Advanced Search

Scope Of The Protocol On Prohibitions Or Restrictions On The Use Of Mines, Booby-Traps And Other Devices As Amended On 3 May 1996 (Protocol Ii In The Am....)

Original Language Title: Geltungsbereich des Protokolls über das Verbot oder die Beschränkung des Einsatzes von Minen, Sprengfallen und anderen Vorrichtungen in der am 3. Mai 1996 geänderten Fassung (Protokoll II in der am...

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now for only USD$40 per month.

192. Presentation by the Federal Chancellor concerning the scope of the Protocol on the Prohibition or Restriction of the Use of Mines, Explosives and Other Devices, as amended on 3 May 1996 (Protocol II in the version adopted on 3 May 1996) Amended in 1996), to the Convention of 10. The Council adopted a resolution on the prohibition or restriction of the use of certain conventional weapons which may be deemed to be excessively injiy or indiscriminate, and of the Protocol of 13 October 1980. October 1995 on blind-making laser weapons (Protocol IV) to the Convention of 10 October 1995. October 1980 on the prohibition or restriction of the use of certain conventional weapons which may cause excessive suffering or which may affect indiscriminately

According to the communications of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the following other States have their notifications to the Protocol on the Prohibition or Restriction of the Use of Mines, Explosives and Other Devices in the Protocol on 3 May 1996 Amended version (Protocol II, as amended on 3 May 1996), to the Convention of 10 November 1996. The European Parliament and the Council of 27 October 1980 on the prohibition or restriction of the use of certain conventional weapons which may cause excessive suffering or have indiscriminate effects, and on the Protocol of 13 October 1980. October 1995 on blind-making laser weapons (Protocol IV) to the Convention of 10 October 1995. October 1980 on the prohibition or restriction of the use of certain conventional weapons which may cause excessive suffering or may affect indiscriminately (BGBl. III, No 17/1999, last proclamation of the BGBl scope. (III) No 171/2002), pursuant to Article 8 of the Convention:

States:

Date of delivery of the notifications:

Protocol II

, as amended

Protocol IV

Albania

28 August 2002

28 August 2002

Belarus

2 March 2004

Burkina Faso

26 November 2003

26 November 2003

Chile

15 October 2003

15 October 2003

Costa Rica

17 December 1998

Ecuador

16 December 2003

Guatemala

30 August 2002

Honduras

30 October 2003

30 October 2003

Latvia

22 August 2002

Liberia

16 September 2005

16 September 2005

Malta

24 September 2004

24 September 2004

Mauritius

24 December 2002

the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

31 May 2005

Pakistan

9 March 1999

Paraguay

22 September 2004

Poland

14 October 2003

23 September 2004

Romania

25 August 2003

25 August 2003

Russian Federation

2 March 2005

Serbia and Montenegro

12 August 2003

Sierra Leone

30 September 2004

30 September 2004

Slovenia

3 December 2002

3 December 2002

Sri Lanka

24 September 2004

24 September 2004

Turkey

2 March 2005

2 March 2005

Turkmenistan

19 March 2004

Ukraine

28 May 2003

Venezuela

19 April 2005

Cyprus

22 July 2003

22 July 2003

On the occasion of their notification, the following states have declared reservations or Statements made:

On Protocol II, as amended:

Belarus:

In accordance with Z 3 (c) of the Technical Annex to amended Protocol II, the Republic of Belarus shall postpone the implementation of Z 3 (b) of the Technical Annex to the amended Protocol II for a period of nine years from the date of entry into force of the amended Protocol II.

Latvia:

According to Z 2 c of the Technical Annex to amended Protocol II, the Republic of Latvia declares that it is postponing the implementation of Z 2 b for a period of nine years from the date of entry into force of the amended Protocol II.

Pakistan:

Article 1:

-

Pakistan assumes that, for the purposes of interpretation, the provisions of Art. 1 shall be subject to the provisions of Article 1. Take action in any other article.

-

The rights and obligations arising out of the situations presented in Article 1 are absolute and unchangeable and compliance with the provisions of the Protocol cannot be interpreted as either directly or indirectly, that it may be prejudice the right of peoples to fight against colonial or other foreign preachings and foreign occupation in the exercise of their inalienable right of self-determination, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, and in the Declaration on the Principles of International Law concerning friendly relations and cooperation between States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

-

The provisions of the Protocol should be complied with at any time, depending on the circumstances.

Article 2 (3):

-

In the context of the expression "in the first place", Pakistan assumes that those anti-armor mines that use anti-personnel mines as detoners, but do not explode through contact with a person, are not anti-personnel mines.

Article 3 (9):

-

Pakistan assumes that a land area for itself can be a legitimate military target for the purpose of the use of landmines, if its neutralization or Disconnection under the applicable circumstances represents a clear military advantage.

Technical Annex, point 2 (c) and (3) c:

Pakistan declares that the implementation of paragraphs 2 (b) and 3 (a) and (b) shall be deferred, as provided for in paragraphs 2 (c) and (3) (c).

Russian Federation:

1.

For the interpretation of Article 3 (10) lit. (c) Protocol II shall mean alternative non-lethal devices and technologies which are not anti-personnel landmines and which temporarily impede, paralyze or be present in one or more persons; without inflicting irreversible damage on them;

2.

In the implementation of Art. 5 (2) lit. (a) of Protocol II, the Russian Federation considers that anti-personnel landmines, which are not remote mines, are placed inside a region marked on its external border, which is monitored by military personnel and by Fenestration or other means is secured in order to be able to effectively keep civilians away from this area. The marking must be of a clearly recognizable and lasting nature and must be visible at least for someone who is about to enter the area marked on its external border. The line of the national border designated in this place may be considered as part of the external marking of a mined area within the border zone, if there are active and repeated attempts by armed invaders to overshoot them or if military, economic, geographical or other conditions make the use of armed forces impossible. The civilian population will be informed in good time of the danger of mines and shall not enter the mined area;

3.

For the interpretation of Article 7 (1) lit. (i) Protocol II shall mean the Russian Federation, in accordance with Article 1 of the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, in the cultural and intellectual heritage of the peoples of 1954;

4.

Under the generally available technical mine-search equipment referred to in point 2 (a) of the Technical Annex to Protocol II, the Russian Federation understands the mine-search equipment available in the Russian Federation, which meets the requirements of the mentioned above.

5.

The Russian Federation shall ensure compliance with Z. 2 (b) and Z 3 (a) and (b) not later than within nine years after the entry into force of this Protocol, in accordance with point 2 (c) and (3) (c) of the Technical Annex to Protocol II.

on Protocol IV:

Poland:

Poland assumes that the provisions of Protocol IV should also be observed in peacetime.

Bowl