Declarations and Reservations
(Unless otherwise indicated, the declarations and reservations were made upon ratification, accession or succession.
For objections thereto and declarations recognizing the competence of the Human Rights Committee under article 41, see hereinafter.)

Denmark 19

2 April 2014


       Modification of the reservation made upon ratification:

       "2 (b) (i) Article 14, paragraph 5, shall be applied in such a manner that:

       - An unlimited right to appeal does not have to be instituted in cases where the conviction concerns a minor offence and the sentence imposed is a fine and/or confiscation below a certain amount to be laid down by law.

       - A right to a further appeal does not have to be instituted in cases where the accused person, having been acquitted by a lower court, is convicted for the first time by a higher court hearing an appeal of the acquittal.

       - A right to appeal does not have to be instituted in criminal proceedings against a Member of Government or any other person brought before the High Court of the Realm (Rigsretten).

       (ii) Article 14, paragraph 7, shall be applied in such a manner that criminal proceedings which led to a final conviction or acquittal may be reopened in certain circumstances to be laid down by law."

       The Government of Denmark confirmed that the reservation to Article 14, paragraph 5 above is a narrowing of the reservation made upon ratification and that the reservation to Article 14, paragraph 7 above is a clarification of the reservation made upon ratification.

       Paragraphs 1, 2 (a) and 3 of Denmark’s reservation made upon ratification remain unchanged:

       "1. The Government of Denmark makes a reservation in respect of Article 10, paragraph 3, second sentence. In Danish practice, considerable efforts are made to ensure appropriate age distribution of convicts serving sentences of imprisonment, but it is considered valuable to maintain possibilities of flexible arrangements.

       2. (a). Article 14, paragraph 1, shall not be binding on Denmark in respect of public hearings. In Danish law, the right to exclude the press and the public from trials may go beyond what is permissible under this Covenant, and the Government of Denmark finds that this right should not be restricted.

       3. Reservation is further made to Article 20, paragraph 1. This reservation is in accordance with the vote cast by Denmark in the XVI General Assembly of the United Nations in 1961 when the Danish Delegation, referring to the preceding article concerning freedom of expression, voted against the prohibition against propaganda for war."
Objections
(Unless otherwise indicated, the objections were made upon
ratification, accession or succession.)
 
Denmark

1 October 1993


With regard to the reservations made by the United States of America:

       "Having examined the contents of the reservations made by the United States of America, Denmark would like to recall article 4, para 2 of the Covenant according to which no derogation from a number of fundamental articles,  inter alia 6 and 7, may be made by a State Party even in time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation.

       In the opinion of Denmark, reservation (2) of the United States with respect to capital punishment for crimes committed by persons below eighteen years of age as well as reservation (3) with respect to article 7 constitute general derogations from articles 6 and 7, while according to article 4, para 2 of the Covenant such derogations are not permitted.

       Therefore, and taking into account that articles 6 and 7 are protecting two of the most basic rights contained in the Covenant, the Government of Denmark regards the said reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant, and consequently Denmark objects to the reservations.

       These objections do not constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Covenant between Denmark and the United States.

4 October 2001


With regard to the reservations made by the Botswana upon ratification:

       "The Government of Denmark has examined the contents of the reservations made by the Government of Botswana to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.  The reservations refer to legislation in force in Botswana as regards the scope of application of two core provisions of the Covenant, Articles 7 and 12 para.3. The Government of Denmark considers that the reservations raise doubts as to the commitment of Botswana to fulfill her obligations under the Covenant and are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant.

       For these reasons, the Government of Denmark objects to these reservations made by the Government of Botswana.  This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant in its entirety between Botswana and Denmark without Botswana benefiting from the reservations."

28 June 2011


With regard to the reservations made by Pakistan upon ratification:

       “The Government of the Kingdom of Denmark has examined the reservations made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan upon ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

       The Government of Denmark considers that the reservations made by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to articles 3, 6, 7, 12, 13, 18, 19 and 25 of the Covenant, which make the applications of these essential obligations under the Covenant subject to Sharia and/or constitutional and/or national law in force in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, raise doubts as to what extent the Islamic Republic of Pakistan considers itself bound by the obligations of the treaty and concern as to the commitment of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to the object and purpose of the Covenant.

       The Government of the Kingdom on Denmark has also examined the reservation of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan with respect to Article 40 of the Covenant.

       The Government of Denmark considers, that the supervisory machinery established under the Covenant, including the system of periodic reporting to the human rights Committee is an essential part of the treaty.

       Accordingly a reservation to the effect that a State Party does not recognize the competence of the Human Rights Committee to review and comment State reports must be considered contrary to the object and purpose of the Covenant.

       The Government of Denmark wishes to recall that, according to customary international law, as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant shall not be permitted.

       Consequently, the Government of Denmark considers the said reservations as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant and accordingly inadmissible and without effect under international law.

       The Government of Denmark therefore objects to the aforementioned reservations made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.  This shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant in its entirety between the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and Denmark.

       The Government of Denmark recommends the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to reconsider its reservations to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”
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.)
Denmark

19 April 1983


       "[The Government of Denmark] recognizes, in accordance with article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, opened for signature in New York on December 19, 1966, the competence of the Committee referred to in article 41 to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant."

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.)