Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities
Parties with reservations, declarations and objections
Party | Reservations / Declarations | Objections |
---|---|---|
Australia | Yes | No |
Azerbaijan | Yes | Yes |
Belgium | Yes | No |
Bhutan | Yes | No |
Brunei | Yes | Yes |
Canada | Yes | No |
China | Yes | No |
Cyprus | Yes | No |
Egypt | Yes | No |
El Salvador | Yes | Yes |
Estonia | Yes | No |
EU (European Union) | Yes | No |
France | Yes | No |
Georgia | Yes | No |
Greece | Yes | No |
Guatemala | Yes | No |
Iran | Yes | Yes |
Ireland | Yes | No |
Israel | Yes | No |
Japan | Yes | No |
Kuwait | Yes | No |
Libya | Yes | Yes |
Liechtenstein | Yes | No |
Lithuania | Yes | No |
Malaysia | Yes | Yes |
Malta | Yes | No |
Mauritius | Yes | No |
Mexico | Yes | No |
Monaco | Yes | No |
Netherlands, the Kingdom of the | Yes | No |
New Zealand | Yes | No |
Norway | Yes | No |
Palestine | Yes | No |
Poland | Yes | No |
Republic of Korea, the | Yes | Yes |
Singapore | Yes | Yes |
Slovakia | Yes | No |
Suriname | Yes | Yes |
Syria | Yes | No |
Thailand | Yes | Yes |
United Kingdom | Yes | No |
Uzbekistan | Yes | No |
Venezuela | Yes | No |
Australia
17-07-2008
Australia recognizes that persons with disability enjoy legal capacity on an equal
basis with others in all aspects of life. Australia declares its understanding that
the Convention allows for fully supported or substituted decision-making arrangements,
which provide for decisions to be made on behalf of a person, only where such arrangements
are necessary, as a last resort and subject to safeguards;
Australia recognizes that every person with disability has a right to respect for
his or her physical and mental integrity on an equal basis with others. Australia
further declares its understanding that the Convention allows for compulsory assistance
or treatment of persons, including measures taken for the treatment of mental disability,
where such treatment is necessary, as a last resort and subject to safeguards;
Australia recognizes the rights of persons with disability to liberty of movement,
to freedom to choose their residence and to a nationality, on an equal basis with
others. Australia further declares its understanding that the Convention does not
create a right for a person to enter or remain in a country of which he or she is
not a national, nor impact on Australia’s health requirements for non-nationals seeking
to enter or remain in Australia, where these requirements are based on legitimate,
objective and reasonable criteria.
Azerbaijan
28-01-2009
The Republic of Azerbaijan declares that it is unable to guarantee the application of the provisions of the Convention in the territories occupied by the Republic of Armenia until these territories are liberated from occupation.
Objection Armenia, 22-09-2010
Given that the Republic of Azerbaijan made a declaration to the Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities at the time of ratification the Republic of Armenia
declares:
The Republic of Azerbaijan deliberately misrepresents the essence of the Nagorno-Karabakh
issue, with respect to cause and effect of the conflict. The conflict arose due to
the policy of ethnic cleansing by the Republic of Azerbaijan followed by the massive
military aggression against the selfdetermined Nagorno-Karabakh Republic - with the
aim to repress the free will of the Nagorno-Karabakh population. As a result, the
Republic of Azerbaijan has occupied several territories of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic.
Belgium
30-03-2007
This signature is equally binding on the French community, the Flemish community, the German-speaking community, the Wallone region, the Flemisch region and the region of the capital-Brussels.
Bhutan
13-03-2024
The Kingdom of Bhutan does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1(a) and paragraph 2 of Article 18, paragraphs 1(b) and (c) of Article 23, paragraphs 1(c) of Article 27, and section (a) (ii) of Article 29 of the United Nations Convention on [the] Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
Brunei
11-04-2016
The Government of Brunei Darussalam expresses its reservation regarding those provisions of the said Convention that may be contrary to the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and to the beliefs and principles of Islam, the official religion of Brunei Darussalam.
Objection Sweden, 26-10-2016
The Government of Sweden has examined the contents of the reservation made by Brunei
Darussalam in relation to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
Brunei Darussalam expresses that ‘[t]he Government of Brunei Darussalam expresses
its reservation regarding those provisions of the said Convention that may be contrary
to the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and to the beliefs and principles of Islam,
the official religion of Brunei Darussalam’.
As regards the reservation made by Brunei Darussalam, Sweden would like to state the
following.
Reservations by which a State Party limits its responsibilities under the Convention
by invoking general references to national or religious law may cast doubts on the
commitments of the reserving 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 also are respected, as to object and purpose, by all parties. The Government
of Sweden therefore objects to the aforementioned reservation.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Sweden
and Brunei Darussalam, without Brunei Darussalam benefitting from its aforementioned
reservation.
Objection Czech Republic, 20-12-2016
The Government of the Czech Republic has examined the contents of the reservation
made by the Government of Brunei Darussalam on 18 April 2016 upon ratification of
the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, according
to which ‘Brunei Darussalam would not consider itself bound by any provisions of the
Convention contrary to the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and to the beliefs and
principles of Islam’.
The Government of the Czech Republic is of the view that the reservation to any provision
of the Convention contrary to the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and to the beliefs
and principles of Islam has a general and indeterminate scope, since it does not sufficiently
specify to what extent Brunei Darussalam considers itself bound by the provisions
of the Convention. Furthermore, the Czech Republic considers it unacceptable under
the customary international law, as codified in Article 27 of the Vienna Convention
on the Law of Treaties, to support a reservation to a treaty by references to domestic
law. Thus, this general reservation referring to domestic and religious laws without
specifying its contents also raises concern regarding the extent to which Brunei Darussalam
is committed to the object and purpose of the Convention.
The Government of the Czech Republic wishes to recall that, according to article 46
paragraph 1 of the Convention, as well as according to customary international law
as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation incompatible
with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted and that such a reservation
is null and void and therefore devoid of any legal effect.
The Government of the Czech Republic, therefore, objects to the aforementioned reservation
made by Brunei Darussalam. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force
of the Convention between the Czech Republic and Brunei Darussalam. The Convention
enters into force in its entirety between the Czech Republic and Brunei Darussalam,
without Brunei Darussalam benefiting from its reservation.
Objection Austria, 03-02-2017
The Government of Austria has examined the reservation made by Brunei Darussalam
upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
Austria considers that by referring to the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and
to the beliefs and principles of Islam Brunei Darussalam has made a reservation of
a general and indeterminate scope. This reservation does not clearly define for the
other States Parties to the Convention the extent to which the reserving State has
accepted the obligations of the Convention.
Austria therefore considers the reservation to be incompatible with the object and
purpose of the Convention and objects to it.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between
the Republic of Austria and Brunei Darussalam.
Objection Poland, 22-02-2017
The Government of the Republic of Poland has carefully examined the reservation made
by Brunei Darussalam to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
done in New York on December 13, 2006, done upon its ratification on April 18, 2016.
The Government of the Republic of Poland considers that the reservation made by Brunei
Darussalam regarding those provisions of the Convention that may be contrary to the
Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and to the beliefs and principles of Islam, the
official religion of Brunei Darussalam, is incompatible with the object and purpose
of the Convention and therefore objects to them.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Republic of Poland and Brunei Darussalam.
Objection Switzerland, 27-02-2017
The Swiss Federal Council has examined the reservation made by the Government of Brunei
Darussalam upon ratification of the Convention of 13 December 2006 on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities.
The reservation, subordinating in general all provisions of the Convention to the
Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and to the beliefs and principles of Islam, constitutes
a reservation of general scope that may raise doubts about the full commitment of
Brunei Darussalam to the object and purpose of the Convention. The Swiss Federal Council
notes that, according to article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention and to article
19 (c) of the Vienna Convention of 23 May 1969 on the Law of Treaties, no reservation
incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention is permissible.
It is in the common interest of States that the object and purpose of the instruments
to which they choose to become parties be respected by all parties thereto, and that
States be prepared to amend their legislation in order to fulfil their treaty obligations.
Consequently, the Swiss Federal Council objects to the reservation made by Brunei
Darussalam. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention,
in its entirety, between Switzerland and Brunei Darussalam.
Objection Portugal, 21-03-2017
The Government of the Portuguese Republic has examined the contents of the reservation
made by Brunei Darussalam upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that this reservation is incompatible
with the object and purpose of the Convention and, in addition, has a general and
indeterminate scope and therefore does not allow States to assess to what extent Brunei
Darussalam has accepted the existing commitments to the Convention. Furthermore, such
general reservation contributes to undermining the basis of International Treaty Law.
Moreover, the Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that reservations by
which a State limits its responsibilities under the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities by invoking the domestic law or/and religious beliefs and principles
raise doubts as to the commitment of the reserving State to the object and purpose
of the Convention, as such reservations are likely to deprive the provisions of the
Convention of their effect and are contrary to the object and purpose thereof.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic recalls that, according to customary international
law as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and in accordance
with Article 46 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, a reservation
incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic thus objects to this reservation.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Portuguese Republic and Brunei Darussalam.
Objection Romania, 22-03-2017
The Government of Romania has examined the reservation made by the Government of Brunei
Darussalam to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (New York,
2006) declaring that it ‘expresses its reservation regarding those provisions of the
said Convention that may be contrary to the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and
to the beliefs and principles of Islam, the official religion of Brunei Darussalam’.
The Government of Romania considers that the reservation is of unlimited scope and
undefined character. The general nature of the reservation does not allow to analyze
its compatibility with the scope and purpose of the Convention as required by article
46 (1) of the Convention and limits the understanding as to the extent of the obligations
assumed by Brunei Darussalam throughout this Convention. Moreover, in accordance with
article 27 of [the] Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, it is the duty of States
Parties to a treaty to ensure that their internal law allows the application and observance
of the treaty.
From that perspective, the Government of Romania remarks that the reservation is contrary
to the terms of article 4, paragraph 1, letters a) and b) of the Convention, according
to which States Parties undertake ‘to adopt all appropriate legislative, administrative
and other measures for the implementation of the rights recognized in the present
Convention’ and ‘to take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to modify
or abolish existing laws, regulations, customs and practices that constitute discrimination
against persons with disabilities’.
Therefore, the Government of Romania objects to the reservation formulated by Brunei
Darussalam to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This objection
shall not affect the entry into force of the Convention between Romania and Brunei
Darussalam.
Objection United Kingdom, 10-04-2017
The United Kingdom Mission to the United Nations in New York […] wishes to lodge an
objection to the reservation made by Brunei upon accession to the Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The reservation is as follows:
Reservation
‘The Government of Brunei Darussalam expresses its reservation regarding those provisions
of the said Convention that may be contrary to the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam
and to the beliefs and principles of Islam, the official religion of Brunei Darussalam.’
The Government of the United Kingdom notes that a reservation which consists of a
general reference to a system of law without specifying its contents does not clearly
define for the other States Parties to the Convention the extent to which the reserving
State has accepted the obligations of the Convention. The Government of the United
Kingdom therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation.
Objection Belgium, 11-04-2017
The Kingdom of Belgium has carefully examined the reservation made by the Sultanate
of Brunei Darussalam upon ratification on 11 April 2016 of the Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities.
The Kingdom of Belgium considers that this reservation regarding the Convention on
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is as a whole incompatible with the object
and purpose of the said Convention.
This reservation effectively subordinates the application of all the provisions of
the Convention to their compatibility with the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam,
and to the beliefs and principles of Islam. The Kingdom of Belgium considers that
such a reservation seeks to limit the responsibilities of the Sultanate of Brunei
Darussalam under the Convention through a general reference to national law and Islam
without specifying its contents.
This results in uncertainty about the extent of the commitment of the Sultanate of
Brunei Darussalam to the object and purpose of the Convention.
Belgium recalls that, under article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities, reservations incompatible with the object and purpose
of the Convention are not permitted. Consequently, Belgium objects to the reservation
formulated by the Sultanate of Brunei Darussalam concerning all the provisions of
the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
Belgium specifies that this objection does not constitute an impediment to the entry
into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Belgium and the Sultanate of Brunei
Darussalam.
Objection Germany, 12-04-2017
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has carefully examined the reservation
made by Brunei Darussalam upon its ratification of the Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities of 13 December 2006.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is of the opinion that by excluding
the application of those provisions of the Convention which may be incompatible with
Brunei Darussalam’s Constitution and beliefs and principles of Islam, Brunei Darussalam
has in fact made a reservation that raises doubts as to the extent of its commitment
to fulfil its obligations under the Convention.
The Federal Republic of Germany objects to this reservation as being incompatible
with the object and purpose of the Convention and thus impermissible according to
Article 46 (1) of the Convention.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Federal Republic of Germany and Brunei Darussalam.
Objection Netherlands, the Kingdom of the, 13-04-2017
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands has carefully examined the reservation
made by Brunei Darussalam upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands notes that Brunei expressed 'its
reservation regarding those provisions of the Convention that may be contrary to the
Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and to the beliefs and principles of Islam, the
official religion of Brunei Darussalam'.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that such a reservation,
which seeks to limit the responsibilities of the reserving State under the Convention
by invoking provisions of its domestic law and/or religious beliefs and principles,
is likely to deprive the provisions of the Convention of their effect and therefore
must be regarded as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands recalls that according to customary
international law, as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, reservations
incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to the reservation
of Brunei Darussalam to the Convention.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Kingdom of the Netherlands and Brunei Darussalam.
Objection Hungary, 13-04-2017
The Government of Hungary has examined the Reservation of the Government of Brunei
Darussalam to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities at the time
of its ratification of the Convention.
The Government of Hungary considers that by referring to the Constitution of Brunei
Darussalam and to the beliefs and principles of Islam Brunei Darussalam has made a
reservation of a general and indeterminate scope which leaves it unclear to what extent
it feels bound by the obligations of the Convention.
Therefore, the Government of Hungary considers the reservation to be incompatible
with the object and purpose of the Convention.
The Government of Hungary recalls that according to customary international law as
codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation incompatible
with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted.
The Government of Hungary therefore objects to the aforesaid Reservation made by the
Government of Brunei Darussalam to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention
between Hungary and Brunei Darussalam.
Objection Peru, 17-04-2017
The Government of the Republic of Peru has examined the contents of the reservation
made by the Government of Brunei Darussalam to the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities, adopted in New York on 13 December 2006.
In this regard, the Government of the Republic of Peru considers that the reservation
made by the State of Brunei Darussalam may be incompatible with the object and purpose
of the Convention insofar as, by making compliance with the provisions of the Convention
subject to their conformity with the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and the beliefs
and principles of Islam, it creates ambiguity with regard to the State’s commitments
under the provisions of the Convention.
Furthermore, the reservation made by the Government of Brunei Darussalam is unacceptable
under public international law, as pursuant to article 27 of the 1969 Vienna Convention
on the Law of Treaties a State party may not invoke the provisions of its internal
law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.
In light of the foregoing, the Government of the Republic of Peru objects to the reservation
made by the Government of Brunei Darussalam.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Republic of Peru and the Government of Brunei Darussalam, without the State of Brunei
Darussalam benefitting from the aforementioned reservation.
Objection Norway, 17-04-2017
The Government of Norway has examined the contents of the reservation made by Brunei
Darussalam on 18 April 2016 in relation to the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities of 13 December 2006 in which ‘[t]he Government of Brunei Darussalam
expresses its reservation regarding those provisions of the said Convention that may
be contrary to the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and to the beliefs and principles
of Islam, the official religion of Brunei Darussalam’.
By declaring itself not bound by an essential provision of the Convention and invoking
general reference to the national Constitution and religious law without further description
of its content, Brunei Darussalam exempts the other States Parties to the Convention
from the possibility of assessing the full effects of the reservation. The Government
of Norway is of the view that the reservation casts doubts as to the full commitment
of the Government of Brunei Darussalam to the object and purpose of the Convention.
Furthermore, such a reservation may 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 are respected, as to their object and purpose, by all Parties. The
Government of Norway therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Kingdom of Norway and Brunei Darussalam. The Convention thus becomes operative between
the Kingdom of Norway [and Brunei Darussalam], without Brunei Darussalam benefitting
from its aforementioned reservation.
Objection Italy, 24-04-2017
The Government of the Italian Republic welcomes the ratification by Brunei Darussalam
on April 11, 2016 to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The Government of the Italian Republic has carefully examined the reservation made
by Brunei Darussalam on April 11, 2016 to the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities.
The Italian Republic considers that the reservation made by Brunei Darussalam regarding
those provisions of the Convention that may be contrary to the Constitution of Brunei
Darussalam and to the beliefs and principles of Islam is incompatible with the object
and purpose of the Convention and therefore objects to it.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Brunei
Darussalam and the Italian Republic.
Objection Latvia, 28-04-2017
The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the reservation made
by the Sultanate of Brunei Darussalam upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities.
The Republic of Latvia considers that this reservation consists of a general reference
to a system of law without specifying its contents and therefore does not clearly
define the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations of the
Convention.
Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that the reservation
made by the Sultanate of Brunei Darussalam seeks to limit the responsibilities of
the reserving State under the Convention and is likely to deprive the provisions of
the Convention of their effect and, hence, must be regarded as incompatible with the
object and purpose of the Convention. Furthermore, under Article 46, paragraph 1 of
the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, reservations incompatible
with the object and purpose of the Convention are not permitted.
Consequently, the Government of the Republic of Latvia objects to the reservation
made by the Sultanate of Brunei Darussalam concerning the Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force
of the Convention, in its entirety, between the Republic of Latvia and the Sultanate
of Brunei Darussalam.
Objection Ireland, 20-03-2018
Ireland has examined the reservation made by Brunei Darussalam to the Convention on
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities at the time of its ratification on 11 April
2016.
Ireland notes that Brunei Darussalam subjects application of the Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities to the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and to
the beliefs and principles of Islam. Ireland is of the view that a reservation which
consists of a general reference to the Constitution of the reserving State and to
religious law and which does not clearly specify the provisions of the Convention
to which it applies and the extent of the derogation therefrom, may cast doubts on
the commitment of the reserving State to fulfil its obligations under the Convention.
Ireland is furthermore of the view that such a general reservation may undermine the
basis of international treaty law and is incompatible with the object and purpose
of the Convention. Ireland recalls that according to Article 46, paragraph l of the
Convention, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention
shall not be permitted.
Ireland therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation made by Brunei Darussalam to
the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Ireland
and Brunei Darussalam.
Canada
11-03-2010
Canada recognises that persons with disabilities are presumed to have legal capacity
on an equal basis with others in all aspects of their lives. Canada declares its understanding
that Article 12 permits supported and substitute decision-making arrangements in appropriate
circumstances and in accordance with the law.
To the extent Article 12 may be interpreted as requiring the elimination of all substitute
decision-making arrangements, Canada reserves the right to continue their use in appropriate
circumstances and subject to appropriate and effective safeguards. With respect to
Article 12 (4), Canada reserves the right not to subject all such measures to regular
review by an independent authority, where such measures are already subject to review
or appeal.
Canada interprets Article 33 (2) as accommodating the situation of federal states
where the implementation of the Convention will occur at more than one level of government
and through a variety of mechanisms, including existing ones.
14-05-2014
The Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations presents its compliments to
the Secretary-General of the United Nations and has the honour to refer to the Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and the Secretary-General's communication
of 9 April 2014, numbered C.N.186.2014.TREATIES-IV.15, relating to that treaty.
The Permanent Mission of Canada notes that this communication was made pursuant to
the Secretary General's capacity as Depositary for the Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities. The Permanent Mission of Canada notes the technical and
administrative role of the Depositary, and that it is for States Parties to a treaty,
not the Depositary, to make their own determination with respect to any legal issues
raised by instruments circulated by a depositary.
In that context, the Permanent Mission of Canada notes that 'Palestine' does not meet
the criteria of a state under international law and is not recognized by Canada as
a state. Therefore, in order to avoid confusion, the Permanent Mission of Canada wishes
to note its position that in the context of the purported Palestinian accession to
the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 'Palestine' is not able
to accede to this convention, and that the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities does not enter into force, or have an effect on Canada's treaty relations,
with respect to the 'State of Palestine'.
China
01-08-2008
The application of the provisions regarding liberty of movement and nationality of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China, shall not change the validity of relevant laws on immigration control and nationality application of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China.
Cyprus
27-06-2011
Whereas the Persons with Disabilities Law, as this has been harmonized with the Council
Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal
treatment in employment and occupation, prescribes in section 3A thereof that the
said Law shall not apply as regards employment:
(a) to the armed forces, to the extent that the nature of the work requires special
abilities which cannot be exercised by persons with disabilities, and
(b) to occupational activities where by reason of the nature or the context in which
they are carried out, a characteristic or an ability which is not possessed by a person
with a disability, constitutes a genuine and determining occupational requirement,
provided that the objective is legitimate and the requirement is proportionate, taking
into account the possibility of adopting reasonable measures,.
the Republic of Cyprus declares that it ratifies the Convention with a reservation
in respect of Article 27(1) of the Convention, to the extent that the provisions thereof
are in conflict with the provisions of section 3A of the Persons with Disabilities
Law.
Egypt
04-04-2007
The Arab Republic of Egypt declares that its interpretation of article 12 of the International Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which deals with the recognition of persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others before the law, with regard to the concept of legal capacity dealt with in paragraph 2 of the said article, is that persons with disabilities enjoy the capacity to acquire rights and assume legal responsibility ("ahliyyat al-wujub) but not the capacity to perform ("ahliyyat al-'ada'), under Egyptian law.
El Salvador
14-12-2007
The Government of the Republic of El Salvador signs the present Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Optional Protocol thereto, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 13 December 2006, to the extent that its provisions do not prejudice or violate the provisions of any of the precepts, principles and norms enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of El Salvador, particularly in its enumeration of principles.
Objection Austria, 26-09-2008
The Government of Austria has examined the reservation to the Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities and Optional Protocol thereto made by the Government
of El Salvador.
According to its reservation, El Salvador envisages becoming Party to the Convention
only to the extent that its provisions do not prejudice or violate the provisions
of any of the precepts, principles and norms enshrined in the Constitution of the
Republic of El Salvador, particularly in its enumeration of principles. In the absence
of further clarification, this reservation does not clearly specify the extent of
El Salvador’s derogation from the provisions of the Convention. This general and vague
wording of the reservation raises doubts as to the degree of commitment assumed by
El Salvador in becoming a party to the Convention and is therefore incompatible with
international law.
The Government of Austria objects to the reservation made by the Government of the
Republic of El Salvador to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
and Optional Protocol thereto.
This objection, however, does not preclude the entry into force, in its entirety,
of the Convention between Austria and El Salvador.
Objection Netherlands, the Kingdom of the, 22-01-2009
The Government of Kingdom of the Netherlands has carefully examined the reservation
made by the Government of the Republic of El Salvador upon signature and confirmed
upon ratification to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, done
at New York on 13 December 200[6].
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that with this reservation
the application of the Convention is made subject to the constitutional law in force
in the Republic of El Salvador. This makes it unclear to what extent the Republic
of El Salvador considers itself bound by the obligations of the Convention.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that such a reservation
must be regarded as incompatible with the object and purpose of the said instrument
and would recall that, according to Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention, a reservation
incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to the reservation
made by the Government of the Republic of El Salvador to the Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities.
It is the understanding of the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands that the
reservation of the Government of the Republic of El Salvador does not exclude or modify
the legal effect of the provisions of the Convention in their application to the Republic
of El Salvador.
This objection does not constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention
between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Republic of El Salvador.
Objection Sweden, 23-01-2009
...the Government of Sweden has examined the reservation made by the Government of
the Republic of El Salvador upon ratifying the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities.
According to international customary law, as codified in the Vienna Convention on
the Law of Treaties, reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty
shall not be permitted. It is in the common interest of all 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 Sweden notes that El Salvador in its reservation gives precedence
to its Constitution over the Convention. The Government of Sweden is of the view that
such a reservation, which does not clearly specify the extent of the derogation, raises
serious doubt as to the commitment of El Salvador to the object and purpose of the
Convention.
The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the
Government of the Republic of El Salvador to the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities and considers the reservation null and void. This objection shall
not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between El Salvador and Sweden.
The Convention enters into force in its entirety between El Salvador and Sweden, without
El Salvador benefiting from its reservation.
Objection Portugal, 23-09-2009
The Government of the Portuguese Republic has carefully examined the reservation made
by the Government of the Republic of El Salvador upon signature and confirmed upon
ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, done at
New York, on the 13th December 2006.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that with this reservation the
application of the Convention is made subject to the constitutional law in force in
the Republic of El Salvador. This makes it unclear to what extent the Republic of
El Salvador considers itself bound by the obligations of
the Convention.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that such a reservation must be
regarded as incompatible with the object and purpose of the said instrument and would
recall that, according to Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention, a reservation
incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic therefore objects to the reservation made
by the Government of the Republic of El Salvador to the Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities.
This objection does not constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention
between the Portuguese Republic and the Republic of El Salvador.
Objection Czech Republic, 30-11-2009
The Czech Republic has examined the reservation made by the Republic of El Salvador
upon its signature and confirmed upon its ratification of the Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities.
The Czech Republic notes that the reservation makes unclear to what extent the Republic
of El Salvador considers itself bound by the obligations of the Convention, as the
Republic of El Salvador subjects the Convention by this reservation to "the provisions
of any of the precepts, principles and norms enshrined in the Constitution of the
Republic of El Salvador".
The Czech Republic considers that this reservation is incompatible with the object
and purpose of the Convention and, according to Article 46 paragraph 1 of the Convention
and according to customary international law as codified in the Vienna Convention
on the Law of Treaties, such reservation shall not be permitted.
The Czech Republic, therefore, objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Republic
of El Salvador to the Convention. This objection shall not preclude the entry into
force of the Convention between the Czech Republic and the Republic of El Salvador,
without the Republic of El Salvador benefiting from its reservation.
Objection Germany, 28-01-2010
Communication relating to the declaration made by the Republic of El Salvador upon
signature and confirmed upon ratification.
The Federal Republic of Germany has carefully examined the aforementioned reservation.
The Federal Republic of Germany is of the opinion that reservations which consist
in a general reference to a system of norms (like the constitution or the legal order
of the reserving State) without specifying the contents thereof leave it uncertain
to which extent that State accepts to be bound by the obligations under the treaty.
Moreover, those norms may be subject to changes.
The reservation made by the Republic of El Salvador is therefore not sufficiently
precise to make it possible to determine the restrictions that are introduced into
the agreement.
The Federal Republic of Germany is therefore of the opinion that the reservation is
incompatible with object and purpose of the Convention and the Protocol and would
like to recall that, according to Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention, and Article
14, paragraph 1 of the Protocol, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose
of the Convention shall not be permitted.
The Federal Republic of Germany therefore objects to the above-mentioned reservation.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention and the Protocol
between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Republic of El Salvador.
Objection Slovakia, 28-09-2010
The Slovak Republic has examined the reservation made by the Republic of El Salvador
upon its signature and confirmed upon its ratification of the Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities, according to which:
'The Government of the Republic of El Salvador signs the present Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Optional Protocol thereto, adopted by
the United Nations General Assembly on 13 December 2006, to the extent that its provisions
do not prejudice or violate the provisions of any of the precepts, principles and
norms enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of El Salvador, particularly in
its enumeration of principles.'
The Slovak Republic notes that the reservation makes unclear to what extent the Republic
of El Salvador considers itself bound by the obligations of the Convention, as the
Republic of El Salvador subjects the Convention by this reservation to 'the provisions
of any of the precepts, principles and norms enshrined in the Constitution of the
Republic of El Salvador'.
The Slovak Republic considers that this reservation is incompatible with the object
and purpose of the Convention and, according to Article 46 paragraph 1 of the Convention
and according to customary international law as codified in the Vienna Convention
on the Law of Treaties; such reservation shall not be permitted.
The Slovak Republic, therefore, objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Republic
of El Salvador to the Convention. This objection shall not preclude the entry into
force of the Convention between the Slovak Republic and the Republic of El Salvador,
without the Republic of El Salvador
benefiting from its reservation.
Objection Switzerland, 15-04-2014
With respect to the reservation by the Republic of El Salvador made upon signature
and confirmed upon ratification:
The Swiss Federal Council has examined the reservation made by the Government of the
Republic of El Salvador upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities.
The Swiss Federal Council believes that the reservation made gives precedence to the
Constitution of the Republic of El Salvador over the Convention. The Swiss Federal
Council is of the view that the reservation does not clearly specify the extent of
the derogation. Accordingly, the reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose
of the Convention and is not permissible under article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
It is in the common interest of States that the object and purpose of the instruments
to which they choose to become parties be respected by all parties thereto, and that
States be prepared to amend their legislation in order to fulfil their treaty obligations.
The Swiss Federal Council objects to the reservation of the Republic of El Salvador.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention, in its entirety,
between the Republic of El Salvador and Switzerland.
18-03-2015
Withdrawal of reservation made upon ratification
Estonia
30-05-2012
The Republic of Estonia interprets article 12 of the Convention as it does not forbid to restrict a person's active legal capacity, when such need arises from the person's ability to understand and direct his or her actions. In restricting the rights of the persons with restricted active legal capacity the Republic of Estonia acts according to its domestic laws.
EU (European Union)
23-12-2010
The European Community states that pursuant to Community law (notably Council Directive
2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment
in employment and occupation), the Member States may, if appropriate, enter their
own reservations to Article 27(1) of the Disabilities Convention to the extent that
Article 3(4) of the said Council Directive provides them with the right to exclude
non-discrimination on the grounds of disability with respect to employment in the
armed forces from the scope of the Directive. Therefore, the Community states that
it concludes the Convention without prejudice to the above right, conferred on its
Member States by virtue of Community law.
Article 44(1) of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(hereinafter referred to as the 'Convention') provides that a regional integration
organisation in its instrument of formal confirmation or accession is to declare the
extent of its competence with respect to matters governed by the Convention.
The current members of the European Community are the Kingdom of Belgium, the Republic
of Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany,
the Republic of Estonia, the Hellenic Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic,
Ireland, the Italian Republic, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the
Republic of Lithuania, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Republic of Hungary, the
Republic of Malta, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Republic of Austria, the Republic
of Poland, the Portuguese Republic, Romania, the Republic of Slovenia, the Slovak
Republic, the Republic of Finland, the Kingdom of Sweden and the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
The European Community notes that for the purpose of the Convention, the term 'State
Parties' applies to regional integration organisations within the limits of their
competence.
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities shall apply,
with regard to the competence of the European Community, to the territories in which
the Treaty establishing the European Community is applied and under the conditions
laid down in that Treaty, in particular Article 299 thereof.
Pursuant to Article 299, this Declaration is not applicable to the territories of
the Member States in which the said Treaty does not apply and is without prejudice
to such act or positions as may be adopted under the Convention by Member States concerned
on behalf and in the interests of those territories.
In accordance with Article 44(1) of the Convention, this Declaration indicates the
competences transferred to the Community by the Member States under the Treaty establishing
the European Community, in the areas covered by the Convention.
The scope and the exercise of Community competence are, by their nature, subject to
continuous development and the Community will complete or amend this Declaration,
if necessary, in accordance with Article 44(1) of the Convention.
In some matters the European Community has exclusive competence and in other matters
competence is shared between the European Community and the Member States. The Member
States remain competent for all matters in respect of which no competence has been
transferred to the European Community.
At present:
1. The Community has exclusive competence as regards the compatibility of state aid
with the common market and the common custom tariff.
To the extent that provisions of Community law are affected by the provision of the
Convention, the European Community has an exclusive competence to accept such obligations
with respect to its own public administration. In this regard, the Community declares
that it has power to deal with regulating the recruitment, conditions of service,
remuneration, training etc. of non-elected officials under the Staff Regulations and
the implementing rules to those Regulations. 1)
2. The Community shares competence with Member States as regards action to combat
discrimination on the ground of disability, free movement of goods, persons, services
and capital agriculture, transport by rail, road, sea and air transport, taxation,
internal market, equal pay for male and female workers, Trans-European network policy
and statistics.
The European Community has exclusive competence to enter into this Convention in respect
of those matters only to the extent that provisions of the Convention or legal instruments
adopted in implementation thereof affect common rules previously established by the
European Community. When Community rules exist but are not affected, in particular
in cases of Community provisions establishing only minimum standards, the Member States
have competence, without prejudice to the competence of the European Community to
act in this field. Otherwise competence rests with the Member States. A list of relevant
acts adopted by the European Community appears in the Appendix hereto 2). The extent
of the European Community's competence ensuing from these acts must be assessed by
reference to the precise provisions of each measure, and in particular, the extent
to which these provisions establish common rules.
3. The following EC policies may also be relevant to the UN Convention: Member States
and the Community shall work towards developing a coordinated strategy for employment.
The Community shall contribute to the development of quality of education by encouraging
cooperation between Member States and, if necessary, by supporting and supplementing
their action. The Community shall implement a vocational training policy which shall
support and supplement the action of the Member States. In order to promote its overall
harmonious development, the Community shall develop and pursue its actions leading
to the strengthening of its economic and social cohesion. The Community conducts a
development cooperation policy and economic, financial and technical cooperation with
third countries without prejudice to the respective competences of the Member States.
_______________
1) Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 of 29 February 1968 laying down
the Staff Regulations of officials of the European Communities and the Conditions
of Employment of other servants of the European Communities (OJ L 56, 4.3.1968, p.
1).
2) Depository Notification C.N. 860.2010.
France
18-02-2010
The French Republic declares that it will interpret the term "consent" in article
15 of the Convention in conformity with international instruments, in particular those
that relate to human rights and biomedicine, and with national legislation, which
is in line with these instruments. This means that, as far as biomedical research
is concerned, the term "consent" applies to two different situations:
1. Consent given by a person who is able to consent, and
2. In the case of persons who are not able to give their consent, permission given
by their representative or an authority or body provided for by law.
The French Republic considers it important that persons who are unable to give their
free and informed consent receive specific protection, without prejudice to all medical
research of benefit to them. In addition to the permission referred to under paragraph
2 above, other protective measures, such as those included in the above-mentioned
international instruments, are considered to be part of this protection.
With regard to article 29 of the Convention, the exercise of the right to vote is
a component of legal capacity that may not be restricted except in the conditions
and in accordance with the modalities provided for in article 12 of the Convention.
Georgia
13-03-2014
Georgia interprets article 12 of the Convention in conjunction with respective provisions of other international human rights instruments and its domestic law and will therefore interpret its provisions in a way conferring the highest legal protection for safeguarding dignity, physical, psychological and emotional integrity of persons and ensuring integrity of their property.
Greece
31-05-2012
The provisions of Article 27 paragraph 1 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities shall not apply with respect to employment and occupation in the armed and security forces in so far as it relates to a difference of treatment on grounds of disability concerning the service thereto, as provided in Article 8 paragraph 4 of the Law 3304/2005 for the implementation of the principle of equal treatment, adopted pursuant to Articles 3 paragraph 4 and 4 of the Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation.
Guatemala
07-04-2009
In accordance with article 33 of the Convention and by Decree No. 78-2009, it has been agreed to designate the National Council for te care of Persons with Disabilties (CONADI) as the government agency responsible for addressing issues relating to compliance with and implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and for producing the reports required under that Convention.
Iran
23-10-2009
... with regard to Article 46, the Islamic Republic of Iran declares that it does not consider itself bound by any provisions of the Convention, which may be incompatible with its applicable rules.
Objection France, 30-03-2010
The Government of the French Republic has examined the declaration made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran upon its adherence to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 13 December 2006. The Government of the French Republic considers that, in aiming to exclude the application of those provisions of the Convention that are deemed incompatible with Iranian laws, the Islamic Republic of Iran has in effect made a reservation of general and indeterminate scope. This reservation is vague, failing to specify the relevant provisions of the Convention or the domestic laws to which the Islamic Republic of Iran wishes to give preference. Consequently, it does not allow other States parties to know the extent of the commitment of the Islamic Republic of Iran and could render the Convention ineffective. The Government of the French Republic considers that this reservation runs counter to the purpose and goals of the Convention and raises an objection to it. This objection does not prevent the entry into force of the Convention between the Islamic Republic of Iran and France.
Objection Belgium, 28-06-2010
Belgium has examined the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran when it
acceded to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The vagueness
and general nature of the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran, which
does not feel itself bound by any of the provisions of the Convention that are deemed
potentially incompatible with Iranian laws, leaves open the extent of the commitment
of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Convention and therefore raises serious doubts
about its commitment to fulfill its obligations under the Convention. Reservations
of such unspecified nature may contribute to undermining the bases of international
human rights treaties.
This reservation should therefore be considered as being incompatible with the object
and purpose of the Convention. Belgium recalls that under article 19 (c) of the Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation incompatible with the object and
purpose of a treaty is not permitted. This objection shall not preclude the entry
into force of the Convention between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Belgium.
Objection Czech Republic, 28-07-2010
The Czech Republic has examined the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran
upon its accession to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (hereinafter
the 'Convention') on October 23, 2009.
The Czech Republic points out that the title of a statement intended to modify or
exclude the legal effects of certain provisions of a treaty does not alone determine
the status of such statement as a reservation or declaration. The Czech Republic is
of the opinion that the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran constitutes,
in fact, a reservation.
The Czech Republic finds that the reservation does not make it clear to what extent
the Islamic Republic of Iran is willing to honour its obligations under the Convention,
since 'it does not consider itself bound by any provisions of the Convention which
may be incompatible with its applicable rules'.
The Czech Republic believes that this reservation is incompatible with the object
and purpose of the Convention. According to Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention
and customary international law codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties,
such reservations should 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 Czech Republic, therefore, objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Islamic
Republic of Iran and considers the reservation null and void. This objection shall
not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Czech Republic and
the Islamic Republic of Iran, without the Islamic Republic of Iran benefiting from
its reservation.
Objection Mexico, 22-10-2010
Having examined the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran with respect
to the Convention, the United Mexican States has concluded that the declaration is,
in fact, a reservation. This reservation, which aims to exclude the legal effects
of certain provisions of the Convention, is incompatible with the object and purpose
of that instrument. Indeed, the declaration is worded in such a way that it could
hinder the realization of normative provisions of the Convention, including those
of articles 4 and 1, and thus is in breach of article 46 of the Convention and article
19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. It should be noted that article
27 of the Vienna Convention codified the principle of international law whereby a
party may not invoke the provisions of its domestic law as justification for its failure
to comply with a treaty. The claim that domestic laws take precedence over the provisions
of treaties that are in force for the Parties is therefore inadmissible.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Islamic Republic of Iran and the United Mexican States.
Objection Latvia, 22-10-2010
The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the declaration made
by the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Convention.
The Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that the declaration contains general
reference to national law, making any provision of the Convention subject to the national
law of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia is of the opinion that the declaration
is in fact a unilateral act deemed to limit the scope of application of the Convention
and therefore, it shall be regarded as a reservation.
Moreover, the Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that the reservation
named as a declaration does not make it clear to what extent the Islamic Republic
of Iran considers itself bound by the provisions of the Convention and whether the
manner of application of the rights prescribed by the Convention are in line with
the object and purpose of the Convention.
Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia recalls that the provisions of
Article 46 of the Convention set out that the reservations that are incompatible with
object and purpose of the Convention are not permitted.
Consequently, the Government of the Republic of Latvia therefore objects to the aforesaid
reservations made by the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Convention.
However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention
between the Republic of Latvia and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Thus, the International
Covenant will become operative without the Islamic Republic of Iran benefiting from
its reservation.
Objection Germany, 01-11-2010
The Federal Republic of Germany has carefully examined the declaration made by the
Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran upon its accession to the Convention on
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 13 December 2006.
The Federal Republic of Germany is of the opinion that by excluding the application
of those provisions of the Convention which may be incompatible with applicable national
rules the Islamic Republic of Iran in fact has made a reservation which leaves it
unclear to what extent the Islamic Republic of Iran accepts being bound by the obligations
under the Convention.
The Federal Republic of Germany objects to this reservation as being incompatible
with the object and purpose of the Convention and thus impermissible according to
Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Federal Republic of Germany and the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Objection Austria, 01-11-2010
The Government of Austria has examined the declaration made by the Government of the
Islamic Republic of Iran upon its accession to the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities of 13 December 2006.
The Government of Austria considers that in aiming to exclude the application of those
provisions of the Convention which are deemed incompatible with applicable national
rules, the Islamic Republic of Iran has made a reservation of general and indeterminate
scope. This reservation does not clearly define for the other States Parties to the
Convention the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations of
the Convention.
The Government of Austria therefore considers the reservation of the Islamic Republic
of Iran incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and objects to
it.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Austria
and the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Objection Portugal, 02-11-2010
The Government of the Portuguese Republic has examined the reservation made by the
Islamic Republic of Iran on 23 October 2009 upon accession to the Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that the reservation subjects
the Convention’s application to domestic law, which is incompatible with the object
and purpose of the Convention, insofar as it disregards the fundamental principles
of International Law and the principles that shape the core of the Convention.
According to International Law, a reservation which is incompatible with the object
and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic therefore objects to the reservation made
by the Islamic Republic of Iran on 23 October 2009 upon accession to the Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities between the Portuguese Republic and the Islamic Republic
of Iran.
Objection Slovakia, 04-11-2010
The Slovak Republic has examined the interpretative declaration made by the Islamic
Republic of Iran upon its accession to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities on 23 October 2009 according to which:
'... with regard to Article 46, the Islamic Republic of Iran declares that it does
not consider itself bound by any provisions of the Convention which may be incompatible
with its applicable rules.'
The Slovak Republic believes that the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of
Iran constitutes in fact a reservation to the Convention.
The Slovak Republic notes that this reservation makes it unclear to what extent the
Islamic Republic of Iran is willing to fulfil its obligations under the Convention,
since 'it does not consider itself bound by any provisions of the Constitution which
may be incompatible with its applicable rules.'
According to Article 46 paragraph 1 of the Convention and according to customary international
law as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation that
is incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted.
The Slovak Republic, therefore, objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Islamic
Republic of Iran to the Convention. This objection shall not preclude the entry into
force of the Convention between the Slovak Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran,
without the Islamic Republic of Iran benefiting from its reservation.
Objection Switzerland, 15-04-2014
With regard to the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon accession:
The Swiss Federal Council has examined the declaration made by the Government of the
Islamic Republic of Iran upon accession to the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities.
The Swiss Federal Council recalls that irrespective of the label given to it, a declaration
constitutes a reservation if it excludes or modifies the legal effect of certain provisions
of the treaty to which it relates. The Swiss Federal Council is of the opinion that,
in substance, the declaration of the Islamic Republic of Iran constitutes a reservation
to the Convention.
The Swiss Federal Council believes that the reservation formulated gives precedence
to the rules of the Islamic Republic of Iran over the Convention. The Swiss Federal
Council is of the view that this reservation does not clearly specify the extent of
the derogation, in that it does not specify either the provisions of the Convention
concerned or the rules of domestic law which the Islamic Republic of Iran intends
to favour. Accordingly, the reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose
of the Convention and is not permissible under article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
It is in the common interest of States that the object and purpose of the instruments
to which they choose to become parties be respected by all parties thereto, and that
States be prepared to amend their legislation in order to fulfil their treaty obligations.
The Swiss Federal Council objects to the reservation of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention, in its entirety,
between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Switzerland.
Objection Netherlands, the Kingdom of the, 14-06-2016
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands has carefully examined the declaration
made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran upon accession to the Convention
on the rights of persons with disabilities.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the declaration made
by the Islamic Republic of Iran in substance constitutes a reservation limiting the
scope of the Convention.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands notes that the reservation, according
to which "... with regard to Article 46, the Islamic Republic of Iran declares that
it does not consider itself bound by any provisions of the Convention, which may be
incompatible with its applicable rules", implies that the application of the Convention
is made subject to a general reservation referring to national legislation in force
in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that such a reservation
must be regarded as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and
would recall that, in accordance with Article 46 of the Convention, reservations incompatible
with its object and purpose shall not be permitted.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to the reservation
made by the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Convention on the rights of persons with
disabilities.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands recalls that according to article
[46], paragraph [2] of the Convention, a reservation incompatible with the object
and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted. The Government of the Kingdom
of the Netherlands therefore objects to these reservations.
Objection Ireland, 20-03-2018
Ireland has examined the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities at the time of its accession on 23 October
2009.
Ireland is of the view that the declaration of the Islamic Republic of Iran in substance
constitutes a reservation limiting the scope of the Convention.
Ireland notes that the Islamic Republic of Iran subjects application of the Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to its applicable rules. Ireland is of
the view that a reservation which consists of a general reference to the applicable
domestic law of the reserving State and which does not clearly specify the provisions
of the Convention to which it applies and the extent of the derogation therefrom,
may cast doubts on the commitment of the reserving State to fulfil its obligations
under the Convention. Ireland is furthermore of the view that such a general reservation
may undermine the basis of international treaty law and is incompatible with the object
and purpose of the Convention. Ireland recalls that according to Article 46, paragraph
1 of the Convention, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the
Convention shall not be permitted.
Ireland therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Islamic Republic
of Iran to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Ireland
and Islamic Republic of Iran.
Ireland
20-03-2018
Article 27 (1)
Ireland accepts the provisions of the Convention, subject to the understanding that
none of its obligations relating to equal treatment in employment and occupation shall
apply to the admission into or service in any of the Defence Forces, An Garda Síochána
(Ireland’s National Police Service), the Prison Service, the Fire Brigade, the Irish
Coastguard and the Ambulance Service.
Article 12
Ireland recognises that persons with disabilities enjoy legal capacity on an equal
basis with others in all aspects of life. Ireland declares its understanding that
the Convention permits supported and substitute decision-making arrangements which
provide for decisions to be made on behalf of a person, where such arrangements are
necessary, in accordance with the law, and subject to appropriate and effective safeguards.
To the extent article 12 may be interpreted as requiring the elimination of all substitute
decision making arrangements, Ireland reserves the right to permit such arrangements
in appropriate circumstances and subject to appropriate and effective safeguards.
Articles 12 and 14
Ireland recognises that all persons with disabilities enjoy the right to liberty and
security of person, and a right to respect for physical and mental integrity on an
equal basis with others. Furthermore, Ireland declares its understanding that the
Convention allows for compulsory care or treatment of persons, including measures
to treat mental disorders, when circumstances render treatment of this kind necessary
as a last resort, and the treatment is subject to legal safeguards.
Israel
28-09-2012
The State of Israel expresses its reservation with regard to the provisions concerning marriage in Article 23 (1) (a) of the Convention, to the extent that the laws on personal status, which are binding on the various religious communities in Israel, do not conform with these provisions.
16-05-2014
The Permanent Mission of Israel to the United Nations presents its compliments to
the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his capacity as depositary to the
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and refers to the communication
by the depositary, dated 9 April 2014, regarding the Palestinian request to accede
to this Convention (Reference number CN.186.2014.TREATIESIV.15).
'Palestine' does not satisfy the criteria for statehood under international law and
lacks the legal capacity to join the aforesaid convention both under general international
law and the terms of bilateral Israeli-Palestinian agreements.
The Government of Israel does not recognize 'Palestine' as a State, and wishes to
place on record, for the sake of clarity, its position that it does not consider 'Palestine'
a party to the Convention and regards the Palestinian request for accession as being
without legal validity and without effect upon Israel's treaty relations under the
Convention.
Japan
20-01-2014
The Government of Japan declares that paragraph 4 of Article 23 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities be interpreted not to apply to a case where a child is separated from his or her parents as a result of deportation in accordance with its immigration law.
Kuwait
22-08-2013
Subject to reservations concerning the provisions of article 18, subparagraph 1(a),
and article 23, paragraph 2.
Article 12, paragraph 2: The enjoyment of legal capacity shall be subject to the conditions
applicable under Kuwaiti law.
Article 19, paragraph (a): This paragraph shall not be interpreted to permit illicit
relations outside legitimate marriage.
Article 25, paragraph (a): The care in question shall not imply recognition of illicit
relations outside legitimate marriage.
Libya
13-02-2018
[…] the State of Libya, having reviewed the above-mentioned Convention, ratifies the Convention and interprets article 25 (a) thereof, concerning the provision of health-care services without discrimination on the basis of disability, in a manner that does not contravene the Islamic sharia and national legislation […]
Objection Germany, 19-03-2018
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has carefully examined the reservation
made by Libya upon its ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities of 13 December 2006.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is of the opinion that by excluding
the application of those provisions of article 25 (a) of the Convention which may
be incompatible with national rules and beliefs and principles of Islam, Libya in
fact has made a reservation which raises doubts as to the extent of the Libya’s commitment
to fulfil its obligations under the Convention.
The Federal Republic of Germany objects this reservation as being incompatible with
the object and purpose of the Convention and thus impermissible according to Article
46, paragraph 1 of the Convention.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Federal Republic of Germany and Libya.
Objection Austria, 06-07-2018
The Government of Austria has examined the declaration made by the State of Libya
upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
Austria considers that by referring to its national legislation and to the Islamic
sharia, Libya has made a declaration of a general and indeterminate scope which amounts
to a reservation. This reservation does not clearly define for the other States Parties
to the Convention the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations
of the Convention.
Austria therefore considers the reservation to be incompatible with the object and
purpose of the Convention and objects to it.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Republic of Austria and the State of Libya. The Convention will thus become operative
between the two states without Libya benefitting from the aforementioned reservation.
Objection Poland, 30-10-2018
The Government of the Republic of Poland has carefully examined the declaration made
by Libya to the article 25 (a) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
done in New York on December 13, 2006, done upon its ratification on February 15,
2018.
The Government of the Republic of Poland considers that the declaration made by Libya
according to which article 25 (a) of the Convention will be interpreted in a manner
that does not contravene the Islamic Sharia and national legislation, is incompatible
with the object and purpose of the convention and therefore objects to it.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the convention between the
Republic of Poland and Libya.
Objection Finland, 29-11-2018
The Government of Finland is pleased to learn that the State of Libya has become party
to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. However, the Government
of Finland has carefully examined the declaration made by the State of Libya upon
ratification, and is of the view that it raises certain concerns. In fact, the declaration
amounts to a reservation that purports to subject the application of one of the Convention's
provisions to Islamic sharia and national legislation.
Reservation of such an indeterminate and general scope as that made by Libya is incompatible
with the object and purpose of the Convention and as such one that is not permitted.
This reservation does not clearly define for the other States Parties the extent to
which Libya has accepted the obligations of the Convention. Therefore Finland objects
to it.
This objection shall not preclude the continued validity of the Convention between
the Republic of Finland and the State of Libya. The Convention will thus continue
to operate between the two states without Libya benefitting from the aforementioned
reservation.
Objection Romania, 12-12-2018
Romania has examined the declaration made upon ratification by the Government of State
of Libya to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (New York, 2006).
Romania considers that the declaration aiming to interpret the article 25 (a) of the
Convention in the light of the Islamic sharia and national legislation qualifies it
as a reservation of undefined character, inadmissible under the Vienna Convention
on the Law of the Treaties. In accordance with article 27 of Vienna Convention on
the Law of Treaties, it is the duty of States Parties to a treaty to ensure that their
internal law allows the application and observance of the treaty.
From that perspective, Romania remarks that the reservation is contrary to the terms
of article 4, paragraph 1, letters a) and b) of the Convention, according to which
States Parties undertake “to adopt all appropriate legislative, administrative and
other measures for the implementation of the rights recognized in the present Convention”
and “to take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to modify or abolish
existing laws, regulations, customs and practices that constitute discrimination against
persons with disabilities”.
Moreover, the general nature of the reservations does not allow to analyze its compatibility
with the scope and purpose of the Convention as required by article 46 (1) of the
Convention and limits the understanding as to the extent of the obligations assumed
by State of Libya.
Objection Latvia, 05-02-2019
The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the declaration made
by Libya upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
In the view of the Government of the Republic of Latvia, declaration made by Libya
according to which Article 25 (a) of the Convention will be interpreted in a manner
that does not contravene the Islamic sharia and national legislation, amounts to a
reservation.
Moreover, a reservation which subordinates any provision of the Convention in general
to the Islamic sharia and national legislation constitutes a reservation of general
scope, which is likely to cast doubt on the full commitment of Libya to the object
and purpose of the Convention.
The reservation made by Libya seeks to limit the scope of the Convention on a unilateral
basis thus the reservation is incompatible with the object and the purpose of the
Convention and therefore inadmissible under Article 19(c) of the Vienna Convention
on the Law of Treaties. Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia objects
to this reservation.
However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention
between the Republic of Latvia and Libya. The Convention will thus become operative
between the two States without Libya benefitting from its declaration.
Objection Belgium, 06-02-2019
The Kingdom of Belgium has carefully examined the reservation made by the State of
Libya on the occasion of the ratification, on 13 February 2018, of the Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The Kingdom of Belgium considers that the reservation to article 25 (a) of the Convention
is incompatible with the object and purpose of the said Convention. This reservation
has the effect of subjecting the application of this provision of the Convention to
its compatibility with Islamic Sharia law and the laws of the State of Libya. The
Kingdom of Belgium considers that this reservation tends to limit the liability of
the State of Libya under the Convention through a general reference to national laws
and Islamic Sharia.
As a result, it is uncertain as to which extent the State of Libya commits to the
object and purpose of this provision.
The Kingdom of Belgium recalls that, under the first paragraph of article 46 of the
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, no reservation incompatible
with the object and purpose of the Convention concerned is permitted. Accordingly,
the Kingdom of Belgium objects to the reservation made by the State of Libya in respect
of article 25 (a) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
Belgium specifies that this objection does not preclude the entry into force of the
said Convention between the Kingdom of Belgium and the State of Libya.
Objection Netherlands, the Kingdom of the, 08-02-2019
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands has carefully examined the declaration
made by the State of Libya upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities on February 13, 2018.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the declaration made
by the State of Libya in substance constitutes a reservation limiting the scope of
article 25 paragraph a of the Convention by interpreting that provision ‘in a manner
that does not contravene the Islamic sharia and national legislation’.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that such a reservation,
which seeks to limit the responsibilities of the reserving State under the Convention
by invoking provisions of its domestic law and/or religious beliefs and principles,
is likely to deprive the provision of the Convention of its effect. Therefore, the
reservation must be regarded as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands recalls that in accordance with article
46 of the Convention, reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of the
Convention shall not be permitted.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to the reservation
of the State of Libya to the Convention.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Kingdom of the Netherlands and the State of Libya.
Objection Slovakia, 11-02-2019
The Government of Slovakia has carefully examined the content of the declaration made
by Libya upon its ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
Considering the exact wording of the declaration that does not clearly define the
extent to which Libya has accepted obligations under the Convention, Slovakia is of
the opinion that Libya has in fact made a reservation. This reservation is too general
and raises serious doubts as to the commitment of Libya to the object and the purpose
of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Government of Slovakia objects to the above mentioned reservation
made by Libya upon its ratification of the Convention.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Slovakia
and Libya. The Convention enters into force in its entirety between Slovakia and Libya
without Libya benefiting from its reservation.
Objection Ireland, 11-02-2019
Ireland welcomes the ratification by Libya of the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities on 13 February 2018.
Ireland has examined the declaration made by Libya to the Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities at the time of its ratification.
Ireland is of the view that the declaration of Libya, purporting to interpret Article
25 (a) in a manner that does not contravene the Islamic Sharia and its national legislation,
in substance constitutes a reservation limiting the scope of the Convention.
Ireland considers that this reservation which purports to subject the reserving State’s
obligations under the Convention to religious law and to national law without specifying
the content thereof and which does not clearly specify the extent of the derogation
from the provision of the Convention may cast doubt on the commitment of the reserving
State to fulfil its obligations under the Convention. Ireland is furthermore of the
view that such a reservation may undermine the basis of international treaty law and
is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. Ireland recalls that,
in accordance with Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention, a reservation incompatible
with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.
Ireland therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation made by Libya to Article 25
(a) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Ireland
and Libya.
Objection Norway, 12-02-2019
[…] the Government of the Kingdom of Norway has carefully examined the declaration
made by the Government of the State of Libya upon ratification of the Convention on
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The Government of the Kingdom of Norway is of the opinion that by declaring that Article
25 (a) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities will be interpreted
in a manner that does not contravene with Islamic sharia and its national legislation,
the Government of the State of Libya has made a declaration which amounts to a reservation
that raises doubts as to the full
commitment of the Government of the State of Libya to the object and purpose of the
Convention.
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. The
Government of Norway therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation. This objection
shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway
and the State of Libya. The Convention thus becomes operative between the two States,
without the State of Libya benefitting from its aforementioned reservation.
Objection Portugal, 12-02-2019
The Government of the Portuguese Republic has examined the declaration made by Libya
to Article 25 (a) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and
considers that it is in fact a reservation that seeks to limit the scope of the Convention
on a unilateral basis.
Moreover, the Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that reservations by
which a State limits its responsibilities under the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities by invoking the domestic law or/and religious beliefs and principles
raises doubts as to the commitment of the reserving State to the object and purpose
of the Convention, as such reservations are likely to deprive the provisions of the
Convention of their effect and are contrary to the object and purpose thereof.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic recalls that, according to customary international
law as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and in accordance
with Article 46 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, a reservation
incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic thus objects to this reservation.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Portuguese Republic and Libya.
Objection Mexico, 14-02-2019
After considering the declaration made by the State of Libya upon ratification of
the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities regarding article 25 (a),
the Government of the United States of Mexico has concluded that the said declaration
constitutes, in fact, a reservation.
This reservation subjects the application of the above article to Islamic law and
to national legislation, which is contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention
and violates article 46 (1) of the said international instrument as well as article
19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
State of Libya and the United States of Mexico. Consequently, the Convention shall
enter into force between the two States without the State of Libya benefiting from
the said reservation.
Objection Czech Republic, 14-02-2019
The Government of the Czech Republic has examined the declaration made by the State
of Libya with regard to article 25 (a) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities.
The Government of the Czech Republic is of the view that the declaration made by the
State of Libya is of general and vague nature and, therefore, its character and scope
cannot be properly assessed.
The declaration leaves open the question whether the State of Libya purports to exclude
or modify the legal effect of article 25 (a) of the Convention in its application
to the State of Libya, and, if so, to what extent the State of Libya commits itself
to the obligations under this article and the Convention as a whole.
Therefore, the Government of the Czech Republic recalls that reservations may not
be general or vague, since such reservations, without indicating in precise terms
their scope, make it impossible to assess whether or not they are compatible with
the object and purpose of the treaty.
Objection Sweden, 14-02-2019
The Government of Sweden has examined the declaration made by Libya at the time of
its ratification of the Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Libya
declared that it interprets article 25 (a) thereof, concerning the provision of health-care
services without discrimination on the basis of disability, in a manner that does
not contravene the Islamic sharia and national legislation.
In this context the Government of Sweden would like to recall, that under well-established
international treaty law, the name assigned to a statement whereby the legal effect
of certain provisions of a treaty is excluded or modified, does not determine its
status as a reservation to the treaty. Thus, the Government of Sweden considers that
the declaration made by the Government of Libya, in the absence of further clarification,
in substance constitutes a reservation to the Convention.
The Government of Sweden notes that the reservation would give precedence to Islamic
sharia and national legislation. The Government of Sweden is of the view that such
a reservation, which does not clearly specify the extent of the derogation, raises
doubt as to the commitment of Libya to the object and purpose of the Convention.
According to the paragraph 1 of article 46 of the Convention and to customary international
law, as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, reservations 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.
For this reason, the Government of Sweden objects to the aforementioned reservation
made by the Government of Libya. The Convention shall enter into force in its entirety
between the two States, without Libya benefitting from its reservation.
Objection Switzerland, 14-02-2019
The Swiss Federal Council has examined the declaration made by the State of Libya
upon the ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
of 13 December 2006.
The declaration, which subjects the provisions of article 25 (a) of the Convention
in general to the Islamic sharia and national legislation amounts to a reservation
of general scope which may cast doubts on the full commitment of the State of Libya
as to the object and purpose of the Convention. The Swiss Federal Council recalls
that, according to article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention and to article 19 (c)
of the Vienna Convention of 23 May 1969 on the Law of Treaties, no reservation incompatible
with the object and purpose of the Convention is permissible.
It is in the common interest of States that the object and purpose of the instruments
to which they choose to join be respected by all parties thereto, and that States
be prepared to amend their legislation in order to fulfil their treaty obligations.
Consequently, the Swiss Federal Council objects to the reservation made by the State
of Libya. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention,
in its entirety, between Switzerland and the State of Libya.
Objection EU (European Union), 14-02-2019
The European Union has carefully examined the aforementioned declaration made by Libya.
The European Union is of the opinion that, by excluding the application of those provisions
of article 25 (a) of the Convention which may be incompatible with national rules
and beliefs and principles of Islam, Libya in fact has made a reservation which raises
doubts as to the extent of Libya’s commitment to fulfil its obligations under the
Convention.
The European Union objects [to] this reservation as being incompatible with the object
and purpose of the Convention and thus impermissible according to Article 46, paragraph
1 of the Convention.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
European Union and Libya.
Objection Hungary, 15-02-2019
The Government of Hungary has examined the declaration made by Libya upon ratification
of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities done in New York on 13
December 2006.
Hungary is of the view that by declaring to interpret Article 25 (a) in a manner that
does not contravene the Islamic sharia and national legislation, Libya has in fact
made a declaration of a general and indeterminate scope that amounts to a reservation.
This reservation raises doubts as to the extent of Libya 's commitment to meet its
obligations under the Convention and contravenes the very purpose of the Convention,
that is to promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights
and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities, and to promote respect
for their inherent dignity.
Hungary considers the aforementioned reservation inadmissible as it is incompatible
with the object and purpose of the Convention, and objects to it. This objection shall
not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Hungary and Libya. The
Convention will thus continue to be operative between the two States without Libya
benefitting from its reservation.
Objection United Kingdom, 15-02-2019
In the view of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland the declaration made by Libya, according to which Article 25 (a) of the convention
will be interpreted in a manner that does not contravene the Islamic sharia and national
legislation, amounts to a reservation.
The Government of the United Kingdom notes that a reservation which consists of a
general reference to a system of law without specifying its contents does not clearly
define for the other States Parties to the Convention the extent to which the reserving
State has accepted the obligations of the Convention. The Government of the United
Kingdom therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation.
Objection Denmark, 27-02-2019
The Government of Denmark welcomes the State of Libya as a party to the Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. From a Danish point of view, the declaration
made by the State of Libya upon ratification, does however raise certain concerns.
In fact, the declaration amounts to a reservation that purports to subject the application
of one of the Convention’s provisions to Islamic sharia and national legislation.
A reservation of such an indeterminate and general scope as that made by Libya is
incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and as such one not permitted
according to article 46.1. This reservation does not clearly define for the other
States Parties the extent to which Libya has accepted the obligations of the Convention.
Thus, Denmark objects to it.
This objection shall not preclude the continued validity of the Convention between
Denmark and the State of Libya. The Convention will thus continue to operate between
the two states without Libya benefitting from the aforementioned reservation.
Objection Greece, 05-03-2019
The Government of the Hellenic Republic has examined the declaration made by the State
of Libya upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
of 13 December 2006.
In the above declaration, the State of Libya, inter alia, emphasizes that it interprets
Article 25 (a) of the said Convention, concerning the provision of health-care services
without discrimination on the basis of disability, ‘in a manner that does not contravene
the Islamic sharia and national legislation’.
The Government of the Hellenic Republic considers that the above declaration is of
a general and indeterminate scope, as it purports to subject the application of the
aforementioned provision to the Islamic sharia and national legislation, without,
however, specifying the content thereof. Such a declaration in fact amounts to a reservation
which is contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention, since it does not clearly
define for the other States Parties the extent to which Libya has accepted the obligations
of the Convention.
The Government of the Hellenic Republic recalls that, according to Article 46 paragraph
1 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, a reservation incompatible
with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.
In the light of the above, the Government of the Hellenic Republic considers the aforesaid
reservation of Libya impermissible as contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention.
The Government of the Hellenic Republic, therefore, objects to the abovementioned
reservation made by the State of Libya upon ratification of the Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Hellenic Republic and the State of Libya.
Liechtenstein
18-12-2023
Declaration with regard to Article 24, paragraph 2 (a) and 2 (b)
The school system of the Principality of Liechtenstein is already strongly committed
to inclusion and offers children with disabilities the opportunity to be educated
in a regular school as well as in a special school. Basis for the decision are the
best interest of the child, the individual needs as well as the preference stated
by the parents. The Principality of Liechtenstein declares its understanding that
its school system is in conformity with article 24, paragraph 2 (a) and 2 (b) of the
convention.
Lithuania
18-08-2010
.... the Republic of Lithuania declares that the concept of "sexual and reproductive health" used in Article 25(a) of the Convention shall not be interpreted to establish new human rights and create relevant international commitments of the Republic of Lithuania. The legal content of this concept does not include support, encouragement or promotion of pregnancy termination, sterilization and medical procedures of persons with disabilities, able to cause discrimination on the grounds of genetic features.
Malaysia
19-07-2010
Malaysia acknowledges that the principles of non-discrimination and equality of opportunity
as provided in articles 3 (b), 3 (e) and 5 (2) of the said Convention are vital in
ensuring full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by
all persons with disabilities, and to promote respect for their inherent dignity,
which shall be applied and interpreted on the basis of disability and on equal basis
with others. Malaysia declares that its application and interpretation of the Federal
Constitution of Malaysia pertaining to the principles of non-discrimination and equality
of opportunity shall not be treated as contravening articles 3 (b), 3 (e) and 5 (2)
of the said Convention.
Malaysia recognizes the participation of persons with disabilities in cultural life,
recreation and leisure as provided in article 30 of the said Convention and interprets
that the recognition is a matter for national legislation.
The Government of Malaysia ratifies the said Convention subject to the reservation
that it does not consider itself bound by articles 15 and 18 of the said Convention.
Objection Austria, 24-06-2011
The Government of Austria has examined the reservation made by Malaysia upon ratification
to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The Government of Austria finds that articles 15 and 18 relate to fundamental principles
of the Convention and that the exclusion of the application of these articles is contrary
to the object and purpose of the Convention. The Government of Austria therefore objects
to this reservation.
This position, however, does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of
the Convention between Austria and Malaysia.
Objection Belgium, 28-06-2011
Belgium has carefully examined the reservation made by Malaysia upon accession to
the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on 19 July 2010.
The vagueness and general nature of the reservation made by Malaysia -which does not
consider itself bound by Articles 15 and 18 of the Convention- may contribute to undermining
the basis of international human rights treaties.
Belgium further notes that the reservation made in respect of Article 15 -concerning
the prohibition against torture, which is an absolute protection- and Article 18 concerns
fundamental provisions of the Convention and is incompatible with the object and purpose
of that instrument.
Belgium notes that under Article 46 (1) of the Convention, reservations incompatible
with the object and purpose of the Convention are not permitted. Furthermore, under
customary international law, as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties,
a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty is not permitted
(article 19 (c)).
Consequently, Belgium objects to the reservation formulated by Malaysia with respect
to Articles 15 and 18 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Kingdom of Belgium and Malaysia.
Objection Sweden, 06-07-2011
The Government of Sweden has examined the interpretative declaration and reservations
made by the Government of Malaysia at the time of its ratification of the Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The Government of Sweden recalls that the designation assigned to a statement whereby
the legal effect of certain provisions of a treaty is excluded or modified does not
determine its status as a reservation to the treaty. The Government of Sweden considers
that the interpretative declaration made by the Government of Malaysia in substance
constitutes a reservation, which raises serious doubt as to the commitment to the
object and purpose of the Convention.
The Government of Sweden furthermore considers that the reservations to articles 15
and 18 raise serious doubt as to the commitment to the object and purpose of the Convention.
According to international customary law, as codified in the Vienna Convention on
the Law of Treaties, reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty
shall not be permitted. It is in the common interest of all 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 Sweden therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the
Government of Malaysia to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
and considers the reservations null and void. This objection shall not preclude the
entry into force of the Convention between Malaysia and Sweden. The Convention enters
into force in its entirety between Malaysia and Sweden, without Malaysia benefiting
from its reservations.
Objection Slovakia, 18-07-2011
The Slovak Republic has examined the reservation made by Malaysia as to its ratification
of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 13 December 2006,
according to which:
‘The Government of Malaysia ratifies the said Convention subject to the reservation
that it does not consider itself bound by articles 15 and 18 of the said Convention.’
The Slovak Republic considers the reservation to Articles 15 and 18 of the Convention
as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention.
It is in the common interest of States that all parties respect treaties to which
they have chosen to become party, as to their object and purpose, and that States
are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations
under the treaties.
The Slovak Republic notes that this calls into question the Malaysia’s commitment
to the object and purpose of the Convention regarded to the prohibition of torture
and to the rights associated with liberty of movement and nationality.
According to Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention and according to the customary
international law as codified by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and
in particular Article 19 (c), the reservation that is incompatible with the object
and purpose of a treaty is not permitted.
The Slovak Republic, therefore, objects to the reservation made by Malaysia to Articles
15 and 18 of the Convention. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force
of the Convention between the Slovak Republic and Malaysia, without Malaysia benefiting
from its reservation.
Objection Portugal, 26-07-2011
The Government of the Portuguese Republic has examined the reservations made by Malaysia
upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, New
York, 13 December 2006.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that the reservation made by Malaysia
to Articles 15 and 18 is a reservation that seeks to exclude the application of these
two provisions that are related to fundamental principles of the Convention thus limiting
the scope of the Convention on an unilateral basis and contributing to undermining
the basis of International Law.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that the present reservation is
contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention that seeks to promote, protect
and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms
by all persons with disabilities, and to promote respect for their inherent dignity.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic recalls that, according to customary international
law as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and in accordance
with Article 46 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, a reservation
incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation
made by the Government of Malaysia to Articles 15 and 18 of the Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities, New York, 13 December [2006].
However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention
between the Portuguese Republic and Malaysia.
Objection Hungary, 01-08-2011
The Government of the Republic of Hungary has examined the reservations made by Malaysia
on 19 July 2010 upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 13 December
2006, with regard to Articles 15 and 18 of the Convention.
The Government of the Republic of Hungary is of the view that Articles 15 and 18 of
the Convention address core human rights values that are not only reflected in several
multilateral treaties, such as the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights but also form part of the international customary law.
In consequence, according to Article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties, which is a treaty and customary norm, these reservations shall not be permitted
as they are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention.
Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Hungary objects to the reservations made
by Malaysia to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, adopted
by General Assembly of the United Nations on 13 December 2006, with regard to Articles
15 and 18.
This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Republic of Hungary and Malaysia.
Objection Germany, 03-08-2011
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has carefully examined the reservation
made by the Government of Malaysia upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities of 13 December 2006.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany considers that the provisions of
Articles 15 and 18 are core provisions of the Convention and that the exclusion of
their application is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany therefore objects to this reservation
as being inadmissible according to Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Federal Republic of Germany and Malaysia.
Objection Switzerland, 15-04-2014
With regard to the reservation made by Malaysia upon ratification:
The Swiss Federal Council has examined the reservation made by the Government of Malaysia
upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The Swiss Federal Council believes that the specific reservation to article 15 concerns
aThe Swiss Federal Council believes that the specific reservation to article 15 concerns
a fundamental legal guarantee enjoyed by persons with disabilities. Accordingly, the
reservation to article 15 is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention
and is not permissible under article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
It is in the common interest of States that the object and purpose of the instruments
to which they choose to become parties be respected by all parties thereto, and that
States be prepared to amend their legislation in order to fulfil their treaty obligations.
The Swiss Federal Council objects to the reservation of Malaysia. This objection shall
not preclude the entry into force of the Convention, in its entirety, between Malaysia
and Switzerland.
Objection Netherlands, the Kingdom of the, 14-06-2016
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands has carefully examined the reservation
and declaration made by the Government of Malaysia upon ratification of the Convention
on the rights of persons with disabilities.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the provisions of
Articles 15 and 18 are core provisions of the Convention and that the exclusion of
their application is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the declaration made
by Malaysia in substance constitutes a reservation limiting the scope of the Convention.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands notes that this reservation, according
to which ‘...its application and interpretation of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia
pertaining to the principles of non-discrimination and equality of opportunity shall
not be treated as contravening articles 3 (b), 3 (e) and 5 (2) of the said Convention’,
implies that the application of these provisions of the Convention is made subject
to national legislation in force in Malaysia.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that such a reservation
must be regarded as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and
would recall that, in accordance with Article 46 of the Convention, reservations incompatible
with its object and purpose shall not be permitted.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to the reservations
made by Malaysia to the Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities.
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 recalls that according to Article
[46], paragraph [1] of the Convention, a reservation incompatible with the object
and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted. The Government of the Kingdom
of the Netherlands therefore objects to these reservations.
Objection Ireland, 20-03-2018
Ireland has examined the reservation made by Malaysia to the Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities at the time of its ratification on 19 July 2010.
Ireland recalls that by ratifying the Convention, a State undertakes to ensure and
promote the full realisation of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all
persons with disabilities without discrimination of any kind on the basis of disability.
Ireland notes that the reservation in respect of Articles 15 and 18 of the Convention
aims to exclude two core provisions of the Convention. Ireland considers that the
obligations contained in Articles 15 and 18 are so central to the aims of the Convention
as to render the aforesaid reservation contrary to its object and purpose. Ireland
recalls that, in accordance with Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention, a reservation
incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.
Ireland has also examined the declaration made by Malaysia to the Convention at the
time of its ratification.
Ireland is of the view that the declaration in substance constitutes a reservation
limiting the scope of the Convention.
Ireland notes that Malaysia subjects application of the Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities to the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. Ireland is of the
view that a reservation which consists of a general reference to the Constitution
of the reserving State and which does not clearly specify the extent of the derogation
from the Convention may cast doubts on the commitment of the reserving State to fulfil
its obligations under the Convention. Ireland is furthermore of the view that such
a general reservation may undermine the basis of international treaty law and is incompatible
with the object and purpose of the Convention. Ireland recalls that, in accordance
with Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention, a reservation incompatible with the
object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.
Ireland therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations made by Malaysia to the Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Ireland
and Malaysia.
Malta
10-10-2012
[...] Pursuant to Article 25 of the Convention, Malta makes the following Interpretative
Statement - Malta understands that the phrase "sexual and reproductive health" in
Art 25 (a) of the Convention does not constitute recognition of any new international
law obligation, does not create any abortion rights, and cannot be interpreted to
constitute support, endorsement, or promotion of abortion. Malta further understands
that the use of this phrase is intended exclusively to underline the point that where
health services are provided, they are provided without discrimination on the basis
of disability.
Malta's national legislation considers the termination of pregnancy through induced
abortion as illegal.
[...] Pursuant to Article 29 (a) (i) and (iii) of the Convention, while the Government
of Malta is fully committed to ensure the effective and full participation of persons
with disabilities in political and public life, including the exercise of their right
to vote by secret ballot in elections and referenda, and to stand for elections, Malta
makes the following reservations:
With regard to (a) (i):
Malta reserves the right to continue to apply its current electoral legislation in
so far as voting procedures, facilities and materials are concerned.
With regard to (a) (iii):
Malta reserves the right to continue to apply its current electoral legislation in
so far as assistance in voting procedures is concerned.
Mauritius
25-09-2007
The Government of the Republic of Mauritius makes the following reservations in relation
to Article 11 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
which pertains to situations of risk and humanitarian emergencies.
The Government of Mauritius signs the present Convention subject to the reservation
that it does not consider itself bound to take measures specified in article 11 unless
permitted by domestic legislation expressly providing for the taking of such measures.
08-01-2010
The Republic of Mauritius declares that it shall not for the time being take any of
the measures provided for in Articles 9.2 (d) and (e) in view of their heavy financial
implication.
With regard to Article 24.2 (b), the Republic of Mauritius has a policy of inclusive
education which is being implemented incrementally alongside special education.
Mexico
17-12-2007
The Political Constitution of the United Mexican States, in its articIe 1, establishes
that: "( ... ) any discrimination on the grounds of ethnic or national origin, gender,
age, disability, social status, health, religion opinion, preference, civil status
or any other form of discrimination that is an affront to human dignity and is intended
to deny or undermine the rights and freedoms of persons is prohibited".
In ratifying this Convention, the United Mexican States reaffirms its commitment to
promoting and protecting the rights of Mexicans who suffer any disability, whether
they are within the national territory or abroad.
The Mexican State reiterates its firm commitment to creating conditions that allow
all individuals to develop in a holistic manner and to exercise their rights and freedoms
fully and without discrimination.
Accordingly, affirming its absolute determination to protect the rights and dignity
of persons with disabilities, the United Mexican States interprets paragraph 2 of
article 12 of the Convention to mean that in the case of conflict between that paragraph
and national legislation, the provision that confers the greatest legal protection
while safeguarding the dignity and ensuring the physical, psychological and emotional
integrity of persons and protecting the integrity of their property shall apply, in
strict accordance with the principle pro homine.
03-01-2012
Withdrawal of interpretative declaration.
Monaco
19-09-2017
(…), taking into account the specific geographical and demographic features of the
Principality of Monaco, which only has a limited number of persons with disabilities
having identified needs, implements individual measures benefitting each person with
disabilities in order to allow that person to seek, receive and impart information
in an accessible and suitable format depending on the administrative procedures being
undertaken and with personalized support. These measures constitute the “appropriate
measures” referred to in article 21 of the Convention.
(…) declares that implementation of the Convention must take into account the unique
features of the Principality of Monaco, particularly the small size of its territory
and the needs of its people.
(…) considers that articles 23 and 25 of the Convention must not be interpreted as
recognizing an individual right to abortion except where expressly provided for under
national law.
(…) considers that the purpose of the Convention is to eliminate all discrimination
on the basis of disability and to ensure that persons with disabilities have full
enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms on an equal basis with others,
but that the Convention does not imply that persons with disabilities should be afforded
rights superior to those afforded to persons without disabilities, especially in terms
of employment, accommodation and nationality.
Netherlands, the Kingdom of the
14-06-2016
Article 10
The Kingdom of the Netherlands acknowledges that unborn human life is worthy of protection.
The Kingdom of the Netherlands interprets the scope of Article 10, in line with the
relevant case law of the European Court of Human Rights on this issue, to the effect
that such protection - and thereby the term ‘human being’ - is a matter of national
legislation.
Article 12
The Kingdom of the Netherlands recognizes that persons with disabilities enjoy legal
capacity on an equal basis with others in all aspects of life. Furthermore, the Kingdom
of the Netherlands declares its understanding that the Convention allows for supported
and substitute decision-making arrangements in appropriate circumstances and in accordance
with the law. The Kingdom of the Netherlands interprets Article 12 as restricting
substitute decision-making arrangements to cases where such measures are necessary,
as a last resort and subject to safeguards.
Article 14
The Kingdom of the Netherlands recognizes that all persons with disabilities enjoy
the right to liberty and security of person, and a right to respect for physical and
mental integrity on an equal basis with others. Furthermore, the Kingdom of the Netherlands
declares its understanding that the Convention allows for compulsory care or treatment
of persons, including measures to treat mental illnesses, when circumstances render
treatment of this kind necessary as a last resort, and the treatment is subject to
legal safeguards.
Article 15
The Kingdom of the Netherlands declares that it will interpret the term ‘consent’
in article 15 in conformity with international instruments and national legislation
which is in line with these instruments. This means that, as far as biomedical research
is concerned, the term ‘consent’ applies to two different situations:
1. Consent given by a person who is able to consent, and
2. In the case of persons who are not able to give their consent, permission given
by their representative or an authority or body provided for by law.
The Kingdom of the Netherlands considers it important that persons who are unable
to give their free and informed consent receive specific protection taking into consideration
the importance of the development of medical science for the benefit of persons with
a disability. In addition to the permission referred to under 2. above, other protective
measures as included in international instruments are considered to be part of this
protection.
Article 23
With regard to Article 23 paragraph 1(b), the Kingdom of the Netherlands declares
that the best interests of the child shall be paramount.
Article 25
The Kingdom of the Netherlands interprets article 25 (a) to concern access to health
care and the affordability of health care, and confirms that discrimination in such
matters is not allowed. The Kingdom of the Netherlands considers it also important
that health care professionals may determine which health care is provided based on
medical grounds and its expected (in)effectiveness.
The individual autonomy of the person is an important principle laid down in Article
3 (a) of the Convention. The Kingdom of the Netherlands understands Article 25 (f)
in the light of this autonomy. This provision is interpreted to mean that good care
involves respecting a person's wishes with regard to medical treatment, food and fluids,
and that a decision to withhold any of these can also be based on medical grounds.
Article 29
The Kingdom of the Netherlands is fully committed to ensure the effective and full
exercise by persons with disabilities of their right and opportunity to vote by secret
ballot. It recognizes the importance of persons with disabilities to have, where necessary,
at their request, assistance in voting. To safeguard voting by secret ballot without
intimidation, as provided for in article 29 (a) (ii), and to ensure the principle
of one vote per person, the Kingdom of the Netherlands declares that it will interpret
the term ‘assistance’ in article 29 (a) (iii) as assistance only to be effected outside
the voting booth, except with regard to assistance required due to a physical disability,
in which case assistance may also be permitted inside the voting booth.
New Zealand
25-09-2008
...consistent with the constitutional status of Tokelau and taking into account the commitment of the Government of New Zealand to the development of self-government for Tokelau through an act of self-determination under the Charter of the United Nations, this ratification shall not extend to Tokelau unless and until a Declaration to this effect is lodged by the Government of New Zealand with the Depositary on the basis of appropriate consultation with that territory.
Norway
03-06-2013
Article 12
Norway recognises that persons with disabilities enjoy legal capacity on an equal
basis with others in all aspects of life. Norway also recognizes its obligations to
take appropriate measures to provide access by persons with disabilities to the support
they may require in exercising their legal capacity. Furthermore, Norway declares
its understanding that the Convention allows for the withdrawal of legal capacity
or support in exercising legal capacity, and/or compulsory guardianship, in cases
where such measures are necessary, as a last resort and subject to safeguards.
Articles 14 and 25
Norway recognises that all persons with disabilities enjoy the right to liberty and
security of person, and a right to respect for physical and mental integrity on an
equal basis with others. Furthermore, Norway declares its understanding that the Convention
allows for compulsory care or treatment of persons, including measures to treat mental
illnesses, when circumstances render treatment of this kind necessary as a last resort,
and the treatment is subject to legal safeguards.
Palestine
06-06-2014
The Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine to the United Nations presents his
compliments to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his capacity as Depositary,
and has the honor to refer to depositary notification C.N.299.2014.TREATIES-IV.15,
dated 22 May 2014, conveying a communication of Israel regarding the accession of
the State of Palestine to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,
dated 13 December 2006.
The Government of the State of Palestine regrets the position of Israel, the occupying
Power, and wishes to recall United Nations General Assembly resolution 67/19 of 29
November 2012 according Palestine 'non-member observer State status in the United
Nations'. In this regard, Palestine is a State recognized by the United Nations General
Assembly on behalf of the international community.
As a State Party to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which
entered into force on 2 May 2014, the State of Palestine will exercise its rights
and honor its obligations with respect to all States Parties. The State of Palestine
trusts that its rights and obligations will be equally respected by its fellow States
Parties.
06-06-2014
The Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine to the United Nations presents his
compliments to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his capacity as Depositary,
and has the honor to refer to depositary notification C.N.281.2014.TREATIES-IV.15,
dated 22 May 2014, conveying a communication of Canada regarding the accession of
the State of Palestine to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,
dated 13 December 2006.
The Government of the State of Palestine regrets the position of Canada and wishes
to recall United Nations General Assembly resolution 67/19 of 29 November 2012 according
Palestine "non-member observer State status in the United Nations". In this regard,
Palestine is a State recognized by the United Nations General Assembly on behalf of
the international community.
As a State Party to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which
entered into force on 2 May 2014, the State of Palestine will exercise its rights
and honor its obligations with respect to all States Parties. The State of Palestine
trusts that its rights and obligations will be equally respected by its fellow States
Parties.
Poland
30-03-2007
The Republic of Poland understands that Articles 23. 1 (b) and 25 (a) shall not be interpreted in a way conferring an individual right to abortion or mandating state party to provide acces thereto.
25-09-2012
The Republic of Poland understands that Article 23.1 (b) and Article 25 (a) shall
not be interpreted in a way conferring an individual right to abortion or mandating
state party to provide access thereto, unless that right is guaranteed by the national
law.
Article 23.1(a) of the Convention refers to the recognition of the right of all persons
with disabilities who are of marriageable age to marry and to found a family on the
basis of free and full consent of the intending spouses. By virtue of Article 46 of
the Convention the Republic of Poland reserves the right not to apply Article 23.1(a)
of the Convention until relevant domestic legislation is amended. Until the withdrawal
of the reservation a disabled person whose disability results from a mental illness
or mental disability and who is of marriageable age, can not get married without the
court's approval based on the statement that the health or mental condition of that
person does not jeopardize the marriage, nor the health of prospective children and
on condition that such a person has not been fully incapacitated. These conditions
result from Article 12 § 1 of the Polish Code on Family and Guardianship (Journal
of Laws of the Republic of Poland of 1964, No. 9, item 59, with subsequent amendments).
The Republic of Poland declares that it will interpret Article 12 of the Convention
in a way allowing the application of the incapacitation, in the circumstances and
in the manner set forth in the domestic law, as a measure indicated in Article 12.4,
when a person suffering from a mental illness, mental disability or other mental disorder
is unable to control his or her conduct.
Republic of Korea, the
11-12-2008
(...) with a reservation on the provision regarding life insurance in the paragraph
(e) of the Article 25.
[Reservation withdrawn 23-12-2021]
Objection Spain, 03-12-2009
The Government of the Kingdom of Spain has examined the reservation formulated by
the Republic of Korea when it ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities with regard to article 25(e) of this international treaty.
The Government of the Kingdom of Spain considers that the Republic of Korea has formulated
a reservation which does not permit clear determination as to the extent to which
the Republic of Korea has accepted the obligations under article 25(e) of the Convention,
which raises doubts as to the commitment of the Republic of Korea to the object and
purpose of the Convention in relation to the non-discriminatory, fair and reasonable
provision of life insurance.
The Government of the Kingdom of Spain recalls that, under article 46.1 of the Convention,
reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention are not acceptable.
Consequently, Spain objects to the reservation formulated by the Republic of Korea
in relation to article 25(e) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Kingdom of Spain and the Republic of Korea.
Singapore
18-07-2013
The Republic of Singapore's current legislative framework provides, as an appropriate
and effective safeguard, oversight and supervision by competent, independent and impartial
authorities or judicial bodies of measures relating to the exercise of legal capacity,
upon applications made before them or which they initiate themselves in appropriate
cases. The Republic of Singapore reserves the right to continue to apply its current
legislative framework in lieu of the regular review referred to in Article 12, paragraph
4 of the Convention.
2. The Republic of Singapore recognises that persons with disabilities have the right
to enjoyment of the highest attainable standards of health without discrimination
on the basis of disability, with a reservation on the provision by private insurers
of health insurance, and life insurance, other than national health insurance regulated
by the Ministry of Health, Singapore, in Article 25, paragraph (e) of the Convention.
3. The Republic of Singapore is fully committed to ensuring the effective and full
participation of persons with disabilities in political and public life, including
through the protection of the exercise of their right to vote by secret ballot in
elections and public referendums without intimidation. With respect to Article 29,
subparagraph (a) (iii) of the Convention, the Republic of Singapore reserves the right
to continue to apply its current electoral legislation which requires that assistance
in voting procedures shall only be effected through a presiding officer who is appointed
by the Returning Officer and has signed an oath to safeguard voting secrecy.
Objection Romania, 26-06-2014
The Government of Romania has examined the reservation made by the Government of Singapore
to articles 12, 25 and 29 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(2006) and appreciates that a reservation which consists of references to national
law may raise doubts as to the commitment of the reserving state to fulfill its obligations
under the Convention.
In accordance to article 29 of the Convention, the exercise of the right to vote is
a component of the legal capacity which cannot be restricted except under the conditions
and in the manner provided by article 12 of the Convention, not as provided in paragraph
1 and 3 of the reservation, by applying the domestic legal framework.
Regarding paragraph 2 of the reservation, the Government of Romania appreciates that
article 25 (e) of the Convention is applicable to the private health insurers too.
The Convention does not create an exception for this category and does not make a
distinction between state and private insurers. The prohibition of discrimination
against persons with disabilities regarding the provision of heath insurances, applies
to all categories of insurers (including private ones).
The Government of Romania considers that the reservation made by Singapore subordinates
the application of some fundamental provisions of the Convention to its domestic law,
being incompatible to its object and purpose, which consist in the obligation to protect
the fundamental rights of the persons with disabilities.
Such a reservation is also, in view of the Government of Romania, subject to the general
principle of treaty interpretation and to Article 27 of the Vienna Convention of the
Law of Treaties, according to which a party may not invoke the provisions of its domestic
law as justification for failure to perform its treaty obligations.
The objection shall not otherwise affect the entry into force of the Convention between
Romania and Singapore.
Slovakia
26-05-2010
In accordance with article 46 of the United Nations Convention on the rights of persons
with disabilities and article 19 of the Vienna convention on the law of treaties:
The Slovak Republic shall apply the provisions of article 27(1)(a) on condition that
the implementation of the prohibition of discrimination on the basis of disability
in setting conditions of recruitment, hiring and employment shall not apply in the
case of recruitment for service as a member of the armed forces, armed security forces,
armed corps, the National Security Office, the Slovak Information Service and the
Fire and Rescue Corps.
Suriname
29-03-2017
(…) the Government of the Republic of Suriname makes the following reservation/declaration
in relation to articles 9 paragraph 2 (d) and (e); 19 paragraph b; 20 paragraph (a);
24 paragraph 2 (b) and 26 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
that was adopted on 13 December 2006:
- the Government of the Republic of Suriname declares that it shall not for the time
being take any of the measures provided for in Article 9 paragraph 2 (d) and (e) in
view of their heavy financial implication;
- the Government of the Republic of Suriname declares that it ratifies the Convention
with a reservation in respect of Article 19 paragraph (a) of the Convention, to the
extent that the nature of the provisions in respect to the right of a place of residence
thereof are stipulated in Article 71 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Suriname;
- the Government of the Republic of Suriname declares that it shall not for the time
being take some of the measures in respect to Article 20 to the extent that Suriname
is recently in an undue financial burden;
- the Government of the Republic of Suriname recognizes the right of persons with
disabilities to education and determines to guarantee free primary education for every
person.
Accordingly, it declares that it shall not for the time being guarantee the application
of the provision 24 paragraph 2 (b) on the condition that the educational system is
still far from inclusive education;
- the Government of Suriname recognizes the rights of persons with disabilities to
attain and maintain maximum independence, full physical, mental, social and full inclusion
and participation in all aspects of life, however declares that it shall not be able
to take some of the measures provided in Article 26 at the earliest possible stage
due to the non-existence of the production of mobility devices and/or limited access
to the materials and equipment needed to produce mobility devices (…)
Objection Mexico, 29-03-2018
Having analysed the declarations made by the Republic of Suriname upon ratification
of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the Government of the
United Mexican States has concluded that such declarations in fact constitute reservations.
Such declarations, the object of which is to exclude the legal effects of article
20, paragraph (a); article 24, paragraph 2 (b); and article 26, are contrary to the
object and purpose of the Convention, specifically:
- Facilitating the personal mobility of persons with disabilities in the manner and
at the time of their choice, and at affordable cost;
- Promoting access to an inclusive, quality and free primary education and secondary
education on an equal basis with others in the communities in which they live; and
- Promoting, developing and implementing effective and relevant measures to provide
comprehensive habilitation and rehabilitation services and programmes for persons
with disabilities.
The above-mentioned reservations are therefore contrary to article 46, paragraph 1,
of the Convention, as well as to article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties.
The present objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between
the Republic of Suriname and the United Mexican States. Accordingly, the Convention
shall enter into force between the two States without the Republic of Suriname benefiting
from the above-mentioned reservation.
Syria
30-03-2007
Upon signature
Understanding:
Our signature of this Convention does not in any way, imply recognition of Israel
or entry into relations with Israel, in any shape or form, in connection with the
Convention.
We signed today on the basis of the understanding contained in the letter dated 5
December 2006 from the Permanent Representative of Iraq to the United Nations addressed,
in his capacity as Chairman of the Group of Arab States for that month, to the Chairman
of the Committee, which contains the interpretation of the Arab Group concerning article
12 relating to the interpretation of the concept of “legal capacity”.
Thailand
29-07-2008
The Kingdom of Thailand hereby declares that the applcation of Article 18 of the Convention shall be subject to the national laws, regulations and practices in Thailand.
Objection Spain, 27-07-2009
The Government of the Kingdom of Spain has examined the interpretative declaration
made by Thailand upon its ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities, relating to article 18 of that international instrument.
The Government of the Kingdom of Spain believes that this interpretative declaration
constitutes a reservation that makes the application of article 18 of the Convention
subject to conformity with the national laws, regulations and practices. Thailand
has formulated a reservation that makes it unclear to what extent it considers itself
bound by the obligations of article 18 of the Convention, and this calls into question
Thailand’s commitment to the object and purpose of the Convention as regards the rights
associated with liberty of movement and nationality.
The Government of the Kingdom of Spain recalls that, by virtue of article 46, paragraph
1, of the Convention, reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of the
Convention shall not be permitted. Consequently, the Government of the Kingdom of
Spain objects to the interpretative declaration by Thailand relating to article 18
of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Spain
and Thailand.
Objection Sweden, 28-07-2009
The Government of Sweden has examined the interpretative declaration made by the Government
of the Kingdom of Thailand on 29 July 2008 to the Convention on the Rights of Persons
With Disabilities.
The Government of Sweden recalls that the designation assigned to a statement whereby
the legal effect of certain provisions of a treaty is excluded or modified does not
determine its status as a reservation to the treaty. The Government of Sweden considers
that the interpretative declaration made by the Government of Thailand in substance
constitutes a reservation.
According to international customary law, as codified in the Vienna Convention on
the Law of Treaties, reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty
shall not be permitted. It is in the common interest of all 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 Sweden notes that Thailand gives precedence to its national laws,
regulations and practices over the application of article 18 of the Convention. The
Government of Sweden is of the view that such a reservation, which does not clearly
specify the extent of the derogation, raises serious doubt as to the commitment to
the object and purpose of the Convention.
The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the
Government of the Kingdom of Thailand to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities and considers the reservation null and void. This objection shall not
preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Thailand and Sweden. The Convention
enters into force in its entirety between Thailand and Sweden, without Thailand benefiting
from its reservation.
Objection Portugal, 23-09-2009
The Government of the Portuguese Republic has examined the interpretative declaration
relating to Article 18 made by the Kingdom of Thailand upon its ratification of the
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, done at New York, on the 13th
December 2006.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic believes that this interpretative declaration
constitutes a reservation that makes the application of Article 18 of the Convention
subject to conformity with the national laws, regulations and practices. The Kingdom
of Thailand has formulated a reservation that makes it unclear to what extent it considers
itself bound by the obligations of Article 18 of the Convention, and this calls into
question the Kingdom of Thailand’s commitment to the object and purpose of the Convention
as regards the rights associated with liberty of movement and nationality.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic recalls that, by virtue of article 46, paragraph
1, of the Convention, reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of the
Convention shall not be permitted.
Consequently, the Government of the Portuguese Republic objects to the interpretative
declaration by the Kingdom of Thailand relating to Article 18 of the Convention on
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the
Portuguese Republic and the Kingdom of Thailand.
Objection Czech Republic, 30-11-2009
The Czech Republic has examined the interpretative declaration made by the Kingdom
of Thailand upon its ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities on 29 July 2008.
The Czech Republic believes that the interpretative declaration made by the Kingdom
of Thailand constitutes in fact a reservation to the Article 18 of the Convention.
The Czech Republic notes that the reservation left open to what extent the Kingdom
of Thailand commits itself to the Article 18 of the Convention and this calls into
question the Kingdom of Thailand's commitment to the object and purpose of the Convention
as regards the rights associated with liberty of movement and nationality. It is in
the common interest of States that treaties, to which they have chosen to become a
party, 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 these treaties.
According to Article 46 paragraph 1 of the Convention and according to customary international
law as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation that
is incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted.
The Czech Republic, therefore, objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Kingdom
of Thailand to the Convention. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force
of the Convention between the Czech Republic and the Kingdom of Thailand, without
the Kingdom of Thailand benefiting from its reservation.
Objection Slovakia, 28-09-2010
The Slovak Republic has examined the interpretative declaration made by the Kingdom
of Thailand upon its ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities on 29 July 2008 according to which:
'The Kingdom of Thailand hereby declares that the application of Article 18 of the
Convention shall be subject to the national laws, regulations and practices in Thailand.'
The Slovak Republic believes that the interpretative declaration made by the Kingdom
of Thailand constitutes in fact a reservation to the Article 18 of the Convention.
The Slovak Republic notes that this reservation makes it unclear to what extent the
Kingdom of Thailand considers itself be bound by the obligations of Article 18 of
the Convention, and this calls into question the Kingdom of Thailand's commitment
to the object and purpose of the Convention as regards the rights associated with
liberty of movement and nationality.
According to Article 46 paragraph 1 of the Convention and according to customary international
law as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation that
is incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted.
The Slovak Republic, therefore, objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Kingdom
of Thailand to the Convention. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force
of the Convention between the Slovak Republic and the Kingdom of Thailand, without
the Kingdom of Thailand benefiting from its reservation.
05-02-2015
[…] the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand [does] hereby withdraw the interpretative declaration made with respect to Article 18 of the Convention.
United Kingdom
08-06-2009
Work and Employment - Convention Article 27 mainly
The United Kingdom accepts the provisions of the Convention, subject to the understanding
that none of its obligations relating to equal treatment in employment and occupation,
shall apply to the admission into or service in any of the naval, military or air
forces of the Crown.
Education - Convention Article 24 Clause 2 (a) and 2 (b)
The United Kingdom reserves the right for disabled children to be educated outside
their local community where more appropriate education provision is available elsewhere.
Nevertheless, parents of disabled children have the same opportunity as other parents
to state a preference for the school at which they wish their child to be educated.
Liberty of Movement
The United Kingdom reserves the right to apply such legislation, insofar as it relates
to the entry into, stay in and departure from the United Kingdom of those who do not
have the right under the law of the United Kingdom to enter and remain in the United
Kingdom, as it may deem necessary from time to time.
Equal Recognition Before the Law - Convention Article 12.4
The United Kingdom's arrangements, whereby the Secretary of State may appoint a person
to exercise rights in relation to social security claims and payments on behalf of
an individual who is for the time being unable to act, are not at present subject
to the safeguard of regular review, as required by Article 12.4 of the Convention
and the UK reserves the right to apply those arrangements. The UK is therefore working
towards a proportionate system of review.
Education - Convention Article 24 Clause 2 (a) and (b)
The United Kingdom Government is committed to continuing to develop an inclusive system
where parents of disabled children have increasing access to mainstream schools and
staff, which have the capacity to meet the needs of disabled children.
The General Education System in the United Kingdom includes mainstream, and special
schools, which the UK Government understands is allowed under the Convention.
21-12-2011
Withdrawal of reservation under Article 12.4.
17-09-2024
… the Government of the United Kingdom hereby extends the application of its ratification
of the [Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD)], with the
reservations and interpretative declaration which currently apply for the United Kingdom,
to the territory of Bermuda, for whose international relations the United Kingdom
is responsible.
…
The Government of the United Kingdom considers the extension of the UNCRPD to Bermuda
to take effect on the date of deposit of this notification...
In addition, the Government of the United Kingdom hereby notifies … that the following
interpretative declaration and reservation for Article 12, relating to supported and
substituted decision making, will apply to the territory of Bermuda only:
Bermuda recognises that persons with disabilities enjoy legal capacity on an equal
basis with others in all aspects of life. Bermuda declares its understanding that
the Convention permits supported and substitute decision-making arrangements which
provide for decisions to be made on behalf of a person, where such arrangements are
necessary, in accordance with the law, and subject to appropriate and effective safeguards.
To the extent article 12 may be interpreted as requiring the elimination of all substitute
decision making arrangements, Bermuda reserves the right to permit such arrangements
in appropriate circumstances and subject to appropriate and effective safeguards.
Uzbekistan
28-06-2021
The Republic of Uzbekistan recognizes that persons with disabilities enjoy legal capacity
on an equal basis with others in all aspects of their life.
The Republic of Uzbekistan declares its understanding that the Convention allows for
taking appropriate measures to ensure access of persons with disabilities to support
and substitute decisionmaking arrangements, including restriction of the active legal
capacity of persons with disabilities, in appropriate circumstances and in accordance
with the law.
To the extent article 12 may be interpreted as requiring the elimination of substitute
decisionmaking arrangements, the Republic of Uzbekistan reserves the right to continue
their use for persons with disabilities in appropriate circumstances and subject to
appropriate and effective safeguards.
Venezuela
24-09-2013
The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela reaffirms its absolute determination to guarantee the rights and protect the dignity of persons with disabilities. Accordingly, it declares that it interprets paragraph 2 of Article 12 of the Convention to mean that in the case of conflict between that paragraph and any provisions in Venezuelan legislation, the provisions that guarantee the greatest legal protection to persons with disabilities, while ensuring their well-being and integral development, without discrimination, shall apply.