Partijen en gegevens

The Government of the Republic of Hungary, while expressing its deep satisfaction over the fact that this very day, the 3rd of October, 1990, the German State has achieved its unity, hereby withdraws, all declarations, which have been made by Hungary to multilateral treaties deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, with respect to notification on behalf of the Federal Republic of Germany extending those treaties to West-Berlin.

This declaration takes effect as of the 3rd of October. ’

The Hungarian People's Republic does not consider itself bound by article 47 of the Convention. ’

The Socialist Republic of Romania declares, pursuant to article 48 of the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road (CMR), done at Geneva on 19 May 1956, that it does not consider itself as bound by article 47 of the Convention, under which any dispute between two or more Contracting Parties relating to the interpretation or application of the Convention which is not settled by negotiation or other means may, at the request of any one of the Contracting Parties concerned, be referred to the International Court of Justice.

The Socialist Republic of Romania considers that such disputes may be referred to the International Court of Justice only with the consent of all parties to the dispute in each individual case.

The Council of State of the Socialist Republic of Romania declares that the provisions of article 42, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Convention are not in keeping with the principle that multilateral international treaties must be open for participation by all States for which the aim and purpose of such treaties are of concern.

The Council of State of the Socialist Republic of Romania declares that the maintenance of the dependent status of certain territories to which reference is made in article 46 of the Convention is not in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations and the documents adopted by the United Nations concerning the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples, including the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, unanimously adopted in 1970 by the General Assembly in its resolution 2625 (XXV), which solemnly proclaims the duty of States to promote realization of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples in order to bring a speedy end to colonialism.

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics declares that the provisions of article 46 of the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road, 1956, to the effect that Contracting Parties may extend the Convention to territories for the international relations of which they are responsible, are outmoded and at variance with Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples adopted by the United Nations General Assembly [resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960].

When authorizing the extension of the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Roads (CMR) of 19 May 1956 to the western sectors of Berlin, the authorities of the three powers took such steps as were necessary to ensure that matters of security and status were not affected. Accordingly, the Berlin declaration made by the Federal Republic of Germany in accordance with established procedures is valid and the Convention applies to the western sectors of Berlin with full force and effect.

The established procedures referred to above were endorsed in the Quadripartite Agreement. They are designed inter alia to afford the authorities of the three powers the opportunity to ensure that international agreements and arrangements entered into by the Federal Republic of Germany which are to be extended to the western sectors of Berlin are extended in such a way that matters of status and security are not affected.

The three [powers] would further point out that, in a communication to the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, which is an integral part (annex IV A) of the Quadripartite Agreement of 3 September 1971, the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States, without prejudice to the maintenance of their rights and responsabilities relating to the representation abroad of the interests of the western sectors of Berlin, confirmed that, provided that matters of status and security are not affected and provided that the extension is specified in each case, international agreements and arrangements entered into by the Federal Republic of Germany may be extended to the western sectors of Berlin in accordance with established procedures. For its part, the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, in a communication to the Government of the three powers, which is similarly an integral part (annex IV B) of the Quadripartite Agreement, affirmed that it would raise no objections to such extension. ’

‛ The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany, on the basis of the legal situation set out in the communication by the Governments of France, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America, disseminated as circular note no. C.N.175.1984.TREATIES-1 of 2 August 1984, wishes to confirm that the application to Berlin (West) of the Convention of 19 May 1956 on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road (CMR) extended by it under the established procedures continues in full force and effect. ’

[The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics] … has the honour to confirm once more the view of the Soviet side set forth in the notes of the Permanent Mission of the USSR Nos. 587 of 14 December 1961 and 680/n of 2 September 1983 that the declaration of the Federal Republic of Germany concerning the application of the 1956 Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road to ‘Land Berlin’ is illegal. West Berlin, as is known, has not been and is not a ‘Land’ or any other constituent part of the Federal Republic of Germany. This was confirmed once more by the Quadripartite Agreement of 3 December 1971.

The Soviet side also wishes to draw attention to the fact that the above-mentioned Convention, to speak of the Convention as such, cannot be extended by the Federal Republic of Germany to West Berlin in any event inasmuch as a number of the Convention's provisions affect matters of security and status. The Quadripartite Agreement of 3 September 1971 clearly determined that the Federal Republic of Germany has no right to extend international agreements of this kind to West Berlin.’ ’

The three Governments do not accept the contentions in the Soviet communication and reaffirm their statement contained in Depositary Notification C.N.175.1984.TREATIES-1 of 2 August 1984.

Furthermore, the Soviet note contains an incomplete and consequently misleading reference to the Quadripartite Agreement. The relevant passage of that Agreement to which the Soviet note referred provides that the ties between the Western Sectors of Berlin and the Federal Republic of Germany will be maintained and developed, taking into account that these Sectors continue not to be a constituent part of the Federal Republic of Germany and not to be governed by it. ’

By their Note of 6 October 1986, disseminated by Depositary Notification C.N.255.1986.TREATIES-1 of 19 December 1986, the Governments of France, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America again answered the assertions made in the Soviet communication referred to above. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany, on the basis of the legal situation set out in the reply of the Three Powers, wishes to confirm that the application in Berlin (West) of the above-mentioned Convention extended by it under the established procedures continues in full force and effect.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany wishes to point out that the absence of a response to further communication of a similar nature should not be taken to imply any changes of its positions in this matter. ’

The Government of Spain declared in its instrument of accession to the Convention that Spain did not consider itself bound by the United Kingdom communication notifying the extension of the Convention to Gibraltar, since it would not apply the Convention to Gibraltar by reason of the fact that article X of the Treaty of Utrecht signed on 13 July 1713 did not grant Gibraltar communication by land with Spain. In a subsequent communication, received on 12 February 1974, the Government of Spain stated that in making the above-quoted declaration its intention was not to formulate a reservation that might be covered by article 48 (3) of the Convention, but to place on record the fact that Spain did not consider itself bound by the communication from the Government of the United Kingdom, a communication which had no legal force whatever inasmuch as it was contrary to article X of the Treaty of Utrecht.

The Government of the United Kingdom does not accept the statements made by the Government of Spain in its instrument of accession and in the letter received by the Secretary-General on 12 February 1974, concerning the effect of article X of the Treaty of Utrecht and the legal force of the notification by the Government of the United Kingdom of the extension of the Convention to Gibraltar.

‛ … I have the honour to state that Gibraltar is a territory for whose international relations the United Kingdom is responsible and that the United Kingdom is therefore entitled to extend to that territory, like other such territories, any Treaties whose terms authorise such action. But, without prejudice to the foregoing, Her Majesty's Government wish to place on record that they do not accept that the CMR Convention has no present application to Gibraltar, nor of course do they accept the legitimacy of the various measures taken by the Spanish Government to interfere with Gibraltar's communications with neighbouring parts of Spain. Moreover, as is well-known, Her Majesty's Government have offered to submit for adjudication by the International Court of Justice the legal issues between Her Majesty's Government and the Spanish Government concerning Gibraltar, an offer that has been rejected by the Spanish Government. ’

‛ Accession thereto does not imply acceptance of the term ‘Republic of’ used in the first paragraph [of the Protocol of Signature to the Convention]. ’

Pursuant to article 48 of the said Convention, the Kingdom of Morocco does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 47 of the Convention, under which any dispute between two or more Parties relating to the interpretation or application of the present Convention which is not settled by negotiation or other means may, at the request of anyone of the Contracting Parties concerned, be referred for settlement to the International Court of Justice.

The Kingdom of Morocco declares that in order for a dispute between two or more Parties to be referred to the International Court of Justice, it is necessary to have the consent of all States Parties to the dispute in each individual case. ’

The Republic of Turkey does not consider itself bound by article 47 of the Convention, under which any dispute between two or more Contracting Parties relating to the interpretation or application of the Convention which is not settled by negotiation or other means may, at the request of any of the Contracting Parties concerned, be referred to the International Court of Justice. ’

In respect of the application of the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road (CMR) to Berlin (West), the German Democratic Republic notes that, in accordance with the Quadripartite Agreement of 3 September 1971 between the Governments of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United States of America and the French Republic, Berlin (West) is not a part of the Federal Republic of Germany and may not be governed by it. Consequently, the Declaration by the Federal Republic of Germany that this Convention also applies to ‘Land Berlin’ contravenes the Quadripartite Agreement and can have no legal force.

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 47 of the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road, 1956, to the effect that disputes relating to the interpretation or application of the Convention may be referred to the International Court of Justice at the request of any one of the parties to the dispute, and states that the referral of such a dispute to the International Court of Justice must be subject to the agreement of all the parties to the dispute in each specific case. ’

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of Article 48 of the Convention Ukraine does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 47 of the Convention.

The Government of Pakistan declares, in terms of article 48 of the Convention, that it does not consider itself bound by article 47 of the Convention, under which any dispute between two or more Contracting Parties relating to the interpretation or application of the Convention, which the parties are unable to settle by negotiation or other means, may, at the request of any one of the Contracting Parties concerned, be referred to the International Court of Justice.