185. The Federal Chancellor's presentation on the scope of the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings

According to the Communications of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the following countries have ratified, acceded or acceded to the United Nations. Certificates of acceptance of the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings (BGBl. III n ° 168/2001, last proclamation of the BGBl area. III No 87/2002):

States:	Date of deposit the ratification, accession, or Acceptance certificate:
Afghanistan	24 September 2003
Egypt	9 August 2005
Andorra	23 September 2004
Equatorial Guinea	7 February 2003
Argentina	25 September 2003
Armenia	16 March 2004
Australia	9 August 2002
Ethiopia	16 April 2003
Bahrain	21 September 2004
Bangladesh	20 May 2005
Barbados	18 September 2002
Belgium	20 May 2005
Benin	31 July 2003
Bosnia and Herzegovina	11 August 2003
Brazil	23 August 2002
Brunei Darussalam	14 March 2002
Burkina Faso	1 October 2003
Côte d' Ivoire	13 March 2002
Germany	23 April 2003
Dominica	24 September 2004
Djibouti	1 June 2004
El Salvador	15 May 2003
Estonia	10 April 2002
Finland	28 May 2002
Gabon	10 March 2005
Georgia	18 February 2004
Ghana	6 September 2002
Greece	27 May 2003
Honduras	25 March 2003
Ireland	30 June 2005
Iceland	15 April 2002
Israel	10 February 2003
Italy	16 April 2003
Jamaica	9 August 2005
Cameroon	21 March 2005
Canada	3 April 2002
Cape Verde	10 May 2002
Kazakhstan	6 November 2002
Kiribati	15 September 2005
Colombia	14 September 2004
Comoros	25 September 2003
Republic of Korea	17 February 2004
Croatia	2 June 2005
Kuwait	19 April 2004
Laos People's Democratic Republic	22 August 2002
Latvia	25 November 2002
Liberia	5 March 2003
Liechtenstein	26 November 2002
Lithuania	17 March 2004
Luxembourg	6 February 2004
Madagascar	24 September 2003
Malawi	11 August 2003
Malaysia	24 September 2003
Mali	28 March 2002
Marshal Islands	27 January 2003
Mauritania	30 April 2003
Mauritius	24 January 2003
the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia	30 August 2004
Mexico	20 January 2003
Federations of Micronesia	23 September 2003
Moldova	10 October 2002
Mozambique	14 January 2003
Nauru	2 August 2005
New Zealand	4 November 2002
Nicaragua	17 January 2003
Niger	26 October 2004
Pakistan	13 August 2002
Papua New Guinea	30 September 2003
Paraguay	22 September 2004
Philippines	7. January 2004
Poland	3 February 2004
Rwanda	13 May 2002
Romania	29 July 2004
San Marino	12 March 2002
Switzerland	23 September 2003
Senegal	27 October 2003
Serbia and Montenegro	31 July 2003
Seychelles	22 August 2003
Sierra Leone	26 September 2003
Slovenia	25 September 2003
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines	15 September 2005
South Africa	1 May 2003
Swaziland	4 April 2003
Tajikistan	29 July 2002
Togo	10 March 2003
Tonga	9 December 2002
Tunisia	22 April 2005
Turkey	30 May 2002
Uganda	5 November 2003
Ukraine	26 March 2002
Venezuela	23 September 2003
United Arab Emirates	23 September 2005
United Republic of Tanzania	22 January 2003
United States	26 June 2002

On the occasion of the deposit of their instruments of ratification, accession and/or accession, The following Member States have expressed the following reservations, or Statements made:

Egypt:

1.		The Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt declares that it is bound by Article 6 (5) of the Convention to the effect that the national legislation of the Contracting States shall not be incompatible with the respective norms and principles of the international law.
2.		The Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt declares that it is bound by Article 19 (2) of the Convention to the effect that the armed forces of a State, in the performance of their duties, do not comply with the norms and principles of the international law.

Andorra:

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the grounds for jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Article 2 for the cases provided for in Article 6 (2) (b), (c) and (d).

Ethiopia:

According to Article 20 (2) of the Convention, the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 20 (1) and that in each individual case the consent of all parties to the dispute shall be deemed to be the submission of the dispute to an arbitral tribunal or to the International Court of Justice.

Australia:

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the justification of the jurisdiction in national law for all cases provided for in Article 6 (2) with effect from 8 September 2002.

Bahrain:

The Kingdom of Bahrain shall not be bound by the provisions of Article 20 (1).

Belgium:

With regard to Article 11 of the Convention, the Government of Belgium declares the following:

1.		In exceptional cases, the Government of Belgium reserves the right to extradite or provide legal assistance with respect to any of the offences listed in Article 2, which they consider to be a political offence, as a criminal offence or a political offence, or a criminal offence. for political reasons, to refuse to do so.
2.		In cases where the above paragraph is applicable, Belgium points out that it is bound by the general legal principle to be bound by judicare in accordance with the rules governing the jurisdiction of its courts.

Brazil:

The Federative Republic of Brazil declares, in accordance with Article 20 (2) of the Convention, that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 20 (1).

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the grounds for jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Article 2 for the cases provided for in Article 6 (2) (a), (b) and (e).

Germany:

The Federal Republic of Germany understands Article 1 (4) of the Convention in such a way that the term "armed forces of a State" also includes the national contingents of United Nations troops. The Federal Republic of Germany continues to believe that the term "armed forces of a state" also includes police forces.

El Salvador:

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the grounds for jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Article 2 under national law for all cases provided for in Article 6 (2).

According to Article 20 (2) of the Convention, the Republic of El Salvador declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 20 (1).

Estonia:

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the grounds for jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Article 2 under national law for all cases provided for in Article 6 (2).

Finland:

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the grounds for jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Article 2 for all cases provided for in Article 6 (1), (2) and (4).

Iceland:

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the grounds for jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Article 2 for all cases provided for in Article 6 (2).

Israel:

The Government of the State of Israel understands Article 1 (4) of the Convention in such a way that the term "armed forces of a state" comprises police and security forces operating in accordance with the national law of Israel.

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the grounds for jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Article 2 for all cases provided for in Article 6 (2).

The Government of the State of Israel considers that the concept of "international humanitarian law" has the same substantive meaning in Article 19 of the Convention as the concept of "martial law (ius in bello)". This area of law does not include the provisions of the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions of 1977, to which Israel does not belong.

The Government of the State of Israel considers that, under Article 1 (4) and Article 19, the Convention does not apply to civilians who conduct or organise the official activities of the armed forces of a State.

The State of Israel declares, in accordance with Article 20 (2) of the Convention, that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 20 (1).

Jamaica:

Declaration on the grounds for jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Article 2 with regard to the offences referred to in Article 6 (2) (2). d determined jurisdiction.

Canada:

Canada declares that it is of the opinion that the application of Art. 2 para. 3 lit. c. the Convention is limited to acts committed in support of a conspiracy of two or more persons to commit a particular offence referred to in Article 2 (1) or (2).

Colombia:

Colombia declares, in accordance with Article 20 (2) of the Convention, that it is not bound by the provisions of Article 20 (1).

Declaration pursuant to Article 6 (3) on the grounds of jurisdiction in accordance with national law regarding para. 2 of this article.

Republic of Korea:

Pursuant to Article 6 (3) of the Convention, the Republic of Korea shall provide the following information on its criminal jurisdiction. The principles of criminal justice are laid down in Chapter I Part I of the Korean Penal Code. The provisions are as follows:

Art. 2 (Crime offences in Korea):

The Criminal Code applies to Koreans and strangers who commit a criminal offence within the borders of the Republic of Korea.

Art. 3 (offences committed by Koreans outside of Korea):

This law is applicable to Korean nationals who commit an offence outside the borders of the Republic of Korea.

Art. 4 (offences of strangers on board Korean ships, etc., outside of Korea):

This law is applicable to strangers who commit a criminal offence on board a Korean ship or aircraft outside the borders of the Republic of Korea.

Art. 5 (offenses of strangers outside of Korea):

This law shall apply to strangers who commit any of the offences listed below outside the borders of the Republic of Korea:

1.		offences relating to insurgency;
2.		offences relating to high treason;
3.		offences relating to the national flag;
4.		the offences relating to the currency;
5.		offences relating to securities, letters and tax stamps;
6.		The offences referred to in Articles 225 to 23O relating to documents and documents
7.		The offences referred to in Article 238 concerning seals.

Art. 6 (Foreign offenses against the Republic of Korea and Koreans outside of Korea):

This law shall apply to a stranger who commits a criminal offence other than in the preceding manner against the Republic of Korea or its nationals outside the borders of the Republic of Korea, unless that act is after the lex loci delictus is not a criminal offence or is exempt from the prosecution or execution of the sentence.

Art. 8 (Application of general provisions):

The provisions of the preceding Article shall also apply to offences provided for by other laws, if these laws do not provide otherwise.

Laos People's Democratic Republic:

In accordance with Article 20 (2) of the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, the Lao People's Democratic Republic does not consider itself bound by Article 20 (1) of the Convention. The Lao People's Democratic Republic declares that, in order to submit a dispute concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention to an arbitral tribunal or the International Court of Justice, the assent of all the parties affected by the dispute shall be Parties are required.

Latvia:

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the grounds for jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Article 2 for all cases provided for in Article 6 (2).

Lithuania:

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the grounds for jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Article 2 for all cases provided for in Article 6 (2).

Malaysia:

1.		Malaysia understands the term "armed forces of a state" in Article 1 (4) of the Convention in such a way that it also includes Malaysia's national contingents in the United Nations forces.
2.		The Malaysian Government considers that Article 8 (1) of the Convention includes the right of the competent authorities not to file a case before the judicial authorities if the suspected offender is in accordance with the laws of the national security and security.
3.		a. Malaysia declares, in accordance with Article 20 (2) of the Convention, that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 20 (1).
b.			Malaysia reserves the right, in certain cases, to agree to the procedure laid down in Article 20 (1) or to any other arbitration procedure.

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the grounds for jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Article 2 for all cases provided for in Article 6 (1) and (2).

Mexico:

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3): Mexico shall exercise jurisdiction over the offences referred to in the Convention in the cases of Art. 6 (2) (a), (b) and (d).

Moldova:

1.		Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the grounds for jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Article 2 for all cases provided for in Article 6 (1) and (2).
2.		Moldova is of the opinion that the provisions of Article 12 of the Convention must be applied in such a way as to ensure clear responsibility for the commission of criminal offences falling within the scope of this Convention, this without disadvantages for the effectiveness of international cooperation in the field of extradition and legal assistance.
3.		The Republic of Moldova declares, in accordance with Article 20 (2) of the Convention, that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 20 (1).

Mozambique:

The Republic of Mozambique declares, in accordance with Article 20 (2) of the Convention, that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 20 (1) and that in each individual case the consent of all parties to the dispute for the submission of the Disputes to an arbitral tribunal or to the International Court of Justice is required.

The Republic of Mozambique further declares that it cannot and will not extradit Mozambican nationals under its constitution and national laws. Mozambican nationals will therefore be brought before national courts.

Pakistan:

The Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan declares that nothing in this Convention is on fighting, including armed fighting, which, in accordance with the provisions of international law, against any foreign or foreign occupation or supremacy the implementation of the right of self-determination has been started. This interpretation is in accordance with Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969, which provides that an agreement or a contract is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it is contrary to a mandatory agreement or contract. The norm of general international law and the right of self-determination is generally recognized as a mandatory right.

Paraguay:

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the justification of the jurisdiction in national law under Article 6 (2) of the Convention.

Sweden:

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3): In accordance with Article 6 (3) of the Convention, Sweden points to its criminal jurisdiction. The principles of Swedish criminal justice are laid down in Chapter 2, Section 1 to 5 of the Swedish Penal Code.

Switzerland:

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the grounds for jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Article 2 for all cases provided for in Article 6 (2).

Tunisia:

On the occasion of the agreement to accede to the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, the Republic of Tunisia declares that it is not bound by the provisions of Article 20 (1), and reaffirms that: Any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention may be submitted to the International Court of Justice only with the prior consent of that dispute.

Turkey:

1)		The Republic of Turkey declares that Articles 9 and 12 must not be interpreted in such a way as to ensure that the offenders are not brought to justice or prosecuted.
2)		The Republic of Turkey declares that the concept of humanitarian law is to be interpreted in Article 19 of the Convention in such a way as to include the relevant international rules, but the provisions of the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions of 12. Turkey, which does not belong to Turkey, is excluded from the list. The first part of the second paragraph of that Article shall not be interpreted as giving armed forces or troops a status other than the armed forces of a State, as is currently understood by international law, and will be applied and new commitments will be made for Turkey.
3)		The Republic of Turkey declares, in accordance with Article 20 (2) of the Convention, that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 20 (1).

Ukraine:

The provisions of Art. 19 (2) do not prevent Ukraine from exercising jurisdiction over the members of the armed forces of a State if their actions are illegal. The Convention is applied in so far as such acts are not governed by other provisions of international law.

Hungary:

Declaration pursuant to Art. 6 (3) concerning the existence of the jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Article 2 for all cases provided for in Article 6 (1) and (2) under Hungarian criminal law.

Venezuela:

In accordance with Article 20 (2) of the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela declares an express reservation concerning the clause in paragraph 1 of this Article. Consequently, it does not consider itself bound to resort to arbitration as a means of dispute settlement and does not recognise the binding jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice.

Furthermore, in accordance with Article 6 (3) of the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela states that it has established, in its national law, jurisdiction over the offences set out in the Under Article 6 (2) of the Convention, situations and circumstances have been committed.

United Arab Emirates:

Reservation of Article 20 (1), which regulates the settlement of disputes between States Parties, in consequence of which the United Arab Emirates shall not be bound by this paragraph in respect of arbitration.

In addition, the United Arab Emirates Government will settle its jurisdiction over the crimes of the cases referred to in Article 6 (2) of the Convention, and shall notify the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

United States of America:

Reservation:

a)		Pursuant to Article 20 (2) of the Convention, the United States of America shall declare that they are not bound by Article 20 (1) of this Convention; and
b)		the United States of America reserves the right to expressly agree to the proceedings pursuant to Article 20 (1) of the Convention or any other arbitration procedure in each individual case.

Explanations:

1.		Definition of the term "armed conflict". The United States of America assumes that the concept of "armed conflict" in Article 19 (2) of the Convention does not include internal unrest, such as turmoil, occasional and irregular acts of violence and other similar acts.
2.		Importance of the concept of 'human rights'. The United States of America assumes that the concept of "human rights" in Article 19 of this Convention has the same substantive meaning as martial law.
3.		Delineation of the activities of armed forces. The United States of America assumes that pursuant to Art. 19 and Article 1 (4), this Convention does not apply to:
A)			the armed forces of a State in the performance of their official duties;
B)			persons who conduct or carry out the official activities of the armed forces; or
C)			Persons who support the official activities of the armed forces of a State, if the persons are formally subject to the authority, supervision or responsibility of these armed forces.

Following a further note by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the People's Republic of China, with effect from 13 November 2001, decided that the Convention will apply to the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macao.

Following a further note by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, New Zealand has stated, with effect from 4 November 2002, that the accession of New Zealand to this Convention will take place until a corresponding declaration by the Government has been issued. New Zealand, after consultation with Tokelau, does not extend to this area.

According to a further note by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the Netherlands has announced that the agreement will be applied to Aruba with the following statement:

The Kingdom of the Netherlands takes the view that Article 8 (1) of the Convention includes the right of the competent judicial authorities to decide not to have a person suspected of having committed such a crime criminal proceedings if, in the opinion of the competent judicial authorities, an effective prosecution is impossible due to serious procedural concerns.

Bowl