Print
Download XMLAanvullend Protocol bij het Verdrag tussen de Staten die Partij zijn bij het Noord-Atlantisch Verdrag en de overige Staten die deelnemen aan het Partnerschap voor de Vrede nopens de rechtspositie van hun krijgsmachten
Partijen met voorbehouden, verklaringen en bezwaren
| Partij | Voorbehoud / verklaring | Bezwaren |
|---|---|---|
| Denemarken | Ja | Nee |
| Duitsland | Ja | Nee |
| Finland | Ja | Nee |
| Griekenland | Ja | Nee |
| Nederlanden, het Koninkrijk der | Ja | Nee |
| Noorwegen | Ja | Nee |
| Russische Federatie | Ja | Ja |
| Spanje | Ja | Nee |
| Zwitserland | Ja | Nee |
Denemarken
08-07-1999
[...] pending further decision, the Additional Protocol [...] will not apply to the
Faroe Islands or to Greenland.
Duitsland
24-09-1998
It is the understanding of the Federal Republic of Germany that Article I of the Agreement
of 19 June 1995 among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the other
States participating in the Partnership for Peace regarding the status of their Forces
shall not affect the EU legislation applicable in the Federal Republic of Germany
with regard to the exemption of foreign armed forces and their members from taxes
and duties.
It is the understanding of the Federal Republic of Germany that, in accordance with
the meaning and purpose of the Agreement of 19 June 1995 among the States Parties
to the North Atlantic Treaty and the other States participating in the Partnership
for Peace regarding the status of their Forces, Article II thereof does not conflict
with the application of the Agreement throughout the whole territory of the Federal
Republic of Germany.
Finland
02-07-1997
The acceptance of the jurisdiction by military authorities of a sending state in accordance with Article VII of the Agreement between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty regarding the status of their Forces by Finland does not apply to the exercise, on the territory of Finland, of the jurisdiction by courts of a sending state.
Griekenland
30-06-2000
[confirmation upon deposit of its instrument of ratification of the declaration made
upon signature]
Regarding the signing of this Protocol by the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
the Hellenic Republic declares that its own signing of the said Protocol can in no
way be interpreted as an acceptance from its part, or as recognition in any form and
content of a name other than that of "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia",
under which the Hellenic Republic has recognized the said country and under which
the latter had joined the NATO "Partnership for Peace" Programme, where resolution
817/93 of the UN Security Council was taken into consideration.
Nederlanden, het Koninkrijk der
26-06-1997
The Kingdom of the Netherlands will be bound by the Agreement among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the other States participating in the Partnership for Peace regarding the Status of their Forces only with respect to those other States participating in the Partnership for Peace which in addition to ratifying, accepting or approving the Agreement, also ratify, accept or approve the Additional Protocol to the Agreement.
Noorwegen
04-10-1996
The Government of Norway will be bound by the Agreement among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the other States participating in the Partnership for Peace regarding the Status of their Forces only with respect to those other States participating in the Partnership for Peace which in addition to ratifying the Agreement, also ratify the Additional Protocol to the Agreement among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the other States participating in the Partnership for Peace regarding the Status of their Forces.
Russische Federatie
28-08-2007
In order to implement the Agreement among the States Parties to the North Atlantic
Treaty and the Other States Participating in the Partnership for Peace Regarding the
Status of Their Forces, signed June 19, 1995, the Russian Federation proceeds from
the following understanding of the provisions of the Agreement among the Parties to
the North Atlantic Treaty Regarding the Status of Their Forces, of June 19, 1951 (hereinafter
the Agreement):
1) the provision of Article III (4) of the Agreement, which obligates the authorities
of the sending State to immediately inform the authorities of the receiving State
of cases where a member of a force or of a civilian component fails to return to his
country after being separated from the service, shall also apply to cases where those
persons absent themselves without authorization from the site of deployment of the
force of the sending State and are carrying weapons;
2) on the basis of reciprocity, the Russian Federation will understand the words 'possess
arms' used in Article VI of the Agreement to mean the application and use of weapons,
and the words 'shall give sympathetic consideration to requests from the receiving
State' to mean the obligation of the authorities of the sending State to consider
the receiving State's requests concerning the shipment, transportation, use, and application
of weapons;
3) the list of offenses set forth in subparagraph c of Article VII (2) is not exhaustive
and, for the Russian Federation, includes, apart from those enumerated, other offenses
that are directed against the foundations of its constitutional system and security
and that are covered by the Russian Federation Criminal Code;
4) pursuant to Article VII (4) of the Agreement, the Russian Federation presumes that
the authorities of the sending State have the right to exercise their jurisdiction
in the event that at sites where the sending State's force is deployed, unidentified
persons commit offenses against that state, members of its force, and members of its
civilian component, or their family members. When a person who committed an offense
is identified, the procedure established by the Agreement takes effect;
5) the assistance mentioned in subparagraph a of Article VII (6) of the Agreement
is provided in conformity with the legislation of the requested State. In providing
legal assistance, the competent authorities of the States Parties to the Agreement
interact directly, and if necessary, through the appropriate higher authorities;
6) the Russian Federation allows importation of the goods and vehicles mentioned in
Article XI (2), (5) and (6) of the Agreement, and the equipment and items mentioned
in Article XI (4) of the Agreement which are intended for the needs of the force,
in accordance with the terms of the customs regime for temporary importation that
were established by the customs legislation of the Russian Federation. In this connection,
such importation is carried out with full exemption from payment of customs duties,
taxes, and fees, except for customs fees for storage, customs processing of goods,
and similar services outside of the designated places or hours of operation of the
customs authorities, and for the periods provided for in the Agreement if such periods
are expressly stipulated in the Agreement.
The Russian Federation presumes that the procedure and terms for importation of the
goods mentioned in Article XI (4) of the Agreement and intended for the needs of the
force will be governed by separate agreements on the sending and receiving of forces
between the Russian Federation and the sending State.
None of the provisions of Article XI, including paras. 3 and 8, restrict the right
of Russian Federation customs authorities to take all necessary steps to monitor compliance
with the terms for importation of goods and vehicles provided for by Article XI of
the Agreement, if such measures are necessary under Russian Federation customs legislation.
The Russian Federation presumes that the sending State will send confirmation to the
Russian Federation customs authorities that all goods and vehicles imported into the
Russian Federation in accordance with the provisions of Article XI of the Agreement
and with separate arrangements on the sending and receiving of forces between the
Russian Federation and the sending State may be used solely for the purposes for which
they were imported. In the event they are used for other purposes, all customs payments
stipulated by Russian Federation legislation must be made for such goods and vehicles,
and the other requirements set by Russian Federation legislation must also be fulfilled.
Transit of the aforesaid goods and vehicles shall be carried out in accordance with
Russian Federation customs legislation.
Pursuant to Article XI (11), the Russian Federation declares that it permits the importation
into the customs territory of the Russian Federation of petroleum products intended
for use in the process of operating official vehicles, aircraft, and vessels belonging
to the forces or the civilian component, with exemption from the payment of customs
duties and taxes in accordance with the requirements and restrictions established
by Russian Federation legislation.
The Russian Federation permits the importation of the vehicles that are mentioned
in Article XI (2), (5) and (6) of the Agreement and intended for personal use by members
of the civilian component and their family members under the terms of temporary importation
that are established by Russian Federation legislation.
The Russian Federation presumes that customs processing of goods imported (exported)
by members of the civilian component and their family members and intended solely
for their personal use, including goods for initially setting up a household, shall
be carried out without the exacting of customs payments, except for customs fees for
storage, customs processing of goods, and similar services outside the designated
places or hours of operation of the customs authorities.
7) The Russian Federation also presumes that documents and materials appended to them
that are sent to its competent authorities within the framework of the Agreement will
be accompanied by duly certified translations thereof into the Russian language.
Bezwaar Litouwen, 04-09-2008
[…] has the honour to transmit the following Statement of the Republic of Lithuania
concerning the statement of the Russian Federation as of 28 August 2007 made upon
ratification of the Agreement and the Additional Protocol to the Agreement.
The Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania,
complying with paragraphs 4 and 5 of Article 20 of the Vienna Convention on the Law
of Treaties (official gazette Valstyb?s žinios, 2002, No 13-480),
having regard to the Statement of the Russian Federation as of 28 August 2007 made
upon ratification of the Agreement Among the States Parties to the North Atlantic
Treaty and the Other States Participating in the Partnership for Peace Regarding the
Status of Their Forces (hereinafter referred to as the 'PfP Agreement') and the Additional
Protocol to the Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the 'Statement of the Russian
Federation'),
hereby states that:
1. The Republic of Lithuania considers the following provisions of the Statement of
the Russian Federation as reservations to the extent that they do not conform to or
modify the provisions of the Agreement Between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty
Regarding the Status of Their Forces, done in London on 19 June 1951 (hereinafter
referred to as "the NATO Agreement") and applied on the basis of the PfP Agreement:
1) regarding subparagraph c of paragraph 2 of Article VII of the NATO Agreement, as
they are set forth in item 3 of the Statement of the Russian Federation;
2) regarding paragraph 4 of Article VII of the NATO Agreement, as they are set forth
in item 4 of the Statement of the Russian Federation;
3) regarding subparagraph a of paragraph 6 of Article VII of the NATO Agreement, as
they are set forth in item 5 of the Statement of the Russian Federation;
4) regarding paragraph 3 of Article XI of the NATO Agreement, as they are set forth
in indent 3 of item 6 of the Statement of the Russian Federation;
5) regarding paragraph 4 of Article XI of the NATO Agreement, as they are set forth
in indent 2 of item 6 of the Statement of the Russian Federation;
6) regarding paragraphs 2, 4, 5 and 6 of Article XI of the NATO Agreement, as they
are set forth in the second sentence of indent 1 of item 6 of the Statement of the
Russian Federation;
7) regarding Article XI of the NATO Agreement, as they are set forth in indent 4 of
item 6 of the Statement of the Russian Federation;
8) regarding paragraph 11 of Article XI of the NATO Agreement, as they are set forth
in indent 6 of item 6 of the Statement of the Russian Federation;
9) regarding Article XI of the NATO Agreement, as they are set forth in indent 8 of
item 6 of the Statement of the Russian Federation.
2. The Republic of Lithuania does not object to the provisions of the Statement of
the Russian Federation mentioned in paragraph 1 of this Statement to the extent that
their implementation will be compatible with the object and purpose of the NATO Agreement
and/or will not create additional obligations for the Republic of Lithuania which
are neither provided for nor related to the provisions of the NATO Agreement.
3. The Republic of Lithuania shall apply the following provisions of the Statement
of the Russian Federation on a reciprocal basis:
1) regarding the provisions of Article VI of the NATO Agreement, as they are set forth
in item 2 of the Statement of the Russian Federation;
2) regarding the provisions of paragraphs 2, 4, 5 and 6 of Article XI of the NATO
Agreement, as they are set forth in the first sentence of indent 1 of item 6 of the
Statement of the Russian Federation;
3) regarding the provisions of paragraphs 2, 5 and 6 of Article XI of the NATO Agreement,
as they are set forth in indent 7 of item 6 of the Statement of the Russian Federation;
4) regarding the provisions of Article XI of the NATO Agreement, as they are set forth
in indent 5 of item 6 of the Statement of the Russian Federation;
5) regarding the provisions of the NATO Agreement related to item 7 of the Statement
of the Russian Federation.
4. It is the understanding of the Republic of Lithuania that:
1) the provisions set forth in item 6 of the Statement of the Russian Federation do
not restrict in any way the obligation of the Russian Federation to exempt the goods
and equipment indicated in Article XI of the NATO Agreement from duties and taxes
during re-export;
2) the provisions set forth in indent 6 of item 6 of the Statement of the Russian
Federation do not restrict in any way the obligation of the Russian Federation to
exempt the oil products indicated in Article XI of the NATO Agreement and intended
for use when operating service vehicles, aircrafts and ships of a force or of a civilian
component from duties and taxes when they are purchased within the territory of the
Russian Federation.
5. The provision 'the object and purpose of the NATO Agreement' as contained in this
Statement shall be deemed by the Republic of Lithuania as 'the object and purpose
of the NATO Agreement to the extent that it is related to the object and purpose of
the PfP Agreement'; the provision 'implementation of the NATO Agreement' shall be
deemed by the Republic of Lithuania as 'implementation of the NATO Agreement to the
extent that it is related to implementation of the PfP Agreement'.'
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Lithuania avails itself of this
opportunity to renew to the United States Department of State the assurances of its
highest consideration.
Bezwaar Griekenland, 11-09-2008
Greece understands that the statement accompanying the instrument of ratification by the Russian Federation of the Agreement among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the other States participating in the Partnership for Peace Regarding the Status of their Forces of the 19th of June 1995, shall not affect the application by the Russian Federation of the provisions of the above Agreement.
Bezwaar Letland, 11-09-2008
The Government of Latvia has carefully examined the "Statements" made by the Russian
Federation to the PfP SOFA upon ratification. Thus, the Government of the Republic
of Latvia is of the opinion that most of the statements are in fact unilateral acts
deemed to limit the scope of application of the PfP SOFA and therefore shall be regarded
as reservations. Namely, statements on Art. III (4), Art. VI, Art. VII (4), Art. XI
(2), (4), (5), (6) (Russian Federation's Statement No. 6, para. 1), Art. XI (3) (Russian
Federation's Statement No.6 para. 3), Art.XI (Russian Federation's Statement No. 6
para. 5), Art XI (11) (Russian Federation's Statement No. 6 para. 6), Art. XI (2),
(5), (6) (Russian Federation's Statement No. 6 para. 7), Art. XI (Russian Federation's
Statement No. 6 para. 8) and Russian Federations Statement No. 7 regarding all the
PfP SOFA and the translation of all documents related to fulfilment of the PfP SOFA.
Moreover, The Government of the Republic of Latvia has noted that the statements do
not make it clear to what extent the Russian Federation considers itself bound by
the provisions of the PfP SOFA and whether the way of implementation of the provisions
of the aforementioned Agreement is in line with the object and purpose of the Agreement.
The Government of the Republic of Latvia therefore objects to the following reservations
made by the Russian Federation to the Agreement among the States parties to the North
Atlantic Treaty and the other States participating in the Partnership for Peace regarding
the status of their forces and the Additional Protocol thereto:
1. Reservation made to Art. VI regarding the interpretation of words "shall give sympathetic
consideration to request from receiving state".
2. Reservation to Art. VII (4).
3. Reservation to Art. XI (3) stating that Russian Federation customs authorities
should be allowed to take all necessary steps to monitor compliance with the terms
of importation of goods and vehicles provided for by Art. XI of the Agreement, if
such measures are necessary under Russian Federation customs legislation.
4. Reservation to Art. XI (6) stating that terms of temporary importation established
by Russian Federation legislation should be applied to importation of vehicles mentioned
in Art. XI (6) and intended for personal use.
5. Reservation stating that translation of documents and attached materials sent to
the competent authorities under the Agreement should be accompanied with their duly
certified translations into Russian.
However, these objections shall not preclude the entry into force of the PfP Sofa
between the Republic of Latvia and the Russian Federation. Thus, the PfP SOFA will
become operative without Russian Federation benefiting from its reservations.
Bezwaar Portugal, 11-09-2008
The Portuguese Republic welcomes the deposit by the Russian Federation of the Instrument
of Ratification of the Agreement among the States parties to the North Atlantic Treaty
and Other States participating in the Partnership for Peace regarding the Status of
their Forces, dated 19 June 1995 and its Additional Protocol, dated 19 June 1995.
However, the Instrument of Ratification contains understandings that exclude or modify
the legal effect of certain provisions of the Agreement among the Parties to the North
Atlantic Treaty regarding the Status of their Forces, of 19 June 1951, hereinafter
referred to as "the Agreement". These reservations on articles III(4), VI, VII(2),
VII(4), VII(6), XI, and on the use of Russian language are incompatible with the object
and purpose of "the Agreement".
The Portuguese Republic therefore objects to the above mentioned reservations made
by the Russian Federation to the Agreement.
In the absence of implementing arrangements between the Portuguese Republic and the
Russian Federation, the regime of "the Agreement" should prevail and no internal law
should override the provisions of "the Agreement".
These objections shall not preclude the entry into force of "the Agreement" in the
relations between the Portuguese Republic and the Russian Federation.
Bezwaar België, 12-09-2008
The Government of the Kingdom of Belgium has reviewed the declarations made by the
Russian Federation when it ratified the the Agreement among the States Parties to
the North Atlantic Treaty and the Other States Participating in the Partnership for
Peace Regarding the Status of their Forces and the Additional Protocol, done at Brussels
June 19, 1995. The Belgian Government considers that the Russian declarations regarding
Article VII, paragraphs 2c, 4, and 6a, and the requirement for a certified translation
into Russian of all documents and annexes, are inconsistent with the aim and purpose
of the Agreement.
The Belgian Government notes that under Article 19(c) of the Vienna Convention on
the Law of Treaties, no reservation that is incompatible with the object and purpose
of the Agreement can be made. Therefore, the Belgian Government objects to the above-mentioned
reservations by the Russian Federation regarding the Agreement among the States Parties
to the North Atlantic Treaty and the Other States Participating in the Partnership
for Peace Regarding the Status of their Forces and the Additional Protocol, done at
Brussels June 19, 1995. Belgium wishes to point out that this objection is not an
obstacle to the entry into force of the Agreement between Belgium and the Russian
Federation. According to the Belgian Government, the declarations by the Russian Federation
concerning Article III, paragraph 4 and Article VI create obligations that are not
provided under the Agreement among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty
and the Other States Participating in the Partnership for Peace Regarding the Status
of their Forces and the Additional Protocol, done at Brussels June 19, 1995. In the
opinion of the Belgian Government, these additional demands could be addressed under
specific arrangements concluded at the time of joint activities.
The declaration regarding Article XI is acceptable to the Belgian Government, except
for the passage referring to separate agreements. Belgium believes that the terms
and procedures governing importation must be uniform for all the forces and can only
vary on the basis of objective and uniform criteria applicable to all the forces of
all the nations concerned and not on the basis of separate agreements.
Bezwaar Canada, 12-09-2008
Canada considers that the Statement of the Russian Federation is incompatible with
provisions of the Agreement Between Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty Regarding
the Status of their Forces, done in London on 19 June 1951. Pursuant to Article 1
of the Agreement Among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the Other
States Participating in the Partnership for Peace Regarding the Status of their Forces,
all States Parties shall apply the provisions of the Agreement Between Parties to
the North Atlantic Treaty Regarding the Status of their Forces, done in London on
19 June 1951 as if they were Parties to it.
Canada objects to the Statement of the Russian Federation on the basis that it constitutes
a Reservation incompatible with Article 1 of the Agreement Among the States Parties
to the North Atlantic Treaty and the Other States Participating in the Partnership
for Peace Regarding the Status of their Forces.
Bezwaar Denemarken, 12-09-2008
The Government of Denmark considers the provisions as set out in item 1-6 of the Statement
of the Government of the Russian Federation as reservations incompatible with the
provisions of the Agreement between Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty regarding
the status of their forces, done at London on 19 June 1951 (NATO SOFA).
NATO SOFA is applicable as Article I in the PfP SOFA provides, except as otherwise
provided for in the PfP SOFA, that all States Parties to the PfP SOFA shall apply
the provisions of the NATO SOFA, as if all State Parties to [the] PfP SOFA were Parties
to the NATO SOFA.
The Government of Denmark objects to the provisions as set out in item 1-6 of the
Statement of the Government of the Russian Federation as reservations incompatible
with the PfP SOFA Article I.
The Government of Denmark considers the provision set out in item 7 of the Statement
of the Russian Federation concerning translations into Russian as a new obligation
in addition to the PfP SOFA.
The Government of Denmark does not accept the provision. Therefore the provision is
not in force in the relation between the Government of Denmark and the Government
of the Russian Federation concerning [the] PfP SOFA.
The objections do not preclude that the PfP SOFA is in force between the Government
of Denmark and the Government of the Russian Federation.
Bezwaar Duitsland, 12-09-2008
The Federal Republic of Germany attaches great importance to the Agreement among the
States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the Other States Participating in
the Partnership for Peace Regarding the Status of their Forces (PfP Status of Forces
Agreement) and welcomes its ratification by the Russian Federation. The Federal Republic
of Germany is convinced that this Agreement has brought benefits to all participating
States.
However, the Federal Republic of Germany believes it necessary to object as follows
to the statements on the Agreement of 19 June 1995 among the States Parties to the
North Atlantic Treaty and the Other States Participating in the Partnership for Peace
Regarding the Status of their Forces (PfP Status of Forces Agreement) submitted by
the Russian Federation on depositing its instrument of ratification and which the
Federal Republic of Germany received on 18 September 2007.
The designation of the individual regulations relates to the Agreement of 19 June
1951 between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty Regarding the Status of their
Forces (NATO Status of Forces Agreement), as the States Parties to the PfP Status
of Forces Agreement apply the NATO Status of Forces Agreement as if they were parties
to the NATO Status of Forces Agreement. The Federal Republic of Germany believes it
is especially necessary to object because the statements of the Russian Federation
refer to domestic Russian law and this creates uncertainty regarding the actual applicable
legal provisions.
1. The Federal Republic of Germany object tot the statement by the Russian federation
that it allows the importation of goods and vehicles referred to in Article XI (2),
(5), and (6), as well as the importation of equipment and other items referred to
in Article XI (4) intended for the deployment of the force, in accordance with the
terms of the customs regime for temporary importation established by the customs legislation
of the Russian Federation.
2. The Federal Republic of Germany objects to the statement by the Russian Federation
that none of the provisions contained in Article XI, including paragraph 3, restrict
the right of the Russian Federation tot take all necessary steps to monitor compliance
with the terms for the importation of goods and vehicles provided for by Article XI
of the Agreement if such measures are necessary under Russian Federation customs legislation.
3. The Federal Republic of Germany objects to the statement by the Russian Federation
that it presumes the sending State will send confirmation to the Russian Federation
customs authorities that all goods and vehicles imported into the Russian Federation
in accordance with the provisions of Article XI of the Agreement and with separate
arrangements on the sending and receiving of forces shall be used solely for the purposes
for which they were imported. The Federal Republic of Germany also objects to the
statement by the Russian Federation that the transit of such goods and vehicles should
be carried out in accordance with Russian federation customs legislation.
4. The Federal Republic of Germany objects to the statement by the Russian Federation
that it intends to permit the importation petroleum products intended for use in the
process of operating official vehicles, aircraft and vessels belonging tot the forces
or the civilian component, with exemption from the payment of customs duties and taxes
in accordance with the requirements established by Russian Federation legislation.
5. The Federal Republic of Germany objects to the statement by the Russian Federation
that it intends to permit the importation of the vehicles referred to in Article XI
(2), (5) and (6) of the Agreement and intended for personal use by members of the
civilian component and their family members under the terms of temporary importation
established by Russian Federation legislation.
6. The Federal Republic of Germany objects to the statement by the Russian Federation
that it presumes that the documents and material sent tot its competent authorities
within the framework of the PfP Status of Forces Agreement will be accompanied by
duly certified translations into the Russian language.
7. The Federal Republic of Germany does not object to the entry into force of the
Agreement between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Russian Federation.
The Federal Republic of Germany stresses the importance of the aforementioned Agreement
and expresses its hope that it will help intensify and enhance the cooperation among
all participating States.
Bezwaar Estland, 12-09-2008
The Government of the Republic of Estonia has carefully examined the statements made
by the Russian Federation upon the ratification of the Agreement among the States
parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the other States participating in the Partnership
for Peace regarding the status of their forces, done on 19 June 1995 (hereinafter
PfP SOFA), and the Additional Protocol thereto. By virtue of Article I of the PfP
SOFA the provisions of the Agreement between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty
regarding the status of their forces, done on 19 June 1951 (hereinafter the NATO SOFA)
apply to the Parties of the PfP SOFA as if they were parties to the NATO SOFA, except
as otherwise provided for in the PfP SOFA and any additional protocol thereto.
The Government of the Republic of Estonia considers the statements made by the Russian
Federation relating to Article VI, sub-paragraph c of paragraph 2 of Article VII,
paragraph 4 of Article VII, sub-paragraph a of paragraph 6 of Article VII and Article
XI of the NATO SOFA, and the statement concerning the translation of documents to
Russian, to be reservations that are contrary to the object and purpose of the NATO
SOFA.
1. The statement relating to Article VI broadens the meaning of terms "possess arms"
and "give sympathetic consideration" and therefore modifies the legal effects and
the scope of implementation of Article VI. Adding new obligations to other States
parties is contrary to the effective implementation of the NATO SOFA and therefore
contrary to the object and purpose of the NATO SOFA.
2. The statement relating to sub-paragraph of paragraph 2 of Article VII seeks to
modify the legal effects and the scope of implementation of that Article. A reservation
which consists of a general reference to national law without specifying its content
does not clearly indicate to what extent the reserving State commits itself when ratifying
the PfP SOFA and thus is contrary to the object and purpose of the NATO SOFA.
3. The statement relating to paragraph 4 of Article VII seeks to modify the scope
of implementation of that paragraph and to create new rights for the Russian Federation
in a manner not compatible with to the object and purpose of the NATO SOFA.
4. The statement relating to sub-paragraph a of paragraph 6 of Article VII seeks to
modify the scope of implementation of that sub-paragraph. A reservation which consists
of a general reference to national law without specifying its content does not clearly
indicate to what extent the reserving State commits itself when ratifying the PfP
SOFA. Accordingly, the reservation is contrary to the object and purpose of the NATO
SOFA.
5. The statement relating to Article XI of the NATO SOFA seeks to modify the scope
of implementation of that Article. The 1st paragraph of the statement relating to
paragraphs 2, 4, 5 and 6 of Article XI, the 3rd paragraph relating to paragraphs 3
and 8 of Article XI, the 5th paragraph of the statement relating to Article XI in
general, the 6th paragraph of the statement relating to paragraph 11 of Article XI
and the 7th paragraph of the statement relating to paragraphs 2, 5 and 6 of Article
XI consist of a general reference to national law and to national procedures without
specifying their content. Such reservation does not clearly indicate to what extent
the reserving State commits itself when ratifying the PfP SOFA and is therefore contrary
to the object and purpose of the NATO SOFA.
The 2nd paragraph of the statement relating to paragraph 4 of Article XI and the 4th
paragraph of the statement relating to Article XI seek to create new obligations to
other States parties that is contrary to the effective implementation of the NATO
SOFA and the object and purpose of the NATO SOFA.
The 8th paragraph of the statement relating to Article XI seeks to restrict the legal
obligations of the Russian Federation in a manner incompatible with the aim of that
Article and is therefore contrary to the object and purpose of the NATO SOFA.
6. The statement relating to the translation of the documents and attached materials
sent to the competent authorities of the Russian Federation to Russian seeks to create
an additional obligation for the other States Parties, which is contrary to the effective
implementation of the NATO SOFA and the object and purpose of the NATO SOFA.
The Government of the Republic of Estonia therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations
made by the Russian Federation upon the ratification on the PfP SOFA. This objection
shall not preclude the entry into force of the PfP SOFA between the Republic of Estonia
and the Russian Federation. The PfP SOFA enters into force between the Republic of
Estonia and the Russian Federation in its entirety without the Russian Federation
benefiting from its reservations.
Bezwaar Frankrijk, 12-09-2008
The Government of the French Republic understands that the Russian Federation's statement
relative to Article VI of the Agreement among the States Parties to the North Atlantic
Treaty regarding the Status of their Forces [done at London on June 19, 1951; hereinafter
"NATO SOFA"], is subordinate to a condition of reciprocity and therefore cannot alone
have an effect on the French Republic's interpretations of this provision.
The Government of the French Republic objects to the Russian Federation's statement
concerning Article VII, 2 (c) of NATO SOFA due to its vague, imprecise nature. This
objection has no effect on the competence of the State of origin pursuant to article
VII, 2 (a), of the NATO SOFA.
The Government of the French Republic considers that the Russian Federation's statement
concerning article VII, §4 of the NATO SOFA can have no effect on the provisions of
this article, nor can it confer upon the State of origin rights that exceed those
acknowledged in Article VII, §10 of the NATO SOFA. The Government of the French Republic
has examined the Russian Federation's statement concerning the procedures and conditions
for importing the goods mentioned in article XI, §4 of the NATO SOFA. The Government
of the French Republic objects to this statement, which by subordinating the effect
of this provision to the conclusion of separate agreements, undermines its legally
binding scope.
The Government of the French Republic has examine[d] the Russian Federation's Statement
concerning the Provisions of Article XI of the NATO SOFA, including paragraphs 3 and
8. By affirming that none of these provisions restricts the jurisdiction of its customs
authorities and, notably, its prerogatives with respect to monitoring compliance for
imports by virtue of its national legislation, the Russian Federation seems to go
beyond the wording of Article XI §1 of the NATO SOFA and makes it unclear, in particular,
whether it intends to respect the inviolability of official documents under an official
seal, as provided in §3 of that article. Consequently, the Government of the French
Republic objects to this statement, which constitutes a vague and imprecise reservation.
The Government of the French Republic has examined the Russian Federation's statement
that the transit of goods and vehicles must be in compliance with Russian customs
law. Without specifying the effect of the implementation of customs law in this regard,
this statement must be considered a vague and imprecise reservation that makes it
impossible to know whether the Russian Federation, as a "receiving state" within the
meaning of Article 1 (e) of the NATO SOFA, will apply the customs exemptions provided
by the Agreement to the goods and vehicles of a force transiting its territory.
The Government of the French Republic has examined the Russian Federation's statement
concerning the "importation of the vehicles that are mentioned in Article XI, (2),
(5) and (6) of the Agreement and intended for personal use by members of the civil
component ant their family members." Given the vague ant imprecise nature of this
statement and the uncertainties it elicits with respect to the specific scope of application
of the provisions to which it relates, the Government of the French Republic considers
this statement a reservation to which it must object.
The Government of the French Republic considers that Russian Federation's statement
concerning the certified Russian translation of documents sent to it pursuant to the
London Agreement does not constitute a simple interpretation of the existing provisions
of that Agreement, and that it is aiming to establish an additional obligation for
other States Party to the Agreement. The Government of the French Republic does not
consider itself bound by such a statement.
These declarations and objections do not constitute an obstacle to the entry in force
of the Agreement between the French Republic and the Russian Federation.
Bezwaar Kroatië, 12-09-2008
The Republic of Croatia takes note of the […] statement which expresses the understanding
of the Russian Federation of the scope of some provisions of the Agreement between
the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty regarding the Status of their Forces, done
in London on 19 June 1951 (hereinafter: the NATO Agreement). The Republic of Croatia
holds that the […] statement contains certain interpretations of some provisions of
the NATO Agreement that could affect the implementation of the PfP SOFA. In this context,
the Republic of Croatia expresses its view that the PfP SOFA should be interpreted
and implemented in accordance with its subject and purpose. The Republic of Croatia
holds that any possible divergence relating to the interpretation and implementation
of the PfP SOFA should be overcome in the future through the conclusion of technical
arrangements.
Bezwaar Nederlanden, het Koninkrijk der, 12-09-2008
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands has carefully examined the statements
made by the Russian Federation upon ratification of the Agreement among the States
Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the other States participating in the Partnership
for Peace regarding the status of their forces (hereinafter referred to as "the PfP
Agreement") and the Additional Protocol thereto.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the statements of
the Russian Federation regarding Article III, paragraph 4, Article VI, Article VII,
paragraph 2c, Article VII, paragraph 4, Article VII paragraph 6a and Article XI of
the Agreement Between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty Regarding the Status
of Their Forces, done in London on 19 June 1951 (hereinafter referred to as "the NATO
Agreement"), and applied on the basis of the PfP Agreement, as well as the statement
relating to the translation of documents into Russian must in fact be considered reservations,
since they have the effect of modifying and/or complementing the scope of the obligations
arising from the PfP Agreement or make it unclear for the other Parties to the PfP
Agreement to identify to what extent the Government of the Russian Federation intends
to modify and/or complement the obligations arising from the PfP Agreement.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the cumulative effect
of these reservations must be regarded as incompatible with the object and purpose
of the PfP Agreement and therefore contrary to Article 19, paragraph c of the Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties. For this reason, the Government of the Kingdom
of the Netherlands objects to the reservations regarding Article III, paragraph 4,
Article VI, Article VII, paragraph 2c, Article VII, paragraph 4, Article VII, paragraph
6a and Article XI of the NATO Agreement, applied on the basis of the PfP Agreement,
as well as the statement relating to the translation of documents into Russian, made
by the Government of the Russian Federation upon ratification of the PfP Agreement.
These objections do not constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the PfP
Agreement and Additional Protocol between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Russian
Federation.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the reservations and
objections thereto are without prejudice to the implementation, through further agreements
between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Russian Federation concluded within
the PfP-framework, of the PfP Agreement between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and
the Russian Federation.
Bezwaar Noorwegen, 12-09-2008
The Government of the Kingdom of Norway hereby states that in the implementation between
the Kingdom of Norway and the Russian Federation of the Agreement Among the States
Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the Other States Participating in the Partnership
for Peace Regarding the Status of Their Forces, the Kingdom of Norway expects the
provisions of the […] Agreement and, by subsequent application, the provisions of
the Agreement Between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty regarding the Status
of their Forces, done in London on 19 June 1951, to take precedence in case of conflicting
national legislation, in accordance with the principles of international law.
The Kingdom of Norway considers itself under no legal obligation to make available
certified translations of written documents within the framework of the […] Agreement.
Bezwaar Polen, 12-09-2008
The Government of the Republic of Poland has examined the reservation made by the
Russian Federation upon the ratification of the Agreement among the States Parties
to the North Atlantic Treaty and other States Participating in the Partnership for
Peace Regarding the Status of Their Forces done at Brussels, June 19, 1995.
The Government of the Republic of Poland considers the above-mentioned reservation
as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Agreement and therefore objects
to it.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Agreement between the
Republic of Poland and the Russian Federation.
Bezwaar Slovenië, 12-09-2008
The Republic of Slovenia considers the statements of the Russian Federation made upon
the ratification of the Agreement among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty
and the other States Participating in the Partnership for peace regarding the Status
of their Forces, done in Brussels on 19 June 1995, and the Additional Protocol Thereto
as reservations and objects to them. The Republic of Slovenia considers the Agreement
among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the other States Participating
in the Partnership for peace regarding the Status of their Forces as remaining in
force between the Republic of Slovenia and the Russian Federation in its original
Text as done in Brussels on 19 June 1995.
Bezwaar Slowakije, 12-09-2008
According to the Article 19 and subsequent Articles of the Vienna convention on the
Law of Treaties (Vienna 1969), Slovak Republic hereby raises the objection to the
Statements made by the Russian Federation at the occasion of the ratification of the
Agreement among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and Other States Participating
in the Partnership for Peace regarding the Status of their Forces, done in Brussels,
on June 19, 1995 (PfP SOFA) and the Additional Protocol thereto (hereinafter referred
to as "the Statements"). Slovak Republic considers the Statements as reservations
to the PfP SOFA as they modify or complement existing obligations to the other Parties
to the PfP SOFA or create new obligations to these Parties. However, Slovak Republic
considers these reservations as not precluding the entry of the PfP SOFA into force,
while all the provisions to which Statements were made will be reciprocally applicable
to the extent agreed in separate arrangements to be made for the implementation of
the PfP SFOA during the sending and receiving of the Armed Forces of the Parties to
the PfP SOFA.
Bezwaar Zweden, 12-09-2008
The Government of Sweden has examined the Statement made by the Russian Federation
upon ratification of the Agreement among the States Parties to the North Atlantic
Treaty and Other States Participating in the Partnership for Peace regarding the Status
of Their Forces ("The Partnership for Peace Agreement") and the Additional Protocol
thereto. The provisions of the NATO SOFA apply according to Article I of the Partnership
for Peace Agreement to the Parties to the Partnership for Peace Agreement as if they
were Parties to the NATO SOFA, except as otherwise provided for in the Partnership
for Peace Agreement and any Additional Protocol thereto.
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 Statement made by the Russian Federation regarding subparagraph 2 (c) and
4 of Article VII, Article XI and the presumption regarding certified translations
of NATO SOFA in substance constitutes reservations to the Partnership for Peace Agreement
in respect of these provisions.
Subparagraph c of Article VII (2) NATO SOFA. If the Russian statement is to be understood
to seek the addition of offences to those which otherwise might fall within the scope
of Article VII (2) c of the NATO SOFA, the Government of Sweden considers that the
statement would seek to modify the legal effect of the Partnership for Peace Agreement
in its application to the Russian Federation. It thus constitutes a reservation to
which Sweden objects.
Article VII (4) NATO SOFA. The Government of Sweden is concerned about the wide scope
of application of this Russian presumption, which would seem to seek to widen the
field of Russian jurisdiction and thus modify the legal effect of the Partnership
for Peace Agreement in its application to the Russian Federation in respect of Article
VII (4) NATO SOFA. It therefore constitutes a reservation to which Sweden objects.
In this context, Sweden recalls its reservation of November 13, 1996, regarding jurisdiction
in the receiving State.
Further regarding Article XI. The references to Russian national legislation aim to
make the Partnership for Peace Agreement subject to national Russian legislation.
The Russian Statement would seem to seek to modify the legal effect of the Partnership
for Peace Agreement in its application to the Russian Federation in respect of Article
XI NATO SOFA. It thus constitutes a reservation to which Sweden objects.
The Statement also presumes certified translation into the Russian language of documents
and materials appended to them. This would constitute an additional obligation for
the other Parties to the Partnership for Peace Agreement and would seem to seek to
modify the Legal effect of the Partnership for Peace Agreement in its application
to the Russian Federation. It thus constitutes a reservation to which Sweden objects.
The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the
Russian Federation to the Agreement among the States Parties to the North Atlantic
Treaty and Other States Participating in the Partnership for Peace regarding the Status
of their Forces and the Additional Protocol thereto. This objection shall not preclude
the entry into force of the Partnership for Peace Agreement and the additional Protocol
thereto between the Russian Federation and Sweden, as modified by the reservation
made by Sweden. The Partnership for Peace Agreement and the additional Protocol thereto
enters into force between the Russian Federation and Sweden without the Russian Federation
benefiting from its reservation.
Bezwaar Finland, 19-09-2008
The Government of Finland considers that the statement submitted by the Russian Federation
upon the ratification of the said Agreement and the Additional Protocol aims at excluding
or modifying the legal effect of certain provisions of the Agreement among the Parties
to the North Atlantic Treaty Regarding the Status of Their Forces (the Nato SOFA)
which apply to the Parties of PfP SOFA by virtue of Article I thereof.
Article VII(2)(c) of the Nato SOFA. The Government of Finland expresses its concern
about the statement by the Russian Federation concerning Article VII(2)(c) of the
Nato SOFA which seem to seek to widen the scope of jurisdiction of the Russian Federation
beyond the provisions of Article VII of the Nato SOFA. Finland considers that this
statement constitutes a reservation.
Article VII(4) of the Nato SOFA. The Government of Finland expresses its concern about
the statement by the Russian Federation concerning Article VII(4) of the Nato SOFA
which seems to seek to widen the scope of jurisdiction of a sending State over persons
who are nationals of or ordinarily resident in the receiving State. Finland considers
that this statement constitutes a reservation. Finland recalls also in this connection
the declaration included in the instrument of ratification of the Pfp SOFA by Finland
concerning the exercise, on the territory of Finland, of the jurisdiction by courts
of a sending state.
Requirement of duly certified translations. The Russian Federation also presumes that
documents and materials appended to them that are sent to its competent authorities
within the framework of the Agreement will be accompanied by duly certified translations
into the Russian language. The Government of Finland recalls Article III(2)(b) of
the Nato SOFA and notes that such a requirement would constitute an additional obligation
for other Parties to the PfP SOFA which would unduly hamper the co-operation under
this Treaty. The Government of Finland objects to this requirement.
Reservations concerning the division of jurisdiction by the Russian Federation concern
the very core of the PfP SOFA and undermine the object and purpose of the Treaty.
The Government of Finland therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations and considers
that such reservations are without legal effect between the Russian Federation and
Finland. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the PfP SOFA and
the Additional Protocol thereto between the Russian Federation and Finland.
Bezwaar Tsjechië, 25-09-2008
The Czech Republic considers this Statement of the Russian Federation as reservations
incompatible with the provisions of the Agreement Between Parties to the North Atlantic
Treaty Regarding the Status of their Forces and the PfP SOFA, because this Statement
refers to the Russian law in a manner that creates uncertainty regarding the legal
rules to be applied among the States Parties of the PfP SOFA.
Therefore, the Czech Republic objects to this Statement of the Russian Federation.
This objection, however, does not preclude that the PfP SOFA is in force between the
Czech Republic and Russian Federation.
Bezwaar Italië, 17-10-2008
After careful appraisal, the Government of the Republic of Italy hereby declares that
the cited statement does not prevent the entry into force of the Agreement between
the Republic of Italy and the Russian Federation, nor does it in any way prejudice
the full effectiveness of said Agreement.
Furthermore, the Government of the Republic of Italy declares that in the implementation
between the Republic of Italy and the Russian Federation of the Agreement among the
States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the other States Participating in
the Partnership for Peace Regarding the Status of Their Forces, the Republic of Italy
expects that the provisions of the mentioned Agreement will prevail in case of conflicting
national legislation, in accordance with the principles of international law.
Bezwaar Bulgarije, 23-12-2008
The Govemment of the Republic of Bulgaria has the honour to refer to the Statement
of the Russian Federation made on 28 August 2008 upon the ratification of the Agreement
among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and the other States. Participating
in the Partnership for Peace regarding the Status of their forces, and the Additional
Protocol thereto, and declares hereby that in its relations with the Russian Federation
it will interpret and apply the provisions of the Agreement among the States Parties
to the North Atlantic Treaty and the other States Participating in the Partnership
for Peace regarding the Status of their forces in accordance with the provisions of
the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and will not consider itself bound by
any other interpretations, which are not in compliance with the said provisions of
the Vienna Convention. In this regard, in case of inconsistency of the interpretations
of the Russian Party with the provisions of the Agreement, the Bulgarian Party will
give priority to the provisions of the Agreement in accordance with the principles
of intemational law.
Spanje
04-02-1998
Spain shall remain bound by the Agreement Among the States Parties to the North Atlantic
Treaty and the Other States Participating in the Partnership for Peace Regarding the
Status of Their Forces only with respect to the other States participating in the
Partnership for Peace that shall have ratified the Agreement and its Additional Protocol.
Zwitserland
09-04-2003
Zwitserland, 9 april 2003
The instrument of ratification of the Additional Protocol by Switzerland was accompanied
by the following reservations and declarations:
On Ratification of the Agreement among the States parties to the North Atlantic Treaty
and the other States participating in the Partnership for Peace regarding the status
of their forces, dated 19 June 1995 and the Additional Protocol to the said Agreement,
Switzerland formulates the following reservations and declaration relating to the
Agreement among the States Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty regarding the Status
of their forces (Status of the NATO troops), dated 19 June 1951:
Reservation concerning Article VII Paragraphs 5 and 6:
I. Switzerland will only hand over members of a military unit, of a civilian component
or their families to the authorities of the sending or receiving state according to
Article VII Paragraph 5 of the NATO-Status of Forces Agreement or provide legal assistance
according to Paragraph 6 in such cases, if the state in question gives the guarantee
that the death penalty is neither pronounced against nor carried out on these persons.
II. Switzerland will not hand over members of a military unit, of a civilian component
or their families to the authorities of the sending or receiving state according to
Article VII Paragraph 5 of the NATO-Status of Forces Agreement nor and will not provide
legal assistance according to Paragraph 6,
i. If there are serious reasons for believing that these persons would be subjected
to torture or to inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment,
ii. If there are serious reasons for believing that these persons would be prosecuted
on account of their race, religion, nationality or political opinion, or that these
persons' positions may be prejudiced for any these reasons.
Reservation concerning Article XIII
Switzerland grants administrative or legal assistance in fiscal matters. The object
of administrative assistance is the correct application of the agreements regarding
the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of their improper use. Switzerland
offers legal assistance only in case of fiscal fraud and on condition of reciprocity.
Declaration concerning Article VII
The acceptance by Switzerland of the penal and disciplinary jurisdiction military
authorities of a sending state according to according to Article VII of the NATO-
NATO-Status of Forces Agreement does not apply to the proceedings, the deliberation
and pronouncement of the judgement by a criminal court of the sending state on the
territory of Switzerland.