You are on page 1of 25

2.

INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF


RACIAL DISCRIMINATION

New York, 7 March 1966

ENTRY INTO FORCE 4 January 1969, in accordance with article 19.1


.

REGISTRATION: 12 March 1969, No. 9464.


STATUS: Signatories: 88. Parties: 178.
TEXT: United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 660, p. 195.
Note: The Convention was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in /doc/source/docs/A_RES_2106-
Eng.pdf 2 of 21 December 1965.

Accession(a), Accession(a),
Succession(d), Succession(d),
Participant3 Signature Ratification Participant3 Signature Ratification
Afghanistan.................................................. 6 Jul 1983 a Republic .................................................
Albania.........................................................11 May 1994 a Chad.............................................................17 Aug 1977 a
Algeria .........................................................
9 Dec 1966 14 Feb 1972 Chile.............................................................
3 Oct 1966 20 Oct 1971
Andorra........................................................
5 Aug 2002 22 Sep 2006 China 5,6,7 ......................................................29 Dec 1981 a
Angola .........................................................
24 Sep 2013 Colombia .....................................................
23 Mar 1967 2 Sep 1981
Antigua and Barbuda ...................................25 Oct 1988 d Comoros.......................................................
22 Sep 2000 27 Sep 2004
Argentina .....................................................
13 Jul 1967 2 Oct 1968 Congo...........................................................11 Jul 1988 a
Armenia .......................................................23 Jun 1993 a Costa Rica....................................................
14 Mar 1966 16 Jan 1967
Australia.......................................................
13 Oct 1966 30 Sep 1975 Côte d'Ivoire ................................................ 4 Jan 1973 a
Austria .........................................................
22 Jul 1969 9 May 1972 Croatia4 ........................................................12 Oct 1992 d
Azerbaijan....................................................16 Aug 1996 a Cuba.............................................................
7 Jun 1966 15 Feb 1972
Bahamas....................................................... 5 Aug 1975 d Cyprus..........................................................
12 Dec 1966 21 Apr 1967
Bahrain.........................................................27 Mar 1990 a Czech Republic ..........................................22 Feb
8 1993 d
Bangladesh...................................................11 Jun 1979 a Democratic Republic of
Barbados ...................................................... 8 Nov 1972 a the Congo...............................................21 Apr 1976 a
Belarus .........................................................
7 Mar 1966 8 Apr 1969 Denmark9 .....................................................
21 Jun 1966 9 Dec 1971
Belgium .......................................................
17 Aug 1967 7 Aug 1975 Djibouti........................................................
14 Jun 2006 30 Sep 2011
Belize ...........................................................
6 Sep 2000 14 Nov 2001 Dominican Republic ....................................25 May 1983 a
Benin............................................................
2 Feb 1967 30 Nov 2001 Ecuador........................................................22 Sep 1966 a
Bhutan..........................................................
26 Mar 1973 Egypt............................................................
28 Sep 1966 1 May 1967
Bolivia (Plurinational El Salvador ..................................................30 Nov 1979 a
State of)..................................................
7 Jun 1966 22 Sep 1970 Equatorial Guinea ........................................ 8 Oct 2002 a
Bosnia and Eritrea ..........................................................31 Jul 2001 a
Herzegovina4 ..........................................16 Jul 1993 d Estonia .........................................................21 Oct 1991 a
Botswana .....................................................20 Feb 1974 a Ethiopia........................................................23 Jun 1976 a
Brazil ...........................................................
7 Mar 1966 27 Mar 1968 Fiji ...............................................................11 Jan 1973 d
Bulgaria .......................................................
1 Jun 1966 8 Aug 1966 Finland .........................................................
6 Oct 1966 14 Jul 1970
Burkina Faso................................................18 Jul 1974 a France ..........................................................28 Jul 1971 a
Burundi ........................................................
1 Feb 1967 27 Oct 1977 Gabon...........................................................
20 Sep 1966 29 Feb 1980
Cabo Verde .................................................. 3 Oct 1979 a Gambia.........................................................29 Dec 1978 a
Cambodia.....................................................
12 Apr 1966 28 Nov 1983 Georgia ........................................................ 2 Jun 1999 a
Cameroon.....................................................
12 Dec 1966 24 Jun 1971 Germany10 ....................................................
10 Feb 1967 16 May 1969
Canada .........................................................
24 Aug 1966 14 Oct 1970 Ghana...........................................................
8 Sep 1966 8 Sep 1966
Central African 7 Mar 1966 16 Mar 1971 Greece..........................................................
7 Mar 1966 18 Jun 1970

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 1
Accession(a), Accession(a),
Succession(d), Succession(d),
Participant3 Signature Ratification Participant3 Signature Ratification
Grenada........................................................
17 Dec 1981 10 May 2013 Mongolia......................................................
3 May 1966 6 Aug 1969
Guatemala....................................................
8 Sep 1967 18 Jan 1983 Montenegro11 ...............................................23 Oct 2006 d
Guinea..........................................................
24 Mar 1966 14 Mar 1977 Morocco.......................................................
18 Sep 1967 18 Dec 1970
Guinea-Bissau..............................................
12 Sep 2000 1 Nov 2010 Mozambique ................................................18 Apr 1983 a
Guyana.........................................................
11 Dec 1968 15 Feb 1977 Namibia12 .....................................................11 Nov 1982 a
Haiti .............................................................
30 Oct 1972 19 Dec 1972 Nauru ...........................................................
12 Nov 2001
Holy See ......................................................
21 Nov 1966 1 May 1969 Nepal............................................................30 Jan 1971 a
Honduras......................................................10 Oct 2002 a Netherlands..................................................
24 Oct 1966 10 Dec 1971
Hungary .......................................................
15 Sep 1966 4 May 1967 New Zealand .............................................
13 25 Oct 1966 22 Nov 1972
Iceland .........................................................
14 Nov 1966 13 Mar 1967 Nicaragua.....................................................15 Feb 1978 a
India .............................................................
2 Mar 1967 3 Dec 1968 Niger ............................................................
14 Mar 1966 27 Apr 1967
Indonesia......................................................25 Jun 1999 a Nigeria .........................................................16 Oct 1967 a
Iran (Islamic Republic Norway ........................................................
21 Nov 1966 6 Aug 1970
of)...........................................................
8 Mar 1967 29 Aug 1968 Oman ........................................................... 2 Jan 2003 a
Iraq...............................................................
18 Feb 1969 13 Feb 1970 Pakistan........................................................
19 Sep 1966 21 Sep 1966
Ireland..........................................................
21 Mar 1968 29 Dec 2000 Palau ............................................................
20 Sep 2011
Israel ............................................................
7 Mar 1966 3 Jan 1979 Panama.........................................................
8 Dec 1966 16 Aug 1967
Italy..............................................................
13 Mar 1968 5 Jan 1976 Papua New Guinea ......................................27 Jan 1982 a
Jamaica ........................................................
14 Aug 1966 4 Jun 1971 Paraguay ......................................................
13 Sep 2000 18 Aug 2003
Japan ............................................................15 Dec 1995 a Peru..............................................................
22 Jul 1966 29 Sep 1971
Jordan...........................................................30 May 1974 a Philippines ...................................................
7 Mar 1966 15 Sep 1967
Kazakhstan...................................................26 Aug 1998 a Poland ..........................................................
7 Mar 1966 5 Dec 1968
Kenya...........................................................13 Sep 2001 a Portugal ......................................................24 Aug
6 1982 a
Kuwait .........................................................15 Oct 1968 a Qatar ............................................................22 Jul 1976 a
Kyrgyzstan................................................... 5 Sep 1997 a Republic of Korea........................................
8 Aug 1978 5 Dec 1978
Lao People's Republic of Moldova ...................................26 Jan 1993 a
Democratic
Romania.......................................................15 Sep 1970 a
Republic .................................................22 Feb 1974 a
Russian Federation ......................................
7 Mar 1966 4 Feb 1969
Latvia ...........................................................14 Apr 1992 a
Rwanda ........................................................16 Apr 1975 a
Lebanon .......................................................12 Nov 1971 a
San Marino ..................................................
11 Dec 2001 12 Mar 2002
Lesotho ........................................................ 4 Nov 1971 a
Sao Tome and Principe................................
6 Sep 2000 10 Jan 2017
Liberia.......................................................... 5 Nov 1976 a
Saudi Arabia ................................................23 Sep 1997 a
Libya............................................................ 3 Jul 1968 a
Senegal.........................................................
22 Jul 1968 19 Apr 1972
Liechtenstein................................................ 1 Mar 2000 a
Serbia ..........................................................12 Mar
4 2001 d
Lithuania......................................................
8 Jun 1998 10 Dec 1998
Seychelles .................................................... 7 Mar 1978 a
Luxembourg.................................................
12 Dec 1967 1 May 1978
Sierra Leone.................................................
17 Nov 1966 2 Aug 1967
Madagascar..................................................
18 Dec 1967 7 Feb 1969
Singapore .....................................................
19 Oct 2015
Malawi .........................................................11 Jun 1996 a
Slovakia8 ......................................................28 May 1993 d
Maldives ......................................................24 Apr 1984 a
Slovenia4 ...................................................... 6 Jul 1992 d
Mali..............................................................16 Jul 1974 a
Solomon Islands ..........................................17 Mar 1982 d
Malta............................................................
5 Sep 1968 27 May 1971
Somalia ........................................................
26 Jan 1967 26 Aug 1975
Mauritania....................................................
21 Dec 1966 13 Dec 1988
South Africa.................................................
3 Oct 1994 10 Dec 1998
Mauritius......................................................30 May 1972 a
Spain ............................................................13 Sep 1968 a
Mexico .........................................................
1 Nov 1966 20 Feb 1975
Sri Lanka......................................................18 Feb 1982 a
Monaco ........................................................27 Sep 1995 a

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 2
CUBA GRENADA24
The Government of the Republic of Cuba will make “The Constitution of Grenada entrenches and
such reservations as it may deem appropriate if and when guarantees to every person in the State of Grenada the
the Convention is ratified. fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual
The Revolutionary Government of the Republic of irrespective of his race or place of origin. The
Cuba does not accept the provision in article 22 of the Constitution prescribes judicial processes to be observed
Convention to the effect that disputes between two or in the event of the violation of any of these rights whether
more States Parties shall be referred to the International by the State or by a private individual. Ratification of the
Court of Justice, since it considers that such disputes Convention by Grenada does not imply the acceptance of
should be settled exclusively by the procedures expressly obligations going beyond the constitutional limits nor the
provided for in the Convention or by negotiation through acceptance of any obligations to introduce judicial
the diplomatic channel between the disputants. processes beyond those provided in the Constitution.
This Convention, intended to eliminate all forms of The Government of Grenada interprets article 4 of the
racial discrimination, should not, as it expressly does in said Convention as requiring a Party to the Convention to
articles 17 and 18, exclude States not Members of the enact measures in the fields covered by sub-paragraphs
United Nations, members of the specialized agencies or (a), (b) and (c) of that article only where it considers that
Parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice the need arises to enact such legislation.”
from making an effective contribution under the GUYANA
Convention, since these articles constitute in themselves a
form of discrimination that is at variance with the "The Government of the Republic of Guyana do not
principles set out in the Convention; the Revolutionary interpret the provisions of this Convention as imposing
Government of the Republic of Cuba accordingly ratifies upon them any obligation going beyond the limits set by
the Convention, but with the qualification just indicated. the Constitution of Guyana or imposing upon them any
obligation requiring the introduction of judicial processes
CZECH REPUBLIC8 going beyond those provided under the same
Constitution."
DENMARK9
EGYPT17,21 HUNGARY25
"The United Arab Republic does not consider itself "The Hungarian People's Republic considers that the
bound by the provisions of article 22 of the Convention, provisions of article 17, paragraph 1, and of article 18,
under which any dispute between two or more States paragraph 1, of the Convention, barring accession to the
Parties with respect to the interpretation or application of Convention by all States, are of a discriminating nature
the Convention is, at the request of any of the parties to and contrary to international law. The Hungarian People's
the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of Republic maintains its general position that multilateral
Justice for decision, and it states that, in each individual treaties of a universal character should, in conformity
case, the consent of all parties to such a dispute is with the principles of sovereign equality of States, be
necessary for referring the dispute to the International open for accession by all States without any
Court of Justice." discrimination whatever."

EQUATORIAL GUINEA INDIA26


The Republic of Equatorial Guinea does not consider "The Government of India declare that for reference of
itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the any dispute to the International Court of Justice for
Convention, under which any dispute between two or decision in terms of Article 22 of the International
more States Parties with respect to the interpretation or Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial
application of the Convention is, at the request of any of Discrimination, the consent of all parties to the dispute is
the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the necessary in each individual case."
International Court of Justice for decision. The Republic
of Equatorial Guinea considers that, in each individual INDONESIA
case, the consent of all parties is necessary for referring
the dispute to the International Court of Justice. "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
FIJI22 interpretation and application of the [Convention] which
cannot be settled through the channel provided for in the
FRANCE23 said article, may be referred to the International Court of
With regard to article 4, France wishes to make it clear Justice only with the consent of all the parties to the
that it interprets the reference made therein to the dispute."
principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
and to the rights set forth in article 5 of the Convention as IRAQ17
releasing the States Parties from the obligation to enact
anti-discrimination legislation which is incompatible with "The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of
the freedoms of opinion and expression and of peaceful Iraq hereby declares that signature for and on behalf of
assembly and association guaranteed by those texts. the Republic of Iraq of the Convention on the Elimination
With regard to article 6, France declares that the of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which was
question of remedy through tribunals is, as far as France adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations
is concerned, governed by the rules of ordinary law. on 21 December 1965, as well as approval by the Arab
With regard to article 15, France's accession to the States of the said Convention and entry into it by their
Convention may not be interpreted as implying any respective governments, shall in no way signify
change in its position regarding the resolution mentioned recognition of Israel or lead to entry by the Arab States
in that provision. 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

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 5
to introduce judicial processes beyond those provided in
AUSTRIA the Constitution.
The Government of Barbados interprets article 4 of the
"Article 4 of the International Convention on the said Convention as requiring a Party to the Convention to
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination enact measures in the fields covered by sub-paragraphs
provides that the measures specifically described in sub- (a), (b) and (c) of that article only where it is considered
paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) shall be undertaken with due that the need arises to enact such legislation."
regard to the principles embodied in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set BELARUS18
forth in article 5 of the Convention. The Republic of
Austria therefore considers that through such measures The Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic states that
the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the the provision in article 17, paragraph 1, of the Convention
right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
may not be jeopardized. These rights are laid down in whereby a number of States are deprived of the
articles 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human opportunity to become Parties to the Convention is of a
Rights; they were reaffirmed by the General Assembly of discriminatory nature, and hold that, in accordance with
the United Nations when it adopted articles 19 and 21 of the principle of the sovereign equality of States, the
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Convention should be open to participation by all
and are referred to in article 5 (d) (viii) and (ix) of the interested States without discrimination or restriction of
present Convention." any kind.

BAHAMAS BELGIUM
"Firstly the Government of the Commonwealth of the In order to meet the requirements of article 4 of the
Bahamas wishes to state its understanding of article 4 of International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
the International Convention on the Elimination of All of Racial Discrimination, the Kingdom of Belgium will
Forms of Racial Discrimination. It interprets article 4 as take care to adapt its legislation to the obligations it has
requiring a party to the Convention to adopt further assumed in becoming a party to the said Convention.
legislative measures in the fields covered by The Kingdom of Belgium nevertheless wishes to
subparagraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article only in so far emphasize the importance which it attaches to the fact
as it may consider with due regard to the principles that article 4 of the Convention provides that the measures
embodied in the Universal Declaration set out in article 5 laid down in subparagraphs (a), (b), and (c) should be
of the Convention (in particular to freedom of opinion and adopted with due regard to the principles embodied in the
expression and the right of freedom of peaceful assembly Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights
and association) that some legislative addition to, or expressly set forth in article 5 of the Convention. The
variation of existing law and practice in these fields is Kingdom of Belgium therefore considers that the
necessary for the attainment of the ends specified in obligations imposed by article 4 must be reconciled with
article 4. Lastly, the Constitution of the Commonwealth the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
of the Bahamas entrenches and guarantees to every person right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
in the Commonwealth of the Bahamas the fundamental Those rights are proclaimed in articles 19 and 20 of the
rights and freedoms of the individual irrespective of his Universal Declaration of Human Rights and have been
race or place of origin. The Constitution prescribes reaffirmed in articles 19 and 21 of the International
judicial process to be observed in the event of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. They have also
violation of any of these rights whether by the State or by been stated in article 5, subparagraph (d) (viii) and (ix) of
a private individual. Acceptance of this Convention by the said Convention.
the Commonwealth of the Bahamas does not imply the The Kingdom of Belgium also wishes to emphasize
acceptance of obligations going beyond the constitutional the importance which it attaches to respect for the rights
limits nor the acceptance of any obligations to introduce set forth in the European Convention for the Protection of
judicial process beyond these prescribed under the Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, especially in
Constitution." articles 10 and 11 dealing respectively with freedom of
opinion and expression and freedom of peaceful assembly
BAHRAIN17 and association.
"With reference to article 22 of the Convention, the BULGARIA19
Government of the State of Bahrain declares that, for the
submission of any dispute in terms of this article to the The Government of the People's Republic of Bulgaria
jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, the considers that the provisions of article 17, paragraph 1,
express consent of all the parties to the dispute is required and article 18, paragraph 1, of the International
in each case." Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
"Moreover, the accession by the State of Bahrain to Discrimination, the effect of which is to prevent sovereign
the said Convention shall in no way constitute recognition States from becoming Parties to the Convention, are of a
of Israel or be a cause for the establishment of any discriminatory nature. The Convention, in accordance
relations of any kind therewith." with the principle of the sovereign equality of States,
should be open for accession by all States without any
BARBADOS discrimination whatsoever.
"The Constitution of Barbados entrenches and CHINA20
guarantees to every person in Barbados the fundamental
rights and freedoms of the individual irrespective of his The People's Republic of China has reservations on
race or place of origin. The Constitution prescribes the provisions of article 22 of the Convention and will not
judicial processes to be observed in the event of the be bound by it. (The reservation was circulated by the
violation of any of these rights whether by the State or by Secretary-General on 13 January 1982.)
a private individual. Accession to the Convention does The signing and ratification of the said Convention by
not imply the acceptance of obligations going beyond the the Taiwan authorities in the name of China are illegal
constitutional limits nor the acceptance of any obligations and null and void.

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 4
CUBA GRENADA24
The Government of the Republic of Cuba will make “The Constitution of Grenada entrenches and
such reservations as it may deem appropriate if and when guarantees to every person in the State of Grenada the
the Convention is ratified. fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual
The Revolutionary Government of the Republic of irrespective of his race or place of origin. The
Cuba does not accept the provision in article 22 of the Constitution prescribes judicial processes to be observed
Convention to the effect that disputes between two or in the event of the violation of any of these rights whether
more States Parties shall be referred to the International by the State or by a private individual. Ratification of the
Court of Justice, since it considers that such disputes Convention by Grenada does not imply the acceptance of
should be settled exclusively by the procedures expressly obligations going beyond the constitutional limits nor the
provided for in the Convention or by negotiation through acceptance of any obligations to introduce judicial
the diplomatic channel between the disputants. processes beyond those provided in the Constitution.
This Convention, intended to eliminate all forms of The Government of Grenada interprets article 4 of the
racial discrimination, should not, as it expressly does in said Convention as requiring a Party to the Convention to
articles 17 and 18, exclude States not Members of the enact measures in the fields covered by sub-paragraphs
United Nations, members of the specialized agencies or (a), (b) and (c) of that article only where it considers that
Parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice the need arises to enact such legislation.”
from making an effective contribution under the GUYANA
Convention, since these articles constitute in themselves a
form of discrimination that is at variance with the "The Government of the Republic of Guyana do not
principles set out in the Convention; the Revolutionary interpret the provisions of this Convention as imposing
Government of the Republic of Cuba accordingly ratifies upon them any obligation going beyond the limits set by
the Convention, but with the qualification just indicated. the Constitution of Guyana or imposing upon them any
obligation requiring the introduction of judicial processes
CZECH REPUBLIC8 going beyond those provided under the same
Constitution."
DENMARK9
EGYPT17,21 HUNGARY25
"The United Arab Republic does not consider itself "The Hungarian People's Republic considers that the
bound by the provisions of article 22 of the Convention, provisions of article 17, paragraph 1, and of article 18,
under which any dispute between two or more States paragraph 1, of the Convention, barring accession to the
Parties with respect to the interpretation or application of Convention by all States, are of a discriminating nature
the Convention is, at the request of any of the parties to and contrary to international law. The Hungarian People's
the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of Republic maintains its general position that multilateral
Justice for decision, and it states that, in each individual treaties of a universal character should, in conformity
case, the consent of all parties to such a dispute is with the principles of sovereign equality of States, be
necessary for referring the dispute to the International open for accession by all States without any
Court of Justice." discrimination whatever."

EQUATORIAL GUINEA INDIA26


The Republic of Equatorial Guinea does not consider "The Government of India declare that for reference of
itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the any dispute to the International Court of Justice for
Convention, under which any dispute between two or decision in terms of Article 22 of the International
more States Parties with respect to the interpretation or Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial
application of the Convention is, at the request of any of Discrimination, the consent of all parties to the dispute is
the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the necessary in each individual case."
International Court of Justice for decision. The Republic
of Equatorial Guinea considers that, in each individual INDONESIA
case, the consent of all parties is necessary for referring
the dispute to the International Court of Justice. "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
FIJI22 interpretation and application of the [Convention] which
cannot be settled through the channel provided for in the
FRANCE23 said article, may be referred to the International Court of
With regard to article 4, France wishes to make it clear Justice only with the consent of all the parties to the
that it interprets the reference made therein to the dispute."
principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
and to the rights set forth in article 5 of the Convention as IRAQ17
releasing the States Parties from the obligation to enact
anti-discrimination legislation which is incompatible with "The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of
the freedoms of opinion and expression and of peaceful Iraq hereby declares that signature for and on behalf of
assembly and association guaranteed by those texts. the Republic of Iraq of the Convention on the Elimination
With regard to article 6, France declares that the of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which was
question of remedy through tribunals is, as far as France adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations
is concerned, governed by the rules of ordinary law. on 21 December 1965, as well as approval by the Arab
With regard to article 15, France's accession to the States of the said Convention and entry into it by their
Convention may not be interpreted as implying any respective governments, shall in no way signify
change in its position regarding the resolution mentioned recognition of Israel or lead to entry by the Arab States
in that provision. 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

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 5
twenty-two of the Convention afore-mentioned and jurisdiction. Claims for reparation for any damage
affirms its reservation that it does not accept the suffered as a result of acts of racial discrimination must be
compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of brought against the persons responsible for the malicious
Justice provided for in the said article." or criminal acts which caused such damage.
1. The acceptance and ratification of the
Convention by Iraq shall in no way signify recognition of JAMAICA
Israel or be conducive to entry by Iraq into such dealings
with Israel as are regulated by the Convention; "The Constitution of Jamaica entrenches and
2. Iraq does not accept the provisions of article 22 guarantees to every person in Jamaica the fundamental
of the Convention, concerning the compulsory rights and freedoms of the individual irrespective of his
jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. The race or place of origin. The Constitution prescribes
Republic of Iraq does not consider itself to be bound by judicial processes to be observed in the event of the
the provisions of article 22 of the Convention and deems violation of any of these rights whether by the State or by
it necessary that in all cases the approval of all parties to a private individual. Ratification of the Convention by
the dispute be secured before the case is referred to the Jamaica does not imply the acceptance of obligations
International Court of Justice. going beyond the constitutional limits nor the acceptance
IRELAND of any obligation to introduce judicial processes beyond
those prescribed under the Constitution."
“Article 4 of the International Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination JAPAN
provides that the measures specifically described in sub-
paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) shall be undertaken with due "In applying the provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b)
regard to the principles embodied in the Universal of article 4 of the [said Convention] Japan fulfills the
Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set obligations under those provisions to the extent that
forth in Article 5 of the Convention. Ireland threfore fulfillment of the obligations is compatible with the
considers that through such measures, the right to guarantee of the rights to freedom of assembly,
freedom of opinion and expression and the right to association and expression and other rights under the
peaceful assembly and association may not be Constitution of Japan, noting the phrase `with due regard
jeopardised. These rights are laid down in Articles 19 and to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of
20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; they Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in
were reaffirmed by the General Assembly of the article 5 of this Convention' referred to in article 4."
United Nations when it adopted Articles 19 and 21 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and KUWAIT17
are referred to in Article 5 (d)(viii) and (ix) of the present
Convention.” "In acceding to the said Convention, the Government
of the State of Kuwait takes the view that its accession
ISRAEL does not in any way imply recognition of Israel, nor does
it oblige it to apply the provisions of the Convention in
"The State of Israel does not consider itself bound by respect of the said country.
the provisions of article 22 of the said Convention." "The Government of the State of Kuwait does not
consider itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the
ITALY Convention, under which any dispute between two or
more States Parties with respect to the interpretation or
(a) The positive measures, provided for in article 4 application of the Convention is, at the request of any
of the Convention and specifically described in sub- party to the dispute, to be referred to the International
paragraphs (a) and (b) of that article, designed to eradicate Court of Justice for decision, and it states that, in each
all incitement to, or acts of, discrimination, are to be individual case, the consent of all parties to such a dispute
interpreted, as that article provides, "with due regard to is necessary for referring the dispute to the International
the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Court of Justice."
Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article
5" of the Convention. Consequently, the obligations LEBANON
deriving from the aforementioned article 4 are not to
jeopardize the right to freedom of opinion and expression The Republic of Lebanon does not consider itself
and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and bound by the provisions of article 22 of the Convention,
association which are laid down in articles 19 and 20 of under which any dispute between two or more States
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, were Parties with respect to the interpretation or application of
reaffirmed by the General Assembly of the United the Convention is, at the request of any party to the
Nations when it adopted articles 19 and 21 of the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of Justice
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and for decision, and it states that, in each individual case, the
are referred to in articles 5 (d) (viii) and (ix) of the consent of all States parties to such a dispute is necessary
Convention. In fact, the Italian Government, in for referring the dispute to the International Court of
conformity with the obligations resulting from Articles 55 Justice.
(c) and 56 of the Charter of the United Nations, remains
faithful to the principle laid down in article 29 (2) of the LIBYA17
Universal Declaration, which provides that "in the
exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be "(a) The Kingdom of Libya does not
subject only to such limitations as are determined by law consider itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the
solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and Convention, under which any dispute between two or
respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of more States Parties with respect to the interpretation or
meeting the just requirements of morality, public order application of the Convention is, at the request of any of
and the general welfare in a democratic society." the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the
(b) Effective remedies against acts of racial International Court of Justice for decision, and it states
discrimination which violate his individual rights and that, in each individual case, the consent of all parties to
fundamental freedoms will be assured to everyone, in such a dispute is necessary for referring the dispute to the
conformity with article 6 ofthe Convention, by the International Court of Justice.
ordinary courts within the framework of their respective
IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 6
"(b) It is understood that the accession to such a dispute is necessary for referring the dispute to the
this Convention does not mean in any way a recognition International Court of Justice.
of Israel by the Government of the Kingdom of Libya.
Furthermore, no treaty relations will arise between the MOZAMBIQUE
Kingdom of Libya and Israel."
"The People's Republic of Mozambique does not
MADAGASCAR consider to be bound by the provision of article 22 and
wishes to restate that for the submission of any dispute to
The Government of the Malagasy Republic does not the International Court of Justice for decision in terms of
consider itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the the said article, the consent of all parties to such a dispute
Convention, under which any dispute between two or is necessary in each individual case."
more States Parties with respect to the interpretation or
application of the Convention is, at the request of any of NEPAL
the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the
International Court of Justice for decision, and states that, "The Constitution of Nepal contains provisions for the
in each individual case, the consent of all parties to such a protection of individual rights, including the right to
dispute is necessary for referral of the dispute to the freedom of speech and expression, the right to form
International Court. unions and associations not motivated by party politics
and the right to freedom of professing his/her own
MALTA religion; and nothing in the Convention shall be deemed
to require or to authorize legislation or other action by
"The Government of Malta wishes to state its Nepal incompatible with the provisions of the
understanding of certain articles in the Convention. Constitution of Nepal.
"It interprets article 4 as requiring a party to the "His Majesty's Government interprets article 4 of the
Convention to adopt further measures in the fields said Convention as requiring a Party to the Convention to
covered by sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article adopt further legislative measures in the fields covered by
should it consider, with due regard to the principles sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article only insofar
embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as His Majesty's Government may consider, with due
and the rights set forth in article 5 of the Convention, that regard to the principles embodied in the Universal
the need arises to enact ‘ ad hoc ’ legislation, in addition Declaration of Human Rights, that some legislative
to or variation of existing law and practice to bring to an addition to, or variation of, existing law and practice in
end any act of racial discrimination. those fields is necessary for the attainment of the end
"Further, the Government of Malta interprets the specified in the earlier part of article 4. His Majesty's
requirements in article 6 concerning `reparation or Government interprets the requirement in article 6
satisfaction' as being fulfilled if one or other of these concerning `reparation or satisfaction' as being fulfilled if
forms of redress is made available and interprets one or other of these forms of redress is made available;
`satisfaction' as including any form of redress effective to and further interprets `satisfaction' as including any form
bring the discriminatory conduct to an end." of redress effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to
an end.
MONACO "His Majesty's Government does not consider itself
bound by the provision of article 22 of the Convention
Monaco reserves the right to apply its own legal under which any dispute between two or more States
provisions concerning the admission of foreigners to the Parties with respect to the interpretation or application of
labour market of the Principality. the Convention is, at the request of any of the parties to
Monaco interprets the reference in that article to the the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of
principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Justice for decision."
and to the rights enumerated in article 5 of the Convention
as releasing States Parties from the obligation to PAPUA NEW GUINEA20
promulgate repressive laws which are incompatible with
freedom of opinion and expression and freedom of "The Government of Papua New Guinea interprets
peaceful assembly and association, which are guaranteed article 4 of the Convention as requiring a party to the
by those instruments. Convention to adopt further legislative measures in the
areas covered by sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that
MONGOLIA27 article only in so far as it may consider with due regard to
the principles contained in the Universal Declaration set
The Mongolian People's Republic states that the out in Article 5 of the Convention that some legislative
provision in article 17, paragraph 1, of the Convention addition to, or variation of existing law and practice, is
whereby a number of States are deprived of the necessary to give effect to the provisions of article 4. In
opportunity to become Parties to the Convention is of a addition, the Constitution of Papua New Guinea
discriminatory nature, and it holds that, in accordance guarantees certain fundamental rights and freedoms to all
with the principle of the sovereign equality of States, the persons irrespective of their race or place of origin. The
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Constitution also provides for judicial protection of these
Discrimination should be open to participation by all rights and freedoms. Acceptance of this Convention does
interested States without discrimination or restriction of not therefore indicate the acceptance of obligations by the
any kind. Government of Papua New Guinea which go beyond
those provided by the Constitution, nor does it indicate
MOROCCO the acceptance of any obligation to introduce judicial
process beyond that provided by the Constitution". (The
The Kingdom of Morocco does not consider itself reservation was circulated by the Secretary-General on
bound by the provisions of article 22 of the Convention, 22 February 1982.)
under which any dispute between two or more States
Parties with respect to the interpretation or application of POLAND28
the Convention is, at the request of any of the parties to
the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of The Polish People's Republic considers that the
Justice for decision. The Kingdom of Morocco states provisions of article 17, paragraph 1, and article18,
that, in each individual case, the consent of all parties to paragraph 1, of the International Convention on the
IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 7
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which Convention may be implemented by means other than
make it impossible for many States to become parties to legislation if such means are appropriate, and if
the said Convention, are of a discriminatory nature and legislation is not required by circumstances.
are incompatible with the object and purpose of that (3) The Republic of Singapore interprets the
Convention. requirement in Article 6 of the Convention concerning
The Polish People's Republic considers that, in “reparation or satisfaction” as being fulfilled if one or
accordance with the principle of the sovereign equality of other of these forms of redress is made available and
States, the said Convention should be open for interprets “satisfaction” as including any form of redress
participation by all States without any discrimination or effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to an end.
restrictions whatsoever. (4) With reference to Article 22 of the Convention, the
Republic of Singapore states that before any dispute to
REPUBLIC OF KOREA which the Republic of Singapore is a party may be
submitted to the jurisdiction of the International Court of
"The Government of the Republic of Korea recognizes Justice under this Article, the specific consent of the
the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Republic of Singapore is required in each case."
Racial Discrimination to receive and consider SLOVAKIA8
communications from individuals or groups of individuals
within the jurisdiction of the Republic of Korea claiming SPAIN31
to be victims of a violation by the Republic of Korea of
any of the rights set forth in the said Convention." SWITZERLAND
Switzerland reserves the right to take the legislative
ROMANIA29 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
The Council of State of the Socialist Republic of Declaration of Human Rights.
Romania declares that the provisions of articles 17 and 18 Switzerland reserves the right to apply its legal
of the International Convention on the Elimination of All provisions concerning the admission of foreigners to the
Forms of Racial Discrimination are not in accordance Swiss market.
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. SYRIAN ARAB REPUBLIC17
1. The accession of the Syrian Arab Republic to
RUSSIAN FEDERATION18 this Convention shall in no way signify recognition of
Israel or entry into a relationship with it regarding any
The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics states that the matter regulated by the said Convention.
provision in article 17, paragraph 1, of the Convention on 2. The Syrian Arab Republic does not consider
the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the
whereby a number of States are deprived of the Convention, under which any dispute between two or
opportunity to become Parties to the Convention is of a more States Parties with respect to the interpretation or
discriminatory nature, and hold that, in accordance with application of the Convention is, at the request of any of
the principle of the sovereign equality of States, the the Parties to the dispute, to be referred to the
Convention should be open to participation by all International Court of Justice for decision. The Syrian
interested States without discrimination or restriction of Arab Republic states that, in each individual case, the
any kind. consent of all parties to such a dispute is necessary for
referring the dispute to the International Court of Justice.
RWANDA30
SAUDI ARABIA THAILAND
[The Government of Saudi Arabia declares that it will] "General Interpretative Declaration
implement the provisions [of the above Convention], The Kingdom of Thailand does not interpret and apply
providing these do not conflict with the precepts of the the provisions of this Convention as imposing upon the
Islamic Shariah . Kingdom of Thailand any obligation beyond the confines
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia shall not be bound by of the Constitution and the laws of the Kingdom of
the provisions of article (22) of this Convention, since it Thailand. In addition, such interpretation and application
considers that any dispute should be referred to the shall be limited to or consistent with the obligations under
International Court of Justice only with the approval of other international human rights instruments to which the
the States Parties to the dispute. Kingdom of Thailand is party.
Reservations
1. The Kingdom of Thailand does not consider
SINGAPORE itself bound by the provisions of Article 22 of the
"The Government of the Republic of Singapore makes Convention."
the following reservations and declarations in relation to
articles 2, 6 and 22 of the International Convention on the TONGA32
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
(hereinafter referred to as the “Convention”) adopted by "To the extent, [...], that any law relating to land in
the General Assembly of the United Nations in New York Tonga which prohibits or restricts the alienation of land
on the 21st day of December 1965 and signed on behalf by the indigenous inhabitants may not fulfil the
of the Republic of Singapore today: obligations referred to in article 5 (d) (v), [...], the
(1) The Republic of Singapore reserves the right to Kingdom of Tonga reserves the right not to apply the
apply its policies concerning the admission and regulation Convention to Tonga.
of foreign work pass holders, with a view to promoting "Secondly, the Kingdom of Tonga wishes to state its
integration and maintaining cohesion within its racially understanding of certain articles in the Convention. It
diverse society. interprets article 4 as requiring a party to the Convention
(2) The Republic of Singapore understands that the to adopt further legislative measures in the fields covered
obligation imposed by Article 2, paragraph 1 (d) of the by sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article only in so

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 8
far as it may consider with due regard to the principles right not to apply the Convention to Rhodesia unless and
embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights until the United Kingdom informs the Secretary-General
and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of the of the United Nations that it is in a position to ensure that
Convention (in particular the right to freedom of opinion the obligations imposed by the Convention in respect of
and expression and the right to freedom of peaceful that territory can be fully implemented.
assembly and association) that some legislative addition "Secondly, the United Kingdom wishes to state its
to or variation of existing law and practice in those fields under- standing of certain articles in the Convention. It
is necessary for the attainment of the end specified in the interprets article 4 as requiring a party to the Convention
earlier part of article 4. Further, the Kingdom of Tonga to adopt further legislative measures in the fields covered
interprets the requirement in article 6 concerning by sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of that article only in so
`reparation or satisfaction' as being fulfilled if one or far as it may consider with due regard to the principles
other of these forms of redress is made available and embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
interprets `satisfaction' as including any form of redress and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of the
effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to an end. In Convention (in particular the right to freedom of opinion
addition it interprets article 20 and the other related and expression and the right to freedom of peaceful
provisions of Part III of the Convention as meaning that if assembly and association) that some legislative addition
a reservation is not accepted the State making the to or variation of existing law and practice in those fields
reservation does not become a Party to the Convention. is necessary for the attainment of the end specified in the
"Lastly, the Kingdom of Tonga maintains its position earlier part of article 4. Further, the United Kingdom
in regard to article 15. In its view this article is interprets the requirement in article 6 concerning
discriminatory in that it establishes a procedure for the `reparation or satisfaction' as being fulfilled if one or
receipt of petitions relating to dependent territories while other of these forms of redress is made available and
making no comparable provision for States without such interprets `satisfaction' as including any form of redress
territories. Moreover, the article purports to establish effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to an end. In
arocedure applicable to the dependent territories of States addition it interprets article 20 and the other related
whether or not those States have become parties to the provisions of Part III of the Convention as meaning that if
Convention. His Majesty's Government have decided that a reservation is not accepted the State making the
the Kingdom of Tonga should accede to the Convention, reservation does not become a Party to the Convention.
these objections notwithstanding because of the "Lastly, the United Kingdom maintains its position in
importance they attach to the Convention as a whole." regard to article 15. In its view this article is
discriminatory in that it establishes arocedure for the
TURKEY receipt of petitions relating to dependent territories while
making no comparable provision for States without such
"The Republic of Turkey declares that it will territories. Moreover, the article purports to establish a
implement the provisions of this Convention only to the procedure applicable to the dependent territories of States
States Parties with which it has diplomatic relations. whether or not those States have become parties to the
The Republic of Turkey declares that this Convention Convention. Her Majesty's Government have decided
is ratified exclusively with regard to the national territory that the United Kingdom should sign the Convention,
where the Constitution and the legal and administrative these objections notwithstanding, because of the
order of the Republic of Turkey are applied. importance they attach to the Convention as a whole."
The Republic of Turkey does not consider itself bound "First, the reservation and interpretative statements
by Article 22 of this Convention. The explicit consent of made by the United Kingdom at the time of signature of
the Republic of Turkey is necessary in each individual the Convention are maintained.
case before any dispute to which the Republic of Turkey "Secondly, the United Kingdom does not regard the
is party concerning the interpretation or application of this Commonwealth Immigrants Acts, 1962 and 1968, or their
Convention may be referred to the International Court of application, as involving any racial discrimination within
Justice." the meaning of paragraph 1 of article 1, or any other
provision of the Convention, and fully reserves its right to
UKRAINE18 continue to apply those Acts.
"Lastly, to the extent if any, that any law relating to
The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic states that the election in Fiji may not fulfil the obligations referred to in
provision in article 17, paragraph 1, of the Convention on article 5 (c), that any law relating to land in Fiji which
the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination prohibits or restricts the alienation of land by the
whereby a number of States are deprived of the indigenous inhabitants may not fulfil the obligations
opportunity to become Parties to the Convention is of a referred to in article 5 (d) (v), or that the school system of
discriminatory nature, and hold that, in accordance with Fiji may not fulfil the obligations referred to in articles 2,
the principle of the sovereign equality of States, the 3 or 5 (e) (v), the United Kingdom reserves the right not
Convention should be open to participation by all to apply the Convention to Fiji."
interested States without discrimination or restriction of
any kind. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES17 "The Constitution of the United States contains
provisions for the protection of individual rights, such as
"The accession of the United Arab Emirates to this the right of free speech, and nothing in the Convention
Convention shall in no way amount to recognition of nor shall be deemed to require or to authorize legislation or
the establishment of any treaty relations with Israel." other action by the United States of America incompatible
with the provisions of the Constitution of the United
UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN States of America."
"I. The Senate's advice and consent is
IRELAND subject to the following reservations:
Subject to the following reservation and interpretative (1) That the Constitution and laws of the
statements: United States contain extensive protections of individual
"First, in the present circumstances deriving from the freedom of speech, expression and association.
usurpation of power in Rhodesia by the illegal régime, the Accordingly, the United States does not accept any
United Kingdom must sign subject to a reservation of the obligation under this Convention, in particular under
articles 4 and 7, to restrict those rights, through the
IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 9
adoption of legislation or any other measures, to the
extent that they are protected by the Constitution and laws VIET NAM20
of the United States.
(2) That the Constitution and laws of the (1) The Government of the Socialist Republic of
United States establish extensive protections against Viet Nam declares that the provisions of article 17 (1) and
discrimination, reaching significant areas of non- of article 18 (1) of the Convention whereby a number of
governmental activity. Individual privacy and freedom States are deprived of the opportunity of becoming Parties
from governmental interference in private conduct, to the said Convention are of a discriminatory nature and
however, are also recognized as among the fundamental it considers that, in accordance with the principle of the
values which shape our free and democratic society. The sovereign equality of States, the Convention should be
United States understands that the identification of the open to participation by all States without discrimination
rights protected under the Convention by reference in or restriction of any kind.
article 1 to fields of `public life' reflects a similar (2) The Government of the Socialist Republic of
distinction between spheres of public conduct that are Viet Nam does not consider itself bound by the provisions
customarily the subject of governmental regulation, and of article 22 of the Convention and holds that, for any
spheres of private conduct that are not. To the extent, dispute with regard to the interpretation or application of
however, that the Convention calls for a broader the Convention to be brought before the International
regulation of private conduct, the United States does not Court of Justice, the consent of all parties to the dispute is
accept any obligation under this Convention to enact necessary. (The reservation was circulated by the
legislation or take other measures under paragraph (1) of Secretary-General on 10 August 1982.)
article 2, subparagraphs (1) (c) and (d) of article 2, article
3 and article 5 with respect to private conduct except as YEMEN16,17
mandated by the Constitution and laws of the United
States. "The accession of the People's Democratic Republic of
(3) That with reference to article 22 of the Yemen to this Convention shall in no way signify
Convention, before any dispute to which the United States recognition of Israel or entry into a relationship with it
is a party may be submitted to the jurisdiction of the regarding any matter regulated by the said Convention.
International Court of Justice under this article, the "The People's Democratic Republic of Yemen does
specific consent of the United States is required in each not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 22
case. of the Convention, under which any dispute between two
II. The Senate's advice and consent is or more States Parties with respect to the interpretation or
subject to the following understanding, which shall apply application of the Convention is, at the request of any of
to the obligations of the United States under this the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the
Convention: International Court of Justice for decision, and states that,
That the United States understands that this in each individual case, the consent of all parties to such a
Convention shall be implemented by the Federal dispute is necessary for referral of the dispute to the
Government to the extent that it exercises jurisdiction International Court of Justice.
over the matters covered therein, and otherwise by the "The People's Democratic Republic of Yemen states
state and local governments. To the extent that state and that the provisions of Article 17, paragraph 1, and Article
local governments exercise jurisdiction over such matters, 18, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Elimination of
the Federal Government shall, as necessary, take All Forms of Racial Discrimination whereby a number of
appropriate measures to ensure the fulfilment of this States are deprived of the opportunity to become Parties
Convention. to the Convention is of a discriminatory nature, and holds
III. The Senate's advice and consent is that, in accordance with the principle of the sovereign
subject to the following declaration: equality of States, the Convention should be opened to
That the United States declares that the provisions of participation by all interested States without
the Convention are not self-executing." discrimination or restriction of any kind."

Objections
(Unless otherwise indicated, the objections were made
upon ratification, accession or succession.)

AUSTRALIA undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply


with their obligations under the treaties.
"In accordance with article 20 (2), Australia objects to Austria is further of the view that a general reservation
[the reservations made by Yemen] which it considers of the kind made by the Government of the Kingdom of
impermissible as being incompatible with the object and Saudi Arabia, which does not clearly specify the
purpose of the Convention." provisions of the Convention to which it applies and the
extent of the derogation therefrom, contributes to
AUSTRIA undermining the basis of international treaty law.
According to international law a reservation is
"Austria is of the view that a reservation by which a inadmissible to the extent as its application negatively
State limits its responsibilities under the Convention in a affects the compliance by a State with its obligations
general and unspecified manner creates doubts as to the under the Convention essential for the fulfilment of its
commitment of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia with its object and purpose.
obligations under the Convention, essential for the Therefore, Austria cannot consider the reservation
fulfilment of its objection and purpose. According to made by the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
paragraph 2 of article 20 a reservation incompatible with as admissible unless the Government of the Kingdom of
the object and purpose of this Convention shall not be Saudi Arabia, by providing additional information or
permitted. through subsequent practice, ensures that the reservation
It is in the common interest of States that treaties to is compatible with the provisions essential for the
which they have chosen to become Parties are prepared to

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 10
implementation of the object and purpose of the CZECH REPUBLIC8
Convention.
This view by Austria would not preclude the entry into DENMARK
force in its entirety of the Convention between the "Article 5 contains undertakings, in compliance with
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Austria.” the fundamental obligations laid down in article 2 of the
Convention, to prohibit and to eliminate racial
BELARUS discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of
everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or
The ratification of the above-mentioned International national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law,
Convention by the so-called "Government of Democratic notably in the enjoyment of the rights enumerated in the
Kampuchea"-the Pol Pot-Ieng Sary clique of hangmen article.
overthrown by the Kampuchean people - is completely The reservations made by the Government of Yemen
unlawful and has no legal force. There is only one State are incompatible with the object and purpose of the
of Kampuchea in the world-The People's Republic of Convention and the reservations are consequently
Kampuchea, recognized by a large number of countries. impermissible according to article 20, paragraph 2 of the
All power in this State is entirely in the hands of its only Convention. In accordance with article 20, paragraph 1 of
lawful Government, the Government of the People's the Convention the Government of Denmark therefore
Republic of Kampuchea, which has the exclusive right to formally objects to these reservations. This objection
act in the name of Kampuchea in the international arena, does not have the effect of preventing the Convention
including the right to ratify international agreements from entering into force between Denmark and Yemen,
prepared within the United Nations. and the reservations cannot alter or modify in any respect,
The farce involving the ratification of the above- the obligations arising from the Convention."
mentioned International Convention by a clique
representing no one mocks the norms of law and morality
and blasphemes the memory of millions of Kampuchean ETHIOPIA
victims of the genocide committed by the Pol Pot-Ieng "The Provisional Military Government of Socialist
Sary régime. Ethiopia should like to reiterate that the Government of
the People's Republic of Kampuchea is the sole legitimate
BELGIUM representative of the People of Kampuchea and as such it
alone has the authority to act on behalf of Kampuchea.
These reservations are incompatible with the object The Provisional Military Government of Socialist
and purpose of the Convention and consequently are not Ethiopia, therefore, considers the ratification of the so-
permitted pursuant to article 20, paragraph 2, of the called `Government of Democratic Kampuchea' to be null
Convention. and void."
CANADA FINLAND
"The effect of these reservations would be to allow "The Government of Finland formally, and in
racial discrimination in respect of certain of the rights accordance with article 20 (2) of the Convention, objects
enumerated in Article 5. Since the objective of the to the reservations made by Yemen to the above
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms provisions.
of Racial Discrimination, as stated in its Preamble, is to In the first place, the reservations concern matters
eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and which are of fundamental importance in the Convention.
manifestations, the Government of Canada believes that The first paragraph of article 5 clearly brings this out.
the reservations made by the Yemen Arab Republic are According to it, the Parties have undertaken to guarantee
incompatible with the object and purpose of the the rights listed in that article "In compliance with
International Convention. Moreover, the Government of fundamental obligations laid down in article 2 of the
Canada believes that the principle of non-discrimination Convention". Clearly, provisions prohibiting racial
is generally accepted and recognized in international law discrimination in the granting of such fundamental
and therefore is binding on all states." political rights and civil liberties as the right to participate
in public life, to marry and choose a spouse, to inherit and
CYPRUS to enjoy freedom of thought, conscience and religion are
central in a convention against racial discrimination.
".....the Government of the Republic of Cyprus has Therefore, the reservations are incompatible with the
examined the declaration made by the Government of the object and purpose of the Convention, as specified in
Republic of Turkey to the International Convention on the paragraph 20 (2) thereof and in article 19 (c) of the
Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (New Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
York, 7 March 1966) on 16 September 2002 in respect of Moreover, it is the view of the Government of Finland
the implementation of the provisions of the Convention that it would be unthinkable that merely by making a
only to the States Parties with which it has diplomatic reservation to the said provisions, a State could achieve
relations. the liberty to start discriminatory practices on the grounds
In the view of the Government of the Republic of of race, colour, or national or ethnic origin in regard to
Cyprus, this declaration amounts to a reservation. This such fundamental political rights and civil liberties as the
reservation creates uncertainty as to the States Parties in right to participate in the conduct of public affairs, the
respect of which Turkey is undertaking the obligations in right of marriage and choice of spouse, the right of
the Convention. The Government of the Republic of inheritance and the freedom of thought, conscience and
Cyprus therefore objects to the reservation made by the religion. Any racial discrimination in respect of those
Government of the Republic of Turkey. fundamental rights and liberties is clearly against the
This reservation or the objection to it shall not general principles of human rights law as reflected in the
preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the practice
the Republic of Cyprus and the Republic of Turkey." of States and international organizations. By making a
reservation atate 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

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 11
legal effect. However, the Government of Finland does inherit and the right to freedom of thought, conscience
not consider that this fact is an obstacle to the entry into and religion. As a result, the reservations made by
force of the Convention in respect of Yemen." Yemen are incompatible with the object and purpose of
"The Government of Finland is of the view that this the Convention within the meaning of article 20,
general reservation raises doubts as to the commitment of paragraph 2 thereof."
Saudi Arabia to the object and purpose of the Convention The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany
and would recall that according to paragraph 2 of article is of the view that this reservation may raise doubts as to
20 of the Convention, a reservation incompatible with the the commitment of Saudi Arabia to the object and
object and purpose of the Convention shall not be purpose of the Convention.
permitted. The Government of Finland would also like to The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany
recall that according to the said paragraph a reservation would like to recall that, according to paragraph 2 of
shall be considered incompatible or inhibitive if at least article 20 of the Convention, a reservation incompatible
two thirds of the States Parties to the Convention object to with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be
it. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to permitted.
which they have chosen to become parties are respected, The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany
as to their object and purpose, by all parties and that therefore objects to the said reservation.
States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes The objection does not preclude the entry into force of
necessary to comply with their obligations under the the Convention between Saudi Arabia and the Federal
treaties. Republic of Germany.
The Government of Finland is further of the view that "The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany
general reservations of the kind made by Saudi Arabia, has examined the General Interpretative Declaration to
which do not clearly specify the provisions of the the International Convention on the Elimination of all
Convention to which they apply and the extent of the Forms of Racial Discrimination made by the Government
derogation therefrom, contribute to undermining the of the Kingdom of Thailand at the time of its accession to
basisof international treaty law. the Convention.
The Government of Finland therefore objects to the The Government of the Federal Repblic of Germany
aforesaid general reservation made by the Government of considers that the General Interpretative Declaration made
Saudi Arabia to the [Convention]. by Thailand is in fact a reservation that seeks to limit the
scope of the Convention on an unilateral basis.
FRANCE The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany
notes that a reservation to all provisions of a Convention
The Government of the French Republic, which does which consists of a general reference to national law
not recognize the coalition government of Democratic without specifying its contents does not clearly define for
Cambodia, declares that the instrument of ratification by the other State Parties to the Convention the extend to
the coalition government of Democratic Cambodia of the which the reserving state has accepted the obligations out
[International] Convention on the Elimination of All of the provisions of the Convention.
Forms of Racial Discrimination, opened for signature at The reservation made by the Government of the
New York on 7 March 1966, is without effect. Kingdom of Thailand in respect to the applications of the
France considers that the reservations made by the provisions of the Convention therefore raises doubts as to
Yemen Arab Republic to the International Convention on the commitment of Thailand to fulfill its obligations out
the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination are of all provisions of the Convention.
not valid as being incompatible with the object and Hence the Government of the Federal Republic of
purpose of the Convention. Germany considers this reservation to be incompatible
Such objection is not an obstacle to the entry into with the object and purpose of the Convention and objects
force of the said Convention between France and the to the General Interpretative Declaration made by the
Yemen Arab Republic. Government of the Kingdom of Thailand.
The Government of the Republic of France has This objection does not preclude the entry into force of
examined the interpretative declaration made by the the Convention between the Federal Republic of Germany
Government of the Kingdom of Thailand upon accession and the Kingdom of Thailand."
to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Racial Discrimination of 7 March 1966. The Government ITALY
of the Republic of France considers that, by making the
interpretation and implementation of the provisions of the "The Government of the Republic of Italy raises an
Convention subject to respect for the Constitution and objection to the reservations entered by the Government
legislation of the Kingdom of Thailand, the Government of the Arab Republic of Yemen to article 5 [(c) and (d)
of the Kingdom of Thailand is making a reservation of (iv), (vi) and (vii)] of the above-mentioned Convention."
such a general and indeterminate scope that it is not
possible to ascertain which changes to obligations under MEXICO
the Convention it is intended to introduce. Consequently,
the Government of France considers that this reservation The Government of the United Mexican States has
as formulated could make the provisions of the concluded that, in view of article 20 of the Convention,
Convention completely ineffective. For these reasons, the the reservation must be deemed invalid, as it is
Government objects to this interpretative declaration, incompatible with the object and purpose of the
which it considers to be a reservation likely toe Convention.
incompatible with the object and purpose of the Said reservation, if implemented would result in
Convention. discrimination to the detriment of a certain sector of the
population and, at the same time, would violate the rights
GERMANY3 established in articles 2, 16 and 18 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights of 1948.
"These reservations relate to the basic obligations of The objection of the United Mexican States to the
States Parties to the Convention to prohibit and eliminate reservation in question should not be interpreted as an
racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the impediment to the entry into force of the Convention of
right of everyone to equality before the law and include 1966 between the United States of Mexico and the
the enjoyment of such fundamental political and civil Government of Yemen.
rights as the right to take part in the conduct of public life,
the right to marriage and choice of spouse, the right to
IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 12
MONGOLIA The Government of Romania therefore objects to the
aforesaid reservation made by Thailand to the Convention
"The Government of the Mongolian People's Republic on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination.
considers that only the People's Revolutionary Council of This objection, however, shall not preclude the entry
Kampuchea as the sole authentic and lawful into force of the Convention between the Government of
representative of the Kampuchean people has the right to Romania and Thailand."
assume international obligations on behalf of the
Kampuchean people. Therefore the Government of the
Mongolian People's Republic considers that the RUSSIAN FEDERATION
ratification of the International Convention on the The ratification of the above-mentioned International
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination by the Convention by the so-called "Government of Democratic
so-called Democratic Kampuchea, a regime that ceased to Kampuchea"-the Pol Pot clique of hangmen overthrown
exist as a result of the people's revolution in Kampuchea, by the Kampuchean people-is completely unlawful and
is null and void." has no legal force. Only the representatives authorized by
the State Council of the People's Republic of Kampuchea
NETHERLANDS can act in the name of Kampuchea. There is only one
State of Kampuchea in the world -the People's Republic
"The Kingdom of the Netherlands objects to the of Kampuchea, which has been recognized by a large
above-mentioned reservations, as they are incompatible number of countries. All power in this State is entirely in
with object and purpose of the Convention. the hands of its only lawful Government, the Government
These objections are not an obstacle for the entry into of the People's Republic of Kampuchea, which has the
force of this Convention between the Kingdom of the exclusive right to act in the name of Kampuchea in the
Netherlands and Yemen." international arena, including the right to ratify
international agreements prepared within the United
NEW ZEALAND Nations.
Nor should one fail to observe that the farce involving
"The New Zealand Government is of the view that the ratification of the above-mentioned International
those provisions contain undertakings which are Convention by a clique representing no one mocks the
themselves fundamental to the Convention. Accordingly norms of law and morality and is a direct insult to the
it considers that the reservations purportedly made by memory of millions of Kampuchean victims of the
Yemen relating to political and civil rights are genocide committed against the Kampuchean people by
incompatible with the object and purpose of the Treaty the Pol Pot Sary régime. The entire international
within the terms of the article 19 (c) of the Vienna community is familiar with the bloody crimes of that
Convention on the Law of Treaties. puppet clique.
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 SLOVAKIA8
the reservations made by Yemen." SPAIN
NORWAY The Government of Spain considers that, given its
unlimited scope and undefined nature, the reservation
"The Government of Norway hereby enters its formal made by the Government of Saudi Arabia is contrary to
objection to the reservations made by Yemen." the object and purpose of the Convention and therefore
"The Government of Norway considers that the inadmissible under article 10, paragraph 2, of the
reservation made by the Government of Saudi Arabia, due Convention. Under the generally accepted law of treaties,
to its unlimited scope and undefined character, is contrary a State party may not invoke the provisions of its
to the object and purpose of the Convention, and thus domestic law as a justification for failure to perform its
impermissible under article 20, paragraph 2, of the treaty obligations. The Government of Spain therefore
Convention. Under well-established treaty law, a State formulates an objection to the reservation made by the
party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as Government of Saudi Arabia. The Government of Spain
justification for its failure to perform treaty obligations. does not consider that this objection constitutes an
For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between
the reservation made by the Government of Saudi Arabia. the Kingdom of Spain and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
The Government of Norway does not consider this
objection to preclude the entry into force of the SWEDEN
Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia." "Article 5 contains undertakings, in compliance with
the fundamental obligations laid down in article 2 of the
ROMANIA Convention, to prohibit and to eliminate racial
discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of
"The Government of Romania has examined the everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or
general interpretative declaration made by the national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law,
Government of Thailand at the time of its accession to the notably in the enjoyment of the rights enumerated in the
Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial article.
Discrimination. The Government of Sweden has come to the
The Government of Romania considers that the conclusion that the reservations made by Yemen are
general interpretative declaration is, in fact, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the
formulated in general terms, that not allows to clearly Convention and therefore are impermissible according to
identify the obligations assumed by Thailand with regard article 20, paragraph 2 of the Convention. For this reason
to this legal instrument and, consequently, to state the the Government of Sweden objects to these reservations.
consistency of this reservation with the purpose and This objection does not have the effect of preventing the
object of the above-mentioned Convention, in accordance Convention from entering into force between Sweden and
with the provisions of article 19 (c) of the Vienna Yemen, and the reservations cannot alter or modify, in
Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969). any respect, the obligations arising from the Convention."
"The Government of Sweden notes that the said
reservation is a reservation of a general kind in respect of

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 13
the provisions of the Convention which may be in conflict reservation makes it unclear to what extent the reserving
with the precepts of the Islamic Shariah . state considers itself bound by the obligations of the
The Government of Sweden is of the view that this Convention. The reservation made by the Kingdom of
general reservation raises doubts as to the commitment Thailand therefore raises doubts as to the commitment of
[of] Saudi Arabia to the object and purpose of the the Kingdom of Thailand to the object and purpose of the
Convention and would recall that, according to article 20, Convention. In addition, according to the Vienna
paragraph 2, of the Convention, a reservation Convention on the Law of Treaties, a party to a treaty
incompatible with the object and purpose of this may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as
Convention shall not be permitted. justification for its failure to abide by the treaty.
It is in the common interest of states that treaties to It is in the common interest of States that treaties to
which they have chosen to become parties are respected, which they have chosen to become parties are respected
as to their object and purpose, by all parties and that states as to their object and purpose, by all parties, and that
are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessar States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes
to comply with their obligations under the treaties. necessary to comply with their obligations under the
The Government of Sweden is further of the view that treaties. According to customary law as codified in the
general reservations of the kind made by the Government Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation
of Saudi Arabia, which do not clearly specify the incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall
provisions of the Convention to which they apply and the not be permitted.
extent of the derogation therefrom, contribute to The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the
undermining the basis of international treaty law. aforesaid reservation made by the Kingdom of Thailand
The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the to the International Convention on the Elimination of All
aforesaid general reservation made by the Government of Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Saudi Arabia to the [said Convention]. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force
This objection does not preclude the entry into force of of the Convention between the Kingdom of Thailand and
the Convention between Saudi Arabia and Sweden. The Sweden. The Convention enters into force between the
Convention will thus become operative between the two two States, without the Kingdom of Thailand benefitting
states without Saudi Arabia benefiting from this from this reservation."
reservation."
The Government of Sweden has examined the UKRAINE
declarations made by Turkey upon ratifying the
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms The ratification of the above-mentioned international
of Racial Discrimination. Convention by the Pol Pot-Ieng Sary clique, which is
Paragraph 1 of the declaration states that Turkey will guilty of the annihilation of millions of Kampucheans and
implement the provisions of the Convention only to the which was overthrown in 1979 by the Kampuchean
States Parties with which it has diplomatic relations. This people, is thoroughly illegal and has no juridical force.
statement in fact amounts, in the view of the Government There is only one Kampuchean State in the World,
of Sweden, to a reservation. The reservation makes it namely, the People's Republic of Kampuchea. All
unclear to what extent the Turkey considers itself bound authority in this State is vested wholly in its sole
by the obligations of the Convention. In absence of legitimate government, the Government of the People's
further clarification, therefore, the reservation raises Republic of Kampuchea. This Government alone has the
doubts as to the commitment of Turkey to the object and exclusive right to speak on behalf of Kampuchea at the
purpose of the Convention. international level, while the supreme organ of State
It is in the common interest ofStates that treaties to power, the State Council of the People's Republic of
which they have chosen to become parties are respected Kampuchea has the exclusive right to ratify international
as to their object and purpose, by all parties, and that agreements drawn up within the framework of the United
States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes Nations.
necessary to comply with their obligations under the
treaties. According to article 20 of the International UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination, a reservation incompatible with the object IRELAND
and purpose of the convention shall not be permitted. "The Government of the United Kingdom of Great
The Government of Sweden objects to the said Britain and Northern Ireland do not accept the
reservation made by the Government of Turkey to the reservations made by the Yemen Arab Republic to article
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms 5 (c) and (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii) of the International
of Racial Discrimination. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
This objection does not preclude the entry into force Discrimination."
of the Convention between Turkey and Sweden. The "The Government of the United Kingdom have
Convention enters into force in its entiretv between the examined the declaration made by the Government of the
two States, without Turkey benefiting from its Republic of Turkey to the International Convention on the
reservation. Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (New
"The Government of Sweden has examined the York, 7 March 1966) on 16 September 2002 in respect of
general interpretative declaration made by the Kingdom implementation of the provisions of the Convention only
of Thailand upon acceding to the International to the States Parties with which it has diplomatic
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial relations.
Discrimination. In the view of the Government of the United
The Government of Sweden recalls that the Kingdom, this declaration amounts to a reservation. This
designation assigned to a statement whereby the legal reservation creates uncertainty as to the States Parties in
effect of certain provisions of a treaty is excluded or respect of which Turkey is undertaking the obligations in
modified does not determine its status as a reservation to the Convention. The Government of the United Kingdom
the treaty. The Government of Sweden considers that the therefore object to the reservation made by the
interpretative declaration made by the Kingdom of Government of the Republic of Turkey.
Thailand in substance constitutes a reservation. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force
The Government of Sweden notes that the application of the Convention between the United Kingdom of Great
of the Convention is being made subject to a general Britain and Northern Ireland and the Republic of Turkey."
reservation referring to the confines of national
legislation, without specifying its contents. Such a
IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 14
"The Government of the United Kingdom have reference to national law without specifying its contents
examined the interpretative declaration made by the and does not clearly define for the other States Parties to
Government of the Kingdom of Thailand to the the Convention the extent to which Grenada has accepted
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms the obligations of the Convention. The United Kingdom
of Racial Discrimination (New York, 7 March 1966) on therefore objects to the reservation made by Grenada in
28 January 2003 in respect of the Government of the its Declaration and hereby gives notice that it does not
Kingdom of Thailand having no obligation to interpret accept it.
and apply the provisions of the Convention beyond the This objection shall not preclude the entry into force
confines of the Constitution and the laws of the Kingdom of the Convention between the United Kingdom of Great
of Thailand and, in addition, that the interpretation and Britain and Northern Ireland and Grenada.”
application shall be limited to or consistent with the VIET NAM
obligations under other international human rights
instruments to which the Kingdom of Thailand is party. "The Government of the Socialist Republic of
In the view of the Government of the United Vietnam considers that only the Government of the
Kingdom, this declaration amounts to a reservation. This People's Republic of Kampuchea, which is the sole
reservation amounts to a general reference to national law genuine and legitimate representative of the Kampuchean
without specifying its contents and does not clearly define People, is empowered to act in their behalf to sign, ratify
for the other States Parties to the Convention the extent to or accede to international conventions.
which the declaring State has accepted the obligations of The Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
the Convention. The Government of the United Kingdom rejects as null and void the ratification of the above-
therefore object to the reservation made by the mentioned international Convention by the so-called
Government of the Kingdom of Thailand. "Democratic Kampuchea"- a genocidal regime
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force overthrown by the Kampuchean people since January 7,
of the Convention between the United Kingdom of Great 1979.
Britain and Northern Ireland and the Kingdom of Furthermore, the ratification of the Convention by a
Thailand." genocidal regime, which massacred more than 3 million
Kampuchean people in gross violation of fundamental
“The Government of the United Kingdom has standards of morality and international laws on human
examined the Declaration made by Grenada. In the view rights, simply plays down the significance of the
of the United Kingdom, the Declaration amounts to a Convention and jeopardises the prestige of the United
reservation. The Declaration makes only a general Nations."

Declarations recognizing the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination33
in accordance with article 14 of the Convention
(Unless otherwise indicated, the declarations and reservations were made upon ratification, accession or
succession.)

ALGERIA violation by the national government of the rights set


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

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 15
of Racial Discrimination, the Government of the Republic of a violation by the Government of Chile of any of the
of Azerbaijan declares that it recognizes the competence rights set forth in this Convention.
of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination to receive and consider communications COSTA RICA
from individuals or groups of individuals within its
jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation of any of Costa Rica recognizes the competence of the
the rights set forth in the above-mentioned Convention." Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
established under article 8 of the Convention on the
BELGIUM Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, in
accordance with article 14 of the Convention, to receive
Belgium recognizes the competence of the Committee and consider communications from individuals or groups
on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, established of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be
by the aforementioned Convention, to receive and victims of a violation by the State of any of the rights set
consider communications from individuals or groups of forth in the Convention.
individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims
of a violation by Belgium of any of the rights set forth in CYPRUS
the Convention.
Pursuant to article 14, paragraph 2, of the Convention, "The Republic of Cyprus recognizes the competence
the Centre pour l'Egalité des Chances et la Lutte contre le of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial
Racisme (Centre for Equal Opportunity and the Struggle Discrimination established under article 14 (1) of [the
against Racism), established by the Act of 15 February Convention] to receive and consider communications
1993, has been designated as competent to receive and from individuals or groups of individuals within its
consider petitions from individuals and groups of jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the
individuals within the jurisdiction of Belgium who claim Republic of Cyprus of any of the rights set forth in this
to be victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in Convention.
the Convention.
Pursuant to article 14, paragraph 2, of the Convention, CZECH REPUBLIC
the Centre pour l'Egalité des Chances et la Lutte contre le The Czech Republic declares that according to Article
Racisme (Centre for Equal Opportunity and the Struggle 14, paragraph 1 of the International Convention on the
against Racism), established by the Act of 15 February Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination it
1993, has been designated as competent to receive and recognizes the competence of the Committee on the
consider petitions from individuals and groups of Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and
individuals within the jurisdiction of Belgium who claim consider communications from individuals or groups of
to be victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims
the Convention. of a violation of any of the rights set forth in the
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
BOLIVIA (PLURINATIONAL STATE OF) of Racial Discrimination.
"The Government of Bolivia recognizes the DENMARK
competence of the Committee on the Elimination of
Racial Discrimination established under article 8 of the Denmark recognizes the competence of the Committee
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive
of Racial Discrimination, in compliance with article 14 of and consider communications from individuals or groups
the Convention." of individuals within Danish jurisdiction claiming to be
victims of a violation by Denmark of any of the rights set
BRAZIL forth in the Convention, with the reservation that the
Committee shall not consider any communications unless
.....the Federative Republic of Brazil recognizes the it has ascertained that the same matter has not been, and is
competence of the Committee on the Elimination of not being, examined under another procedure of
Racial Discrimination to receive and consider complaints international investigation or settlement.
of human rights violations, as provided for under article
XIV of the International Convention on the Elimination of ECUADOR
All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which was opened
for signature in New York on 7th of March 1966. The State of Ecuador, by virtue of Article 14 of the
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
BULGARIA of Racial Discrimination, recognizes the competence of
the Committee on the Elimination of Racial
"The Republic of Bulgaria declares that it recognizes Discrimination to receive and consider communications
the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of from individuals or groups of individuals within its
Racial Discrimination to receive and consider jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation of the
communications from individuals or groups of individuals rights set forth in the above-mentioned Convention.
within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation
by the Republic of Bulgaria of any of the rights set forth EL SALVADOR
in this Convention."
… the Government of the Republic of El Salvador
CHILE recognizes the competence of the Committee on the
Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and
In accordance with article 14 (1) of the International consider communications from individuals or groups of
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial individuals within the jurisdiction of a State Party who
Discrimination, the Government of Chile declares that it claim to be victims of violations by that State of any of
recognizes the competence of the Committee on the the rights set forth in the International Convention on the
Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, as
consider communications from individuals or groups of provided for in article 14 of the said Convention.
individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 16
ESTONIA
“The Republic of Estonia declares that pursuant to HUNGARY
Article 14 paragraph 1 of the Convention it recognizes the "The Hungarian People's Republic hereby recognizes
competence of the Committee on the Elimination of the competence of the Committee established by the
Racial Discrimination to receive and consider International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
communications from individuals or groups of individuals of Racial Discrimination provided for in paragraph 1 of
within the jurisdiction of Estonia claiming to be victims article 14 of the Convention."
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 ICELAND
Declaration. “[The Government of Iceland declares] in accordance
Estonia recognizes that competence on the with article 14 of the International Convention on the
understanding that the Committee on the Elimination of Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination which
Racial Discrimination shall not consider any was opened for signature in New York on 7 March 1966,
communications without ascertaining that the same matter that Iceland recognizes the competence of the Committee
is not being considered or has not already been considered on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive
by another international body of investigation or and consider communications from individuals or groups
settlement.” of individuals within the jurisdiction of Iceland claiming
FINLAND to be victims of a violation by Iceland of any of the rights
set forth in the Convention, with the reservation that the
"Finland recognizes the competence of the Committee Committee shall not consider any communication from an
on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive individual or group of individuals unless the Committee
and consider communications from individuals or groups has ascertained that the same matter is not being
of individuals within the jurisdiction of Finland claiming examined or has not been examined under another
to be victims of a violation by Finland of any of the rights procedure of international investigation or settlement."
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 IRELAND
Committee has ascertained that the same matter is not “With reference to article 14, paragraph 1, of the
being examined or has not been examined under another International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
procedure of international investigation or settlement." of Racial Discrimination, opened for signature at New
York on 7 March 1966, Ireland recognizes the
FRANCE competence of the Committee on the Elimination of
Racial Discrimination, established by the afore-mentioned
[The Government of the French Republic declares], in Convention to receive and consider communications from
accordance with article 14 of the International Convention individuals or groups of individuals within Ireland
on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination claiming to be victims of a violation by Ireland of any of
opened for signature on 7 March 1966, [that it] recognizes the rights set forth in the Convention.
the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Ireland recognizes that competence on the
Racial Discrimination to receive and consider understanding that the said Committee shall not consider
communications from individuals or groups of individuals any communication without ascertaining that the same
within French jurisdiction that either by reason of acts or matter is not being considered or has not already been
omissions, events or deeds occurring after 15 August considered by another international body of investigation
1982, or by reason of a decision concerning the acts or or settlement.”
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 ITALY
Convention. With reference to article 14, paragraph 1, of the
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
GEORGIA of Racial Discrimination, opened for signature at New
York on 7 March 1966, the Government of the Italian
"In accordance with Article 14, Paragraph 1, of the Republic recognizes the competence of the Committee on
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, established by
Discrimination done at New York on March 7, 1966 the afore-mentioned Convention, to receive and consider
Georgia recognizes the competence of the Committee for communications from individuals or groups of individuals
the elimination of racial discrimination to receive and within Italian jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a
consider communications from individuals or groups of violation by Italy of any of the rights set forth in the
individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims Convention.
of a violation, by Georgia, of any of the rights set forth in The Government of the Italian Republic recognizes
the abovementioned Convention." that competence on the understanding that the Committee
on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination shall not
GERMANY consider any communication without ascertaining that the
same matter is not being considered or has not already
The Federal Republic of Germany hereby declares that been considered by another international body of
pursuant to Article 14 paragraph 1 of the Convention it investigation or settlement.
recognizes the competence of the Committee on the
Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and
consider communications from individuals or groups of KAZAKHSTAN
individuals within her jurisdiction claiming to be victims “In accordance with article 14, paragraph 1, of the
of a violation by the Federal Republic of Germany of any International convention on the elimination of all forms of
of the rights set forth in this Convention. However, this racial discrimination done at New York on December 21,
shall only apply insofar as the Committee has determined 1965 the Republic of Kazakhstan hereby declares that it
that the same matter is not being or has not been recognizes the competence of the Committee of
examined under another procedure of international elimination of racial discrimination within its jurisdiction
investigation or settlement. to receive and consider communications from or on behalf
IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 17
of individuals who claim to be victims of a violation by within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation
the Republic of Kazakhstan of the provisions of the by that State of any of the rights stipulated in the
Convention.” Convention.
LIECHTENSTEIN Accordingly, in exercise of the power vested in me
under article 89, subparagraph X, of the Political
".....the Principality of Liechtenstein recognizes the Constitution of the United Mexican States and in
competence of the Committee on the Elimination of accordance with article 5 of the Conclusion of Treaties
Racial Discrimination to receive and consider Act, I hereby issue this instrument of acceptance, the
communications from individuals or groups of individuals Declaration on Recognition of the Competence of the
within the jurisdiction of Liechtenstein claiming to be Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination,
victims of a violation by Liechtenstein of any of the rights as set out in the Declaration adopted by the Senate of the
set forth in the Convention. Distinguished Congress of the Union, and promise, on
The Principality of Liechtenstein recognizes that behalf of the Mexican Nation, to implement it, uphold it
competence on the understanding that the said Committee and ensure that it is implemented and upheld.
shall not consider any communication without
ascertaining that the same matter is not being considered MONACO
or has not already been considered under another
international procedure of investigation or settlement. We hereby declare that we recognize the competence
Pursuant to article 14, paragraph 2, of the Convention, of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial
the Constitutional Court has been designated as Discrimination to receive and examine communications
competent to receive and consider petitions from from individuals or groups of individuals under its
individuals and groups of individuals within the jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation by the
jurisdiction of Liechtenstein who claim to be victims of a Principality of Monaco of any of the rights set forth in the
violation of any of the rights set forth in the Convention." said Convention, such competence to be exercised only
when all domestic remedies have been exhausted, and we
LUXEMBOURG pledge our word as Prince and promise, on behalf of
ourselves and our successors, to observe and execute it
Pursuant to article 14 (1) of the [said Convention], faithfully and loyally.
Luxembourg declares that it recognizes the competence of
the Committee on the Elimination of Racial MONTENEGRO
Discrimination to receive and consider communications
from individuals or groups of individuals within its “By affirming its commitment to establish the
jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by principles of the rule of law and promote and protect
Luxembourg of any of the rights set forth in the human rights, the Government of the Federal Republic of
Convention. Yugoslavia recognizes the competence of the Committee
Pursuant to article 14 (2) of the [said Convention], the on the elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and
"Commission spéciale permanente contre la consider complaints submitted by individuals and groups
discrimination", created in May 1996 pursuant to article alleging violations of rights guaranteed under the
24 of the Law dated 27 July 1993 on the integration of International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
aliens shall be competent to receive and consider petitions of Racial Discrimination.
from individuals and groups of individuals within the The Government of the Federal Republic of
jurisdiction of Luxembourg who claim to be victims of a Yugoslavia determines the competence of the Federal
violation of any of the rights set forth in the Convention. Constitutional Court to accept and consider, within its
domestic legal system, the complaints submitted by
MALTA individuals and groups under the State jurisdiction,
alleging to have been victims of rights violations under
Malta declares that it recognizes the competence of the the Convention, and who have exhausted all available
Committee to receive and consider communications from legal means provided for by the national legislation.”
individuals subject to the jurisdiction of Malta who claim
to be victims of a violation by Malta of any of the rights MOROCCO
set forth in the Convention which results from situations
or events occurring after the date of adoption of the In accordance with article 14 of the International
present declaration, or from a decision relating to Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
situations or events occurring after that date. Discrimination, the Government of the Kingdom of
The Government of Malta recognizes this competence Morocco declares that it recognizes, on the date of deposit
on the understanding that the Committee on the of the present document, the competence of the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination shall Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to
not consider any communication without ascertaining that receive and consider communications from individuals or
the same matter is not being considered or has not already groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be
been considered by another international body of victims of a violation, subsequent to the date of deposit of
investigation or settlement." the present document, of any of the rights set forth in this
Convention.
MEXICO
The United Mexican States recognizes as duly binding NETHERLANDS
the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of In accordance with article 14, paragraph 1, of the
Racial Discrimination, established by article 8 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms Discrimination concluded at New York on 7 March 1966,
of Racial Discrimination, adopted by the United Nations the Kingdom of the Netherlands recognizes, for the
General Assembly in its resolution 2106 (XX) of 21 Kingdom in Europe, Surinam and the Netherlands
December 1965 and opened for signature on 7 March Antilles, the competence of the Committee for the
1966. Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and
The United Mexican States declares, pursuant to consider communications from individuals or groups of
article 14 of the Convention, that it recognizes the individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims
competence of the Committee to receive and consider of a violation, by the Kingdom of the Netherlands, of any
communications from individuals or groups of individuals of the rights set forth in the above-mentioned Convention.
IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 18
Portugal indicates the High Commissioner for
See also notes 1 and 2 under "Netherlands" regarding Immigration and Ethnic Minorities as the body with
Aruba/Netherlands Antilles in the "Historical competence to receive and consider petitions from
Information" section in the front matter of this volume. individuals and groups of individuals that claim to be
NORWAY victims of violation of any of the rights set forth in the
Convention".
"The Norwegian Government recognizes the
competence of the Committee on the Elimination of REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Racial Discrimination to receive and consider
communications from individuals or groups of individuals "The Government of the Republic of Korea recognizes
within the jurisdiction of Norway claiming to be victims the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of
of a violation by Norway of any of the rights set forth in Racial Discrimination to receive and consider
the International Convention of 21 December 1965 on the communications from individuals or groups of individuals
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination within the jurisdiction of the Republic of Korea claiming
according to article 14 of the said Convention, with the to be victims of a violation by the Republic of Korea of
reservation that the Committee shall not consider any any of the rights set forth in the said Convention."
communication from an individual or group of individuals
unless the Committee has ascertained that the same matter REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
is not being examined or has not been examined under
another procedure of international investigation or “According to Article 14, paragraph 1 of the
settlement." International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Racial Discrimination, the Republic of Moldova
PANAMA recognizes the competence of the Committee on the
Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and
… the Republic of Panama recognizes the competence consider communications from individuals or groups of
of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial individuals within the jurisdiction of the Republic of
Discrimination to receive and consider communications Moldova claiming to be victims of a violation by the
from individuals or groups of individuals within its Republic of Moldova of any of the rights set forth in the
jurisdiction claiming to be victims of violations by the Convention, with the reservation that the Committee shall
Republic of Panama of any of the rights set forth in the not consider any communication unless it has ascertained
referred Convention. that the same matter is not being examined or has not
PERU been examined under another procedure of international
investigation or settlement.”
[The Government of the Republic of Peru declares] [T]he Government decides:
that, in accordance with its policy of full respect for 1. To designate the Bureau of Inter-Ethnic Relations as
human rights and fundamental freedoms, without the body responsible for the submission of the Moldovan
distinctions as to race, sex, language or religion, and with Government's comments on communications from
the aim of strengthening the international instruments on individuals and groups of individuals concerning the
the subject, Peru recognizes the competence of the Republic of Moldova addressed to the United Nations
Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.
receive and consider communications from individuals or 2. The Bureau of Inter-Ethnic Relations shall keep
groups of individuals within its jurisdiction, who claim to official records in accordance with this decision.
be victims of violations of any of the rights set forth in the 3. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Integration shall inform the depositary of the designation
Discrimination, in conformity with the provisions of of the competent body.
article 14 of the Convention. ROMANIA
POLAND "Romania declares, in accordance with article 14
paragraph 1 of the International Convention on the
The Government of the Republic of Poland recognizes Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, that it
the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of recognizes the competence of the Committee on the
Racial Discrimination, established by the provisions of Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and
the afore-mentioned Convention, to receive and consider consider communications from persons within its
communications from individuals or groups of individuals jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by
within jurisdiction of the Republic of Poland claiming, to Romania of any of the rights set forth in the Convention,
be victims of a violation by the Republic of Poland of the to which Romania acceded by Decree no. 345 of 1970.
rights set forth in the above Convention and concerning Without prejudice to the article 14 paragraphs 1 and 2
all deeds, decisions and facts which will occur after the of the International Convention on the Elimination of All
day this Declaration has been deposited with the Forms of Racial Discrimination, Romania considers that
Secretary-General of the United Nations. the mentioned provisions do not confer to the Committee
on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination the
PORTUGAL competence of examining communications of persons
invoking the existence and infringement of collective
".....The Government of Portugal recognises the rights.
competence of the Committee established under Article The body which is competent in Romania, according
14 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of to domestic law, to receive and to examine
Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications in accordance with article 14 paragraph
communications from individuals or groups of individuals 2 of the International Convention on the Elimination of
within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation All Forms of Racial Discrimination is the National
by the Republic of Portugal of any of the rights set forth Council for Combating Discrimination established by the
in that Convention. Government Decision no. 1194 of 2001."
Portugal recognises such jurisdiction provided that the
Committee does not consider any communication unless RUSSIAN FEDERATION
it is satisfied that the matter has neither been examined
nor is it subject to appreciation by any other international The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics declares that
body with powers of inquiry or decision. it recognizes the competence of the Committee on the
IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 19
Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and (a) declares that, for the purposes of
consider communications, in respect of situations and paragraph 1 of article 14 of the Convention, it recognises
events occurring after the adoption of the present the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of
declaration, from individuals or groups of individuals Racial Discrimination to receive and consider
within the jurisdiction of the USSR claiming to be victims communications from individuals or groups of individuals
of a violation by the USSR of any of the rights set forth in within the Republic's jurisdiction claiming to be victims
the Convention. of a violation by the Republic in any of the rights set forth
in the Convention after having exhausted all domestic
SAN MARINO remedies
and
The Republic of San Marino, in accordance with (b) indicates that, for the purposes of
article 14 of the International Convention on the paragraph 2 of article 14 of the Convention, the South
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, African Human Rights Commission is the body within the
recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Republic's national legal order which shall be competent
Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and to receive and consider petitions from individuals or
consider communications from individuals or groups of groups of individuals within the Republic's jurisdiction
individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims who claim to be victims of any of the rights set forth in
of a violation by the Republic of San Marino of any of the the Convention."
rights set forth in the Convention.
SENEGAL SPAIN
In accordance with [article 14], the Government of [The Government of Spain] recognizes the
Senegal declares that it recognizes the competence of the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of
Committee (on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination) Racial Discrimination to receive and consider
to receive and consider communications from individuals communications from individuals or groups of individuals
within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation within the jurisdiction of Spain claiming to be victims of
by Senegal of any of the rights set forth in the Convention violations by the Spanish State of any of the rights set
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. forth in that Convention.
Such competence shall be accepted only after appeals
SERBIA to national jurisdiction bodies have been exhausted, and it
must be exercised within three months following the date
“By affirming its commitment to establish the of the final judicial decision.
principles of the rule of law and promote and protect
human rights, the Government of the Federal Republic of SWEDEN
Yugoslavia recognizes the competence of the Committee
on the elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and "Sweden recognizes the competence of the Committee
consider complaints submitted by individuals and groups on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive
alleging violations of rights guaranteed under the and consider communications from individuals or groups
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of individuals within the jurisdiction of Sweden claiming
of Racial Discrimination. to be victims of a violation by Sweden of any of the rights
The Government of the Federal Republic of set forth in the Convention, with the reservation that the
Yugoslavia determines the competence of the Federal Committee shall not consider any communication from an
Constitutional Court to accept and consider, within its individual or a group of individuals unless the Committee
domestic legal system, the complaints submitted by has ascertained that the same matter is not being
individuals and groups under the State jurisdiction, examined or has not been examined under another
alleging to have been victims of rights violations under procedure of international investigation or settlement."
the Convention, and who have exhausted all available
legal means provided for by the national legislation.” SWITZERLAND
SLOVAKIA ... .Switzerland recognizes, pursuant to article 14,
paragraph 1, of the International Convention on the
The Slovak Republic, pursuant to article 14 of the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,
Convention, recognizes the competence of the Committee concluded at New York on 21 December 1965, the
on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive competence of the Committee on the Elimination of
and consider communications from individuals or groups Racial Discrimination (CERD) to receive and consider
of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be communications under the above-mentioned provision,
victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in the with the reservation that the Committee shall not consider
Convention. any communication from an individual or group of
individuals unless the Committee has ascertained that the
SLOVENIA same matter is not being examined or has not been
examined under another procedure of international
"The Republic of Slovenia recognizes to the investigation or settlement.
Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
competence to receive and consider communications from THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA
individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction
claiming to be victims of a violation by the Republic of “The Republic of Macedonia declares that it
Slovenia of any of the rights set forth in the Convention, recognizes the competence of the Committee on the
with the reservation that the Committee shall not consider Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and
any communications unless it has ascertained that the consider communcations from individuals or groups of
same matter has not been, and is not being, examined individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims
under another procedure of international investigation or of a violation by the Republic of Macedonia of any of its
settlement." rights set forth in this Convention, with the reservation
that the Committee shall not consider any communication
SOUTH AFRICA from individuals or groups of individuals, unless it has
ascertained that the same matter has not been, and is not
"The Republic of South Africa-
IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 20
being, examined under another procedure of international violation by [it] of any of the rights set forth in the
investigation or settlement." Convention.

TOGO URUGUAY
Expressing its determination to maintain the rule of The Government of Uruguay recognizes the
law, to defend and protect human rights and in accordance competence of the Committee on the Elimination of
with Article 14, the Government the Republic of Togo Racial Discrimination, under article 14 of the Convention.
declares that it recognizes the competence of the
Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination to VENEZUELA (BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF)
receive and consider communications from individuals
within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation Pursuant to the provisions of article 14, paragraph 1 of
by the Republic of Togo, of any of the rights set forth in the International Convention on the Elimination of All
the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Government of the
Discrimination. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela recognizes the
UKRAINE competence of the Committee on the Elimination of
Racial Discrimination established under article 8 of the
In accordance with the article 14 of the International Convention to receive and consider communications from
Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Racial individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction
Discrimination, Ukraine declares that it recognizes the claiming to be victims of violations by the Bolivarian
competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Republic of Venezuela of any of the rights set forth in the
Racial Discrimination to receive and consider Convention.
communications from individuals or groups of individuals
[within its jurisdiction] claiming to be victims of a

Notes:
1 Article 19 of the Convention provides that the Convention Government of Poland, which was the twenty-seventh
shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after the date of deposit instrument of ratification or instrument of accession deposited
with the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the twenty- with the Secretary-General.
seventh instrument of ratification or instrument of accession. On
2 Official Records of the General Assembly, Twentieth
5 December 1968, the Government of Poland deposited the
twenty-seventh instrument. However, among those instruments Session, Supplement No. 14 (A/6014),p. 47.
there were some which contained a reservation and therefore
were subject to the provisions of article 20 of the Convention 3 The German Democratic Republic had acceded to the
allowing States to notify objections within ninety days from the Convention on 23 March 1973 with a reservation and a
date of circulation by the Secretary-General of the reservations. declaration. For the text of the reservation and declaration, see
In respect of two such instruments, namely those of Kuwait and United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 883, p. 190.
Spain, the ninety-day period had not yet expired on the date of
deposit of the twenty-seventh instrument. The reservation Moreover, on 26 April 1984, the Government of the German
contained in one further instrument, that of India, had not yet Democratic Republic had made an objection with regard to the
been circulated on that date, and the twenty-seventh instrument ratification made by the Government of the Democratic
itself, that of Poland, contained a reservation; in respect of these Kampuchea. For the text of the objection, see United Nations,
two instruments the ninety-day period would only begin to run Treaty Series , vol. 1355, p. 327.
on the date of the Secretary-General's notification of their
deposit. Therefore, in that notification, which was dated 13 See also note 2 under “Germany” in the “Historical
December 1968, the Secretary-General called the attention of Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
the interested States to the situation and stated the following:
4 The former Yugoslavia had signed and ratified the
"It appears from the provisions of article 20 of the Convention Convention on 15 April 1966 and 2 October 1967, respectively.
that it would not be possible to determine the legal effect of the See also note 1 under "Bosnia and Herzegovina", "Croatia",
four instruments in question pending the expiry of the respective "former Yugoslavia", "Slovenia", "The Former Yugoslav
periods of time mentioned in the preceding paragraph. Republic of Macedonia" and "Yugoslavia" in the "Historical
Information" section in the front matter of this volume.
Having regard to the above-mentioned consideration, the
Secretary-General is not at the present time in a position to 5 On 10 June 1997, the Secretary-General received
ascertain the date of entry into force of the Convention." communications concerning the status of Hong Kong from the
Governments of the United Kingdom and China (see also note 2
Subsequently, in a notification dated 17 March 1969, the under “China” and note 2 under “United Kingdom of Great
Secretary-General informed the interested States; (a) that within Britain and Northern Ireland” regarding Hong Kong in the
the period of ninety days from the date of his previous “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this
notification he had received an objection from one State to the volume). Upon resuming the exercise of sovereignty over
reservation contained in the instrument of ratification by the Hong Kong, China notified the Secretary-General that the
Government of India; and (b) that the Convention, in accordance Convention with the reservation made by China will also apply
with paragraph 1 of article 19, had entered into force on 4 to the Hong Kong special Administrative Region.
January 1969, i.e., on the thirtieth day after the date of deposit of
the instrument of ratification of the Convention by the

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 21
In addition, the notification made by the Government of China 8 Czechoslovakia had signed and ratified the Convention on
contained the following declarations: 7 October 1966 and 29 December 1966, respectively, with
reservations. Subsequently, on 12 March 1984, the Government
1. ... of Czechoslovakia made an objection to the ratification by
Democratic Kampuchea. Further, by a notification received on
2. The reservation of the People's Republic of China on behalf 26 April 1991, the Government of Czechoslovakia notified the
of the the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region interprets Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the reservation to
the requirement in article 6 concerning "reparation and article 22 made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification.
satisfaction" as being fulfilled if one or other of these forms of For the text of the reservations and the objection, see United
redress is made available and interprets "satisfaction" as Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 660, p. 276 and vol. 1350, p. 386,
including any form of redress effective to bring the respectively. See also note 14 in this chapter and note 1 under
discriminatory conduct to an end. “Czech Republic” and note 1 under “Slovakia” in the “Historical
Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
6 On 27 April 1999, the Government of Portugal informed
the Secretary-General that the Convention would apply to 9 In a communication received on 4 October 1972, the
Macao. Government of Denmark notified the Secretary-General that it
withdrew the reservation made with regard to the
Subsequently, the Secretary-General received communications implementation on the Faroe Islands of the Convention. For the
concerning the status of Macao from Portugal and China (see text of the reservation see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol.
note 3 under “China” and note 1 under “Portgual” in the 820, p. 457.
Historical Information section in the front matter of this
volume). Upon resuming the exercise of sovereignty over The legislation by which the Convention has been
Macao, China notified the Secretary-General that the implemented on the Faroe Islands entered into force by 1
Convention with the reservation made by China will also apply November 1972, from which date the withdrawal of the above
to the Macao Special Administrative Region. reservation became effective.
7 The Convention had previously been signed and ratified 10 See note 1 under “Germany” regarding Berlin (West) in
on behalf of the Republic of China on 31 March 1966 and 10 the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this
December 1970, respectively. See also note 1 under "China" in volume.
the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this
volume. 11 See note 1 under "Montenegro" in the "Historical

Information" section in the front matter of this volume.


With reference to the above-mentioned signature and/or
ratification, communications have been received by the 12 See note 1 under “Namibia” in the “Historical
Secretary-General from the Governments of Bulgaria (12 march Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
1971), Mongolia (11 January 1971), the Byelorussian Soviet
Socialist Republic (9 June 1971), the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist 13 See note 1 under "New Zealand" regarding Tokelau in the
Republic (21 April 1971) and the Union of Soviet Socialist
"Historical Information" section in the preliminary pages in the
Republics (18 January 1971) stating that they considered the
front matter of this volume.
said signature and/or ratification as null and void, since the so-
called "Government of China" had no right to speak or assume 14 On 7 October 2016, the Government of Thailand notified
obligations on behalf of China, there being only one Chinese
the Secretary-General of the withdrawal of the reservation to
State, the People's Republic of China, and one Government
article 4 made upon accession to the Convention. The text of the
entitled to represent it, the Government of the People's Republic
reservation read as follows:
of China.
"The Kingdom of Thailand interprets Article 4 of the
In letters addressed to teh Secretary-General in regard to the
Convention as requiring a party to the Convention to adopt
above-mentioned communications, the Permanent
measures in the fields covered by subparagraphs (a), (b) and (c)
Representative of China to the United Nations stated that the
of that article only where it is considered that the need arises to
Republic of China, a sovereign State and Member of the United
enact such legislation."
Nations, had attended the twentieth regular session of hte United
Nations General Assembly, contributed to the formulation of the 15 In its instrument of ratification, the Government of the
Convention concerned, signed the Convention and duly
deposited the instrument of ratification thereof, and that "any United Kingdom specified that the ratification also applied to
statements and reservations relating to the abocve-mentioned the following territories: Associated States (Antigua, Dominica,
Convention that are incmopatible with or derogatory to the Grenada, Saint Christopher Nevis Anguilla and Saint Lucia) and
legitimate position of the Government of the Republic of China Territories under the territorial sovereignty of the United
shall in no wa affect the rights and obligations of the Republic of Kingdom, as well as the State of Brunei, the Kingdom of Tonga
China under this Convention". and the British Solomon Islands Protectorate.

16 The Yemen Arab Republic had acceded to the Convention


Finally, upon depositing its instrument of accession, the
Government of the People's Republic of China made the on 6 April 1989 with the following reservation:
following declaration: The signing and ratification of the said
Convention by the Taiwan authorities in the name of China are Reservations in respect of article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv),
illegal and null and void. (vi) and (vii).

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 22
In this regard, the Secretary-General received on 30 April 20 None of the States concerned having objected to the
1990, from the Government of Czechoslovakia the following reservation by the end of a period of ninety days after the date
objection: when it was circulated by the Secretary-General, the said
reservation is deemed to have been permitted in accordance with
"The Czech and Slovak Federal Republic considers the the provisions of article 20 (1).
reservations of the Government of Yemen with respect to article
5 (c) and articles 5 (d) (iv), (vi), and (vii) of [the Convention], 21 In a notification received on 18 January 1980, the
as incompatible with the object and purpose of this Convention." Government of Egypt informed the Secretary-General that it had
decided to withdraw the declaration it had made in respect of
See also note 1 under “Yemen” in the “Historical Information” Israel. For the text of the declaration see United Nations, Treaty
section in the front matter of this volume. Series , vol. 60, p. 318. The notification indicates 25 January
1980 as the effective date of the withdrawal.
17 In a communication received by the Secretary-General on
10 July 1969, the Government of Israel declared: 22 In a communication received in 10 August 2012, the

Government of Fiji notified the Secretary-General of the


"[The Government of Israel] has noted the political character withdrawal of the reservations and declarations made upon
of the declaration made by the Government of Iraq on signing sucession to the Convention. The text of the reservations and
the above Convention. declarations read as follows:
In the view of the Government of Israel, the Convention is not The reservation and declarations formulated by the
the proper place for making such political pronouncements. The Government of the United Kingdom on behalf of Fiji are
Government of Israel will, in so far as concerns the substance of affirmed but have been redrafted in the following terms:
the matter, adopt towards the Government of Iraq an attitude of
complete reciprocity. Moreover, it is the view of the "To the extent, if any, that any law relating to elections in Fiji
Government of Israel that no legal relevance can be attached to may not fulfil the obligations referred to in article 5 (c), that any
those Iraqi statements which purport to represent the views of law relating to land in Fiji which prohibits or restricts the
the other States". alienation of land by the indigenous inhabitants may not fulfil
the obligations referred to in article 5 (d) (v), or that the school
Except for the omission of the last sentence, identical system of Fiji may not fulfil the obligations referred to in
communica- tions in essence, mutatis mutandis , were received articles 2, 3, or 5 (e) (v), the Government of Fiji reserves the
by the Secretary-General from the Government of Israel as right not to implement the aforementioned provisions of the
follows: on 29 December 1966 in respect of the declaration Convention.
made by the Government of the United Arab Republic upon
signature (see also note 17); on 16 August 1968 in respect of "The Government of Fiji wishes to state its understanding of
the declaration made by the Government of Libya upon certain articles in the Convention. It interprets article 4 as
accession; on 12 December 1968 in respect of the declaration requiring a party to the Convention to adopt further legislative
made by the Government of Kuwait upon accession; on 9 July measures in the fields covered by sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c)
1969 in respect of the declaration made by the Government of of that article only in so far as it may consider with due regard to
Syria upon accession; on 21 April 1970 made in respect of the the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human
declaration made by Government of Iraq upon ratification with Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of the
the following statement: "With regard to the political declaration Convention (in particular the right to freedom of opinion and
in the guise of a reservation made on the occasion of the expression and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and
ratification of the above Treaty, the Government of Israel wishes association) that some legislative addition to or variation of
to refer to its objection circulated by the Secretary-General in his existing law and practice in those fields is necessary for the
letter [. . .] and to maintain that objection."; on 12 February 1973 attainment of the end specified in the earlier part of Article 4.
in respect of the declaration made by the Government of the
People's Democratic Republic of Yemen upon accession; on 25 Further, the Government of Fiji interprets the requirement in
September 1974 in respect of the declaration made by the United article 6 concerning `reparation or satisfaction' as being fulfilled
Arab Emirates upon accession and on 25 June 1990 in rthe if one or other of these forms of redress is made available and
reservation made by Bahrain upon accession. interprets `satisfaction' as including any form of redress
effective to bring the discriminatory conduct to an and. In
18 In communications received on 8 March, 19 and 20 April addition it interprets article 20 and the other related provisions
1989, the Governments of the Union of Soviet Socialist of Part III of the Convention as meaning that if a reservation is
Republics, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic and the not accepted the State making the reservation does not become a
Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, respectively, notified the Party to the Convention.
Secretary-General that they had decided to withdraw the
reservations relating to article 22. For the texts of the "The Government of Fiji maintains the view that Article 15 is
reservations, see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 676, p. discriminatory in that it establishes a procedure for the receipt of
397, vol. 81, p. 392 and vol.77, p. 435. petitions relating to dependent territories whilst making no
comparable provision for States without such territories."
19 On 24 June 1992, the Government of Bulgaria notified the

Secretary-General its decision to withdraw the reservation to


article 22 made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification.
For the text of the reservation, see United Nations, Treaty
Series , vol. 60, p. 270.

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 23
23 In a communication received subsequently, the 31 On 22 October 1999, the Government of Spain informed

Government of France indicated that the first paragraph of the the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its
declaration did not purport to limit the obligations under the reservation in respect of article XXII made upon accession. For
Convention in respect of the French Government, but only to the texte of the reservation, see United Nations, Treaty Series ,
record the latter's interpretation of article 4 of the Convention. vol. 660, p. 316.

24 The Secretary-General received on 7 August 2013 the 32 By a notification received on 28 October 1977, the
following communication from the Government of the French Government of Tonga informed the Secretary-General that it has
Republic: decided to withdraw only those reservations made upon
accession relating to article 5 (c) in so far as it relates to
The Government of the French Republic has examined the elections, and reservations relating to articles 2, 3 and 5 (e) (v),
declaration formulated by the Government of Grenada at the in so far as these articles relate to education and training. For the
time of the deposit of its instrument of ratification of the text of the original reservation see United Nations, Treaty
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Series , vol. 829, p. 371.
Racial Discrimination of 7 March 1966. The Government of the
French Republic takes note of this ratification. It regrets, 33 The first ten declarations recognizing the competence of
however, that the declaration made by Grenada, which the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination took
constitutes a reservation, gives rise to a restriction on the effect on 3 December 1982, date of the deposit of the tenth
international obligations accepted by Grenada under the declaration, according to article 14, paragraph 1 of the
Convention and to legal uncertainty. The reservation has indeed Convention.
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.

25 In a communication received on 13 September 1989, the

Government of Hungary notified the Secretary-General that it


had decided to withdraw the reservation in respect to article 22
of the Convention made upon ratification. For the text of the
reservation, see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 60, p. 310.

26 In a communication received on 24 February 1969, the

Government of Pakistan notified the Secretary-General that it


"has decided not to accept the reservation made by the
Government of India in her instrument of ratification".

27 In a communication received on 19 July 1990, the

Government of Mongolia notified the Secretary-General of its


decision to withdraw the reservation concerning article 22 made
upon ratification. For the text of the reservation see United
Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 60, p. 289.

28 On 16 October 1997, the Government of Poland notified

the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its


reservation with regard to article 22 of the Convention made
upon ratification. For the text of the reservation see United
Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 660, p. 195.

29 On 19 August 1998, the Government of Romania notified


the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its
reservation made with regard to article 22 of the Convention
made upon accession. For the text of the reservation, see United
Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 763, p. 362.

30 In a communication received in 15 December 2008, the

Government of Rwanda notified the Secretary-General of the


withdrawal of the reservation made upon accession to the
Convention. The text of the reservation reads as follows:

The Rwandese Republic does not consider itself as bound by


article 22 of the Convention.

IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 24
IV 2. HUMAN RIGHTS 25