Algeria
Argentina17
Reservation to article 48, paragraph 2: The Argentine Republic does not recognize the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice.
Austria
Bangladesh
Belarus
Bulgaria18
Declaration "The People's Republic of Bulgaria considers it necessary to stress that the wording of article 40, paragraph 1; article 12, paragraphs 2 and 3; article 13, paragraph 2; article 14, paragraphs 1 and 2; and article 31, paragraph 1 "b" has a discriminatory character as it excludes the participation of a certain number of States. These texts are obviously inconsistent with the character of the Convention, aiming at unifying the efforts of all Parties with a view to achieving regulation of the questions, affecting the interests of all countries in this field."
Czech Republic7
Egypt19
France
Hungary20
India
Reservations: "Subject to the reservations referred to in Article 49 (1) (a), (b), (d) and (e) of the Convention, namely, subject to the right of the Government of India to permit temporarily in any of its territories: "(a) The quasi-medical use of opium, "(b) Opium smoking, "(d) The use of cannabis, cannabis resin, extracts and tinctures of cannabis for non-medical purposes, and "(e) The production and manufacture of and trade in the drugs referred to under (a), (b), and “ (d) above for the purposes mentioned therein.
Declarations: "Since the Government of India do not recognise the Nationalist Chinese authorities as the competent Government of China, they cannot regard signature of the said Convention by a Nationalist Chinese Representative as a valid signature on behalf of China."
Indonesia21
Reservation made upon signature and confirmed upon ratifica tion: "(1) . . . "(2) . . . "(3) With respect to article 48, paragraph 2, the Indonesian Government does not consider itself bound by the provisions of this paragraph which provide for a mandatory reference to the International Court of Justice of any dispute which cannot be resolved according to the terms of paragraph 1. The Indonesian Government takes the position that for any dispute to be referred to the International Court of Justice for decision the agreement of all the parties to the dispute shall be necessary in each individual case."
Liechtenstein
Myanmar
Reservation made upon signature and confirmed upon ratifica tion: "Subject to the understanding that the Shan State is being allowed to have reservation of the right: "(1) To allow addicts in the Shan State to smoke opium for a transitory period of 20 years with effect from the date of coming into force of this Single Convention; "(2) To produce and manufacture opium for the above purpose; "(3) To furnish a list of opium consumers in the Shan State after the Shan State Government has completed the taking of such list on the 31st December, 1963."
Netherlands (Kingdom of the)
Pakistan
Papua New Guinea22
Poland
Romania23
Reservations: (a) ... (b) The Socialist Republic of Romania does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 12, paragraphs 2 and 3; article 13, paragraph 2; article 14, paragraphs 1 and 2; article 31, paragraph 1 (b), in so far as those provisions refer to States which are not Parties to the Single Convention.
Declarations: (a) The Council of State of the Socialist Republic of Romania considers that the maintenance of the state of dependence of certain territories to which the provisions of article 42 and article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention apply is not in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the documents adopted by the United Nations concerning the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples, including the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, unanimously adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in its resolution 2625 (XXV) of 1970, which solemnly proclaims the obligation of States to promote realization of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples in order to bring an end to colonialism without delay. (b) The Council of State of the Socialist Republic of Romania considers that the provisions of article 40 of the Convention are not in accordance with the principle that international multilateral treaties, the aims and objectives of which concern the international community as a whole, should be open to participation by all States.
Russian Federation
Saudi Arabia24
Slovakia7
South Africa
Sri Lanka
Switzerland
Ukraine
Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, Twenty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 1 (E/3169), p. 17.
Signed and ratified on behalf of the Republic of China on 30 March 1961 and 12 May 1969 respectively. See note concerning signatures, ratifications, accessions, etc. on behalf of China (note 1 under “China” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume). See also the declaration made by the Government of India upon ratification.
On 27 April 1999, the Government of Portugal informed the Secretary-General that the Convention would apply to Macao.
Subsequently, on 19 October and 21 October 1999, the Secretary-General received communications regarding the status of Macao from China and Portugal (see also note 3 under “China” and note 1 under “Portgual” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume). Upon resuming the exercise of sovereignty over Macao, China notified the Secretary-General that the Convention will also apply to the Macao Special Administrative Region.
In addition, the communication by the Government of the People's Republic of China contained the following reservation:
The Government of the People's Republic of China has reservation to paragraph 2 of Article 48 of the Convention.
Within the above ambit, the Government of the People's Republic of China will assume the responsibility for the international rights and obligations that place on a Party to the Convention.
See note 2 under “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland” regarding Hong Kong in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
The Republic of Viet-Nam had acceded to the Convention on 14 September 1970. In this regard, see also note 1 under “Viet Nam” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
In a communication received by the Secretary-General on 23 November 1970, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Albania had stated that the Albanian Government considered the above-mentioned accession to be without any legal validity, since the only representative of the people of South Viet-Nam qualified to speak on its behalf and to enter into international commitments were the Provisional Revolution ary Government of the Republic of South Viet-Nam.
A similar communication was received by the Secretary-General on 11 January 1971 from the Permanent Representative of the Mongolian People's Republic to the United Nations.
The former Yugoslavia had signed and ratified the Convention on 30 March 1961 and 27 August 1963, respectively. See also note 1 under "Bosnia and Herzegovina", "Croatia", "former Yugoslavia", "Slovenia", "The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" and "Yugoslavia" in the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this volume.
Czechoslovakia had signed and ratified the Convention on 31 July 1961 and 20 March 1964, respectively, with reservations. For the text of the reservations, see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 520, pp. 361 and 412. See also note 1 under “Czech Republic” and note 1 under “Slovakia” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
See note 1 under “Germany” regarding Berlin (West) in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
The German Democratic Republic had acceded to the Convention on 2 December 1975 with reservations and declarations. For the text of the reservations and declarations see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 987, p. 425.
The Secretary-General had also received on 15 March 1976 a communication from the Government of the German Democratic Republic stating in part as follows:
In acceding to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 30 March 1961, the German Democratic Republic started solely from the provisions on accession to this Convention as set forth in its article 40. There was no intention of acceding to the Convention as amended by the Protocol of 25 March 1972.
Later, upon its accession to the 1972 Protocol, the Government of the German Democratic Republic declared that the said communication was to be considered as withdrawn.
See also note 2 under “Germany” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
By a communication received by the Secretary-General on 11 March 1980, the Government of Liechtenstein confirmed that it was not its intention to become a Party to the Convention as modified by the Protocol of 23 March 1972.
See note 1 under "Montenegro" in the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this volume.
For the Kingdom in Europe, Surinam and the Netherlands Antilles. See also notes 1 and 2 under “Netherlands” regarding Aruba/Netherlands Antilles in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
See note 1 under “New Zealand” regarding Tokelau in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
On 12 April 1994, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Greece the following communication:
"Accession of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to the Single [Convention on] Narcotic Drugs of the United Nations of 1961 does not imply its recognition on behalf of the Hellenic Republic."
See also note 1 under “Greece” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
In the instrument of ratification, the Government of Peru withdrew the reservation made on its behalf at the time of signing the Convention; for the text of that reservation, see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 520, p. 376.
See note 1 under “Uganda” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
In a communication received by the Secretary-General on 24 October 1979, the Government of Argentina declared that it withdrew the reservation relating to article 49 of the Convention. (For the text of that reservation, see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 520, p. 353.)
For the text of reservations as formulated by the Government of Bulgaria in respect of the same articles of the Convention at the time of its signature, see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 520, p. 355.
In a notification received on 6 May 1994, the Government of Bulgaria notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservations made by Bulgaria upon ratification with respect to article 48 (2). For the text of the reservations, see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 649, p. 362.
In a notification received on 18 January 1980, the Government of Egypt informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the declaration relating to Israel. For the text of the said declaration, see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 568 p. 364. The notification indicates 25 January 1980 as the effective date of the withdrawal.
A communication was received by the Secretary-General on 21 September 1966 from the Government of Israel with reference to the above-mentioned declaration. For the text of the communication see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 573,p. 347.
In a communication received on 8 December 1989, the Government of Hungary notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservation in respect of article 48 (2) of the Convention made upon ratification. For the text of the reservation, see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 520, p. 364.
In its instrument of ratification the Government of Indonesia withdraws the declarations made upon signature regarding its intention to make reservations with respect to article 40 (1) and article 42 of the said Convention. For the text of these declarations, corresponding to paragraphs 1 and 2, see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 520, p. 368.
Inasmuch as the reservation in question was not formulated by Australia at the time the Convention was originally extended to Papua and New Guinea, it will become effective on the date when it would have done so, pursuant to article 41 (2) and 50 (2) of the Convention, had it been formulated on accession, that is to say the thirtieth day after the deposit of the notification of succession by the Government of Papua New Guinea, i.e., on 27 November 1980.
In a communication received on 19 September 2007, the Government of Romania notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservation in respect of article 48 (2) of the Convention made upon accession. For the text of the reservation, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 908, p. 91.
In a communication received by the Secretary-General on 23 May 1972 the Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations made the following declaration:
"The Government of Israel has noted the political character of the reservation made by the Government of Saudi Arabia on that occasion. In the view of the Government of Israel, this Convention is not the proper place for making such political pronouncements. Moreover, the said pronouncement by the Government of Saudi Arabia cannot in any way affect whatever obligations are binding upon Saudi Arabia, under general international law or under particular treaties. The Government of Israel will, in so far as concerns the substance of the matter, adopt towards the Government of Saudi Arabia an attitude of complete reciprocity."
On 3 October 1983, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Argentina the following objection :
[The Government of Argentina makes a] formal objection to the declaration of territorial extension issued by the United Kingdom with regard to the Malvinas Islands (and dependencies), which that country is illegally occupying and refers to as the "Falkland Islands".
The Argentine Republic rejects and considers null and void the [said declaration] of territorial extension.
With reference to the above-mentioned objection the Secretary-General received, on 28 February 1985, from the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland the following declaration:
"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland have no doubt as to their right, by notification to the Depositary under the relevant provisions of the above-mentioned Convention, to extend the application of the Convention in question to the Falkland Islands or to the Falkland Islands Dependencies, as the case may be.
For this reason alone, the Government of the United Kingdom are unable to regard the Argentine [communication] under reference as having any legal effect."