Convention for the suppression of unlawful acts against the safety of civil aviation

PartiesTooltipParties with a link have a reservation.

Extensions

China

Denmark

Algeria

06-10-1995

Algeria acceded to the Convention with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

Andorra

30-06-2006

At the time of accession to this Convention and the Protocol (of 1988) thereto, Andorra, while possessing heliports and various helisites, does not have any airports or aerodromes within its territory or any aircraft registered in the country.

Bahrain

20-02-1984

Bahrain does not consider itself bound by Article 14(1) of the Convention.

Belarus

31-01-1973

The Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic does not consider itself bound by the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 14 providing for the reference of disputes concerning the
interpretation or application of the Convention to arbitration or to the International Court at the request of one of the parties.

Brazil

24-07-1972

Subject to reservation provided for in Article 14(2).

Cameroon

11-07-1973

In accordance with the provisions of the Convention of September 23, 1971, for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts directed against the Security of Civil Aviation, the Government of the United Republic of Cameroon declares that in view of the fact that it does not have any relations with South Africa and Portugal, it has no obligation towards these two countries with regard to the implementation of the stipulations of the Convention.

06-12-1977

[…] that the Government of the United Republic of Cameroon “having established Diplomatic relations with Portugal, on the 12th of February, 1977, has decided to withdraw, as from that date, the declaration it made against Portugal […]” upon deposit of its instrument of accession to the Convention. The Embassy further states “that the position of Cameroon against South Africa, in the same context still stands.”

China

10-09-1980

[…] the Chinese Government will not be bound by Paragraph 1, Article 14 of the Montreal Convention […]. At the same time, the Chinese Government declares illegal and null and void the signature and ratification of the […][Convention] by the Taiwan authorities in the name of China.

03-06-1997

The Convention for the Suppression of [Unlawful] Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation done on 23 September 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the “Convention”) to which the Government of the People’s Republic of China deposited its instrument of accession on 10 September 1980, will apply to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region with effect from 1 July 1997. The Government of the People’s Republic of China also makes the following declaration:
The reservation to Paragraph 1 of Article 14 of the said Convention made by the People’s Republic of China when it deposited its instrument of accession on 10 September 1980 will also apply to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

29-11-1999

The Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation, done at Montreal on 23 September 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the “Convention”), to which the Government of the People’s Republic of China deposited the instrument of accession on 10 September 1980, will apply to the Macao 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 14 of the Convention will also apply to the Macao Special Administrative Region.

Cook Islands

14-04-2005

The Government of New Zealand is responsible for the External Relations of the Cook Islands.

Croatia

08-10-1991

Croatia deposited an instrument of ratification on 8 juni 1993, with a declaration under Article 1, paragrah 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

Egypt

20-05-1975

Egypt signed the Convention at London November 24, 1972 and ratified the Convention at Washington with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

Ethiopia

11-01-1979

Reservation on accession in respect of Article 14(1).

France

30-06-1976

France does not consider itself bound by Article 14, paragraphe 1, of the Convention.

Guatemala

19-10-1978

Guatemala ratified the Convention with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

Honduras

13-04-1987

Honduras acceded to the Convention with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

India

12-11-1982

India ratified the Convention with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

Indonesia

27-08-1976

Indonesia acceded to the Convention with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

Kuwait

09-04-1979

It is understood that Accession to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation done at Montreal 1971, does not mean in any way recognition of Israel by the State of Kuwait. Furthermore, no treaty relation will arise between the State of Kuwait and
Israel.

Malawi

21-12-1972

Malawi acceded to the Convention with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

Mongolia

05-09-1972

Mongolia signed and ratified the Convention with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

Morocco

24-10-1975

In case of a dispute, all recourse must be made to the International Court of Justice on the basis of the unanimous consent of the parties concerned.

Mozambique

16-01-2003

Mozambique acceded to the Convention with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

Oman

02-02-1977

1. that the accession of the said Convention by the Government of the Sultanate of Oman does not mean or imply, and shall not be interpreted as recognition of Israel generally or in the context of this Convention; and
2. that the Government of the Sultanate of Oman does not consider itself bound by Article 14, paragraph 1 of the Convention.

Papua New Guinea

04-12-1975

In succeeding to this Convention, Papua New Guinea hereby exercises its right under Article 14(2) of the Convention to declare it does not consider itself bound by Article 14(1).

Qatar

26-08-1981

Qatar acceded to the Convention with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

Romania

15-08-1975

[The Socialist Republic of] Romania declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 14, paragraph 1, of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation. The position of [the Socialist Republic of] Romania is that any
disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention may be submitted to the International Court of Justice only with the agreement of all the parties to the dispute in each individual case.
In addition the Government of [the Socialist Republic of] Romania declared on signature [red. 23-09-1971] that they considered "null and void the signing at Montreal of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation by the so-called Chiang-Kai-Shek authorities, as the only Government entitled to assume obligations on behalf of China and to represent it on the international plane is the Government of the People's Republic of China.

Russian Federation

19-02-1973

The Government of the [Union of Soviet Socialist Republics] does not consider itself bound by the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 14 providing for disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention to be referred to arbitration or to the International Court at the request of one of the parties to the dispute.

Saudi Arabia

14-06-1974

Saudi Arabia acceded to the Convention with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14. The instrument of accession by Saudi Arabia contains a statement, an English translation of which reads as follows: the accession of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to the said Convention does not mean or imply, and shall not be interpreted as, recognition of Israel generally or in the context of this Convention.

South Africa

30-05-1972

South Africa ratified the Convention with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

Syria

10-07-1980

Syria acceded to the Convention with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

Tunisia

16-11-1981

Tunisia acceded to the Convention with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

Ukraine

26-01-1973

The former Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic signed the Convention with a declaration under Article 14, paragraph 2 of the Convention that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 14.

15-10-2015

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine presents its compliments to Governments of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United States of America and the Russian Federation, as the Depositaries of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft of 16 December 1970 and the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation of 23 September 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the “Conventions”)and has the honour to inform of the following.
In February 2014 the Russian Federation launched armed aggression against Ukraine and occupied a part of the territory of Ukraine – the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, and today exercises effective control over certain districts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine. These actions are in gross violation of the Charter of the United Nations and constitute a threat to international peace and security. The Russian Federation, as the Aggressor State and Occupying Power, bears full responsibility for its actions and their consequences under international law.
The United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/68/262 of 27 March 2014 confirmed the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders. The United Nations also called upon all States, international organizations and specialized agencies not to recognize any alteration of the status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol.
In this regard, Ukraine states that from 20 February 2014 and for the period of temporary occupation by the Russian Federation of a part of the territory of Ukraine – the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol – as a result of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation committed against Ukraine and until the complete restoration of the constitutional law and order and effective control by Ukraine over such occupied territory, as well as over certain districts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine, which are temporarily not under control of Ukraine as a result of the aggression of the Russian Federation, the application and implementation by Ukraine of the obligations under the above Conventions, as applied to the aforementioned occupied and uncontrolled territory of Ukraine, is limited and is not guaranteed.
Documents or requests made or issued by the occupying authorities of the Russian Federation, its officials at any level in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol and by the illegal authorities in certain districts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine, which are temporarily not under control of Ukraine, are null and void and have no legal effect regardless of whether they are presented directly or indirectly through the authorities of the Russian Federation.
The provisions of the Conventions regarding the possibility of direct communication or interaction do not apply to the territorial organs of Ukraine in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, as well as in certain districts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine, which are temporarily not under control of Ukraine. The procedure of the relevant communication is determined by the central authorities of Ukraine in Kyiv.
Therefore, the Ukrainian Side would be grateful if the Governments of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United States of America and the Russian Federation, as the Depositaries of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft of 16 December 1970 and the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation of 23 September 1971, would circulate this notification on the specifics of the territorial application and implementation of the above Conventions in Ukraine among all the Contracting States to those Conventions.

United Arab Emirates

10-04-1981

In accepting the said Convention, the Government of the United Arab Emirates takes the view that its acceptance of the said Convention does not in any way imply its recognition of Israel, nor does it oblige it to apply the provisions of the Convention in respect of the said Country.

Venezuela

21-11-1983

Venezuela will take into consideration clearly political motives and the circumstances under which offenses described in Article 1 of this Convention are committed, in refusing to extradite or prosecute an offender, unless financial extortion or injury to the crew, passengers, or other persons has occurred.

21-11-1985

In reference to the notification made by the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland regarding the reservation made by the Government of the Republic of Venezuela as not valid, the Embassy of Venezuela would like to inform the following:
“The reserve made by the Government of Venezuela to Articles 4, 7 and 8 of the Convention is based on the fact that the principle of asylum is contemplated in Article 116 of the Constitution of the Republic of Venezuela. Article 116 reads:
‘The Republic grants asylum to any person subject to persecution or which finds itself in danger, for political reasons, within the conditions and requirements established by the laws and norms of international law’.
“It is for this reason that the Government of Venezuela considers that in order to protect this right, which would be diminished by the application without limits of the said articles, it was necessary to request the formulation of the declaration contemplated in Art. 2 of the Law approving the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Security of Civil Aviation.