpose of the Convention impermissible according to article 20, paragraph 2 of the and would recall that according to paragraph 2 of article Convention. In accordance with article 20, paragraph 1 of 20 of the Convention, a reservation incompatible with the the Convention the Government of Denmark therefore object and purpose of the Convention shall not be formally objects to these reservations. This objection permitted. The Government of Finland would also like to does not have the effect of preventing the Convention recall that according to the said paragraph a reservation from entering into force between Denmark and Yemen, shall be considered incompatible or inhibitive if at least and the reservations cannot alter or modify in any respect, two thirds of the States Parties to the Convention object to the obligations arising from the Convention." it. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties are respected, ETHIOPIA as to their object and purpose, by all parties and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes 25 January 1984 necessary to comply with their obligations under the "The Provisional Military Government of Socialist treaties. Ethiopia should like to reiterate that the Government of The Government of Finland is further of the view that the People's Republic of Kampuchea is the sole legitimate general reservations of the kind made by Saudi Arabia, representative of the People of Kampuchea and as such it which do not clearly specify the provisions of the alone has the authority to act on behalf of Kampuchea. Convention to which they apply and the extent of the The Provisional Military Government of Socialist derogation therefrom, contribute to undermining the basis Ethiopia, therefore, considers the ratification of the so- of international treaty law. called `Government of Democratic Kampuchea' to be null The Government of Finland therefore objects to the and void." aforesaid general reservation made by the Government of Saudi Arabia to the [Convention].

FINLAND FRANCE 7 July 1989 With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning 15 May 1984 article (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii): The Government of the French Republic, which does "The Government of Finland formally, and in not recognize the coalition government of Democratic accordance with article 20 (2) of the Convention, objects Cambodia, declares that the instrument of ratification by to the reservations made by Yemen to the above the coalition government of Democratic Cambodia of the provisions. [International] Convention on the Elimination of All In the first place, the reservations concern matters Forms of Racial Discrimination, opened for signature at which are of fundamental importance in the Convention. New York on 7 March 1966, is without effect. The first paragraph of article 5 clearly brings this out. 20 September 1989 According to it, the Parties have undertaken to guarantee With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning the rights listed in that article "In compliance with article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii): fundamental obligations laid down in article 2 of the France considers that the reservations made by the Convention". Clearly, provisions prohibiting racial Yemen Arab Republic to the International Convention on discrimination in the granting of such fundamental the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination are political rights and civil liberties as the right to participate not valid as being incompatible with the object and in public life, to marry and choose a spouse, to inherit and purpose of the Convention. to enjoy freedom of thought, conscience and religion are Such objection is not an obstacle to the entry into central in a convention against racial discrimination. force of the said Convention between France and the Therefore, the reservations are incompatible with the Yemen Arab Republic. object and purpose of the Convention, as specified in paragraph 20 (2) thereof and in article 19 (c) of the 25 April 2003 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. With regard to the declaration made by Thailand upon Moreover, it is the view of the Government of Finland accession: that it would be unthinkable that merely by making a The Government of the Republic of France has reservation to the said provisions, a State could achieve examined the interpretative declaration made by the the liberty to start discriminatory practices on the grounds Government of the Kingdom of Thailand upon accession of race, colour, or national or ethnic origin in regard to to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of such fundamental political rights and civil liberties as the Racial Discrimination of 7 March 1966. The Government right to participate in the conduct of public affairs, the of the Republic of France considers that, by making the right of marriage and choice of spouse, the right of interpretation and implementation of the provisions of the inheritance and the freedom of thought, conscience and Convention subject to respect for the Constitution and religion. Any racial discrimination in respect of those legislation of the Kingdom of Thailand, the Government fundamental rights and liberties is clearly against the of the Kingdom of Thailand is making a reservation of general principles of human rights law as reflected in the such a general and indeterminate scope that it is not Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the practice possible to ascertain which changes to obligations under of States and international organizations. By making a the Convention it is intended to introduce. Consequently,

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 12 the Government of France considers that this reservation This objection does not preclude the entry into force of as formulated could make the provisions of the the Convention between the Federal Republic of Germany Convention completely ineffective. For these reasons, the and the Kingdom of Thailand." Government objects to this interpretative declaration, which it considers to be a reservation likely toe incompatible with the object and purpose of the ITALY Convention. 7 August 1989 "The Government of the Republic of Italy raises an 3 GERMANY objection to the reservations entered by the Government of the Arab Republic of Yemen to article 5 [(c) and (d) 8 August 1989 (iv), (vi) and (vii)] of the above-mentioned Convention." With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii): MEXICO "These reservations relate to the basic obligations of States Parties to the Convention to prohibit and eliminate 11 August 1989 racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the With regard to reservation made by Yemen concerning right of everyone to equality before the law and include article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii): the enjoyment of such fundamental political and civil The Government of the United Mexican States has rights as the right to take part in the conduct of public life, concluded that, in view of article 20 of the Convention, the right to marriage and choice of spouse, the right to the reservation must be deemed invalid, as it is inherit and the right to freedom of thought, conscience incompatible with the object and purpose of the and religion. As a result, the reservations made by Convention. Yemen are incompatible with the object and purpose of Said reservation, if implemented would result in the Convention within the meaning of article 20, discrimination to the detriment of a certain sector of the paragraph 2 thereof." population and, at the same time, would violate the rights 3 February 1998 established in articles 2, 16 and 18 of the Universal With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. Arabia upon accession: The objection of the United Mexican States to the The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany reservation in question should not be interpreted as an is of the view that this reservation may raise doubts as to impediment to the entry into force of the Convention of the commitment of Saudi Arabia to the object and 1966 between the United States of Mexico and the purpose of the Convention. Government of Yemen. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany would like to recall that, according to paragraph 2 of MONGOLIA article 20 of the Convention, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be 7 June 1984 permitted. "The Government of the Mongolian People's Republic The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany considers that only the People's Revolutionary Council of therefore objects to the said reservation. Kampuchea as the sole authentic and lawful The objection does not preclude the entry into force of representative of the Kampuchean people has the right to the Convention between Saudi Arabia and the Federal assume international obligations on behalf of the Republic of Germany. Kampuchean people. Therefore the Government of the Mongolian People's Republic considers that the 29 April 2003 ratification of the International Convention on the With regard to the interpretative declaration made by Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination by the Thailand upon accession: so-called Democratic Kampuchea, a regime that ceased to "The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany exist as a result of the people's revolution in Kampuchea, has examined the General Interpretative Declaration to is null and void." the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination made by the Government NETHERLANDS of the Kingdom of Thailand at the time of its accession to the Convention. 25 July 1989 The Government of the Federal Repblic of Germany With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning considers that the General Interpretative Declaration made by Thailand is in fact a reservation that seeks to limit the article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii): scope of the Convention on an unilateral basis. "The Kingdom of the Netherlands objects to the The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany above-mentioned reservations, as they are incompatible notes that a reservation to all provisions of a Convention with object and purpose of the Convention. which consists of a general reference to national law These objections are not an obstacle for the entry into without specifying its contents does not clearly define for force of this Convention between the Kingdom of the the other State Parties to the Convention the extend to Netherlands and Yemen." which the reserving state has accepted the obligations out 3 February 1998 of the provisions of the Convention. With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi The reservation made by the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand in respect to the applications of the Arabia upon accession: provisions of the Convention therefore raises doubts as to [Same objection, identical in essence, as the one made for the commitment of Thailand to fulfill its obligations out Yemen.] of all provisions of the Convention. Hence the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany considers this reservation to be incompatible NEW ZEALAND with the object and purpose of the Convention and objects 4 August 1989 to the General Interpretative Declaration made by the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand. With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii):

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 13 "The New Zealand Government is of the view that can act in the name of Kampuchea. There is only one those provisions contain undertakings which are State of Kampuchea in the world -the People's Republic themselves fundamental to the Convention. Accordingly of Kampuchea, which has been recognized by a large it considers that the reservations purportedly made by number of countries. All power in this State is entirely in Yemen relating to political and civil rights are the hands of its only lawful Government, the Government incompatible with the object and purpose of the Treaty of the People's Republic of Kampuchea, which has the within the terms of the article 19 (c) of the Vienna exclusive right to act in the name of Kampuchea in the Convention on the Law of Treaties. international arena, including the right to ratify The Government of New Zealand advises therefore international agreements prepared within the United under article 20 of the Convention on the Elimination of Nations. All Forms of Racial Discrimination that it does not accept Nor should one fail to observe that the farce involving the reservations made by Yemen." the ratification of the above-mentioned International Convention by a clique representing no one mocks the norms of law and morality and is a direct insult to the NORWAY memory of millions of Kampuchean victims of the 28 July 1989 genocide committed against the Kampuchean people by the Pol Pot Sary régime. The entire international With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning community is familiar with the bloody crimes of that article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii): puppet clique. "The Government of Norway hereby enters its formal objection to the reservations made by Yemen." 8 6 February 1998 SLOVAKIA With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi SPAIN Arabia upon accession: 18 September 1998 "The Government of Norway considers that the reservation made by the Government of Saudi Arabia, due With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi to its unlimited scope and undefined character, is contrary Arabia upon accession: to the object and purpose of the Convention, and thus The Government of Spain considers that, given its impermissible under article 20, paragraph 2, of the unlimited scope and undefined nature, the reservation Convention. Under well-established treaty law, a State made by the Government of Saudi Arabia is contrary to party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as the object and purpose of the Convention and therefore justification for its failure to perform treaty obligations. inadmissible under article 10, paragraph 2, of the For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to Convention. Under the generally accepted law of treaties, the reservation made by the Government of Saudi Arabia. a State party may not invoke the provisions of its The Government of Norway does not consider this domestic law as a justification for failure to perform its objection to preclude the entry into force of the treaty obligations. The Government of Spain therefore Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the formulates an objection to the reservation made by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia." Government of Saudi Arabia. The Government of Spain does not consider that this objection constitutes an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between ROMANIA the Kingdom of Spain and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. 3 December 2003 With regard to the general interpretative declaration SWEDEN made by Thailand upon accession: 5 July 1989 "The Government of Romania has examined the general interpretative declaration made by the With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning Government of Thailand at the time of its accession to the article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii): Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial "Article 5 contains undertakings, in compliance with Discrimination. the fundamental obligations laid down in article 2 of the The Government of Romania considers that the Convention, to prohibit and to eliminate racial general interpretative declaration is, in fact, a reservation discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of formulated in general terms, that not allows to clearly everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or identify the obligations assumed by Thailand with regard national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law, to this legal instrument and, consequently, to state the notably in the enjoyment of the rights enumerated in the consistency of this reservation with the purpose and article. object of the above-mentioned Convention, in accordance The Government of Sweden has come to the with the provisions of article 19 (c) of the Vienna conclusion that the reservations made by Yemen are Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969). incompatible with the object and purpose of the The Government of Romania therefore objects to the Convention and therefore are impermissible according to aforesaid reservation made by Thailand to the Convention article 20, paragraph 2 of the Convention. For this reason on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination. the Government of Sweden objects to these reservations. This objection, however, shall not preclude the entry This objection does not have the effect of preventing the into force of the Convention between the Government of Convention from entering into force between Sweden and Romania and Thailand." Yemen, and the reservations cannot alter or modify, in any respect, the obligations arising from the Convention." RUSSIAN FEDERATION 27 January 1998 With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi 28 December 1983 Arabia upon accession: The ratification of the above-mentioned International Convention by the so-called "Government of Democratic "The Government of Sweden notes that the said Kampuchea"-the Pol Pot clique of hangmen overthrown reservation is a reservation of a general kind in respect of by the Kampuchean people-is completely unlawful and the provisions of the Convention which may be in conflict has no legal force. Only the representatives authorized by with the precepts of the Islamic Shariah . the State Council of the People's Republic of Kampuchea

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 14 The Government of Sweden is of the view that this interpretative declaration made by the Kingdom of general reservation raises doubts as to the commitment Thailand in substance constitutes a reservation. [of] Saudi Arabia to the object and purpose of the The Government of Sweden notes that the application Convention and would recall that, according to article 20, of the Convention is being made subject to a general paragraph 2, of the Convention, a reservation reservation referring to the confines of national incompatible with the object and purpose of this legislation, without specifying its contents. Such a Convention shall not be permitted. reservation makes it unclear to what extent the reserving It is in the common interest of states that treaties to state considers itself bound by the obligations of the which they have chosen to become parties are respected, Convention. The reservation made by the Kingdom of as to their object and purpose, by all parties and that states Thailand therefore raises doubts as to the commitment of are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessar the Kingdom of Thailand to the object and purpose of the to comply with their obligations under the treaties. Convention. In addition, according to the Vienna The Government of Sweden is further of the view that Convention on the Law of Treaties, a party to a treaty general reservations of the kind made by the Government may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as of Saudi Arabia, which do not clearly specify the justification for its failure to abide by the treaty. provisions of the Convention to which they apply and the It is in the common interest of States that treaties to extent of the derogation therefrom, contribute to which they have chosen to become parties are respected undermining the basis of international treaty law. as to their object and purpose, by all parties, and that The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes aforesaid general reservation made by the Government of necessary to comply with their obligations under the Saudi Arabia to the [said Convention]. treaties. According to customary law as codified in the This objection does not preclude the entry into force of Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation the Convention between Saudi Arabia and Sweden. The incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall Convention will thus become operative between the two not be permitted. states without Saudi Arabia benefiting from this The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the reservation." aforesaid reservation made by the Kingdom of Thailand 14 January 2003 to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. With regard to declarations made by Turkey upon This objection shall not preclude the entry into force ratification: of the Convention between the Kingdom of Thailand and The Government of Sweden has examined the Sweden. The Convention enters into force between the declarations made by Turkey upon ratifying the two States, without the Kingdom of Thailand benefitting International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms from this reservation." of Racial Discrimination. Paragraph 1 of the declaration states that Turkey will implement the provisions of the Convention only to the UKRAINE States Parties with which it has diplomatic relations. This 17 January 1984 statement in fact amounts, in the view of the Government of Sweden, to a reservation. The reservation makes it The ratification of the above-mentioned international unclear to what extent the Turkey considers itself bound Convention by the Pol Pot-Ieng Sary clique, which is by the obligations of the Convention. In absence of guilty of the annihilation of millions of Kampucheans and further clarification, therefore, the reservation raises which was overthrown in 1979 by the Kampuchean doubts as to the commitment of Turkey to the object and people, is thoroughly illegal and has no juridical force. purpose of the Convention. There is only one Kampuchean State in the World, It is in the common interest of States that treaties to namely, the People's Republic of Kampuchea. All which they have chosen to become parties are respected authority in this State is vested wholly in its sole as to their object and purpose, by all parties, and that legitimate government, the Government of the People's States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes Republic of Kampuchea. This Government alone has the necessary to comply with their obligations under the exclusive right to speak on behalf of Kampuchea at the treaties. According to article 20 of the International international level, while the supreme organ of State Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial power, the State Council of the People's Republic of Discrimination, a reservation incompatible with the object Kampuchea has the exclusive right to ratify international and purpose of the convention shall not be permitted. agreements drawn up within the framework of the United The Government of Sweden objects to the said Nations. reservation made by the Government of Turkey to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN of Racial Discrimination. IRELAND This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Turkey and Sweden. The 4 August 1989 Convention enters into force in its entiretv between the "The Government of the United Kingdom of Great two States, without Turkey benefiting from its Britain and Northern Ireland do not accept the reservation. reservations made by the Yemen Arab Republic to article 27 January 2004 5 (c) and (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii) of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial With regard to the interpretative declaration made by Discrimination." Thailand upon ratification: 26 June 2003 "The Government of Sweden has examined the general interpretative declaration made by the Kingdom With regard to the declaration made by Turkey upon of Thailand upon acceding to the International ratification: Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial "The Government of the United Kingdom have Discrimination. examined the declaration made by the Government of the The Government of Sweden recalls that the Republic of Turkey to the International Convention on the designation assigned to a statement whereby the legal Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (New effect of certain provisions of a treaty is excluded or York, 7 March 1966) on 16 September 2002 in respect of modified does not determine its status as a reservation to implementation of the provisions of the Convention only the treaty. The Government of Sweden considers that the

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 15 to the States Parties with which it has diplomatic which the declaring State has accepted the obligations of relations. the Convention. The Government of the United Kingdom In the view of the Government of the United therefore object to the reservation made by the Kingdom, this declaration amounts to a reservation. This Government of the Kingdom of Thailand. reservation creates uncertainty as to the States Parties in This objection shall not preclude the entry into force respect of which Turkey is undertaking the obligations in of the Convention between the United Kingdom of Great the Convention. The Government of the United Kingdom Britain and Northern Ireland and the Kingdom of therefore object to the reservation made by the Thailand." Government of the Republic of Turkey. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the United Kingdom of Great VIET NAM Britain and Northern Ireland and the Republic of Turkey." 29 February 1984 With regard to the interpretative declaration made by "The Government of the Socialist Republic of Thailand upon accession: Vietnam considers that only the Government of the "The Government of the United Kingdom have People's Republic of Kampuchea, which is the sole examined the interpretative declaration made by the genuine and legitimate representative of the Kampuchean Government of the Kingdom of Thailand to the People, is empowered to act in their behalf to sign, ratify International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms or accede to international conventions. of Racial Discrimination (New York, 7 March 1966) on The Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam 28 January 2003 in respect of the Government of the rejects as null and void the ratification of the above- Kingdom of Thailand having no obligation to interpret mentioned international Convention by the so-called and apply the provisions of the Convention beyond the "Democratic Kampuchea"- a genocidal regime confines of the Constitution and the laws of the Kingdom overthrown by the Kampuchean people since January 7, of Thailand and, in addition, that the interpretation and 1979. application shall be limited to or consistent with the Furthermore, the ratification of the Convention by a obligations under other international human rights genocidal regime, which massacred more than 3 million instruments to which the Kingdom of Thailand is party. Kampuchean people in gross violation of fundamental In the view of the Government of the United standards of morality and international laws on human Kingdom, this declaration amounts to a reservation. This rights, simply plays down the significance of the reservation amounts to a general reference to national law Convention and jeopardises the prestige of the United without specifying its contents and does not clearly define Nations." for the other States Parties to the Convention the extent to

Declarations recognizing the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination30 in accordance with article 14 of the Convention (Unless otherwise indicated, the declarations and reservations were made upon ratification, accession or succession.)

Racism (INADI) as competent within the national legal ALGERIA system to receive and consider petitions from individuals 12 September 1989 and groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of the The Algerian Government declares, pursuant to article Republic of Argentina, who claims to be victims of a 14 of the Convention, that it recognizes the competence of violation by the national government of the rights set the Commit tee to receive and consider communications forth in the Convention. from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by it of AUSTRALIA any of the rights set forth in the Convention. 28 January 1993 "The Government of Australia hereby declares that it ANDORRA recognises, for and on behalf of Australia, the competence 22 September 2006 of the Committee to receive and consider communications Pursuant to paragraph 1 of article 14 of the from individuals or groups of individuals within its Convention, the Principality of Andorra declares that it jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Australia of any of the rights set forth in the aforesaid Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and Convention." consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals claiming to be victims of a violation by the AUSTRIA Principality of Andorra of any of the rights set forth in the Convention. However, this procedure applies only insofar 20 February 2002 as the Committee has established that the same matter is "The Republic of Austria recognizes the competence not being examined, or has not been examined by another of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial international body of investigation or settlement. Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of Austria claiming to be victims of a ARGENTINA violation by Austria of any of the rights set forth in the 5 February 2007 Convention, with the reservation that the Committee shall Pursuant to the provisions of article 14, paragraphs 2 not consider any communication from an individual or a and 3, of the International Convention on the Elimination group of individuals unless the Committee has ascertained of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Government of that the facts of the case are not being examined or have the Republic of Argentina designates the National not been examined under another procedure of Institute to Combat Discrimination, Xenophobia and international investigation or settlement. Austria reserves

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 16 the right to indicate a national body as set forth in Article within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation 14 paragraph 2." by the Republic of Bulgaria of any of the rights set forth in this Convention."

AZERBAIJAN CHILE 27 September 2001 "In accordance with article 14, paragraph 1, of the 18 May 1994 International Convention on the Elimination of All forms In accordance with article 14 (1) of the International of Racial Discrimination, the Government of the Republic Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial of Azerbaijan declares that it recognizes the competence Discrimination, the Government of Chile declares that it of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Discrimination to receive and consider communications Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and from individuals or groups of individuals within its consider communications from individuals or groups of jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation of any of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims the rights set forth in the above-mentioned Convention." of a violation by the Government of Chile of any of the rights set forth in this Convention.

BELGIUM COSTA RICA 10 October 2000 Belgium recognizes the competence of the Committee 8 January 1974 on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, established Costa Rica recognizes the competence of the by the aforementioned Convention, to receive and Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination consider communications from individuals or groups of established under article 8 of the Convention on the individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, in of a violation by Belgium of any of the rights set forth in accordance with article 14 of the Convention, to receive the Convention. and consider communications from individuals or groups Pursuant to article 14, paragraph 2, of the Convention, of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be the Centre pour l'Egalité des Chances et la Lutte contre le victims of a violation by the State of any of the rights set Racisme (Centre for Equal Opportunity and the Struggle forth in the Convention. against Racism), established by the Act of 15 February 1993, has been designated as competent to receive and consider petitions from individuals and groups of CYPRUS individuals within the jurisdiction of Belgium who claim 30 December 1993 to be victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in "The Republic of Cyprus recognizes the competence the Convention. of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination established under article 14 (1) of [the Pursuant to article 14, paragraph 2, of the Convention, Convention] to receive and consider communications the Centre pour l'Egalité des Chances et la Lutte contre le from individuals or groups of individuals within its Racisme (Centre for Equal Opportunity and the Struggle jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the against Racism), established by the Act of 15 February Republic of Cyprus of any of the rights set forth in this 1993, has been designated as competent to receive and Convention. consider petitions from individuals and groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of Belgium who claim to be victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in CZECH REPUBLIC the Convention. 11 October 2000 The Czech Republic declares that according to Article BOLIVIA 14, paragraph 1 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination it 14 February 2006 recognizes the competence of the Committee on the "The Government of Bolivia recognizes the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and competence of the Committee on the Elimination of consider communications from individuals or groups of Racial Discrimination established under article 8 of the individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of a violation of any of the rights set forth in the of Racial Discrimination, in compliance with article 14 of International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms the Convention." of Racial Discrimination.

BRAZIL DENMARK 17 June 2002 11 October 1985 .....the Federative Republic of Brazil recognizes the Denmark recognizes the competence of the Committee competence of the Committee on the Elimination of on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive Racial Discrimination to receive and consider complaints and consider communications from individuals or groups of human rights violations, as provided for under article of individuals within Danish jurisdiction claiming to be XIV of the International Convention on the Elimination of victims of a violation by Denmark of any of the rights set All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which was opened forth in the Convention, with the reservation that the for signature in New York on 7th of March 1966. Committee shall not consider any communications unless it has ascertained that the same matter has not been, and is BULGARIA not being, examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. 12 May 1993 "The Republic of Bulgaria declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of ECUADOR Racial Discrimination to receive and consider 18 March 1977 communications from individuals or groups of individuals

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 17 The State of Ecuador, by virtue of Article 14 of the "The Hungarian People's Republic hereby recognizes International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms the competence of the Committee established by the of Racial Discrimination, recognizes the competence of International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms the Committee on the Elimination of Racial of Racial Discrimination provided for in paragraph 1 of Discrimination to receive and consider communications article 14 of the Convention." from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation of the rights set forth in the above-mentioned Convention. ICELAND 10 August 1981 FINLAND “[The Government of Iceland declares] in accordance with article 14 of the International Convention on the 16 November 1994 Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination which "Finland recognizes the competence of the Committee was opened for signature in New York on 7 March 1966, on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive that Iceland recognizes the competence of the Committee and consider communications from individuals or groups on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive of individuals within the jurisdiction of Finland claiming and consider communications from individuals or groups to be victims of a violation by Finland of any of the rights of individuals within the jurisdiction of Iceland claiming set forth in the said Convention, with the reservation that to be victims of a violation by Iceland of any of the rights the Committee shall not consider any communication set forth in the Convention, with the reservation that the from an individual or a group of individuals unless the Committee shall not consider any communication from an Committee has ascertained that the same matter is not individual or group of individuals unless the Committee being examined or has not been examined under another has ascertained that the same matter is not being procedure of international investigation or settlement." examined or has not been examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement."

FRANCE IRELAND 16 August 1982 [The Government of the French Republic declares], in “With reference to article 14, paragraph 1, of the accordance with article 14 of the International Convention International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination of Racial Discrimination, opened for signature at New opened for signature on 7 March 1966, [that it] recognizes York on 7 March 1966, Ireland recognizes the the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider Racial Discrimination, established by the afore-mentioned communications from individuals or groups of individuals Convention to receive and consider communications from within French jurisdiction that either by reason of acts or individuals or groups of individuals within Ireland omissions, events or deeds occurring after 15 August claiming to be victims of a violation by Ireland of any of 1982, or by reason of a decision concerning the acts or the rights set forth in the Convention. omissions, events or deeds after the said date, would Ireland recognizes that competence on the complain of being victims of a violation, by the French understanding that the said Committee shall not consider Republic, of one of the rights mentioned in the any communication without ascertaining that the same Convention. matter is not being considered or has not already been considered by another international body of investigation or settlement.” GEORGIA 30 June 2005 ITALY "In accordance with Article 14, Paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial 5 May 1978 Discrimination done at New York on , 1966 With reference to article 14, paragraph 1, of the Georgia recognizes the competence of the Committee for International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms the elimination of racial discrimination to receive and of Racial Discrimination, opened for signature at New consider communications from individuals or groups of York on 7 March 1966, the Government of the Italian individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims Republic recognizes the competence of the Committee on of a violation, by Georgia, of any of the rights set forth in the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, established by the abovementioned Convention." the afore-mentioned Convention, to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within Italian jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a GERMANY violation by Italy of any of the rights set forth in the Convention. 30 August 2001 The Government of the Italian Republic recognizes The Federal Republic of Germany hereby declares that that competence on the understanding that the Committee pursuant to Article 14 paragraph 1 of the Convention it on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination shall not recognizes the competence of the Committee on the consider any communication without ascertaining that the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and same matter is not being considered or has not already consider communications from individuals or groups of been considered by another international body of individuals within her jurisdiction claiming to be victims investigation or settlement. of a violation by the Federal Republic of Germany of any of the rights set forth in this Convention. However, this shall only apply insofar as the Committee has determined KAZAKHSTAN that the same matter is not being or has not been examined under another procedure of international 29 May 2008 investigation or settlement. “In accordance with article 14, paragraph 1, of the International convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination done at New York on December 21, HUNGARY 1965 the Republic of Kazakhstan hereby declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee of 13 September 1989 elimination of racial discrimination within its jurisdiction

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 18 to receive and consider communications from or on behalf General Assembly in its resolution 2106 (XX) of 21 of individuals who claim to be victims of a violation by December 1965 and opened for signature on 7 March the Republic of Kazakhstan of the provisions of the 1966. Convention.” The United Mexican States declares, pursuant to article 14 of the Convention, that it recognizes the LIECHTENSTEIN competence of the Committee to receive and consider 18 March 2004 communications from individuals or groups of individuals ".....the Principality of Liechtenstein recognizes the within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation competence of the Committee on the Elimination of by that State of any of the rights stipulated in the Racial Discrimination to receive and consider Convention. communications from individuals or groups of individuals Accordingly, in exercise of the power vested in me within the jurisdiction of Liechtenstein claiming to be under article 89, subparagraph X, of the Political victims of a violation by Liechtenstein of any of the rights Constitution of the United Mexican States and in set forth in the Convention. accordance with article 5 of the Conclusion of Treaties The Principality of Liechtenstein recognizes that Act, I hereby issue this instrument of acceptance, the competence on the understanding that the said Committee Declaration on Recognition of the Competence of the shall not consider any communication without Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, ascertaining that the same matter is not being considered as set out in the Declaration adopted by the Senate of the or has not already been considered under another Distinguished Congress of the Union, and promise, on international procedure of investigation or settlement. behalf of the Mexican Nation, to implement it, uphold it Pursuant to article 14, paragraph 2, of the Convention, and ensure that it is implemented and upheld. the Constitutional Court has been designated as competent to receive and consider petitions from MONACO individuals and groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of Liechtenstein who claim to be victims of a 6 November 2001 violation of any of the rights set forth in the Convention." We hereby declare that we recognize the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and examine communications LUXEMBOURG from individuals or groups of individuals under its 22 July 1996 jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation by the Pursuant to article 14 (1) of the [said Convention], Principality of Monaco of any of the rights set forth in the Luxembourg declares that it recognizes the competence of said Convention, such competence to be exercised only the Committee on the Elimination of Racial when all domestic remedies have been exhausted, and we Discrimination to receive and consider communications pledge our word as Prince and promise, on behalf of from individuals or groups of individuals within its ourselves and our successors, to observe and execute it jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by faithfully and loyally. Luxembourg of any of the rights set forth in the Convention. MONTENEGRO Pursuant to article 14 (2) of the [said Convention], the "Commission spéciale permanente contre la Confirmed upon succession : discrimination", created in May 1996 pursuant to article “By affirming its commitment to establish the 24 of the Law dated 27 July 1993 on the integration of principles of the rule of law and promote and protect aliens shall be competent to receive and consider petitions human rights, the Government of the Federal Republic of from individuals and groups of individuals within the Yugoslavia recognizes the competence of the Committee jurisdiction of Luxembourg who claim to be victims of a on the elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and violation of any of the rights set forth in the Convention. consider complaints submitted by individuals and groups alleging violations of rights guaranteed under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms MALTA of Racial Discrimination. 16 December 1998 The Government of the Federal Republic of Malta declares that it recognizes the competence of the Yugoslavia determines the competence of the Federal Committee to receive and consider communications from Constitutional Court to accept and consider, within its individuals subject to the jurisdiction of Malta who claim domestic legal system, the complaints submitted by to be victims of a violation by Malta of any of the rights individuals and groups under the State jurisdiction, set forth in the Convention which results from situations alleging to have been victims of rights violations under or events occurring after the date of adoption of the the Convention, and who have exhausted all available present declaration, or from a decision relating to legal means provided for by the national legislation.” situations or events occurring after that date. The Government of Malta recognizes this competence MOROCCO on the understanding that the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination shall 19 October 2006 not consider any communication without ascertaining that In accordance with article 14 of the International the same matter is not being considered or has not already Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial been considered by another international body of Discrimination, the Government of the Kingdom of investigation or settlement." Morocco declares that it recognizes, on the date of deposit of the present document, the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to MEXICO receive and consider communications from individuals or 15 March 2002 groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be The United Mexican States recognizes as duly binding victims of a violation, subsequent to the date of deposit of the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of the present document, of any of the rights set forth in this Racial Discrimination, established by article 8 of the Convention. International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, adopted by the United Nations

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 19 NETHERLANDS by the Republic of Portugal of any of the rights set forth in that Convention. In accordance with article 14, paragraph 1, of the Portugal recognises such jurisdiction provided that the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Committee does not consider any communication unless Discrimination concluded at New York on 7 March 1966, it is satisfied that the matter has neither been examined the Kingdom of the Netherlands recognizes, for the nor is it subject to appreciation by any other international Kingdom in Europe, Surinam and the Netherlands body with powers of inquiry or decision. Antilles, the competence of the Committee for the Portugal indicates the High Commissioner for Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and Immigration and Ethnic Minorities as the body with consider communications from individuals or groups of competence to receive and consider petitions from individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims individuals and groups of individuals that claim to be of a violation, by the Kingdom of the Netherlands, of any victims of violation of any of the rights set forth in the of the rights set forth in the above-mentioned Convention. Convention".

NORWAY REPUBLIC OF KOREA 23 January 1976 5 March 1997 "The Norwegian Government recognizes the "The Government of the Republic of Korea recognizes competence of the Committee on the Elimination of the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals communications from individuals or groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of Norway claiming to be victims within the jurisdiction of the Republic of Korea claiming of a violation by Norway of any of the rights set forth in to be victims of a violation by the Republic of Korea of the International Convention of 21 December 1965 on the any of the rights set forth in the said Convention." Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination according to article 14 of the said Convention, with the reservation that the Committee shall not consider any ROMANIA communication from an individual or group of individuals 21 March 2003 unless the Committee has ascertained that the same matter "Romania declares, in accordance with article 14 is not being examined or has not been examined under paragraph 1 of the International Convention on the another procedure of international investigation or Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, that it settlement." recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and PERU consider communications from persons within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by 27 November 1984 Romania of any of the rights set forth in the Convention, [The Government of the Republic of Peru declares] to which Romania acceded by Decree no. 345 of 1970. that, in accordance with its policy of full respect for Without prejudice to the article 14 paragraphs 1 and 2 human rights and fundamental freedoms, without of the International Convention on the Elimination of All distinctions as to race, sex, language or religion, and with Forms of Racial Discrimination, Romania considers that the aim of strengthening the international instruments on the mentioned provisions do not confer to the Committee the subject, Peru recognizes the competence of the on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to competence of examining communications of persons receive and consider communications from individuals or invoking the existence and infringement of collective groups of individuals within its jurisdiction, who claim to rights. be victims of violations of any of the rights set forth in the The body which is competent in Romania, according Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial to domestic law, to receive and to examine Discrimination, in conformity with the provisions of communications in accordance with article 14 paragraph article 14 of the Convention. 2 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination is the National POLAND Council for Combating Discrimination established by the Government Decision no. 1194 of 2001." 1 December 1998 The Government of the Republic of Poland recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of RUSSIAN FEDERATION Racial Discrimination, established by the provisions of 1 October 1991 the afore-mentioned Convention, to receive and consider The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics declares that communications from individuals or groups of individuals it recognizes the competence of the Committee on the within jurisdiction of the Republic of Poland claiming, to Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and be victims of a violation by the Republic of Poland of the consider communications, in respect of situations and rights set forth in the above Convention and concerning events occurring after the adoption of the present all deeds, decisions and facts which will occur after the declaration, from individuals or groups of individuals day this Declaration has been deposited with the within the jurisdiction of the USSR claiming to be victims Secretary-General of the United Nations. of a violation by the USSR of any of the rights set forth in the Convention. PORTUGAL 2 March 2000 SAN MARINO ".....The Government of Portugal recognises the 22 February 2008 competence of the Committee established under Article The Republic of San Marino, in accordance with 14 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of article 14 of the International Convention on the Racial Discrimination to receive and consider Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, communications from individuals or groups of individuals recognizes the competence of the Committee on the within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 20 consider communications from individuals or groups of and individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims (b) indicates that, for the purposes of of a violation by the Republic of San Marino of any of the paragraph 2 of article 14 of the Convention, the South rights set forth in the Convention. African Human Rights Commission is the body within the Republic's national legal order which shall be competent SENEGAL to receive and consider petitions from individuals or 3 December 1982 groups of individuals within the Republic's jurisdiction In accordance with [article 14], the Government of who claim to be victims of any of the rights set forth in Senegal declares that it recognizes the competence of the the Convention." Committee (on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination) to receive and consider communications from individuals SPAIN within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by Senegal of any of the rights set forth in the Convention 13 January 1998 on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. [The Government of Spain] recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider SERBIA communications from individuals or groups of individuals Confirmed upon succession : within the jurisdiction of Spain claiming to be victims of “By affirming its commitment to establish the violations by the Spanish State of any of the rights set principles of the rule of law and promote and protect forth in that Convention. human rights, the Government of the Federal Republic of Such competence shall be accepted only after appeals Yugoslavia recognizes the competence of the Committee to national jurisdiction bodies have been exhausted, and it on the elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and must be exercised within three months following the date consider complaints submitted by individuals and groups of the final judicial decision. alleging violations of rights guaranteed under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms SWEDEN of Racial Discrimination. The Government of the Federal Republic of "Sweden recognizes the competence of the Committee Yugoslavia determines the competence of the Federal on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive Constitutional Court to accept and consider, within its and consider communications from individuals or groups domestic legal system, the complaints submitted by of individuals within the jurisdiction of Sweden claiming individuals and groups under the State jurisdiction, to be victims of a violation by Sweden of any of the rights alleging to have been victims of rights violations under set forth in the Convention, with the reservation that the the Convention, and who have exhausted all available Committee shall not consider any communication from an legal means provided for by the national legislation.” individual or a group of individuals unless the Committee has ascertained that the same matter is not being examined or has not been examined under another SLOVAKIA procedure of international investigation or settlement." 17 March 1995 The Slovak Republic, pursuant to article 14 of the SWITZERLAND Convention, recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive 19 June 2003 and consider communications from individuals or groups ... .Switzerland recognizes, pursuant to article 14, of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be paragraph 1, of the International Convention on the victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, Convention. concluded at New York on 21 December 1965, the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) to receive and consider SLOVENIA communications under the above-mentioned provision, with the reservation that the Committee shall not consider 10 November 2001 any communication from an individual or group of "The Republic of Slovenia recognizes to the individuals unless the Committee has ascertained that the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination same matter is not being examined or has not been competence to receive and consider communications from examined under another procedure of international individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction investigation or settlement. claiming to be victims of a violation by the Republic of Slovenia of any of the rights set forth in the Convention, with the reservation that the Committee shall not consider THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA any communications unless it has ascertained that the same matter has not been, and is not being, examined 22 December 1999 under another procedure of international investigation or “The Republic of Macedonia declares that it settlement." recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communcations from individuals or groups of SOUTH AFRICA individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims "The Republic of South Africa- of a violation by the Republic of Macedonia of any of its (a) declares that, for the purposes of rights set forth in this Convention, with the reservation paragraph 1 of article 14 of the Convention, it recognises that the Committee shall not consider any communication the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of from individuals or groups of individuals, unless it has Racial Discrimination to receive and consider ascertained that the same matter has not been, and is not communications from individuals or groups of individuals being, examined under another procedure of international within the Republic's jurisdiction claiming to be victims investigation or settlement." of a violation by the Republic in any of the rights set forth in the Convention after having exhausted all domestic remedies

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 21 UKRAINE 28 July 1992 VENEZUELA (BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF) In accordance with the article 14 of the International 22 September 2003 Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Racial Pursuant to the provisions of article 14, paragraph 1 of Discrimination, Ukraine declares that it recognizes the the International Convention on the Elimination of All competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Government of the Racial Discrimination to receive and consider Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela recognizes the communications from individuals or groups of individuals competence of the Committee on the Elimination of [within its jurisdiction] claiming to be victims of a Racial Discrimination established under article 8 of the violation by [it] of any of the rights set forth in the Convention to receive and consider communications from Convention. individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of violations by the Bolivarian URUGUAY Republic of Venezuela of any of the rights set forth in the Convention. 11 September 1972 The Government of Uruguay recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, under article 14 of the Convention.

Notes:

1 Article 19 of the Convention provides that the Convention 2 Official Records of the General Assembly, Twentieth shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after the date of deposit Session, Supplement No. 14 (A/6014),p. 47. with the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the twenty- seventh instrument of ratification or instrument of accession. On 3 The German Democratic Republic had acceded to the 5 , the Government of Poland deposited the Convention on 23 March 1973 with a reservation and a twenty-seventh instrument. However, among those instruments declaration. For the text of the reservation and declaration, see there were some which contained a reservation and therefore United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 883, p. 190. were subject to the provisions of article 20 of the Convention allowing States to notify objections within ninety days from the Moreover, on 26 April 1984, the Government of the German date of circulation by the Secretary-General of the reservations. Democratic Republic had made an objection with regard to the In respect of two such instruments, namely those of Kuwait and ratification made by the Government of the Democratic Spain, the ninety-day period had not yet expired on the date of Kampuchea. For the text of the objection, see United Nations, deposit of the twenty-seventh instrument. The reservation Treaty Series , vol. 1355, p. 327. contained in one further instrument, that of India, had not yet been circulated on that date, and the twenty-seventh instrument See also note 2 under “Germany” in the “Historical itself, that of Poland, contained a reservation; in respect of these Information” section in the front matter of this volume. two instruments the ninety-day period would only begin to run on the date of the Secretary-General's notification of their 4 The former Yugoslavia had signed and ratified the deposit. Therefore, in that notification, which was dated 13 Convention on 15 and 2 , respectively. December 1968, the Secretary-General called the attention of See also note 1 under "Bosnia and Herzegovina", "Croatia", the interested States to the situation and stated the following: "former Yugoslavia", "Slovenia", "The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" and "Yugoslavia" in the "Historical "It appears from the provisions of article 20 of the Convention Information" section in the front matter of this volume. that it would not be possible to determine the legal effect of the

four instruments in question pending the expiry of the respective 5 On 10 June 1997, the Secretary-General received periods of time mentioned in the preceding paragraph. communications concerning the status of from the Governments of the United Kingdom and China (see also note 2 Having regard to the above-mentioned consideration, the under “China” and note 2 under “United Kingdom of Great Secretary-General is not at the present time in a position to Britain and Northern Ireland” regarding Hong Kong in the ascertain the date of entry into force of the Convention." “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume). Upon resuming the exercise of sovereignty over Subsequently, in a notification dated 17 March 1969, the Hong Kong, China notified the Secretary-General that the Secretary-General informed the interested States; (a) that within Convention with the reservation made by China will also apply the period of ninety days from the date of his previous to the Hong Kong special Administrative Region. notification he had received an objection from one State to the reservation contained in the instrument of ratification by the In addition, the notification made by the Government of China Government of India; and (b) that the Convention, in accordance contained the following declarations: with paragraph 1 of article 19, had entered into force on 4 January 1969, i.e., on the thirtieth day after the date of deposit of 1. ... the instrument of ratification of the Convention by the Government of Poland, which was the twenty-seventh 2. The reservation of the People's Republic of China on behalf instrument of ratification or instrument of accession deposited of the the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region interprets with the Secretary-General. the requirement in article 6 concerning "reparation and satisfaction" as being fulfilled if one or other of these forms of

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 22 redress is made available and interprets "satisfaction" as For the text of the reservations and the objection, see United including any form of redress effective to bring the Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 660, p. 276 and vol. 1350, p. 386, discriminatory conduct to an end. respectively. See also note 14 in this chapter and note 1 under “Czech Republic” and note 1 under “Slovakia” in the “Historical

6 On 27 April 1999, the Government of Portugal informed Information” section in the front matter of this volume. the Secretary-General that the Convention would apply to

Macao. 9 In a communication received on 4 October 1972, the Government of Denmark notified the Secretary-General that it Subsequently, the Secretary-General received communications withdrew the reservation made with regard to the concerning the status of Macao from Portugal and China (see implementation on the Faroe Islands of the Convention. For the note 3 under “China” and note 1 under “Portgual” in the text of the reservation see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. Historical Information section in the front matter of this 820, p. 457. volume). Upon resuming the exercise of sovereignty over Macao, China notified the Secretary-General that the The legislation by which the Convention has been Convention with the reservation made by China will also apply implemented on the Faroe Islands entered into force by 1 to the Macao Special Administrative Region. November 1972, from which date the withdrawal of the above reservation became effective.

7 The Convention had previously been signed and ratified on behalf of the Republic of China on 31 March 1966 and 10 10 See note 1 under “Germany” regarding Berlin (West) in , respectively. See also note 1 under "China" in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this volume. volume.

11 See note 1 under "Montenegro" in the "Historical With reference to the above-mentioned signature and/or Information" section in the front matter of this volume. ratification, communications have been received by the

Secretary-General from the Governments of Bulgaria (12 See note 1 under “” in the “Historical 1971), Mongolia (11 ), the Byelorussian Soviet Information” section in the front matter of this volume. Socialist Republic (9 ), the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist

Republic (21 ) and the Union of Soviet Socialist 13 See note 1 under "New Zealand" regarding Tokelau in the Republics (18 January 1971) stating that they considered the "Historical Information" section in the preliminary pages in the said signature and/or ratification as null and void, since the so- front matter of this volume. called "Government of China" had no right to speak or assume

obligations on behalf of China, there being only one Chinese 14 In its instrument of ratification, the Government of the State, the People's Republic of China, and one Government United Kingdom specified that the ratification also applied to entitled to represent it, the Government of the People's Republic the following territories: Associated States (Antigua, Dominica, of China. Grenada, Saint Christopher Nevis Anguilla and Saint Lucia) and Territories under the territorial sovereignty of the United In letters addressed to teh Secretary-General in regard to the Kingdom, as well as the State of Brunei, the Kingdom of Tonga above-mentioned communications, the Permanent and the British Solomon Islands Protectorate. Representative of China to the United Nations stated that the Republic of China, a sovereign State and Member of the United 15 The Yemen Arab Republic had acceded to the Convention Nations, had attended the twentieth regular session of hte United on 6 April 1989 with the following reservation: Nations General Assembly, contributed to the formulation of the Convention concerned, signed the Convention and duly Reservations in respect of article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), deposited the instrument of ratification thereof, and that "any (vi) and (vii). statements and reservations relating to the abocve-mentioned Convention that are incmopatible with or derogatory to the In this regard, the Secretary-General received on 30 April legitimate position of the Government of the Republic of China 1990, from the Government of Czechoslovakia the following shall in no wa affect the rights and obligations of the Republic of objection: China under this Convention". "The Czech and Slovak Federal Republic considers the Finally, upon depositing its instrument of accession, the reservations of the Government of Yemen with respect to article Government of the People's Republic of China made the 5 (c) and articles 5 (d) (iv), (vi), and (vii) of [the Convention], following declaration: The signing and ratification of the said as incompatible with the object and purpose of this Convention." Convention by the Taiwan authorities in the name of China are illegal and null and void. See also note 1 under “Yemen” in the “Historical Information”

section in the front matter of this volume. 8 Czechoslovakia had signed and ratified the Convention on

7 and 29 , respectively, with 16 In a communication received by the Secretary-General on reservations. Subsequently, on 12 March 1984, the Government 10 , the Government of Israel declared: of Czechoslovakia made an objection to the ratification by Democratic Kampuchea. Further, by a notification received on "[The Government of Israel] has noted the political character 26 April 1991, the Government of Czechoslovakia notified the of the declaration made by the Government of Iraq on signing Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the reservation to the above Convention. article 22 made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification.

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 23 In the view of the Government of Israel, the Convention is not declaration did not purport to limit the obligations under the the proper place for making such political pronouncements. The Convention in respect of the French Government, but only to Government of Israel will, in so far as concerns the substance of record the latter's interpretation of article 4 of the Convention. the matter, adopt towards the Government of Iraq an attitude of complete reciprocity. Moreover, it is the view of the 22 In a communication received on 13 September 1989, the Government of Israel that no legal relevance can be attached to Government of Hungary notified the Secretary-General that it those Iraqi statements which purport to represent the views of had decided to withdraw the reservation in respect to article 22 the other States". of the Convention made upon ratification. For the text of the reservation, see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 60, p. 310. Except for the omission of the last sentence, identical

communica- tions in essence, mutatis mutandis , were received 23 In a communication received on 24 , the by the Secretary-General from the Government of Israel as Government of Pakistan notified the Secretary-General that it follows: on 29 December 1966 in respect of the declaration "has decided not to accept the reservation made by the made by the Government of the United Arab Republic upon Government of India in her instrument of ratification". signature (see also note 17); on 16 in respect of

the declaration made by the Government of Libya upon 24 In a communication received on 19 July 1990, the accession; on 12 December 1968 in respect of the declaration Government of Mongolia notified the Secretary-General of its made by the Government of Kuwait upon accession; on 9 July decision to withdraw the reservation concerning article 22 made 1969 in respect of the declaration made by the Government of upon ratification. For the text of the reservation see United Syria upon accession; on 21 made in respect of the Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 60, p. 289. declaration made by Government of Iraq upon ratification with

the following statement: "With regard to the political declaration 25 On 16 October 1997, the Government of Poland notified in the guise of a reservation made on the occasion of the the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its ratification of the above Treaty, the Government of Israel wishes reservation with regard to article 22 of the Convention made to refer to its objection circulated by the Secretary-General in his upon ratification. For the text of the reservation see United letter [. . .] and to maintain that objection."; on 12 February 1973 Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 660, p. 195. in respect of the declaration made by the Government of the

People's Democratic Republic of Yemen upon accession; on 25 26 On 19 August 1998, the Government of Romania notified September 1974 in respect of the declaration made by the United the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its Arab Emirates upon accession and on 25 June 1990 in rthe reservation made with regard to article 22 of the Convention reservation made by Bahrain upon accession. made upon accession. For the text of the reservation, see United

Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 763, p. 362. 17 In communications received on 8 March, 19 and 20 April

1989, the Governments of the Union of Soviet Socialist 27 In a communication received in 15 December 2008, the Republics, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Government of Rwanda notified the Secretary-General of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, respectively, notified the withdrawal of the reservation made upon accession to the Secretary-General that they had decided to withdraw the Convention. The text of the reservation reads as follows: reservations relating to article 22. For the texts of the reservations, see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 676, p. The Rwandese Republic does not consider itself as bound by 397, vol. 81, p. 392 and vol.77, p. 435. article 22 of the Convention.

18 On 24 June 1992, the Government of Bulgaria notified the 28 On 22 October 1999, the Government of Spain informed Secretary-General its decision to withdraw the reservation to the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its article 22 made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification. reservation in respect of article XXII made upon accession. For For the text of the reservation, see United Nations, Treaty the texte of the reservation, see United Nations, Treaty Series , Series , vol. 60, p. 270. vol. 660, p. 316.

19 None of the States concerned having objected to the 29 By a notification received on 28 October 1977, the reservation by the end of a period of ninety days after the date Government of Tonga informed the Secretary-General that it has when it was circulated by the Secretary-General, the said decided to withdraw only those reservations made upon reservation is deemed to have been permitted in accordance with accession relating to article 5 (c) in so far as it relates to the provisions of article 20 (1). elections, and reservations relating to articles 2, 3 and 5 (e) (v),

20 in so far as these articles relate to education and training. For the In a notification received on 18 January 1980, the text of the original reservation see United Nations, Treaty Government of Egypt informed the Secretary-General that it had Series , vol. 829, p. 371. decided to withdraw the declaration it had made in respect of

Israel. For the text of the declaration see United Nations, Treaty 30 The first ten declarations recognizing the competence of Series , vol. 60, p. 318. The notification indicates 25 January the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination took 1980 as the effective date of the withdrawal. effect on 3 December 1982, date of the deposit of the tenth

21 declaration, according to article 14, paragraph 1 of the In a communication received subsequently, the Convention. Government of France indicated that the first paragraph of the

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 24