Scope Of The Convention On The Physical Protection Of Nuclear Material

Original Language Title: Geltungsbereich des Übereinkommens über den physischen Schutz von Kernmaterial

Read the untranslated law here: https://www.global-regulation.com/law/austria/2996933/geltungsbereich-des-bereinkommens-ber-den-physischen-schutz-von-kernmaterial.html

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now for only USD$20 per month, or Get a Day Pass for only USD$4.99.
185. by-laws of the Federal Chancellor concerning the scope of the Convention on the physical protection of nuclear material

After messages of the Director General of the IAEA, following further States have their instruments of ratification or accession to the Convention on the physical protection of nuclear material (Federal Law Gazette No. 53/1989, last proclamation of the scope BGBl. III No. 148/2008) deposited:

 







States:









Date of deposit of the instrument of ratification or instrument of accession:









Bahrain





May 10, 2010







Côte d'Ivoire





October 17, 2012







Dominican Republic





April 30, 2009







Guinea-Bissau





October 8, 2008







Jordan





September 7, 2009







Laos





September 29, 2010







Lesotho





August 18, 2010







Niue





June 19, 2009







Saudi Arabia





January 7, 2009







St. Lucia





14 September 2012







Viet Nam





October 4, 2012





 

On the occasion of the deposit of its instrument of accession, the following States have submitted following observations:

Bahrain:

The Kingdom of Bahrain considered para. 2 of the Convention itself to the provisions of article 17 tied.

Jordan:

The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan declared a reservation in respect of article 17 paragraph 2 of the agreement on dispute settlement (both regarding the arbitration procedure and concerning submission to the International Criminal Court).

Laos:

In accordance with article 17, paragraph 3 of the Convention explains the Democratic People's Republic of Laos that she tied considered paragraph 2 of the present Convention is to article 17. The Democratic People's Republic of Laos further explains that the consent of all parties will be required to a dispute concerning the interpretation or application of the present Convention to submit to international arbitration or the International Court of Justice for a decision to make.

Declaration relating to article 11 paragraph 2:

The Democratic People's Republic of Laos explains that makes them dependent on the delivery of the existence of a treaty. However, not it considered the Convention on the physical protection of nuclear material as the legal basis for extradition in relation to the offences listed therein. It also explains that bilateral agreements were the basis for extradition between the Democratic People's Republic of Laos and the other Contracting States in relation to all offences.

Saudi Arabia:

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia declares, that it is none the in article 17 para. 2 of the Convention provided for means of dispute tied to considered.

St. Lucia:



1. St. Lucia agreed, the Convention on the physical protection of nuclear material through the accession to be bound;

2. that pursuant to article 17 paragraph 3 of the Convention the Government of St. Lucia not to that in article 17 paragraph 2 of the Convention procedure bound considers;

3. that the explicit consent of the Government of Saint Lucia to submit disputes to arbitration of the International Court of Justice was necessary.

Viet Nam:

With the accession to this Convention, the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam in accordance with article 17 explains para 3 of this Convention the following reservation: the Socialist Republic of Vietnam considered paragraph 2 of this Convention is to article 17 tied and only, on the basis of the consent of all parties, subject to arbitration or submit to the International Court of justice any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention.

With the accession to the Convention, the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam in accordance with article 11 of the Convention declares that it considers this Convention not as direct legal basis for extradition. The Socialist Republic of Vietnam carries out the delivery in accordance with the provisions of Vietnamese law on the basis of agreements on extradition and the principle of reciprocity.

 

On October 14, 2012, another communication of the Director-General having IAEA according to the Kingdom of the Netherlands communicated that it completely pulls back the given Vorbehalt1 to article 10.

Faymann