Partijen en gegevens

On signing the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, I declare that the Government of the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia adheres to the said Convention, with reservations in respect of Articles 11 and 45.

In regard to Article 11, the Government of the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia will not consider as legal a request by the Detaining Power that a neutral State or an international organization or a humanitarian organization should undertake the functions performed under the present Convention by the Protecting Powers, on behalf of protected persons, unless the Government whose nationals they are has given its consent.

In regard to Article 45, the Government of the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia will not consider it legal for a Power, which effects a transfer of protected persons to another Power, to be freed from its responsibility for applying the Convention for the whole of the time during which such protected persons are in the custody of the Power accepting them.

On proceeding to sign the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, I declare that the Government of the Czechoslovakian Republic adheres to the said Convention, with reservations in respect of Articles 11 and 45.

In regard to Article 11, the Government of the Czechoslovakian Republic will not consider as legal a request by the Detaining Power that a neutral State or an international organization or a humanitarian organization should undertake the functions performed under the present Convention by the Protecting Powers, on behalf of protected persons, unless the Government whose nationals they are has given its consent.

In regard to Article 45, the Government of the Czechoslovakian Republic will not consider it legal for a Power, which effects a transfer of protected persons, to be freed from its responsibility for applying the Convention, even for the time during which such protected persons are in the custody of the Power accepting them.

Every protected person who is national de jure of an enemy State, against whom action is taken or sought to be taken under Article 41 by assignment of residence or internment, or in accordance with any law, on the ground of his being an enemy alien, shall be entitled to submit proofs to the Detaining Power, or as the case may be, to any appropriate Court or administrative board which may review his case, that he does not enjoy the protection of any enemy State, and full weight shall be given to this circumstance, if it is established whether with or without further enquiry by the Detaining Power, in deciding appropriate action, by way of an initial order or, as the case may be, by amendment thereof. ’

The Government of Pakistan associate themselves with the reservation made by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and reserve the right to impose the death penalty in accordance with the provision of Article 68, paragraph 2, without regard to whether the offences referred to therein are punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory at the time the occupation begins. ’

In accordance with instructions received from my Government, I shall sign the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War without any reservation. But in the case of each of the other three Conventions, our signature will be given with a reservation the purport of which is as follows:

Subject to the reservation that, while respecting the inviolability of the distinctive signs and emblems provided for in Article 38 of the Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field of August 12, 1949, Israel will use the Red Shield of David as the emblem and distinctive sign provided for in this Convention.

On signing the Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics feels called upon to make the following declaration:

Although the present Convention does not cover the civilian population in territory not occupied by the enemy and does not, therefore, completely meet humanitarian requirements, the Soviet Delegation, recognizing that the said Convention makes satisfactory provision for the protection of the civilian population in occupied territory and in certain other cases, declares that it is authorized by the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics to sign the present Convention with the following reservations:

Article 11: The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics will not recognize the validity of requests by the Detaining Power to a neutral State or to a humanitarian organization, to undertake the functions performed by a Protecting Power, unless the consent of the Government of the country of which the protected persons are nationals has been obtained.

Article 45: The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics will not consider as valid the freeing of a Detaining Power, which has transferred protected persons to another Power, from responsibility for the application of the Convention to the persons transferred, while the latter are in the custody of the Power accepting them.

I am authorized to make the following declaration on signing the Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War:

The Government of the Rumanian People's Republic considers that this Convention does not completely meet humanitarian requirements, owing to the fact that it does not apply to the civilian population in territory not occupied by the enemy.

Nethertheless[lees: Nevertheless], taking into consideration the fact that the Convention is intended to protect the interests of the civilian population in occupied territory, I am authorized by the Rumanian People's Government to sign the said Convention with the following reservations:

Article 11: The Rumanian People's Republic will not recognize the validity of requests by the Detaining Power to a neutral State or to a humanitarian organization, to undertake the functions performed by a Protecting Power, unless the consent of the Government of the country of which the protected persons are nationals has been obtained.

Article 45: The Rumanian People's Republic will not concider[lees: consider] as valid the freeing of a Detaining Power, which has transferred protected persons to another Power, from responsibility for the application of the Convention to the persons transferred, while the latter are under the protection of the Power accepting them.

In my capacity as representative of the Government of the Bulgarian People's Republic, I have the pleasant duty of expressing here its satisfaction at having been able to take part in drawing up humanitarian instrument of the highest international importance—a group of conventions for the protection of war victims.

Nevertheless, my wish is that there shall be no need to apply them; that is to say, that we may exert every effort to prevent a new war, so that there may be no victims to be helped in accordance with the provisions of a convention.

I must, first of all, express my Government's deep regret that the majority of the Diplomatic Conference did not accept the Soviet Delegation's proposal for the unconditional banning of atomic weapons and other weapons for the mass extermination of the population.

On signing the present Convention, the Government of the Bulgarian People's Republic makes the following reservations, which constitute an integral part of the Convention:

With regard to Article 11: The Bulgarian People's Republic will not recognize as valid the action of a Detaining Power of civilian persons in time of war, in approaching a neutral Power or a humanitarian organization with a view to entrusting it with the protection of such persons without the consent of the Government of the country of which the latter are nationals.

With regard to Article 45: The Bulgarian People's Republic will not consider the Detaining Power of civilian persons in time of war, which has transferred such persons to another Power which has agreed to accept them, as being freed from responsibility for applying the provisions of the Convention to such persons during the time that they are detained by the other Power.

My Government has instructed me to sign the four Conventions established at the Diplomatic Conference held at Geneva from April 21 to August 12, 1949, but my Government wishes to make the following reservation regarding the Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, which reservation reads as follows:

The Kingdom of the Netherlands reserves the right to impose the death penalty in accordance with the provisions of Article 68, paragraph 2, without regard to whether the offences referred to therein are punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory at the time the occupation begins.

At the meeting of the Diplomatic Conference on August 11th, 1949, the Delegation of the Hungarian People's Republic reserved the right to make express reservations on signing the Conventions, after having examined them. In their speech at the above meeting the Hungarian Delegation observed that they were not in agreement with all the provisions of the Conventions. After a thorough study of the text of the Conventions, the Government of the Hungarian People's Republic decided to sign the Conventions in spite of their obvious defects, as it considered that the Conventions constituted an advance in comparison with the existing situation from the point of view of the practical application of humanitarian principles and the protection of war victims.

The Government of the Hungarian People's Republic is obliged to state that the concrete results achieved by the Diplomatic Conference which ended on August the 12th do not come up to expectations, since the majority of the members of the Conference did not adopt the proposals of the Soviet Delegation concerning the atomic weapon and other means of mass extermination of the population.

The Delegation of the Hungarian People's Republic noted with regret the point of view of the majority of the Conference, which was contrary to the wishes of the nations engaged in the struggle for peace and liberty. The Delegation of the Hungarian People's Republic is convinced that the adoption of the Soviet proposals would have been the most effective means of protecting war victims. The Delegation of the Hungarian People's Republic wishes, in particular, to point out the essential defects of the Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War; they drew the attention of the States taking part in the Conference to those defects during the meetings. A particular case in point is that of Article 4 of the Convention; by virtue of that Article the provisions of the Civilians Convention do not apply to certain persons, because the States whose nationals they are, have not adhered to the Convention. The Government of the Hungarian People's Republic considers that the above provision is contrary to the humanitarian principles which the Convention is intended to uphold.

The Hungarian People's Government has also serious objections to Article 5 of the said Convention; according to the terms of that Article, if protected persons are definitely suspected of activities hostile to the security of the State, that is enough to deprive them of protection under the Convention. The Government of the Hungarian People's Republic considers that that provision has already made any hope of realizing the fundamental principles of the Convention illusory.

The express reservations made by the Government of the Hungarian People's Republic on signing the Conventions, are as follows:

On signing the Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, the Government of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic feels called upon to make the following declaration:

Although the present Convention does not cover the civilian population in territory not occupied by the enemy and does not, therefore, completely meet humanitarian requirements, the Ukrainian Delegation, recognizing that the said Convention makes satisfactory provision for the protection of the civilian population in occupied territory and in certain other cases, declares that it is authorized by the Government of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic to sign the present Convention with the following reservations:

Article 11: The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic will not recognize the validity of requests by the Detaining Power to a neutral State or to a humanitarian organization, to undertake the functions performed by a Protecting Power, unless the consent of the Government of the country of which the protected persons are nationals has been obtained.

Article 45: The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic will not consider as valid the freeing of a Detaining Power, which has transferred protected persons to another Power, from responsibility for the application of the Convention to the persons transferred, while the latter are in the custody of the Power accepting them.

On signing the Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, the Government of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic feels called upon to make the following declaration:

Although the present Convention does not cover the civilian population in territory not occupied by the enemy and does not, therefore, completely meet humanitarian requirements, the Byelorussian Delegation, recognizing that the said Convention makes satisfactory provision for the protection of the civilian population in occupied territory and in certain other cases, declares that it is authorized by the Government of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic to sign the present Convention with the following reservations:

Article 11: The Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic will not recognize the validity of requests by the Detaining Power to a neutral State or to a humanitarian organization, to undertake the functions performed by a Protecting Power, unless the consent of the Government of the country of which the protected persons are nationals has been obtained.

Article 45: The Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic will not consider as valid the freeing of a Detaining Power, which has transferred protected persons to another Power, from responsibility for the application of the Convention to the persons transferred, while the latter are in the custody of the Power accepting them.

On signing the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, I declare that the Government of the Polish Republic adheres to the said Convention, with reservations in respect of Articles 11 and 45.

In regard to article 11, the Government of the Polish Republic will not consider as legal a request by the Detaining Power that a neutral State or an international organization or a humanitarian organization should undertake the functions performed under the present Convention by the Protecting Powers, on behalf of protected persons, unless the Government whose nationals they are has given its consent.

In regard to Article 45, the Government of the Polish Republic will not consider it legal for a Power, which effects a transfer of protected persons, to be freed from its responsibility for applying the Convention, even for the time during which such protected persons are in the custody of the Power accepting them.

The Government of the United States fully supports the objectives of this Convention.

I am instructed by my Government to sign, making the following reservation to Article 68:

The United States reserves the right to impose the death penalty in accordance with the provisions of Article 68, paragraph 2, without regard to whether the offences referred to therein are punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory at the time the occupation begins.

Rejecting the reservations — other than to Article 68, paragraph 2 — which States have made with respect to the Geneva convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war, the United States accepts treaty relations with all parties to that convention, except as to the changes proposed by such reservations. ’

‛ Although the Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of August 12, 1949 does not apply to civilian persons outside enemy-occupied areas and consequently does not completely meet humanitarian requirements, it is found to be in accord with the interest of protecting civilian persons in occupied territory and in certain other cases, hence it is ratified with the following reservations: ’

Regarding Article 11, the People's Republic of China will not recognize as valid a request by the Detaining Power of protected persons to a neutral State or to a humanitarian organization, to undertake the functions which should be performed by a Protecting Power, unless the consent has been obtained of the government of the State of which the protected persons are nationals. ’

Regarding Article 45, the People's Republic of China holds that the original Detaining Power which has transferred protected persons to another Contracting Power, is not for that reason freed from its responsibility for the application of the Convention while such protected persons are in the custody to the Power accepting them. ’

Article 11: The People's Republic of Albania will not recognize a request by a Detaining Power to a humanitarian organization or to a neutral State to take the place of a Protecting Power, as being in order, unless the Power of which the protected persons are nationals has given its consent.

Article 45: The People's Republic of Albania considers that in the case of protected persons being transferred to another Power by the Detaining Power, the responsibility for the application of the Convention to such protected persons will continue to rest with the Detaining Power.

On signing the Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Brazil wishes to make two express reservations—in regard to Article 44, because it is liable to hamper the action of the Detaining Power, and in regard to Article 46, because the matter dealt with in its second paragraph is outside the scope of the Convention, the essential and specific purpose of which is the protection of persons and not of their property.

In signing the Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom desire me to make the following reservation:

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland reserve the right to impose the death penalty in accordance with the provisions of Article 68, paragraph 2, without regard to whether the offences referred to therein are punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory at the time the occupation begins.

Whilst they (sc. de Britse Regering) regard all the above-mentioned States as being parties to the above-mentioned Conventions (sc. het onderhavige Verdrag alsook het Verdrag van Genève van 12 augustus 1949 betreffende de behandeling van krijgsgevangenen), they do not regard the above-mentioned reservations thereto made by those States as valid, and will therefore regard any application of any of those reservations as constituting a breach of the Convention to which the reservation relates. ’

In ratifying the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia reserves the right to impose the death penalty in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 68 of the said Convention without regard to whether the offences referred to therein are punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory at the time the occupation begins and declares that it interprets the term ‘military installations’ in paragraph 2 of Article 68 of the said Convention as meaning installations having an essential military interest for an Occupying Power. ’

Whilst they (sc. de Australische Regering) regard all the above-mentioned (sc. de hierboven genoemde Staten) as being parties to the above-mentioned Conventions (sc. het onderhavige Verdrag alsmede het Verdrag van Genève van 12 augustus 1949 betreffende de behandeling van krijgsgevangenen) they do not regard the above-mentioned reservation as valid and will therefore regard any application of any of those reservations as constituting a breach of the Convention to which the reservation relates. ’

While the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia does not recognise any of the foregoing (sc. de hierboven genoemde Staat en de hierboven genoemde gebieden) it has taken note of their acceptance of the provisions of the Conventions (sc. het onderhavige Verdrag alsmede de andere Geneefse Verdragen van 12 augustus 1949) and their intention to apply them. The position of the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia towards the reservations referred to above applies equally in relation to the similar reservations attached to such acceptance. ’

‛ To the extent of Her Majesty's powers in relation to those territories. ’

In signing the four Conventions established by the Diplomatic Conference at Geneva 1949, the New Zealand Governement[lees: Government] desire me to state that as there has been insufficient opportunity to study the reservations made on behalf of other States, the Government for the present reserve their views in regard to such reservations.

In signing the Convention relating to the protection of civilian persons in time of war, the New Zealand Government desire me to make the following reservations:

The Republic of Korea reserves the right to impose the death penalty in accordance with the provisions of Article 68, paragraph 2, without regard to whether the offences referred to therein are punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory at the time the occupation begins.

‛ …… it does not imply recognition of Israel or entering with it into relations governed by the Conventions thereto acceded. ’

The Government of Israel takes note that by declarations dated 10 February 1977, and received by the Swiss Government on 25 May 1977, the Popular Democratic Republic of Yemen adhered to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 relating to the protection of war victims.

The said instruments were accompanied by a declaration of a political character in respect to Israel. In the view of the Government of Israel, this is not the proper place for making such political pronouncements, which are, moreover, in flagrant contradiction to the principles, objects and purposes of the said Conventions. The said declaration cannot in any way affect whatever obligations are binding upon the Popular Democratic Republic of Yemen under general international law or under particular treaties.

The Government of Barbados notes that the following countries have made reservations with respect to Article 85 of the Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War: Albania, Byelorussia, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Rumania, Ukraine, and Soviet Union; and Yugoslavia has made reservations with respect to Article 12 of the Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War and to Article 45 of the Convention Relative to the Treatment of Civilian Persons in Time of War. The Government of Barbados states that whilst it regards all the abovementioned States as being parties to abovementioned Conventions it does not regard the abovementioned reservations thereto made by those States as valid and will therefore regard any application of any of those reservations as constituting a breach of the Convention to which the reservation relates.

The Government of Barbados notes that the People's Republic of China has deposited a reservation in respect to Article 85 of the Convention relative to the treatment of Prisoners of War but considers that China is a party to the Convention and does not accept the validity of any reservations made by the Government of the People's Republic. ’

The Kingdom of the Netherlands reserves the right to impose the death penalty in accordance with the provisions of Article 68, paragraph 2, without regard to whether the offences referred to there in are punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory at the time the occupation begins.

Accession to the aforementioned Geneva Conventions and Protocols is governed by an identically worded article which stipulated that:

‘From the date of its coming into force, it shall be open to any power in whose name the present Convention has not been signed, to accede to this Convention.’

Since South West Africa/Namibia cannot, in terms of international law, be regarded as such a Power and since neither it nor the UN Council for Namibia is able to assume the obligations imposed upon such Power by the four Geneva Conventions, the South African Government rejects the so-called instruments of accession of the UN Council for Namibia to the four Geneva Conventions and its two Additional Protocols as having no legal effect.

[...] decided on to adhere to the reservations made by the Former Republic of Yugoslavia, in respect of Article 11 and 45.

In regard to Article 11:

The Government of the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia will not consider as legal a request by the Detaining Power that a neutral State or an international organization or a humanitarian organization should undertake the functions performed under the present Convention by the Protecting Powers, on behalf of protected persons, unless the Government whose nationals they are has given its consent.

In regard to Article 45:

The Government of the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia will not consider it legal for a Power, which effects a transfer of protected persons to another Power to be freed from its responsibility for applying the Convention, for the whole of the time during which such protected persons are in the custody of the Power accepting them.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, pursuant to paragraph 2 of the Article 90 of Protocol I, recognizes, ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any other High Contracting Party accepting the same obligations, the competence of the International Fact-Finding Commission to enquire into allegations by such other Party, as authorized by this Article. ’

‛ The Kazakh Society of Red Crescent and Red Cross was transformed into present Red Crescent Society of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 29 March 2002 during its XVI Congress. Hence the joint emblem of the society (red cross and red crescent) was changed to the emblem of Red Crescent. ’

The Government of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea considers that the present Convention cannot fully meet humanitarian requirements, inasmuch as it does not apply to the civilian persons outside the territory occupied by the enemy. But, considering that the present Convention has a positive aspect of protecting the interests of civilian persons in the territory of occupation and in a series of other cases, the Government of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea accedes to it with reservations on the following articles:

On Article 11 of the same Convention:

In the event of a Power detaining protected persons requesting a neutral State, or a humanitarian organization, to undertake the functions incumbent on a Protecting Power, the Government of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea will not consider it a legal request unless an approval is obtained from the Government of the State on which the protected persons concerned depend.

On Article 45 of the same Convention:

The Government of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea considers that, even during the period in which the Power detaining protected persons have transferred the protected persons to other Powers which are parties to the present Convention to be in their custody, responsibility as an original Detaining Power for the application of the present Convention towards the protected persons concerned will not be released.