Partijen en gegevens

With reference to article 2, the Argentine Republic would prefer a broader definition of sale of children, as set out in the Inter-American Convention on International Traffic in Minors which Argentina has ratified and which, in its article 2, expressly defines traffic as the abduction, removal or retention, or attempted abduction, removal or retention, of a minor for unlawful purposes or by unlawful means. Therefore, under article 41 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, this meaning shall continue to apply. For the same reasons, the Argentine Republic believes that the sale of children should be criminalized in all cases and not only in those enumerated in article 3, paragraph 1(a).

Concerning article 3, the Argentine Republic further states that it has not signed international instruments on the international adoption of minors, has entered a reservation in respect of subparagraphs (b), (c), (d) and (e) of article 21 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child dealing with international adoption, and does not permit international adoption of children domiciled or resident in its jurisdiction.

Concerning article 7, the Argentine Republic construes the term ‘confiscation’ (confiscación) to mean the seizure of goods and proceeds as part of a sentence or penalty (decomisar).*

This signature is equally binding on the French community, the Flemish community and the German-speaking community.

The expression ‘child pornography’ is understood to mean the visual representation of a child participating in real or simulated sexual activities or the visual representation of the sexual parts of a child, when the dominant characteristic is a description for sexual purposes.

Concerning article 7 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, Colombia declares that, in accordance with its domestic legal system, it construes the penalty of ‘confiscation’ (confiscación) only as seizure or forfeiture during the penalty phase.

In connection with the deposit of Denmark's instrument of ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography Denmark declares that she interprets the words ‘any representation’ in article 2(c), of the Protocol to mean ‘any visual representation’. Denmark further declares that the possession of pornographic visual representation of a person, who has completed his or her fifteenth year and who has consented to the said possession, shall not be considered covered by the binding provisions of the Protocol.

Depositaire mededeling: With a territorial exclusion of the Faroe Islands and Greenland.

Withdrawal of declaration relating to the territorial exclusion in respact of the Faroe Islands and Greenland.

The Government of the Republic of El Salvador recognizes the extradiction of nationals on the basis of the second and third clauses of article 28 of the Constitution, which stipulate that ‘Extradition will be regulated under international treaties; in cases involving Salvadorans, extradition will proceed only if the treaty in question expressly allows it and the treaty has been approved by the respective legislatures of the signatory countries. In any case, the terms of the treaty must include the principle of reciprocity and give Salvadorans all the guarantees with respect to trials and penalties that this Constitution provides. The accused will be extradited if the offence was committed in the territory of the requesting country, unless the offence is international in scope, and in no case for political offences, even though common criminal offences may have occured as a result.’

… with a reservation in respect of paragraph 5 of article 3 of the second protocol.

The Lao People's Democratic Republic (…) does not consider itself bound by Article 5 (2) of the said Optional Protocol.

… subject to the sultanate's reservations to the Convention on the Rights of the Child

The Government of the French Republic has examined the reservation entered by the Government of the Sultanate of Oman upon acceding, on 17 September 2004, to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, concerning the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography by which the Sultanate extends to the Protocol the reservations it entered with respect to the Convention. While indicating that it was acceding to the Protocol and voicing, in a general manner, reservations with respect to provisions of the Protocol that it regards as violating Islamic sharia rules, the Sultanate of Oman has entered a reservation of a general, indeterminate nature that leaves other States parties unable to establish which provisions of the Convention the reservation currently concerns and which provisions are likely to be concerned in the future. The Government of the French Republic believes that the reservation could deprive the provisions of the Convention of any effect and is entering an objection thereto. This objection shall not prevent the entry into force of the Convention between France and the Sultanate of Oman.

he[lees: The] Permanent Mission of Norway to the United Nations presents its compliments to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and has the honour to convey that Norway has examined the second and third reservations made by the Government of the Sultanate of Oman on 17 September 2004 on accession to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography (New York, 25 May 2000) which concern Islamic and domestic law and limits imposed by the material resources available.

The Government of Norway is of the view that these general reservations raise doubts as to the full commitment of the Sultanate of Oman to the object and purpose of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography and would like to recall that according to customary international law as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.

The Government of Norway therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the Government of the Sultanate of Oman to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. This objection does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety, of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the Sultanate of Oman, without the latter benefiting from these reservations.

The Government of the Republic of Hungary has examined the reservations made by the Sultanate of Oman on 17 September 2004 to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. The Government of the Republic of Hungary notes that the Sultanate of Oman does not consider itself bound by the provisions of the Optional Protocol that do not accord with the Islamic law or the legislation in force in the Sultanate, and also notes that the Sultanate of Oman intends to apply the Optional Protocol within the limits imposed by the material resources available.

The Government of the Republic of Hungary is of the view that the Sultanate of Oman has made reservations of a general nature which do not define clearly to what extent it considers itself bound by the provisions of the Optional Protocol. The Government of the Republic of Hungary notes that according to Article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties reservations that are incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty shall not be permitted.

The Government of the Republic of Hungary therefore objects to the above-mentioned reservations. The objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Optional Protocol between the Republic of Hungary and the Sultanate of Oman. The Optional Protocol enters into force in its entirety between the Republic of Hungary and the Sultanate of Oman, without the Sultanate of Oman benefiting from its reservations.

The Government of the Czech Republic has examined the reservation to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography (hereinafter as the ‘Optional Protocol’) made by the Government of the Sultanate of Oman upon accession to the Optional Protocol. Since in the reservation the Sultanate of Oman announces that the scope of application of the provisions of the Optional Protocol will be limited by Islamic law, by the legislation in force in the Sultanate, and by the material resources available, the Government of the Czech Republic believes that the reservation raises doubts about the extent to which the Sultanate of Oman undertakes to honour its obligations arising from the Optional Protocol.

The Government of the Czech Republic believes that this reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Optional Protocol. The Government of the Czech Republic points out that customary international law codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treatieś (Vienna, 23 May 1969), in particular in its Article 19, does not be permit such reservations.

The Government of the Czech Republic therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation to the Optional Protocol made by the Sultanate of Oman.

This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Optional Protocol between the Czech Republic and the Sultanate of Oman, without the Sultanate of Oman benefiting from its reservation.

… subject to a general reservation regarding any provisions in the protocol that are in conflict with the Islamic Shariah.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has examined the reservation to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography made by the Government of Qatar at the time of its accession to the Optional Protocol. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is of the view that the reservation with regard to the compatibility of the rules of the Optional Protocol with the precepts of Islamic Shariah raises doubts as to the commitment of Qatar to fulfil its obligations under the Optional Protocol. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany considers this reservation to be incompatible with the object and purpose of the Optional Protocol. Therefore the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Government of Qatar to the Optional Protocol.

The Government of Finland has carefully examined the contents of the reservation made by the Government of Qatar to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography.

The Government of Finland notes that the reservation made by Qatar which consists of a general reference to religious law without specifying its contents does not clearly define the extent to which Qatar commits itself to the Protocol and therefore creates serious doubts as to its commitment to fulfil its obligations under the Protocol. Such a reservation is subject to the general principle of treaty interpretation according to which a party may not invoke the provisions of its domestic law as justification for a failure to perform its treaty obligations.

The Government of Finland also notes that the reservation of Qatar, being of too general a nature, raises doubts as to the full commitment of Qatar to the object and purpose of the Protocol, and wishes to recall that, according to the customary international law as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.

The Government of Finland therefore objects to the reservation made by the Government of Qatar to the Protocol.

The Government of the French Republic has examined the reservation entered by the Government of Qatar upon acceding to the Optional Protocol of 25 May 2000 to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, concerning the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. While indicating that it was acceding to the Protocol and voicing, in a general manner, reservations with respect to provisions of the Protocol that it regards as violating Islamic Shariah rules, the Government of Qatar has entered a reservation of a general, indeterminate nature that leaves other States parties unable to establish which provisions of the Convention the reservation currently concerns and which provisions are likely to be concerned in the future. The Government of the French Republic believes that the reservation could deprive the provisions of the Convention of any effect and is entering an objection thereto.

The Government of Ireland have examined the reservation to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography made by the Government of Qatar at the time of its accession to the Optional Protocol.

The Government of Ireland are of the view that this reservation refers in a general manner to Islamic law without precising its content and therefore leaves other states parties in doubt as to the real extent of the state of Qatar's commitment to the Optional Protocol. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties are respected as to their object and purpose, by all parties, and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations under the treaties.

For these reasons, the Government of Ireland object to this reservation made by the Government of Qatar.

This position, however, does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the Optional Protocol between Qatar and Ireland.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands has examined the reservation made by the Government of Qatar at the time of its accession to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the rights of the child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the reservation concerning the national law of Qatar, which seeks to limit the responsibilities of the reserving State under the Protocol by invoking national law, may raise doubts as to the commitment of this State to the object and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands recalls that, according to paragraph 2 of article 28 of the Convention, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.

It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become party are respected, as to their object and purpose, by all parties and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations under the treaties.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Government of Qatar to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the rights of the child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Qatar.

The Government of Norway has examined the content of the reservation made by the Government of Qatar upon accession to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography.

The reservation purports to give Islamic Shariah preference over the provisions of the Optional Protocol and does not clearly define to what extent Qatar has accepted the obligations of the latter. The Government of Norway therefore objects to the reservation, as it is contrary to the object and purpose of the Optional Protocol and thus impermissible according to well-established principles of international law.

This objection does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the Optional Protocol between the Kingdom of Norway and Qatar. The Optional Protocol thus becomes operative between Norway and Qatar without Qatar benefiting from the reservation.

The Government of Austria has examined the reservation to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography made by the Government of Qatar at the time of its accession to the Optional Protocol.

The Government of Austria are of the view that since this reservation refers in a general manner to the Islamic law without precising its content it leaves other state parties in doubt as to the real extent of the state of Qatar's commitment to the Optional Protocol. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties are respected as to their object and purpose, by all parties, and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative change necessary to comply with their obligations under the treaties.

For these reasons, the Government of Austria objects to this reservation made by the Government of Qatar.

This position, however, does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the Optional Protocol between Qatar and Austria.

The Government of the Kingdom of Spain has examined the reservation made by the Government of the State of Qatar on 14 December 2001 to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, concerning any provisions in the protocol that are in conflict with the Islamic Shariah.

The Government of the Kingdom of Spain considers that this reservation, which refers in a general way to Islamic law without specifying its content, creates doubts among the other States parties about the extent to which the State of Qatar commits itself to comply with the Optional Protocol.

The Government of the Kingdom of Spain is of the view that the reservation by the Government of the State of Qatar is incompatible with the object and purpose of the said Optional Protocol, since it refers to the Protocol as a whole and could seriously restrict or even exclude its application on a basis as ill-defined as the general reference to the Islamic Shariah.

Therefore, the Government of the Kingdom of Spain objects to the above-mentioned reservation by the Government of the State of Qatar to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the said Optional Protocol between the Kingdom of Spain and the State of Qatar.

The Government of Sweden has examined the reservation made by Qatar upon acceding to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography.

The Government of Sweden notes that the Protocol is being made subject to a general reservation of unlimited scope referring to the contents of Islamic sharia.

The Government of Sweden is of the view that this reservation which does not clearly specify the provisions of the Convention to which it applies, and the extent of the derogation therefrom, raises serious doubts as to the commitment of Qatar to the object and purpose of the Protocol. The Government of Sweden would like to recall that, according to customary international law as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted.

It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties are respected as to their object and purpose, by all parties, and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations under the treaties.

The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Government of Qatar to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Qatar and Sweden. The Convention enters into force in its entirety between the two States, without Qatar benefiting from its reservation.

The State of Qatar acceded to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography on 14 December 2001, subject to a general reservation concerning any provisions in the protocol that are in conflict with the Islamic Shariah.

The Council of Ministers decided at its 27th ordinary session of 2007, held on 19 September of that year, to withdraw the general reservation to any provisions of the Optional Protocol incompatible with the Islamic Shariah.

We should therefore like to revise the aforementioned reservation and, in view of the above, to withdraw it.

A reservation is entered to the provisions set forth in article 3, paragraph 5, and article 3, paragraph 1(a) (ii) of the Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, which relate to adoption.

Ratification of the two Optional Protocols by the Syrian Arab Republic shall not in any event imply recognition of Israel and shall not lead to entry into any dealings with Israel in the matters governed by the provisions of the Protocols.

The Government of the State of Israel has noted that the instrument of ratification of the Syrian Arab Republic to the above mentioned Protocol contains a reservation [declaration] with respect to the State of Israel.

The Government of the State of Israel is of the view that this reservation [declaration] which is political in its nature, is incompatible with the purposes and objectives of this Protocol.

The Government of the State of Israel therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation [declaration] made by the Syrian Arab Republic to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography.

The Government of the State of Israel has noted that the instrument of accession of the Syrian Arab Republic of the abovementioned Protocol which appears in the Depositary Notification Ref: C.N.679.2003.TREATIES-15 of 2 July 2003, contains a declaration with respect to the State of Israel. The Government of the State of Israel considers that such declaration, which is explicitly of a political nature, is incompatible with the purposes and objectives of the Protocol.

The Government of the State of Israel therefore objects to the aforesaid declaration made by the Syrian Arab Republic.

The Republic of Turkey declares that it will implement the provisions of the existing Optional Protocol only to the States Parties which it recognizes and with which it has diplomatic relations.

…The Government of the Republic of Cyprus has examined the declaration made by the Government of the Republic of Turkey upon ratifying the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography on 19 August 2002, in respect of the implementation of the provisions of the Convention only to the States Parties which it recognizes and with which it has diplomatic relations.

In the view of the Government of the Republic of Cyprus, this declaration amounts to a reservation. This reservation creates uncertainty as to the States Parties in respect of which Turkey is undertaking the obligations in the Convention and raises doubt as to the commitment of Turkey to the object and purpose of the said Optional Protocol. The Government of the Republic of Cyprus therefore objects to the reservation made by the Government of the Republic of Turkey to the Optional Protocol to the Convention of the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.

This reservation or the objection to it shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Republic of Cyprus and the Republic of Turkey.

The Government of the Republic of Cyprus wishes to reiterate its objection of 12th August 2003, with regard to the declaration made by Turkey upon ratification.

The Government of Sweden has examined the declaration made by Turkey upon ratifying the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.

The declaration states that Turkey will implement the provisions of the Optional Protocol only to the States Parties which it recognises and with which it has diplomatic relations. This statement in fact amounts, in the view of the Government of Sweden, to a reservation. The reservation makes it unclear to what extent Turkey considers itself bound by the obligations of the Optional Protocol. In absence of further clarification, therefore, the reservation raises doubt as to the commitment of Turkey to the object and purpose of the Optional Protocol.

The Government of Sweden would like to recall that, according to customary international law as codified in the Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties are respected as to their object and purpose, by all parties, and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations under the treaties.

The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation made by Turkey to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.

This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Optional Protocol between Turkey and Sweden. The Optional Protocol enters into force in its entirety between the two States, without Turkey benefiting from its reservation.

To the extent that the domestic law of the United States does not provide for jurisdiction over an offense described in Article 3 (1) of the Protocol if the offense is committed on board a ship or aircraft registered in the United States, the obligation with respect to jurisdiction over that offense shall not apply to the United States until such time as the United States may notify the Secretary-General of the United Nations that United States domestic law is in full conformity with the requirements of Article 4 (1) of the Protocol.

The Senate's advice and consent is subject to the following understandings:

The United States Mission to the United Nations presents its compliments to the Executive Office of the Secretary-General of the United Nations and refers to the U.N. Secretary-General’s depositary notification C.N.796.2017.TREATIES-IV.11.c, dated January 2, 2018, regarding the purported accession by the ‘State of Palestine’ to Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, done at New York May 25, 2000 (the Protocol), for which the Secretary-General of the United Nations is the depositary.

The Government of the United States of America does not believe the ‘State of Palestine’ qualifies as a sovereign State and does not recognize it as such. Accession to the Protocol is limited to sovereign States. Therefore, the Government of the United States of America believes that the ‘State of Palestine’ is not qualified to accede to the Protocol and affirms that it will not consider itself to be in a treaty relationship with the ‘State of Palestine’ under the Protocol.

… the Socialist Republic of Vietnam makes its reservation to article 5 (1), (2), (3), and (4) of the said Protocol.

Withdrawal of the following reservation:

...... the Socialist Republic of Vietnam makes its reservation to article 5 (1)(2)(3) and (4) of the said Protocol.

The Government of the Republic of Korea understands that Article 3(1)(a)(ii) of the aforementioned Protocol is applicable only to States Parties to the Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption, done at The Hague on 29 May 1993.

Reference is made to earlier statements submitted by the EU in connection with the Working group's ad-referendum adoption of the Optional Protocol on 4 February 2000 and the national statement submitted by Sweden at the same occasion as well as the Swedish statement submitted in connection with the adoption of the Protocol by the General Assembly on 25 May 2000. Furthermore Sweden interprets the words ‘any representation’ in article 2 c) as ‘visual representation’.

…Sweden interprets the word ‘any representation’ in article 2c) of the Protocol as ‘visual representation’.

Until the full re-establishment of the territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova, the provisions of the convention shall be applied only on the territory controlled effectively by the authorities of the Republic of Moldova.

The Republic of Belarus, pursuant to article 3 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict, declares that voluntary recruitment of citizens into the armed forces of the Republic of Belarus shall occur upon the attainment by them of 18 years of age.

Admission to a military academy, to which citizens aged 17 years or over, including those who attain 17 years of age during the year in which they are admitted to such an academy, are entitled, in accordance with article 43 of the Act of the Republic of Belarus of 5 November 1992 on Military Obligations and Military Service, shall constitute an exception to the above. Such admission shall not be forced or coerced.

The legislation of the Republic of Belarus guarantees that entry into military service as a cadet at a military academy:

Shall be voluntary;

Shall occur with the informed consent of the person's parents or legal guardians;

Shall occur on condition that such persons are fully informed of the duties involved in military service;

Shall be permitted on condition that such persons provide reliable proof of age prior to acceptance into military service.

[…] declares that, consistent with the constitutional status of Tokelau and taking into account the commitment of the Government of New Zealand to the development of self-government for Tokelau through an act of self-determination under the Charter of the United Nations, this ratification shall not extend to Tokelau unless and until a Declaration to this effect is lodged by the Government of New Zealand with the Depositary on the basis of appropriate consultation with that territory; […]

… the Republic of Kiribati has no national armed forces, and a declaration as to the minimum age for recruitment is therefore not applicable in the case of the Republic of Kiribati.

... with a reservation regarding article 3, paragraph 5.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has examined the reservation made by the United Arab Emirates upon its [accession to] the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography of 25 May 2000 with respect to Article 3 (5) thereof.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany considers that the reservation to Article 3 (5) is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany therefore objects to this reservation.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Federal Republic of Germany and the United Arab Emirates.

The Permanent Mission of United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland… wishes to lodge an objection to a reservation made by the United Arab Emirates upon accession to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography. The reservation is as follows:

Reservation

‘… with a reservation regarding article 3, paragraph 5.’

Article 3

5. States Parties shall take all appropriate legal and administrative measures to ensure that all persons involved in the adoption of a child act in conformity with applicable international legal instruments.

The UK Government notes that there is no specific detail provided in the reservation and as such it does not clearly define for the other States Parties to the Convention the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations of the Convention. The UK Government therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation.

The Permanent Mission of Israel to the United Nations presents its compliments to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his capacity as depositary of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, dated 25 May 2000, and has the honor to refer to the Palestinian request to accede to this Protocol (Reference number C.N.796.2017.TREATIES-IV.11.c). ‘Palestine’ does not satisfy the criteria for statehood under international law and lacks the legal capacity to join the aforesaid Optional Protocol both under general international law and the terms of bilateral Israeli-Palestinian agreements.

The Government of Israel does not recognize ‘Palestine’ as a State, and wishes to place on record, for the sake of clarity, its position that it does not consider ‘Palestine’ a party to the [Protocol] and regards the Palestinian request for accession as being without legal validity and without effect upon Israel’s treaty relations under the [Protocol].

The Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine to the United Nations presents his compliments to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his capacity as Depositary, and has the honor to refer to depositary notification C.N.192.2018.TREATIES-IV.11.c, dated 4 April 2018, conveying a communication of the United States of America regarding the accession of the State of Palestine to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, 25 May 2000.

The Government of the State of Palestine regrets the position of the United States of America and wishes to recall the United Nations General Assembly resolution 67/19 of 29 November 2012 according to which Palestine was accorded a ‘Non-member Observer State status in the United Nations’. In this regard, Palestine is a State recognized by the United Nations General Assembly on behalf of the international community.

As a State Party to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, 25 May 2000, which entered into force on 29 January 2018 for the State of Palestine, the State of Palestine will exercise its rights and honor its obligations with respect to all States Parties. The State of Palestine trusts that its rights and obligations will be equally respected by its fellow States Parties.

The Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine to the United Nations presents his compliments to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his capacity as Depositary, and has the honor to refer to depositary notification C.N.178.2018.TREATIES-IV.11.c, dated 4 April 2018, conveying a communication of Israel regarding the accession of the State of Palestine to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, 25 May 2000.

The Government of the State of Palestine regrets the position of Israel and wishes to recall the United Nations General Assembly resolution 67/19 of 29 November 2012 according to which Palestine was accorded a ‘Non-member Observer State status in the United Nations’. In this regard, Palestine is a State recognized by the United Nations General Assembly on behalf of the international community.

As a State Party to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, 25 May 2000, which entered into force on 29 January 2018 for the State of Palestine, the State of Palestine will exercise its rights and honor its obligations with respect to all States Parties. The State of Palestine trusts that its rights and obligations will be equally respected by its fellow States Parties.