UNTC

Objections

(Unless otherwise indicated, the objections were made upon
ratification, accession or succession.)


Canada Canada 18 September 2007 With regard to the reservation made by Maldives upon accession: "The Government of Canada has carefully examined the reservation made by the Government of the Maldives upon acceding to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in accordance with which the "application of the principles set out in Article 18 of the Covenant shall be without prejudice to the Constitution of the Republic of Maldives". The Government of Canada considers that a reservation which consists of a general reference to national law constitutes, in reality, a reservation with a general, indeterminate scope, such that it makes it impossible to identify the modifications to obligations under the Covenant, which it purports to introduce and it does not clearly define for the other States Parties to the Convention the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations of the Covenant. The Government of Canada notes that the reservation made by the Government of the Maldives which addresses one of the most essential provisions of the Covenant, to which no derogation is allowed according to article 4 of the Covenant, is in contradiction with the object and purpose of the Covenant. The Government of Canada therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Government of the Maldives. This objection does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the Covenant between Canada and the Maldives." 27 June 2011 With regard to the reservations made by Pakistan upon ratification: “The Government of Canada has carefully examined the reservations made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan upon ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which declare that: “the provisions of Articles 3, 6, 7, 18 and 19 shall be so applied to the extent that they are not repugnant to the Provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan and the Sharia laws”; “the provisions of Article 12 shall be so applied as to be in conformity with the Provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan”; “With respect to Article 13, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan reserves its right to apply its law relating to foreigners”; “the provisions of Article 25 shall be so applied to the extent that they are not repugnant to the Provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan”; and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan “does not recognize the competence of the Committee provided for in Article 40 of the Covenant”. The Government of Canada considers that reservations which consist of a general reference to national law or to the prescriptions of the Islamic Sharia constitute, in reality, reservations with a general, indeterminate scope. This makes it impossible to identify the modifications to obligations under the Covenant that each reservation purports to introduce and impossible for the other States Parties to the Covenant to know the extent to which Pakistan has accepted the obligations of the Covenant, an uncertainty which is unacceptable, especially in the context of treaties related to human rights. The Government of Canada further considers that the competence of the Committee to receive, study and comment on the reports submitted by States Parties as provided for in Article 40 of the Covenant is essential to the implementation of the Covenant. Through its function and its activity, the Human Rights Committee plays an essential role in monitoring the fulfillment of the obligations of the States Parties to the Convention. Participation in the reporting mechanism outlined in Article 40, which is aimed at encouraging more effective implementation by States Parties of their treaty obligations, is standard practice of States Parties to the Covenant. The Government of Canada notes that the reservations made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, addressing many of the most essential provisions of the Covenant, and aiming to exclude the obligations under those provisions, are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant, and thus inadmissible under Article 19(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. In addition, Articles 6, 7 and 18 of the Covenant are among the provisions from which no derogation is allowed, according to Article 4 of the Covenant. The Government of Canada therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. This objection does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the Covenant between Canada and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.” 21 May 2019 With regard to the reservations and statements made by Qatar upon accession: “The Government of Canada has carefully examined the reservations and declarations made by the Government of Qatar upon ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Government of Canada considers that reservations consisting of a general reference to national law or to the prescriptions of the Islamic Sharia constitute. in reality reservations with a general, indeterminate scope. This makes it impossible to identify the modifications to obligations under the Covenant that the reservation purports to introduce. With such a reservation, the other States Parties to the Covenant do not know the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations of the Covenant. This uncertainty is unacceptable, especially in the context of treaties related to human rights. The Government of Canada notes that the reservations made by the Government of Qatar, which address some of the most essential provisions of the Covenant and aim to exclude or limit the obligations under those provisions, are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant, and thus inadmissible under Article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The Government of Canada notes that the declarations made by the Government of Qatar aim at applying a provision of the Covenant only in conformity with domestic law or Islamic Sharia. However, the Covenant is to be applied in accordance with international law. The Government of Canada considers that these declarations are reservations in disguise, incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant, and thus inadmissible under article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. It is in the common interest of States that the treaties to which they have chosen to become Party 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 Canada therefore objects to the reservations and declarations made by the Government of Qatar. This objection does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the Covenant between Canada and Qatar.”

Canada

18 September 2007

With regard to the reservation made by Maldives upon accession:

"The Government of Canada has carefully examined the reservation made by the Government of the Maldives upon acceding to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in accordance with which the "application of the principles set out in Article 18 of the Covenant shall be without prejudice to the Constitution of the Republic of Maldives".

The Government of Canada considers that a reservation which consists of a general reference to national law constitutes, in reality, a reservation with a general, indeterminate scope, such that it makes it impossible to identify the modifications to obligations under the Covenant, which it purports to introduce and it does not clearly define for the other States Parties to the Convention the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations of the Covenant.

The Government of Canada notes that the reservation made by the Government of the Maldives which addresses one of the most essential provisions of the Covenant, to which no derogation is allowed according to article 4 of the Covenant, is in contradiction with the object and purpose of the Covenant. The Government of Canada therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Government of the Maldives.

This objection does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the Covenant between Canada and the Maldives."

27 June 2011

With regard to the reservations made by Pakistan upon ratification:

“The Government of Canada has carefully examined the reservations made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan upon ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which declare that:

“the provisions of Articles 3, 6, 7, 18 and 19 shall be so applied to the extent that they are not repugnant to the Provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan and the Sharia laws”;

“the provisions of Article 12 shall be so applied as to be in conformity with the Provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan”;

“With respect to Article 13, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan reserves its right to apply its law relating to foreigners”;

“the provisions of Article 25 shall be so applied to the extent that they are not repugnant to the Provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan”; and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan “does not recognize the competence of the Committee provided for in Article 40 of the Covenant”.

The Government of Canada considers that reservations which consist of a general reference to national law or to the prescriptions of the Islamic Sharia constitute, in reality, reservations with a general, indeterminate scope. This makes it impossible to identify the modifications to obligations under the Covenant that each reservation purports to introduce and impossible for the other States Parties to the Covenant to know the extent to which Pakistan has accepted the obligations of the Covenant, an uncertainty which is unacceptable, especially in the context of treaties related to human rights.

The Government of Canada further considers that the competence of the Committee to receive, study and comment on the reports submitted by States Parties as provided for in Article 40 of the Covenant is essential to the implementation of the Covenant. Through its function and its activity, the Human Rights Committee plays an essential role in monitoring the fulfillment of the obligations of the States Parties to the Convention. Participation in the reporting mechanism outlined in Article 40, which is aimed at encouraging more effective implementation by States Parties of their treaty obligations, is standard practice of States Parties to the Covenant.

The Government of Canada notes that the reservations made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, addressing many of the most essential provisions of the Covenant, and aiming to exclude the obligations under those provisions, are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant, and thus inadmissible under Article 19(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. In addition, Articles 6, 7 and 18 of the Covenant are among the provisions from which no derogation is allowed, according to Article 4 of the Covenant. The Government of Canada therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

This objection does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the Covenant between Canada and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.”

21 May 2019

With regard to the reservations and statements made by Qatar upon accession:

“The Government of Canada has carefully examined the reservations and declarations made by the Government of Qatar upon ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The Government of Canada considers that reservations consisting of a general reference to national law or to the prescriptions of the Islamic Sharia constitute. in reality reservations with a general, indeterminate scope. This makes it impossible to identify the modifications to obligations under the Covenant that the reservation purports to introduce. With such a reservation, the other States Parties to the Covenant do not know the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations of the Covenant. This uncertainty is unacceptable, especially in the context of treaties related to human rights.

The Government of Canada notes that the reservations made by the Government of Qatar, which address some of the most essential provisions of the Covenant and aim to exclude or limit the obligations under those provisions, are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant, and thus inadmissible under Article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

The Government of Canada notes that the declarations made by the Government of Qatar aim at applying a provision of the Covenant only in conformity with domestic law or Islamic Sharia. However, the Covenant is to be applied in accordance with international law. The Government of Canada considers that these declarations are reservations in disguise, incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant, and thus inadmissible under article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

It is in the common interest of States that the treaties to which they have chosen to become Party 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 Canada therefore objects to the reservations and declarations made by the Government of Qatar. This objection does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the Covenant between Canada and Qatar.”

Declarations recognizing the competence of the Human Rights Committee under article 41 ⁴⁶

(Unless otherwise indicated, the declarations were made
upon ratification, accession or succession.)

Canada

29 October 1979

"The Government of Canada declares, under article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, that it recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee referred to in article 28 of the said Covenant to receive and consider communications submitted by another State Party, provided that such State Party has, not less than twelve months prior to the submission by it of a communication relating to Canada, made a declaration under article 41 recognizing the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications relating to itself."

Notifications under Article 4 (3) of the Covenant (Derogations)

(Taking into account the important number of these declarations, and in order not to increase excessively the number of pages of the present publication, the text of the notifications has in some cases, exceptionally, been abridged. Unless otherwise indicated, when the notification concerns an extension, the said extension affects those articles of the Covenant originally derogated from, and was decided for the same reasons. The date on the right hand, above the notification, is the date of receipt.)