Scope Of The Optional Protocol To The International Covenant On Civil And Political Rights

Original Language Title: Geltungsbereich des Fakultativprotokolls zum Internationalen Pakt über bürgerliche und politische Rechte

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.
213. Proclamation of the Federal Chancellor concerning the scope of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and political rights

After messages of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, following further States have their instruments of ratification or accession to the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and political rights (Federal Law Gazette No. 105/1988, last proclamation of the scope of Federal Law Gazette No. 293/1995) deposited:

 







States:









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









Azerbaijan





November 27, 2001







Bosnia and Herzegovina





March 1, 1995







Burkina Faso





January 4, 1999







Côte d'Ivoire





5 March 1997







Djibouti





November 5, 2002







El Salvador





June 6, 1995







Ghana





September 7, 2000







Greece





5 May 1997







Guatemala





November 28, 2000







Honduras





June 7, 2005







Cape Verde





19 May 2000







Croatia





October 12, 1995







Lesotho





September 6, 2000







Liechtenstein





December 10, 1998







Malawi





June 11, 1996







Mali





October 24, 2001







Mexico





March 15, 2002







Paraguay





10 January 1995







Serbia and Montenegro





September 6, 2001







Sierra Leone





August 23, 1996







Sri Lanka





October 3, 1997







South Africa





August 28, 2002







Tajikistan





January 4, 1999







Chad





9 June 1995







Turkmenistan





May 1, 1997







Uganda





14 November 1995







Uzbekistan





28 September 1995





 

On the occasion of the deposit of its instrument of ratification or instrument of accession, following States have declared following reservations or made declarations:

El Salvador:

The Government of the Republic of El Salvador stated that its provisions mean that the competence of the Human Rights Committee, solely for the purpose is established, to receive individual complaints and examine exclusively and solely with regard to those situations, events, cases, omissions and legal events or acts which were carried out after the date of deposit of the instrument of ratification that is, that, three months after the date of filing in accordance with article 9 paragraph 2 of the Protocol took place; also, the Committee without jurisdiction shall be for the communications and/or complaints, the other procedures of international investigation or settlement have been subject to.

Guatemala:

Guatemala recognises the competence of the Committee for human rights to the receipt and inspection of messages from his jurisdiction below persons claiming, victims of a violation of the rights recognized in the International Covenant by Guatemala to be unless, that such acts, omissions, developments or events arising, which occurred after the Optional Protocol for the Republic of Guatemala in force or from a decision relating to acts , Omissions, developments or events after that date.

Croatia:

The Republic of Croatia interpreted article 1 of the Protocol so that the Committee for the acceptance and testing of releases of the jurisdiction of the Republic of Croatia of under people is responsible, who claim to be victims of a violation of rights recognized in the Covenant by the Republic of Croatia, which is revealed occurred that from acts, omissions, developments or events after the Protocol for the Republic of Croatia entered into force.

The Republic of Croatia makes it clear that the Committee on human rights in accordance with article 5 paragraph 2 lit. of the Protocol has not the competence to check messages a person if the matter already is checked before another international investigation or compensation instance or has been tested.

Sri Lanka:

Recognizes the Government of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka in accordance with article 1 of the Optional Protocol the competence of the Human Rights Committee to the receipt and inspection of messages of the jurisdiction of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka of under people who claim to be victims of a violation of the rights recognized in the Covenant, was that such acts, omissions, developments or events arising, entered , after the Protocol for the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka is in force or from a decision relating to acts, omissions, developments or events after that date. The Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka is of the opinion that the Human Rights Committee may not review messages a person, if not clearly, that this matter not already before another international investigation or compensation instance is checked or examined.

Uganda: The Republic of Uganda accepted not the competence of the Committee on human rights to the examination of a communication from an individual under article 5 para 2, if the matter before another international investigation or instance of compensation has been tested.

 

According to another communication from the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Guyana has deposited on 5 April 1999 following conditional:

Guyana declared a reservation in respect of article 6, with the effect that the Human Rights Committee not to the reception and examination of communications from individuals is responsible, convicted of murder or treason to death on matters concerning their prosecution, detention, the procedures, the conviction, the penalty or the death penalty or other matters related.

In recognition of the principle that States may use the Optional Protocol as a means for the introduction of reservations to the International Covenant on Civil and political rights, the Government of Guyana, stresses that its reservation to the Optional Protocol subordinate to their obligations according to the Pact, including their obligation to all the courts of Guyana and on their territory persons, the rights recognized in the Covenant (if not a reservation was declared) such as in article 2 committed themselves , to secure and respect as well as Guyana's obligation to report to the Human Rights Committee after the monitoring mechanism established in article 40 of the Covenant adversely affected in any way.

 

After further releases of the Secretary-General of the United Nations have on 23 October 1997 Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago on 27 March 2000 decisions communicated to denounce the Optional Protocol.

Bowl

Related Laws