UNTC

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.)

Norway ³⁶

Norway36

Subject to reservations to article 10, paragraph 2 (b) and paragraph 3 "with regard to the obligation to keep accused juvenile persons and juvenile offenders segregated from adults" and to article 14, paragraphs 5 and 7 and to article 20, paragraph 1.

19 September 1995

[The Government of Norway declares that] the entry into force of an amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act, which introduces the right to have a conviction reviewed by a higher court in all cases, the reservation made by the Kingdom of Norway with respect to article 14, paragraph 5 of the Covenant shall continue to apply only in the following exceptional circumstances:

1. "Riksrett" (Court of Impeachment)

According to article 86 of the Norwegian Constitution, a special court shall be convened in criminal cases against members of the Government, the Storting (Parliament) or the Supreme Court, with no right of appeal.

2. Conviction by an appellate court

In cases where the defendant has been acquitted in the first instance, but convicted by an appellate court, the conviction may not be appealed on grounds of error in the assessment of evidence in relation to the issue of guilt. If the appellate court convicting the defendant is the Supreme Court, the conviction may not be appealed whatsoever.

Objections

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


Norway Norway 4 October 1993 With regard to reservations to articles 6 and 7 made by the United States of America: "1. In the view of the Government of Norway, the reservation (2) concerning capital punishment for crimes committed by persons below eighteen years of age is according to the text and history of the Covenant, incompatible with the object and purpose of article 6 of the Covenant. According to article 4 (2), no derogations from article 6 may be made, not even in times of public emergency. For these reasons the Government of Norway objects to this reservation. 2. In the view of the Government of Norway, the reservation (3) concerning article 7 of the Covenant is according to the text and interpretation of this article incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant. According to article 4 (2), article 7 is a non-derogable provision, even in times of public emergency. For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to this reservation. The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Covenant between Norway and the United States of America." 22 July 1997 With regard to the declarations and the reservation made by Kuwait : "In the view of the Government of Norway, a statement by which a State Party purports to limit its responsibilities by invoking general principles of internal law may create doubts about the commitment of the reserving State to the objective and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law. Under well-established treaty law, a State is not permitted to invoke internal law as justification for its failure to perform its treaty obligations. Furthermore, the Government of Norway finds the reservations made to article 8, paragraph 1 (d) and article 9 as being problematic in view of the object and purpose of the Covenant. For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to the said reservations made by the Government of Kuwait. The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Kingdom of Norway and the State of Kuwait." 11 October 2001 With regard to the reservation made by Botswana upon ratification : "The Government of Norway has examined the contents of the reservation made by the Government of the Republic of Botswana upon ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The reservation's reference to the national Constitution without further description of its contents, exempts the other States Parties to the Covenant from the possibility of assessing the effects of the reservation. In addition, as the reservation concerns two of the core provisions of the Covenant, it is the position of the Government of Norway that the reservation is contrary to the object and purpose of the Covenant. Norway therefore objects to the reservation made by the Government of Botswana. This objection does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the Covenant between the Kingdom of Norway and the Republic of Botswana. The Covenant thus becomes operative between Norway and Botswana without Botswana benefiting from the said reservation." 29 June 2011 With regard to the reservations made by Pakistan upon ratification: “The Government of Norway has examined the reservations made by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan upon ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Government of Norway considers that the reservations with regard to articles 3, 6, 7, 12, 13, 18, 19, 25 and 40 of the Covenant are so extensive as to be contrary to its object and purpose. The Government of Norway therefore objects to the reservations made by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Kingdom of Norway and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The Covenant thus becomes operative between the Kingdom of Norway and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan without the Islamic Republic of Pakistan benefiting from the aforesaid reservations.” 20 May 2019 With regard to the reservations and statements made by Qatar upon accession: “… the Government of the Kingdom of Norway has carefully examined the reservations and statements made by the State of Qatar upon accession to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 16 December 1966. The reservations made by the State of Qatar to Article 3 and Article 23 (4), as well as the statements concerning Article 7, Article 18 (2), Article 22 and Article 23 (2), make the application of specific provisions of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia or national legislation. Statements 1 to 4 are thus also formulated as reservations. The Government of the Kingdom of Norway is of the view that the above-mentioned provisions concern essential elements of the Covenant, and that the State of Qatar, by making the application of these provisions subject to the Islamic Sharia or national law, has submitted reservations which raise doubts as to the full commitment of the Government of the State of Qatar to the object and purpose of the Covenant. These reservations are thus not permitted under international law. The State of Qatar has furthermore declared that it ‘shall interpret Article 27 of the Covenant that professing and practicing one’s own religion require that they do not violate the rules of public order and public morals, the protection of public safety and public health, or the rights of and basic freedoms of others’. If this statement is to be understood as a mere reference to Article 18 (3) of the Covenant, the statement is acceptable to the Government of the Kingdom of Norway. However, if the statement is meant to make the application of Article 27 subject to specific national rules, which are not further specified,this statement also lacks the necessary clarity and raises doubt as to the full commitment of the Government of the State of Qatar to the object and purpose of the Covenant. The Government of the Kingdom of Norway thus objects to the reservations made by the State of Qatar with regard to Article 3, Article 7, Article 18 (2), Article 22, Article 23 (2) and Article 23 (4). The statement related to Article 27 is acceptable to the Government of the Kingdom of Norway as far as it is in conformity with Article 18 (3). This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Kingdom of Norway and the State of Qatar.”

Norway

4 October 1993

With regard to reservations to articles 6 and 7 made by the United States of America:

"1. In the view of the Government of Norway, the reservation (2) concerning capital punishment for crimes committed by persons below eighteen years of age is according to the text and history of the Covenant, incompatible with the object and purpose of article 6 of the Covenant. According to article 4 (2), no derogations from article 6 may be made, not even in times of public emergency. For these reasons the Government of Norway objects to this reservation.

2. In the view of the Government of Norway, the reservation (3) concerning article 7 of the Covenant is according to the text and interpretation of this article incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant. According to article 4 (2), article 7 is a non-derogable provision, even in times of public emergency. For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to this reservation.

The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Covenant between Norway and the United States of America."

22 July 1997

With regard to the declarations and the reservation made by Kuwait :

"In the view of the Government of Norway, a statement by which a State Party purports to limit its responsibilities by invoking general principles of internal law may create doubts about the commitment of the reserving State to the objective and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law. Under well-established treaty law, a State is not permitted to invoke internal law as justification for its failure to perform its treaty obligations. Furthermore, the Government of Norway finds the reservations made to article 8, paragraph 1 (d) and article 9 as being problematic in view of the object and purpose of the Covenant. For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to the said reservations made by the Government of Kuwait.

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

11 October 2001

With regard to the reservation made by Botswana upon ratification :

"The Government of Norway has examined the contents of the reservation made by the Government of the Republic of Botswana upon ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The reservation's reference to the national Constitution without further description of its contents, exempts the other States Parties to the Covenant from the possibility of assessing the effects of the reservation. In addition, as the reservation concerns two of the core provisions of the Covenant, it is the position of the Government of Norway that the reservation is contrary to the object and purpose of the Covenant. Norway therefore objects to the reservation made by the Government of Botswana.

This objection does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the Covenant between the Kingdom of Norway and the Republic of Botswana. The Covenant thus becomes operative between Norway and Botswana without Botswana benefiting from the said reservation."

29 June 2011

With regard to the reservations made by Pakistan upon ratification:

“The Government of Norway has examined the reservations made by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan upon ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Government of Norway considers that the reservations with regard to articles 3, 6, 7, 12, 13, 18, 19, 25 and 40 of the Covenant are so extensive as to be contrary to its object and purpose. The Government of Norway therefore objects to the reservations made by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Kingdom of Norway and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The Covenant thus becomes operative between the Kingdom of Norway and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan without the Islamic Republic of Pakistan benefiting from the aforesaid reservations.”

20 May 2019

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

“… the Government of the Kingdom of Norway has carefully examined the reservations and statements made by the State of Qatar upon accession to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 16 December 1966.

The reservations made by the State of Qatar to Article 3 and Article 23 (4), as well as the statements concerning Article 7, Article 18 (2), Article 22 and Article 23 (2), make the application of specific provisions of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia or national legislation. Statements 1 to 4 are thus also formulated as reservations. The Government of the Kingdom of Norway is of the view that the above-mentioned provisions concern essential elements of the Covenant, and that the State of Qatar, by making the application of these provisions subject to the Islamic Sharia or national law, has submitted reservations which raise doubts as to the full commitment of the Government of the State of Qatar to the object and purpose of the Covenant. These reservations are thus not permitted under international law.

The State of Qatar has furthermore declared that it ‘shall interpret Article 27 of the Covenant that professing and practicing one’s own religion require that they do not violate the rules of public order and public morals, the protection of public safety and public health, or the rights of and basic freedoms of others’. If this statement is to be understood as a mere reference to Article 18 (3) of the Covenant, the statement is acceptable to the Government of the Kingdom of Norway. However, if the statement is meant to make the application of Article 27 subject to specific national rules, which are not further specified,this statement also lacks the necessary clarity and raises doubt as to the full commitment of the Government of the State of Qatar to the object and purpose of the Covenant.

The Government of the Kingdom of Norway thus objects to the reservations made by the State of Qatar with regard to Article 3, Article 7, Article 18 (2), Article 22, Article 23 (2) and Article 23 (4). The statement related to Article 27 is acceptable to the Government of the Kingdom of Norway as far as it is in conformity with Article 18 (3).

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Kingdom of Norway and the State of Qatar.”

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.)

Norway

31 August 1972

"Norway recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee referred to in article 28 of the Covenant, 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.)