CHAPTER IV

HUMAN RIGHTS12Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penaltyNew York, 15 December 1989Entry into force11 July 1991, in accordance with article 8(1).Registration11 July 1991, No. 14668StatusSignatories36Parties76TextUnited Nations, <i>Treaty Series </i>, vol. 1642, p. 414.The said Protocol, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, was adopted by resolution 44/128<superscript>1</superscript> of 15 December 1989 at the Forty-fourth session of the General Assembly of the United Nations and is open for signature at the United Nations Headquarters in New York by all States having signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

ParticipantSignatureRatification, Accession(a), Succession(d)Albania17 Oct 2007 aAndorra 5 Aug 2002 22 Sep 2006 Argentina20 Dec 2006 2 Sep 2008 Australia 2 Oct 1990 aAustria 8 Apr 1991 2 Mar 1993 Azerbaijan22 Jan 1999 aBelgium12 Jul 1990 8 Dec 1998 Benin 5 Jul 2012 aBosnia and Herzegovina 7 Sep 2000 16 Mar 2001 Brazil25 Sep 2009 aBulgaria11 Mar 1999 10 Aug 1999 Canada25 Nov 2005 aCape Verde19 May 2000 aChile15 Nov 2001 26 Sep 2008 Colombia 5 Aug 1997 aCosta Rica14 Feb 1990 5 Jun 1998 Croatia12 Oct 1995 aCyprus<superscript>2</superscript>10 Sep 1999 aCzech Republic15 Jun 2004 aDenmark13 Feb 1990 24 Feb 1994 Djibouti 5 Nov 2002 aEcuador23 Feb 1993 aEstonia30 Jan 2004 aFinland13 Feb 1990 4 Apr 1991 France 2 Oct 2007 aGeorgia22 Mar 1999 aGermany<superscript>3</superscript>13 Feb 1990 18 Aug 1992 Greece 5 May 1997 aGuinea-Bissau12 Sep 2000 Honduras10 May 1990 1 Apr 2008 Hungary24 Feb 1994 aIceland30 Jan 1991 2 Apr 1991 Ireland18 Jun 1993 aItaly13 Feb 1990 14 Feb 1995 Kyrgyzstan 6 Dec 2010 aLatvia19 Apr 2013 aLiberia16 Sep 2005 aLiechtenstein10 Dec 1998 aLithuania 8 Sep 2000 27 Mar 2002 Luxembourg13 Feb 1990 12 Feb 1992 Madagascar24 Sep 2012 Malta<superscript>4</superscript>29 Dec 1994 aMexico26 Sep 2007 aMonaco28 Mar 2000 aMongolia13 Mar 2012 aMontenegro<superscript>5</superscript>23 Oct 2006 dMozambique21 Jul 1993 aNamibia28 Nov 1994 aNepal 4 Mar 1998 aNetherlands<superscript>6</superscript> 9 Aug 1990 26 Mar 1991 New Zealand<superscript>7</superscript>22 Feb 1990 22 Feb 1990 Nicaragua21 Feb 1990 25 Feb 2009 Norway13 Feb 1990 5 Sep 1991 Panama21 Jan 1993 aParaguay18 Aug 2003 aPhilippines20 Sep 2006 20 Nov 2007 Poland21 Mar 2000 Portugal13 Feb 1990 17 Oct 1990 Republic of Moldova20 Sep 2006 aRomania15 Mar 1990 27 Feb 1991 Rwanda15 Dec 2008 aSan Marino26 Sep 2003 17 Aug 2004 Sao Tome and Principe 6 Sep 2000 Serbia 6 Sep 2001 aSeychelles15 Dec 1994 aSlovakia22 Sep 1998 22 Jun 1999 Slovenia14 Sep 1993 10 Mar 1994 South Africa28 Aug 2002 aSpain<superscript>8</superscript>23 Feb 1990 11 Apr 1991 Sweden13 Feb 1990 11 May 1990 Switzerland16 Jun 1994 aThe former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia26 Jan 1995 aTimor-Leste18 Sep 2003 aTurkey 6 Apr 2004 2 Mar 2006 Turkmenistan11 Jan 2000 aUkraine25 Jul 2007 aUnited Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland31 Mar 1999 10 Dec 1999 Uruguay13 Feb 1990 21 Jan 1993 Uzbekistan23 Dec 2008 aVenezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) 7 Jun 1990 22 Feb 1993 Azerbaijan<superscript>9</superscript>Reservation:<right>28 September 2000</right>“It is provided for the application of the death penalty in time of war pursuant to a conviction of a person for a most serious crime of a military nature committed during wartime.”BrazilReservation:... with an express reservation to article 2.ChileReservation:The State of Chile formulates the reservation authorised under article 2, paragraph 1, of the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, and may in consequence apply the death penalty in time of war pursuant to a conviction for a most serious crime of a military nature committed during wartime.Cyprus<superscript>2</superscript>GreeceReservation:Subject to article 2 for the application of the death penalty in time of war pursuant to a conviction for a most serious crime of a military nature committed during wartime.Malta<superscript>4</superscript>Republic of MoldovaDeclaration:"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. "Spain<superscript>8</superscript>Finland<right>27 September 2010</right>With regard to the reservation made by Brazil upon accession:“The Government of Finland welcomes the accession of Brazil to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and has taken note of the reservation made by Brazil to Article 2 thereof upon accession.The Government of Finland recalls that it is the object and purpose of the Second Optional Protocol to abolish the death penalty in all circumstances and reservations are, as a main rule, not admissible. This object of aiming at the complete abolition of the death penalty enjoys the full support of Finland. However, the Government observes that, in the light of the wording of Article 2(1), a reservation to the Protocol is allowed to the extent it concerns the application of the death penalty in time of war pursuant to a conviction for a most serious crime of a military nature committed during wartime. The acceptability of such a reservation requires that the State Party making the reservation communicates, at the time of ratification or accession, to the Secretary-General of the United Nations the relevant provisions of its national legislation applicable during wartime.Accordingly, the Government of Finland would find the reservation made by Brazil acceptable, provided it meets the requirements set out in Article 2(1) and (2). According to information available to the Government, the applicable provisions of the national legislation of Brazil were not communicated to the Secretary-General at the time of accession. Therefore, the Government of Finland objects to the reservation. Should, to the contrary, Brazil have communicated the provisions to the Secretary-General pursuant to Article 2(2), this objection may be considered null and void.This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Protocol between Brazil and Finland. The Protocol will thus become operative between the two states without Brazil benefiting from its reservation."1<i> Official Records of the General Assembly, Forty-fourth Session, Supplement No. 49 (A/44/49) </i>, p. 206.2On 20 June 2003, the Government of Cyprus informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation made upon accession to the Optional Protocol. The reservation reads as follows:“The Republic of Cyprus in accordance with article 2.1 of the [...] Protocol reserves the right to apply the Death Penalty in time of war pursuant to a conviction of a most serious crime of a military nature committed during wartime.”3The German Democratic Republic signed and ratified the Protocol on 7 March 1990 and 16 August 1990, respectively. See also note 2 under “Germany” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.4In a communication received on 15 June 2000, the Government of Malta informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation made upon accession. For the text of the reservation, see United Nations, <i>Treaty Series</i>, vol. 1844, p. 3185See note 1 under "Montenegro" in the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this volume.6For the Kingdom in Europe, the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba. See also note 2 under “Netherlands” regarding Netherlands Antilles in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.7See also note 1 under “New Zealand” regarding Tokelau in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.8On 13 January 1998, the Government of Spain notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation made upon ratification. The reservation reads as follows:Pursuant to article 2, Spain reserves the right to apply the death penalty in the exceptional and extremely serious cases provided for in Fundamental Act No. 13/1985 of 9 December 1985 regulating the Military Criminal Code, in wartime as defined in article 25 of that Act.9The reservation made upon accession read as follows: "The Republic of Azerbaijan, adopting the [said Protocol], in exceptional cases, adopting the special law, allows the application of death penalty for the grave crimes, committed during the war or in condition of the threat of war." With regard to the reservation made by Azerbaijain upon accession, the Secretary-General received communications from the following States on the dates indicated hereinafter: <i>France (8 february 2000): </i> The Government of the French Republic has taken note of the reservation made by Azerbaijan to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, which was adopted on 15 December 1989. This reservation, in allowing the application of the death penalty for grave crimes committed during war or ‘in condition of the threat of war', exceeds the scope of the reservations permitted under article 2, paragraph 1, of the Protocol. Under this article, only a reservation made ‘at the time of ratification or accession that provides for the application of the death penalty in time of war pursuant to a conviction for a most serious crime of a military nature committed during wartime' is admissible. Consequently, the Government of the French Republic expresses its objection to this reservation, without prejudice to the entry into force of the Protocol between Azerbaijan and France. <i>Finland (17 March 2000): </i> "The Government of Finland notes that, according to Article 2 of the Second Optional Protocol, a reservation other than the kind referred to in the same Article is not acceptable. The reservation made by the Government of Azerbaijan is partly in contradiction with Article 2 as it does not limit theapplication of death penalty to the most serious crimes of a military nature committed during the time of war. The Government of Finland therefore objects to the reservation made by the Government of Azerbaijan to the said Protocol. This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Second Optional Protocol between Azerbaijan and Finland. The Optional Protocol will thus become operative between the two states without Azerbaijan benefitting from the reservation." <i>GermanyMarch 2000): </i> "The reservation allows the application of the death penalty for grave crimes committed during war ‘or in condition of the threat of war’. Thus the reservation is partly in contradiction of article 2 of the Protocol since it does not limit the application of the death penalty to the most serious crimes of a military nature committed during the time of war. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany therefore objects to the reservation by the Government of Azerbaijan. This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Protocol between Azerbaijan and Germany." <i>Sweden (27 April 2000): </i> “The Government of Sweden recalls that reservations other than the kind referred to in Article 2 of the Protocol are not permitted. The reservation made by the Government of Azerbaijan goes beyond the limit of Article 2 of the Protocol, as it does not limit the application of the death penalty to the most serious crimes of a military nature committed during the time of war. The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Government of Azerbaijan to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This shall not preclude the entry into force of the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights between the Republic of Azerbaijan and the Kingdom of Sweden, without Azerbaijan benefiting from the reservation." <i>Netherlands (17 July 2000) </i> “ The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands notes that, according to Article 2 of the Second Optional Protocol, a reservation other than the kind referred to in the same Article is not acceptable. The reservation made by the Government of Azerbaijan is in contradiction with Article 2 as it does not limit the application of death penalty to the most serious crimes of a military nature committed during the time of war. The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objehe aforesaid reservation made by the Government of Azerbaijan. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Azerbaijan." Subsequently, on 28 September 2000, the Government of Azerbaijan communicated to the Secretary-General a modification to its reservation made upon accession. Within a period of 12 months from the date of its circulation, i.e. on 5 October 2000, none of the Contracting States to the Protocol notified the Secretary-General of an objection. Consequently, the modified reservation was deemed to have been accepted for deposit upon the expiration of the 12 month period, i.e., on 5 October 2001.