Partijen en gegevens

The Belgian Government considers that in the present state of international law and having regard to the work in progress in that field, certain provisions of the Convention may not be interpreted as conferring on a coastal State rights of control over dumping beyond the limits generally accepted by international law.

The Belgian Government also considers that this Convention may not be interpreted as modifying in any way the present state of international law in the field of responsibility.

‛ The signature by the Taiwan authorities in the name of China on December 29, 1972, is illegal and therefore null and void. ’

‛ The Ratification is, until further notice, subject to a reservation with regard to the obligation of the Faroe Islands under the Convention. ’

The French Government considers that, in the present state of international law and having regard to work in progress in that field, none of the provisions of this Convention may be interpreted as conferring on any coastal State the right to control dumping beyond the conditions generally permitted by International Law.

It also considers that this Convention may not be interpreted as modifying in any way the present state of international law in respect of the principles governing responsibility.

In cases where the provisions of the Convention would hinder activities which it considered necessary for its national defence, the French Government would not apply such provisions to those activities.

The Italian Government considers that this Convention may not be interpreted as modifying in any way the present state of international law in respect of the principles governing responsibility.

[…] that its ratification does not extend to the Cook Islands, Niue and Tokelau Islands.

The Convention shall not enter into force for the Bailiwick of Jersey until the thirtieth day following the date on which the Government of the United Kingdom shall have notified the other depositary Governments that the measures required to implement the provisions of the Convention in the Bailiwick of Jersey have been taken.

that it accepts the amendment to Annex III of the London Dumping Convention as adopted on 3 November 1989 by resolution LDC.37(12) with the reservation, that appropriate national legislation will be enacted. Such legislation is currently under consideration. The Secretariat of the London Dumping Convention will be informed in due course about the enactment of this legislation. In the meantime, the Federal Republic of Germany will apply the amended provisions of the Convention on a voluntary basis. That means in practice, that any licence that may be issued by the competent authority will be in conformity with above-mentioned resolution LDC. 37(12). ’

… the Government of Argentina declares that at this time it is unable to accept resolution LC.49(16) …

‛ Australia accepts the prohibition on the dumping of industrial wastes at sea as from 1 January 1996 as envisaged in resolution LC.49(16) for all types of industrial wastes as defined by the resolution with the exception of jarosite waste for which it is necessary, for technical reasons which will be elaborated at future meetings of the London Convention, to retain the option of dumping at sea for a short period after the expiration of the deadline set down in resolution LC.49(16). Under no circumstances will the dumping at sea of jarosite be permitted by the Australian Government beyond 31 December 1997. ’

… the Russian Federations does not accept the amendment to Annexes I and II to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter of 29 December 1972, as contained in resolution LC.51(16), adopted on 12 November 1993 at the Sixteenth Consultative Meeting of the States Parties to the Convention. Russia will, however, continue its endeavours to ensure that the sea is not polluted by the dumping of wastes and other matter, the prevention of which is the object of the provisions contained in the above-mentioned amendment.

The Syrian Arab Republic's accession to this Agreement does not in any way signify recognition of Israel and will not lead to entry into any dealing with it that is regulated by the provisions of this Agreement.