Print
Download XMLUnited Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property
Parties with reservations, declarations and objections
| Party | Reservations / Declarations | Objections |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | Yes | No |
| Iran | Yes | No |
| Italy | Yes | No |
| Liechtenstein | Yes | No |
| Norway | Yes | No |
| Saudi Arabia | Yes | No |
| Sweden | Yes | No |
| Switzerland | Yes | No |
Finland
23-04-2014
Finland hereby declares its understanding that the Convention does not apply to military activities, including the activities of armed forces during an armed conflict, as those terms are understood under international humanitarian law, and activities undertaken by military forces of a State in the exercise of their official functions; that the express mention of heads of State in article 3 of the Convention cannot be considered to affect the immunity ratione personae which other State officials might enjoy under international law; and that the Convention is without prejudice to any future international legal development concerning the protection of human rights.
Iran
29-09-2008
Pursuant to Article 27, paragraph 3 of the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 27, paragraph 2 of the Convention. The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran affirms that the consent of all parties to such a dispute is necessary, in each individual case, for the submission of the dispute to the International Court of Justice. The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran can, if it deems appropriate, for the settlement of such a dispute, agree with the submission of the dispute to arbitration in accordance with its related domestic law.
Italy
06-05-2013
In depositing the present instrument of ratification, the Italian Republic wishes
to underline that Italy understands that the Convention will be interpreted and applied
in accordance with the principles of international law and, in particular, with the
principles concerning the protection of human rights from serious violations. In addition,
Italy states its understanding that the Convention does not apply to the activities
of armed forces and their personnel, whether carried out during an armed conflict
as defined by international humanitarian law, or undertaken in the exercise of their
official duties.
Similarly, the Convention does not apply where there are special immunity regimes,
including the ones concerning the status of armed forces and associated personnel
following the armed forces, as well as immunities ratione personae. Italy understands
that the express reference, in Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Convention, to Heads
of State cannot be interpreted so as to exclude or affect the immunity ratione personae
of other State officials according to international law [...].
Liechtenstein
22-04-2015
General interpretative declaration:
In accordance with General Assembly resolution 59/38, adopted on 2 December 2004,
the Principality of Liechtenstein hereby understands that the Convention does not
cover criminal proceedings.
Interpretative declaration concerning article 12:
The Principality of Liechtenstein considers that article 12 does not govern the question
of pecuniary compensation for serious human rights violations which are alleged to
be attributable to a State and are committed outside the State of the forum. Consequently,
this Convention is without prejudice to developments in international law in this
regard.
Norway
27-03-2006
Recalling inter alia resolution 59/38 adopted by the General Assembly of the United
Nations on 2 December 2004, in which the General Assembly took into account, when
adopting the Convention, the statement of 25 October 2004 of the Chairman of the Ad
Hoc Committee on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property introducing
the Committee's report, Norway hereby states its understanding that the Convention
does not apply to military activities, including the activities of armed forces during
an armed conflict, as those terms are understood under international humanitarian
law, and activities undertaken by military forces of a State in the exercise of their
official duties. Such activities remain subject to other rules of international law.
Similarly, as also noted in the said statement, the Convention does not apply where
there is a special immunity regime, including immunities ratione personae. Thus,
the express mention of heads of State in Article 3 should not be read as suggesting
that the immunity ratione personae of other State officials is affected by the Convention.
Furthermore, in cases where it has been established that property of a State is specifically
in use or intended for use by the State for other than government non-commercial purposes
and is in the territory of the State of the forum, it is the understanding of Norway
that Article 18 does not prevent pre-judgement measures of constraint from being taken
against property that has a connection with the entity against which the proceeding
was directed.
Finally, Norway understands that the Convention is without prejudice to any future
international development in the protection of human rights.
Saudi Arabia
01-09-2010
... the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia does accede to and accept the United Nations Convention
on
Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, with the following reservation
to article 27, paragraph 2, of the Convention regarding referral of disputes to the
International Court of Justice:
The Kingdom does not consider itself bound by the provision that disputes concerning
the interpretation or application of the Convention may be referred to the International
Court of Justice.
Disputes should not be referred to the International Court of Justice without the
agreement of all parties
involved.
Sweden
23-12-2009
Recalling inter alia resolution 59/38, adopted by the General Assembly on 16 December
2004, taking into account inter alia the statement of the Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee
introducing the report of the Ad Hoc Committee to the General Assembly, as well as
the report of the Ad Hoc Committee, Sweden hereby declares its understanding that
the Convention does not apply to military activities, including the activities of
armed forces during an armed conflict, as those terms are understood under international
humanitarian law, and activities undertaken by military forces of a State in the exercise
of their official functions.
Sweden also declares its understanding that the express mention of heads of State
in article 3 should not be read as suggesting that the immunity ratione personae which
other State officials might enjoy under international law is affected by the Convention.
Sweden furthermore declares its understanding that the Convention is without prejudice
to any future international legal development concerning the protection of human rights.
Switzerland
16-04-2010
General interpretative declaration:
In accordance with General Assembly resolution 59/38, adopted on 2 December 2004,
Switzerland hereby understands that the Convention does not cover criminal proceedings;
Interpretative declaration concerning article 12:
Switzerland considers that article 12 does not govern the question of pecuniary compensation
for serious human rights violations which are alleged to be attributable to a State
and are committed outside the State of the forum. Consequently, this Convention is
without prejudice to developments in international law in this regard;
Interpretative declaration concerning article 22, paragraph 3:
If the State concerned is a Swiss canton, Switzerland considers that "official language"
should be understood as the official language or one of the official languages of
the canton in which process is to be served.