General Documents Not Relating To Specific States - Meetings of State Parties or of the UN Economic and Social Council - CEDAW - 2000 - Declarations, Reservations, Objections and Notifications of Withdrawal of Reservations Relating to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women

1. The present document contains the declarations, reservations, objections and notifications of withdrawal of reservations made by States parties with respect to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women reproduced in Multilateral Treaties Deposited with the Secretary-General: Status as at 30 April 1999.

Declarations, reservations, objections and notifications of withdrawal of reservations have also been taken from the report of the Secretary-General on the status of the Convention (A/54/224 and Corr.1). Declarations, reservations, objections and notifications of withdrawal of reservations made from 1 August 1999 to 1 July 2000 have been taken from the Multilateral Treaties web site.

2. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women was adopted by the General Assembly in its resolution 34/180 of 18 December 1979. It entered into force on 3 September 1981, in accordance with the provisions of its article 27. The status of States parties with respect to the Convention as of 1 July 2000 is shown below.

^e Before becoming a separate State on 1 January 1993, the Czech Republic and Slovakia formed part of Czechoslovakia, which had ratified the Convention on 16 February 1982. The Convention entered into force on 18 March 1982.

^f With effect from 3 October 1990, the German Democratic Republic (which ratified the Convention on 9 July 1980) and the Federal Republic of Germany (which ratified the Convention on 10 July 1985) united to form one sovereign State, which acts in the United Nations under the designation of "Germany".

^g On 22 May 1990, Democratic Yemen and Yemen merged to form a single State, which acts in the United Nations under the designation of "Yemen".

The Government of the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria declares that it is prepared to apply the provisions of this article on condition that they do not conflict with the provisions of the Algerian Family Code.

The Government of the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria wishes to express its reservations concerning the provisions of article 9, paragraph 2, which are incompatible with the provisions of the Algerian Nationality Code and the Algerian Family Code.

The Algerian Nationality Code allows a child to take the nationality of the mother only when:

- The child is born in Algeria to an Algerian mother and a foreign father who was born in Algeria.

Moreover, a child born in Algeria to an Algerian mother and a foreign father who was not born on Algerian territory may, under article 26 of the Algerian Nationality Code, acquire the nationality of the mother providing the Ministry of Justice does not object.

Article 41 of the Algerian Family Code states that a child is affiliated to its father through legal marriage.

Article 43 of that Code states that "the child is affiliated to its father if it is born in the 10 months following the date of separation or death".

The Government of the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria declares that the provisions of article 15, paragraph 4, concerning the right of women to choose their residence and domicile should not be interpreted in such a manner as to contradict the provisions of chapter 4 (art. 37) of the Algeria Family Code.

The Government of the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria declares that the provisions of article 16 concerning equal rights for men and women in all matters relating to marriage, both during marriage and at its dissolution, should not contradict the provisions of the Algerian Family Code.

The Government of the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria does not consider itself bound by article 29, paragraph 1, which states that any dispute between two or more States parties concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention which is not settled by negotiation shall, at the request of one of them, be submitted to arbitration or to the International Court of Justice.

The Government of the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria holds that no such dispute can be submitted to arbitration or to the International Court of Justice except with the consent of all the parties to the dispute.

The Government of Argentina declares that it does not consider itself bound by article 29, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.

Australia has a federal constitutional system in which legislative, executive and judicial powers are shared or distributed between the Commonwealth and the Constituent States. The implementation of the Treaty throughout Australia will be effected by the Commonwealth State and Territory Authorities having regard to their respective constitutional powers and arrangements concerning their exercise.

The Government of Australia states that maternity leave with pay is provided in respect of most women employed by the Commonwealth Government and the Governments of New South Wales and Victoria. Unpaid maternity leave is provided in respect of all other women employed in the State of New South Wales and elsewhere to women employed under Federal and some State industrial awards. Social security benefits subject to income tests are available to women who are sole parents.

The Government of Australia advises that it is not at present in a position to take the measures required by article 11, paragraph 2 (b), to introduce maternity leave with pay or with comparable social benefits throughout Australia.

The Government of Australia advises that it does not accept the application of the Convention insofar as it would require alteration of Defence Force policy which excludes women from combat and combat-related duties. The Government of Australia is reviewing this policy so as to more closely define "combat" and "combat-related duties".

Austria reserves its right to apply the provision of article 7 (b) as far as service in the armed forces is concerned, and the provision of article 11 as far as night work of women and special protection of working women is concerned, within the limits established by national legislation.

The Government of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 2 (a), article 9, paragraph 2, article 16, paragraph 1 (h) [and] article 29, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

The Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh does not consider as binding upon itself the provisions of articles 2, and 16, paragraph 1 (c), as they conflict with Shariah law based on Holy Qur'an and Sunna.

The application of article 7 shall not affect the validity of the provisions of the Constitution as laid down in article 60, which reserves for men the exercise of royal powers, and in article 58, which reserves for the sons of the King or, where there are none, for Belgian princes of the branch of the royal family in line to the throne, the function of ex officio senators as from the age of 18 years, with entitlement to vote as from the age of 25 years.

The application of article 15, paragraphs 2 and 3, shall not affect the validity of the interim provisions enacted for couples married before the entry into force of the Act of 14 July 1976 concerning the reciprocal rights and duties of husbands and wives and their marriage contracts, in cases where, in accordance with the option available to them under the Act, they have declared they are maintaining in toto their prior marriage contracts.

Brazil does not consider itself bound by article 29, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

The Government of Chile has signed the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, mindful of the important step which this document represents, not only in terms of the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women, but also in terms of their full and permanent integration into society in conditions of equality.

The Government is obliged to state, however, that some of the provisions of the Convention are not entirely compatible with current Chilean legislation.

At the same time, it reports the establishment of a Commission for the Study and Reform of the Civil Code, which now has before it various proposals to amend, inter alia, those provisions which are not fully consistent with the terms of the Convention.

The People's Republic of China does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of article 29 of the Convention.

The Government of the Republic of Cuba makes a specific reservation concerning the provisions of article 29 of the Convention inasmuch as it holds that any disputes that may arise between States parties should be resolved by means of direct negotiations through the diplomatic channel.

The Government of the Republic of Cyprus wishes to enter a reservation concerning the granting to women of equal rights with men with respect to the nationality of their children, mentioned in article 9, paragraph 2, of the Convention. This reservation is to be withdrawn upon amendment of the relevant Law.

Reservation to the text of article 9, paragraph 2, concerning the granting to women of equal rights with men with respect to the nationality of their children, without prejudice to the acquisition by a child born of a marriage of the nationality of his father. This is in order to prevent a child's acquisition of two nationalities, since this may be prejudicial to his future. It is clear that the child's acquisition of his father's nationality is the procedure most suitable for the child and that this does not infringe upon the principle of equality between men and women, since it is customary for a woman to agree, upon marrying an alien, that her children shall be of the father's nationality.

Reservation to the text of article 16 concerning the equality of men and women in all matters relating to marriage and family relations during the marriage and upon its dissolution, without prejudice to the Islamic Shariah provisions whereby women are accorded rights equivalent to those of their spouses so as to ensure a just balance between them. This is out of respect for the sacrosanct nature of the firm religious beliefs which govern marital relations in Egypt and which may not be called in question and in view of the fact that one of the most important bases of these relations is an equivalency of rights and duties so as to ensure complementarity which guarantees true equality between the spouses, not a quasi-equality that renders the marriage a burden on the wife. The provisions of the Shariah lay down that the husband shall pay bridal money to the wife and maintain her fully and shall also make a payment to her upon divorce, whereas the wife retains full rights over her property and is not obliged to spend anything on her keep. The Shariah therefore restricts the wife's rights to divorce by making it contingent on a judge's ruling, whereas no such restriction is laid down in the case of the husband.

The Egyptian delegation maintains the reservation contained in article 29, paragraph 2, concerning the right of a State signatory to the Convention to declare that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of that article concerning the submission to an arbitral body of any dispute which may arise between States concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention. This is in order to avoid being bound by the system of arbitration in this field.

The Arab Republic of Egypt is willing to comply with the content of this article, provided that such compliance does not run counter to the Islamic Shariah.

The Government of El Salvador made a reservation with regard to the application of the provisions of article 29, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

Socialist Ethiopia does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of article 29 of the Convention.

The Government of the French Republic declares that article 9 of the Convention must not be interpreted as precluding the application of the second paragraph of article 96 of the code of French nationality.

[All other declarations and reservations were confirmed in substance upon ratification.]

The Government of the French Republic declares that the preamble to the Convention - in particular the eleventh preambular paragraph - contains debatable elements which are definitely out of place in this text.

The Government of the French Republic declares that the term "family education" in article 5 (b) of the Convention must be interpreted as meaning public education concerning the family and that, in any event, article 5 will be applied subject to respect for article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

The Government of the French Republic declares that no provision of the Convention must be interpreted as prevailing over provisions of French legislation which are more favourable to women than to men.

1. The Government of the French Republic declares that article 5 (b) and article 16, paragraph 1 (d), must not be interpreted as implying joint exercise of parental authority in situations in which French legislation allows of such exercise by only one parent.

2. The Government of the French Republic declares that article 16, paragraph 1 (d), of the Convention must not preclude the application of article 383 of the Civil Code.

1. The Government of the French Republic declares that article 14, paragraph 2 (c), should be interpreted as guaranteeing that women who fulfil the conditions relating to family or employment required by French legislation for personal participation shall acquire their own rights within the framework of social security.

2. The Government of the French Republic declares that article 14, paragraph 2 (h), of the Convention should not be interpreted as implying the actual provision, free of charge, of the services mentioned in that paragraph.

The Government of the French Republic enters a reservation concerning the right to choose a family name mentioned in article 16, paragraph 1 (g), of the Convention.

The Government of the French Republic declares, in pursuance of article 29, paragraph 2, of the Convention, that it will not be bound by the provisions of article 29, paragraph 1.

The right of peoples to self-determination, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and in the International Covenants of 19 December 1966, applies to all peoples and not only to those living under alien and colonial domination and foreign occupation. All peoples thus have the inalienable right freely to determine their political status and freely to pursue their economic, social and cultural development. The Federal Republic of Germany would be unable to recognize as legally valid an interpretation of the right to self-determination which contradicts the unequivocal wording of the Charter of the United Nations and of the two International Covenants of 19 December 1966 on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. It will interpret the eleventh paragraph of the preamble accordingly.

Article 7 (b) will not be applied to the extent that it contradicts the second sentence of article 12 a (4) of the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany. Pursuant to this provision of the Constitution, women may on no account render service involving the use of arms.

With regard to articles 5 (a) and 16, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the Government of the Republic of India declares that it shall abide by and ensure these provisions in conformity with its policy of non-interference in the personal affairs of any community without its initiative and consent.

With regard to article 16, paragraph 2, of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the Government of the Republic of India declares that, though in principle it fully supports the principle of compulsory registration of marriages, it is not practical in a vast country like India with its variety of customs, religions and level of literacy.

With regard to article 29 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the Government of the Republic of India declares that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of this article.

The Government of the Republic of Indonesia does not consider itself bound by the provision of article 29, paragraph 1, of this Convention and takes the position that any dispute relating to the interpretation or application of the Convention may only be submitted to arbitration or to the International Court of Justice with the agreement of all the parties to the dispute.

1. Approval of and accession to this Convention shall not mean that the Republic of Iraq is bound by the provisions of article 2, subparagraphs (f) and (g), of article 9, paragraphs 1 and 2, or of article 16 of the Convention. The reservations to this last-mentioned article shall be without prejudice to the provisions of the Islamic Shariah according women rights equivalent to the rights of their spouses so as to ensure a just balance between them. Iraq also enters a reservation to article 29, paragraph 1, of this Convention with regard to the principle of international arbitration in connection with the interpretation or application of this Convention.

2. This approval in no way implies recognition of or entry into any relations with Israel.

The question of supplementing the guarantee of equality contained in the Irish Constitution with special legislation governing access to financial credit and other services and recreational activities, where these are provided by private persons, organizations or enterprises, is under consideration. For the time being Ireland reserves the right to regard its existing law and measures in this area as appropriate for the attainment in Ireland of the objectives of the Convention.

With regard to paragraph 3 of this article, Ireland reserves the right not to supplement the existing provisions in Irish law which accord women a legal capacity identical to that of men with further legislation governing the validity of any contract or other private instrument freely entered into by a woman.

Ireland is of the view that the attainment in Ireland of the objectives of the Convention does not necessitate the extension to men of rights identical to those accorded by law to women in respect of the guardianship, adoption and custody of children born out of wedlock and reserves the right to implement the Convention subject to that understanding.

Ireland reserves the right to regard the Anti-Discrimination (Pay) Act, 1974 and the Employment Equality Act 1977 and other measures taken in implementation of the European Economic Community standards concerning employment opportunities and pay as sufficient implementation of article 11, paragraph 1 (b), (c) and (d).

Ireland reserves the right for the time being to maintain provisions of Irish legislation in the area of social security which are more favourable to women than men.

The State of Israel hereby expresses its reservation with regard to article 7 (b) of the Convention concerning the appointment of women to serve as judges of religious courts where this is prohibited by the laws of any of the religious communities in Israel. Otherwise, the said article is fully implemented in Israel, in view of the fact that women take a prominent part in all aspects of public life.

The State of Israel hereby expresses its reservation with regard to article 16 of the Convention, insofar as the laws of personal status binding on the several religious communities in Israel do not conform with the provisions of that article.

In accordance with paragraph 2 of article 29 of the Convention, the State of Israel hereby declares that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of that article.

Italy reserves the right to exercise, when depositing the instrument of ratification, the option provided for in article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 23 May 1969.

The Government of Jamaica declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 29, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

(b) Article 15, paragraph 4 (a woman's residence and domicile are with her husband);

(c) Article 16, paragraph 1 (c), relating to the rights arising upon the dissolution of a marriage in connection with maintenance and compensation;

The Government of Kuwait enters a reservation regarding article 7 (a), inasmuch as the provision contained in that paragraph conflicts with the Kuwaiti Electoral Act, under which the right to be eligible for election and to vote is restricted to males.

The Government of Kuwait reserves its right not to implement the provision contained in article 9, paragraph 2, of the Convention, inasmuch as it runs counter to the Kuwaiti Nationality Act, which stipulates that a child's nationality shall be determined by that of his father.

The Government of the State of Kuwait declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provision contained in article 16, paragraph 1 (f), inasmuch as it conflicts with the provisions of the Islamic Shariah, Islam being the official religion of the State.

The Government of Kuwait declares that it is not bound by the provision contained in article 29, paragraph 1.

The Government of the Lebanese Republic enters reservations regarding article 9, paragraph 2, and article 16, paragraph 1 (c), (d), (f) and (g) (regarding the right to choose a family name).

In accordance with paragraph 2 of article 29, the Government of the Lebanese Republic declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of paragraph 1 of that article.

The Government of the Kingdom of Lesotho declares that it does not consider itself bound by article 2 to the extent that it conflicts with Lesotho's constitutional stipulations relative to succession to the throne of the Kingdom of Lesotho and the law relating to succession to chieftainship. The ratification by the Government of Lesotho is subject to the understanding that none of its obligations under the Convention, especially in article 2 (e), shall be treated as extending to the affairs of religious denominations.

Furthermore, the Government of Lesotho declares that it shall not take any legislative measures under the Convention where those measures would be incompatible with the Constitution of Lesotho.

Accession is subject to the general reservation that such accession cannot conflict with the laws on personal status derived from the Islamic Shariah.

[On 5 July 1995, the Government of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya notified the Secretary-General of its decision to modify, making it more specific, the general reservation it had made upon accession, to read as follows:]

The Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya has declared its accession to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 18 December 1979, with the following reservation:

1. Article 2 of the Convention shall be implemented with due regard for the peremptory norms of the Islamic Shariah relating to determination of the inheritance portions of the estate of a deceased person, whether female or male.

2. The implementation of article 16, paragraph 1 (c) and (d), of the Convention shall be without prejudice to any of the rights guaranteed to women by the Islamic Shariah.

In the light of the definition given in article 1 of the Convention, the Principality of Liechtenstein reserves the right to apply, with respect to all the obligations of the Convention, article 3 of the Liechtenstein Constitution.

(a) The application of article 7 shall not affect the validity of the article of our Constitution concerning the hereditary transmission of the crown of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, in accordance with the family compact of the House of Nassau of 30 June 1783, maintained by article 71 of the Treaty of Vienna of 9 June 1815 and expressly maintained by article 1 of the Treaty of London of 11 May 1867.

(b) The application of paragraph 1 (g) of article 16 of the Convention shall not affect the right to choose the family name of children.

The Government of Malaysia declares that Malaysia's accession is subject to the understanding that the provisions of the Convention do not conflict with the provisions of the Islamic Shariah law and the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. With regard thereto, further, the Government of Malaysia does not consider itself bound by the provisions of articles 2 (f), 5 (a), 7 (b), 9 and 16 of the aforesaid Convention.

In relation to article 11, Malaysia interprets the provisions of this article as a reference to the prohibition of discrimination on the basis of equality between men and women only.

The Government of the Republic of Maldives expresses its reservations to article 7 (a) of the Convention, to the extent that the provision contained in the said paragraph conflicts with the provision of article 34 of the Constitution of the Republic of Maldives.

The Government of the Republic of Maldives reserves its right to apply article 16 of the Convention concerning the equality of men and women in all matters relating to marriage and family relations without prejudice to the provisions of the Islamic Shariah, which govern all marital and family relations of the 100 per cent Muslim population of the Maldives.

The Government of Malta interprets paragraph 1 of article 11, in the light of the provisions of paragraph 2 of article 4, as not precluding prohibitions, restrictions or conditions on the employment of women in certain areas, or the work done by them, where this is considered necessary or desirable to protect the health and safety of women or the human foetus, including such prohibitions, restrictions or conditions imposed in consequence of other international obligations of Malta.

(i) The Government of Malta reserves the right, notwithstanding anything in the Convention, to continue to apply its tax legislation, which deems, in certain circumstances, the income of a married woman to be the income of her husband and taxable as such.

(ii) The Government of Malta reserves the right to continue to apply its social security legislation, which in certain circumstances makes certain benefits payable to the head of the household, which is, by such legislation, presumed to be the husband.

While the Government of Malta is committed to remove, insofar as possible, all aspects of family property law which may be considered as discriminatory to females, it reserves the right to continue to apply present legislation in that regard until such time as the law is reformed and during such transitory period until those laws are completely superseded.

The Government of Malta does not consider itself bound by subparagraph (e) of paragraph 1 of article 16, insofar as the same may be interpreted as imposing an obligation on Malta to legalize abortion.

The Government of Mauritius does not consider itself bound by subparagraphs (b) and (d) of paragraph 1 of article 11 and subparagraph (g) of paragraph 1 of article 16.

The Government of Mauritius does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of article 29 of the Convention, in pursuance of paragraph 2 of article 29.

In signing ad referendum the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, which the General Assembly opened for signature by States on 18 December 1979, the Government of the United Mexican States wishes to place on record that it is doing so on the understanding that the provisions of the said Convention, which agree in all essentials with the provisions of Mexican legislation, will be applied in Mexico in accordance with the modalities and procedures prescribed by Mexican legislation and that the granting of material benefits in pursuance of the Convention will be as generous as the resources available to the Mexican State permit.

The Government of the Kingdom of Morocco expresses its readiness to apply the provisions of this article provided that:

- They are without prejudice to the constitutional requirements that regulate the rules of succession to the throne of the Kingdom of Morocco;

- They do not conflict with the provisions of the Islamic Shariah. It should be noted that certain of the provisions contained in the Moroccan Code of Personal Status according women rights that differ from the rights conferred on men may not be infringed upon or abrogated because they derive primarily from the Islamic Shariah, which strives, among its other objectives, to strike a balance between the spouses in order to preserve the coherence of family life.

The Government of the Kingdom of Morocco declares that it can only be bound by the provisions of this paragraph, in particular those relating to the rights of women to choose their residence and domicile, to the extent that they are not incompatible with articles 34 and 36 of the Moroccan Code of Personal Status.

The Government of the Kingdom of Morocco makes a reservation with regard to this article in view of the fact that the Law of Moroccan Nationality permits a child to bear the nationality of its mother only in the cases where it is born to an unknown father, regardless of place of birth, or to a stateless father, when born in Morocco, and it does so in order to guarantee to each child its right to a nationality. Further, a child born in Morocco of a Moroccan mother and a foreign father may acquire the nationality of its mother by declaring, within two years of reaching the age of majority, its desire to acquire that nationality, provided that, on making such declaration, its customary and regular residence is in Morocco.

The Government of the Kingdom of Morocco makes a reservation with regard to the provisions of this article, particularly those relating to the equality of men and women in respect of rights and responsibilities on entry into and at dissolution of marriage. Equality of this kind is considered incompatible with the Islamic Shariah, which guarantees to each of the spouses the rights and responsibilities within a framework of equilibrium and complementarity in order to preserve the sacred bond of matrimony.

The provisions of the Islamic Shariah oblige the husband to provide a nuptial gift upon marriage and to support his family, while the wife is not required by law to support the family.

Furthermore, at dissolution of marriage, the husband is obliged to pay maintenance. In contrast, the wife enjoys complete freedom of disposition of her property during the marriage and upon its dissolution without supervision by the husband, the husband having no jurisdiction over his wife's property.

For these reasons, the Islamic Shariah confers the right of divorce on a woman only by decision of a Shariah judge.

The Government of the Kingdom of Morocco does not consider itself bound by the first paragraph of this article, which provides that "any dispute between two or more States parties concerning the interpretation or application of the present Convention which is not settled by negotiation shall, at the request of one of them, be submitted to arbitration".

The Government of the Kingdom of Morocco is of the view that any dispute of this kind can only be referred to arbitration by agreement of all the parties to the dispute.

[The Government of Myanmar] does not consider itself bound by the provision set forth in the said article.

During the preparatory stages of the present Convention and in the course of debates on it in the General Assembly the position of the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands was that it was not desirable to introduce political considerations such as those contained in paragraphs 10 and 11 of the preamble in a legal instrument of this nature. Moreover, the considerations are not directly related to the achievement of total equality between men and women. The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that it must recall its objections to the said paragraphs in the preamble at this occasion.

The Government of New Zealand, the Government of the Cook Islands and the Government of Niue reserve the right not to apply the provisions of article 11, paragraph 2 (b).

The Government of New Zealand, the Government of the Cook Islands and the Government of Niue reserve the right not to apply the provisions of the Convention insofar as they are inconsistent with policies relating to recruitment into or service in:

(a) The armed forces which reflect either directly or indirectly the fact that members of such forces are required to serve on armed forces aircraft or vessels and in situations involving armed combat; or

(b) The law enforcement forces which reflect either directly or indirectly the fact that members of such forces are required to serve in situations involving violence or threat of violence.

The Government of the Cook Islands reserves the right not to apply article 2 (f) and article 5 (a) to the extent that the customs governing the inheritance of certain Cook Islands chief titles may be inconsistent with those provisions.

The Government of the Republic of the Niger expresses reservations with regard to article 2, paragraphs (d) and (f), concerning the taking of all appropriate measures to abolish all customs and practices which constitute discrimination against women, particularly in respect of succession.

The Government of the Republic of the Niger expresses reservations with regard to the modification of social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women.

The Government of the Republic of the Niger declares that it can be bound by the provisions of the paragraph, particularly those concerning the right of women to choose their residence and domicile, only to the extent that these provisions refer only to unmarried women.

The Government of the Republic of the Niger expresses reservations concerning the above-referenced provisions of article 16, particularly those concerning the same rights and responsibilities during marriage and its dissolution, the same rights to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children, and the right to choose a family name.

The Government of the Republic of the Niger declares that the provisions of article 2, paragraphs (d) and (f), article 5, paragraphs (a) and (b), article 15, paragraph 4, and article 16, paragraph 1 (c), (e) and (g), concerning family relations, cannot be applied immediately, as they are contrary to existing customs and practices which, by their nature, can be modified only with the passage of time and the evolution of society and cannot, therefore, be abolished by an act of authority.

The Government of the Republic of the Niger, expresses a reservation concerning article 29, paragraph 1, which provides that any dispute between two or more States concerning the interpretation or application of the present Convention which is not settled by negotiation shall, at the request of one of them, be submitted to arbitration.

In the view of the Government of the Niger, a dispute of this nature can be submitted to arbitration only with the consent of all parties to the dispute.

The Government of the Republic of the Niger declares that the term "family education" which appears in article 5, paragraph (b), of the Convention should be interpreted as referring to public education concerning the family, and that in any event, article 5 would be applied in compliance with article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The accession by [the] Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to the [said Convention] is subject to the provisions of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

The Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan declares that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of article 29 of the Convention.

The Government of the Republic of Korea does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 9 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women of 1979.

Bearing in mind the fundamental principles as embodied in the said Convention, the Government of the Republic of Korea has recently established the Korea Women's welfare and social activities. A committee under the chairmanship of the Prime Minister will shortly be set up to consider and coordinate overall policies on women.

The Government of the Republic of Korea will make continued efforts to take further measures in line with the provisions stipulated in the Convention.

The Government of the Republic of Korea, having examined the said Convention, hereby ratifies the Convention considering itself not bound by the provisions of article 9 and subparagraph [...] (g) of paragraph 1 of article 16 of the Convention.

In the context of Singapore's multiracial and multireligious society and the need to respect the freedom of minorities to practise their religious and personal laws, the Republic of Singapore reserves the right not to apply the provisions of articles 2 and 16 where compliance with these provisions would be contrary to their religious or personal laws.

Singapore is geographically one of the smallest independent countries in the world and one of the most densely populated. The Republic of Singapore accordingly reserves the right to apply such laws and conditions governing the entry into, stay in, employment of and departure from its territory of those who do not have the right under the laws of Singapore to enter and remain indefinitely in Singapore, and to the conferment, acquisitions and loss of citizenship of women who have acquired such citizenship by marriage and of children born outside Singapore.

Singapore interprets article 11, paragraph 1, in the light of the provisions of article 4, paragraph 2, as not precluding prohibitions, restrictions or conditions on the employment of women in certain areas, or on work done by them where this is considered necessary or desirable to protect the health and safety of women or the human foetus, including such prohibitions, restrictions or conditions imposed in consequence of other international obligations of Singapore, and considers that legislation in respect of article 11 is unnecessary for the minority of women who do not fall within the ambit of Singapore's employment legislation.

The Republic of Singapore declares, in pursuance of article 29, paragraph 2, of the Convention, that it will not be bound by the provisions of article 29, paragraph 1.

The ratification of the Convention by Spain shall not affect the constitutional provisions concerning succession to the Spanish crown.

Said provisions shall be without prejudice to Swiss military legislation prohibiting women from performing functions involving armed conflict, except in self-defence.

Said provision shall be applied subject to the regulations on family name (Civil Code, article 160 and article 8 (a), final section).

Said provisions shall be applied subject to several interim provisions of the matrimonial regime (Civil Code, articles 9 (e) and 10, final section).

The Royal Thai Government wishes to express its understanding that the purposes of the Convention are to eliminate discrimination against women and to accord to every person, men and women alike, equality before the law, and are in accordance with the principles prescribed by the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand.

The Royal Thai Government does not consider itself bound by the provisions of [...] article 16 and article 29, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

The Republic of Trinidad and Tobago declares that it does not consider itself bound by article 29 (1) of the said Convention, relating to the settlement of disputes.

The Tunisian Government declares that it shall not take any organizational or legislative decision in conformity with the requirements of this Convention where such a decision would conflict with the provisions of chapter I of the Tunisian Constitution.

In accordance with the provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, dated 23 May 1969, the Tunisian Government emphasizes that the requirements of article 15, paragraph 4, of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, and particularly that part relating to the right of women to choose their residence and domicile, must not be interpreted in a manner which conflicts with the provisions of the Personal Status Code on this subject, as set forth in chapters 23 and 61 of the Code.

The Tunisian Government expresses its reservation with regard to the provisions in article 9, paragraph 2, of the Convention, which must not conflict with the provisions of chapter VI of the Tunisian Nationality Code.

The Tunisian Government considers itself not bound by article 16, paragraph 1 (c), (d) and (f), of the Convention and declares that paragraph 1 (g) and (h) of that article must not conflict with the provisions of the Personal Status Code concerning the granting of family names to children and the acquisition of property through inheritance.

The Tunisian Government declares, in conformity with the requirements of article 29, paragraph 2, of the Convention, that it shall not be bound by the provisions of paragraph 1 of that article, which specify that any dispute between two or more States parties concerning the interpretation or application of the present Convention which is not settled by negotiation shall be referred to the International Court of Justice at the request of any one of those parties.

The Tunisian Government considers that such disputes should be submitted for arbitration or consideration by the International Court of Justice only with the consent of all parties to the dispute.

Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention is not in conflict with the provisions of article 5, paragraph 1, and articles 15 and 17 of the Turkish Law on Nationality, relating to the acquisition of citizenship, since the intent of those provisions regulating acquisition of citizenship through marriage is to prevent statelessness.

[...] The reservation and declaration made upon signature and confirmed ratification by the Government of Turkey with respect to article 29, paragraph 1, and article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, respectively, continue to apply.

(a) The United Kingdom understands the main purpose of the Convention, in the light of the definition contained in article 1, to be the reduction, in accordance with its terms, of discrimination against women, and does not therefore regard the Convention as imposing any requirement to repeal or modify any existing laws, regulations, customs or practices which provide for women to be treated more favourably than men, whether temporarily or in the longer term; the United Kingdom's undertakings under article 4, paragraph 1, and other provisions of the Convention are to be construed accordingly.

(c) In the light of the definition contained in article 1, the United Kingdom's ratification is subject to the understanding that none of its obligations under the Convention shall be treated as extending to the succession to, or possession and enjoyment of, the Throne, the peerage, titles of honour, social precedence or armorial bearings, or as extending to the affairs of religious denominations or orders or to the admission into or service in the Armed Forces of the Crown.

(d) The United Kingdom reserves the right to continue to apply such immigration legislation governing entry into, stay in and departure from the United Kingdom as it may deem necessary from time to time and, accordingly, its acceptance of article 15 (4) and of the other provisions of the Convention is subject to the provisions of any such legislation as regards persons not at the time having the right under the law of the United Kingdom to enter and remain in the United Kingdom.

The British Nationality Act 1981, which was brought into force with effect from January 1983, is based on principles which do not allow of any discrimination against women within the meaning of article 1 as regards acquisition, change or retention of their nationality or as regards the nationality of their children. The United Kingdom's acceptance of article 9 shall not, however, be taken to invalidate the continuation of certain temporary or transitional provisions which will continue in force beyond that date.

The United Kingdom reserves the right to apply all United Kingdom legislation and the rules of pension schemes affecting retirement pensions, survivors' benefits and other benefits in relation to death or retirement (including retirement on grounds of redundancy), whether or not derived from a social security scheme.

This reservation will apply equally to any future legislation which may modify or replace such legislation, or the rules of pension schemes, on the understanding that the terms of such legislation will be compatible with the United Kingdom's obligations under the Convention.

The United Kingdom reserves the right to apply the following provisions of United Kingdom legislation concerning the benefits specified:

(b) Increases of benefit for adult dependants under sections 44 to 47, 49 and 66 of the Social Security Act 1975 and under sections 44 to 47, 49 and 66 of the Social Security (Northern Ireland) Act 1975;

The United Kingdom reserves the right to apply any non-discriminatory requirement for a qualifying period of employment or insurance for the application of the provisions contained in article 11, paragraph 2.

In relation to article 15, paragraph 3, the United Kingdom understands the intention of this provision to be that only those terms or elements of a contract or other private instrument which are discriminatory in the sense described are to be deemed null and void, but not necessarily the contract or instrument as a whole.

As regards paragraph 1 (f) of article 16, the United Kingdom does not regard the reference to the paramount of the interests of the children as being directly relevant to the elimination of discrimination against women, and declares in this connection that the legislation of the United Kingdom regulating adoption, while giving a principal position to the promotion of the children's welfare, does not give to the child's interests the same paramount place as in issues concerning custody over children.

[Same declarations and reservations as those made in respect of the United Kingdom under section A, paragraphs (a), (c) and (d), except that in the case of (d) they apply to the territories and their laws.]

[Same reservation as the one made in respect of the United Kingdom except with regard to the absence of a reference to United Kingdom legislation.]

[Same reservation as the one made in respect of the United Kingdom except that reference is made to the laws of the territories, and not to the laws of the United Kingdom.]

[Same reservations as those made in respect of the United Kingdom except that reference is made to the laws of the territories, and not to the laws of the United Kingdom.]

Also, as far as the territories are concerned, the specific benefits listed and which may be applied under the provisions of these territories' legislation are as follows:

(a) Social security benefits for persons engaged in caring for a severely disabled person;

This reservation will apply equally to any future legislation which may modify or replace any of the provisions specified in subparagraphs (a) to (d) above, on the understanding that the terms of such legislation will be compatible with the United Kingdom's obligations under the Convention.

Venezuela makes a formal reservation with regard to article 29, paragraph 1, of the Convention, since it does not accept arbitration or the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice for the settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention.

In implementing this Convention, the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam will not be bound by the provisions of paragraph 1 of article 29.

The Government of the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen declares that it does not consider itself bound by article 29, paragraph 1, of the said Convention, relating to the settlement of disputes which may arise concerning the application or interpretation of the Convention.

The Republic of Argentina rejects the extension of the territorial application of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 18 December 1979, to the Malvinas (Falkland) Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, notified by the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland upon its ratification of that instrument on 7 April 1986.

The Republic of Argentina reaffirms its sovereignty over the aforementioned archipelagos, which are an integral part of its national territory, and recalls that the General Assembly adopted resolutions 2065 (XX), 3160 (XXVIII), 31/49, 37/9, 38/12 and 39/6, in which a sovereignty dispute is recognized and the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom are urged to resume negotiations in order to find as soon as possible a peaceful and lasting solution to the dispute and their remaining differences relating to this question, through the good offices of the Secretary-General. The General Assembly also adopted resolutions 40/21, 41/40, 42/19 and 43/25, which reiterate its request to the parties to resume such negotiations.

The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland rejects the statement made by the Government of Argentina on 4 April 1989 regarding the Falkland Islands and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands. The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has no doubt as to British sovereignty over the Falkland Islands and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, and its consequent right to extend treaties to those Territories.

The reservation made by the Maldives is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and is therefore inadmissible under article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and shall not be permitted, in accordance with article 28 (2) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. Austria therefore states that this reservation cannot alter or modify in any respect the obligations arising from the Convention for any State Party thereto.

Austria is of the view that a reservation by which a State limits its responsibilities under the Convention in a general and unspecified manner by invoking internal law creates doubts as to the commitment of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan with its obligations under the Convention, essential for the fulfilment of its object and purpose.

It is in the common interests of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties are respected, as to their object and purpose, by all parties and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations under the treaties.

Austria is further of the view that a general reservation of the kind made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, which does not clearly specify the provisions of the Convention to which it applies and the extent of the derogation therefrom, contributes to undermining the basis of international treaty law.

Given the general character of this reservation, a final assessment as to its admissibility under international law cannot be made without further clarification.

According to international law a reservation is inadmissible to the extent as its application negatively affects the compliance by a State with its obligations under the Convention essential for the fulfilment of its object and purpose.

Therefore, Austria cannot consider the reservation made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan as admissible unless the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, by providing additional information or through subsequent practice, ensure that the reservation is compatible with the provisions essential for the implementation of the object and purpose of the Convention.

This view by Austria would not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the Convention between Pakistan and Austria.

In the view of the Government of Canada, this reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention (art. 28, para. 2). The Government of Canada therefore enters its formal objection to this reservation. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Canada and the Republic of Maldives.

[The Secretary-General received from the Government of Denmark the following communication with regard to reservations made by Kuwait upon ratification.]

The Government of Denmark finds that the said reservations are covering central provisions of the Convention. Furthermore it is a general principle of international law that internal law may not be invoked as justification for failure to perform treaty obligations. The Government of Denmark finds that the reservations are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and accordingly inadmissible and without effect under international law. Consequently, the Government of Denmark objects to these reservations.

It is the opinion of the Government of Denmark that no time limit applies to objections against reservations, which are inadmissible under international law.

The Government of Denmark recommends that the Government of Kuwait reconsider its reservation to the Convention.

[On the same date, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Denmark, communications, identical in essence, mutatis mutandis, as the one made for Kuwait, with regard to reservations made by Lesotho upon ratification, and Malaysia, Maldives and Singapore upon accession.]

[The Secretary-General received from the Government of Denmark the following communication with regard to the reservation made by Lebanon upon accession in respect to article 9, paragraph 2, and article 16, paragraph 1 (c), (d), (f) and (g), inasmuch as the last paragraph deals with the right to choose a family name.]

The Government of Denmark is of the view that the reservations made by the Government of Lebanon raise doubt as to the commitment of Lebanon to the object and purpose of the Convention and would recall that, according to article 28, paragraph 2, of the Convention shall not be permitted. For this reason, the Government of Denmark objects to the said reservations made by the Government of Lebanon.

The Government of Denmark recommends that the Government of Lebanon reconsider its reservations to the Convention.

The Government of Denmark has taken note of the reservation made by the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya when acceding to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. In the view of the Government of Denmark this reservation is subject to the general principle of treaty interpretation according to which a party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for failure to perform a treaty obligation.

The Secretary-General received from the Government of Denmark a communication, identical in essence to the one made for Kuwait, with regard to reservations made by Pakistan upon ratification.

The Government of Finland recalls that, by acceding to the Convention, a State commits itself to adopt the measures required for the elimination of discrimination, in all its forms and manifestations, against women. In particular, article 7 requires States parties to undertake actions to eliminate discrimination against women in the political and public life of the country. This is a fundamental provision of the Convention the implementation of which is essential to fulfilling its object and purpose.

Reservations to article 7 (a) and article 9, paragraph 2, are both subject to the general principle of the observance of treaties according to which a party may not invoke the provision of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform its treaty obligations. It is in the common interest of States that contracting parties to international treaties are prepared to undertake the necessary legislative changes in order to fulfil the object and purpose of the treaty.

Furthermore, in the view of the Government of Finland, the unlimited and undefined character of the reservation to article 16 (f) leaves open to what extent the reserving State commits itself to the Convention and therefore creates serious doubts about the commitment of the reserving State to fulfil its obligations under the Convention. Reservations of such unspecified nature may contribute to undermining the basis of international human rights treaties.

In their present formulation the reservations are clearly incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and therefore inadmissible under article 28, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Therefore, the Government of Finland objects to these reservations. The Government of Finland further notes that the reservations made by the Government of Kuwait are devoid of legal effect.

The Government of Finland recommends that the Government of Kuwait reconsider its reservations to the Convention.

The Government of Finland has examined the contents of the reservations made by the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and considers the said reservations as being incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. The Government of Finland therefore enters its formal objection to this reservation.

This objection is not an obstacle to the entry into force of the said Convention between Finland and the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.

The Government of Finland has examined the contents of the modified reservation made by the Government of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.

A reservation which consists of a general reference to religious law without specifying its contents does not clearly define to the other parties to the Convention the extent to which the reserving State commits itself to the Convention and therefore may cast doubts about the commitment of the reserving State to fulfil its obligations under the Convention. Such a reservation is also, in the view of the Government of Finland, subject to the general principle of the observance of treaties according to which a party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for failure to perform a treaty obligation.

The Government of Finland has examined the contents of the reservations made by the Government of Malaysia upon accession to the said Convention.

The reservations made by Malaysia, consisting of a general reference to religious and national law without specifying the contents thereof and without stating unequivocally the provisions the legal effect of which may be excluded or modified, do not clearly define to the other parties to the Convention the extent to which the reserving State commits itself to the Convention and therefore creates serious doubts about the commitment of the reserving State to fulfil its obligations under the Convention. Reservations of such unspecified nature may contribute to undermining the basis of international human rights treaties.

The Government of Finland also recalls that the reservations of Malaysia are subject to the general principle of observance of treaties according to which a party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for failure to perform its treaty obligations. It is in the common interest of States that parties to international treaties are prepared to take the necessary legislative changes in order to fulfil the object and purpose of the treaty.

Furthermore, the reservations made by Malaysia, in particular to articles 2 (f) and 5 (a), are to fundamental provisions of the Convention the implementation of which is essential to fulfilling its object and purpose.

The Government of Finland considers that in their present formulation the reservations made by Malaysia are clearly incompatible with the object and purpose of the said Convention and therefore inadmissible under article 28, paragraph 2, of the said Convention. In view of the above, the Government of Finland objects to these reservations and notes that they are devoid of legal effect.

In the view of the Government of Finland, the unlimited and underlined character of the said reservations create serious doubts about the commitment of the reserving State to fulfil its obligations under the Convention. In their extensive formulation, they are clearly contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention. Therefore, the Government of Finland objects to such reservations.

The Government of Finland also recalls that the said reservations are subject to the general principle of treaty interpretation according to which a party may not invoke the provisions of its domestic law as a justification for failure to perform its treaty obligations.

The Government of Finland does not, however, consider that this objection constitutes an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between Finland and Maldives.

The Government of Finland objected in 1994 to the reservations made by the Government of Maldives upon accession to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. The Government of Finland has now examined the contents of the modified reservation made by the Government of the Republic of Maldives to the said Convention.

The Government of Finland welcomes with satisfaction that the Government of the Republic of Maldives has specified that the reservations made at the time of its accession to the Convention include elements which are objectionable. However, the reservations to article 7 (a) and 16 still include elements which are objectionable. The Government of Finland therefore wishes to declare that it assumes that the Government of the Republic of Maldives will ensure the implementation of the rights recognized in the Convention and will do its utmost to bring its national legislation into compliance with obligations under the Convention with a view to withdrawing the reservation. This declaration does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Maldives and Finland.

The Government of France considers that the reservations made by Malaysia, as expressed in the practical withdrawal and modifications made by Malaysia on 6 February 1998, are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. The Government of France therefore objects to the [reservations].

This objection shall not otherwise affect the entry into force of the Convention between France and Malaysia.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has examined the contents of the reservations made by the Government of Algeria on its accession to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, in which the Government of Algeria stated its readiness to apply article 2, article 9, paragraph 2, article 15, paragraph 4, and article 16 of the Convention provided that they do not conflict with Algerian family law.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany considers that such reservation seeking to limit the validity of the Convention by making it contingent upon congruity with Algerian family law may raise doubts as to Algeria's commitment to the object and purpose of the Convention. The Convention does not allow for reservations arguing the primacy of national law. It is in the common interest of all parties to a treaty that it is respected as to object and purpose by all parties. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany therefore objects to the above-mentioned reservations.

This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Algeria and the Federal Republic of Germany.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany considers that the declaration and reservations, which seek to limit the responsibilities of Malaysia under the Convention by restricting them to the Islamic Shariah and to already existing national legislation and by restricting the application of central articles of the Convention, may raise doubts as to the commitment of Malaysia to the object and purpose of the Convention. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany therefore objects to these reservations and the declaration.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany does not, however, consider that this objection constitutes an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between Germany and Malaysia.

The modification does not constitute a withdrawal or a partial withdrawal of the origin reservations to the Convention by the Republic of Maldives. Instead the modification constitutes a new reservation to article 7 (a) (right of women to vote in all elections) and article 16 (elimination of discrimination against women in all matters relating to marriage and family relations) of the Convention extending and reinforcing the original reservations.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany notes that reservations to treaties can only be made by a State when signing, ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to a treaty (article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties). After a State has bound itself to a treaty under international law it can no longer submit new reservations or extend or add to old reservations. It is also possible to totally or partially withdraw original reservations, something unfortunately not done by the Government of the Republic of Maldives with its modification.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany objects to the modification of the reservations.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has examined the contents of the "general declaration" made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan on its accession to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. The declaration reads: "The accession by [the] Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women is subject to the provisions of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan."

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany considers that such a declaration which seeks to limit the validity of the Convention by making it contingent upon congruity with the Pakistan Constitution may raise doubts as to Pakistan's commitment to the object and purpose of the Convention. Such a reservation referring generally to the Constitution is not permitted under the Convention. It is in the common interest of all parties to a treaty that it is respected as to object and purpose by all parties. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany therefore objects to the above-mentioned declaration.

This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Federal Republic of Germany.

The Federal Republic of Germany considers that the reservations made by Egypt regarding article 2, article 9, paragraph 2, and article 16, by Bangladesh regarding article 2, article 13 (a) and article 16, paragraph 1 (c) and (f), by Brazil regarding article 15, paragraph 4, and article 16, paragraph 1 (a), (c), (g) and (h), by Jamaica regarding article 9, paragraph 2, by the Republic of Korea regarding article 9 and article 16, paragraph 1 (c), (d), (f) and (g), and by Mauritius regarding article 11, paragraph 1 (b) and (d), and article 16, paragraph 1 (g), are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention (art. 28, para. 2) and therefore objects to them. In relation to the Federal Republic of Germany, they may not be invoked in support of a legal practice which does not pay due regard to the legal status afforded to women and children in the Federal Republic of Germany in conformity with the above-mentioned articles of the Convention. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention as between Egypt, Bangladesh, Brazil, Jamaica, the Republic of Korea, Mauritius and the Federal Republic of Germany.

Objections of the same nature were also formulated by the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany in regard to reservations made by various States, as follows:

(a) 15 October 1986: In respect of reservations formulated by the Government of Thailand concerning article 9, paragraph 2, article 10, article 11, paragraph 1 (b), article 15, paragraph 3, and article 16. (The Federal Republic of Germany also holds the view that the reservation made by Thailand regarding article 7 of the Convention is likewise incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention because for all matters which concern national security it reserves in a general and thus unspecific manner the right of the Royal Thai Government to apply the provisions only within the limits established by national laws, regulations and practices.);

(b) 15 October 1986: In respect of reservations and some declarations formulated by the Government of Tunisia concerning article 9, paragraph 2, and article 16, as well as the declaration concerning article 15, paragraph 4;

(c) 3 March 1987: In respect of reservations made by the Government of Turkey to article 15, paragraphs 2 and 4, and article 16, paragraphs 1 (c), (d), (f) and (g); in respect of reservations made by the Government of Iraq with regard to article 2, subparagraphs (f) and (g), article 9 and article 16;

(d) 7 April 1988: In respect of the first reservation made by the Government of Malawi;

(e) 20 June 1990: In respect of the reservation made by the Government of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya;

The Government of the United Mexican States has studied the content of the reservations made by Mauritius to article 11, paragraphs 1 (b) and (d), and article 16, paragraph 1 (g), of the Convention and concluded that they should be considered invalid in the light of article 28, paragraph 2, of the Convention, because they are incompatible with its object and purpose.

Indeed, these reservations, if implemented, would inevitably result in discrimination against women on the basis of sex, which is contrary to all the articles of the Convention. The principles of equal rights of men and women and non-discrimination on the basis of sex, which are embodied in the second preambular paragraph and article 1, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations, to which Mauritius is a signatory, and in articles 2 and 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, were previously accepted by the Government of Mauritius when it acceded, on 12 December 1973, to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The above-mentioned principles were stated in article 2, paragraph 1, and article 3 of the former Covenant and in article 2, paragraph 2, and article 3 of the latter. Consequently, it is inconsistent with these contractual obligations previously assumed by Mauritius for its Government now to claim that it has reservations, on the same subject, about the 1979 Convention.

The objection of the Government of the United Mexican States to the reservations in question should not be interpreted as an impediment to the entry into force of the 1979 Convention between the United Mexican States and Mauritius.

Objections, identical in essence, mutatis mutandis, were also formulated by the Government of Mexico in regard to the reservations made by various States, as follows [for the States which were not Parties to the Covenants (marked below with an asterisk), the participation in the Covenants was not invoked by Mexico in its objection with regard to reservations]:

(a) 21 February 1985: In respect of reservations made by the Government of Bangladesh* concerning article 2, article 13, subparagraph (a), and article 16, paragraph 1 (c) and (f);

(b) 21 February 1985: In respect of the reservation made by the Government of Jamaica concerning article 9, paragraph 2;

(c) 22 May 1985: In respect of reservations made by the Government of New Zealand (applicable to the Cook Islands) concerning article 2, subparagraph (f), and article 5, subparagraph (a);

(d) 6 June 1985: In respect of reservations made by the Government of the Republic of Korea concerning article 9 and article 16, paragraphs 1 (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g). In this case, the Government of Mexico stated that the principle of the equal rights of men and women and of non-discrimination on the basis of sex, which are set forth in the Charter of the United Nations as one of its purposes, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and in various multilateral instruments, have already become general principles of international law which apply to the international community, to which the Republic of Korea belongs;

(e) 29 January 1986: In respect of the reservation made by the Government of Cyprus to article 9, paragraph 2;

(f) 7 May 1986: In respect of the reservations made by the Government of Turkey* to paragraphs 2 and 4 of article 15 and paragraph 1 (c), (d), (f) and (g) of article 16;

(g) 16 July 1986: In respect of the reservations made by the Government of Egypt to articles 9 and 16;

(h) 16 October 1986: In respect of the reservations made by Thailand* concerning article 9, paragraph 2, article 15, paragraph 3, and article 16;

(i) 4 December 1986: In respect of the reservations made by Iraq concerning article 2, subparagraphs (f) and (g), article 9, paragraphs 1 and 2, and article 16;

(j) 23 July 1990: In respect of the reservation made by the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.

[The Secretary-General received from the Government of Mexico, on the date indicated below, a communication as follows:]

Malawi, 5 August 1987: The Government of the United Mexican States hopes that the process of eradication of traditional customs and practices referred to in the first reservation of the Republic of Malawi will not be so protracted as to impair fulfilment of the purpose and intent of the Convention.

With regard to the reservations made by Fiji upon accession and by Lesotho upon ratification:

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers the reservations made by Kuwait incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention (art. 28, para. 2).

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to the above-mentioned reservations. These objections shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Kuwait and the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

With regard to the reservations regarding article 9, paragraph 2, and article 16, paragraph 1 (c), (d), (f) and (g) made by Lebanon upon accession:

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers, with regard to the reservations made by Malaysia relating to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, [...] that such reservations, which seek to limit the responsibilities of the reserving State under the Convention by invoking the general principles of national law and the Constitution, may raise doubts as to the commitment of this State to the object and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties should be respected, as to object and purpose, by all parties.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands further considers that the reservations made by Malaysia regarding article 2 (f), article 5 (a), article 9 and article 16 of the Convention are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to the above-mentioned reservations. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Malaysia.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands has examined the modification of the reservations made by Malaysia to article 5 (a) and article 16, paragraph 1 (a) and paragraph 2 of the [Convention].

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands acknowledges that Malaysia has specified these reservations, made at the time of its accession to the Convention. The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands wishes to declare that it assumes that Malaysia will ensure implementation of the rights enshrined in the above articles and will strive to bring its relevant national legislation into conformity with the obligations imposed by the Convention. This declaration shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Malaysia.

Consequently, the modification in question is not accepted, the Government of France having objected thereto.

The Government [of the] Kingdom of the Netherlands has examined the declaration made by the Government of Pakistan at the time of its accession to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and considers the said declaration as a reservation.

The Government [of the] Kingdom of the Netherlands notes that the said declaration amounts to reservations of a general nature in respect of the provisions of the Convention which are considered contrary to the Constitution of Pakistan.

The Kingdom of the Netherlands is of the view that these general reservations, which seek to limit the obligations of the reserving State by invoking its Constitution, may raise doubts as to the commitment of Pakistan to the object and purpose of the Convention and recalls that, according to paragraph 2 of article 28 of the Convention, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.

It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties are respected, as to their object and purpose, by all parties and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations under the treaties. The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands is further of the view that general reservations of the kind made by the Government of Pakistan, which do not clearly specify the provisions of the Convention to which they apply and the extent of the derogation therefrom, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to the aforesaid declaration made by the Government of Pakistan to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Pakistan.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the reservations made by Bangladesh regarding article 2, article 13, subparagraph (a), and article 16, paragraph 1 (c) and (f), by Egypt regarding article 2, article 9 and article 16, by Brazil regarding article 15, paragraph 4, and article 16, paragraph 1 (a), (c), (g) and (h), by Iraq regarding article 2, subparagraphs (f) and (g), article 9 and article 16, by Mauritius regarding article 11, paragraph 1 (b) and (d), and article 16, paragraph 1 (g), by Jamaica regarding article 9, paragraph 2, by the Republic of Korea regarding article 9 and article 16, paragraph 1 (c), (d), (f) and (g), by Thailand regarding article 9, paragraph 2, article 15, paragraph 3, and article 16, by Tunisia regarding article 9, paragraph 2, article 15, paragraph 4, and article 16, paragraph 1 (c), (d), (f), (g) and (h), by Turkey regarding article 15, paragraphs 2 and 4, and article 16, paragraphs 1 (c), (d), (f) and (g), by the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya upon accession, and the first paragraph of the reservations made by Malawi upon accession, are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention (art. 28, para. 2).

These objections shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention as between Bangladesh, Egypt, Brazil, Iraq, Mauritius, Jamaica, the Republic of Korea, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Malawi and the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the declarations made by India regarding article 5, subparagraph (a), and article 16, paragraph 1, of the Convention are reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention (art. 28, para. 2).

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the declaration made by India regarding article 16, paragraph 2, of the Convention is a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention (art. 28, para. 2).

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the declaration made by Morocco expressing the readiness of Morocco to apply the provisions of article 2 provided that they do not conflict with the provisions of the Islamic Shariah, is a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention (art. 28, para. 2).

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the declaration made by Morocco regarding article 15, paragraph 4, of the Convention is a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention (art. 28, para. 2).

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the declaration made by Morocco regarding article 9, paragraph 2, and article 16 of the Convention are reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention (art. 28, para. 2).

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands has examined the reservations made by Maldives, by which "the Government of the Republic of Maldives will comply with the provisions of the Convention, except those which the Government may consider contradictory to the principles of the Islamic Shariah, upon which the laws and traditions of the Maldives are founded", and the Republic of Maldives declares that it "does not see itself bound by any provisions of the Convention which obliges it to change its Constitution and laws in any manner". The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers the said reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands objects to the above-mentioned declarations and reservations.

These objections shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention as between India, Maldives, Morocco and the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

With regard to the reservations made by Singapore upon accession, the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands ... considers:

That the reservation under (1) is incompatible with the purpose of the Convention;

That the reservation under (2) suggests a distinction between migrating men and migrating women, and by that is an implicit reservation regarding article 9 of the Convention, which is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention;

That the reservation under (3), particularly the last part - "and considers that legislation in respect of article 11 is unnecessary for the minority of women who do not fall within the ambit of Singapore's employment legislation" - is a reservation which seeks to limit the responsibilities of the reserving State under the Convention by invoking the general principles of its national law, and in this particular case to exclude the application of the said article for a specific category of women, and therefore may raise doubts as to the commitment of this State to the object and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law. It is in the common interest of States that all parties should respect treaties to which they have chosen to become parties, should be respected, as to object and purpose, by all parties.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to the above-mentioned reservations.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Singapore and the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

The Government of Norway has examined the contents of the reservation made by the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, by which the accession "is subject to the general reservation that such accession cannot conflict with the laws on personal status derived from the Islamic Shariah". The Norwegian Government has come to the conclusion that this reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention (art. 28, para. 2). The Government of Norway objects to the reservation.

The Norwegian Government will stress that, by acceding to the Convention, a State commits itself to adopt the measures required for the elimination of discrimination, in all forms and manifestations, against women. A reservation by which a State party limits its responsibilities under the Convention by invoking religious law (Shariah), which is subject to interpretation, modification and selective application in different States adhering to Islamic principles, may create doubts about the commitments of the reserving State to the object and purpose of the Convention. It may also undermine the basis of international treaty law. All States have a common interest in securing that all parties respect the treaties to which they have chosen to become parties.

In the view of the Government of Norway, a reservation by which a State party limits its responsibilities under the Convention by invoking general principles of internal law may create doubts about the commitments of the reserving State to the object and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contribute to undermine the basis of international treaty law. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties also are respected, as to their object and purpose, by all parties. Furthermore, under well-established international treaty law, a State is not permitted to invoke internal law as justification for its failure to perform its treaty obligations. For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to the reservations of Maldives.

The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the above-stated Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the Republic of Maldives.

The Government of Norway has examined the content of the reservations made by Kuwait upon accession and stresses that, by acceding to the Convention, a State commits itself to adopt the measures required for the elimination of discrimination, in all its forms and manifestations, against women. A reservation by which a State party limits its responsibilities under the Convention by invoking internal or religious law may create doubts about the commitments of the reserving State to the object and purpose of the Convention. Furthermore, under well-established international treaty law, a State may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties also are respected, as to their object and purpose, by all parties. For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to the Kuwaiti reservation.

The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to preclude the entry into force of the above-stated Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the State of Kuwait.

The Government of Norway considers that the latter part of the reservations made by the Kingdom of Lesotho, owing to its unlimited scope and undefined character, is inadmissible under international law. A reservation by which a State party limits its responsibilities under the Convention by invoking general principles of internal law may create doubts about the commitment of the reserving State to the object and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law. Under well-established international treaty law, a State is not permitted to invoke internal law as a justification for its failure to perform its treaty obligations. For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to the reservation made by the Government of the Kingdom of Lesotho.

The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the Kingdom of Lesotho.

The Government of Norway has examined the contents of the reservations made by Malaysia upon accession, ...

In the view of the Government of Norway, a statement by which a State party purports to limit its responsibilities under the Convention by invoking general principles of internal or religious law may create doubts about the commitment of the reserving State to the object and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law. Under well-established international treaty law, a State is not permitted to invoke internal law as justification for its failure to perform its treaty obligations. Further, the Government of Norway considers that reservation made by the Government of Malaysia with respect to certain specific provisions of the Convention is so extensive as to be contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention, and thus not permitted under article 28, paragraph 2, of the Convention. For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to the reservations made by the Government of Malaysia.

The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and Malaysia.

The Government of Norway has examined the content of the reservation made by the Government of Pakistan upon accession to the above Convention, which reads as follows: "The accession ... is subject to the provisions of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan". The Government of Norway considers that the reservation made by the Government of Pakistan, owing to its unlimited scope and undefined character, is contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention. Under well-established treaty law, a State party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform treaty obligations. For these reasons the Government of Norway objects to the reservation made by the Government of Pakistan.

The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

The Government of Portugal considers that the reservations formulated by Maldives are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and are inadmissible under article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Furthermore, the Government of Portugal considers that these reservations cannot alter or modify in any respect the obligations arising from the Convention for any State party thereto.

Portugal is of the view that a general declaration of the kind made by Pakistan, constituting in fact in legal terms a general reservation, and not clearly specifying the provisions of the Convention to which it applies and the extent of the derogation therefrom, contributes to undermining the basis of international law.

Furthermore, according to paragraph 2 of article 28 of the Convention general reservation of such a kind is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and shall not be permitted.

Portugal therefore objects to the aforesaid general reservation which will not preclude the entry into force of the Convention in its entirety between Pakistan and Portugal.

The Government of Sweden considers that [the following reservations] are incompatible with the object and purposes of the Convention (art. 28, para. 2), and therefore objects to them:

- Thailand regarding article 9, paragraph 2, article 15, paragraph 3, and article 16;

- Tunisia regarding article 9, paragraph 2, article 15, paragraph 4, and article 16, paragraph 1 (c), (d), (f), (g) and (h);

- Bangladesh regarding article 2, article 13, subparagraph (a), and article 16, paragraph 1 (c) and (f);

- Brazil regarding article 15, paragraph 4, and article 16, paragraph 1 (a), (c), (g) and (h).

Indeed the reservations in question, if put into practice, would inevitably result in discrimination against women on the basis of sex, which is contrary to everything the Convention stands for. It should also be borne in mind that the principles of equal rights of men and women and of non-discrimination on the basis of sex are set forth in the Charter of the United Nations as one of its purposes, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and in various multilateral instruments, to which Thailand, Tunisia and Bangladesh are parties.

The Government of Sweden furthermore notes that, as a matter of principle, the same objection could be made to the reservations made by:

- Mauritius regarding article 11, paragraph 1 (b) and (d), and article 16, paragraph 1 (g);

- Republic of Korea regarding article 9 and article 16, paragraph 1 (c), (d), (f) and (g);

- New Zealand in respect of the Cook Islands regarding article 2, subparagraph (f), and article 5, subparagraph (a).

In this context, the Government of Sweden wishes to take this opportunity to make the observation that the reason why reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty are not acceptable is precisely that otherwise they would render a basic international obligation of a contractual nature meaningless. Incompatible reservations, made in all forms of discrimination against women, do not only cast doubts on the commitments of the reserving States to the objects and purpose of this Convention, but, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international contractual law. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties also are respected, as to object and purpose, by other parties.

[Subsequently, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Sweden, on the dates indicated below, objections of the same nature as the ones above with regard to the reservations made by the following States:]

- 12 March 1987: With regard to the reservations made by Iraq to article 2, subparagraphs (f) and (g), article 9, paragraph 1, and article 16;

- 25 May 1990: With regard to the reservation made by the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya;

- 5 February 1993: With regard to the reservations made by Jordan in respect of article 9, paragraph 2, article 15, paragraph 4, the wording on article 16, paragraphs 1 (c), (d) and (g);

- 26 October 1994: With regard to the reservations made by Maldives upon accession. The Government of Sweden objects to these reservations and considers that they constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between Sweden and the Republic of Maldives;

- 27 January 1998: With regard to the reservations made by Lebanon upon accession;

- 27 April 2000: With regard to the reservations to articles 2, 5, 15 and 16 made by Niger upon accession.

The Government of Sweden has examined the content of the following reservations made by the Government of Kuwait upon accession to the said Convention.

The Government of Kuwait enters a reservation regarding article 7 (a), inasmuch as the provision contained in that paragraph conflicts with the Kuwait Electoral Act, under which the right to be eligible for election and to vote is restricted to males.

The Government of Kuwait reserves its right not to implement the provision contained in article 9, paragraph 2, of the Convention, inasmuch as it runs counter to the Kuwait Nationality Act, which stipulates that a child's nationality shall be determined by that of his father.

The Government of the State of Kuwait declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions contained in article 16, paragraph 1 (f) inasmuch as it conflicts with the provision of the Islamic Shariah, Islam being the official religion of the State.

The Swedish Government considers that the reservations made by Kuwait are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. According to article 28, paragraph 2, reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.

By acceding to the Convention, a State commits itself to adopt the measures required for the elimination of discrimination, in all its forms and manifestations, against women. If the reservations made by Kuwait were to apply, they would inevitably have the effect of discrimination against women on grounds of sex.

In this context the Swedish Government wishes to make the observation that reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty not only cast doubts on the commitments of the reserving State, but moreover contribute to undermining the basis of international law. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties also are respected, as to object and purpose, by other parties and the States are prepared to undertake legislative changes necessary to comply with such treaties.

In view of the above the Government of Sweden objects to the above-mentioned reservations made by the Government of Kuwait to the Convention.

The Government of Sweden is of the view that the general reservations [made by Singapore] raise doubts as to the communication of Singapore to the object and purpose of the Convention and would recall that, according to article 28, paragraph 2, of the Convention, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.

The Government of Sweden is further of the view that general reservations of the kind made by the Government of Singapore, which do not clearly specify the provisions of the Convention to which they apply and the extent of the derogation therefrom, contribute to undermining the basis international treaty law.

The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the aforesaid general reservations made by the Government of Singapore to the [said Convention].

This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Singapore and Sweden. The Convention will thus become operative between the two States without Singapore benefiting from these reservations.

It is the opinion of the Government of Sweden that no time applies to objections against reservations, which are inadmissible under international laws.

On 23 July 1997, the Government of Bangladesh notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw its reservations with regard to articles 13 (a) and 16, paragraph 1 (f), of the Convention, which it had made upon ratification of the Convention.

In communications received on 8 March and 19 and 20 April 1989, respectively, the Governments of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the Belorussian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Ukrainian Socialist Republic notified the Secretary-General that they had decided to withdraw the reservations made upon their ratification relating to article 29, paragraph 1. The reservations were identical in essence, mutatis mutandis, to the reservation made by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

In a communication received on 14 September 1998, the Government of Belgium informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation with respect to article 7 made upon ratification.

On 20 December 1994, the Government of Brazil notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification to article 15, paragraph 4, and to article 16, paragraph 1 (a), (c), (g) and (h), of the Convention.

On 24 June 1992, the Government of Bulgaria notified the Secretary-General its decision to withdraw the reservation to article 29, paragraph 1, of the Convention, made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification.

On 28 May 1992, the Government of Canada notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the declaration relating to article 11, paragraph 1 (d), of the Convention made upon ratification.

The Government of Czechoslovakia signed and ratified the Convention on 17 July 1980 and 16 February 1982, respectively, with a reservation. Subsequently, on 26 April 1991, the Government of Czechoslovakia notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the reservation made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification.

On 24 January 2000, the Government of Fiji notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservations with respect to articles 5 (a) and 9 of the Convention made upon accession.

In a notification received on 26 March 1984, the Government of France informed the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the reservation to article 7 of the Convention made upon ratification. The notification specified that the withdrawal was effected because Organic Law No. 83-1096 of 20 December 1983 had abrogated article LO 128 of the electoral code relating to temporary disqualifications of persons who have obtained French nationality.

Subsequently, in a notification received on 21 July 1986, the Government of France informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation relating to article 15, paragraphs 2 and 3, and article 16, paragraph 1 (c), (d) and (h) of the Convention, made upon ratification. The notification specified that the withdrawal was effected because the existing discriminatory provisions against women in the rules governing property rights arising out of a matrimonial relationship and those concerning the legal administration of the property of children had been abrogated by Act No. 85-1372 of 23 December 1985 concerning equality of spouses in respect of property rights arising out of a matrimonial relationship and equality of parents in respect of the property of minor children, which entered into force on 1 July 1986.

In a communication received on 8 December 1989, the Government of Hungary notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservation in respect of article 29, paragraph 1, made upon ratification.

On 19 December 1986 and 24 March 2000, the Government of Ireland notified the Secretary-General that it has decided to withdraw its reservations, made upon accession, to article 9, paragraph 1, article 11, paragraph 1, article 13, subparagraph (a), and article 15, paragraphs 3 and 4.

On 8 September 1995, the Government of Jamaica notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw its reservation with regard to article 9, paragraph 2, of the Convention, which it had made upon ratification.

On 5 July 1995, the Government of the Socialist People's Libyan Republic notified the Secretary-General of the "new formulation of its reservation to the Convention, which replaces the formulation contained in the instrument of accession" which read as follows:

"[Accession] is subject to the general reservation that such accession cannot conflict with the laws on personal status delivered from Islamic Shariah."

On 3 October 1996, the Government of Liechtenstein notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservation concerning article 9, paragraph 2, made upon accession, whereby: "The Principality of Liechtenstein reserves the right to apply the Liechtenstein legislation according to which Liechtenstein nationality is granted under certain conditions."

On 24 October 1991, the Government of Malawi notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the following reservations made upon accession:

"Owing to the deep-rooted nature of some traditional customs and practices of Malawians, the Government of the Republic of Malawi shall not, for the time being, consider itself bound by such of the provisions of the Convention as required immediate eradication of such traditional customs and practices.

"While the Government of the Republic of Malawi accepts the principles of article 29, paragraph 2, of the Convention this acceptance should nonetheless be read in conjunction with [its] declaration of 12 December 1966, concerning the recognition, by the Government of the Republic of Malawi, as compulsory the jurisdiction of the international justice, under article 36, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the Court."

On 6 February 1998, the Government of Malaysia notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to modify its reservation made upon accession as follows:

With respect to article 5 (a) of the Convention, the Government of Malaysia declares that the provision is subject to Shariah law on the division of inherited property.

With respect to article 7 (b) of the Convention, the Government of Malaysia declares that the application of said article 7 (b) shall not affect appointment to certain public offices like the Mufti Shariah Court Judges, and the Imam, which is in accordance with the provisions of the Islamic Shariah law.

With respect to article 9, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the Government of Malaysia declares that under the Shariah law and the laws of Malaysia the age limit for marriage for women is sixteen and for men is eighteen.

In keeping with the depository practice followed in similar cases, the Secretary-General proposed to receive the modification in question for deposit in the absence of any objection on the part of any contracting State either to the deposit itself or to the procedure envisaged, within a period of 90 days from the date of its notification (21 April 1998), that is to say, on 20 July 1998.

On 29 January 1999, the Government of Maldives notified the Secretary-General of a modification of its reservation made upon accession. In keeping with the depository practices followed in similar cases, the Secretary-General proposed to receive the modification in question for deposit in the absence of any objection on the part of any of the contracting States, either to the deposit itself or to the procedure envisaged, within a period of 90 days from the date of its notification (i.e., 25 March 1999). No objection having been received, the modification was accepted for deposit upon the expiration of the 90 days period, that is to say on 23 June 1999. The text of the reservations made upon accession read as follows:

"The Government of the Republic of Maldives will comply with the provisions of the Convention, except those which the Government may consider contradictory to the principles of the Islamic Shariah upon which the laws and traditions of Maldives is founded.

"Furthermore, the Republic of Maldives does not see itself bound by any provisions of the Convention which obliges it to change its Constitution and laws in any manner."

In a communication received on 5 May 1998, the Government of Mauritius informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservations, made upon accession, with regard to subparagraphs (b) and (d) of paragraph 1 of article 11 and subparagraph (g) of paragraph 1 of article 16.

In a communication received on 19 July 1990, the Government of Mongolia notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the reservation made upon ratification, with respect to article 29, paragraph 1.

On 13 January 1989, the Secretary-General received from the Government of New Zealand a communication notifying him that, after consultation with the Government of the Cook Islands and the Government of Niue, it had denounced the Convention concerning the employment of women on underground work in mines of all kinds (ILO Convention No. 45) on 23 June 1987 and that in accordance with article 28, paragraph 3, of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, it had withdrawn the reservation made upon ratification, which reads as follows:

"The Government of New Zealand, the Government of the Cook Islands and the Government of Niue reserve the right, to the extent the Convention is inconsistent with the provisions of the Convention concerning the employment of women on underground work in mines of all kinds (ILO Convention No. 45) which was ratified by the Government of New Zealand on 29 March 1938, to apply the provisions of the latter."

On 16 October 1997, the Government of Poland notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation, made upon ratification, with regard to article 29, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

On 15 March and 24 August 1999, the Government of the Republic of Korea notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw, with effect as from those dates, the reservations made upon ratification to the extent that they apply to subparagraphs (c), (d) and (f) of paragraph 1 of article 16 and to article 9, respectively.

On 2 April 1997, the Government of Romania notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation made with regard to article 29 of the Convention.

On 25 January 1991, the Government of Thailand notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the reservations made upon accession to the extent that they apply to article 11, paragraph 1 (b), and article 15, paragraph 3.

Subsequently, on 26 October 1992, the Government of Thailand notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw one of the reservations made upon accession to the Convention, i.e., that relating to article 9, paragraph 2, which reservation read as follows:

"2.With regard to article 9, paragraph 2, [...] the Royal Thai Government considers that the application of the said provisions shall be subject to the limits and criteria established by national law, regulations and practices."

Subsequently, on 1 August 1996, the Government of Thailand notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw, as from the same date, the following reservation, made upon accession:

"1.In all matters which concern national security, maintenance of public order and service or employment in the military or paramilitary forces, the Royal Thai Government reserves its right to apply the provisions of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, in particular articles 7 and 10, only within the limits established by national laws, regulations and practices."

On 20 September 1999, the Government of the Republic of Turkey notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservations made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification of the Convention with regard to article 15, paragraphs 2 and 4, and article 16, paragraphs 1 (c), (d), (f) and (g), and that the reservation and declaration made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification by the Government of Turkey with respect to article 29, paragraph 1, and article 9, paragraph 1 of the Convention, respectively, continued to apply.

On 4 January 1995, the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the following declaration and reservations, made upon ratification:

"... The United Kingdom of Great Britain declares that, in the event of a conflict between obligations under the present Convention and its obligations under the Convention concerning the employment of women on underground work in mines of all kinds (ILO Convention No. 45), the provisions of the last-mentioned Convention shall prevail.

"The United Kingdom of Great Britain reserves the right, notwithstanding the obligations undertaken in article 13, or any other relevant article of the Convention, to continue to apply the income tax and capital gains tax legislation which:

"(i) Deems for income tax purposes the income of a married woman living with her husband in a year, or part of a year, of assessment to be her husband's income and not to be her income (subject to the right of the husband and the wife to elect jointly that the wife's earned income shall be charged to income tax as if she were a single woman with no other income); and

"(ii) Requires tax in respect of such income and of chargeable gains accruing to such a married woman to be assessed on her husband (subject to the right of either of them to apply for separate assessment) and consequently (if no such application is made) restricts to her husband the right to appeal against any such assessment and to be heard or to be represented at the hearing of any such appeal; and

"(iii) Entitles a man who has his wife living with him, or whose wife is wholly maintained by him, during the year of assessment to a deduction from his total income of an amount larger than that to which an individual in any other case is entitled and entitles an individual whose total income includes any earned income of his wife to have that deduction increased by the amount of that earned income or by an amount specified in the legislation whichever is the less."

Further, on 22 March 1996, the Government of the United Kingdom notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the following reservations and declarations made upon ratification:

"... The United Kingdom reserves the right to regard the provisions of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978, the Employment Act 1980, the Sex Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Order 1976, the Industrial Relations (No. 2) (Northern Ireland) Order 1976, the Industrial Relations (Northern Ireland) Order 1982, the Equal Pay Act 1970 (as amended), including the exceptions and exemptions contained in any of these acts and orders, as constituting appropriate measures for the practical realisation of the objectives of the Convention in the social economic circumstances of the United Kingdom, and to continue to apply these provisions accordingly; this reservation will apply equally to any future legislation which may modify or replace the above acts and orders on the understanding that the terms of such legislation will be compatible with the United Kingdom's obligations under the Convention.

"With reference to the provisions of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and other applicable legislation, the United Kingdom's acceptance of article 1 is subject to the reservation that the phrase `irrespective of their marital status' shall not be taken to render discriminatory any difference of treatment accorded to single persons as against married persons, so long as there is equality of treatment as between married men and married women and as between single men and single women.

"In the light of the substantial progress already achieved in the United Kingdom in promoting the progressive elimination of discrimination against women, the United Kingdom reserves the right, without prejudice to the other reservations made by the United Kingdom, to give effect to paragraphs (f) and (g) by keeping under review such of its laws and regulations as may still embody significant differences in treatment between men and women with a view to making changes to those laws and regulations when to do so would be compatible with essential and overriding considerations of economic policy. In relation to forms of discrimination more precisely prohibited by other provisions of the Convention, the obligation under this article must (in the case of the United Kingdom) be read in conjunction with the other reservations and declarations made in respect of those provisions including the declarations and reservations of the United Kingdom contained in paragraphs (a)-(d) above.

"With regard to paragraphs (f) and (g) of this article the United Kingdom reserves the right to continue to apply its law relating to sexual offences and prostitution; this reservation will apply equally to any future law which may modify or replace it.

"The United Kingdom reserves the right to take such steps as may be necessary to comply with its obligations under article 2 of the First Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed at Paris on 20 March 1952 and its obligations under paragraph 3 of Article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights opened for signature at New York on 19 December 1966, to the extent that the said provisions preserve the freedom of parental choice in respect of the education of children; and reserves also the right not to take any measures which may conflict with its obligation under paragraph 4 of article 13 of the said Covenant not to interfere with the liberty of individuals and bodies to establish and direct educational institutions, subject to the observation of certain principles and standards.

"Moreover, the United Kingdom can only accept the obligations under paragraph (c) of article 10 within the limits of the statutory powers of central Government, in the light of the fact that the teaching curriculum, the provision of textbooks and teaching methods are reserved for local control and are not subject to central Government direction; moreover, the acceptance of the objective of encouraging coeducation is without prejudice to the right of the United Kingdom also to encourage other types of education.

"The United Kingdom interprets the `right to work' referred to in paragraph 1 (a) as a reference to the `right to work' as defined in other human rights instruments to which the United Kingdom is a party, notably article 6 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 19 December 1966.

"The United Kingdom interprets paragraph 1 of article 11, in the light of the provisions of paragraph 2 of article 4, as not precluding prohibitions, restrictions or conditions on the employment of women in certain areas, or on the work done by them, where this is considered necessary or desirable to protect the health and safety of women or the human foetus, including such prohibitions, restrictions or conditions imposed in consequence of other international obligations of the United Kingdom;

"The United Kingdom reserves the right to apply the following provisions of United Kingdom legislation concerning the benefits specified:

"(a)Social security benefits for persons engaged in caring for a severely disabled person under section 37 of the Social Security Act 1975 and section 37 of the Social Security (Northern Ireland) Act 1975;

"(c)Retirement pensions and survivors' benefits under the Social Security Acts of 1975 to 1982 and the Social Security (Northern Ireland) Acts 1975 to 1982;

"(d)Family income supplements under the Family Income Supplements Act 1970 and the Family Income Supplements Act (Northern Ireland) 1971.

"This reservation will apply equally to any future legislation which may modify or replace any of the provisions specified in subparagraphs (a) to (d) above, on the understanding that the terms of such legislation will be compatible with the United Kingdom's obligations under the Convention.

"In relation to article 15, paragraph 2, the United Kingdom understands the term `legal capacity' as referring merely to the existence of a separate and distinct legal personality.

"The United Kingdom's acceptance of paragraph 1 of article 16 shall not be treated as either limiting the freedom of a person to dispose of his property as he wishes or as giving a person a right to property the subject of such a limitation."

By the same communication, the Government of the United Kingdom also informed the Secretary-General for the avoidance of doubt, that the declarations and reservations entered in respect of the dependent territories on behalf of which the Convention was also ratified on 7 April 1986 continue to apply, but are under active review.

As at 1 July 2000, 23 States parties had deposited with the Secretary-General instruments of the acceptance of the amendment to article 20, paragraph 1, of the Convention (see annex III for a list of States parties that have accepted the amendment of art. 20, para. 1).

The Optional Protocol was adopted by the General Assembly in its resolution 54/4 of 6 October 1999. In accordance with its article 15 (i), the Optional Protocol was opened for signature, ratification and accession at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, on 10 December 1999. As of 1 July 2000, 5 States parties had ratified and 43 States parties had signed the Optional Protocol (see annex IV).

On 10 June 1997, the Governments of China and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland notified the Secretary-General of the following:

(1) The reservation made by the Government of the People's Republic of China to paragraph 1 of article 29 of the Convention will also apply to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

(2) The Government of the People's Republic of China understands, on behalf of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the main purpose of the Convention, in the light of the definition contained in article 1, to be the reduction, in accordance with its terms, of discrimination against women, and does not therefore regard the Convention as imposing any requirement upon the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to repeal or modify any of its existing laws, regulations, customs or practices which provides for women to be treated more favourably than men, whether temporary or in the longer term. Undertakings by the Government of the People's Republic of China on behalf of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region under article 4, paragraph 1, and other provisions of the Convention are to be construed accordingly.

(3) The Government of the People's Republic of China reserves, for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the right to continue to apply relevant immigration legislation governing the entry into, stay in and departure from Hong Kong Special Administrative Region as may be deemed necessary from time to time. Accordingly, acceptance of article 15, paragraph 4, and of other provisions of the Convention is subject to the provisions of any such legislation as regards persons not at the time having the right under the laws of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to enter and remain in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

(4) The Government of the People's Republic of China understands, in the light of the definition in article 1, that none of its obligations under the Convention shall be treated as extending to the affairs of religious denominations or orders in the Hong Kong Administrative Region.

(5) Laws applicable in the New Territories of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region which enable male indigenous villagers to exercise certain rights in respect of property and which provide for rent concessions in respect of land or property held by indigenous persons or their lawful successors through the male line will continue to [be] applied.

(6) The Government of the People's Republic of China reserves, for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the right to apply all its legislation and the rules of pension schemes affecting retirement pensions, survivors' benefit in relation to whether or not derived from a social security scheme.

This reservation will apply to any future legislation which may modify or replace such aforesaid legislation, or the rules of pension schemes, on the understanding that the terms of such legislation will be compatible with the Government of the People's Republic of China's obligations under the Convention in respect of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

The Government of the People's Republic of China reserves the rights for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to apply any non-discriminatory requirement or a qualifying period of employment for the application of the provisions contained in article 11, paragraph 2, of the Convention.

(7) The Government of the People's Republic of China understands, on behalf of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the intention of article 15, paragraph 3, of the Convention to be that only those terms or elements of the contract or other private instrument which are discriminatory in the sense described are to be deemed null and void, but not necessarily the contract or instrument as a whole.

On 12 December 1986, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Israel the following objection:

"... In the view of the Government of the State of Israel, such declaration which is explicitly of a political character is incompatible with the purposes and objectives of the Convention and cannot in any way affect whatever obligations are binding upon Iraq under general international law or under particular Conventions.

"The Government of the State of Israel will, insofar as concerns the substance of the matter, adopt towards Iraq an attitude of complete reciprocity."

On 27 April 1999, the Government of Portugal informed the Secretary-General that the Convention would apply to Macau.

"On 19 October 1999: In accordance with the Joint Declaration of the Government of the People's Republic of China and the Government of the Republic of Portugal on the questions of Macau (hereinafter referred to as the Joint Declaration), the Government of the People's Republic of China will resume the exercise of sovereignty over Macau with effect from 20 December 1999. Macau will, from that date, become a Special Administrative Region in foreign and defence affairs, which are the responsibilities of the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China."

In this connection, the Government of the People's Republic of China informed the Secretary-General of the following:

"The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (hereinafter referred to as the `Convention'), to which the Government of the People's Republic of China deposited the instrument of ratification on 4 November 1980, will apply to the Macau Special Administrative Region with effect from 20 December 1999. The Government of the People's Republic of China also wishes to make the following declaration:

"The reservation made by the Government of the People's Republic of China to paragraph 1 of article 29 of the Convention will also apply to the Macau Special Administrative Region.

"The Government of the People's Republic of China will assume responsibilities for the international rights and obligations arising from the application of the Convention to the Macau Special Administrative Region."

"in accordance with the Joint Declaration of the Government of the Portuguese Republic and the Government of the People's Republic of China on the question of Macau signed on 13 April 1987, the Portuguese Republic will continue to have international responsibility for Macau until 19 December 1999, and from that date onwards the People's Republic of China will resume the exercise of sovereignty over Macau with effect from 20 December 1999. From 20 December 1999 onwards the Portuguese Republic will cease to be responsible for the international rights and obligations arising from the application of the Convention to Macau."

The instrument of ratification indicates that in accordance with the special relationships that exist between New Zealand and the Cook Islands and between New Zealand and Niue, there have been consultations regarding the Convention between the Government of New Zealand and the Government of the Cook Islands and between the Government of New Zealand and the Government of Niue; that the Government of the Cook Islands, which has exclusive competence to implement treaties in the Cook Islands, has requested that the Convention should extend to the Cook Islands; that the Government of Niue, which has exclusive competence to implement treaties in Niue, has requested that the Convention should extend to Niue. The said instrument specifies that accordingly the Convention shall apply also to the Cook Islands and Niue.

The instrument of ratification specifies that the said Convention is ratified in respect of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man, the British Virgin Islands, the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and the Turks and Caicos Islands.

In this connection, on 4 April 1989, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Argentina an objection, identical in essence, mutatis mutandis, as the one made in this regard, on 3 October 1983, however, also referring to General Assembly resolutions 40/41, 42/19 and 43/25.

Subsequently, on 27 November 1989, the Secretary-General received from the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland a communication, identical in essence, mutatis mutandis, as the one made in this regard.

Further, on 14 October 1966, the Secretary-General received from the Government of the United Kingdom a communication stating that it had decided to apply the Convention to Hong Kong, subject to the following reservations and declarations.

"(a) The United Kingdom on behalf of Hong Kong understands the main purpose of the Convention, in the light of the definition contained in article 1, to the reduction, in accordance with its terms, of discrimination against women, and does not therefore regard the Convention as imposing any requirement to repeal or modify any existing laws, customs or practices which provide for women to be treated more favourably than men, whether temporarily or in the longer term. Undertakings by the United Kingdom on behalf of Hong Kong under article 4, paragraph 1, and other provisions of the convention are to be construed accordingly.

"(b) The right to continue to apply such immigration legislation governing entry into, stay in and departure from Hong Kong as may be deemed necessary from time to time is reserved by the United Kingdom on behalf of Hong Kong. Accordingly, acceptance of article 15 (4), and of other provisions of the Convention, is subject to the provisions of any such legislation as regards persons not at the time having the right under the law of Hong Kong to enter and remain in Hong Kong.

"(c) In the light of the definition contained in article 1, the United Kingdom's extension of its ratification to Hong Kong is subject to the understanding that one of its obligations under the Convention in Hong Kong shall be treated as extending to the affairs of religious denominations or orders.

"(d) Laws applicable in the New Territories which enable male indigenous villages to exercise certain rights in respect of land or property held by indigenous persons or their lawful successors through the male line will continue to be applied.

"The British Nationality Act 1981, which was brought into force with effect from January 1983, is based on principles which do not allow of any discrimination against women within the meaning of article 1 as regards acquisition, change, or retention of their nationality or as regards the nationality of their children, the United Kingdom's acceptance of article 9 on behalf of Hong Kong shall not, however, be taken to invalidate the continuation of certain temporary or transitional provisions, which will continue in force beyond that date.

"The United Kingdom on behalf of Hong Kong reserves the right to apply all Hong Kong legislation and the rules of pension schemes affecting retirement pensions, survivors' benefits and other benefits in relation to death or retirement (including retirement on grounds of redundancy) whether or not delivered from a social security scheme.

"This reservation will apply equally to any further legislation, which may modify or replace such legislation, or the rules of pension schemes, on the understanding that the terms of such legislation will be compatible with the United Kingdom's obligations under the Convention in respect of Hong Kong.

"The United Kingdom on behalf of Hong Kong reserves the right to apply any non-discriminatory requirement for a qualifying period of employment for the application of the provisions contained in article 11 (2).

"In relation to article 15, paragraph 3, the United Kingdom on behalf of Hong Kong understands the intention of this provision to be that only those terms or elements of a contract or other private instrument which are discriminatory in the sense described are to be deemed null and void, but not necessarily the contract or instrument as a whole."

State party	Articles for which declarations or reservations have been made	States parties that have raised objections	Articles for which reservations have been withdrawn
Algeria	2 9, para. 2 15, para. 4 16 29	Germany Netherlands Norway/Sweden Portugal/ Denmark
Argentina	29, para. 1
Australia	11, para. 2 (b)
Austria	7, para. (b) 11, para. 1 (f)
Bahamas	2, para. (a) 9, para. 2 16, para. 1 (h) 29, para. 1
Bangladesh	2	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden
	13, para. (a)	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden	13, para. (a)
	[16, para. 1] (c) [and (f)]	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden	16, para. 1 (f)
Belarus	[29, para. 1]		29, para. 1
Belgium	7 15, paras. 2 and 3
Brazil	[15, para. 4]	Germany Netherlands Sweden	15, para. 4
	[16, para. 1 (a), (c), (g) and (h)]	Germany Netherlands Sweden	16, para. 1 (a), (c), (g) and (h)
	29, para. 1
Bulgaria	[29, para. 1]		29, para. 1
Canada	[11, para. 1 (d)]		11, para. 1 (d)
Chile	General declaration
China	29, para. 1
Cuba	29, para. 1
Cyprus	9, para. 2	Mexico
Egypt	2	Germany Netherlands Sweden
	9, para. 2	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden
	16	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden
	29, para. 1	Mexico
El Salvador	29, para. 1
Ethiopia	29, para. 1
Fiji	5, para. (a), 9	Netherlands	5 and 9
France	[7] 14, para. 2 (c) and (h) [15, paras. 2 and 3] [16, para. 1 (c), (d) and (h)] 16, para. 1 (g) 29, para. 1		7 15, paras. 2 and 3 16, para. 1 (c), (d) and (h)
Germany	General declaration: 7, para. (b)
Hungary	[29, para. 1]		29, para. 1
India	5, para. (a)	Netherlands
	16, para. 1	Netherlands
	16, para. 2	Netherlands
	29, para. 1
Indonesia	29, para. 1
Iraq	2, paras. (f) and (g)	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden
	9, para. 1	Sweden
	9, paras. 1 and 2	Germany Israel Mexico Netherlands Sweden
	16	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden
	29, para. 1	Sweden
Ireland	[9, para. 1] [11, para. 1] [13, para. (a)] 13, paras. (b) and (c) 15, para. 3 [15, para. 4] 16, paras. 1 (d) and (f)		9, para. 1 11, para. 1 13, para. (a) 15, para. 4
Israel	7, para. (b) 16 29, para. 1
Italy	General reservation
Jamaica	[9, para. 2]	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden	9, para. 2
	29, para. 1
Jordan	9, para. 2	Sweden
	15, para. 4	Sweden
	16, para. 1 (c), (d) and (g)	Sweden
Kuwait	7, para. (a)	Finland Netherlands Norway Sweden
	9, para. 2	Finland Netherlands Norway Sweden
	16, para. 1 (f)	Finland Netherlands Norway Sweden
	29, para. 1	Norway
Lebanon	9, para. 2 16 (1) (c), (d), (f) and (g) 29, para. 2	Austria Denmark Netherlands Sweden
Lesotho	2, para. (e)	Denmark Finland Germany Mexico Netherlands Norway
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya	General	Denmark Finland Germany Mexico Netherlands Norway Sweden
	2
	16, para. 1 (c) and (d)
Liechtenstein	1 [9, para. 2]		9, para. 2
Luxembourg	7 16, para. 1 (g)
Malawi	[5]	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden	5
	[29, para. 2]		29, para. 2
Malaysia	2, para. (f) 5, para. (a) 7, para. (b) 9 16	Denmark Finland France Germany Netherlands Norway
Maldives	2	Austria Canada Finland Germany Netherlands Norway Portugal Sweden
Malta	11, para. 1 13 15 16, para. 1 (e)
Mauritius	11, para. 1 (b) and (d)	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden	11, para. 1 (b) and (d) 16, para. 1 (g)
	16, para. 1 (g)	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden
	29, para. 1
Mexico	General declaration
Mongolia	[29, para. 1]		29, para. 1
Morocco	2	Netherlands
	9, para. 2	Netherlands
	15, para. 4	Netherlands
	16	Netherlands
	29
Myanmar	29
Netherlands	General declaration
New Zealand (Cook Islands)	2, para. (f)	Mexico Sweden
(Cook Islands)	5, para. (a)	Mexico Sweden
(Cook Islands and Niue)	11, para. 2 (b)
Niger	2, paras. (d) and (f) 5, para. (a) 15, para. (4) 16, para. 1 (c), (e) and (g) 29, para. 1 5, para. (b)
Pakistan	29, para. 1	Austria Denmark Finland Germany Netherlands Norway Portugal
Poland	[29, para. 1]		29, para. 1
Republic of Korea	9	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden	9 16, para. 1 (c), (d) and (f)
	16, para. 1 [(c), (d) and (f)] (g)	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden	16, para. 1 (c), (d) and (f)
Romania	[29, para. 1]		29, para. 1
Russian Federation	[29, para. 1]		29, para. 1
Singapore	2	Finland Netherlands Norway
	16	Finland Netherlands Norway Sweden
	11, para. 1	Finland Netherlands Norway
	29, para. 1	Finland Netherlands Norway
Spain	7 (declaration)
Switzerland	7 (b) 15, para. 2 16, para. 1 (g) 16, para. 1 (h)
Thailand	7	Germany
	[9, para. 2]	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden	9, para. 2
	10	Germany Mexico
	[11, para. 1 (b)]	Germany	11, para. 1 (b)
	[15, para. 3]	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden	15, para. 3
	16	Germany Mexico Netherlands Sweden
	29, para. 1
Trinidad and Tobago	29, para. 1
Tunisia	9, para. 2	Germany Netherlands Sweden
	15, para. 4	Germany Netherlands Sweden
	16, para. 1 (c), (d), (f), (g) and (h) 29, para. 1	Germany Netherlands Sweden
Turkey	9, para. 1 (declaration)		15, paras. 2 and 4 16, paras. 1 (e), (d), (f) and (g)
	15, paras. 2 and 4	Germany Netherlands
	16, para. 1 (c), (d), (f) and (g)	Germany Mexico Netherlands
	29, para. 1
Ukraine	[29, para. 1]		29, para. 1
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland	(declarations) 1 [2, paras. (f) and (g)] 9 10, para. (c) 11, paras. 1 and 2 [13] 15, paras. 2 and 3 16, para. 1	Argentina	2, paras. (f) and (g) 11, para. 1 (part) 13
(United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) on behalf of: British Virgin Islands, Falkland Islands (Malvinas), Isle of Man, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands, and Turks and Caicos Islands	(declarations) 1, 2, 9, 11, 13, 15, 16
Venezuela	29, para. 1
Viet Nam	29, para. 1
Yemen	29, para. 1

1 Liechtenstein, United Kingdom and on behalf of: British Virgin Islands, Falkland Islands (Malvinas), South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands, and Turks and Caicos Islands

2 Algeria, Bangladesh, Egypt, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Maldives, Morocco, Singapore

9 Fiji, France, Malaysia, Republic of Korea, United Kingdom and on behalf of: British Virgin Islands, Falkland Islands (Malvinas), South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands, and Turks and Caicos Islands

9, para. 2 Algeria, Bahamas, Cyprus, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia

11 United Kingdom and on behalf of: British Virgin Islands, Falkland Islands (Malvinas), South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands, and Turks and Caicos Islands

13 Malta, United Kingdom on behalf of: British Virgin Islands, Falkland Islands (Malvinas), South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands, and Turks and Caicos Islands

15, paras. 2 and 3 Belgium, United Kingdom and on behalf of: British Virgin Islands, Falkland Islands (Malvinas), South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands, and Turks and Caicos Islands

16 Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Morocco, Singapore, Thailand

16, para. 1 (f) United Kingdom and on behalf of: British Virgin Islands, Falkland Islands (Malvinas), South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands, and Turks and Caicos Islands

29, para. 1 Algeria, Argentina, Bahamas, Brazil, China, Cuba, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, France, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Jamaica, Kuwait, Mauritius, Morocco, Myanmar, Niger, Pakistan, Singapore, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen

^b For the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man, the British Virgin Islands, and the Turks and Caicos Islands.

State party	Date of signature	Date of receipt of the instrument of ratification
Argentina	28 February 2000
Austria	10 December 1999
Azerbaijan	6 June 2000
Belgium^a	10 December 1999
Benin	25 May 2000
Bolivia	10 December 1999
Bulgaria	6 June 2000
Chile	10 December 1999
Colombia	10 December 1999
Costa Rica	10 December 1999
Croatia	5 June 2000
Cuba^b	17 March 2000
Czech Republic	December 1999
Denmark	10 December 1999	13 May 2000
Dominican Republic	14 March 2000
Ecuador	10 December 1999
Finland	10 December 1999
France	10 December 1999	9 June 2000
Germany	10 December 1999
Ghana	24 February 2000
Greece	10 December 1999
Iceland	10 December 1999
Indonesia	28 February 2000
Italy	10 December 1999
Liechtenstein	10 December 1999
Luxembourg	10 December 1999
Mexico	10 December 1999
Namibia	19 May 2000	26 May 2000
Netherlands	10 December 1999
Norway	10 December 1999
Panama	9 June 2000
Paraguay	28 December 1999
Philippines	21 March 2000
Portugal	16 February 2000
Senegal	10 December 1999	26 May 2000
Slovakia	5 June 2000
Slovenia	10 December 1999
Spain	14 March 2000
Sweden	10 December 1999
Thailand	15 June 2000	15 June 2000
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia	3 April 2000
Uruguay	9 May 2000
Venezuela	17 March 2000

^a Belgium, upon signature of the Optional Protocol, declared that "the Flemish and German-speaking communities of Belgium are equally bound by this signature".

^b Cuba, upon signature of the Optional Protocol, declared that: "the Government of the Republic of Cuba declares that it does not recognize the competence of the Committee established by virtue of article 8 and 9 of the Protocol".

State party	Acceptance date
Australia	4 June 1998
Brazil	5 March 1997
Canada	3 November 1997
Chile	8 May 1998
Denmark	12 March 1996
Finland	18 March 1996
France	8 August 1997
Guatemala	3 June 1999
Italy	31 May 1996
Liechtenstein	15 April 1997
Madagascar	19 July 1996
Malta	5 March 1997
Mexico	16 September 1996
Mongolia	19 December 1997
Netherlands	10 December 1997^a
New Zealand	26 September 1996
Norway	29 March 1996
Republic of Korea	12 August 1996
Panama	5 November 1996
Sweden	17 July 1996
Switzerland	2 December 1997
United Kingdom	19 November 1997^b