Print
Download XMLInternationaal Verdrag inzake de uitbanning van alle vormen van rassendiscriminatie
Partijen met voorbehouden, verklaringen en bezwaren
Afghanistan
06-07-1983
While acceding to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Racial Discrimination, the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan does not consider itself
bound by the provisions of article 22 of the Convention since according to this article,
in the event of disagreement between two or several States Parties to the Convention
on the interpretation and implementation of provisions of the Convention, the matters
could be referred to the International Court of Justice upon the request of only one
side.
The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, therefore, states that should any disagreement
emerge on the interpretation and implementation of the Convention, the matter will
be referred to the International Court of Justice only if all concerned parties agree
with that procedure.
Furthermore, the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan states that the provisions of
articles 17 and 18 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Racial Discrimination have a discriminatory nature against some states and therefore
are not in conformity with the principle of universality of international treaties.
Algerije
12-09-1989
The Algerian Government declares, pursuant to article 14 of the Convention, that it recognizes the competence of the Commit tee to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by it of any of the rights set forth in the Convention.
Andorra
22-09-2006
Pursuant to paragraph 1 of article 14 of the Convention, the Principality of Andorra declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals claiming to be victims of a violation by the Principality of Andorra of any of the rights set forth in the Convention. However, this procedure applies only insofar as the Committee has established that the same matter is not being examined, or has not been examined by another international body of investigation or settlement.
Antigua en Barbuda
25-10-1988
The Constitution of Antigua and Barbuda entrenches and guarantees to every person
in Antigua and Barbuda the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual irrespective
of 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 a
private individual. Acceptance of the Convention by the Government of Antigua and
Barbuda does not imply the acceptance of obligations going beyond the constitutional
limits nor the acceptance of any obligations to introduce judicial processes beyond
those provided in the Constitution.
The Government of Antigua and Barbuda interprets article 4 of the Convention as requiring
a Party to enact measures in the fields covered by subparagraphs (a), (b) and (c)
of that article only where it is considered that the need arises to enact such legislation.
Argentinië
05-02-2007
Pursuant to the provisions of article 14, paragraphs 2 and 3, of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Government of the Republic of Argentina designates the National Institute to Combat Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism (INADI) as competent within the national legal system to receive and consider petitions from individuals and groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of the Republic of Argentina, who claims to be victims of a violation by the national government of the rights set forth in the Convention.
Australië
30-09-1975
The Government of Australia [...] declares that Australia is not at present in a position specifically to treat as offences all the matters covered by article 4 (a) of the Convention. Acts of the kind there mentioned are punishable only to the extent provided by the existing criminal law dealing with such matters as the maintenance of public order, public mischief, assault, riot, criminal libel, conspiracy and attempts. It is the intention of the Australian Government, at the first suitable moment, to seek from Parliament legislation specifically implementing the terms of article 4 (a).
28-01-1993
The Government of Australia hereby declares that it recognises, for and on behalf of Australia, the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by Australia of any of the rights set forth in the aforesaid Convention.
Azerbeidzjan
27-09-2001
In accordance with article 14, paragraph 1, of the International Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Racial Discrimination, the Government of the Republic of Azerbaijan declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in the above-mentioned Convention.
Bahama's
05-08-1975
Firstly the Government of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas wishes to state its understanding of article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. It interprets article 4 as requiring a party to the Convention to adopt further legislative measures in the fields covered by subparagraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article only in so far as it may consider with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration set out in article 5 of the Convention (in particular to freedom of opinion and expression and the right of freedom of peaceful assembly and association) that some legislative addition to, or variation of existing law and practice in these fields is necessary for the attainment of the ends specified in article 4. Lastly, the Constitution of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas entrenches and guarantees to every person in the Commonwealth of the Bahamas the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual irrespective of his race or place of origin. The Constitution prescribes judicial process to be observed in the event of the violation of any of these rights whether by the State or by a private individual. Acceptance of this Convention by the Commonwealth of the Bahamas does not imply the acceptance of obligations going beyond the constitutional limits nor the acceptance of any obligations to introduce judicial process beyond these prescribed under the Constitution.
Bahrein
27-03-1990
With reference to article 22 of the Convention, the Government of the State of Bahrain declares that, for the submission of any dispute in terms of this article to the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, the express consent of all the parties to the dispute is required in each case.
Bezwaar Israël, 25-06-1990
[The Government of Israel] has noted the political character of the declaration made
by the Government of Bahrain.
In the view of the Government of Israel, the Convention is 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 Bahrain an attitude
of complete reciprocity.
Barbados
08-11-1972
The Constitution of Barbados entrenches and guarantees to every person in Barbados
the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual irrespective of his 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 a private
individual. Accession to the Convention does not imply the acceptance of obligations
going beyond the constitutional limits nor the acceptance of any obligations to introduce
judicial processes beyond those provided in the Constitution.
The Government of Barbados interprets article 4 of the said Convention as requiring
a Party to the Convention to enact measures in the fields covered by sub-paragraphs
(a), (b) and (c) of that article only where it is considered that the need arises
to enact such legislation.
Belarus
08-04-1969
The Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic states that the provision in article 17, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination whereby a number of States are deprived of the opportunity to become Parties to the Convention is of a discriminatory nature, and hold 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 of any kind.
België
07-08-1975
In order to meet the requirements of article 4 of the International Convention on
the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Kingdom of Belgium will
take care to adapt its legislation to the obligations it has assumed in becoming a
party to the said Convention.
The Kingdom of Belgium nevertheless wishes to emphasize the importance which it attaches
to the fact that article 4 of the Convention provides that the measures laid down
in subparagraphs (a), (b), and (c) should be adopted with due regard to the principles
embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set
forth in article 5 of the Convention. The Kingdom of Belgium therefore considers that
the obligations imposed by article 4 must be reconciled with the right to freedom
of opinion and expression and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
Those rights are proclaimed in articles 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights and have been reaffirmed in articles 19 and 21 of the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights. They have also been stated in article 5, subparagraph
(d) (viii) and (ix) of the said Convention.
The Kingdom of Belgium also wishes to emphasize the importance which it attaches to
respect for the rights set forth in the European Convention for the Protection of
Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, especially in articles 10 and 11 dealing respectively
with freedom of opinion and expression and freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
10-10-2000
Belgium recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, established by the aforementioned Convention, to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by Belgium of any of the rights set forth in the Convention. Pursuant to article 14, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the Centre pour l'Egalité des Chances et la Lutte contre le Racisme (Centre for Equal Opportunity and the Struggle 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 individuals within the jurisdiction of Belgium who claim to be victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in the Convention.
Bolivia
14-02-2006
The Government of Bolivia recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination established under article 8 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, in compliance with article 14 of the Convention.
Brazilië
17-06-2002
[...] the Federative Republic of Brazil recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider complaints of human rights violations, as provided for under article XIV of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which was opened for signature in New York on 7th of March 1966.
Bulgarije
08-08-1966
The Government of the People's Republic of Bulgaria considers that the provisions of article 17, paragraph 1, and article 18, paragraph 1, of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the effect of which is to prevent sovereign States from becoming Parties to the Convention, are of a discriminatory nature. The Convention, in accordance with the principle of the sovereign equality of States, should be open for accession by all States without any discrimination or restrictions whatsoever.
12-05-1993
The Republic of Bulgaria declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the Republic of Bulgaria of any of the rights set forth in this Convention.
Canada
14-05-2014
The Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations presents its compliments to
the Secretary-General of the United Nations and has the honour to refer to the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and the Secretary-General's
communication of 9 April 2014, numbered C.N.179.2014.TREATIES-IV.2, relating to that
treaty.
The Permanent Mission of Canada notes that this communication was made pursuant to
the Secretary General's capacity as Depositary for the International Convention on
the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The Permanent Mission of Canada
notes the technical and administrative role of the Depositary, and that it is for
States Parties to a treaty, not the Depositary, to make their own determination with
respect to any legal issues raised by instruments circulated by a depositary.
In that context, the Permanent Mission of Canada notes that 'Palestine' does not meet
the criteria of a state under international law and is not recognized by Canada as
a state. Therefore, in order to avoid confusion, the Permanent Mission of Canada wishes
to note its position that in the context of the purported Palestinian accession to
the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,
'Palestine' is not able to accede to this convention, and that the International Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination does not enter into force,
or have an effect on Canada's treaty relations, with respect to the 'State of Palestine'.
Chili
18-05-1994
In accordance with article 14 (1) of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Government of Chile declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the Government of Chile of any of the rights set forth in this Convention.
China
29-12-1981
The People's Republic of China has reservations on the provisions of article 22 of
the Convention and will not be bound by it.
The signing and ratification of the said Convention by the Taiwan authorities in the
name of China are illegal and null and void.
10-06-1997
The reservation of the People's Republic of China on behalf of the the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region interprets the requirement in article 6 concerning "reparation and satisfaction" as being fulfilled if one or other of these forms of redress is made available and interprets "satisfaction" as including any form of redress effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to an end.
27-04-1999
Upon resuming the exercise of sovereignty over Macao, China notified the Secretary-General that the Convention with the reservation made by China will also apply to the Macao Special Administrative Region.
Costa Rica
08-01-1974
Costa Rica recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination established under article 8 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, in accordance with article 14 of the Convention, to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the State of any of the rights set forth in the Convention.
Cuba
15-02-1972
The Revolutionary Government of the Republic of Cuba does not accept the provision
in article 22 of the Convention to the effect that disputes between two or more States
Parties shall be referred to the International Court of Justice, since it considers
that such disputes should be settled exclusively by the procedures expressly provided
for in the Convention or by negotiation through the diplomatic channel between the
disputants.
This Convention, intended to eliminate all forms of racial discrimination, should
not, as it expressly does in articles 17 and 18, exclude States not Members of the
United Nations, members of the specialized agencies or Parties to the Statute of the
International Court of Justice from making an effective contribution under the Convention,
since these articles constitute in themselves a form of discrimination that is at
variance with the principles set out in the Convention; the Revolutionary Government
of the Republic of Cuba accordingly ratifies the Convention, but with the qualification
just indicated.
Cyprus
30-12-1993
The Republic of Cyprus recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination established under article 14 (1) of [the Convention] to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the Republic of Cyprus of any of the rights set forth in this Convention.
Denemarken
11-10-1985
Denmark recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within Danish jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by Denmark of any of the rights set forth in the Convention, with the reservation that the Committee shall not consider any communications unless it has ascertained that the same matter has not been, and is not being, examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement.
Duitsland
30-08-2001
The Federal Republic of Germany hereby declares that pursuant to Article 14 paragraph 1 of the Convention it recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within her jurisdiction claiming to be victims 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 that the same matter is not being or has not been examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement.
Ecuador
18-03-1977
The State of Ecuador, by virtue of Article 14 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications 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.
Egypte
01-05-1967
The United Arab Republic does not 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 application of the Convention is, at the request of any of the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of Justice for decision, and it states that, in each individual case, the consent of all parties to such a dispute is necessary for referring the dispute to the International Court of Justice.
El Salvador
23-03-2016
… the Government of the Republic of El Salvador recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of a State Party who claim to be victims of violations by that State of any of the rights set forth in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, as provided for in article 14 of the said Convention.
Equatoriaal-Guinea
08-10-2002
The Republic of Equatorial Guinea does not 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 application of the Convention is, at the request of any of the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of Justice for decision. The Republic of Equatorial Guinea considers that, in each individual case, the consent of all parties is necessary for referring the dispute to the International Court of Justice.
Estland
21-07-2010
The Republic of Estonia declares that pursuant to Article 14 paragraph 1 of the Convention
it
recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
to receive and
consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within the jurisdiction
of Estonia claiming to be victims of a violation by Estonia of any of the rights set
forth in the Convention if this violation results from circumstances or events occurring
after the deposit of this Declaration.
Estonia recognizes that competence on the understanding that the Committee on the
Elimination of Racial Discrimination shall not consider any communications without
ascertaining that the same matter is not being considered or has not already been
considered by another international body of investigation or settlement.
Finland
16-11-1994
Finland recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of Finland claiming to be victims of a violation by Finland of any of the rights set forth in the said Convention, with the reservation that the Committee shall not consider any communication from an 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 procedure of international investigation or settlement.
Frankrijk
28-07-1971
With regard to article 4, France wishes to make it clear that it interprets the reference
made therein to the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and to
the rights set forth in article 5 of the Convention as releasing the States Parties
from the obligation to enact anti-discrimination legislation which is incompatible
with the freedoms of opinion and expression and of peaceful assembly and association
guaranteed by those texts.
With regard to article 6, France declares that the question of remedy through tribunals
is, as far as France is concerned, governed by the rules of ordinary law.
With regard to article 15, France's accession to the Convention may not be interpreted
as implying any change in its position regarding the resolution mentioned in that
provision.
In a communication subsequently, the Government of France indicated that the first
paragraph of the declaration did not purport to limit the obligations under the Convention
in respect of the French Government, but only to record the latter's interpretation
of article 4 of the Convention.
16-08-1982
[The Government of the French Republic declares], in accordance with article 14 of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination opened for signature on 7 March 1966, [that it] recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within French jurisdiction that either by reason of acts or omissions, events or deeds occurring after 15 August 1982, or by reason of a decision concerning the acts or omissions, events or deeds after the said date, would complain of being victims of a violation, by the French Republic, of one of the rights mentioned in the Convention.
Georgië
30-06-2005
In accordance with Article 14, Paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination done at New York on March 7, 1966 Georgia recognizes the competence of the Committee for the elimination of racial discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation, by Georgia, of any of the rights set forth in the abovementioned Convention.
Grenada
10-05-2013
The Constitution of Grenada entrenches and guarantees to every person in the State
of Grenada the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual irrespective of his
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 a
private individual. Ratification of the Convention by Grenada does not imply the acceptance
of obligations going beyond the constitutional limits nor the acceptance of any obligations
to introduce judicial processes beyond those provided in the Constitution.
The Government of Grenada interprets article 4 of the said Convention as requiring
a Party to the Convention to enact measures in the fields covered by sub-paragraphs
(a), (b) and (c) of that article only where it considers that the need arises to enact
such legislation.
Bezwaar Frankrijk, 07-08-2013
The Government of the French Republic has examined the declaration formulated by the
Government of Grenada at the time of the deposit of its instrument of ratification
of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
of 7 March 1966. The Government of the French Republic takes note of this ratification.
It regrets, however, that the declaration made by Grenada, which constitutes a reservation,
gives rise to a restriction on the international obligations accepted by Grenada under
the Convention and to legal uncertainty. The reservation has indeed a general and
indeterminate scope, since its aim is to subordinate the implementation of Grenada's
obligations under the Convention to respect for its domestic law, with no indication
of which provisions are concerned. The States Parties to the Convention cannot, therefore,
assess the scope of the reservation. By the present declaration, however, the Government
of the French Republic does not oppose Grenada becoming a party to the Convention.
Bezwaar Verenigd Koninkrijk, 09-08-2013
The Government of the United Kingdom has examined the Declaration made by Grenada.
In the view of the United Kingdom, the Declaration amounts to a reservation. The Declaration
makes only a general reference to national law without specifying its contents and
does not clearly define for the other States Parties to the Convention the extent
to which Grenada has accepted the obligations of the Convention. The United Kingdom
therefore objects to the reservation made by Grenada in its Declaration and hereby
gives notice that it does not accept it. This objection shall not preclude the entry
into force of the Convention between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland and Grenada.
Guyana
11-12-1968
The Government of the Republic of Guyana do not interpret the provisions of this Convention as imposing upon them any obligation going beyond the limits set by the Constitution of Guyana or imposing upon them any obligation requiring the introduction of judicial processes going beyond those provided under the same Constitution.
Hongarije
04-05-1967
The Hungarian People's Republic considers that the provisions of article 17, paragraph 1, and of article 18, paragraph 1, of the Convention, barring accession to the Convention by all States, are of a discriminating nature and contrary to international law. The Hungarian People's Republic maintains its general position that multilateral treaties of a universal character should, in conformity with the principles of sovereign equality of States, be open for accession by all States without any discrimination whatever.
13-09-1989
The Hungarian People's Republic hereby recognizes the competence of the Committee established by the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination provided for in paragraph 1 of article 14 of the Convention.
Ierland
29-12-2000
Article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination provides that the measures specifically described in sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) shall be undertaken with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in Article 5 of the Convention. Ireland threfore considers that through such measures, the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to peaceful assembly and association may not be jeopardised. These rights are laid down in Articles 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; they were reaffirmed by the General Assembly of the United Nations when it adopted Articles 19 and 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and are referred to in Article 5 (d)(viii) and (ix) of the present Convention.
29-12-2000
With reference to article 14, paragraph 1, of the International Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, opened for signature at New York
on 7 March 1966, Ireland recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination
of Racial Discrimination, established by the afore-mentioned Convention to receive
and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within Ireland
claiming to be victims of a violation by Ireland of any of the rights set forth in
the Convention.
Ireland recognizes that competence on the understanding that the said Committee shall
not consider any communication without ascertaining that the same matter is not being
considered or has not already been considered by another international body of investigation
or settlement.
IJsland
10-08-1981
[The Government of Iceland declares] in accordance with article 14 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination which was opened for signature in New York on 7 March 1966, that Iceland recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of Iceland claiming to be victims of a violation by Iceland of any of the rights set forth in the Convention, with the reservation that the Committee shall not consider any communication from an individual or group of individuals unless the Committee has ascertained that the same matter is not being examined or has not been examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement.
India
03-12-1968
The Government of India declare that for reference of any dispute to the International Court of Justice for decision in terms of Article 22 of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, the consent of all parties to the dispute is necessary in each individual case.
Bezwaar Pakistan, 24-02-1969
The Government of Pakistan has decided not to accept the reservation made by the Government of India in her instrument of ratification.
Indonesië
25-06-1999
The Government of the Republic of Indonesia does not consider itself bound by the provision of Article 22 and takes the position that disputes relating to the interpretation and application of the [Convention] which cannot be settled through the channel provided for in the said article, may be referred to the International Court of Justice only with the consent of all the parties to the dispute.
Irak
18-02-1969
The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Iraq hereby declares that signature
for and on behalf of the Republic of Iraq of the Convention on the Elimination of
All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which was adopted by the General Assembly of the
United Nations on 21 December 1965, as well as approval by the Arab States of the
said Convention and entry into it by their respective governments, shall in no way
signify recognition of Israel or lead to entry by the Arab States into such dealings
with Israel as may be regulated by the said Convention.
Furthermore, the Government of the Republic of Iraq does not consider itself bound
by the provisions of article twenty-two of the Convention afore-mentioned and affirms
its reservation that it does not accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the International
Court of Justice provided for in the said article.
Bezwaar Israël, 10-07-1969
[The Government of Israel] has noted the political character of the declaration made
by the Government of Iraq on signing the above Convention.
In the view of the Government of Israel, the Convention is 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. Moreover, it is the view of the Government of Israel that
no legal relevance can be attached to those Iraqi statements which purport to represent
the views of the other States.
14-01-1970
1. The acceptance and ratification of the Convention by Iraq shall in no way signify
recognition of Israel or be conducive to entry by Iraq into such dealings with Israel
as are regulated by the Convention;
2. Iraq does not accept the provisions of article 22 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 the provisions of article 22 of the Convention
and deems it necessary that in all cases the approval of all parties to the dispute
be secured before the case is referred to the International Court of Justice.
Bezwaar Israël, 21-04-1970
With regard to the political declaration in the guise of a reservation made on the occasion of the ratification of the above Treaty, the Government of Israel wishes to refer to its objection circulated by the Secretary-General in his letter [. . .] and to maintain that objection.
Israël
03-01-1979
The State of Israel does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the said Convention.
16-05-2014
The Permanent Mission of Israel to the United Nations presents its compliments to
the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his capacity as depositary to the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and refers to
the communication by the depositary, dated 9 April 2014, regarding the Palestinian
request to accede to this Convention (Reference number C.N.179.2014.TREATIES-IV.2).
'Palestine' does not satisfy the criteria for statehood under international law and
lacks the legal capacity to join the aforesaid convention bath under general international
law and the terms of bilateral Israeli-Palestinian agreements.
The Government of Israel does not recognize 'Palestine' as a State, and wishes to
place on record, for the sake of clarity, its position that it does not consider 'Palestine'
a party to the Convention and regards the Palestinian request for accession as being
without legal validity and without effect upon Israel's treaty relations under the
Convention.
Italië
05-01-1976
(a) The positive measures, provided for in article 4 of the Convention and specifically
described in sub-paragraphs (a) and (b) of that article, designed to eradicate all
incitement to, or acts of, discrimination, are to be interpreted, as that article
provides, "with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5" of the Convention.
Consequently, the obligations deriving from the aforementioned article 4 are not to
jeopardize the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to freedom
of peaceful assembly and association which are laid down in articles 19 and 20 of
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, were reaffirmed by the General Assembly
of the United Nations when it adopted articles 19 and 21 of the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights, and are referred to in articles 5 (d) (viii) and (ix)
of the Convention. In fact, the Italian Government, in conformity with the obligations
resulting from Articles 55 (c) and 56 of the Charter of the United Nations, remains
faithful to the principle laid down in article 29 (2) of the Universal Declaration,
which provides that "in the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be
subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of
securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of
meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in
a democratic society."
(b) Effective remedies against acts of racial discrimination which violate his individual
rights and fundamental freedoms will be assured to everyone, in conformity with article
6 of the Convention, by the ordinary courts within the framework of their respective
jurisdiction. Claims for reparation for any damage suffered as a result of acts of
racial discrimination must be brought against the persons responsible for the malicious
or criminal acts which caused such damage.
05-05-1978
With reference to article 14, paragraph 1, of the International Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, opened for signature at New York
on 7 March 1966, the Government of the Italian Republic recognizes the competence
of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, established by the afore-mentioned
Convention, to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals
within Italian jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by Italy of any
of the rights set forth in the Convention.
The Government of the Italian Republic recognizes that competence on the understanding
that the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination shall not consider
any communication without ascertaining that the same matter is not being considered
or has not already been considered by another international body of investigation
or settlement.
Jamaica
04-06-1971
The Constitution of Jamaica entrenches and guarantees to every person in Jamaica the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual irrespective of his 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 a private individual. Ratification of the Convention by Jamaica does not imply the acceptance of obligations going beyond the constitutional limits nor the acceptance of any obligation to introduce judicial processes beyond those prescribed under the Constitution.
Japan
15-12-1995
In applying the provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of article 4 of the [said Convention] Japan fulfills the obligations under those provisions to the extent that fulfillment of the obligations is compatible with the guarantee of the rights to freedom of assembly, association and expression and other rights under the Constitution of Japan, noting the phrase `with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of this Convention' referred to in article 4.
Jemen
18-10-1972
The accession of the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen to this Convention shall
in no way signify recognition of Israel or entry into a relationship with it regarding
any matter regulated by the said Convention.
The People's Democratic Republic of Yemen does not 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 application of the Convention is, at
the request of any of the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the International
Court of Justice for decision, and states that, in each individual case, the consent
of all parties to such a dispute is necessary for referral of the dispute to the International
Court of Justice.
The People's Democratic Republic of Yemen states that the provisions of Article 17,
paragraph 1, and Article 18, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Elimination of
All Forms of Racial Discrimination whereby a number of States are deprived of the
opportunity to become Parties to the Convention is of a discriminatory nature, and
holds that, in accordance with the principle of the sovereign equality of States,
the Convention should be opened to participation by all interested States without
discrimination or restriction of any kind.
Bezwaar Israël, 12-02-1973
[The Government of Israel] has noted the political character of the declaration made
by the Government of Yemen.
In the view of the Government of Israel, the Convention is 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 Yemen an attitude
of complete reciprocity.
06-04-1989
Reservations in respect of article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii).
Bezwaar Zweden, 05-07-1989
With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning article 5 (c) and article 5 (d)
(iv), (vi) and (vii):
Article 5 contains undertakings, in compliance with the fundamental obligations laid
down in article 2 of the Convention, to prohibit and to eliminate racial discrimination
in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as to
race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law, notably in
the enjoyment of the rights enumerated in the article.
The Government of Sweden has come to the conclusion that the reservations made by
Yemen are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and therefore
are impermissible according to article 20, paragraph 2 of the Convention. For this
reason the Government of Sweden objects to these reservations. This objection does
not have the effect of preventing the Convention from entering into force between
Sweden and Yemen, and the reservations cannot alter or modify, in any respect, the
obligations arising from the Convention.
Bezwaar Finland, 07-07-1989
With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning article (c) and article 5 (d)
(iv), (vi) and (vii):
The Government of Finland formally, and in accordance with article 20 (2) of the Convention,
objects to the reservations made by Yemen to the above provisions.
In the first place, the reservations concern matters which are of fundamental importance
in the Convention. The first paragraph of article 5 clearly brings this out. According
to it, the Parties have undertaken to guarantee the rights listed in that article
"In compliance with fundamental obligations laid down in article 2 of the Convention".
Clearly, provisions prohibiting racial discrimination in the granting of such fundamental
political rights and civil liberties as the right to participate in public life, to
marry and choose a spouse, to inherit and to enjoy freedom of thought, conscience
and religion are central in a convention against racial discrimination. Therefore,
the reservations are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention, as
specified in paragraph 20 (2) thereof and in article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention
on the Law of Treaties.
Moreover, it is the view of the Government of Finland that it would be unthinkable
that merely by making a reservation to the said provisions, a State could achieve
the liberty to start discriminatory practices on the grounds of race, colour, or national
or ethnic origin in regard to such fundamental political rights and civil liberties
as the right to participate in the conduct of public affairs, the right of marriage
and choice of spouse, the right of inheritance and the freedom of thought, conscience
and religion. Any racial discrimination in respect of those fundamental rights and
liberties is clearly against the general principles of human rights law as reflected
in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the practice of States and international
organizations. By making a reservation a State cannot contract out from universally
binding human rights standards.
For the above reasons, the Government of Finland notes that the reservations made
by Yemen are devoid of legal effect. However, the Government of Finland does not consider
that this fact is an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention in respect
of Yemen.
Bezwaar Denemarken, 10-07-1989
With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning article 5 (c) and article 5 (d)
(iv), (vi) and (vii):
Article 5 contains undertakings, in compliance with the fundamental obligations laid
down in article 2 of the Convention, to prohibit and to eliminate racial discrimination
in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as to
race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law, notably in
the enjoyment of the rights enumerated in the article.
The reservations made by the Government of Yemen are incompatible with the object
and purpose of the Convention and the reservations are consequently impermissible
according to article 20, paragraph 2 of the Convention. In accordance with article
20, paragraph 1 of the Convention the Government of Denmark therefore formally objects
to these reservations. This objection does not have the effect of preventing the Convention
from entering into force between Denmark and Yemen, and the reservations cannot alter
or modify in any respect, the obligations arising from the Convention.
Bezwaar Nederlanden, het Koninkrijk der, 25-07-1989
With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning article 5 (c) and article 5 (d)
(iv), (vi) and (vii):
The Kingdom of the Netherlands objects to the above-mentioned reservations, as they
are incompatible with object and purpose of the Convention.
These objections are not an obstacle for the entry into force of this Convention between
the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Yemen.
Bezwaar Noorwegen, 28-07-1989
With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning article 5 (c) and article 5 (d)
(iv), (vi) and (vii):
The Government of Norway hereby enters its formal objection to the reservations made
by Yemen.
Bezwaar Nieuw-Zeeland, 04-08-1989
With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning article 5 (c) and article 5 (d)
(iv), (vi) and (vii):
The New Zealand Government is of the view that those provisions contain undertakings
which are themselves fundamental to the Convention. Accordingly it considers that
the reservations purportedly made by Yemen relating to political and civil rights
are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Treaty within the terms of the
article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
The Government of New Zealand advises therefore under article 20 of the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination that it does not accept the
reservations made by Yemen.
Bezwaar Verenigd Koninkrijk, 04-08-1989
The Government of the United Kingdom and Nothern Ireland do not accept the reservations made by the Yemen Arab Republic to article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii) of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Bezwaar Italië, 07-08-1989
The Government of the Republic of Italy raises an objection to the reservations entered by the Government of the Arab Republic of Yemen to article 5 [(c) and (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii)] of the above-mentioned Convention.
Bezwaar Australië, 08-08-1989
In accordance with article 20 (2), Australia objects to [the reservations made by Yemen] which it considers impermissible as being incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention.
Bezwaar België, 08-08-1989
With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning article 5 (c) and article 5 (d)
(iv), (vi) and (vii):
These reservations are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention
and consequently are not permitted pursuant to article 20, paragraph 2, of the Convention.
Bezwaar Duitsland, 08-08-1989
With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning article 5 (c) and article 5 (d)
(iv), (vi) and (vii):
These reservations relate to the basic obligations of States Parties to the Convention
to prohibit and eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee
the right of everyone to equality before the law and include the enjoyment of such
fundamental political and civil rights as the right to take part in the conduct of
public life, the right to marriage and choice of spouse, the right to inherit and
the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. As a result, the reservations
made by Yemen are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention within
the meaning of article 20, paragraph 2 thereof.
Bezwaar Canada, 10-08-1989
With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning article 5 (c) and article 5 (d)
(iv), (vi) and (vii):
The effect of these reservations would be to allow racial discrimination in respect
of certain of the rights enumerated in Article 5. Since the objective of the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, as stated in
its Preamble, is to eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and manifestations,
the Government of Canada believes that the reservations made by the Yemen Arab Republic
are incompatible with the object and purpose of the International Convention. Moreover,
the Government of Canada believes that the principle of non-discrimination is generally
accepted and recognized in international law and therefore is binding on all states.
Bezwaar Mexico, 11-08-1989
With regard to reservation made by Yemen concerning article 5 (c) and article 5 (d)
(iv), (vi) and (vii):
The Government of the United Mexican States has concluded that, in view of article
20 of the Convention, the reservation must be deemed invalid, as it is incompatible
with the object and purpose of the Convention.
Said reservation, if implemented would result in discrimination to the detriment of
a certain sector of the population and, at the same time, would violate the rights
established in articles 2, 16 and 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
of 1948.
The objection of the United Mexican States to the reservation in question should not
be interpreted as an impediment to the entry into force of the Convention of 1966
between the United States of Mexico and the Government of Yemen.
Bezwaar Frankrijk, 20-09-1989
With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning article 5 (c) and article 5 (d)
(iv), (vi) and (vii):
France considers that the reservations made by the Yemen Arab Republic to the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination are not valid
as being incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention.
Such objection is not an obstacle to the entry into force of the said Convention between
France and the Yemen Arab Republic.
Kazachstan
29-05-2008
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, 1965 the Republic of Kazakhstan hereby declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee of elimination of racial discrimination within its jurisdiction to receive and consider communications from or on behalf of individuals who claim to be victims of a violation by the Republic of Kazakhstan of the provisions of the Convention.
Koeweit
15-10-1968
In acceding to the said Convention, the Government of the State of Kuwait takes the
view that its accession does not in any way imply recognition of Israel, nor does
it oblige it to apply the provisions of the Convention in respect of the said country.
The Government of the State of Kuwait does not 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 application of the Convention is, at
the request of any party to the dispute, to be referred to the International Court
of Justice for decision, and it states that, in each individual case, the consent
of all parties to such a dispute is necessary for referring the dispute to the International
Court of Justice.
Bezwaar Israël, 12-12-1968
[The Government of Israel] has noted the political character of the declaration made
by the Government of Kuwait.
In the view of the Government of Israel, the Convention is 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 Kuwait an attitude
of complete reciprocity.
Libanon
12-11-1971
The Republic of Lebanon does not 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 application of the Convention is, at the request of any party to the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of Justice for decision, and it states that, in each individual case, the consent of all States parties to such a dispute is necessary for referring the dispute to the International Court of Justice.
Libië
03-07-1968
(a) The Kingdom of Libya does not 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 application of the Convention is, at the request
of any of the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of
Justice for decision, and it states that, in each individual case, the consent of
all parties to such a dispute is necessary for referring the dispute to the International
Court of Justice.
(b) It is understood that the accession to this Convention does not mean in any way
a recognition of Israel by the Government of the Kingdom of Libya. Furthermore, no
treaty relations will arise between the Kingdom of Libya and Israel.
Bezwaar Israël, 16-08-1968
[The Government of Israel] has noted the political character of the declaration made
by the Government of Libya.
In the view of the Government of Israel, the Convention is 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 Libya an attitude
of complete reciprocity.
Liechtenstein
18-03-2004
[.. ] the Principality of Liechtenstein recognizes the competence of the Committee
on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications
from individuals or groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of Liechtenstein
claiming to be victims of a violation by Liechtenstein of any of the rights set forth
in the Convention.
The Principality of Liechtenstein recognizes that competence on the understanding
that the said Committee shall not consider any communication without ascertaining
that the same matter is not being considered or has not already been considered under
another international procedure of investigation or settlement.
Pursuant to article 14, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the Constitutional Court has
been designated as competent to receive and consider petitions from individuals and
groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of Liechtenstein who claim to be victims
of a violation of any of the rights set forth in the Convention.
Luxemburg
22-07-1996
Pursuant to article 14 (1) of the [said Convention], Luxembourg declares that it recognizes
the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive
and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction
claiming to be victims of a violation by Luxembourg of any of the rights set forth
in the Convention.
Pursuant to article 14 (2) of the [said Convention], the "Commission spéciale permanente
contre la discrimination", created in May 1996 pursuant to article 24 of the Law dated
27 July 1993 on the integration of aliens shall be competent to receive and consider
petitions from individuals and groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of Luxembourg
who claim to be victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in the Convention.
Madagaskar
07-02-1969
The Government of the Malagasy Republic does not 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 application of the Convention is, at the request of any of the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of Justice for decision, and states that, in each individual case, the consent of all parties to such a dispute is necessary for referral of the dispute to the International Court.
Malta
27-05-1971
The Government of Malta wishes to state its understanding of certain articles in the
Convention.
It interprets article 4 as requiring a party to the Convention to adopt further measures
in the fields covered by sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article should it
consider, with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights and the rights set forth in article 5 of the Convention, that the
need arises to enact 'ad hoc' legislation, in addition to or variation of existing
law and practice to bring to an end any act of racial discrimination.
Further, the Government of Malta interprets the requirements in article 6 concerning
`reparation or satisfaction' as being fulfilled if one or other of these forms of
redress is made available and interprets `satisfaction' as including any form of redress
effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to an end.
16-12-1998
Malta declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee to receive and consider
communications from individuals subject to the jurisdiction of Malta who claim to
be victims of a violation by Malta of any of the rights set forth in the Convention
which results from situations or events occurring after the date of adoption of the
present declaration, or from a decision relating to situations or events occurring
after that date.
The Government of Malta recognizes this competence on the understanding that the Committee
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination shall not consider any communication
without ascertaining that the same matter is not being considered or has not already
been considered by another international body of investigation or settlement.
Marokko
18-12-1970
The Kingdom of Morocco does not 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 application of the Convention is, at the request of any of the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of Justice for decision. The Kingdom of Morocco states that, in each individual case, the consent of all parties to such a dispute is necessary for referring the dispute to the International Court of Justice.
19-10-2006
In accordance with article 14 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Government of the Kingdom of 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 receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation, subsequent to the date of deposit of the present document, of any of the rights set forth in this Convention.
Mexico
15-03-2002
The United Mexican States recognizes as duly binding the competence of the Committee
on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, established by article 8 of the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, adopted by the
United Nations General Assembly in its resolution 2106 (XX) of 21 December 1965 and
opened for signature on 7 March 1966.
The United Mexican States declares, pursuant to article 14 of the Convention, that
it recognizes the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications
from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims
of a violation by that State of any of the rights stipulated in the Convention.
Accordingly, in exercise of the power vested in me under article 89, subparagraph
X, of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States and in accordance with
article 5 of the Conclusion of Treaties Act, I hereby issue this instrument of acceptance,
the Declaration on Recognition of the Competence of the Committee on the Elimination
of Racial Discrimination, as set out in the Declaration adopted by the Senate of the
Distinguished Congress of the Union, and promise, on behalf of the Mexican Nation,
to implement it, uphold it and ensure that it is implemented and upheld.
Moldavië
08-05-2013
According to Article 14, paragraph 1 of the International Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Republic of Moldova recognizes the competence
of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider
communications from individuals or groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of
the Republic of Moldova claiming to be victims of a violation by the Republic of Moldova
of any of the rights set forth in the Convention, with the reservation that the Committee
shall not consider any communication unless it has ascertained that the same matter
is not being examined or has not been examined under another procedure of international
investigation or settlement.
06-03-2014
[T]he Government decides:
1. To designate the Bureau of Inter-Ethnic Relations as the body responsible for the
submission of the Moldovan Government's comments on communications from individuals
and groups of individuals concerning the Republic of Moldova addressed to the United
Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.
2. The Bureau of Inter-Ethnic Relations shall keep official records in accordance
with this decision.
3. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration shall inform the depositary
of the designation of the competent body.
Monaco
27-09-1995
Article 2, paragraph 1:
Monaco reserves the right to apply its own legal provisions concerning the admission
of foreigners to the labour market of the Principality.
Article 4:
Monaco interprets the reference in that article to the principles of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, and to the rights enumerated in article 5 of the Convention
as releasing States Parties from the obligation to promulgate repressive laws which
are incompatible with freedom of opinion and expression and freedom of peaceful assembly
and association, which are guaranteed by those instruments.
06-11-2001
We hereby declare that we recognize the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and examine communications from individuals or groups of individuals under its jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation by the Principality of Monaco of any of the rights set forth in the said Convention, such competence to be exercised only when all domestic remedies have been exhausted, and we pledge our word as Prince and promise, on behalf of ourselves and our successors, to observe and execute it faithfully and loyally.
Mongolië
06-08-1969
The Mongolian People's Republic states that the provision in article 17, paragraph 1, of the Convention whereby a number of States are deprived of the opportunity to become Parties to the Convention is of a discriminatory nature, and it holds that, in accordance with the principle of the sovereign equality of States, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination should be open to participation by all interested States without discrimination or restriction of any kind.
Montenegro
23-10-2006
Confirmed upon succession: By affirming its commitment to establish the principles
of the rule of law and promote and protect human rights, the Government of the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia recognizes the competence of the Committee on the elimination
of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider complaints submitted by individuals
and groups alleging violations of rights guaranteed under the International Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia determines the competence of
the Federal Constitutional Court to accept and consider, within its domestic legal
system, the complaints submitted by individuals and groups under the State jurisdiction,
alleging to have been victims of rights violations under the Convention, and who have
exhausted all available legal means provided for by the national legislation.
Mozambique
18-04-1983
The People's Republic of Mozambique does not consider to be bound by the provision of article 22 and wishes to restate that for the submission of any dispute to the International Court of Justice for decision in terms of the said article, the consent of all parties to such a dispute is necessary in each individual case.
Nederlanden, het Koninkrijk der
08-07-2011
In accordance with article 14, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Elimination of
All Forms of Racial Discrimination concluded at New York on 7 March 1966, the Kingdom
of the Netherlands recognizes, for the European part of the Netherlands, Aruba, Curaçao,
Sint Maarten and the Caribbean part of the Netherlands (the islands of Bonaire, Sint
Eustatius and Saba), the competence of the Committee for the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of
individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation, by the
Kingdom of the Netherlands, of any of the rights set forth in the above-mentioned
Convention.
Nepal
30-01-1971
The Constitution of Nepal contains provisions for the protection of individual rights,
including the right to freedom of speech and expression, the right to form unions
and associations not motivated by party politics and the right to freedom of professing
his/her own religion; and nothing in the Convention shall be deemed to require or
to authorize legislation or other action by Nepal incompatible with the provisions
of the Constitution of Nepal.
His Majesty's Government interprets article 4 of the said Convention as requiring
a Party to the Convention to adopt further legislative measures in the fields covered
by 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 Declaration
of Human Rights, that some legislative addition to, or variation of, existing law
and practice in those fields is necessary for the attainment of the end specified
in the earlier part of article 4. His Majesty's Government interprets the requirement
in article 6 concerning `reparation or satisfaction' as being fulfilled if one or
other of these forms of redress is made available; and further interprets `satisfaction'
as including any form of redress effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to
an end.
His Majesty's Government does not consider itself bound by the provision of article
22 of the Convention under which any dispute between two or more States Parties with
respect to the interpretation or application of the Convention is, at the request
of any of the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of
Justice for decision.
Noord-Macedonië
22-12-1999
The Republic of Macedonia declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communcations from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the Republic of Macedonia of any of its rights set forth in this Convention, with the reservation that the Committee shall not consider any communication from individuals or groups of individuals, unless it has ascertained that the same matter has not been, and is not being, examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement.
Noorwegen
23-01-1976
The Norwegian Government recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of Norway claiming to be victims of a violation by Norway of any of the rights set forth in the International Convention of 21 December 1965 on the 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 communication from an individual or group of individuals unless the Committee has ascertained that the same matter is not being examined or has not been examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement.
Oekraïne
07-03-1969
The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic states that the provision in article 17, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination whereby a number of States are deprived of the opportunity to become Parties to the Convention is of a discriminatory nature, and hold 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 of any kind.
28-07-1992
In accordance with the article 14 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Racial Discrimination, Ukraine declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals [within its jurisdiction] claiming to be victims of a violation by [it] of any of the rights set forth in the Convention.
Oostenrijk
22-07-1969
Article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination provides that the measures specifically described in sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) shall be undertaken with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of the Convention. The Republic of Austria therefore considers that through such measures the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association may not be jeopardized. These rights are laid down in articles 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; they were reaffirmed by the General Assembly of the United Nations when it adopted articles 19 and 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and are referred to in article 5 (d) (viii) and (ix) of the present Convention.
20-02-2002
The Republic of Austria recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of Austria claiming to be victims of a violation by Austria of any of the rights set forth in the Convention, with the reservation that the Committee shall not consider any communication from an individual or a group of individuals unless the Committee has ascertained that the facts of the case are not being examined or have not been examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. Austria reserves the right to indicate a national body as set forth in Article 14 paragraph 2.
Palestina
06-06-2014
The Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine to the United Nations presents his
compliments to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his capacity as Depositary,
and has the honor to refer to depositary notification C.N.258.2014.TREATIES-IV.2,
dated 15 May 2014, conveying a communication of the United States of America regarding
the accession of the State of Palestine to the International Convention on the Elimination
of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, dated 7 March 1966.
The Government of the State of Palestine regrets the position of the United States
of America and wishes to recall United Nations General Assembly resolution 67/19 of
29 November 2012 according Palestine 'non-member observer State status in the United
Nations'. In this regard, Palestine is a State recognized by the United Nations General
Assembly on behalf of the international community.
As a State Party to the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of
Racial Discrimination, which entered into force on 2 May 2014, the State of Palestine
will exercise its rights and honor its obligations with respect to all States Parties.
The State of Palestine trusts that its rights and obligations will be equally respected
by its fellow States Parties.
06-06-2014
The Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine to the United Nations presents his
compliments to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his capacity as Depositary,
and has the honor to refer to depositary notification C.N.293.2014.TREATIES-IV.2,
dated 22 May 2014, conveying a communication of Israel regarding the accession of
the State of Palestine to the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms
of Racial Discrimination, dated 7 March 1966.
The Government of the State of Palestine regrets the position of Israel, the occupying
Power, and wishes to recall United Nations General Assembly resolution 67/19 of 29
November 2012 according Palestine 'non-member observer State status in the United
Nations'. In this regard, Palestine is a State recognized by the United Nations General
Assembly on behalf of the international community.
As a State Party to the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of
Racial Discrimination, which will enter into force on 2 May 2014, the State of Palestine
will exercise its rights and honor its obligations with respect to all States Parties.
The State of Palestine trusts that its rights and obligations will be equally respected
by its fellow States Parties.
06-06-2014
The Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine to the United Nations presents his
compliments to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his capacity as Depositary,
and has the honor to refer to depositary notification C.N.265.2014.TREATIES-IV.2,
dated 22 May 2014, conveying a communication of Canada regarding the accession of
the State of Palestine to the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms
of Racial Discrimination, dated 7 March 1966.
The Government of the State of Palestine regrets the position of Canada and wishes
to recall United Nations General Assembly resolution 67/19 of 29 November 2012 according
Palestine 'non-member observer State status in the United Nations'. In this regard,
Palestine is a State recognized by the United Nations General Assembly on behalf of
the international community.
As a State Party to the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of
Racial Discrimination, which entered into force on 2 May 2014, the State of Palestine
will exercise its rights and honor its obligations with respect to all States Parties.
The State of Palestine trusts that its rights and obligations will be equally respected
by its fellow States Parties.
08-08-2019
[…] the Government of the State of Palestine makes the following declaration in relation
to article 14 and recognizes the competence of the Committee to receive and consider
communications from individuals and groups of individuals within its jurisdiction
claiming to be victims of violation by State of Palestine of any rights set forth
in this Convention, and who have exhausted all available legal means provided for
by the national legislation.
State of Palestine indicates the Independent Commission for Human Rights as the body
with the competence to receive and consider complaints from individuals and groups
that claim to be victims of violations of any rights set forth in the Convention.
Panama
07-05-2015
[…] the Republic of Panama recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of violations by the Republic of Panama of any of the rights set forth in the referred Convention.
Papoea-Nieuw-Guinea
27-01-1982
The Government of Papua New Guinea interprets article 4 of the Convention as requiring a party to the Convention to adopt further legislative measures in the areas covered by sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article only in so far as it may consider with due regard to the principles contained in the Universal Declaration set out in Article 5 of the Convention that some legislative addition to, or variation of existing law and practice, is necessary to give effect to the provisions of article 4. In addition, the Constitution of Papua New Guinea guarantees certain fundamental rights and freedoms to all persons irrespective of their race or place of origin. The Constitution also provides for judicial protection of these rights and freedoms. Acceptance of this Convention does not therefore indicate the acceptance of obligations by the Government of Papua New Guinea which go beyond those provided by the Constitution, nor does it indicate the acceptance of any obligation to introduce judicial process beyond that provided by the Constitution.
Peru
27-11-1984
[The Government of the Republic of Peru declares] that, in accordance with its policy of full respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, without distinctions as to race, sex, language or religion, and with the aim of strengthening the international instruments on the subject, Peru recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction, who claim to be victims of violations of any of the rights set forth in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, in conformity with the provisions of article 14 of the Convention.
Polen
05-12-1968
The Polish People's Republic considers that the provisions of article 17, paragraph
1, and article18, paragraph 1, of the International Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which make it impossible for many States to
become parties to the said Convention, are of a discriminatory nature and are incompatible
with the object and purpose of that Convention.
The Polish People's Republic considers that, in accordance with the principle of the
sovereign equality of States, the said Convention should be open for participation
by all States without any discrimination or restrictions whatsoever.
01-12-1998
The Government of the Republic of Poland recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, established by the provisions of the afore-mentioned Convention, to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within jurisdiction of the Republic of Poland claiming, to be victims of a violation by the Republic of Poland of the rights set forth in the above Convention and concerning all deeds, decisions and facts which will occur after the day this Declaration has been deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Portugal
02-03-2000
[...] The Government of Portugal recognises the competence of the Committee established
under Article 14 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within
its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the Republic of Portugal
of any of the rights set forth in that Convention.
Portugal recognises such jurisdiction provided that the Committee does not consider
any communication unless it is satisfied that the matter has neither been examined
nor is it subject to appreciation by any other international body with powers of inquiry
or decision.
Portugal indicates the High Commissioner for Immigration and Ethnic Minorities as
the body with competence to receive and consider petitions from individuals and groups
of individuals that claim to be victims of violation of any of the rights set forth
in the Convention
Roemenië
15-09-1970
[...] The Council of State of the Socialist Republic of Romania declares that the provisions of articles 17 and 18 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination are not in accordance with the principle that multilateral treaties, the aims and objectives of which concern the world community as a whole, should be open to participation by all States.
21-03-2003
Romania declares, in accordance with article 14 paragraph 1 of the International Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, that it recognizes the competence
of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider
communications from persons within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation
by Romania of any of the rights set forth in the Convention, to which Romania acceded
by Decree no. 345 of 1970.
Without prejudice to the article 14 paragraphs 1 and 2 of the International Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, Romania considers that the
mentioned provisions do not confer to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
the competence of examining communications of persons invoking the existence and infringement
of collective rights.
The body which is competent in Romania, according to domestic law, to receive and
to examine communications in accordance with article 14 paragraph 2 of the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination is the National
Council for Combating Discrimination established by the Government Decision no. 1194
of 2001.
Russische Federatie
04-02-1969
The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics states that the provision in article 17, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination whereby a number of States are deprived of the opportunity to become Parties to the Convention is of a discriminatory nature, and hold 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 of any kind.
01-10-1991
The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications, in respect of situations and events occurring after the adoption of the present declaration, from individuals or groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of the USSR claiming to be victims of a violation by the USSR of any of the rights set forth in the Convention.
San Marino
22-02-2008
The Republic of San Marino, in accordance with article 14 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the Republic of San Marino of any of the rights set forth in the Convention.
Saudi-Arabië
23-09-1997
[The Government of Saudi Arabia declares that it will] implement the provisions [of
the above Convention], providing these do not conflict with the precepts of the Islamic
Shariah.
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia shall not be bound by the provisions of article (22) of
this Convention, since it considers that any dispute should be referred to the International
Court of Justice only with the approval of the States Parties to the dispute.
Bezwaar Zweden, 27-01-1998
With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi Arabia upon accession:
The Government of Sweden notes that the said reservation is a reservation of a general
kind in respect of the provisions of the Convention which may be in conflict with
the precepts of the Islamic Shariah .
The Government of Sweden is of the view that this general reservation raises doubts
as to the commitment [of] Saudi Arabia to the object and purpose of the Convention
and would recall that, according to article 20, paragraph 2, of the Convention, a
reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of this Convention 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 the treaties.
The Government of Sweden is further of the view that general reservations of the kind
made by the Government of Saudi Arabia, which do not clearly specify the provisions
of the Convention to which they apply and the extent of the derogation therefrom,
contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law.
The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the aforesaid general reservation made
by the Government of Saudi Arabia to the [said Convention].
This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Saudi
Arabia and Sweden. The Convention will thus become operative between the two states
without Saudi Arabia benefiting from this reservation.
Bezwaar Duitsland, 03-02-1998
With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi Arabia upon accession:
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is of the view that this reservation
may raise doubts as to the commitment of Saudi Arabia to the object and purpose of
the Convention.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany would like to recall that, according
to paragraph 2 of article 20 of the Convention, a reservation incompatible with the
object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany therefore objects to the said reservation.
The objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Saudi
Arabia and the Federal Republic of Germany.
Bezwaar Nederlanden, het Koninkrijk der, 03-02-1998
With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi Arabia upon accession:
The Kingdom of the Netherlands objects to the above-mentioned general reservation,
as it is incompatible with object and purpose of the Convention.
This general reservation is not an obstacle for the entry into force of this Convention
between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Saudi Arabia.
Bezwaar Finland, 06-02-1998
With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi Arabia upon accession:
The Government of Finland is of the view that this general reservation raises doubts
as to the commitment of Saudi Arabia to the object and purpose of the Convention and
would recall that according to paragraph 2 of article 20 of the Convention, a reservation
incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.
The Government of Finland would also like to recall that according to the said paragraph
a reservation shall be considered incompatible or inhibitive if at least two thirds
of the States Parties to the Convention object to it. 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 the treaties.
The Government of Finland is further of the view that general reservations of the
kind made by Saudi Arabia, which do not clearly specify the provisions of the Convention
to which they apply and the extent of the derogation therefrom, contribute to undermining
the basis of international treaty law.
The Government of Finland therefore objects to the aforesaid general reservation made
by the Government of Saudi Arabia to the [Convention].
Bezwaar Noorwegen, 06-02-1998
With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi Arabia upon accession:
The Government of Norway considers that the reservation made by the Government of
Saudi Arabia, due to its unlimited scope and undefined character, is contrary to the
object and purpose of the Convention, and thus impermissible under article 20, paragraph
2, of the Convention. Under well-established treaty law, a State party may not invoke
the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform treaty
obligations. For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to the reservation
made by the Government of Saudi Arabia.
The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to preclude the entry into
force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Bezwaar Oostenrijk, 19-02-1998
With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi Arabia upon accession:
Austria is of the view that a reservation by which a State limits its responsibilities
under the Convention in a general and unspecified manner creates doubts as to the
commitment of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia with its obligations under the Convention,
essential for the fulfilment of its objection and purpose. According to paragraph
2 of article 20 a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of this Convention
shall not be permitted.
It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to
become Parties are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply
with their obligations under the treaties.
Austria is further of the view that a general reservation of the kind made by the
Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which does not clearly specify the provisions
of the Convention to which it applies and the extent of the derogation therefrom,
contributes to undermining the basis of international treaty law.
According to international law a reservation is inadmissible to the extent as its
application negatively affects the compliance by a State with its obligations under
the Convention essential for the fulfilment of its object and purpose.
Therefore, Austria cannot consider the reservation made by the Government of the Kingdom
of Saudi Arabia as admissible unless the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,
by providing additional information or through subsequent practice, ensures that the
reservation is compatible with the provisions essential for the implementation of
the object and purpose of the Convention.
This view by Austria would not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the
Convention between the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Austria.
Bezwaar Spanje, 18-09-1998
With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi Arabia upon accession:
The Government of Spain considers that, given its unlimited scope and undefined nature,
the reservation made by the Government of Saudi Arabia is contrary to the object and
purpose of the Convention and therefore inadmissible under article 10, paragraph 2,
of the Convention. Under the generally accepted law of treaties, a State party may
not invoke the provisions of its domestic law as a justification for failure to perform
its treaty obligations. The Government of Spain therefore formulates an objection
to the reservation made by the 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 the Kingdom of Spain and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Senegal
03-12-1982
In accordance with [article 14], the Government of Senegal declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee (on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination) to receive and consider communications from individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by Senegal of any of the rights set forth in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Servië
12-03-2001
By affirming its commitment to establish the principles of the rule of law and promote
and protect human rights, the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia recognizes
the competence of the Committee on the elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive
and consider complaints submitted by individuals and groups alleging violations of
rights guaranteed under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Racial Discrimination.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia determines the competence of
the Federal Constitutional Court to accept and consider, within its domestic legal
system, the complaints submitted by individuals and groups under the State jurisdiction,
alleging to have been victims of rights violations under the Convention, and who have
exhausted all available legal means provided for by the national legislation.
Singapore
27-11-2017
(1) With reference to Article 2 (1), the Republic of Singapore reserves the right
to apply its policies concerning the admission and regulation of foreign work pass
holders, with a view to promoting integration and maintaining cohesion within its
racially diverse society.
(2) With reference to Article 22 of the Convention, the Republic of Singapore states
that before any dispute to which the Republic of Singapore is a party may be submitted
to the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice under this Article, the
specific consent of the Republic of Singapore is required in each case.
(3) The Republic of Singapore understands that the obligation imposed by Article 2
paragraph l (d) of the Convention may be implemented by means other than legislation
if such means are appropriate, and if legislation is not required by circumstances.
(4) The Republic of Singapore interprets the requirement in Article 6 of the Convention
concerning “reparation or satisfaction” as being fulfilled if one or other of these
forms of redress is made available, and interprets ‘satisfaction’ as including any
form of redress effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to an end.
Slovenië
10-11-2001
The Republic of Slovenia recognizes to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination competence to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction 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 any communications unless it has ascertained that the same matter has not been, and is not being, examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement.
Slowakije
17-03-1995
The Slovak Republic, pursuant to article 14 of the Convention, recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in the Convention.
Spanje
13-01-1998
[The Government of Spain] recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination
of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or
groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of Spain claiming to be victims of violations
by the Spanish State of any of the rights set forth in that Convention.
Such competence shall be accepted only after appeals to national jurisdiction bodies
have been exhausted, and it must be exercised within three months following the date
of the final judicial decision.
Syrië
21-04-1969
1. The accession of the Syrian Arab Republic to this Convention shall in no way signify
recognition of Israel or entry into a relationship with it regarding any matter regulated
by the said Convention.
2. The Syrian Arab Republic does not 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 application of the Convention is, at the request
of any of the Parties to the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of
Justice for decision. The Syrian Arab Republic states that, in each individual case,
the consent of all parties to such a dispute is necessary for referring the dispute
to the International Court of Justice.
Bezwaar Israël, 09-07-1969
[The Government of Israel] has noted the political character of the declaration made
by the Government of Syria.
In the view of the Government of Israel, the Convention is 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 Syria an attitude
of complete reciprocity.
Thailand
28-01-2003
The Kingdom of Thailand does not interpret and apply the provisions of this Convention
as imposing upon the Kingdom of Thailand any obligation beyond the confines of the
Constitution and the laws of the Kingdom of Thailand. In addition, such interpretation
and application shall be limited to or consistent with the obligations under other
international human rights instruments to which the Kingdom of Thailand is party.
1. The Kingdom of Thailand interprets Article 4 of the Convention as requiring a party
to the Convention to adopt measures in the fields covered by subparagraphs (a), (b)
and (c) of that article only where it is considered that the need arises to enact
such legislation.
2. The Kingdom of Thailand does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article
22 of the Convention.
Bezwaar Frankrijk, 25-04-2003
The Government of the Republic of France has examined the interpretative declaration
made by the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand upon accession to the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination of 7 March 1966. The Government
of the Republic of France considers that, by making the interpretation and implementation
of the provisions of the Convention subject to respect for the Constitution and legislation
of the Kingdom of Thailand, the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand is making a
reservation of such a general and indeterminate scope that it is not possible to ascertain
which changes to obligations under the Convention it is intended to introduce. Consequently,
the Government of France considers that this reservation as formulated could make
the provisions of the Convention completely ineffective. For these reasons, the Government
objects to this interpretative declaration, which it considers to be a reservation
likely to be incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention.
Bezwaar Duitsland, 29-04-2003
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has examined the General Interpretative
Declaration to the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial
Discrimination made by the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand at the time of its
accession to the Convention.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany considers that the General Interpretative
Declaration made by Thailand is in fact a reservation that seeks to limit the scope
of the Convention on an unilateral basis.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany notes that a reservation to all
provisions of a Convention which consists of a general reference to national law without
specifying its contents does not clearly define for the other State Parties to the
Convention the extend to which the reserving state has accepted the obligations out
of the provisions of the Convention.
The reservation made by the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand in respect to the
applications of the provisions of the Convention therefore raises doubts as to the
commitment of Thailand to fulfill its obligations out of all provisions of the Convention.
Hence the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany considers this reservation
to be incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and objects to the
General Interpretative Declaration made by the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand.
This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Federal Republic of Germany and the Kingdom of Thailand.
Bezwaar Verenigd Koninkrijk, 26-06-2003
The Government of the United Kingdom have examined the interpretative declaration
made by the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand to the International Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (New York, 7 March 1966)
on 28 January 2003 in respect of the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand having
no obligation to interpret and apply the provisions of the Convention beyond the confines
of the Constitution and the laws of the Kingdom of Thailand and, in addition, that
the interpretation and application shall be limited to or consistent with the obligations
under other international human rights instruments to which the Kingdom of Thailand
is party.
In the view of the Government of the United Kingdom, this declaration amounts to a
reservation. This reservation amounts to a general reference to national law without
specifying its contents and does not clearly define for the other States Parties to
the Convention the extent to which the declaring State has accepted the obligations
of the Convention. The Government of the United Kingdom therefore object to the reservation
made by the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Kingdom of Thailand.
Bezwaar Roemenië, 03-12-2003
The Government of Romania has examined the general interpretative declaration made
by the Government of Thailand at the time of its accession to the Convention on the
Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination.
The Government of Romania considers that the general interpretative declaration is,
in fact, a reservation formulated in general terms, that not allows to clearly identify
the obligations assumed by Thailand with regard to this legal instrument and, consequently,
to state the consistency of this reservation with the purpose and object of the above-mentioned
Convention, in accordance with the provisions of article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention
on the Law of Treaties (1969).
The Government of Romania therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation made by Thailand
to the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination.
This objection, however, shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention
between the Government of Romania and Thailand.
Bezwaar Zweden, 27-01-2004
The Government of Sweden has examined the general interpretative declaration made
by the Kingdom of Thailand upon acceding to the International Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
The Government of Sweden recalls that the designation 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. The Government of Sweden considers
that the interpretative declaration made by the Kingdom of Thailand in substance constitutes
a reservation.
The Government of Sweden notes that the application of the Convention is being made
subject to a general reservation referring to the confines of national legislation,
without specifying its contents. Such a reservation makes it unclear to what extent
the reserving state considers itself bound by the obligations of the Convention. The
reservation made by the Kingdom of Thailand therefore raises doubts as to the commitment
of the Kingdom of Thailand to the object and purpose of the Convention. In addition,
according to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a party to a treaty may
not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to
abide by the treaty.
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 the treaties. According to customary law as codified in the
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation incompatible with the object
and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted.
The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the
Kingdom of Thailand to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Racial Discrimination.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Kingdom of Thailand and Sweden. The Convention enters into force between the two States,
without the Kingdom of Thailand benefitting from this reservation.
07-10-2016
Withdrawal of reservation to article 4.
Togo
09-01-2015
Expressing its determination to maintain the rule of law, to defend and protect human rights and in accordance with Article 14, the Government the Republic of Togo declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the Republic of Togo, of any of the rights set forth in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Tonga
16-02-1972
To the extent, [...], that any law relating to land in Tonga which prohibits or restricts
the alienation of land by the indigenous inhabitants may not fulfil the obligations
referred to in article 5 (d) (v), [...], the Kingdom of Tonga reserves the right not
to apply the Convention to Tonga.
Secondly, the Kingdom of Tonga wishes to state its understanding of certain articles
in the Convention. It interprets article 4 as requiring a party to the Convention
to adopt further legislative measures in the fields covered by sub-paragraphs (a),
(b) and (c) of that article only in so far as it may consider with due regard to the
principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly
set forth in article 5 of the Convention (in particular the right to freedom of opinion
and expression and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association) that
some legislative addition to or variation of existing law and practice in those fields
is necessary for the attainment of the end specified in the earlier part of article
4. Further, the Kingdom of Tonga interprets the requirement in article 6 concerning
`reparation or satisfaction' as being fulfilled if one or other of these forms of
redress is made available and interprets `satisfaction' as including any form of redress
effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to an end. In addition it interprets
article 20 and the other related provisions of Part III of the Convention as meaning
that if a reservation is not accepted the State making the reservation does not become
a Party to the Convention.
Lastly, the Kingdom of Tonga maintains its position in regard to article 15. In its
view this article is discriminatory in that it establishes a procedure for the receipt
of petitions relating to dependent territories while making no comparable provision
for States without such territories. Moreover, the article purports to establish a
procedure applicable to the dependent territories of States whether or not those States
have become parties to the Convention. His Majesty's Government have decided that
the Kingdom of Tonga should accede to the Convention, these objections notwithstanding
because of the importance they attach to the Convention as a whole.
28-10-1977
By a notification received on 28 October 1977, the Government of Tonga informed the Secretary-General that it has decided to withdraw only those reservations made upon accession relating to article 5 (c) in so far as it relates to elections, and reservations relating to articles 2, 3 and 5 (e) (v), in so far as these articles relate to education and training.
Tsjechië
11-10-2000
The Czech Republic declares that according to Article 14, paragraph 1 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination it recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Turkije
16-09-2002
The Republic of Turkey declares that it will implement the provisions of this Convention
only to the States Parties with which it has diplomatic relations.
The Republic of Turkey declares that this Convention is ratified exclusively with
regard to the national territory where the Constitution and the legal and administrative
order of the Republic of Turkey are applied.
The Republic of Turkey does not consider itself bound by Article 22 of this Convention.
The explicit consent of the Republic of Turkey is necessary in each individual case
before any dispute to which the Republic of Turkey is party concerning the interpretation
or application of this Convention may be referred to the International Court of Justice.
Bezwaar Zweden, 14-01-2003
The Government of Sweden has examined the declarations made by Turkey upon ratifying
the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Paragraph 1 of the declaration states that Turkey will implement the provisions of
the Convention only to the States Parties with which it has diplomatic relations.
This statement in fact amounts, in the view of the Government of Sweden, to a reservation.
The reservation makes it unclear to what extent the Turkey considers itself bound
by the obligations of the Convention. In absence of further clarification, therefore,
the reservation raises doubts as to the commitment of Turkey to the object and purpose
of the Convention.
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 the treaties. According to article 20 of the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, a reservation
incompatible with the object and purpose of the convention shall not be permitted.
The Government of Sweden objects to the said reservation made by the Government of
Turkey to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Turkey
and Sweden. The Convention enters into force in its entiretv between the two States,
without Turkey benefiting from its reservation.
Bezwaar Verenigd Koninkrijk, 26-06-2003
The Government of the United Kingdom have examined the declaration made by the Government
of the Republic of Turkey to the International Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Racial Discrimination (New York, 7 March 1966) on 16 September 2002 in respect
of implementation of the provisions of the Convention only to the States Parties with
which it has diplomatic relations.
In the view of the Government of the United Kingdom, this declaration amounts to a
reservation. This reservation creates uncertainty as to the States Parties in respect
of which Turkey is undertaking the obligations in the Convention. The Government of
the United Kingdom therefore object to the reservation made by the Government of the
Republic of Turkey.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Republic of Turkey.
Bezwaar Cyprus, 05-08-2003
[...] the Government of the Republic of Cyprus has examined the declaration made by
the Government of the Republic of Turkey to the International Convention on the Elimination
of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (New York, 7 March 1966) on 16 September 2002
in respect of the implementation of the provisions of the Convention only to the States
Parties with which it has diplomatic relations.
In the view of the Government of the Republic of Cyprus, this declaration amounts
to a reservation. This reservation creates uncertainty as to the States Parties in
respect of which Turkey is undertaking the obligations in the Convention. The Government
of the Republic of Cyprus therefore objects to the reservation made by the Government
of the Republic of Turkey.
This reservation or the objection to it shall not preclude the entry into force of
the Convention between the Republic of Cyprus and the Republic of Turkey.
Uruguay
11-09-1972
The Government of Uruguay recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, under article 14 of the Convention.
Venezuela
22-09-2003
Pursuant to the provisions of article 14, paragraph 1 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination established under article 8 of the Convention to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of violations by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela of any of the rights set forth in the Convention.
Verenigd Koninkrijk
11-10-1966
First, in the present circumstances deriving from the usurpation of power in Rhodesia
by the illegal régime, the United Kingdom must sign subject to a reservation of the
right not to apply the Convention to Rhodesia unless and until the United Kingdom
informs the Secretary-General of the United Nations that it is in a position to ensure
that the obligations imposed by the Convention in respect of that territory can be
fully implemented.
Secondly, the United Kingdom wishes to state its under- standing of certain articles
in the Convention. It interprets article 4 as requiring a party to the Convention
to adopt further legislative measures in the fields covered by sub-paragraphs (a),
(b) and (c) of that article only in so far as it may consider with due regard to the
principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly
set forth in article 5 of the Convention (in particular the right to freedom of opinion
and expression and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association) that
some legislative addition to or variation of existing law and practice in those fields
is necessary for the attainment of the end specified in the earlier part of article
4. Further, the United Kingdom interprets the requirement in article 6 concerning
`reparation or satisfaction' as being fulfilled if one or other of these forms of
redress is made available and interprets `satisfaction' as including any form of redress
effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to an end. In addition it interprets
article 20 and the other related provisions of Part III of the Convention as meaning
that if a reservation is not accepted the State making the 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 discriminatory in that it establishes a procedure for the receipt
of petitions relating to dependent territories while making no comparable provision
for States without such territories. Moreover, the article purports to establish a
procedure applicable to the dependent territories of States whether or not those States
have become parties to the Convention. Her Majesty's Government have decided that
the United Kingdom should sign the Convention, these objections notwithstanding, because
of the importance they attach to the Convention as a whole.
07-03-1969
First, the reservation and interpretative statements made by the United Kingdom at
the time of signature of the Convention are maintained.
Secondly, the United Kingdom does not regard the Commonwealth Immigrants Acts, 1962
and 1968, or their application, as involving any racial discrimination within the
meaning of paragraph 1 of article 1, or any other provision of the Convention, and
fully reserves its right to continue to apply those Acts.
Lastly, to the extent if any, that any law relating to election in Fiji may not fulfil
the obligations referred to in article 5 (c), that any law relating to land in Fiji
which prohibits or restricts the alienation of land by the indigenous inhabitants
may not fulfil the obligations referred to in article 5 (d) (v), or that the school
system of Fiji may not fulfil the obligations referred to in articles 2, 3 or 5 (e)
(v), the United Kingdom reserves the right not to apply the Convention to Fiji.
Verenigde Arabische Emiraten
20-06-1974
The accession of the United Arab Emirates to this Convention shall in no way amount to recognition of nor the establishment of any treaty relations with Israel.
Bezwaar Israël, 25-09-1974
[The Government of Israel] has noted the political character of the declaration made
by the Government of the United Arab Emirates.
In the view of the Government of Israel, the Convention is 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 United Arab
Emirates an attitude of complete reciprocity.
Verenigde Staten van Amerika
28-09-1966
The Constitution of the United States contains provisions for the protection of individual rights, such as the right of free speech, and nothing in the Convention shall be deemed to require or to authorize legislation or other action by the United States of America incompatible with the provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America.
21-10-1994
I. The Senate's advice and consent is subject to the following reservations:
(1) That the Constitution and laws of the United States contain extensive protections
of individual freedom of speech, expression and association. Accordingly, the United
States does not accept any obligation under this Convention, in particular under articles
4 and 7, to restrict those rights, through the adoption of legislation or any other
measures, to the extent that they are protected by the Constitution and laws of the
United States.
(2) That the Constitution and laws of the United States establish extensive protections
against discrimination, reaching significant areas of non-governmental activity. Individual
privacy and freedom from governmental interference in private conduct, however, are
also recognized as among the fundamental values which shape our free and democratic
society. The United States understands that the identification of the rights protected
under the Convention by reference in article 1 to fields of `public life' reflects
a similar distinction between spheres of public conduct that are customarily the subject
of governmental regulation, and spheres of private conduct that are not. To the extent,
however, that the Convention calls for a broader regulation of private conduct, the
United States does not accept any obligation under this Convention to enact legislation
or take other measures under paragraph (1) of article 2, subparagraphs (1) (c) and
(d) of article 2, article 3 and article 5 with respect to private conduct except as
mandated by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(3) That with reference to article 22 of the Convention, before any dispute to which
the United States is a party may be submitted to the jurisdiction of the International
Court of Justice under this article, the specific consent of the United States is
required in each case.
II. The Senate's advice and consent is subject to the following understanding, which
shall apply to the obligations of the United States under this Convention:
That the United States understands that this Convention shall be implemented by the
Federal Government to the extent that it exercises jurisdiction over the matters covered
therein, and otherwise by the state and local governments. To the extent that state
and local governments exercise jurisdiction over such matters, the Federal Government
shall, as necessary, take appropriate measures to ensure the fulfilment of this Convention.
III. The Senate's advice and consent is subject to the following declaration:
That the United States declares that the provisions of the Convention are not self-executing.
13-05-2014
The Government of the United States of America does not believe the 'State of Palestine' qualifies as a sovereign State and does not recognize it as such. Accession to the Convention is limited to sovereign States. Therefore, the Government of the United States of America believes that the 'State of Palestine' is not qualified to accede to the Convention and affirms that it will not consider itself to be in a treaty relationship with the 'State of Palestine' under the Convention.
Vietnam
09-06-1982
(1) The Government of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam declares that the provisions of article 17 (1) and of article 18 (1) of the Convention whereby a number of States are deprived of the opportunity of becoming Parties to the said Convention are of a discriminatory nature and it considers that, in accordance with the principle of the sovereign equality of States, the Convention should be open to participation by all States without discrimination or restriction of any kind.
10-08-1982
(2) The Government of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the Convention and holds that, for any dispute with regard to the interpretation or application of the Convention to be brought before the International Court of Justice, the consent of all parties to the dispute is necessary.
Zuid-Afrika
10-12-1998
The Republic of South Africa-
(a) declares that, for the purposes of paragraph 1 of article 14 of the Convention,
it recognises the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within
the Republic's jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the Republic
in any of the rights set forth in the Convention after having exhausted all domestic
remedies
and
(b) indicates that, for the purposes of paragraph 2 of article 14 of the Convention,
the South African Human Rights Commission is the body within the Republic's national
legal order which shall be competent to receive and consider petitions from individuals
or groups of individuals within the Republic's jurisdiction who claim to be victims
of any of the rights set forth in the Convention.
Zuid-Korea
05-03-1997
The Government of the Republic of Korea recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of the Republic of Korea claiming to be victims of a violation by the Republic of Korea of any of the rights set forth in the said Convention.
Zweden
06-12-1971
Sweden recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of Sweden claiming to be victims of a violation by Sweden of any of the rights set forth in the Convention, with the reservation that the Committee shall not consider any communication from an 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 procedure of international investigation or settlement.
Zwitserland
29-11-1994
Reservation concerning article 4:
Switzerland reserves the right to take the legislative measures necessary for the
implementation of article 4, taking due account of freedom of opinion and freedom
of association, provided for inter alia in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Reservation concerning article 2, paragraph 1 (a):
Switzerland reserves the right to apply its legal provisions concerning the admission
of foreigners to the Swiss market.
19-06-2003
[...] Switzerland recognizes, pursuant to article 14, paragraph 1, of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, concluded at New York on 21 December 1965, the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) to receive and consider communications under the above-mentioned provision, with the reservation that the Committee shall not consider any communication from an individual or group of individuals unless the Committee has ascertained that the same matter is not being examined or has not been examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement.