UNTC

Declarations and Reservations

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

Norway ⁴⁹

Norway49

Objections

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


Norway Norway 30 December 1991 With regard to the declaration made by Djibouti upon ratification: "A reservation by which a State party limits its responsibilities under the Convention by invoking general principles of national law may create doubts about the commitments of the reserving state to the object and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law. It is in the common interest of states that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties also are respected, as to object and purpose, by all parties. The Government of Norway, therefore, objects to this reservation. "This objection shall not constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between Norway and the Republic of Djibouti." Subsequently, the Secretary-General received, from the Government of Norway, objections of the same nature as the one above with regard to reservations made by the following States on the dates indicated hereinafter: - 30 December 1991: with regard to the reservation made by Indonesia upon ratification concerning articles 1, 14, 16, 17, 21, 22 and 29 and with regard to the reservation made by Pakistan upon signature and confirmed upon ratification; - 25 October 1994: with regard to the reservation made by the Syrian Arab Republic upon ratification; - 5 September 1995: with regard to the reservation made by Iran (Islamic Republic of) upon ratification. 14 June 1996 With regard to the declaration made by Qatar upon ratification: "The Government of Norway considers that the reservation made by the State of Qatar, due to its unlimited scope and undefined character, is inadmissible under international law. For that reason, the Government of Norway objects to the reservation made by the State of Qatar. The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the State of Qatar." 27 June 1996 With regard to the reservation made by Malaysia upon ratification: "The Government of Noway considers that the reservation made by the Government of Malaysia, due to its very broad scope and undefined character, is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention, and thus not permitted under article 51, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Moreover, the Government of Norway considers that the monitoring system established under the Convention is not optional and that, accordingly, reservations with respect to articles 44 and 45 of the Convention are not permissible. For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to the reservation made by the Government of Malaysia. The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and Malaysia." 29 November 1996 With regard to the reservation and declaration made by Singapore upon accession: "The Government of Norway considers that reservation (3) made by the Republic of Singapore, due to its unlimited scope and undefined character, is contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention, and thus impermissible under article 51, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Furthermore, the Government of Norway considers that declaration (2) made by the Republic of Singapore, in so far as it purports to exclude or to modify the legal effect of articles 19 and 37 of the Convention, also constitutes a reservation impermissible under the Convention, due to the fundamental nature of the rights concerned and the unspecified reference to domestic law. For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to the said reservations made by the Government of Singapore. The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the Republic of Singapore." 4 March 1997 With regard to the reservation made by Brunei Darussalam upon accession: [Same objection, mutatis mutandis, as the one made with regard to Qatar.] 13 March 1997 With regard to the reservation made by Saudi Arabia upon accession: [Same objection, mutatis mutandis, as the one made with regard to Malaysia.] 9 February 1998 With regard to the reservations made by Oman upon accession: [Same objection, mutatis mutandis, as the one made with regard to Singapore.] 29 September 2016 With regard to the reservations made by Somalia upon ratification: “The Government of Norway welcomes the ratification by the Federal Republic of Somalia of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Government of Norway has examined the reservation made by the Government of the Federal Republic of Somalia upon ratification of the Convention, according to which the Federal Republic of Somalia ‘does not consider itself bound by Articles 14, 20, 21 of the above stated Convention and any other provisions of the Convention contrary to the General Principles of Islamic Sharia’. The Government of Norway notes that the Government of the Federal Republic of Somalia has made a general reservation in respect of the provisions of the Convention which may be contrary to the General Principles of Islamic Sharia. The reservation is limiting the scope of the Convention, without identifying all the provisions in question, nor the extent of the derogation therefrom. The Government of Norway accordingly considers that the reservation raises serious doubts as to the full commitment of the Government of the Federal Republic of Somalia to the object and purpose of the Convention, and undermines the basis of international treaty law. Moreover, insofar as the reservation relates to Articles 14, 20 and 21 of the Convention, the Government of Norway considers that, in addition to being too vague, it affects essential elements of the treaty. The Government of Norway therefore considers the reservation made by the Federal Republic of Somalia to be incompatible with the object and the purpose of the Convention. The Government of Norway recalls that according to Article 51 paragraph 2 of the Convention, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted. The Government of Norway therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation. This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the Federal Republic of Somalia. The Convention thus becomes operative between the Kingdom of Norway and the Federal Republic of Somalia without the Federal Republic of Somalia benefiting from the aforesaid reservation.”

Norway

30 December 1991

With regard to the declaration made by Djibouti upon ratification:

"A reservation by which a State party limits its responsibilities under the Convention by invoking general principles of national law may create doubts about the commitments of the reserving state to the object and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law. It is in the common interest of states that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties also are respected, as to object and purpose, by all parties. The Government of Norway, therefore, objects to this reservation.

"This objection shall not constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between Norway and the Republic of Djibouti."

Subsequently, the Secretary-General received, from the Government of Norway, objections of the same nature as the one above with regard to reservations made by the following States on the dates indicated hereinafter:

- 30 December 1991: with regard to the reservation made by Indonesia upon ratification concerning articles 1, 14, 16, 17, 21, 22 and 29 and with regard to the reservation made by Pakistan upon signature and confirmed upon ratification;

- 25 October 1994: with regard to the reservation made by the Syrian Arab Republic upon ratification;

- 5 September 1995: with regard to the reservation made by Iran (Islamic Republic of) upon ratification.

14 June 1996

With regard to the declaration made by Qatar upon ratification:

"The Government of Norway considers that the reservation made by the State of Qatar, due to its unlimited scope and undefined character, is inadmissible under international law. For that reason, the Government of Norway objects to the reservation made by the State of Qatar.

The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the State of Qatar."

27 June 1996

With regard to the reservation made by Malaysia upon ratification:

"The Government of Noway considers that the reservation made by the Government of Malaysia, due to its very broad scope and undefined character, is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention, and thus not permitted under article 51, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Moreover, the Government of Norway considers that the monitoring system established under the Convention is not optional and that, accordingly, reservations with respect to articles 44 and 45 of the Convention are not permissible. For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to the reservation made by the Government of Malaysia.

The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and Malaysia."

29 November 1996

With regard to the reservation and declaration made by Singapore upon accession:

"The Government of Norway considers that reservation (3) made by the Republic of Singapore, due to its unlimited scope and undefined character, is contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention, and thus impermissible under article 51, paragraph 2, of the Convention.

Furthermore, the Government of Norway considers that declaration (2) made by the Republic of Singapore, in so far as it purports to exclude or to modify the legal effect of articles 19 and 37 of the Convention, also constitutes a reservation impermissible under the Convention, due to the fundamental nature of the rights concerned and the unspecified reference to domestic law.

For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to the said reservations made by the Government of Singapore.

The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the Republic of Singapore."

4 March 1997

With regard to the reservation made by Brunei Darussalam upon accession:

[Same objection, mutatis mutandis, as the one made with regard to Qatar.]

13 March 1997

With regard to the reservation made by Saudi Arabia upon accession:

[Same objection, mutatis mutandis, as the one made with regard to Malaysia.]

9 February 1998

With regard to the reservations made by Oman upon accession:

[Same objection, mutatis mutandis, as the one made with regard to Singapore.]

29 September 2016

With regard to the reservations made by Somalia upon ratification:

“The Government of Norway welcomes the ratification by the Federal Republic of Somalia of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The Government of Norway has examined the reservation made by the Government of the Federal Republic of Somalia upon ratification of the Convention, according to which the Federal Republic of Somalia ‘does not consider itself bound by Articles 14, 20, 21 of the above stated Convention and any other provisions of the Convention contrary to the General Principles of Islamic Sharia’.

The Government of Norway notes that the Government of the Federal Republic of Somalia has made a general reservation in respect of the provisions of the Convention which may be contrary to the General Principles of Islamic Sharia. The reservation is limiting the scope of the Convention, without identifying all the provisions in question, nor the extent of the derogation therefrom. The Government of Norway accordingly considers that the reservation raises serious doubts as to the full commitment of the Government of the Federal Republic of Somalia to the object and purpose of the Convention, and undermines the basis of international treaty law. Moreover, insofar as the reservation relates to Articles 14, 20 and 21 of the Convention, the Government of Norway considers that, in addition to being too vague, it affects essential elements of the treaty.

The Government of Norway therefore considers the reservation made by the Federal Republic of Somalia to be incompatible with the object and the purpose of the Convention.

The Government of Norway recalls that according to Article 51 paragraph 2 of the Convention, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted. The Government of Norway therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation.

This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the Federal Republic of Somalia. The Convention thus becomes operative between the Kingdom of Norway and the Federal Republic of Somalia without the Federal Republic of Somalia benefiting from the aforesaid reservation.”