UNTC

Objections

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


Latvia Latvia 23 March 2016 With regard to the reservations made by the Federal Republic of Somalia upon ratification: “… The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the reservations made by the Federal Republic of Somalia upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Republic of Latvia considers that Article 14 of the Convention forms the very basis of the Convention and thereof International Human Rights Law, thus no derogations from those obligations can be made. Moreover, the Republic of Latvia emphasises that para 3 of Article 14 contains the particular provisions related to the possible limitations of the right to manifest child's religious beliefs. Therefore, the Republic of Latvia considers that general reservation to Article 14 of the Convention cannot be considered in line with object and purpose of the Convention. Regarding the reservation to Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention that address the issues of the removal of child from family environment and matters of adoption, the Government of Latvia draws attention that Articles provide only general principles, leaving the issues of practical implementation up to the State Parties. Consequently, the reservation stipulating that the State Party to the Convention is not bound by Articles establishing the principle that the child can be removed from family environment and that the adoption shall be performed in the best interests of child, cannot be considered in line with aim and purpose of the Convention. Moreover, the reservation subjecting any of provision of the Convention to the General Principles of Islamic Sharia does not allow evaluate to what extent the Federal Republic of Somalia considers itself bound by the provisions of the Convention. Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia referring to para 2 of Article 51 of the Convention setting out that reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted, objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the Federal Republic of Somalia to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Republic of Latvia and the Federal Republic of Somalia. Thus, the Convention will become operative without the Federal Republic of Somalia benefiting from its reservation…”

Latvia

23 March 2016

With regard to the reservations made by the Federal Republic of Somalia upon ratification:

“… The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the reservations made by the Federal Republic of Somalia upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The Republic of Latvia considers that Article 14 of the Convention forms the very basis of the Convention and thereof International Human Rights Law, thus no derogations from those obligations can be made. Moreover, the Republic of Latvia emphasises that para 3 of Article 14 contains the particular provisions related to the possible limitations of the right to manifest child's religious beliefs.

Therefore, the Republic of Latvia considers that general reservation to Article 14 of the Convention cannot be considered in line with object and purpose of the Convention.

Regarding the reservation to Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention that address the issues of the removal of child from family environment and matters of adoption, the Government of Latvia draws attention that Articles provide only general principles, leaving the issues of practical implementation up to the State Parties. Consequently, the reservation stipulating that the State Party to the Convention is not bound by Articles establishing the principle that the child can be removed from family environment and that the adoption shall be performed in the best interests of child, cannot be considered in line with aim and purpose of the Convention.

Moreover, the reservation subjecting any of provision of the Convention to the General Principles of Islamic Sharia does not allow evaluate to what extent the Federal Republic of Somalia considers itself bound by the provisions of the Convention.

Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia referring to para 2 of Article 51 of the Convention setting out that reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted, objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the Federal Republic of Somalia to the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Republic of Latvia and the Federal Republic of Somalia. Thus, the Convention will become operative without the Federal Republic of Somalia benefiting from its reservation…”