Partijen en gegevens

The Soviet Union can take note of the declaration by the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany concerning the extension to Berlin (West) of the sphere of application of the Protocol amending the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, signed in Geneva on 25 March 1972 only on the understanding that this extension is carried out in conformity with the Quadripartite Agreement of 3 September 1971, that the established procedures are respected, and that in the application of the provisions of the Protocol questions concerning status will not be raised.

Brazil wishes to take this opportunity to repeat the declaration that was made at the appropriate occasion during the plenary session of the Protocol's Negotiating Conference which took place in Geneva from March 6th to March 24th, 1972, to the effect that the amendments to article 36 of the Convention do not oblige States with laws against extradition of nationals to extradite them.

It is understood that the ratification of this Agreement does not mean in any way a recognition of Israel by the Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt. Furthermore, no treaty relation will arise between the Arab Republic of Egypt and Israel.

…The Government of the State of Israel, in accordance with the powers vested in it by the law, decided to ratify the Protocol while maintaining all its rights to adopt toward all other parties an attitude of complete reciprocity.

In acceding to the Protocol the Government of the State of Kuwait takes the view that its accession to the said Protocol does not in any way imply its recognition of Israel, nor does it oblige it to apply the provisions of the aforementioned Protocol in respect of the said country.

The instrument of acceptance by the Government of Kuwait of the Protocol contains a statement 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 Protocol. That statement, therefore, possesses no legal validity whatsoever.

‘The Government of Israel utterly rejects that statement and will proceed on the assumption that it has no validity as to the rights and duties of any State Party to the said treaties.

‘The declaration of the Government of Kuwait cannot in any way affect Kuwait's obligations under whatever other obligations are binding upon that State by virtue of general international law.

‘The Government of Israel, will, in so far as concerns the substance of the matter, adopt toward the Government of Kuwait an attitude of complete reciprocity.

With a reservation regarding article 36, paragraph 2 that appears on document of May 3, 1972, signed by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Panama.

…With the express resevation[lees: reservation] that the amendment which article 14 of the Protocol makes to article 36, paragraph 2, of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 (a) does not modify the extradition treaties to which the Republic of Panama is a party in any manner which may compel it to extradite its own nationals; (b) does not require the Republic of Panama to include, in such extradition treaties as it may conclude in the future, any provision requiring it to extradite its own nationals; and (c) may not be interpreted or applied in any manner which gives rise to an obligation on the part of the Republic of Panama to extradite any of its own nationals.)

The Socialist Republic of Romania does not consider itself bound by the provisions contained in article 6, in so far as those provisions relate to States which are not parties to the Single Convention .

The Council of State of the Socialist Republic of Romania considers that the provisions of article 17 of the Protocol are not in accordance with the principle that international multilateral treaties, the aims and objectives of which concern the world community as a whole, should be open to participation by all States.

His Majesty's Government of Nepal in accordance with Article 49 paragraph 1 of the said convention hereby reserves the right to permit temporarily in its territory:

The State of Bahrain does not recognise the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice laid down in Article 48, paragraph 2 of the 1975 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 as amended by the Protocol of 25 March 1972 amending the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961.

Moreover, the accession by the State of Bahrain to the said Convention shall in no way constitute recognition of Israel or be a cause for the establishment of any relations of any kind therewith.

The Government of the State of Israel has noted that the instruments of accession of Bahrain to the above-mentioned Conventions contain a declaration in respect of Israel.

In view of the Government of the State of Israel such declaration, which is explicitly of a political character, is incompatible with the purpose and objectives of those Conventions and cannot in any way affect whatever obligations are binding upon Bahrain under general international law or under particular conventions.

The Government of the State of Israel will in so far as concerns the substance of the matter, adopt towards Bahrain an attitude of complete reciprocity.

The Plurinational State of Bolivia reserves the right to allow in its territory: traditional coca leaf chewing; the consumption and use of the coca leaf in its natural state for cultural and medicinal purposes, such as its use in infusions; and also the cultivation, trade and possession of the coca leaf to the extent necessary for these licit purposes.

At the same time, the Plurinational State of Bolivia will continue to take all necessary measures to control the cultivation of coca in order to prevent its abuse and the illicit production of the narcotic drugs which may be extracted from the leaf.

[…] Canada objects to the reservation put forward by the Plurinational State of Bolivia. Canada has long held that the Convention forms the cornerstone of international efforts to prevent the illicit production, manufacture, trafficking and abuse of drugs, while ensuring that licit drugs are available for medical and scientific purposes. The Convention, along with the 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances and the 1988 United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances are the key instruments in global efforts to address illicit drugs. Canada continues to be concerned that Bolivia's reservation would lead to a greater supply of coca leaf and consequent availability of cocaine.

Should Bolivia's reservation be deemed to be permitted in accordance with Article 50, paragraph 3 of the Convention, this objection would not constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between Canada and the Plurinational State of Bolivia, but Canada would not assume toward Bolivia any legal obligations under the Convention that is affected by this reservation.

The Federal Republic of Germany expressly welcomes the essential willingness of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to accept the obligations deriving from the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961, as amended by the Protocol thereto.

The Federal Republic of Germany has thoroughly and carefully reviewed the wording of the reservation submitted in accordance with Article 50, paragraph 3 of the Convention, as contained in the communication from the Plurinational State of Bolivia. The Federal Republic of Germany hereby objects to the reservation. Should the reservation of the Plurinational State of Bolivia be deemed to be permitted in accordance with Article 50, paragraph 3 of the Convention, this objection should not constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Plurinational State of Bolivia. The Federal Republic of Germany will not assume towards the Plurinational State of Bolivia any legal obligation under the Convention which is affected by the reservation.

The Plurinational State of Bolivia deposited its instrument of denunciation of the Convention on 29 June 2011 with effect as of 1 January 2012. On 29 December 2011, Bolivia informed the depositary of its intention to reacceed to the Convention subject to the authorisation of the reservation by the States Parties submitted in accordance with article 50, paragraph 3 of the Convention.

The Government of Finland has carefully examined this procedure and the reservation made by the Plurinational State of Bolivia and notes that it is in contradiction with the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and well-established customary international law to denounce a treaty and reacceed to it to be able to make it subject to a new reservation. The Government of Finland is, therefore, of the view that the procedure provided in article 50, paragraph 3, cannot be used for this purpose.

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 Finland, therefore, objects to the reservation made by the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia. This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Plurinational State of Bolivia and Finland. The Convention will thus become operative between the two States without Bolivia benefitting from this reservation.

France is aware of the importance Bolivia attaches to the preservation of its ancestral traditions and practices and to the rights of indigenous peoples. It notes that it is within this context that Bolivia, by entering a reservation together with its instrument of accession to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, purports to preserve in its territory the cultivation and chewing of the coca leaf in its natural state.

France welcomes the assurance offered by Bolivia that it will continue to take all necessary measures to prevent the illicit production of narcotic drugs.

Nevertheless, France objects to the general reservation entered by Bolivia, as it could undermine the overall balance of the Convention and, consequently, the response to global drug trafficking. The reservation creates a risk of increased coca leaf production and of illicit exploitation of such production through drug trafficking.

Furthermore, the reservation is vague and in this case disregards the principle of legal certainty, which is essential to the stability of treaty relations.

Therefore, France recalls that it will not be bound in relation to Bolivia by the provisions that Bolivia purports to exclude from the scope of obligations imposed on the parties within the meaning of the Convention. It expresses the hope that Bolivia will apply a restrictive interpretation to the scope of the provisions it does not intend to implement. France does not, by means of this objection, purport to oppose Bolivia's becoming a party to the Convention, pursuant to article 50, paragraph 3, of the Convention, and it reaffirms the importance it attaches to Bolivia's continued engagement in action against narcotic drugs.

The Government of Ireland has examined the proposed reservation contained in the instrument of accession to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs 1961, as amended by the Protocol Amending the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, made by the Plurinational State of Bolivia on 28 December 2011.

The Government of Ireland welcomes Bolivia's renewed commitment to continue to take all necessary legal measures to control the illicit cultivation of coca in order to prevent its abuse and the illicit production of the narcotic drugs which may be extracted from the leaf.

The Government of Ireland is of the view, however, that this proposed reservation raises doubts as to the commitment of Bolivia to the object and purpose of the Single Convention, as amended, which is to limit the production, trade and use of narcotic drugs to medical and scientific use and which provides for international cooperation and control for the achievement of this object. The proposed reservation, on the contrary, seeks to limit the international obligations of Bolivia by reserving its right to allow for the continued cultivation, trade and possession of the coca leaf.

The Government of Ireland is concerned with regard to the procedure followed by the Government of Bolivia in that the denunciation of the Single Convention, succeeded by re-accession with a reservation, compromises the rules of the law of treaties that prohibit the formulation of reservations after a state has become party to a treaty and undermines international efforts to limit the production, trade and use of narcotic drugs.

The Government of Ireland therefore objects to the aforementioned reservation made by the Government of Bolivia to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, as amended by the Protocol Amending the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs.

The objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Single Convention, as amended, between Ireland and Bolivia.

Israel objects to the proposed reservation. There is a substantial danger that the reservation might lead to a greater supply of available coca and an increase of coca production and sales. As a result, the reservation might weaken the international efforts to prevent illicit production, traffic and abuse of drugs which constitute the cornerstone of the Convention.

Italy praises the efforts by Bolivia to reduce the production and trade of illicit coca products. Italy fully respects the cultural identity and traditions of Indigenous Populations, guaranteed by the United Nations Declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples. However, Italy believes that the dialogue aimed at further promoting the respect of Indigenous traditions should be fully coherent with and preserve the integrity of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs.

States that are a Party to the Single Convention undertake an obligation to limit the trade and use of narcotic drugs exclusively for medical and scientific purposes. States Parties also recognize that measures against abuse of narcotic drugs require coordinated and universal action. Schedule I to the Single Convention lists coca leaf as a narcotic drug.

Italy is therefore of the opinion that, in proposing reservations, States Parties should be guided by the object and purpose of the Single Convention. The Bolivian approach poses the risk of creating a precedent and may undermine the international anti-narcotics legal framework. This would send a negative signal, out of step with the actions undertaken so far in the fight against drug trafficking and drug use.

Moreover, the procedure applied by Bolivia - denunciation and rejoin with reservation of the 1961 Convention - is contrary to the principle of ‘good faith’ under article 26 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties, since it appears directed to avoid the limits established in article 49 and 50 of the Single Convention.

In light of these considerations, the Government of Italy hereby informs the Secretary-General in accordance with Article 50, paragraph 3 of the Single Convention, that it objects to the proposed reservation by Bolivia of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs and requests that the Secretary- General inform States Parties to the Single Convention accordingly.

The Government of Japan has examined the reservation made by the Plurinational State of Bolivia and understands that Bolivia's contention is based on its custom and tradition. However the Government of Japan is of the view that the reservation seems to be incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention to prevent the illicit production, manufacture and trafficking of cocaine. Therefore, the Government of Japan objects to the aforesaid reservation.

Should the aforesaid reservation be deemed to be permitted as provided under Article 50, paragraph 3 of the Convention, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Japan and the Plurinational State of Bolivia. However, as also stipulated in the last sentence of the said paragraph, Japan would not assume towards the Plurinational State of Bolivia any legal obligation under the Convention which is affected by the reservation.

Be that as it may, the Government of Japan welcomes Bolivia's renewed commitment to continue to take all necessary legal measures to control the illicit cultivation of coca in order to prevent its abuse and the illicit production of the narcotic drugs which may be extracted from the leaf.

The Government of Mexico, pursuant to the applicable domestic and international legislation and to the procedure indicated in article 50, paragraph 3 of the Convention, submits through the present note its objection to the reservation for the following reasons:

[…] the Permanent Mission of Mexico to the United Nations wishes to inform, for any relevant purposes, that, having made a comprehensive assessment of the recent developments in multilateral discussions on the subject of drugs, the Government of Mexico has decided to withdraw the objection to the reservation made by the Plurinational State of Bolivia upon accession to the Convention, submitted by Mexico on 9 January 2013 and communicated in depositary notification C.N.85.2013.TREATIESVI.18 […]

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands has carefully considered the intention of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to re-accede with a reservation to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, as amended.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands fully recognizes the efforts of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to reduce the production and trade in illicit coca products.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands would like to underline that States that are Party to the Single Convention undertake an obligation to limit the trade and use of narcotic drugs exclusively for medical and scientific purposes.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands is therefore of the opinion that, in proposing reservations, States Parties should be guided by the object and purpose of the Single Convention. The Bolivian approach poses the risk of creating a precedent and may undermine the international anti-narcotics legal framework.

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers the procedure followed by the Plurinational State of Bolivia of denouncing the Single Convention as amended, followed by a re-accession with a reservation, as contrary to the rules of the law of treaties that prohibit the formulation of reservations after ratification. The procedure followed by the Plurinational State of Bolivia circumvents these well-established rules and the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to it.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Single Convention, as amended, between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Plurinational State of Bolivia.

The Plurinational State of Bolivia deposited its instrument of denunciation of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, as amended by the Protocol amending the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, New York, 8 August 1975, with effect as of 1 January 2012.

On 29 December 2011, Bolivia informed the depositary of its intention to accede once again to the Convention, subject to the authorisation by the States Parties of a reservation, submitted in accordance with Article 50, paragraph 3 of the Convention.

The Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that the United Nations' drug control conventions are the corner stone of the international legal framework for the fight against drugs.

The Government of the Portuguese Republic recognizes the efforts of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to reduce the production and trade in illicit coca products and respects the cultural importance of the coca leaf in Bolivia as part of Bolivian heritage.

However, the Government of the Portuguese Republic has serious concerns regarding the procedure followed by the Plurinational State of Bolivia of denouncing the Convention followed by an immediate re-accession with a reservation, since the Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that submitting the said reservation is not possible since 13 of December 1989, in accordance with the Articles 49, paragraph 2 and 41, paragraph 1 of the Convention.

The Government of the Portuguese Republic therefore objects to the proposed aforesaid reservation made by the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia.

Should the reservation of the Plurinational State of Bolivia be deemed to be permitted in accordance with Article 50, paragraph 3 of the Convention, this objection shall not constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between the Portuguese Republic and the Plurinational State of Bolivia.

The Government of Romania, while not filing a formal objection to the reservation made by Bolivia to article 49 of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, presents the following declaration:

The Government of Romania notes that Bolivia withdraw from the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (to which it did not have any reservations) followed within a very short period of time by a re-accession with a reservation.

The Government of Romania considers that the practice of withdrawing and re-acceding to a Convention with the sole purpose of presenting a reservation is inconsistent with the customary rule of international law according to which late reservations may not be allowed. At the same time, such actions may raise questions with respect to the stability of legal relations, as well as to the principle of pacta sunt servanda.

Pursuant to article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969, the Russian Federation objects to the reservation entered by the Plurinational State of Bolivia on 29 December 2011 to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, as amended by the Protocol amending the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 (the Convention).

The Russian Federation considers the Convention one of the fundamental international legal instruments for the control of narcotics; undermining it, including in matters relating to the coca leaf, could have serious negative consequences in terms of the use of the coca leaf for illicit purposes, including the cultivation of coca bush, the production of cocaine and an increased volume of illicit trafficking of cocaine. This step will also establish a dangerous precedent that might be used by other States in order to establish in their territories more liberal drug control regimes than are provided for by the Convention, the Convention on Psychotropic Substances, 1971 and the United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, 1988.

The question of what reservations may be made to the provisions of the Convention concerning coca leaf chewing, and on what conditions, is strictly governed by the special rule set out in article 49. Pursuant to that article, the State's ability to permit temporarily the chewing of the coca leaf in its territory is clearly subject to a number of restrictions and additional obligations, the most important of which is that coca leaf chewing must be abolished within 25 years from the coming into force of the Convention. That period expired for the Plurinational State of Bolivia in 2001.

In view of the foregoing, the Russian Federation calls upon the Plurinational State of Bolivia to review its position and withdraw the aforementioned reservation.

The Russian Federation welcomes the commitment by the Plurinational State of Bolivia to take all necessary measures to continue to control the cultivation and trade of the coca leaf in order to avoid its diversion to illicit channels and the desire of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to continue being a party to the Convention.

The United Kingdom acknowledges and respects the cultural importance of the coca leaf in Bolivia. The United Kingdom also understands that the Bolivian government considers it an integral part of Bolivian heritage and that the use of coca for traditional purposes has been established as a cultural right in the Constitution of the Plurinational State of Bolivia. The United Kingdom also welcomes the recent reductions in coca production in Bolivia, as outlined in the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2011 National Coca Monitoring Survey. The United Kingdom is, however, concerned that the reservation could lead to increases in coca production and — crucially — the amount of coca diverted to the cocaine trade. As such, the reservation would weaken international law as it relates to the global effort to tackle the drugs trade and could weaken the international community's response to that trade. Therefore, the United Kingdom objects to the proposed reservation and requests that the Secretary-General inform States Parties to the Single Convention accordingly.

[…] the United States objects to the proposed reservation. The United States considers the Convention to be one of the cornerstones of international efforts to prevent the illicit production, manufacture, traffic in and abuse of drugs, while ensuring that licit drugs are available for medical and scientific purposes.

The United States is concerned that Bolivia's reservation is likely to lead to a greater supply of available coca, and as a result, more cocaine will be available for the global cocaine market, further fueling narcotics trafficking and related criminal activities in Bolivia and the countries along the cocaine trafficking route. The United States welcomes Bolivia's renewed commitment to continue to take all necessary legal measures to control the illicit cultivation of coca in order to prevent its abuse and the illicit production of the narcotic drugs which may be extracted from the leaf.

Should Bolivia's reservation be deemed to be permitted in accordance with Article 50, paragraph 3 of the Convention, this objection would not constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between the United States and Bolivia, but the United States would not assume toward Bolivia any legal obligation under the Convention that is affected by the reservation.

The Government of Sweden fully recognizes the efforts of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to reduce the production and trade in illicit coca products. Sweden also understands the concerns that the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia has expressed concerning the United Nations' drug control conventions and the traditional coca leaf chewing.

The United Nations' drug control conventions are the corner stones of the international legal framework for the fight against drugs. An exemption for coca leaf chewing and the growing of coca plants for this purpose risks to undermine this system and to weaken the control over cocaine production. Furthermore, the ambition expressed in the convention is the successive prohibition also of traditional uses of drugs, the chewing of coca leaves being explicitly mentioned.

The Government of Sweden has serious concerns regarding the procedure followed by the Plurinational State of Bolivia with denunciation of the Convention followed by immediate re-accession with a reservation. While article 46 of the Convention provides that any Party may denounce the Convention, the denunciation should in no case be used by a State Party for the sole purpose of formulating reservations to the Convention after re-accession. Such practice would constitute a misuse of the procedure and would undermine the basis of international treaty law and the international legal framework for the fight against drugs.

For these reasons the Government of Sweden objects to the proposed reservation by the Plurinational State of Bolivia.

The Principality of Andorra does not consider itself bound by the provisions of paragraph 2 of article 48 which provide for a mandatory referral to the International Court of Justice of any dispute which cannot be resolved according to the terms of paragraph 1. The Government of Andorra takes the position that for any dispute to be referred to the International Court of Justice for decision the agreement of all the parties to the dispute shall be necessary in each individual case.

[The Government of Viet Nam declares its reservation to] article 48, paragraph 2 on Dispute settlement of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961.