Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972

PartiesTooltipParties with a link have a reservation.

Extensions

China

Portugal

United Kingdom

United States of America

Argentina

12-08-1986

[...] the Argentine Government rejects the extension made by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland of the application to the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands of the [...] Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972, as amended [...] and reaffrims the right of sovereignty of the Argentine Republic over those archipelagos which form part of its national territory.
The General Assembly of the United Nations has adopted resolutions 2065 (XX), 3160 (XXVIII), 31/49, 37/9, 38/12 and 39/6 which recognize the existence of a sovereignty dispute relating to the question of the Malvinas Islands, urging the Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom to resume negotiations in order to find, as sson as possible, a peaceful and definitive solution to the dispute through the good offices of the Secretary-General of the United Nations who is requested to inform the General Assembly on the progress made. Similarly, the General Assembly of the United Nations at its fortieth session adopted resolution 40/21 of 27 November 1985 which again urges both parties to resume the said negotiations.

Canada

07-03-1975

The Government of Canada considers that the provisions of rule 10, 'Traffic Separation Schemes', do not provide for compulsory use of the adopted schemes. The Government of Canada considers that the compulsory routeing of ships is necessary to avoid collisions between ships and the resulting damage to the marine environment.
The Government of Canada notes that there are no exceptions to rule 10(b) (c) and (h) for vessels engaged in fishing with nets, lines, trawls, trolling lines or other apparatus, or for vessels engaged in special operations such as survey, cable, buoy, pipeline or salvage operations, and that the exceptions in rule 10(e) are not broad enough to adequately provide for vessels engaged in special operations. The Government of Canada considers that the practical application of rule 10 would be complicated without realistic exceptions for fishing vessels and for vessels engaged in special operations.
The Government of Canada therefore does not consider that it is prohibited from providing for the compulsory use of traffic separation schemes or providing for such exceptions to rule 10(b), (c), (e) and (h).

Cuba

07-11-1983

The Government of the Republic of Cuba considers that the provisions of article II of the Convention, notwithstanding the fact that it deals with matters of interest for all States, are discriminatory in nature in that they withhold from a number of States the right of signature and accession, which is contrary to the principle of universality.
The Government of the Republic of Cuba considers that the application of the provisions contained in article III of the Convention is at variance with the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples contained in resolution 1514(XV) adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 14 December 1960, which proclaims the necessity of putting a speedy and unconditional end to colonialism in all its forms and manifestations.

Hungary

15-12-1976

The Presidential Council of the Hungarian People's Republic declares that article II, paragraph (2) of the Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea of 1972, which does not allow some States to become a Party to the Convention, is of discriminative nature. The Convention regulates such questions which concern all States and, therefore, under the principle of sovereign equality of States, it should be open for all States without any restriction and discrimination.
The Presidential Council of the Hungarian People's Republic also declares that article III of the Convention is at variance with the UN General Assembly's resolution No. 1514(XV) of 14 December 1960 on the granting of independence to the colonial countries and peoples, which declared the necessity of the unconditional elimination of all forms of colonialism.

Kuwait

04-06-1979

It is understood that the ratification of the State of Kuwait of the Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea and Regulations attached thereto done at London, on the 20th of October, 1972, does not in any way mean recognition of Israel by the State of Kuwait. Furthermore, no treaty relations will arise between the State of Kuwait and Israel.

Romania

27-03-1975

(a) The Council of State of the Socialist Republic of Romania considers that the provisions of rule 18(2) of the Convention are not in accord with the principle whereby international treaties, the objectives and aims of which are of concern to the international community as a whole, should be open to participation by all States.
(b) The Council of State of the Socialist Republic of Romania considers that the maintenance in a state of dependence of certain territories, to which the provisions of article III of the Convention refer, is not in accord with the Charter of the United Nations and the documents adopted by the United Nations concerning the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples, including the Declaration on the principles of international law affecting friendly relations and co-operation between States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, unanimously adopted by the UN General Assembly resolution 2625(XXV) of 1970, which solemnly proclaims the right of States to encourage achievement of the principle of the equality of rights of peoples and their right to take their own decisions, with a view to putting a swift end to colonialism.

Russian Federation

09-11-1973

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics declares that article II, paragraph 2, of the 1972 Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, under which certain States are precluded from becoming parties to that Convention, is of a discriminatory character, and considers that, in accordance with the principle of the sovereign equality of States, the Convention should be open to participation by all interested States without discrimination or restriction.
The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics also deems it necessary to declare that the provisions of article III of the 1972 Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, concerning the extension of its application to a territory for whose international relations a Contracting Party is responsible, are out-dated and contrary to the Declaration of the General Assembly of the United Nations on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples (resolution 1514(XV) of 14 December 1960), which proclaimed the necessity of bringing to a speedy and unconditional end colonialism in all its forms and manifestations.

Slovakia

30-01-1995

Slovakia considers itself bound by this treaty, including reservations and declarations made earlier by the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic:
[...] that the provision of article II, paragraph 2 of the Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea - COLREG (London 1972) prevents some States from becoming parties to the Convention. It is therefore of the opinion that the Convention should be opened to all the interested countries in keeping with the principle of equal sovereignty of States.
The Czechoslovak Socialist Republic deems it also necessary to declare that the provision of article III of the Convention, dealing with the extension of its validity to territories for whose international relations the party to the Convention is responsible, is at variance with the United Nations General Assembly Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (resolution 1514(XV) of 14 December 1960) which proclaimed the necessity of putting a speedy and unconditional end to colonialism in all its forms and manifestations.

Syria

16-02-1976

[...] the acceptance of the Syrian Arab Republic to the regulations stipulated in the said Convention and its ratification do not imply in any way the recognition in Israel and do not lead to its engagement with it in any dealings that may be regulated by the said Convention.