CHAPTER III
PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES, DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR RELATIONS, ETC
3Vienna Convention on Diplomatic RelationsVienna, 18 April 196124 April 1964, in accordance with article 51.24 June 1964, No. 7310Signatories60Parties192United Nations, <i>Treaty Series </i>, vol. 500, p. 95.The Convention was adopted on 14 April 1961 by the United Nations Conference on Diplomatic Intercourse and Immunities held at the Neue Hofburg in Vienna, Austria, from 2 March to 14 April 1961. The Conference also adopted the Optional Protocol concerning the Acquisition of Nationality, the Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes, the Final Act and four resolutions annexed to that Act. The Convention and two Protocols were deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The Final Act, by unanimous decision of the Conference, was deposited in the archives of the Federal Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Austria. The text of the Final Act and of the annexed resolutions is published in the United Nations, <i>Treaty Series </i>, vol. 500, p. 212. For the proceedings of the Conference, see <i>United Nations Conference on Diplomatic Intercourse and Immunities, Official Records</i>, vols. I and II (United Nations publication, Sales Nos: 61.X.2 and 62.X.1).
ParticipantSignatureRatification, Accession(a), Succession(d)Afghanistan 6 Oct 1965 aAlbania18 Apr 1961 8 Feb 1988 Algeria14 Apr 1964 aAndorra 3 Jul 1996 aAngola 9 Aug 1990 aAntigua and Barbuda17 Feb 2017 aArgentina18 Apr 1961 10 Oct 1963 Armenia23 Jun 1993 aAustralia30 Mar 1962 26 Jan 1968 Austria18 Apr 1961 28 Apr 1966 Azerbaijan13 Aug 1992 aBahamas17 Mar 1977 dBahrain 2 Nov 1971 aBangladesh13 Jan 1978 dBarbados 6 May 1968 dBelarus18 Apr 1961 14 May 1964 Belgium23 Oct 1961 2 May 1968 Belize30 Nov 2000 aBenin27 Mar 1967 aBhutan 7 Dec 1972 aBolivia (Plurinational State of)28 Dec 1977 aBosnia and Herzegovina<superscript>1</superscript> 1 Sep 1993 dBotswana11 Apr 1969 aBrazil18 Apr 1961 25 Mar 1965 Brunei Darussalam24 May 2013 aBulgaria18 Apr 1961 17 Jan 1968 Burkina Faso 4 May 1987 aBurundi 1 May 1968 aCabo Verde30 Jul 1979 aCambodia31 Aug 1965 aCameroon 4 Mar 1977 aCanada 5 Feb 1962 26 May 1966 Central African Republic28 Mar 1962 19 Mar 1973 Chad 3 Nov 1977 aChile18 Apr 1961 9 Jan 1968 China<superscript>2,3,4</superscript>25 Nov 1975 aColombia18 Apr 1961 5 Apr 1973 Comoros27 Sep 2004 aCongo11 Mar 1963 aCosta Rica14 Feb 1962 9 Nov 1964 Côte d'Ivoire 1 Oct 1962 aCroatia<superscript>1</superscript>12 Oct 1992 dCuba16 Jan 1962 26 Sep 1963 Cyprus10 Sep 1968 aCzech Republic<superscript>5</superscript>22 Feb 1993 dDemocratic People's Republic of Korea29 Oct 1980 aDemocratic Republic of the Congo18 Apr 1961 19 Jul 1965 Denmark18 Apr 1961 2 Oct 1968 Djibouti 2 Nov 1978 aDominica24 Nov 1987 dDominican Republic30 Mar 1962 14 Jan 1964 Ecuador18 Apr 1961 21 Sep 1964 Egypt 9 Jun 1964 aEl Salvador 9 Dec 1965 aEquatorial Guinea30 Aug 1976 aEritrea14 Jan 1997 aEstonia21 Oct 1991 aEswatini25 Apr 1969 aEthiopia22 Mar 1979 aFiji21 Jun 1971 dFinland20 Oct 1961 9 Dec 1969 France30 Mar 1962 31 Dec 1970 Gabon 2 Apr 1964 aGambia28 Mar 2013 aGeorgia12 Jul 1993 aGermany<superscript>6,7</superscript>18 Apr 1961 11 Nov 1964 Ghana18 Apr 1961 28 Jun 1962 Greece29 Mar 1962 16 Jul 1970 Grenada 2 Sep 1992 aGuatemala18 Apr 1961 1 Oct 1963 Guinea10 Jan 1968 aGuinea-Bissau11 Aug 1993 aGuyana28 Dec 1972 aHaiti 2 Feb 1978 aHoly See18 Apr 1961 17 Apr 1964 Honduras13 Feb 1968 aHungary18 Apr 1961 24 Sep 1965 Iceland18 May 1971 aIndia15 Oct 1965 aIndonesia 4 Jun 1982 aIran (Islamic Republic of)27 May 1961 3 Feb 1965 Iraq20 Feb 1962 15 Oct 1963 Ireland18 Apr 1961 10 May 1967 Israel18 Apr 1961 11 Aug 1970 Italy13 Mar 1962 25 Jun 1969 Jamaica 5 Jun 1963 aJapan26 Mar 1962 8 Jun 1964 Jordan29 Jul 1971 aKazakhstan 5 Jan 1994 aKenya 1 Jul 1965 aKiribati 2 Apr 1982 dKuwait23 Jul 1969 aKyrgyzstan 7 Oct 1994 aLao People's Democratic Republic 3 Dec 1962 aLatvia13 Feb 1992 aLebanon18 Apr 1961 16 Mar 1971 Lesotho26 Nov 1969 aLiberia18 Apr 1961 15 May 1962 Libya 7 Jun 1977 aLiechtenstein18 Apr 1961 8 May 1964 Lithuania15 Jan 1992 aLuxembourg 2 Feb 1962 17 Aug 1966 Madagascar31 Jul 1963 aMalawi19 May 1965 aMalaysia 9 Nov 1965 aMaldives 2 Oct 2007 aMali28 Mar 1968 aMalta<superscript>8</superscript> 7 Mar 1967 dMarshall Islands 9 Aug 1991 aMauritania16 Jul 1962 aMauritius18 Jul 1969 dMexico18 Apr 1961 16 Jun 1965 Micronesia (Federated States of)29 Apr 1991 aMonaco 4 Oct 2005 aMongolia 5 Jan 1967 aMontenegro<superscript>9</superscript>23 Oct 2006 dMorocco19 Jun 1968 aMozambique18 Nov 1981 aMyanmar 7 Mar 1980 aNamibia14 Sep 1992 aNauru 5 May 1978 dNepal28 Sep 1965 aNetherlands<superscript>10</superscript> 7 Sep 1984 aNew Zealand<superscript>11</superscript>28 Mar 1962 23 Sep 1970 Nicaragua31 Oct 1975 aNiger 5 Dec 1962 aNigeria31 Mar 1962 19 Jun 1967 North Macedonia<superscript>1</superscript>18 Aug 1993 dNorway18 Apr 1961 24 Oct 1967 Oman31 May 1974 aPakistan29 Mar 1962 29 Mar 1962 Panama18 Apr 1961 4 Dec 1963 Papua New Guinea 4 Dec 1975 dParaguay23 Dec 1969 aPeru18 Dec 1968 aPhilippines20 Oct 1961 15 Nov 1965 Poland18 Apr 1961 19 Apr 1965 Portugal<superscript>3</superscript>11 Sep 1968 aQatar 6 Jun 1986 aRepublic of Korea<superscript>12</superscript>28 Mar 1962 28 Dec 1970 Republic of Moldova26 Jan 1993 aRomania18 Apr 1961 15 Nov 1968 Russian Federation18 Apr 1961 25 Mar 1964 Rwanda15 Apr 1964 aSamoa26 Oct 1987 aSan Marino25 Oct 1961 8 Sep 1965 Sao Tome and Principe 3 May 1983 aSaudi Arabia10 Feb 1981 aSenegal18 Apr 1961 12 Oct 1972 Serbia<superscript>1</superscript>12 Mar 2001 dSeychelles29 May 1979 aSierra Leone13 Aug 1962 aSingapore 1 Apr 2005 aSlovakia<superscript>5</superscript>28 May 1993 dSlovenia<superscript>1</superscript> 6 Jul 1992 dSomalia29 Mar 1968 aSouth Africa28 Mar 1962 21 Aug 1989 Spain21 Nov 1967 aSri Lanka18 Apr 1961 2 Jun 1978 St. Kitts and Nevis 6 Jul 2010 aSt. Lucia27 Aug 1986 dSt. Vincent and the Grenadines27 Apr 1999 dState of Palestine 2 Apr 2014 aSudan13 Apr 1981 aSuriname28 Oct 1992 aSweden18 Apr 1961 21 Mar 1967 Switzerland18 Apr 1961 30 Oct 1963 Syrian Arab Republic 4 Aug 1978 aTajikistan 6 May 1996 aThailand30 Oct 1961 23 Jan 1985 Timor-Leste30 Jan 2004 aTogo27 Nov 1970 aTonga31 Jan 1973 dTrinidad and Tobago19 Oct 1965 aTunisia24 Jan 1968 aTurkey 6 Mar 1985 aTurkmenistan25 Sep 1996 aTuvalu<superscript>13</superscript>15 Sep 1982 dUganda15 Apr 1965 aUkraine18 Apr 1961 12 Jun 1964 United Arab Emirates24 Feb 1977 aUnited Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland<superscript>2</superscript>11 Dec 1961 1 Sep 1964 United Republic of Tanzania27 Feb 1962 5 Nov 1962 United States of America29 Jun 1961 13 Nov 1972 Uruguay18 Apr 1961 10 Mar 1970 Uzbekistan 2 Mar 1992 aVanuatu16 Oct 2018 aVenezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)18 Apr 1961 16 Mar 1965 Viet Nam<superscript>14</superscript>26 Aug 1980 aYemen<superscript>15</superscript>10 Apr 1986 aZambia<superscript>16</superscript>16 Jun 1975 dZimbabwe13 May 1991 a
Declarations and Reservations(Unless otherwise indicated, the declarations and reservations were madeupon ratification, accession or succession. For objections thereto see hereinafter.)Australia<right>14 March 1968</right>"The Government of the Commonwealth of Australia does not regard the statements concerning paragraph (1) of Article 11 made by the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the Mongolian People's Republic as modifying any rights or obligations under that paragraph."The Government of the Commonwealth of Australia declares that it does not recognize as valid the reservations to paragraph 2, Article 37, of the Convention made by the United Arab Republic and by Cambodia."<right>20 November 1970</right>"The Government of the Commonwealth of Australia declares that it does not recognize as valid the reservations to article 37, paragraph 2, of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by Morocco and Portugal."<right>6 September 1973</right>"The Government of Australia does not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Convention made by the German Democratic Republic, in a letter accompanying the instrument of accession as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph."<right>25 January 1977</right>"The Government of Australia does not regard as valid the reservations made by the Government of the People's Republic of China to paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 of article 37 of that Convention."<right>21 June 1978</right>"The Government of Australia does not regard the reservation made by the Government of the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen to paragraph (1) of article 11 as modifying any rights or obligations under that paragraph."<right>22 February 1983</right>"Australia does not regard as valid the reservations made by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the State of Bahrain, the State of Kuwait and the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, in respect of treatment of the diplomatic bag under article 27 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations."<right>10 February 1987</right>"Australia does not regard as valid the reservations made by the State of Qatar and the Yemen Arab Republic in respect of treatment of the diplomatic bag under Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 18 April 1961."Bahrain<superscript>17</superscript>"1. With respect to paragraph 3 of article 27, relating to the `Diplomatic Bag', the Government of the State of Bahrain reserves its right to open the diplomatic bag if there are serious grounds for presuming that it contains articles the import or export of which is prohibited by law."2. The approval of this Convention does not constitute a recognition of Israel, or amount to entering with it into any transaction required by the aforesaid Convention."Belarus<i>Reservation concerning article 11, paragraph 1:</i>In accordance with the principle of the equality of rights of States, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic considers that any difference of opinion regarding the size of a diplomatic mission should be settled by agreement between the sending State and the receiving State.<i>Declaration concerning articles 48 and 50:</i>The Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic considers it necessary to draw attention to the discriminatory nature of articles 48 and 50 of the Convention, under the terms of which a number of States are precluded from acceding to the Convention. The Convention deals with matters which affect the interests of all States and should therefore be open for accession by all States. In accordance with the principle of sovereign equality no State has the right to bar other States from accession to a Convention of this nature.<right>2 November 1977</right>The Government of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic does not recognize the validity of the reservation made by the Chinese People's Republic to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.<right>16 October 1986</right>[Same reservation, mutatis mutandis,as the one made by the Russian Federation on 6 October 1986.]<right>11 November 1986</right>[Same reservation, mutatis mutandis,as the one made by the Russian Federation on 6 November 1986.]Botswana"Subject to the reservation that article 37 of the Convention should be applicable on the basis of reciprocity only."Bulgaria<i>Reservation concerning article 11, paragraph 1:</i>In accordance with the principle of the equality of States, the People's Republic of Bulgaria considers that any difference of opinion regarding the size of a diplomatic mission should be settled by agreement between the sending State and the receiving State.<i>Declaration concerning articles 48 and 50:</i>The People's Republic of Bulgaria considers it necessary to draw attention to the discriminatory nature of articles 48 and 50 of the Convention, under the terms of which a number of States are precluded from acceding to the Convention. The provisions of these articles are inconsistent with the very nature of the Con- vention, which is universal in character and should be open for accession by all States. In accordance with the principle of equality, no State has the right to bar other States from accession to a convention of this kind.CambodiaThe diplomatic immunities and privileges provided for in article 37, paragraph 2, of the afore-mentioned Convention, recognized and admitted in customary law and in the practice of States in favour of heads of missions and members of diplomatic staff of the mission, cannot be granted by the Royal Government of Cambodia for the benefit of other categories of mission staff, including administrative and technical staff.Canada"The Government of Canada does not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of Article 11 of the Convention made by the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as modifying any rights or obligations under this paragraph."<right>16 March 1978</right>"The Government of Canada does not regard as valid the reservations to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the People's Republic of China. Similarly the Government of Canada does not regard as valid the reservations to paragraph 2 of article 37 of the Convention which have been made by the Government of the United Arab Republic (now the Arab Republic of Egypt), the Government of Cambodia (now Kampuchea) and the Government of the Kingdom of Morocco."The Government of Canada does not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Convention made by the Government of the Mongolian People's Republic, the Government of Bulgaria, the Government of the German Demo- cratic Republic and the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph."The Government of Canada also desires to place on record that it does not regard as valid the reservations to paragraph 3 of article 27 of the Convention made by the Government of Bahrain and the reservations to paragraph 4 of article 27 made by the State of Kuwait and the Government of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya."China<superscript>18</superscript>The Government of the People's Republic of China holds reservations on the provisions about nuncios and the representa- tive of the Holy See in articles 14 and 16 and on the provisions of paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37.CubaThe Revolutionary Government of Cuba makes an explicit reservation in respect of the provisions of articles 48 and 50 of the Convention, because it considers that, in view of the nature of the contents of the Convention and the subject it concerns, all free and sovereign States have the right to participate in it: for that reason, the Revolutionary Government of Cuba favours facilitating the admission of all countries of the International Community, without any distinction based on the extent of a State's territory, the number of its inhabitants or its social, economic or political system.Denmark"The Government of Denmark does not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of Article 11 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the People's Republic of Bulgaria, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Mongolian People's Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph. Further, the Government of Denmark does not regard as valid the reservation to paragraph 2 of Article 37 made by the United Arab Republic, Cambodia and Morocco. This statement shall not be regarded as precluding the entry into force of the Convention between Denmark and the above-mentioned countries."<right>5 August 1970</right>"The Government of Denmark does not regard the reserva- tion to article 37, paragraph 2, of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by Portugal on 11th of September 1968 as valid."This statement shall not be regarded as precluding the entry into force of the said Convention between Denmark and Portu- gal."<right>29 March 1977</right>"The Government of Denmark does not regard as valid the reservations made by the People's Republic of China to article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 18 April 1961. This statement is not to be regarded as preventing the Convention's entry into force as between Denmark and the People's Republic of China.Ecuador<superscript>19</superscript>Egypt<superscript>17,20</superscript>"1. Paragraph 2 of article 37 shall not apply."FranceThe Government of the French Republic considers that article 38, paragraph 1, is to be interpreted as granting to a diplomatic agent who is a national of or permanently resident in the receiving State only immunity from jurisdiction, and inviolability, both being confined to official acts performed by the said diplomatic agent in the exercise of his functions.The Government of the French Republic declares that the provisions of the bilateral agreements in force between France and foreign States are not affected by the provisions of the Con- vention.The Government of the French Republic does not regard the statements concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 made by the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Mongolian People's Republic, the People's Republic of Bulgaria, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as modifying any rights or obligations under that paragraph.The Government of the French Republic does not regard as valid the reservation to article 27, paragraph 4, made by the State of Kuwait.The Government of the French Republic does not regard as valid the reservations to article 37, paragraph 2, made by the Government of Cambodia, the Government of the Kingdom of Morocco, the Government of Portugal and the Government of the United Arab Republic.None of these declarations shall be regarded as an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between the French Republic and the States mentioned.<right>28 December 1976</right>The Government of the French Republic does not regard as valid the reservations made by the People's Republic of China to article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 18 April 1961. This declaration is not to be regarded as preventing the Convention's entry into force as between the French Republic and the People's Republic of China.<right>29 August 1986</right>1. The Government of the French Republic declares that it does not recognize as valid the reservation entered by the Government of the Yemen Arab Republic which would make it permissible to request the opening of the diplomatic bag and to return it to the sender. The Government of the French Republic considers that this or any similar reservation is inconsistent with the object and the purpose of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations done at Vienna on 18April 1961.2. This declaration shall not be regarded as an obstacle to the entry into force of the said Convention between the French Republic and the Yemen Arab Republic.Greece<superscript>21</superscript>Guatemala<right>23 December 1963</right>The Government of Guatemala rejects formally the reserva- tions to articles 48 and 50 of the Convention made by the Government of Cuba in its instrument of ratification.Haiti<right>9 May 1972</right>The Haitian Government considers that the reservation expressed by the Government of Bahrain with regard to the inviolability of diplomatic correspondence may destroy the effectiveness of the Convention, one of the main aims of which is precisely to put an end to certain practices impeding the performance of the functions assigned to diplomatic agents.Hungary"The Hungarian People's Republic considers it necessary to draw attention to the discriminatory nature of articles 48 and 50 of the Convention, under the terms of which a number of States were precluded from signing and are precluded from acceding to the Convention. The Convention deals with matters which affect the interests of all States and therefore, in accordance with the principle of sovereign equality of States, no State should be barred from participation in a Convention of this nature."<right>7 July 1975</right>"The reservation made by the Government of Bahrain to article 27, paragraph 3, of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations is contrary to the principle of the inviolability of the diplomatic bag which is generally recognized in the international practice, and is incompatible with the objectives of the Convention."Therefore, the Hungarian People's Republic does not recognize this reservation as valid."<right>6 September 1978</right>"The Government of the Hungarian People's Republic does not recognize the validity of the reservation made by the Chinese People's Republic to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations."Iraq"With reservation that paragraph 2 of article 37 shall be applied on the basis of reciprocity."Ireland<right>17 January 1978</right>"The Government of Ireland object to the reservations made by the Government of the People's Republic of China concerning the provisions relating to Nuncios and the representative of the Holy See in articles 14 and 16 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. The Government of Ireland do not regard these reservations as modifying any rights or obligations under those articles."The Government of Ireland do not regard as valid the reser- vations made by the Government of the People's Republic of China to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37."This statement is not to be regarded as preventing the entry into force of the Convention as between Ireland and the People's Republic of China."Japan<i>Declaration with regard to article 34 (a) of the said Convention:</i>"It is understood that the taxes referred to in article 34 (a) include those collected by special collectors under the laws and regulations of Japan provided that they are normally incorporated in the price of goods or services. For example, in the case of the travelling tax, railway, shipping and airline companies are made special collectors of the tax by the Travelling Tax Law. Passengers of railroad trains, vessels and airplanes who are legally liable to pay the tax for their travels within Japan are required to purchase travel tickets normally at a price incorporating the tax with out being specifically informed of its amount. Accordingly, taxes collected by special collectors such as the travelling tax have to be considered as the indirect taxes normally incorporated in the price of goods or services referred to in article 34 (a)."<right>27 January 1987</right>"With respect to paragraphs 3 and 4 of article 27 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 18 April 1961, the Government of Japan believes that the protection of diplomatic correspondence by means of diplomatic bags constitutes an important element of the Convention, and any reservation intended to allow a receiving State to open diplomatic bags without the consent of the sending State is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. Therefore the Government of Japan does not regard as valid the reservations concerning article 27 of the Convention made by the Government of Bahrain and the Government of Qatar on 2 November 1971 and 6 June 1986, respectively. The Government of Japan also desires to record that the above-stated position is applicable to any reservations to the same effect to be made in the future by other countries."Kuwait<superscript>17</superscript>If the State of Kuwait has reason to believe that the diplomatic pouch contains something which may not be sent by pouch under paragraph 4 of article 27 of the Convention, it considers that it has the right to request that the pouch be opened in the presence of the representative of the diplomatic mission [concerned]. If this request is refused by the authorities of the sending State, the diplomatic pouch shall be returned to its place of origin.The Government of Kuwait declares that its accession to the Convention does not imply recognition of "Israel" or entering with it into relations governed by the Convention thereto acceded.Libya<superscript>17</superscript>(1) The accession of the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to said Convention cannot be interpreted as signifying in any form whatsoever any recognition of Israel nor does accession to said Convention imply the entertaining of any relations or obligations with Israel.(2) The Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya will not be bound by paragraph 3 of article 37 of the Convention except on the basis of reciprocity.(3) In the event that the authorities of the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya entertain strong doubts that the contents of a diplomatic pouch include items which may not be sent by diplomatic pouch in accordance with paragraph 4 of article 27 of said Convention, the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya reserves its right to request the opening of such pouch in the presence of an official representative of the diplomatic mission concerned. If such request is denied by the authorities of the sending state, the diplomatic pouch shall be returned to its place of origin.Luxembourg<right>18 January 1965</right>With reference to the reservation and declaration made by the Governments of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics upon ratification of the Convention, the Government of Luxembourg regrets that it cannot accept that reservation or that declaration which tends to modify the effect of certain provisions of the Convention.<right>25 October 1965</right>With reference to the statement made by the Government of Hungary upon ratification of the Convention, the Government of Luxembourg regrets that it cannot accept this declaration.Malta"The Government of Malta wishes to declare that paragraph 2 of article 37 shall be applied on the basis of reciprocity."Mongolia<superscript>22</superscript>Referring to articles 48 and 50, the Government of the Mongolian People's Republic deems it necessary to draw attention to the discriminatory nature of articles 48 and 50 of the Vienna Convention and declares that, as the Convention deals with matters affecting the interests of all States, it should be open for accession by all States.<right>18 January 1978</right>"Reservation made by the Government of Bahrain to paragraph 3, article 27 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations is incompatible with the very object and purpose of the Convention. Therefore the Government of the Mongolian People's Republic does not consider itself bound by the above-mentioned reservation."The Government of the Mongolian People's Republic does not recognize the validity of the reservation made by the Government of the People's Republic of China to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations."MoroccoThe Kingdom of Morocco accedes to the Convention subject to the reservation that paragraph 2 of article 37 is not applicable.Mozambique"The People's Republic of Mozambique takes this opportun-ity to draw the attention to the discriminatory nature of the articles 48 and 50 of the present Convention which preclude a number of States from acceding to it. In view of its broad scope which affects the interest of all States in the world the present Convention should therefore be open for participation of all States.""The People's Republic of Mozambique considers that the joint participation of States in a convention does not represent their official recognition."Nepal"Subject to the reservation with regard to article 8, paragraph 3, of the Convention, that the prior consent to His Majesty's Government of Nepal shall be required for the appointment to the diplomatic staff of any mission in Nepal of any national of a third State who is not also a national of the sending State."New Zealand"The Government of New Zealand does not regard the state- ments concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the People's Republic of Bulgaria, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Mongolian People's Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph. Further, the Government of New Zealand does not accept the reservation to paragraph 2 of Article 37 of the Convention made by Cambodia, Morocco, Portugal and the United Arab Republic."<right>25 January 1977</right>"The Government of New Zealand does not regard as valid the reservations to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 18 April 1961 made by the Government of the People's Republic of China and considers that those paragraphs are in force between New Zealand and the People's Republic of China."Oman"The accession of this Convention does not mean in any way recognition of Israel by the Government of the Sultanate of Oman. Furthermore, no treaty relations will arise between the Sultanate of Oman and Israel."Poland<right>3 November 1975</right>"The reservation made by the Government of Bahrain to article 27, paragraph 3 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, done at Vienna on 18 April 1961, is not compatible with the object and purpose of this Convention. It is contrary to fundamental principles of diplomatic international law. Therefore, the Polish People's Republic does not recognize this reser- vation as valid."<right>7 March 1978</right>"The principles of inviolability of diplomatic pouch and freedom of communication are generally recognized in interna- tional law and cannot be changed by unilateral reservation."This objection does not prevent entry into force of the Convention as between the Polish People's Republic and the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya."Portugal<superscript>23</superscript>Qatar<superscript>17</superscript><i>I. On article 27, para. 3:</i>The Government of the State of Qatar reserves its right to open a diplomatic bag in the following two situations:1. The abuse, observed in flagrante delicto, of the diplo- matic bag for unlawful purposes incompatible with the aims of the relevant rule of immunity, by putting therein items other that the diplomatic documents and articles for official use mentioned in para.4 of the said article, in violation of the obligations prescribed by the Government and by international law and custom.In such a case both the foreign Ministry and the Mission concerned will be notified. The bag will not be opened except with the approval by the Foreign Ministry.The contraband articles will be seized in the presence of a representative of the Ministry and the Mission.2. The existence of strong indications or suspicions that the said violations have been perpetrated.In such a case the bag will not be opened except with the approval of the Foreign Ministry and in the presence of a member of the Mission concerned. If permission to open the bag is denied it will be returned to its place of origin.<i>II. On article 37, para. 2:</i>The State of Qatar shall not be bound by para. 2 of article 37.III. Accession to this Convention does not mean in any way recognition of Israel and does not entail entering with it into any transactions regulated by this Convention.RomaniaThe Council of State of the Socialist Republic of Romania considers that the provisions of articles 48 and 50 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, done at Vienna on 18 April 1961, are at variance with the principle that all States have the right to become parties to multilateral treaties governing matters of general interest.Russian Federation<i>Reservation concerning article 11, paragraph 1:</i>In accordance with the principle of the equality of rights of States, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics considers that any difference of opinion regarding the size of a diplomatic mission should be settled by agreement between the sending State and the receiving State.<i>Declaration concerning articles 48 and 50:</i>The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics considers it necess- ary to draw attention to the discriminatory nature of articles 48 and 50 of the Convention, under the terms of which a number of States are precluded from acceding to the Convention. The Con- vention deals with matters which affect the interests of all States and should therefore be open for accession by all States. In accordance with the principle of sovereign equality, no State has the right to bar other States from accession to a Convention of this nature.<right>6 June 1972</right><i>With respect to the reservation made by Bahrain to article 27 (3):</i>... This reservation is contrary to the principle of the inviol- ability of the diplomatic bag, which is recognized in international practice, and is therefore unacceptable.<right>11 October 1977</right>The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics does not recognize the validity of the reservation expressed by the People's Republic of China concerning paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961.<right>7 November 1977</right>"The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics does not consider itself bound by the reservation made by the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya concerning article 27 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations."<right>16 February 1982</right>"The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics does not recognize the validity of the reservation made by the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on its accession to the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, since that reservation is contrary to one of the most important provisions of the Convention, namely, that the diplomatic bag shall not be opened or detained."<right>6 October 1986</right>The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics does not recognize as valid the reservations of the Government of Qatar with respect to article 27, paragraph 3 and article 37, paragraph 2 of the 1961 Convention on Diplomatic Relations. The Government of the USSR considers that the reservations in question are illegal, since they conflict with the purposes of the Convention.<right>6 November 1986</right>The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics does not recognize as lawful the reservations of the Government of Yemen with respect to articles 27, 36 and 37 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, since those reservations conflict with the purposes of the Convention.Saudi Arabia<superscript>17</superscript><i>Reservations:</i>1. If the authorities of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia suspect that the diplomatic pouch or any parcel therein contains matters which may not be sent through the diplomatic pouch, such authorities may request the opening of the parcel in their presence and in the presence of a representative appointed by the diplomatic mission concerned. If such request is rejected, the pouch or parcel shall be returned back.2. Accession to this Convention shall not constitute a recognition of Israel or lead to any kind of intercourse with it or the establishment of any relations with Israel under the Conven- tion.Sudan<superscript>17</superscript><i>Reservations:</i>"The diplomatic immunities and privileges provided for in article 37 paragraph 2 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, recognized and admitted in customary law and in the practice of States in favour of heads of missions and members of diplomatic staff of the mission, cannot be granted by the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Sudan for other categories of mission staff except on the basis of reciprocity."The Government of the Democratic Republic of the Sudan reserves the right to interpret article 38 as not granting to a diplomatic agent who is a national of or permanent resident in the Sudan any immunity from jurisdiction, and inviolability, even though the acts complained of are official acts performed by the said diplomatic agent in the exercise of his functions."<i>Understanding:</i>"The Government of the Democratic Republic of the Sudan understands that its ratification of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 does not imply whatsoever recognition of Israel or entering with it into relations governed by the said Convention."Syrian Arab Republic<superscript>17,24</superscript><right>15 March 1979</right>1. The Syrian Arab Republic does not recognize Israel and will not enter into dealings with it.2. The Optional Protocol Concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes does not enter into force for the Syrian Arab Republic.3. The exemption provided for in article 36, paragraph 1, shall not apply to the administrative and technical staff of the mission except during the first six months following their arrival in the receiving State.Ukraine<i>Reservation concerning article 11, paragraph 1:</i>In accordance with the principle of the equality of rights of States, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic considers that any difference of opinion regarding the size of a diplomatic mission should be settled by agreement between the sending State and the receiving State.<i>Declaration concerning articles 48 and 50:</i>The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic considers it necess- ary to draw attention to the discriminatory nature of articles 48 and 50 of the Convention, under the terms of which a number of States are precluded from acceding to the Convention. The Con- vention deals with matters which affect the interests of all States and should therefore be open for accession by all States. In accordance with the principle of sovereign equality, no State has the right to bar other States from accession to a Convention of this nature.<right>28 July 1972</right>The reservation made by the Government of Bahrain to the above-mentioned Convention is contrary to the principle of the inviolability of the diplomatic bag, which is generally recognized in international practice, and is therefore unacceptable to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.<right>24 October 1977</right>"The Government of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic does not recognize as valid the reservation to article 37, paragraphs 2, 3 and 4, of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the People's Republic of China."<right>20 October 1986</right>[Same objection, mutatis mutandis,as the one made by the Russian Federation on 6 October1986.]United Arab Emirates"The accession of the United Arab Emirates to this Conven- tion shall in no way amount to recognition of nor the establish- ment of any treaty relation with Israel."United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland<right>1 September 1964</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom do not regard as valid the reservation to paragraph 2 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the United Arab Republic. Further, the Government of the United Kingdom do not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Convention made by the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph."<right>7 June 1967</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom do not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Convention made by the Government of the Mongolian People's Republic as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph."<right>29 March 1968</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom do not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Convention made by the Government of Bulgaria as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph."<right>19 June 1968</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom do not regard as valid the reservation to paragraph 2 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the Government of Cambodia."<right>23 August 1968</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom do not regard as valid the reservation to paragraph 2 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the Kingdom of Morocco."<right>10 December 1968</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland do not regard as valid the reservation to paragraph 2 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the Government of Portugal."<right>13 March 1973</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland wish to put on record that they do not regard as valid the reservation to paragraph 3 of Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the Government of Bahrain."<right>16 April 1973</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland wish to place on record that they do not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of Article 11 of the Convention made by the German Democratic Republic, in a letter accompanying the instrument of accession, as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph."<right>25 January 1977</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland do not regard as valid the reservations to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the People's Republic of China".<right>4 February 1977</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland wish to place on record that they do not re- gard the reservation concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Convention, made by the Government of Democratic Yemen, as modifying any rights or obligations under that paragraph."<right>19 February 1987</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland wish to place on record that they do not regard as valid the reservations to paragraph 3 of article 27, and to paragraph 2 of article 37, of the Vienna Convention on Diplo- matic Relations made by the Government of the State of Qatar."United States of America<right>2 July 1974</right>"The Government of the United States of America ... states its objection to reservations with respect to paragraph 3 of article 27 by Bahrain; with respect to paragraph 4 of article 27 by Kuwait; with respect to paragraph 2 of article 37 by the United Arab Republic (now the Arab Republic of Egypt), by Cambodia (now the Khmer Republic) and by Morocco, respectively. The Government of the United States, however, considers the Con- vention as continuing in force between it and the respective above-mentioned States except for the provisions to which the reservations are addressed in each case."<right>4 September 1987</right>"The Government of the United States of America wishes to state its objections to the reservations regarding the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made with respect to paragraph 4 of Article 27 by the Yemen Arab Republic and with respect to paragraph 3 of Article 27 and paragraph 2 of Article 37 by the State of Qatar, respectively....The Government of the United States, however, considers the [Convention] as continuing in force between it and the respective above-mentioned States except for the provisions to which the reservations are addressed in each case."Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)<superscript>25</superscript>Under the Constitution of Venezuela, all Venezuelan nationals are equal before the law and none may enjoy special privileges; for that reason [the Government of Venezuela] make[s] a formal reservation to article 38 of the Convention.Viet Nam1. The degrees of privileges and immunities accorded the administrative and technical staff and the members of their families as stipulated in paragraph 2, article 37 of the Convention should be agreed upon in detail by the concerned States;2. The provisions of articles 48 and 50 of the Convention are of a discriminatory character, which is not in accordance with the principle of equality of the sovereignty among States and limits the universality of the Convention. The Government of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, therefore, holds the view that all States have the right to adhere to the said Convention.Yemen<superscript>15,17</superscript><i>Reservation concerning article 11, paragraph 1:</i>In conformity with the principle of equality among States, the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen holds that any difference of opinion regarding the size of the diplomatic mission should be settled by agreement between the sending State and the receiving State.<i>Declaration:</i>The People's Democratic Republic of Yemen states that its acceptance of the provisions of the Convention does not, in any way whatsoever, imply recognition of, or entering into contrac- tual relations with, Israel.Objections(Unless otherwise indicated, the objections were madeupon ratification, accession or succession.)Australia<right>14 March 1968</right>"The Government of the Commonwealth of Australia does not regard the statements concerning paragraph (1) of Article 11 made by the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the Mongolian People's Republic as modifying any rights or obligations under that paragraph."The Government of the Commonwealth of Australia declares that it does not recognize as valid the reservations to paragraph 2, Article 37, of the Convention made by the United Arab Republic and by Cambodia."<right>20 November 1970</right>"The Government of the Commonwealth of Australia declares that it does not recognize as valid the reservations to article 37, paragraph 2, of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by Morocco and Portugal."<right>6 September 1973</right>"The Government of Australia does not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Convention made by the German Democratic Republic, in a letter accompanying the instrument of accession as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph."<right>25 January 1977</right>"The Government of Australia does not regard as valid the reservations made by the Government of the People's Republic of China to paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 of article 37 of that Convention."<right>21 June 1978</right>"The Government of Australia does not regard the reservation made by the Government of the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen to paragraph (1) of article 11 as modifying any rights or obligations under that paragraph."<right>22 February 1983</right>"Australia does not regard as valid the reservations made by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the State of Bahrain, the State of Kuwait and the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, in respect of treatment of the diplomatic bag under article 27 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations."<right>10 February 1987</right>"Australia does not regard as valid the reservations made by the State of Qatar and the Yemen Arab Republic in respect of treatment of the diplomatic bag under Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 18 April 1961."Bahamas<superscript>26</superscript>Belarus<right>2 November 1977</right>The Government of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic does not recognize the validity of the reservation made by the Chinese People's Republic to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.<right>16 October 1986</right>[Same reservation, mutatis mutandis,as the one made by the Russian Federation on 6 October 1986.]<right>11 November 1986</right>[Same reservation, mutatis mutandis,as the one made by the Russian Federation on 6 November 1986.]BelgiumThe Belgian Government considers the statement made by the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Mongolian People's Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 to be incompatible with the letter and spirit of the Convention and does not regard it as modifying any rights or obligations under that paragraph.The Belgian Government also considers the reservation made by the United Arab Republic and the Kingdom of Cambodia to paragraph 2 of article 37 to be incompatible with the letter and spirit of the Convention.28 January 1975The Government of the Kingdom of Belgium objects to the reservations made with respect to article 27, paragraph 3, by Bahrain and with respect to article 37, paragraph 2, by the United Arab Republic (now the Arab Republic of Egypt), Cambodia (now the Khmer Republic) and Morocco. The Government nevertheless considers that the Convention remains in force as between it and the aforementioned States, respectively, except in respect of the provisions which in each case are the subject of the said reservations.Bulgaria22 September 1972The Government of the People's Republic of Bulgaria cannot regard the reservation made by the Bahraini Government with respect to article 27, paragraph 3, of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations as valid.18 August 1977"The Bulgarian Government does not consider itself to be bound by the reservation made by the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya concerning the application of article 27, paragraph 3, of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations."23 June 1981"The Government of the People's Republic of Bulgaria does not consider itself bound by the reservation made by the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on its accession to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations regarding the immunity of the diplomatic bag and the right of the competent authorities of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to demand the open- ing of the diplomatic bag and, in case of refusal on the part of the diplomatic mission concerned, its return. It is the understanding of the Government of the People's Republic of Bulgaria that the reservation thus made is in violation of article 27, para. 4 of the 1961 Convention on Diplomatic Relations."Canada"The Government of Canada does not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of Article 11 of the Convention made by the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as modifying any rights or obligations under this paragraph."<right>16 March 1978</right>"The Government of Canada does not regard as valid the reservations to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the People's Republic of China. Similarly the Government of Canada does not regard as valid the reservations to paragraph 2 of article 37 of the Convention which have been made by the Government of the United Arab Republic (now the Arab Republic of Egypt), the Government of Cambodia (now Kampuchea) and the Government of the Kingdom of Morocco."The Government of Canada does not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Convention made by the Government of the Mongolian People's Republic, the Government of Bulgaria, the Government of the German Demo- cratic Republic and the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph."The Government of Canada also desires to place on record that it does not regard as valid the reservations to paragraph 3 of article 27 of the Convention made by the Government of Bahrain and the reservations to paragraph 4 of article 27 made by the State of Kuwait and the Government of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya."Czech Republic<superscript>5</superscript>Denmark"The Government of Denmark does not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of Article 11 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the People's Republic of Bulgaria, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Mongolian People's Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph. Further, the Government of Denmark does not regard as valid the reservation to paragraph 2 of Article 37 made by the United Arab Republic, Cambodia and Morocco. This statement shall not be regarded as precluding the entry into force of the Convention between Denmark and the above-mentioned countries."<right>5 August 1970</right>"The Government of Denmark does not regard the reserva- tion to article 37, paragraph 2, of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by Portugal on 11th of September 1968 as valid."This statement shall not be regarded as precluding the entry into force of the said Convention between Denmark and Portu- gal."<right>29 March 1977</right>"The Government of Denmark does not regard as valid the reservations made by the People's Republic of China to article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 18 April 1961. This statement is not to be regarded as preventing the Convention's entry into force as between Denmark and the People's Republic of China.FranceThe Government of the French Republic does not regard the statements concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 made by the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Mongolian People's Republic, the People's Republic of Bulgaria, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as modifying any rights or obligations under that paragraph.The Government of the French Republic does not regard as valid the reservation to article 27, paragraph 4, made by the State of Kuwait.The Government of the French Republic does not regard as valid the reservations to article 37, paragraph 2, made by the Government of Cambodia, the Government of the Kingdom of Morocco, the Government of Portugal and the Government of the United Arab Republic.None of these declarations shall be regarded as an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between the French Republic and the States mentioned.<right>28 December 1976</right>The Government of the French Republic does not regard as valid the reservations made by the People's Republic of China to article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 18 April 1961. This declaration is not to be regarded as preventing the Convention's entry into force as between the French Republic and the People's Republic of China.<right>29 August 1986</right>1. The Government of the French Republic declares that it does not recognize as valid the reservation entered by the Government of the Yemen Arab Republic which would make it permissible to request the opening of the diplomatic bag and to return it to the sender. The Government of the French Republic considers that this or any similar reservation is inconsistent with the object and the purpose of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations done at Vienna on 18April 1961.2. This declaration shall not be regarded as an obstacle to the entry into force of the said Convention between the French Republic and the Yemen Arab Republic.Germany<superscript>6</superscript>"The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany con- siders as incompatible with the letter and spirit of the Convention the reservations made by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic concerning article 11 of the Convention."Objections, identical in essence, mutatis mutandis, were also formulated by the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany in regard to reservations made by various states, as follows:i) 16 March 1967: In respect of the reservations by the United Arab Republic and the Kingdom of Cambodia concerning article 37, paragraph 2.ii) 10 May 1967: In respect of the reservation made by the Mongolian People's Republic concerning article 11.iii) 9 July 1968: In respect of the reservation made by the People's Republic of Bulgaria concerning article 11, paragraph 1.iv) 23 December 1968: In respect of the reservations made by the Kingdom of Morocco and by Portugal concerning article 37, paragraph 2.v) 5 September 1974: In respect of the reservation made by the German Democratic Republic concerning article 11, para. 1.vi) 4 February 1975: In respect of the reservation made by Bahrain concerning article 27, paragraph 3.vii) 4 March 1977: In respect of the reservation made by the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen concerning article 11, paragraph 1.viii) 6 May 1977: In respect of the reservations made by the People's Republic of China concerning article 37.ix) 19 September 1977: In respect of the reservation made by the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya concerning article 27.x) 11 July 1979: In respect of the reservation made by the Syrian Arab Republic concerning article 36, paragraph 1.xi) 11 December 1980: In respect of the declaration made by the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam concerning article 37, paragraph 2.xii) 15 May 1981: In respect of the reservation made by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia concerning article 27.xiii) 30 September 1981: In respect of the reservations made by the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Sudan concerning article 37, paragraph 2 and of article 38.xiv) 3 March 1987: In respect of the reservations made by the Yemen Arab Republic and the State of Qatar in respect of articles 27 (3) and 37 (2).In the case of objections under paragraphs viii), ix), x), xii) and xiii), the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany specified that the declaration is not to be interpreted as prevent- ing the entry into force of the Convention as between the Federal Republic of Germany and the respective States.GreeceThe Government of Greece cannot accept the reservation to paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Convention made by Bulgaria, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Mongolia, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, as well as the reservation to paragraph 2 of article 37 of the Convention made by Cambodia, Morocco, Portugal and the United Arab Republic.Guatemala<right>23 December 1963</right>The Government of Guatemala rejects formally the reserva- tions to articles 48 and 50 of the Convention made by the Government of Cuba in its instrument of ratification.Haiti<right>9 May 1972</right>The Haitian Government considers that the reservation expressed by the Government of Bahrain with regard to the inviolability of diplomatic correspondence may destroy the effectiveness of the Convention, one of the main aims of which is precisely to put an end to certain practices impeding the performance of the functions assigned to diplomatic agents.Hungary<right>7 July 1975</right>"The reservation made by the Government of Bahrain to article 27, paragraph 3, of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations is contrary to the principle of the inviolability of the diplomatic bag which is generally recognized in the international practice, and is incompatible with the objectives of the Convention."Therefore, the Hungarian People's Republic does not recognize this reservation as valid."<right>6 September 1978</right>"The Government of the Hungarian People's Republic does not recognize the validity of the reservation made by the Chinese People's Republic to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations."Ireland<right>17 January 1978</right>"The Government of Ireland object to the reservations made by the Government of the People's Republic of China concerning the provisions relating to Nuncios and the representative of the Holy See in articles 14 and 16 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. The Government of Ireland do not regard these reservations as modifying any rights or obligations under those articles."The Government of Ireland do not regard as valid the reser- vations made by the Government of the People's Republic of China to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37."This statement is not to be regarded as preventing the entry into force of the Convention as between Ireland and the People's Republic of China."Japan<right>27 January 1987</right>"With respect to paragraphs 3 and 4 of article 27 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 18 April 1961, the Government of Japan believes that the protection of diplomatic correspondence by means of diplomatic bags constitutes an important element of the Convention, and any reservation intended to allow a receiving State to open diplomatic bags without the consent of the sending State is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. Therefore the Government of Japan does not regard as valid the reservations concerning article 27 of the Convention made by the Government of Bahrain and the Government of Qatar on 2 November 1971 and 6 June 1986, respectively. The Government of Japan also desires to record that the above-stated position is applicable to any reservations to the same effect to be made in the future by other countries."Luxembourg<right>18 January 1965</right>With reference to the reservation and declaration made by the Governments of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics upon ratification of the Convention, the Government of Luxembourg regrets that it cannot accept that reservation or that declaration which tends to modify the effect of certain provisions of the Convention.<right>25 October 1965</right>With reference to the statement made by the Government of Hungary upon ratification of the Convention, the Government of Luxembourg regrets that it cannot accept this declaration.Malta"The Government of Malta does not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 made by the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as modify- ing any rights and obligations under that paragraph."Mongolia<right>18 January 1978</right>"Reservation made by the Government of Bahrain to paragraph 3, article 27 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations is incompatible with the very object and purpose of the Convention. Therefore the Government of the Mongolian People's Republic does not consider itself bound by the above-mentioned reservation."The Government of the Mongolian People's Republic does not recognize the validity of the reservation made by the Government of the People's Republic of China to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations."Netherlands"1. The Kingdom of the Netherlands does not accept the declarations by the People's Republic of Bulgaria, the German Democratic Republic, the Mongolian People's Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic and the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen concerning article 11, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Kingdom of the Netherlands takes the view that this provision remains in force in relations between it and the said States in accordance with international customary law."2. The Kingdom of the Netherlands does not accept the declaration by the State of Bahrain concerning article 27, para- graph 3 of the Convention. It takes the view that this provision remains in force in relations between it and the State of Bahrain in accordance with international customary law. The Kingdom of the Netherlands is nevertheless prepared to agree to the following arrangement on a basis of reciprocity: If the authorities of the receiving state have serious grounds for supposing that the diplomatic bag contains something which pursuant to article 27, paragraph 4 of the Convention may not be sent in the diplomatic bag, they may demand that the bag be opened in the presence of the representative of the diplomat mission concerned. If the authorities of the sending state refuse to comply with such a request, the diplomatic bag shall be sent back to the place of origin."3. The Kingdom of the Netherlands does not accept the declarations by the Arab Republic of Egypt, the Khmer Republic, the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, the Republic of Malta and the Kingdom of Morocco concerning article 37, paragraph 2 of the Convention. It takes the view that these provisions remain in force in relations between it and the said States in accordance with international customary law."5 December 1986The Kingdom of the Netherlands does not accept both reser- vations made by the State of Qatar concerning article 27, para- graph 3, of the Convention. It takes the view that this provision remains in force in relations between it and the State of Qatar in accordance with international customary law. The Kingdom of the Netherlands is nevertheless prepared to agree to the following arrangement on a basis of reciprocity: If the authorities of the receiving State have serious grounds for believing that the diplomatic bag contains something which, pursuant to article 27, paragraph 4, of the Convention, may not be sent in the diplomatic bag, they may demand that the bag be opened in the presence of the representative of the diplomatic mission concerned. If the authorities of the sending State refuse to comply with such a demand, the diplomatic bag shall be sent back to the place of origin.Furthermore, the Kingdom of the Netherlands does not accept the reservation made by the State of Qatar concerning article 37, paragraph 2, of the Convention. It takes the view that this provision remains in force in relations between it and the State of Qatar in accordance with international customary law.Moreover, the Kingdom of the Netherlands does not accept the reservation made by the Yemen Arab Republic concerning article 37, paragraph 2, of the Convention. It takes the view that these provisions remain in force in relations between it and the Yemen Arab Republic in accordance with international customary law.New Zealand"The Government of New Zealand does not regard the state- ments concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the People's Republic of Bulgaria, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Mongolian People's Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph. Further, the Government of New Zealand does not accept the reservation to paragraph 2 of Article 37 of the Convention made by Cambodia, Morocco, Portugal and the United Arab Republic."<right>25 January 1977</right>"The Government of New Zealand does not regard as valid the reservations to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 18 April 1961 made by the Government of the People's Republic of China and considers that those paragraphs are in force between New Zealand and the People's Republic of China."Poland<right>3 November 1975</right>"The reservation made by the Government of Bahrain to article 27, paragraph 3 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, done at Vienna on 18 April 1961, is not compatible with the object and purpose of this Convention. It is contrary to fundamental principles of diplomatic international law. Therefore, the Polish People's Republic does not recognize this reser- vation as valid."<right>7 March 1978</right>"The principles of inviolability of diplomatic pouch and freedom of communication are generally recognized in interna- tional law and cannot be changed by unilateral reservation."This objection does not prevent entry into force of the Convention as between the Polish People's Republic and the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya."Russian Federation<right>6 June 1972</right><i>With respect to the reservation made by Bahrain to article 27 (3):</i>... This reservation is contrary to the principle of the inviol- ability of the diplomatic bag, which is recognized in international practice, and is therefore unacceptable.<right>11 October 1977</right>The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics does not recognize the validity of the reservation expressed by the People's Republic of China concerning paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961.<right>7 November 1977</right>"The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics does not consider itself bound by the reservation made by the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya concerning article 27 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations."<right>16 February 1982</right>"The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics does not recognize the validity of the reservation made by the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on its accession to the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, since that reservation is contrary to one of the most important provisions of the Convention, namely, that the diplomatic bag shall not be opened or detained."<right>6 October 1986</right>The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics does not recognize as valid the reservations of the Government of Qatar with respect to article 27, paragraph 3 and article 37, paragraph 2 of the 1961 Convention on Diplomatic Relations. The Government of the USSR considers that the reservations in question are illegal, since they conflict with the purposes of the Convention.<right>6 November 1986</right>The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics does not recognize as lawful the reservations of the Government of Yemen with respect to articles 27, 36 and 37 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, since those reservations conflict with the purposes of the Convention.Slovakia<superscript>5</superscript>Thailand"1. The Government of the Kingdom of Thailand does not regard the statements concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Convention made by the People's Republic of Bulgaria, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen, the German Democratic Republic, the Mongolian People's Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph.2. The Government of the Kingdom of Thailand does not regard as valid the reservation made by the State of Bahrain in respect of paragraph 3 of article 27 of the Convention.3. The Government of the Kingdom of Thailand does not regard as valid the reservations and declarations with respect to paragraph 2 of article 37 of the Convention made by Democratic Kampuchea, the Arab Republic of Egypt and the Kingdom of Morocco.The foregoing objections shall not, however, be regarded as preventing the entry into force of the Convention as between Thailand and the above-mentioned countries."TongaIn its notification of succession, the Government of Tonga has indicated that it adopts the objections made by the United Kingdom respecting the reservations and statements made by Egypt, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Mongolia, Bulgaria, the Khmer Republic, Morocco and Portugal, when ratifying (or acceding to) the said Convention on Diplomatic Relations.Ukraine<right>28 July 1972</right>The reservation made by the Government of Bahrain to the above-mentioned Convention is contrary to the principle of the inviolability of the diplomatic bag, which is generally recognized in international practice, and is therefore unacceptable to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.<right>24 October 1977</right>"The Government of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic does not recognize as valid the reservation to article 37, paragraphs 2, 3 and 4, of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the People's Republic of China."<right>20 October 1986</right>[Same objection, mutatis mutandis,as the one made by the Russian Federation on 6 October1986.]United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland<right>1 September 1964</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom do not regard as valid the reservation to paragraph 2 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the United Arab Republic. Further, the Government of the United Kingdom do not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Convention made by the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph."<right>7 June 1967</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom do not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Convention made by the Government of the Mongolian People's Republic as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph."<right>29 March 1968</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom do not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Convention made by the Government of Bulgaria as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph."<right>19 June 1968</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom do not regard as valid the reservation to paragraph 2 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the Government of Cambodia."<right>23 August 1968</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom do not regard as valid the reservation to paragraph 2 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the Kingdom of Morocco."<right>10 December 1968</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland do not regard as valid the reservation to paragraph 2 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the Government of Portugal."<right>13 March 1973</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland wish to put on record that they do not regard as valid the reservation to paragraph 3 of Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the Government of Bahrain."<right>16 April 1973</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland wish to place on record that they do not regard the statement concerning paragraph 1 of Article 11 of the Convention made by the German Democratic Republic, in a letter accompanying the instrument of accession, as modifying any rights and obligations under that paragraph."<right>25 January 1977</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland do not regard as valid the reservations to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made by the People's Republic of China".<right>4 February 1977</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland wish to place on record that they do not re- gard the reservation concerning paragraph 1 of article 11 of the Convention, made by the Government of Democratic Yemen, as modifying any rights or obligations under that paragraph."<right>19 February 1987</right>"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland wish to place on record that they do not regard as valid the reservations to paragraph 3 of article 27, and to paragraph 2 of article 37, of the Vienna Convention on Diplo- matic Relations made by the Government of the State of Qatar."United Republic of Tanzania22 June 1964"The Government of the United Republic of Tanganyika and Zanzibar rejects formally the reservation to article 11, paragraph 1, of the Convention made by the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in its instrument of ratification."United States of America<right>2 July 1974</right>"The Government of the United States of America ... states its objection to reservations with respect to paragraph 3 of article 27 by Bahrain; with respect to paragraph 4 of article 27 by Kuwait; with respect to paragraph 2 of article 37 by the United Arab Republic (now the Arab Republic of Egypt), by Cambodia (now the Khmer Republic) and by Morocco, respectively. The Government of the United States, however, considers the Con- vention as continuing in force between it and the respective above-mentioned States except for the provisions to which the reservations are addressed in each case."<right>4 September 1987</right>"The Government of the United States of America wishes to state its objections to the reservations regarding the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations made with respect to paragraph 4 of Article 27 by the Yemen Arab Republic and with respect to paragraph 3 of Article 27 and paragraph 2 of Article 37 by the State of Qatar, respectively....The Government of the United States, however, considers the [Convention] as continuing in force between it and the respective above-mentioned States except for the provisions to which the reservations are addressed in each case."1The former Yugoslavia had signed and ratified the Convention 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.2See note 2 under “China” and 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.3See note 3 under "China” and note 1 under “Portugal” regarding Macao in the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this volume.4Signed and ratified on behalf of the Republic of China on 18 April 1961 and 19 December 1969, respectively. 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.5Czechoslovakia had signed and ratified the Convention on 18 April 1961 and 24 May 1963, respectively. Subsequently, the Government of Czechoslovakia communicated objections to various reservations and declarations. For the text of the objections, see United Nations, <i>Treaty Series</i>, vol. 808, p. 388; vol. 1057, p. 330 and vol. 1060, p. 347. On 1 June 1987, the Government of Czechoslovakia communicated the following objections: <i>With regard to the reservations made by Yemen concerning articles 27, 36 and 37: </i> "The Czechoslovak Socialist Republic regards the reservations of the Yemen Arab Republic with respect to articles 27, 36 and 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of April 18, 1961 as incompatible with the objects and purposes of this Convention. Therefore, the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic does not recognize these reservations as valid." <i>With regard to reservations made by Qatar concerning article 27, paragraph 3 and article 37, paragraph 2: </i> "The Czechoslovak Socialist Republic regards the reservations of the State of Qatar with respect to article 27, paragraph 3 and article 37, paragraph 2 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of April 18, 1961 as incompatible with the objects and purposes of this Convention. Therefore, the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic does not recognize these reservations as valid." See also note 1 under “Czech Republic” and note 1 under “Slovakia” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.6The German Democratic Republic had acceded to the Convention on 23 February 1973 with a reservation and a declaration. For the text of the reservation and declaration, see United Nations, <i>Treaty Series</i>, vol. 856, p. 231. See also note 2 under “Germany” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.7See note 1 under “Germany” regarding Berlin (West) in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.8In 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].9See note 1 under “Montenegro” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.10For 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.11See note 1 under "New Zealand" regarding Tokelau in the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this volume.12In communications addressed to the Secretary-General with reference to the above-mentioned ratification, the Permanent Mission of Bulgaria and the Permanent Representative of Romania to the United Nations, stated that their Governments considered the said ratification as null and void for the South Korean authorities could not speak on behalf of Korea.Subsequently, in a communication addressed to the Secretary-General concerning the communication made by the Permanent Representative of Romania, the Permanent Observer of the Republic of Korea to the United Nations stated the following:"The Republic of Korea took part in the United Nations Conference on Diplomatic Intercourse and Immunities, and contributed to the formulation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, done at Vienna on 18 April 1961, signed the Convention on the same day and duly deposited the instrument of ratification thereof with the Secretary-General of the United Nations on 28 December 1970."As the resolution 195 (III) of the General Assembly of the United Nations dated 12 December 1948 declares unmistakably, the Government of the Republic of Korea is the only lawful government in Korea."Therefore, the rights and obligations of the Republic of Korea under the said Convention shall in no way be affected by any statement that has no basis in fact or unjustly distorts the legitimacy of the Government of the Republic of Korea."Further, on 13 March 2002, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Romania the following communication:"The Permanent Mission of Romania to the United Nations presents its compliments to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and has the honour to present the position of the Romanian Government concerning its communication following the deposit of the instrument of ratification of the Convention on Diplomatic Relations (Vienna, the 18th of April 1961) by the Republic of Korea, on the 28th of December 1970, which stated that this ratificationnull and void.Romania and the Republic of Korea have established diplomatic relations by signing a Protocol on the 31st of March 1990 and, therefore, the two States have been developing diplomatic relations on the basis of respect of the international law, including the relevant provisions of the Vienna Convention.In the new historical context, the communication mentioned above became obsolete."Moreover, in a communication received on 24 October 2002, the Government of Bulgaria informed the Secretary-General of the following:“[U]pon ratification of the Convention by the Republic of Korea, in 1971 the Government of the People’s Republic of Bulgaria[,] in [a] communication addressed to the Secretary-General with reference to the above-mentioned ratification, ... stated that its Government considered the said ratification as null and void for the South Korean authorities could not speak on behalf of Korea.Now therefore [the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria declares] that the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria, having reviewed the said declaration, hereby withdraws the same.”13In a communication accompanying the notification of succession, the Government of Tuvalu declared that it had decided not to succeed to the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes, done at Vienna on 18 April 1961, and that pursuant to Tuvalu's declaration, dated 19 December 1978, regarding treaties applied before independence, the application of the Optional Protocol to Tuvalu should be regarded as terminated as at 1 September 1982.14The Republic of Viet-Nam had acceded to the Convention on 10 May 1973. See also note 1 under “Viet Nam” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.15The Yemen Arab Republic had acceded to the Convention on 10 April 1986 with the following reservations: 1. The accession of the Yemen Arab Republic to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, done at Vienna on 18 April 1961, in no way implies recognition of Israel and shall not entail the entry of the Yemen Arab Republic with Israel into any of the relations governed by this Convention. 2. The Yemen Arab Republic has the right to inspect foodstuffs imported by diplomatic envoys and diplomatic missions in order to ascertain that they conform in quantity and in kind to the list submitted by them to the customs authorities and to the Office of Protocol at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for the purpose of obtaining approval for their importation exempt from customs duties in accordance with article 36 of the Convention. 3. Where there are serious and strong grounds for believing that the diplomatic bag contains articles or substances not mentioned in article 27, paragraph 4, of the Convention, the Yemen Arab Republic reserves its right to request that the bag be opened in the presence of a representative of the embassy concerned. If the embassy refuses to comply with this request, the bag shall be returned to its place of origin. 4. Reservation concerning the privileges and immunities provided for in article 37, paragraph 2, of the Convention in respect of members of the administrative and technical staff of the mission: the Yemen Arab Republic shall not be bound to implement this paragraph except on a basis of reciprocity. See aslo note 1 under “Yemen” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.16In a communication received on 16 October 1985, the Government of Zambia specified that upon succession, it had not wished to maintain the objections made by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland with respect to articles 11 (1), 27 (3) and 37 (2).17In a communication received by the Secretary-General on 5 September 1969, the Government of Israel declared that it "has noted the political character of the declaration made by the Government of Kuwait on acceding to the above Convention. In the view of the Government of Israel, this Convention is not the proper place for making such political pronouncements. The Government of Israel will, in so far as concerns the substance of the matter, adopt towards the Government of Kuwait an attitude of complete reciprocity". Identical communications, in essence, <i>mutatis mutandis</i>, were received by the Secretary-General from the Government of Israel on 15 October 1969 in respect of the declaration made upon accession by Egypt (see also note 20 in this chapter and note 1 under “United Arab Republic” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume), on 6 January 1972 in respect of the declaration made upon accession by Bahrain, on 12 January 1977 in respect of the declaration made upon accession by Democratic Yemen, on 30 August 1977 in respect of the declaration made upon accession by the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, on 29 October 1979 in respect of the declaration made on 15 March 1979 by the Syrian Arab Republic, on 1 April 1981 in respect of the declaration made upon accession by Saudi Arabia, on 14 August 1981 in respect of the declaration made upon accession by Sudan, on 15 October 1986 in respect of the reservation made upon accession by Qatar, and on 1 September 1987 in respect of the reservation made upon accession by Yemen.18In a communication received on 15 September 1980, the Government of China notified the Secretary-General that it withdraws its reservations with regard to article 37, paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of the Convention.19Upon ratification of the Convention, the Government of Ecuador withdrew the reservation to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of article 37 of the Convention formulated at the time of its signature.20In a notification received on 18 January 1980, the Government of Egypt informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation relating to Israel, made upon accession. The notification indicates 25 January 1980 as the effective date of the withdrawal. For the text of that reservation, see United Nations, <i>Treaty Series </i>, vol. 500, p. 211.21In a letter accompanying the instrument of ratification, the Government of Greece notified the Secretary-General that it did not maintain the reservation made at the time of signature of the Convention, to the effect that the last sentence of paragraph 2 of article 37 would not apply. (See United Nations, <i>Treaty Series</i>, vol. 500, p. 186.)22In a communication received on 19 July 1990, the Government of Mongolia informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation with regard to article 11, paragraph 1. For the text of the declaration, see United Nations, <i>Treaty Series</i>, vol. 587, p. 352.23In a communication received on 1 June 1972, the Government of Portugal notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the reservation to paragraph 2 of article 37 of the Convention, made upon accession. For the text of that reservation, see United Nations, <i>Treaty Series </i>, vol. 645, p. 372.24These reservations were not included in the instrument of accession deposited on behalf of the Syrian Arab Republic on 4 August 1978. In accordance with the practice followed by the Secretary-General in similar circumstances, the text of the reservations was communicated to the States concerned on 2 April 1979, and, since no objections to this procedure were received within 90 days from that date, the Secretary-General received the said notification of reservation in definitive deposit on 1 July 1979. For the objection as to the substance formulated by the Federal Republic of Germany in respect of reservation No. 3, see under <i> <b>"Objections" </b> </i>. It should be noted that, as at the date of receipt of the said declaration the Syrian Arab Republic had become neither a party nor a signatory to the Optional Protocol concerning the settlement of disputes.25In the instrument of ratification, the Government of Venezuela confirmed the reservation set forth in paragraph 3 of its reservations made upon signature. On depositing the instrument of ratification, the Permanent Representative of Venezuela to the United Nations stated that the reservations set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 had not been main- tained by the Government of Venezuela upon ratification and should be considered as withdrawn; for the text of those reservations, see United Nations, <i>Treaty Series </i>, vol. 500, p. 202.26In a communication received by the Secretary-General on 8 June 1977, the Government of the Bahamas declared that it wishes to maintain the objections made by the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland prior to the independence of the Bahamas. (For the text of the objections made by the Government of the United Kingdom prior to 10 July 1973, the date when the Bahamas acceded to independence, see under <b>" <i>Objections </i>" </b>.)