UNTC

Objections

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


Latvia Latvia 15 November 2005 With regard to reservations made by Mauritania upon ratification: "The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the declaration made by Mauritania to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights upon accession. The Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that the declaration contains general reference to prescriptions of the Islamic Shariah, making the provisions of International Covenant subject to the prescriptions of the Islamic Shariah. Thus, the Government of the Republic of Latvia is of the opinion that the declaration is in fact a unilateral act deemed to limit the scope of application of the International Covenant and therefore, it shall be regarded as a reservation. Moreover, the Government of the Republic of Latvia noted that the reservation does not make it clear to what extent Mauritania considers itself bound by the provisions of the International Covenant and whether the way of implementation of the provisions of the International Covenant is in line with the object and purpose of the International Covenant. The Government of the Republic of Latvia recalls that customary international law as codified by Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and in particular Article 19c), sets out that reservations that are incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty are not permissible. The Government of the Republic of Latvia therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations made by Mauritania to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the International Covenant between the Republic of Latvia and Mauritania. Thus, the International Covenant will become operative without Mauritania benefiting from its reservation." 13 August 2007 With regard to reservation made by Bahrain: "The Government of the Republic of Latvia has noted that the reservation made by the Kingdom of Bahrain is submitted to the Secretary General on 4 December 2006, but the consent to be bound by the said Covenant by accession is expressed on 20 September 2006. In accordance with Article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties reservations might be made upon signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Taking into considerations the aforementioned, the Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that the said reservation is not in force since its submission." 4 September 2007 With regard to the reservation made by Maldives upon accession: "The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the reservation made by the Republic of Maldives to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights upon accession. The Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that the said reservation makes the constitutive provisions of International Covenant subject to the national law (the Constitution) of the Republic of Maldives. The Government of the Republic of Latvia recalls that customary international law as codified by Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and in particular Article 19 (c), sets out that reservations that are incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty are not permissible. The Government of the Republic of Latvia, therefore, objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the Republic of Maldives to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the International Covenantbetween the Republic of Latvia and the Republic of Maldives. Thus, the International Covenant will become operative without the Republic of Maldives benefiting from its reservation." 29 June 2011 With regard 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, 6, 7, 12, 13, 18, 19, 25 and 40 of the International Covenant upon ratification. Articles 3, 6 and 7 of the International Covenant shall be viewed as constituting the object and purpose thereof. Therefore, pursuant to Article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, reservations, whereby the mentioned provisions of the International Covenant are subjected to the regime of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan or of Sharia law may not be viewed as being compatible with the object and purpose of the International Covenant. Moreover, the Government of the Republic of Latvia notes that the reservations expressed by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to Articles 3, 6 and 7 of the International Covenant are ambiguous, thereby lacking clarity, whether and to what extent the fundamental rights guaranteed by Articles 3, 6 and 7 of the International Covenant will be ensured. Furthermore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that Article 40 of the International Covenant contains essential provisions to oversee the implementation of the rights guaranteed by the International Covenant. Therefore, the reservation declaring that the State Party does not consider itself bound with the provisions of this Article cannot be in line with the object and purpose of the International Covenant. Consequently, the Government of the Republic of Latvia objects to the reservations made by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan regarding Articles 3, 6, 7 and 40 of the International Covenant. At the same time, this objection shall notpreclude the entry into force of the International Covenant between the Republic of Latvia and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Thus, the International Covenant will become operative without the Islamic Republic of Pakistan benefiting from its reservation.” 15 May 2019 With regard to the reservations and statements made by Qatar upon accession: “The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the reservations and the statements made by the State of Qatar upon ratification of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights making the application of specific provisions of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia or national legislation. The Republic of Latvia considers that Article 3 and Article 23.4 of the Covenant forms the very basis of the Covenant and its main purpose. In addition, the Republic of Latvia is in the opinion that Articles mentioned in the statements 1 to 4 consists of the core elements of the Covenant and the statements also are in their nature reservations. Therefore, no derogations from those obligations can be made. The reservations made by the State of Qatar excludes the legal effect of central provisions of the Covenant, thus the reservations are incompatible with the object and the purpose of the Covenant and therefore inadmissible under Article 19 (c) of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Republic of Latvia and the State of Qatar. Thus, the Covenant will become operative between the two States without the State of Qatar benefitting from its reservations.”

Latvia

15 November 2005

With regard to reservations made by Mauritania upon ratification:

"The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the declaration made by Mauritania to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights upon accession.

The Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that the declaration contains general reference to prescriptions of the Islamic Shariah, making the provisions of International Covenant subject to the prescriptions of the Islamic Shariah.

Thus, the Government of the Republic of Latvia is of the opinion that the declaration is in fact a unilateral act deemed to limit the scope of application of the International Covenant and therefore, it shall be regarded as a reservation.

Moreover, the Government of the Republic of Latvia noted that the reservation does not make it clear to what extent Mauritania considers itself bound by the provisions of the International Covenant and whether the way of implementation of the provisions of the International Covenant is in line with the object and purpose of the International Covenant.

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

The Government of the Republic of Latvia therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations made by Mauritania to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the International Covenant between the Republic of Latvia and Mauritania. Thus, the International Covenant will become operative without Mauritania benefiting from its reservation."

13 August 2007

With regard to reservation made by Bahrain:

"The Government of the Republic of Latvia has noted that the reservation made by the Kingdom of Bahrain is submitted to the Secretary General on 4 December 2006, but the consent to be bound by the said Covenant by accession is expressed on 20 September 2006. In accordance with Article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties reservations might be made upon signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Taking into considerations the aforementioned, the Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that the said reservation is not in force since its submission."

4 September 2007

With regard to the reservation made by Maldives upon accession:

"The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the reservation made by the Republic of Maldives to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights upon accession.

The Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that the said reservation makes the constitutive provisions of International Covenant subject to the national law (the Constitution) of the Republic of Maldives.

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

The Government of the Republic of Latvia, therefore, objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the Republic of Maldives to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the International Covenantbetween the Republic of Latvia and the Republic of Maldives. Thus, the International Covenant will become operative without the Republic of Maldives benefiting from its reservation."

29 June 2011

With regard 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, 6, 7, 12, 13, 18, 19, 25 and 40 of the International Covenant upon ratification.

Articles 3, 6 and 7 of the International Covenant shall be viewed as constituting the object and purpose thereof. Therefore, pursuant to Article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, reservations, whereby the mentioned provisions of the International Covenant are subjected to the regime of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan or of Sharia law may not be viewed as being compatible with the object and purpose of the International Covenant.

Moreover, the Government of the Republic of Latvia notes that the reservations expressed by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to Articles 3, 6 and 7 of the International Covenant are ambiguous, thereby lacking clarity, whether and to what extent the fundamental rights guaranteed by Articles 3, 6 and 7 of the International Covenant will be ensured.

Furthermore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that Article 40 of the International Covenant contains essential provisions to oversee the implementation of the rights guaranteed by the International Covenant. Therefore, the reservation declaring that the State Party does not consider itself bound with the provisions of this Article cannot be in line with the object and purpose of the International Covenant.

Consequently, the Government of the Republic of Latvia objects to the reservations made by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan regarding Articles 3, 6, 7 and 40 of the International Covenant.

At the same time, this objection shall notpreclude the entry into force of the International Covenant between the Republic of Latvia and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Thus, the International Covenant will become operative without the Islamic Republic of Pakistan benefiting from its reservation.”

15 May 2019

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

“The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the reservations and the statements made by the State of Qatar upon ratification of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights making the application of specific provisions of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia or national legislation.

The Republic of Latvia considers that Article 3 and Article 23.4 of the Covenant forms the very basis of the Covenant and its main purpose. In addition, the Republic of Latvia is in the opinion that Articles mentioned in the statements 1 to 4 consists of the core elements of the Covenant and the statements also are in their nature reservations. Therefore, no derogations from those obligations can be made.

The reservations made by the State of Qatar excludes the legal effect of central provisions of the Covenant, thus the reservations are incompatible with the object and the purpose of the Covenant and therefore inadmissible under Article 19 (c) of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Republic of Latvia and the State of Qatar. Thus, the Covenant will become operative between the two States without the State of Qatar benefitting from its reservations.”

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.)

Latvia

16 March 2020

The Secretary-General received from the Government of Latvia a notification dated 16 March 2020, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, regarding the declaration of a state of emergency in the entire territory of Latvia from 13 March 2020 to 14 April 2020 by order No. 103 of the Cabinet of Ministers of 12 March 2020.

(See C.N.105.2020.TREATIES-IV.4 of 19 March 2020 for the text of the notification.)

16 April 2020

The Secretary-General received from the Government of Latvia a notification dated 15 April 2020, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, regarding the extension on 7 April 2020 of the state of emergency in the entire territory of Latvia until 12 May 2020.

(See C.N.135.2020.TREATIES-IV.4 of 21 April 2020 for the text of the notification.)

13 May 2020

The Secretary-General received from the Government of Latvia a notification dated 13 May 2020, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, regarding the extension on 7 May 2020 of the state of emergency in the entire territory of Latvia until 9 June 2020.

(See C.N.171.2020.TREATIES-IV.4 of 21 May 2020 for the text of the notification.)

9 June 2020

The Secretary-General received from the Government of Latvia a notification dated 9 June 2020, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, regarding the termination of the state of emergency in the entire territory of Latvia with effect on 10 June 2020.

(See C.N.204.2020.TREATIES-IV.4 of 18 June 2020 for the text of the notification.)

30 December 2020

The Secretary-General received from the Government of Latvia a notification dated 30 December 2020, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, regarding the extension of the state of emergency in the entire territory of Latvia with effect until 7 February 2021.

(See C.N.579.2020.TREATIES-IV.4 of 8 January 2021 for the text of the notification.)

8 February 2021

The Secretary-General received from the Government of Latvia a notification dated 8 February 2021, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, regarding the extension of the emergency situation in the entire territory of Latvia on 5 February 2021 until 6 April 2021.

(See C.N.60.2021.TREATIES-IV.4 of 11 February 2021 for the text of the notification.)

6 April 2021

The Secretary-General received from the Government of Latvia a notification dated 6 April 2021, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, regarding the termination of the state of emergency in the entire territory of Latvia with effect on 6 April 2021.

(See C.N.122.2021.TREATIES-IV.4 of 7 April 2021 for the text of the notification.)

21 October 2021

The Secretary-General received from the Government of Latvia a notification dated 21 October 2021, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, regarding the declaration of an emergency situation in the entire territory of Latvia as of 11 October 2021 until 11 January 2022 by Order of the Cabinet of Ministers of 9 October 2021 no. 720.

(See C.N.355.2021.TREATIES-IV.4 of 29 October 2021 for the text of the notification.)

15 November 2021

The Secretary-General received from the Government of Latvia a notification dated 15 November 2021, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, notifying that it withdraws its derogation from Article 21 of the Covenant.

(See C.N.378.2021.TREATIES-IV.4 of 22 November 2021 for the text of the notification.)