The presiding body of the Revolutionary Council of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan declares that the provisions of paragraphs 1 and 3 of article 48 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and provisions of paragraphs 1 and 3 of article 26 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, according to which some countries cannot join the aforesaid Covenants, contradicts the International character of the aforesaid Treaties. Therefore, according to the equal rights of all States to sovereignty, both Covenants should be left open for the purpose of the participation of all States.
1. The Algerian Government interprets article 1, which is common to the two Covenants, as in no case impairing the inalienable right of all peoples to self-determination and to control over their natural wealth and resources.
It further considers that the maintenance of the State of dependence of certain territories referred to in article 1, paragraph 3, of the two Covenants and in article 14 of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations, to the Charter of the Organization and to the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples [General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV)].
2. The Algerian Government interprets the provisions of article 8 of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and article 22 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as making the law the framework for action by the State with respect to the organization and exercise of the right to organize.
3. The Algerian Government considers that the provisions of article 13, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights can in no case impair its right freely to organize its educational system.
4. The Algerian Government interprets the provisions of article 23, paragraph 4, of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights regarding the rights and responsibilities of spouses as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution as in no way impairing the essential foundations of the Algerian legal system.
"Article 1:
It is the understanding of the Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh that the words "the right of self-determination of Peoples" appearing in this article apply in the historical context of colonial rule, administration, foreign domination, occupation and similar situations.
Articles 2 and 3:
The Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh will implement articles 2 and 3 in so far as they relate to equality between man and woman, in accordance with the relevant provisions of its Constitution and in particular, in respect to certain aspects of economic rights viz. law of inheritance.
Articles 7 and 8:
The Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh will apply articles 7 and 8 under the conditions and in conformity with the procedures established in the Constitution and the relevant legislation of Bangladesh.
Articles 10 and 13:
While the Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh accepts the provisions embodied in articles 10 and 13 of the Covenant in principle, it will implement the said provisions in a progressive manner, in keeping with the existing economic conditions and the development plans of the country."
"(a) The application of sub-paragraph (a) (1) of article 7 of the Covenant in so far as it concerns the provision of equal pay to men and women for equal work;
"(b) The application of article 10 (2) in so far as it relates to the special protection to be accorded mothers during a reasonable period during and after childbirth; and
"(c) The application of article 13 (2) (a) of the Covenant, in so far as it relates to primary education; since, while the Barbados Government fully accepts the principles embodied in the same articles and undertakes to take the necessary steps to apply them in their entirety, the problems of implementation are such that full application of the principles in question cannot be guaranteed at this stage."
1. With respect to article 2, paragraph 2, the Belgian Government interprets non-discrimination as to national origin as not necessarily implying an obligation on States automatically to guarantee to foreigners the same rights as to their nationals. The term should be understood to refer to the elimination of any arbitrary behaviour but not of differences in treatment based on objective and reasonable considerations, in conformity with the principles prevailing in democratic societies.
2. With respect to article 2, paragraph 3, the Belgian Government understands that this provision cannot infringe the principle of fair compensation in the event of expropriation or nationalization.
The signature that the Taiwan authorities affixed, by usurping the name of "China", to the [said Covenant] on 5 October 1967, is illegal and null and void.
Statement made upon ratification:
In accordance with the Decision made by the Standing Committee of the Ninth National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China at its Twentieth Session, the President of the People's Republic of China hereby ratifies The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which was signed by Mr. Qin Huasun on behalf of the People's Republic of China on 27 October 1997, and declares the following:
1. The application of Article 8.1 (a) of the Covenant to the People's Republic of China shall be consistent with the relevant provisions of the Constitution of the People's Republic of China, Trade Union Law of the People's Republic of China and Labor Law of the People's Republic of China;
2. In accordance with the official notes addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations by the Permanent Representative of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations on 20 June 1997 and 2 December 1999 respectively, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights shall be applicable to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China and the Macao Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China and shall, pursuant to the provisions of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China and the Basic Law of the Macao Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China , be implemented through the respective laws of the two special administrative regions.
... Taking into consideration the provisions of the Islamic Sharia and the fact that they do not conflict with the text annexed to the instrument, we accept, support and ratifiy it ... .
(1) The Government of the Republic considers that, in accordance with Article 103 of the Charter of the United Nations, in case of conflict between its obligations under the Covenant and its obligations under the Charter (especially Articles 1 and 2 thereof), its obligations under the Charter will prevail.
(2) The Government of the Republic declares that articles 6, 9, 11 and 13 are not to be interpreted as derogating from provisions governing the access of aliens to employment or as establishing residence requirements for the allocation of certain social benefits.
(3) The Government of the Republic declares that it will implement the provisions of article 8 in respect of the right to strike in conformity with article 6, paragraph 4, of the European Social Charter according to the interpretation thereof given in the annex to that Charter.
The Government of the Republic of Guinea likewise considers that article 1, paragraph 3, and the provisions of article 14 of that instrument are contrary to the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, in general, and United Nations resolutions on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples, in particular.
The above provisions are contrary to the Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States contained in General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV), pursuant to which every State has the duty to promote realization of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples in order to put an end to colonialism.
"The Government of the Hungarian People's Republic declares that paragraph 1 of article 26 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and paragraph 1 of article 48 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights according to which certain States may not become signatories to the said Covenants are of a discriminatory nature and are contrary to the basic principle of international law that all States are entitled to become signatories to general multilateral treaties. These discriminatory provisions are incompatible with the objectives and purposes of the Covenants."
Upon ratification:
"The Presidential Council of the Hungarian People's Republic declares that the provisions of article 48, paragraphs 1 and 3, of [...] the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and article 26, paragraphs 1 and 3, of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights are inconsistent with the universal character of the Covenants. It follows from the principle of sovereign equality of States that the Covenants should be open for participation by all States without any discrimination or limitation."
"I. With reference to article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India declares that the words `the right of self-determination' appearing in [this article] apply only to the peoples under foreign domination and that these words do not apply to sovereign independent States or to a section of a people or nation--which is the essence of national integrity.
"II. With reference to article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India takes the position that the provisions of the article shall be so applied as to be in consonance with the provisions of clauses (3) to (7) of article 22 of the Constitution of India. Further under the Indian Legal System, there is no enforceable right to compensation for persons claiming to be victims of unlawful arrest or detention against the State.
"III. With respect to article 13 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India reserves its right to apply its law relating to foreigners.
"IV. With reference to articles 4 and 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Government of the Republic of India declares that the provisions of the said [article] shall be so applied as to be in conformity with the provisions of article 19 of the Constitution of India.
"V. With reference to article 7 (c) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Government of the Republic of India declares that the provisions of the said article shall be so applied as to be in conformity with the provisions of article 16(4) of the Constitution of India."
"The entry of the Republic of Iraq as a party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights shall in no way signify recognition of Israel nor shall it entail any obligation towards Israel under the said two Covenants."
"The entry of the Republic of Iraq as a party to the above two Covenants shall not constitute entry by it as a party to the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights."
Upon ratification:
"Ratification by Iraq ... shall in no way signify recognition of Israel nor shall it be conducive to entry with her into such dealings as are regulated by the said [Covenant]."
"Article 2, paragraph 2
In the context of Government policy to foster, promote and encourage the use of the Irish language by all appropriate means, Ireland reserves the right to require, or give favourable consideration to, a knowledge of the Irish language for certain occupations.
Article 13, paragraph 2 (a)
Ireland recognises the inalienable right and duty of parents to provide for the education of children, and, while recognising the State's obligations to provide for free primary education and requiring that children receive a certain minimum education, nevertheless reserves the right to allow parents to provide for the education of their children in their homes provided that these minimum standards are observed."
"1. In applying the provisions of paragraph (d) of article 7 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Japan reserves the right not be bound by 'remuneration for public holidays' referred to in the said provisions.
"2. Japan reserves the right not to be bound by the provisions of sub-paragraph (d) of paragraph 1 of article 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, except in relation to the sectors in which the right referred to in the said provisions is accorded in accordance with the laws and regulations of Japan at the time of ratification of the Covenant by the Government of Japan.
"3. In applying the provisions of sub-paragraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 of article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Japan reserves the right not to be bound by `in particular by the progressive introduction of free education' referred to in the said provisions.
"4. Recalling the position taken by the Government of Japan, when ratifying the Convention (No. 87) concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, that `the police' referred to in article 9 of the said Convention be interpreted to include the fire service of Japan, the Government of Japan declares that `members of the police' referred to in paragraph 2 of article 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as well as in paragraph 2 of article 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights be interpreted to include fire service personnel of Japan."
Although the Government of Kuwait endorses the worthy principles embodied in article 2, paragraph 2, and article 3 as consistent with the provisions of the Kuwait Constitution in general and of its article 29 in particular, it declares that the rights to which the articles refer must be exercised within the limits set by Kuwaiti law.
Interpretative declaration regarding article 9:
The Government of Kuwait declares that while Kuwaiti legislation safeguards the rights of all Kuwaiti and non-Kuwaiti workers, social security provisions apply only to Kuwaitis.
Reservation concerning article 8, paragraph 1 (d):
The Government of Kuwait reserves the right not to apply the provisions of article 8, paragraph 1 (d).
The Government of Mexico accedes to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights with the understanding that article 8 of the Covenant shall be applied in the Mexican Republic under the conditions and in conformity with the procedure established in the applicable provisions of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States and the relevant implementing legislation.
The Princely Government declares that it interprets the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of national origin, embodied in article 2, paragraph 2, as not necessarily implying an automatic obligation on the part of States to guarantee foreigners the same rights as their nationals.
The Princely Government declares that articles 6, 9, 11 and 13 should not be constituting an impediment to provisions governing access to work by foreigners or fixing conditions of residence for the granting of certain social benefits.
The Princely Government declares that it considers article 8, paragraph 1, subparagraphs (a), (b) and (c) on the exercise of trade union rights to be compatible with the appropriate legislative provisions regarding the formalities, conditions and procedures designed to ensure effective trade union representation and to promote harmonious labour relations.
The Princely Government declares that in implementing the provisions of article 8 relating to the exercise of the right to strike, it will take into account the requirements, conditions, limitations and restrictions which are prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in order to guarantee the rights and freedoms of others or to protect public order (ordre public), national security, public health or morals.
Article 8, paragraph 2, should be interpreted as applying to the members of the police force and agents of the State, the Commune and public enterprises.
The Mongolian People's Republic declares that the provisions of paragraph 1 of article 26 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and of paragraph 1 of article 48 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, under which a number of States cannot become parties to these Covenants, are of a discriminatory nature and considers that the Covenants, in accordance with the principle of sovereign equality of States, should be open for participation by all States concerned without any discrimination or limitation.
"The Kingdom of the Netherlands does not accept this provision in the case of the Netherlands Antilles with regard to the latter's central and local government bodies." [The Kingdom of the Netherlands] clarify that although it is not certain whether the reservation [...] is necessary, [it] has preferred the form of a reservation to that of a declaration. In this way the Kingdom of the Netherlands wishes to ensure that the relevant obligation under the Covenant does not apply to the Kingdom as far as the Netherlands Antilles is concerned."
"The Government of New Zealand reserves the right to postpone, in the economic circumstances foreseeable at the present time, the implementation of article 10 (2) as it relates to paid maternity leave or leave with adequate social security benefits."
The Government of the Socialist Republic of Romania declares that the provisions of article 26, paragraph 1, of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights are at variance with the principle that all States have the right to become parties to multilateral treaties governing matters of general interest.
Upon ratification:
(a) The State Council of the Socialist Republic of Romania considers that the provisions of article 26 (1) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights are inconsistent with the principle that multilateral international treaties whose purposes concern the international community as a whole must be open to universal participation.
(b) The State Council of the Socialist Republic of Romania considers that the maintenance in a state of dependence of certain territories referred to in articles 1 (3) and 14 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations and the instruments adopted by the Organization on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples, including the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, adopted unanimously by the United Nations General Assembly in its resolution 2625 (XXV) of 1970, which solemnly proclaims the duty of States to promote the realization of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples in order to bring a speedy end to colonialism.
The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics declares that the provisions of paragraph 1 of article 26 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and of paragraph 1 of article 48 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, under which a number of States cannot become parties to these Covenants, are of a discriminatory nature and considers that the Covenants, in accordance with the principle of sovereign equality of States, should be open for participation by all States concerned without any discrimination or limitation.
2. The Syrian Arab Republic considers that paragraph 1 of article 26 of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and paragraph 1 of article 48 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights are incompatible with the purposes and objectives of the said Covenants, inasmuch as they do not allow all States, without distinction or discrimination, the opportunity to become parties to the said Covenants.
"The Government of the Kingdom of Thailand declares that the term "self-determination"as appears in Article 1 Paragraph 1 of the Covenant shall be interpreted as being compatible with that expressed in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, adopted by the World Conference on Human Rights on 25 June 1993."
"The Government of Trinidad and Tobago reserves the right to impose lawful and or reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the aforementioned rights by personnel engaged in essential services under the Industrial Relations Act or under any Statute replacing same which has been passed in accordance with the provisions of the Trinidad and Tobago Constitution.
The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic declares that the provisions of paragraph 1 of article 26 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and of paragraph 1 of article 48 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, under which a number of States cannot become parties to these Covenants, are of a discriminatory nature and considers that the Covenants, in accordance with the principle of sovereign equality of States, should be open for participation by all States concerned without any discrimination or limitation.
"First, the Government of the United Kingdom declare their understanding that, by virtue of article 103 of the Charter of the United Nations, in the event of any conflict between their obligations under article 1 of the Covenant and their obligations under the Charter (in particular, under articles 1, 2 and 73 thereof) their obligations under the Charter shall prevail.
"Secondly, the Government of the United Kingdom declare that they must reserve the right to postpone the application of sub-paragraph (a) (i) of article 7 of the Covenant in so far as it concerns the provision of equal pay to men and women for equal work, since, while they fully accept this principle and are pledged to work towards its complete application at the earliest possible time, the problems of implementation are such that complete application cannot be guaranteed at present.
"Thirdly, the Government of the United Kingdom declare that, in relation to article 8 of the Covenant, they must reserve the right not to apply sub-paragraph (b) of paragraph 1 in Hong Kong, in so far as it may involve the right of trade unions not engaged in the same trade or industry to establish federations or confederations.
"Lastly, the Government of the United Kingdom declare that the provisions of the Covenant shall not apply to Southern Rhodesia unless and until they inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations that they are in a position to ensure that the obligations imposed by the Covenant in respect of that territory can be fully implemented."
Upon ratification:
"Firstly, the Government of the United Kingdom maintain their declaration in respect of article 1 made at the time of signature of the Covenant.
"The Government of the United Kingdom declare that for the purposes of article 2 (3) the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, the Gilbert Islands, the Pitcairn Islands Group, St. Helena and Dependencies, the Turks and Caicos Islands and Tuvalu are developing countries.
"The Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right to interpret article 6 as not precluding the imposition of restrictions, based on place of birth or residence qualifications, on the taking of employment in any particular region or territory for the purpose of safeguarding the employment opportunities of workers in that region or territory.
"The Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right to postpone the application of sub-paragraph (i) of paragraph (a) of article 7, in so far as it concerns the provision of equal pay to men and women for equal work in the private sector in Jersey, Guernsey, the Isle of Man, Bermuda, Hong Kong and the Solomon Islands.
"The Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right not to apply sub-paragraph 1(b) of article 8 in Hong Kong.
"The Government of the United Kingdom while recognising the right of everyone to social security in accordance with article 9 reserve the right to postpone implementation of the right in the Cayman Islands and the Falkland Islands because of shortage of resources in these territories.
"The Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right to postpone the application of paragraph 1 of article 10 in regard to a small number of customary marriages in the Solomon Islands and the application of paragraph 2 of article 10 in so far as it concerns paid maternity leave in Bermuda and the Falkland Islands.
"The Government of the United Kingdom maintain the right to postpone the application of sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph 2 of article 13, and article 14, in so far as they require compulsory primary education, in the Gilbert Islands, the Solomon Islands and Tuvalu.
"Lastly the Government of the United Kingdom declare that the provisions of the Covenant shall not apply to Southern Rhodesia unless and until they inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations that they are in a position to ensure that the obligations imposed by the Covenant in respect of that territory can be fully implemented."
That the provisions of article 48, paragraph 1, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and article 26, paragraph 1, of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, under which a number of States are deprived of the opportunity to become parties to the Covenants, are of a discriminatory nature. The Government of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam considers that the Covenants, in accordance with the principle of sovereign equality of States, should be open for participation by all States without any discrimination or limitation.
The Government of the Republic of Zambia states that it reserves the right to postpone the application of article 13 (2) (a) of the Covenant, in so far as it relates to primary education; since, while the Government of the Republic of Zambia fully accepts the principles embodied in the same article and undertakes to take the necessary steps to apply them in their entirety, the problems of implementation, and particularly the financial implications, are such that full application of the principles in question cannot be guaranteed at this stage.
With regard to the declarations and the reservation made by Kuwait :
"The Government of Finland notes that according to the interpretative declaration regarding article 2, paragraph 2, and article 3 the application of these articles of the Covenant is in a general way subjected to national law. The Government of Finland considers this interpretative declaration as a reservation of a general kind. The Government of Finland is of the view that such a general reservation raises doubts as to the commitment of Kuwait to the object and purpose of the Covenant and would recall that a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant shall not be permitted.
The Government of Finland also considers the interpretative declaration to article 9 as a reservation and regards this reservation as well as the reservation to article 8, paragraph 1(d), as problematic in view of the object and purpose of the Covenant.
It is in the common interests of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties are respected, as to their object and purpose, by all parties and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations under the treaties.
The Government of Finland is further of the view that general reservations of the kind made by the Government of Kuwait, which do not clearly specify the extent of the derogation from the provisions of the Covenant, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law.
The Government of Finland therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the Government of Kuwait to the [said Covenant].
This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between Kuwait and Finland."
13 December 1999
With regard to the declarations to Articles 2, 3, 7, 8, 10 and 13 made by Bangladesh upon accession:
"The Government of Finland has examined the contents of the declarations made by the Government of Bangladesh to Articles 2, 3, 7, 8, 10 and 13 and notes that the declarations constitute reservations as they seem to modify the obligations of Bangladesh under the said articles.
A reservation which consists of a general reference to national law without specifying its contents does not clearly define for the other Parties of the Convention the extent to which the reserving state commits itself to the Convention and therefore may raise doubts as to the commitment of the reserving state to fulfil its obligations under the Convention. Such a reservation is also, in the view of the Government of Finland, subject to the general principle of treaty interpretation according to which a party may not invoke the provisions of its domestic law as justification for a failure to perform its treaty obligations.
Therefore the Government of Finland objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the Government of Bangladesh. This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Bangladesh and Finland. The Convention will thus become operative between the two States without Bangladesh benefitting from these reservations".
30 September 1999
With regard to the declarations made by Bangladesh upon accession:
The Government of France notes that the 'declarations' made by Bangladesh in fact constitute reservations since they are aimed at precluding or modifying the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty. With regard to the declaration concerning article 1, the reservation places on the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination conditions not provided for in the Charter of the United Nations. The declarations concerning articles 2 and 3 and articles 7 and 8, which render the rights recognized by the Covenant in respect of individuals subordinate to domestic law, are of a general nature and undermine the objective and purpose of the treaty. In particular, the country's economic conditions and development prospects should not affect the freedom of consent of intended spouses to enter into marriage, non-discrimination for reasons of parentage or other conditions in the implementation of special measures of protection and assistance on behalf of children and young persons, or the freedom of parents or legal guardians to choose schools for their children. Economic difficulties or problems of development cannot free a State party entirely from its obligations under the Covenant. In this regard, in compliance with article 10, paragraph 3, of the Covenant, Bangladesh must adopt special measures to protect children and young persons from economic and social exploitation, and the law must punish their employment in work harmful to their morals or health and should also set age limits below which the paid employment of child labour should be prohibited. Consequently, the Government of France lodges an objection to the reservations of a general scope mentioned above. This objection does not prevent the entry into force of the Covenant between Bangladesh and France.
"The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany strongly objects, ... to the declaration made by the Republic of India in respect of article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and of article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
"The right of self-determination as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and as embodied in the Covenants applies to all peoples and not only to those under foreign domination. All peoples, therefore, have the inalienable right freely to determine their political status and freely to pursue their economic, social and cultural development. The Federal Government cannot consider as valid any interpretation of the right of self-determination which is contrary to the clear language of the provisions in question. It moreover considers that any limitation of their applicability to all nations is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenants."
10 July 1997
With regard to the declarations and the reservation made by Kuwait :
"The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany notes that article 2 (2) and article 3 have been made subject to the general reservation of national law. It is of the view that these general reservations may raise doubts as to the commitment of Kuwait to the object and purpose of the Covenant.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany regards the reservation concerning article 8 (1) (d), in which the Government of Kuwait reserves the right not to apply the right to strike expressly stated in the Covenant, as well as the interpretative declaration regarding article 9, according to which the right to social security would only apply to Kuwaitis, as being problematic in view of the object and purpose of the Covenant. It particularly feels that the declaration regarding article 9, as a result of which the many foreigners working on Kuwaiti territory would, on principle, be totally excluded from social security protection, cannot be based on article 2 (3) of the Covenant.
It is in the common interest of all parties that a treaty should be respected, as to its object and purpose, by all parties.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany therefore objects to the [said] general reservations and interpretative declarations.
This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between Kuwait and the Federal Republic of Germany."
With regard to the declarations and the reservation made by Kuwait :
"The Government of Italy considers these reservations to be contrary to the object and the purpose of this International Covenant. The Government of Italy notes that the said reservations include a reservation of a general kind in respect of the provisions on the internal law.
The Government of Italy therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the Government of Kuwait to the [said Covenant].
This objection does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the Covenant between the State of Kuwait and the Italian Republic."
"The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands objects to the declaration made by the Government of the Republic of India in relation to article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, since the right of self determination as embodied in the Covenants is conferred upon all peoples. This follows not only from the very language of article 1 common to the two Covenants but as well from the most authoritative statement of the law concerned, i.e., the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. Any attempt to limit the scope of this right or to attach conditions not provided for in the relevant instruments would undermine the concept of self-determination itself and would thereby seriously weaken its universally acceptable character."
18 March 1991
With regard to the interpretative declaration made by Algeria concerning article 13, paragraphs 3 and 4:
"In the opinion of the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the interpretative declaration concerning article 13, paragraphs 3 and 4 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights must be regarded as a reservation to the Covenant. From the text and history of the Covenant it follows that the reservation with respect to article 13, paragraphs 3 and 4 made by the Government of Algeria is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant. The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore considers the reservation unacceptable and formally raises an objection to it.
[This objection is] not an obstacle to the entry into force of [the Covenant] between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Algeria."
22 July 1997
With regard to the declarations and the reservation made by Kuwait :
[Same objection identical in essence, mutatis mutandis, as the one made for Algeria.]
With regard to the declarations and the reservation made by Kuwait :
"In the view of the Government of Norway, a statement by which a State Party purports to limit its responsibilities by invoking general principles of internal law may create doubts about the commitment of the reserving State to the objective and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law. Under well-established treaty law, a State is not permitted to invoke internal law as justification for its failure to perform its treaty obligations. Furthermore, the Government of Norway finds the reservations made to article 8, paragraph 1 (d) and article 9 as being problematic in view of the object and purpose of the Covenant. For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to the said reservations made by the Government of Kuwait.
The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Kingdom of Norway and the State of Kuwait.
"The Government of Portugal hereby presents its formal objection to the interpretative declarations made by the Government of Algeria upon ratification of the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Government of Portugal having examined the contents of the said declarations reached the conclusion that they can be regarded as reservations and therefore should be considered invalid as well as incompatible with the purposes and object of the Covenants.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenants between Portugal and Algeria."
With regard to the declarations and the reservation made by Kuwait :
"[The Government of Sweden] is of the view that these general reservations may raise doubts as to the commitment of Kuwait to the object and purpose of the Covenant.
The Government of Sweden regards the reservation concerning article 8 (1) (d), in which the Government of Kuwait reserves the right not to apply the right to strike expressly stated in the Covenant, as well as the interpretative declaration regarding article 9, according to which the right to social security would only apply to Kuwaitis, as being problematic in view of the object and purpose of the Covenant. It particularly considers the declaration regarding article 9, as a result of which the many foreigners working on Kuwaiti territory would, in principle, be totally excluded from social security protection, cannot be based on article 2 (3) of the Covenant.
It is in the common interest of all parties that a treaty should be respected, as to its object and purpose, by all parties.
The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the above-mentioned general reservations and interpretative declarations.
This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between Kuwait and Sweden in its entirety."
14 December 1999
With regard to the declarations made by Bangladesh upon accession:
"In this context the Government of Sweden would like to recall, that under well-established international treaty law, the name assigned to a statement whereby the legal effect of certain provisions of a treaty is excluded or modified, does not determine its status as a reservation to the treaty. Thus, the Government of Sweden considers that the declarations made by the Government of Bangladesh, in the absence of further clarification, in substance constitute reservations to the Covenant.
The declaration concerning article 1 places on the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination conditions not provided for in international law. To attach such conditions could undermine the concept of self-determination itself and would thereby seriously weaken its universally acceptable character.
Furthermore, the Government of Sweden notes that the declaration relating to articles 2 and 3 as well as 7 and 8 respectively, imply that these articles of the Covenant are being made subject to a general reservation referring to relevant provisions of the domestic laws of Bangladesh.
Consequently, the Government of Sweden is of the view that, in the absence of further clarification, these declarations raise doubts as to the commitment of Bangladesh to the object and purpose of the Covenant and would recall that, according to well-established international law, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted.
It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties are respected, as to their object and purpose, by all parties and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations under these treaties.
The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the aforesaid general reservations made by the Government of Bangladesh to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between Bangladesh and Sweden. The Covenant will thus become operative between the two States without Bangladesh benefiting from the declarations".
| Participant | Date of receipt of the notification | Territories |
| Netherlands19,.. . . . . . . . | 11 Dec 1978 | Netherlands Antilles |
| Portugal20,. . . . . . . . . . .. | 27 Apr 1993 | Macau |
| United Kingdom21,22,. | 20 May 1976 | Bailiwick of Guernsey, the Bailiwick of Jersey, the Isle of Man, Belize, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, the Falkland Islands and Dependencies, Gibraltar, the Gilbert Islands, Hong Kong, Montserrat, the Pitcairn Group, St. Helena and Dependencies, the Solomon Islands, the Turks and Caicos Islands and Tuvalu |
|
|
1. The thirty-fifth instrument
of ratification or accession was deposited with the Secretary-General on
3 October 1975. The Contracting States did not object to having those instruments
accompanied with reservations taken into account under article 27 (1) for
the purpose of determining the date of general entry into force of the
Covenant.
2. The former Yugoslavia had
signed and ratified the Convenant on 8 August 1967 and 2 June 1971, respectively.
See also notes 1 regarding "Bosnia and Herzegovina", "Croatia", "former
Yugoslavia", "Slovenia", "The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" and
"Yugoslavia" in the "Historical Information" section in the front matter
of this volume.
3. The signature was effected by Democratic Kampuchea. In this regard the Secretary-General received, on 5 November 1980, the following communication from the Government of Mongolia:
"The Government of the Mongolian People's Republic considers that only the People's Revolutionary Council of Kampuchea as the sole authentic and lawful representative of the Kampuchean people has the right to assume international obligations on behalf of the Kampuchean people. Therefore the Government of the Mongolian People's Republic considers that the signature of the Human Rights Covenants by the representative of the so-called Democratic Kampuchea, a régime that ceased to exist as a result of the people's revolution in Kampuchea, is null and void.
"The signing of the Human Rights Covenants by an individual, whose régime during its short period of reign in Kampuchea had exterminated about 3 million people and had thus grossly violated the elementary norms of human rights, each and every provision of the Human Rights Covenants is a regrettable precedence, which discredits the noble aims and lofty principles of the United Nations Charter, the very spirit of the above-mentioned Covenants, gravely impairs the prestige of the United Nations."
Thereafter, similar communications were received from the Government of the following States on the dates indicated and their texts were circulated as depositary notifications or, at the request of the States concerned, as official documents of the General Assembly (A/33/781 and A/35/784):
| State | Date of receipt | |
| German Democratic Republic* | 11 Dec 1980 | |
| Poland | 12 Dec 1980 | |
| Ukraine | 16 Dec 1980 | |
| Hungary | 19 Jan 1981 | |
| Bulgaria | 29 Jan 1981 | |
| Belarus | 18 Feb 1981 | |
| Russian Federation | 18 Feb 1981 | |
| Czechoslovakia** | 10 Mar 1981 | |
| *See note 8. | ||
| **See note 7. | ||
4. Although Democratic Kampuchea
had signed both [the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Political
Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights] on
17 October 1980 (see note 2), the Government of Cambodia deposited an instrument
of accession to the said Covenants.
5. Signed on behalf of the Republic of China on 5 October 1967. See note concerning signatures, ratifications, accessions, etc., on behalf of China (note 5 in chapter I.1).
With reference to the above-mentioned signature, communications have been addressed to the Secretary-General by the Permanent Representatives of Permanent Missions to the United Nations of Bulgaria, Byelorussian SSR, Czechoslovakia, Mongolia, Romania, the Ukrainian SSR, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Yugoslavia, stating that their Governments did not recognize the said signature as valid since the only Government authorized to represent China and to assume obligations on its behalf was the Government of the People's Republic of China.
In letters addressed to the Secretary-General in regard
to the above-mentioned communications, the Permanent Representative of
China to the United Nations stated that the Republic of China, a sovereign
State and Member of the United Nations, had attended the twenty-first regular
session of the General Assembly of the United Nations and contributed to
the formulation of, and signed the Covenants and the Optional Protocol
concerned, and that "any statements or reservations relating to the above-mentioned
Covenants and Optional Protocol that are incompatible with or derogatory
to the legitimate position of the Government of the Republic of China shall
in no way affect the rights and obligations of the Republic of China under
these Covenants and Optional Protocol".
6. On 20 April 2001, the Secretary-General received from the Government of China the following communication:
1. Article 6 of the Covenant does not preclude the formulation of regulations by the HKSAR for employment restrictions, based on place of birth or residence qualifications, for the purpose of safeguarding the employment opportunities of local workers in the HKSAR
2. "National federations or confederations" in Article
8.1(b) of the Covenant shall be interpreted, in this case, as "federations
or confederations in the HKSAR", and this Article does not imply the right
of trade union federations or confederations to form or join political
organizations or bodies established outside the HKSAR.
7. Czechoslovakia had signed
and ratified the Covenant on 7 October 1968 and 23 December 1975, respectively,
with declarations. For the text of the declarations, see United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 993, pp.78 and 85. See also note 3 and note 12 in chapter
I.2.
8. The German Democratic Republic
had signed and ratified the Convention with reservations on 27 March 1973
and 8 November 1973, respectively. For the text of the reservations, see
United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 993. p. 83. See also note 15 in chapter
I.2.
9. With the following declaration: "... The said Covenant shall also apply to Berlin (West) with effect from the date on which it enters into force for the Federal Republic of Germany except as far as Allied rights and responsibilities are affected."
In this connection, the Secretary-General received on 5 July 1974, a communication from the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics which states in part as follows:
By reason of their material content, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 19 December 1966 directly affect matters of security and status. With this in mind the Soviet Union considers the statement made by the Federal Republic of Germany concerning the extension of the operation of these Covenants to Berlin (West) to be illegal and to have no force in law, since, under the Quadripartite Agreement of 3 September 1971, the treaty obligations of the Federal Republic of Germany affecting matters of security and status may not be extended to the Western Sectors of Berlin.
Communications identical in essence, mutatis mutandis, were re- ceived from the Governments of the German Democratic Republic (12 August 1974) and of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (16 August 1974).
In this regard, the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States of America, in a communication received on 5 November 1974, made the following declaration:
"The Governments of France, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America wish to bring to the attention of the States Parties to the Covenants that the extension of the Covenants to the Western Sectors of Berlin received the prior authorization, under established procedures, of the authorities of France, the United Kingdom and the United States on the basis of their supreme authority in those Sectors.
"The Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States wish to point out that the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the primary purpose of both of which is the protection of the rights of the individual, are not treaties which `by reason of their material content, directly affect matters of security and status'.
"As for the references to the Quadripartite Agreement of 3 September 1971 which are contained in the communication made by the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics referred to in the Legal Counsel's Note, the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States wish to point out that, in a communication to the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics which is an integral part (Annex IV A) of the Quadripartite Agreement, they reaffirmed that, provided that matters of security and status are not affected, international agreements and arrangements entered into by the Federal Republic of Germany may be extended to the Western Sectors of Berlin. For its part the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, in a communication to the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States which is similarly an integral part (Annex IV B) of the Quadripartite Agreement, affirmed that it would raise no objection to such extension.
"In authorizing the extension of the Covenants to the Western Sectors of Berlin, as mentioned above, the authorities of France, the United Kingdom and the United States took all necessary measures to ensure that the Covenants cannot be applied in the Western Sectors of Berlin in such a way as to affect matters of security and status. Accordingly, the application of the Covenants to the Western Sectors of Berlin continues in full force and effect."
In a communication received on 6 December 1974, the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany stated in part:
"By their note of 4 November 1974, circulated to all States Parties to either of the Covenants on 19 November 1974, the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States answered the assertions made in the communication of the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics referred to above. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany shares the position set out in the note of the Three Powers. The extension of the Covenants to Berlin (West) continues in full force and effect."
On the same subject, the Secretary-General received the following communications:
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (13 February1975):
The Soviet Union deems it essential to reassert its view that the extension by the Federal Republic of Germany of the operation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 19 December 1966 to Berlin (West) is illegal as stated in the note dated 4 July 1974 addressed to the Secretary-General (circulated on 5 August 1974).
France, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States of America (8 July 1975--in relation to the declarations by the German Democratic Republic and by the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic received on 12 and 16 August 1974, respectively):
"The communications mentioned in the notes listed above refer to the Quadripartite Agreement of 3 September 1971. This Agreement was concluded in Berlin between the Governments of the French Republic, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America. The Governments sending these communications are not parties to the Quadripartite Agreement and are therefore not competent to make authoritative comments on its provisions.
The Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States wish to bring the following to the attention of the States Parties to the instruments referred to in the above-mentioned communications. When authorising the extension of these instruments to the Western Sectors of Berlin, the authorities of the Three Powers, acting in the exercise of their supreme authority, ensured in accordance with established procedures that those instruments are applied in the Western Sectors of Berlin in such a way as not to affect matters of security and status.
Accordingly, the application of these instruments to the Western Sectors of Berlin continues in full force and effect.
The Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States do not consider it necessary to respond to any further communications of a similar nature by States which are not signatories to the Quadripartite Agreement. This should not be taken to imply any change in the position of those Governments in this matter."
Federal Republic of Germany (19 September 1975--in relation to the declarations by the German Democratic Republic and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic received on 12 and 16 August 1974, respectively):
"By their note of 8 July 1975, disseminated on 13 August 1975, the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States answered the assertions made in the communications referred to above. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany, on the basis of the legal situation set out in the Note of the Three Powers, wishes to confirm that the application in Berlin (West) of the above-mentioned instruments extended by it under the established procedures continues in full force and effect.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany wishes to point out that the absence of a response to further communications of a similar nature should not be taken to imply any change of its position in this matter."
See also note 8.
10. In a communication received
on 10 May 1982, the Government of Solomon Islands declared that Solomon
Islands maintains the reservations entered by the United Kingdom save in
so far as the same cannot apply to Solomon Islands.
11. The formality was effected
by the Yemen Arab Republic. See also note 35 in chapter I.2.
12. With respect to the interpretative declarations made by Algeria the Secretary-General received, on 25 October 1990, from the Government of Germany the following declaration:
[The Federal Republic of Germany] interprets the declaration under paragraph 2 to mean that the latter is not intended to eliminate the obligation of Algeria to ensure that the rights guaranteed in article 8, paragraph 1, of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and in article 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights may be restricted only for the reasons mentioned in the said articles and that such restrictions shall be prescribed by law.
It interprets the declaration under paragraph 4 to
mean that Algeria, by referring to its domestic legal system, does not
intend to restrict its obligation to ensure through appropriate steps equality
of rights and responsibilities of spouses as to marriage, during marriage
and at its dissolution.
13. In this regard, the Secretary-General received communications from the following Governments on the dates indicated hereinafter:
Germany (17 December 1999):
"The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany notes that the declaration concerning article 1 constitutes a reservation that places on the exercise of the right of all peoples to self-determination conditions not provided for in international law. To attach such conditions could undermine the concept of self-determination and seriously weaken its universally acceptable character.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany further notes that the declarations with regard to articles 2 and 3, 7 and 8, and 10 and 13 constitute reservations of a general nature in respect of provisions of the Covenant which may be contrary to the Constitution, legislation, economic conditions and development plans of Bangladesh.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is of the view that these general reservations raise doubts as to the full commitment of Bangladesh to the object and purpose of the Covenant. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become Parties are respected, as to their object and purpose, by all Parties and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations under these treaties.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany objects to the aforementioned reservations made by the Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Federal Republic of Germany and the People's Republic of Bangladesh".
Netherlands (20 December 1999):
"The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands has examined the declarations made by the Government of Bangladesh at the time of its accession to the International Covenant on economic, social and cultural rights and considers the declarations concerning Articles 1, 2 and 3, and 7 and 8 as reservations.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands objects to the reservation made by the Government of Bangladesh in relation to Article 1 of the said Covenant, since the right of self-determination as embodied in the Covenant is conferred upon all peoples. This follows not only from the very language of Article 1 of the Covenant but as well from the most authoritative statement of the law concerned, i.e. the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. Any attempt to limit the scope of this right or to attach conditions not provided for in the relevant instruments would undermine the concept of self-determination itself and would thereby seriously weaken its universally acceptable character.
Furthermore, the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands objects to the reservations made by the Government of Bangladesh in relation to Articles 2 and 3, and, 7 and 8 of the said Covenant.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that such reservations which seek to limit the responsibilities of the reserving State under the Covenant by invoking national law, may raise doubts as to the commitment of this State to the object and purpose of the Covenant and, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law.
It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties should be respected, as to object and purpose by all parties.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the Government of Bangladesh.
These objections shall not preclude the entry into
force of the Convention between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Bangladesh".
14. On 30 September 1992,
the Government of Belarus notified the Secretary-General its decision to
withdraw the reservation made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification.
For the text of the reservation, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
993, p. 78.
15. On 21 March 2001, the Government of the Congo informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation made upon accession which read as follows:
Reservation:
The Government of the People's Republic of the Congo declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 13, paragraphs 3 and 4 ...
Paragraphs 3 and 4 of article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights embody the principle of freedom of education by allowing parents the liberty to choose for their children schools other than those established by the public authorities. Those provisions also authorize individuals to establish and direct educational institutions.
In our country, such provisions are inconsistent with
the principle of nationalization of education and with the monopoly granted
to the State in that area.
16. In a communication received
on 14 January 1976, the Government of Denmark notified the Secretary-General
that it withdraws its reservation made prior with regard to article 7 (a)
(i) on equal pay for equal work.
17. In two communications received by the Secretary-General on 10 July 1969 and 23 March 1971 respectively, the Government of Israel declared that it "has noted the political character of the declaration made by the Government of Iraq on signing and ratifying the above Covenants. In the view of the Government of Israel, these two Covenants are not the proper place for making such political pronouncements. The Government of Israel will, in so far as concerns the substance of the matter, adopt towards the Government of Iraq an attitude of complete reciprocity.
Identical communications, mutatis mutandis, were received
by the Secretary-General from the Government of Israel on 9 July 1969 in
respect of the declaration made upon accession by the Government of Syria,
and on 29 June 1970 in respect of the declaration made upon accession by
the Government of Libya. In the latter communication, the Government of
Israel moreover stated that the declaration concerned "cannot in any way
affect the obligations of the Libyan Arab Republic already existing under
general international law".
18. Upon ratification, the
Government of Malta indicated that it had decided to withdraw its reservation
made upon signature to paragraph 2, article 10. For the text of the said
reservation, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 993, p. 80.
19. See note 9 in chapter
I.1.
20. In its notification of territorial application to Macau, the Government of Portugal stated the following:
... The Covenants are confirmed and proclaimed binding and valid, and they shall have effect and be implemented and observed without exception, bearing in mind that:
Article 1. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, ratified, respectively, by Act No. 29/78 of 12 June, and by Act No. 45/78 of 11 July, shall be applicable in the territory of Macau.
Article 2. 1. The applicability in Macau of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and in particular of article 1 in both Covenants, shall in no way effect the status of Macau as defined in the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic and in the Organic Statute of Macau.
2. The applicability of the Covenants in Macau shall in no way affect the provisions of the Joint Declaration of the Government of the Portuguese Republic and the Government of the People's Republic of China on the Question of Macau, signed on 13 April 1987, especially with respect to the provision specifying that Macau forms part of Chinese territory and that the Government of the People's Republic of China will resume the exercise of sovereignty over Macau with effect from 20 December 1999, and that Portugal will be responsible for the administration until 19 December 1999.
Article 3. Article 25 (b) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights shall not apply to Macau with respect to the composition of elected bodies and the method of choosing and electing their officials as defined in the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, the Organic Statute of Macau and provisions of the Joint Declaration on the Question of Macau.
Article 4. Article 12 (4) and article 13 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights shall not apply to Macau with respect to the entry and exit of individuals and the expulsion of foreigners from the territory. These matters shall continue to be regulated by the Organic Statute of Macau and other applicable legislation, and also by the Joint Declaration on the Question of Macau.
Article 5. 1. The provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights that are applicable to Macau shall be implemented in Macau, in particular through specific legal documents issued by the organs of government of the territory.
2. The restrictions of the fundamental rights in Macau shall be confined to those cases prescribed by law and shall not exceed the limits permitted by the applicable provisions of the aforementioned Covenants.
Subsequenty, the Secretary-General received the following communications:
Portugal (21 October 1999):
"In accordance with the Joint Declaration of the Government of the Portuguese Republic and the Government of the People's Republic of China on the Question of Macau signed on 13 April 1987, the Portuguese Republic will continue to have international responsibility for Macau until 19 December 1999 and from that date onwards the People's Republic of China will resume the exercise of sovereignty over Macau with effect from 20 December 1999.
From 20 December 1999 onwards the Portuguese Republic will cease to be responsible for the international rights and obligations arising from the application of the Convention to Macau."
China (3 December 1999):
In accordance with the Joint Declaration of the Government of the People's Republic of China and the Government of the Republic of Portugal on the Question of Macau signed on 13 April 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the Joint Declaration), the Government of the People's Republic of China will resume the exercise of sovereignty over Macau with effect from 20 December 1999. Macau will, from that date, become a Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China and will enjoy a high degree of autonomy, except in foreign and defense affairs which are the responsibilities of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China.
It is provided both in Section VIII of Elaboration by the Government of the People's Republic of China of its Basic Policies Regarding Macau, which is Annex 1 to the Joint Declaration, and Article 138 of the Basic Law of the Macau Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the Basic Law), which was adopted on 31 March 1993 by the National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China, that international agreements to which the People's Republic of China is not yet a party but which are implemented in Macau may continue to be implemented in the Macau Special Administrative Region.
In accordance with the above provisions, [the Government of the People's Republic of China informs the Secretary-General of the following:]
The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, adopted at New York on 16 December 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the "Covenant"), which applies to Macau at present, will continue to apply to the Macau Special Administrative Region with effect from 20 December 1999. The Government of the People's Republic of China also wishes to make the following declaration:
1. The application of the Covenant, and its article 1 in particular, to the Macau Special Administrative Region shall not affect the status of Macau as defined in the Joint Declaration and in the Basic Law.
2. The provisions of the Covenant which are applicable to the Macau Special Administrative Region shall be implemented in Macau through legislation of the Macau Special Administrative Region.
The residents of Macau shall not be restricted in the rights and freedoms that they are entitled to, unless otherwise provided for by law. In case of restrictions, they shall not contravene the provisions of the Covenant that are applicable to the Macau Special Administrative Region.
Within the above ambit, the Government of the People's
Republic of China will assume the responsibility for the international
rights and obligations that place on a Party to the Covenant.
21. On 3 October 1983 the Secretary-General received from the Government of Argentina the following objection:
[The Government of Argentina makes a] formal objection to the [declaration] of territorial extension issued by the United Kingdom with regard to the Malvinas Islands (and dependencies), which that country is illegally occupying and refers to as the "Falkland Islands".
The Argentine Republic rejects and considers null and void the [said declaration] of territorial extension.
With reference to the above-mentioned objection the Secretary-General received, on 28 February 1985, from the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland the following declaration:
[For the text of the declaration see note 28 in chapter IV.1.]
Upon ratification, the Government of Argentina made the following declaration with regard to the above-mentioned declaration made by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland:
The Argentine Republic rejects the extension, notified to the Secretary-General of the United Nations on 20 May 1976 by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, of the application of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 16 December 1966, to the Malvinas, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands, and reaffirms its sovereign rights to those archipelagos, which form an integral part of its national territory.
The General Assembly of the United Nations had adopted resol- utions 2065 (XX), 3160 (XXVIII), 31/49, 37/9, 38/12, 39/6 and 40/21 in which it recognizes the existence of a sovereignty dispute regarding the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) and urges the Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pursue negotiations in order to find as soon as possible a peaceful and definitive solution to the dispute, through the good offices of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall inform the General Assembly of the progress made."
With reference to the above-mentioned declaration by the Govern- ment of Argentina, the Secretary-General received, on 13 January 1988, from the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland the following communication:
"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland rejects the statements made by the Argentine Republic, regarding the Falkland Islands and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, when ratifying [the said Covenants and acceding to the said Protocol].
The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland has no doubt as to British sovereignty over the Falkland
Islands and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and its consequent
right to extend treaties to those territories."
22. With regard to the application of the Covenant to Hong Kong, on 10 June 1997, the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland notified the Secretary-General of the following:
[Same notification as the one made under note 5 in
chapter IV.1.]