Partijen en gegevens

…that until consultations with various territories under the territorial sovereignty of the United Kingdom are completed, the Convention and Protocol will apply in respect of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland only. Consultations with the territories are in hand and are expected to be completed by the end of 1991.

This is in compliance with the provision of paragraph 4 of each of the two articles.

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 6, paragraph 3 of the Convention, the Secretary-General has been informed that Canada has established jurisdiction over offences in all of the cases cited in Article 6, paragraph 2 of the Convention.

The Argentine Republic declares, in accordance with the provisions of article 16, paragraph 2, of the Convention, that it shall not be bound by any of the provisions of paragraph 1 of that article.

Mexico's accession to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, 1988, and to its Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the Continental Shelf, 1988, is on the understanding that in matters relating to extradition, both article 11 of the Convention and article 3 of the Protocol will be applied in the Republic of Mexico subject to the modalities and procedures laid down in the applicable provisions of national law.

… with the qualification, however, that the Convention as well as the Protocol will not apply to the Faroes nor to Greenland, pending a further decision.

In face of its internal law Portugal considers that the handing over of the suspect mentioned in article 8 of the Convention can only be based on strong suspicions that he committed any of the crimes mentioned in article 3, and will always depend on a court decision. Furthermore it will not be admitted in the event that the crime ascribed entails death sentence.

In accordance with Article 16(2) of the Convention for Suppression of Unlawful Acts against Safety of Maritime Navigation, 1988, Government of the Republic of India hereby declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article-16(1).

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 6, paragraph 2(c) of the Convention, the Secretary-General has been informed that Jamaica has established jurisdiction over the offences set forth in Article 3.

The Republic of Cuba, in accordance with paragraph 2 of article 16, declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of paragraph 1 of the aforesaid article, with respect to the settlement of disputes between States Parties, since it considers that such disputes should be settled by amicable agreement. Similarly, the Republic of Cuba reiterates that it does not recognize the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice.

The Government of the Union of Myanmar wishes to express reservation of Article 16(1) relating to arbitration and does not consider itself bound by the same.

Subject to reservation in respect of article 16(a).

The Government of the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 16, paragraph 1 of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation concluded in Rome on 10 March 1988. The Government of the People's Democratic Republic of Algeria declares that for a dispute to be submitted to arbitration or to the International Court of Justice, the agreement of all the parties involved shall be necessary in each case.

The Republic of Tunisia, in agreeing to accede to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation concluded in Rome on 10 March 1988, declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of paragraph 1 of article 16 of the Convention and maintains that disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention may be submitted to arbitration or to the International Court of Justice only with the prior agreement of all the parties involved.

The People's Republic of China shall not be bound by paragraph 1 of article 16 of the said Convention.

The above reservation made on 20-08-1991 by the Government of the People's Republic of China (PRC) to pargraph 1 of Article 16 of the SUA Convention also applies to the Macao Special Administrative Region of the PRC.

The Republic of Armenia declares that it does not consider itself bound by the 2nd sentence of Article 16, paragraph 1, of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation.

In connection with the provisions of article 4 of the present Convention, the Government of Chile shall not apply the provisions thereof to incidents that occur in its internal waters and in the waters of Magellan Strait.

The Russian Federation applies the provisions of point 1 of article 8 of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation to the extent to which they do not conflict with its own legislation.

In signing the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation and the Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the Continental Shelf, the Government of the Republic of Turkey, under the article 16(2) of the said Convention declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of paragraph (1) of the article 16 of the said Convention.

According to the Convention, the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam makes its reservation to paragraph 1 of article 16 thereof.

This document announces the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s accession to and approval of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation and the Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the Continental Shelf, with full reservation as to Article 11 and Article 16, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

This signature does not in any way imply recognition of Israel or entry into any relationship with it.

The Government of the State of Israel has noted that the reservation made upon the signature of Iraq of the aforementioned Convention contains a statement with respect to the State of Israel.

The Government of the State of Israel considers that such a statement, which is explicitly of a political nature, is incompatible with the purposes and objectives of the Convention.

The Government of the State of Israel, therefore, objects to the aforesaid statement made by Iraq.

Pursuant to Article 16, paragraph 2 of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 16, paragraph 1 of the Convention. The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran affirms that the consent of all parties to such a dispute is necessary in each individual case, for the submission of the dispute to arbitration or to the International Court of Justice. The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran can, if it deems appropriate, agree with the submission of the dispute to arbitration in accordance with the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and related domestic Law. With regard to Article 11, paragraph 4, the Islamic Republic of Iran considers that the extradition would be applicable only to the State Party within the territorial jurisdiction of which the crime has occurred. In the case where an extradition agreement exists between the requesting State and the State in which the crime has occurred, the agreement shall be applied.

Andorra is a landlocked State and, at the time of its accession to the Convention and the Protocol, has no official ships registered. However, in accordance with the Traffic Code of 10 June 1999, individuals of Andorran nationality and foreigners residing legally in the country may have their sports vessels entered in a register established by the Government of Andorra.

In this context, Andorra reserves the right recognized in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, in particular article 125, to request transit States (the Kingdom of Spain and the Republic of France) for right of access to and from the sea, and freedom of transit through their territories for that purpose.

We, the Co-princes, having read and considered the above-mentioned Convention and Protocol, hereby express the consent of the State to be bound by the provisions contained therein, and to that end we command issuance of this instrument of accession, signed by us and countersigned by the Head of the Government.

In accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 16 of the Convention, the Republic of Azerbaijan declares that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of Article 16.

[...] with reservation to article 6, paragraph 2; article 8 and article 16, paragraph 1 of the Convention and to article 3, paragraph 2 of the Protocol.

In accordance with article 16, paragraph 2, of the Convention the Federal Republic of Germany declares that it does not consider itself bound by article 16, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

Pusuant to Article 16, paragraph 2 of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, the Government of Israel declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 16, paragraph 1 of the Convention.

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 by the authorities of the Republic of Moldova.The Republic of Moldova shall apply the provisions of article 8, paragraph 1 of the Convention as far as it will not infringe its own national legislation.

The Republic of Moldova declares that it shall establish its own jurisdiction over the offences specified in article 3 of the Convention, in cases provided in article 6, paragraph 2 of this Convention.According to article 16, paragraph 2 of the Convention, the Republic of Moldova does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 16, paragraph 1 of the Convention.

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 6 of the Convention, the Secretary-General has been informed that the Republic of Paraguay has established jurisdiction in accordance with Article 6, paragraph 2 of the Convention.

The Government of the United Arab Emirates has taken cognizance of the provisions of the aforementioned Convention and Protocol and accedes to them with full reservation in respect of the provisions of article 16, paragraph 1 of the Convention, concerning the settlement of a dispute between States Parties to the Convention by arbitration or, if they are unable to agree on the organization of arbitration, by referral of the dispute to the International Court of Justice. It also enters a full reservation with respect to the provisions of article 1 of the Protocol, insofar as they refer to article 16, paragraph 1 of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation.

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.

Pursuant to Article 16, paragraph 2 of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (SUA 1988), the Government of the Republic of Iraq states that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 16, paragraph 1 of the Convention.

Article 16, paragraph 2 of the Convention provides that a State Party may only at the time of signature or ratification, acceptance or approval of this Convention or accession thereto declare that it does not consider itself bound by any or all of the provisions of paragraph 1 of this article.

The Republic of Iraq deposited its instrument of accession to the Convention on March 21, 2014, without making the above-mentioned reservation. The Federal Republic of Germany therefore regards the reservation as not having been made in due time and hereby opposes it.

The Government of Austria has examined the reservation made by the Republic of Iraq to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (hereinafter "Convention") on 11 February 2019.

Article 16, paragraph 2 of the Convention provides that a State Party may only "at the time of signature or ratification, acceptance or approval of this Convention or accession thereto" declare that it does not consider itself bound by any or all of the provisions of paragraph 1 of this article.

The Republic of Iraq deposited its instrument of accession to the Convention already on 21 March 2014, without making the above-mentioned reservation. Austria therefore considers the reservation to be formulated late and opposes it.

In accordance with article 16, paragraph 2 of the Convention, each State may at the time of signature or ratification, acceptance or approval of the Convention or accession thereto, declare that it does not consider itself bound by any or all of the provisions of paragraph 1 of this article.

The Government of Finland recalls that the Republic of Iraq deposited its instrument of accession to the Convention on 21 March 2014. The reservation related to article 16, paragraph 1 of the Convention was made on 11 February 2019. Hence, the reservation was formulated too late. The Government of Finland, therefore, opposes the reservation on account of its late formulation, and considers it devoid of any legal effect.

In accordance with article 16, paragraph 2, of the Convention, each State Party may, at the time of signature, ratification, acceptance or approval of or accession to this Convention, declare that it does not consider itself bound by any or all of the provisions of paragraph 1 of this article. The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands recalls that the Republic of Iraq deposited its instrument of ratification on 21 March 2014. Since the abovementioned reservation was deposited on 11 February 2019, it was deposited too late by the Republic of Iraq.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands objects to this late reservation by the Republic of Iraq and considers it devoid of any legal effect.

This objection shall not preclude the continued application of the Convention between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Republic of Iraq.

The Government of the Portuguese Republic has examined the reservation formulated on 11 February 2019 by the Republic of Iraq to article 16, paragraph 2 of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation.

Article 16, paragraph 2 of the Convention provides that a State Party may only declare that it does not consider itself bound by any or all of the provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article 'at the time of signature or ratification, acceptance or approval of this Convention or accession thereto'.

As the Republic of Iraq deposited its instrument of accession to the Convention on 21 March 2014 without making the above-mentioned reservation, the Portuguese Republic considers the reservation to be formulated late and thus opposes it.

In accordance with article 16, paragraph 2 of the Convention, each State may at the time of signature or ratification, acceptance or approval of the Convention or accession thereto, declare that it does not consider itself bound by any or all of the provisions of paragraph 1 of this article.

The Government of Romania recalls that the Republic of Iraq deposited its instrument of accession to the Convention on 24 March 2014. The reservation related to article 16, paragraph 1 of the Convention was made on 11 February 2019. Hence, the reservation was not formulated in conformity with article 16, paragraph 2. The Government of Romania, therefore, opposes to the reservation on account of its late formulation, and considers it devoid of any legal effect.