United Nations - Treaty Collection on the Internet
Skip Navigation Links
    UNTS Document   
 
STATUS AS AT : 20-04-2014 05:01:08 EDT
CHAPTER III
PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES, DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR RELATIONS, ETC
5 . Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes
Vienna, 18 April 1961
Entry into force
:
24 April 1964, in accordance with article VIII.
Registration :
24 June 1964, No. 7312
Status :
Signatories : 29. Parties : 69
Text :
United Nations,  Treaty Series , vol. 500, p. 241.
Note :
See  "Note:" in chapter III.3.
Participant 1
Signature
Accession(a), Succession(d), Ratification
Australia
  26 Jan 1968 a
Austria
18 Apr 1961
28 Apr 1966
Bahamas
  17 Mar 1977 a
Belgium
23 Oct 1961
 2 May 1968
Bosnia and Herzegovina 2
   1 Sep 1993 d
Botswana
  11 Apr 1969 a
Bulgaria
   6 Jun 1989 a
Cambodia
  31 Aug 1965 a
Central African Republic
28 Mar 1962
19 Mar 1973
Colombia
18 Apr 1961
 
Costa Rica
   9 Nov 1964 a
Democratic Republic of the Congo
  19 Jul 1965 a
Denmark
18 Apr 1961
 2 Oct 1968
Dominica
  24 Mar 2006 a
Dominican Republic
30 Mar 1962
13 Feb 1964
Ecuador
18 Apr 1961
21 Sep 1964
Estonia
  21 Oct 1991 a
Fiji
  21 Jun 1971 d
Finland
20 Oct 1961
 9 Dec 1969
France
30 Mar 1962
31 Dec 1970
Gabon
   2 Apr 1964 a
Germany 3, 4
18 Apr 1961
11 Nov 1964
Ghana
18 Apr 1961
 
Guinea
  10 Jan 1968 a
Hungary
   8 Dec 1989 a
Iceland
  18 May 1971 a
India
  15 Oct 1965 a
Iran (Islamic Republic of)
27 May 1961
 3 Feb 1965
Iraq
20 Feb 1962
15 Oct 1963
Ireland
18 Apr 1961
 
Israel
18 Apr 1961
 
Italy
13 Mar 1962
25 Jun 1969
Japan
26 Mar 1962
 8 Jun 1964
Kenya
   1 Jul 1965 a
Kuwait
  21 Feb 1991 a
Lao People's Democratic Republic
   3 Dec 1962 a
Lebanon
18 Apr 1961
 
Liberia
  16 Sep 2005 a
Liechtenstein
18 Apr 1961
 8 May 1964
Lithuania
  26 Sep 2012 a
Luxembourg
 2 Feb 1962
17 Aug 1966
Madagascar
  31 Jul 1963 a
Malawi
  29 Apr 1980 a
Malaysia
   9 Nov 1965 a
Malta 5
   7 Mar 1967 d
Mauritius
  18 Jul 1969 d
Montenegro 6
  23 Oct 2006 d
Nauru
  14 Dec 2012 a
Nepal
  28 Sep 1965 a
Netherlands 7
   7 Sep 1984 a
New Zealand 8
28 Mar 1962
23 Sep 1970
Nicaragua
   9 Jan 1990 a
Niger
  26 Apr 1966 a
Norway
18 Apr 1961
24 Oct 1967
Oman
  31 May 1974 a
Pakistan
  29 Mar 1976 a
Panama
   4 Dec 1963 a
Paraguay
  23 Dec 1969 a
Philippines
20 Oct 1961
15 Nov 1965
Republic of Korea
30 Mar 1962
25 Jan 1977
Romania
  19 Sep 2007 a
Serbia 2
  12 Mar 2001 d
Seychelles
  29 May 1979 a
Slovakia
  27 Apr 1999 a
Slovenia 2
   6 Jul 1992 d
Spain
  21 Sep 2011 a
Sri Lanka
  31 Jul 1978 a
Suriname
  28 Oct 1992 a
Sweden
18 Apr 1961
21 Mar 1967
Switzerland
18 Apr 1961
22 Nov 1963
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 2, 9
  18 Aug 1993 d
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
11 Dec 1961
 1 Sep 1964
United Republic of Tanzania
27 Feb 1962
 5 Nov 1962
United States of America
29 Jun 1961
13 Nov 1972
End Note
1.Signed on behalf of the Republic of China on 18 April 1961.  See also note 1 under "China" in the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this volume.

In communications addressed to the Secretary-General with reference to the above-mentioned signature and/or ratification, the Permanent Representatives of the Permanent Missions to the United  of Bulgaria, the Byelorussian SSR, Mongolia, Pakistan, Poland, Romania, the Ukrainian SSR and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics stated that their Governments considered the said signature and/or ratification as null and void, since the so-called "Government of China" had no right to speak or assume obligations on behalf of China, there being only one Chinese State, the People's Republic of China, and one Government entitled to represent it, the Government of the People's Republic of China.

In letters addressed to the Secretary-General in regard to the above-mentioned communications, the Permanent Representative of China to the United Nations stated that the Republic of China, a sovereign State and Member of the United Nations, had attended the 1961 Conference on Diplomatic Intercourse and Immunities, contributed to the formulation of the Convention concerned, signed the Convention and duly deposited the instrument of ratification thereof, and that "any statements and reservations relating to the above-mentioned Convention that are incompatible with or derogatory to the legitimate position of the Government of the Republic of China shall in no way affect the rights and obligations of the Republic of China under this Convention".

The instrument of accession deposited on behalf of the Government of China on 25 November 1975 contained the following declaration:

The "signature" on and "ratification" of this Convention by the Chiang Kai-shek clique usurping the name of China are illegal and null and void.

2.The former Yugoslavia had signed and ratified the Optional Protocol on 18 April 1961 and 1 April 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.
3.See note 2 under “Germany” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
4.In a communication received on 22 March 1965, the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany informed the Secretary-General of the following:

"The Federal Republic of Germany is not a Party to the Statute of the International Court of Justice. In order to meet her obligations under article I of the Optional Protocol on the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes, and in accordance with Security Council resolution of 15 October 1946 on the conditions under which the International Court of Justice shall be open to States not Parties to that Statute [resolution 9 (1946) adopted by the Security Council at its 76th meeting], the Federal Republic has issued a declaration accepting the competence of the International Court of Justice for the disputes named in article I of the Optional Protocol on the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes.  This declaration also applies to the disputes named in article IV of the Optional Protocol on the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes which arise from the interpretation or application of the Optional Protocol on the Acquisition of Nationality."

The declaration referred to above was deposited by the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany on 29 January 1965 with the Registrar of the International Court of Justice who transmitted certified true copies thereof to all States parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice, in accordance with paragraph 3 of the Security Council resolution referred to above.

In the same communication, the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has notified the Secretary-General, in accordance with article IV of the Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes, done at Vienna on 18 April 1961, that it will extend the provisions of the said Protocol to disputes arising outof the interpretation or application of the Optional Protocol concerning the Acquisition of Nationality, done at Vienna on 18 April 1961.

See also note 1 under “Germany” regarding Berlin (West)  iHistorical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.

5.In its notification of succession the Government of Malta indicated that it considers itself bound by the Convention as from 1 October 1964 [the date of entry into force of the Convention for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland].
6.See note 1 under “Montenegro” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
7.For the Kingdom in Europe 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.
8.See note 1 under "New Zealand" regarding Tokelau in the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this volume.
9.Upon depositing the notification of succession, the Government of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia declared that "... the stipulation contained in this Protocol also apply to differences that arose from the interpretation or implementation of the Protocol with facultative signing relating to the acquisition of citizenship".