UNTC

Objections

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


Latvia Latvia 29 June 2011 With regards to the reservations made by Pakistan upon ratification: “The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the reservations expressed by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to Articles 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 13, 16, 28 and 30 of the Convention upon ratification. The Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that the reservations expressed by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan seek to limit the effect of the application of the Convention. Moreover, the Government of the Republic of Latvia notes that the reservations expressed by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to Articles 3, 4, 6, 12, 13 and 16 of the Convention, viewed as constituting the object and purpose thereof, subject these provisions to the regime of its national law. The Government of the Republic of Latvia recalls that Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties sets out that a State Party may not invoke provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform obligations arising from an international treaty. The Government of the Republic of Latvia also recalls that customary international law as codified by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and in particular Article 19 (c) thereof, sets out that a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty is not permissible. Hence, reservations expressed by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to Articles 3, 4, 6, 12, 13 and 16 of the Convention raise doubts as to whether the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan will apply the Convention in line with its object and purpose. Consequently, the Government of the Republic of Latvia objects to the reservations made by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to Articles 3, 4, 6, 12, 13 and 16 of the Convention. At the same time, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Republic of Latvia and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Thus, the Convention will become operative without the Islamic Republic of Pakistan benefiting from its reservation.” 26 September 2013 With regard to the reservation made by Lao People’s Democratic Republic upon ratification: “The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the reservations and declarations made by the Lao People’s Democratic Republic to the Convention upon ratification. Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia believes that the first declaration, making the notion of ‘torture’ as it is understood by this Convention subject to national legislation of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, should not be considered an interpretative declaration having a mere declarative purpose. The interpretative declaration is deemed to change the legal effect of the Convention by limiting its applicability. Thus, it should be considered a reservation as stipulated in Article 2 (1) (d) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Moreover, the Government of the Republic of Latvia holds an opinion that this reservation contains vague reference to national legislation thus making impossible to determine to what extent the Lao People’s Democratic Republic considers itself bound by the provisions of the Convention. Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia regards this reservation as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. Whereof, the Government of the Republic of Latvia recalls that customary international law as codified by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and in particular Article 19 (c) thereof, sets out that a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty is not permissible. Consequently, the Government of the Republic of Latvia objects to the declaration of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic made upon the ratification of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. At the same time, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Republic of Latvia and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic benefiting from its reservation.”

Latvia

29 June 2011

With regards to the reservations made by Pakistan upon ratification:

“The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the reservations expressed by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to Articles 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 13, 16, 28 and 30 of the Convention upon ratification.

The Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that the reservations expressed by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan seek to limit the effect of the application of the Convention.

Moreover, the Government of the Republic of Latvia notes that the reservations expressed by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to Articles 3, 4, 6, 12, 13 and 16 of the Convention, viewed as constituting the object and purpose thereof, subject these provisions to the regime of its national law.

The Government of the Republic of Latvia recalls that Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties sets out that a State Party may not invoke provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform obligations arising from an international treaty.

The Government of the Republic of Latvia also recalls that customary international law as codified by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and in particular Article 19 (c) thereof, sets out that a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty is not permissible.

Hence, reservations expressed by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to Articles 3, 4, 6, 12, 13 and 16 of the Convention raise doubts as to whether the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan will apply the Convention in line with its object and purpose.

Consequently, the Government of the Republic of Latvia objects to the reservations made by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to Articles 3, 4, 6, 12, 13 and 16 of the Convention.

At the same time, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Republic of Latvia and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Thus, the Convention will become operative without the Islamic Republic of Pakistan benefiting from its reservation.”

26 September 2013

With regard to the reservation made by Lao People’s Democratic Republic upon ratification:

“The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the reservations and declarations made by the Lao People’s Democratic Republic to the Convention upon ratification.

Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia believes that the first declaration, making the notion of ‘torture’ as it is understood by this Convention subject to national legislation of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, should not be considered an interpretative declaration having a mere declarative purpose. The interpretative declaration is deemed to change the legal effect of the Convention by limiting its applicability. Thus, it should be considered a reservation as stipulated in Article 2 (1) (d) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Moreover, the Government of the Republic of Latvia holds an opinion that this reservation contains vague reference to national legislation thus making impossible to determine to what extent the Lao People’s Democratic Republic considers itself bound by the provisions of the Convention. Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia regards this reservation as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention.

Whereof, the Government of the Republic of Latvia recalls that customary international law as codified by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and in particular Article 19 (c) thereof, sets out that a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty is not permissible.

Consequently, the Government of the Republic of Latvia objects to the declaration of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic made upon the ratification of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

At the same time, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Republic of Latvia and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic benefiting from its reservation.”