Partijen en gegevens

In accordance with Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Protocol, France interprets the terms ‘international court established by relevant international instruments and whose jurisdiction is recognised by that Party’ (Article 6, paragraph 1) as being any international criminal jurisdiction explicitely recognised as such by the French authorities and established under its domestic law.

In accordance with Article 3, paragraphs 2 and 3, of the Protocol, the Government of the Kingdom of Denmark declares that Denmark reserves the right to fully or to partially refrain from criminalising acts covered by Article 3, paragraph 1.

In accordance with Article 5, paragraph 2, letter b, of the Protocol, the Government of the Kingdom of Denmark declares that Denmark reserves the right to fully or to partially refrain from criminalising acts covered by Article 5, paragraph 1.

In accordance with Article 6, paragraph 2, letter b, of the Protocol, the Government of the Kingdom of Denmark declares that Denmark reserves the right to fully or to partially refrain from criminalising acts covered by Article 6, paragraph 1.

Pursuant to Article 14 of the Protocol, Denmark declares, until further notice, the Protocol will not apply to the Feroe Islands and Greenland.

In accordance with Article 6, paragraph 2, subparagraph a, and Article 12, paragraph 3, of the Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime, the Republic of Lithuania states that criminal liability for denial or gross minimisation arises if it has been commited ‘with the intent to incite hatred, discrimination or violence against any indivdual or group of individuals, based on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin, as well as religion if used as a pretext for any of the factors’.

In accordance with Article 6, paragraph 2, subparagraph a, of the Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime, Ukraine declares that it shall require that denial or gross minimization referred to in paragraph 1 of that Article is committed with the intention to provoke hatred, discrimination or violence against any person or group of persons based on signs of race, colour, national or ethnic origin as well as faith if they are used as a reason for any of those actions.

In February 2014 the Russian Federation launched armed aggression against Ukraine and occupied a part of the territory of Ukraine – the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, and today exercises effective control over certain districts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine. These actions are in gross violation of the Charter of the United Nations and constitute a threat to international peace and security. The Russian Federation, as the Aggressor State and Occupying Power, bears full responsibility for its actions and their consequences under international law.

The United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/68/262 of 27 March 2014 confirmed the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders. The United Nations also called upon all States, international organizations and specialized agencies not to recognize any alteration of the status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol.

In this regard, Ukraine states that from 20 February 2014 and for the period of temporary occupation by the Russian Federation of a part of the territory of Ukraine – the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol – as a result of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation committed against Ukraine and until the complete restoration of the constitutional law and order and effective control by Ukraine over such occupied territory, as well as over certain districts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine, which are temporarily not under control of Ukraine as a result of the aggression of the Russian Federation, the application and implementation by Ukraine of the obligations under the above Conventions, Protocols, Agreement, as applied to the aforementioned occupied and uncontrolled territory of Ukraine, is limited and is not guaranteed.

Documents or requests made or issued by the occupying authorities of the Russian Federation, its officials at any level in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol and by the illegal authorities in certain districts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine, which are temporarily not under control of Ukraine, are null and void and have no legal effect regardless of whether they are presented directly or indirectly through the authorities of the Russian Federation.

The provisions of the Conventions, Protocols, Agreement regarding the possibility of direct communication or interaction do not apply to the territorial organs of Ukraine in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, as well as in certain districts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine, which are temporarily not under control of Ukraine. The order of the relevant communication is determined by the central authorities of Ukraine in Kyiv.

The Permanent Representation of Ukraine to the Council of Europe presents its compliments to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe and has the honour […] to inform about the impossibility to guarantee the implementation by the Ukrainian Side in full of its obligations under the above mentioned international treaties of Ukraine for the period of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine and introduction of martial law on the territory of Ukraine, until full termination of the infringement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and inviolability of borders of Ukraine.

In accordance with Article 3, paragraph 3 of the Protocol, Norway reserves the right not to apply paragraph 1 to those cases of discrimination for which, due to established principles in its national legal system concerning freedom of expression, it cannot provide for effective remedies as referred to in the said paragraph 2.

In accordance with Article 5, paragraph 2 b of the Protocol, Norway reserves the right not to apply paragraph 1 of this Article, except for hatred offences.

In accordance with Article 6, paragraph 2 b of the Protocol, Norway reserves the right not to apply paragraph 1 of this Article, except for hatred offences.

Pursuant to Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Additional Protocol, the Republic of Croatië reserves the right not to attach criminal liability to conduct as defined by paragraph 1 of Article 3 of the Additional Protocol, where racist and xenophobic material as defined in Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Additional Protocol advocates, promotes or incites discrimination that is not associated with hatred or violence

In accordance with Article 5, paragraph 2.b, of the Additional Protocol, Romania reserves the right not to apply the provisions of Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Additional Protocol concerning racist and xenophobic motivated insult.

In accordance with Article 3, paragraph 3, of the Protocol, the Republic of Finland reserves the right not to apply Article 3, paragraph 1, to those cases of discrimination for which, due to established principles in its national legal system concerning freedom of expression, it cannot provide for effective remedies as referred to in Article 3, paragraph 2.

In accordance with Article 5, paragraph 2, subparagraph b, of the Protocol, the Republic of Finland, due to established principles in its national legal system concerning freedom of expression, reserves the right not to apply, in whole or in part, Article 5, paragraph 1, to cases where the national provisions on defamation or ethnic agitation are not applicable.

In accordance with Article 6, paragraph 2, subparagraph b, of the Protocol, the Republic of Finland, due to established principles in its national legal system concerning freedom of expression, reserves the right not to apply, in whole or in part, Article 6, paragraph 1, to cases where the national provisions on ethnic agitation are not applicable.

Spain declares that, in the event that the present Protocol were to be ratified by the United Kingdom and extended to the territory of Gibraltar, Spain wishes to make the following Statement:

In accordance with Article 12, paragraph 3, and Article 5, paragraph 2, sub-paragraph a, of the Protocol, the Hellenic Republic requires that the offence referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 5 has the effect that the person or group of persons referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 5 is exposed to hatred, contempt or ridicule.

In accordance with Article 12, paragraph 3, and Article 6, paragraph 2, sub-paragraph a, of the Protocol, the Hellenic Republic requires that the denial or the gross minimisation referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 6 is committed with the intent to incite hatred, discrimination or violence against any individual or group of individuals, based on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin, as well as religion if used as a pretext for any of these factors.

In accordance with Article 6, paragraph 2, subparagraph b, of the Protocol, the Principality of Monaco reserves the right not to apply, in whole or in part, paragraph 1 of Article 6 of the Protocol.

In accordance with Article 6, paragraph 2.a, of the Additional Protocol, Sweden declares that it reserves the right to require in its domestic law that the denial or the gross minimisation is committed with the intent to incite hatred, discrimination or violence against any individual or group of individuals, based on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin, as well as religion if used as a pretext for any of these factors, or otherwise, for the conduct referred to in Article 6, paragraph 1, to constitute criminal offences.

The Permanent Representation of Iceland to the Council of Europe has the honour to refer to its Note dated 11 January 2023, in which Iceland notified the deposit of its instrument of ratification of the Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime (“the Additional Protocol”).

The Permanent Representation of Iceland wishes to inform the Secretary General that due to human error, Iceland’s reservations to the Additional Protocol were not included in the note of 11 January 2023. Upon the adoption of necessary legislation amendments which implemented the Additional Protocol in Icelandic legislation, it was noted and reasoned in the explanatory report with the legislation that Iceland intended to make certain reservations to the Additional Protocol.

Accordingly, in order to correct this error, Iceland communicates to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, in her capacity as Depositary of the Convention, the following:

In accordance with Article 3, paragraph 3, of the Protocol, Iceland reserves the right not to apply paragraph 1 to those cases of discrimination for which, due to established principles in its national legal system concerning freedom of expression, it cannot provide for effective remedies as referred to in the said paragraph 2.

In accordance with Article 5, paragraph 2, subparagraph b, of the Protocol, Iceland due to established principles in its national legal system concerning freedom of expression, reserves the right not to apply, in whole or in part, Article 5, paragraph 1.

In accordance with Article 6, paragraph 2, subparagraph b, of the Protocol, Iceland, due to established principles in its national legal system concerning freedom of expression, reserves the right not to apply, in whole or in part, Article 6, paragraph 1.

Iceland sincerely apologizes for any inconvenience this error may have caused and would like to reiterate its commitment to the Additional Protocol.