Depositary
14.aInternational Convention for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency
Geneva, 20 April 1929 1
Entry into force
:
22 February 1931, in accordance with article 25.
Registration :
22 February 1931, No. 2623
Ratifications or definitive accessions
Austria

(June 25th, 1931)

Belgium

(June 6th, 1932)

Brazil

(July 1st, 1938 a)

Bulgaria

(May 22nd, 1930)

Colombia

(May 9th, 1932)

Cuba

(June 13th, 1933)

Czechoslovakia 2

(September 12th, 1931)

Denmark 3

(February 19th, 1931)

Ecuador

(September 25th, 1937 a)

Estonia

(August 30th, 1930 a)

Finland

(September 25th, 1936 a)

Germany 4

(October 3rd, 1933)

Greece

(May 19th, 1931)

Hungary

(June 14th, 1933)

Ireland

(July 24th, 1934 a)

Italy

(December 27th, 1935)

Latvia

(July 22nd, 1939 a)

Mexico

(March 30th, 1936 a)

Monaco

(October 21st, 1931)

The Netherlands

(April 30th, 1932)

Norway 5

(March 16th, 1931)

In view of the provisions of Article 176, paragraph 2, of the Norwegian Ordinary Criminal Code and Article 2 of the Norwegian Law on the Extradition of Criminals, the extradition provided for in Article 10 of the present Convention may not be granted for the offence referred to in Article 3, No. 2, where the person uttering the counterfeit currency himself accepted it bona fide as genuine.

Poland

(June 15th, 1934)

Portugal

(September 18th, 1930)

Romania

(March 7th, 1939)

Spain

(April 28th, 1930)

Turkey

(January 21st, 1937 a)

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics 6

(July 13th, 1931)

Yugoslavia (former) 7

(November 24th, 1930)
Signatures not yet perfected by ratification
Albania
United States of America
India
As provided in Article 24 of the Convention, this signature does not include the territories of any Prince or Chief under the suzerainty of His Majesty.
China8
Japan
Luxembourg
Panama
Actions subsequent to the assumption of depositary functions by the Secretary-General of the United Nations
Participant 4, 9
Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d)
Algeria 10
 17 Mar 1965 a
Andorra
  3 Oct 2007 a
Australia
  5 Jan 1982 a
Bahamas
  9 Jul 1975 d
Belarus
 23 Aug 2001 d
Benin
 17 Mar 1966 a
Bosnia and Herzegovina
 27 Apr 2009 a
Burkina Faso
  8 Dec 1964 a
Côte d'Ivoire
 25 May 1964 a
Croatia
 30 Dec 2003 d
Cyprus
 10 Jun 1965 a
Czech Republic
  9 Feb 1996 d
Egypt
 15 Jul 1957 a
Fiji
 25 Mar 1971 d
France
 28 Mar 1958
Gabon
 11 Aug 1964 a
Georgia
 20 Jul 2000 a
Ghana
  9 Jul 1964 a
Holy See
  1 Mar 1965 a
Indonesia 11
  3 Aug 1982 a
Iraq
 14 May 1965 a
Israel
 10 Feb 1965 a
Kazakhstan
 22 Dec 2010 a
Kenya
 10 Nov 1977 a
Kuwait
  9 Dec 1968 a
Lebanon
  6 Oct 1966 a
Liberia
 16 Sep 2005 a
Lithuania
  2 Apr 2004 a
Luxembourg
 14 Mar 2002
Malawi
 18 Nov 1965 a
Malaysia 12
  4 Jul 1972 a
Mali
  6 Jan 1970 a
Malta
 17 Nov 2015 a
Mauritius
 18 Jul 1969 d
Montenegro
 15 Dec 2015 a
Morocco 13
  4 May 1976 a
Niger
  5 May 1969 a
Peru
 11 May 1970 a
Philippines 14
  5 May 1971 a
San Marino
 18 Oct 1967 a
Senegal
 25 Aug 1965 a
Serbia 15
 18 Mar 2016 d
Singapore
 12 Feb 1979 d
Slovakia 2
 28 May 1993 d
Slovenia
  9 May 2006 d
Solomon Islands
  3 Sep 1981 d
South Africa
 28 Aug 1967 a
Sri Lanka
  2 Jun 1967 a
Sweden
 15 Mar 2001 a
Switzerland
 30 Dec 1948
Syrian Arab Republic 16
 14 Aug 1964
Thailand
  6 Jun 1963 a
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
  7 Mar 2005 d
Togo
  3 Oct 1978 a
Uganda
 15 Apr 1965 a
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
 28 Jul 1959
Viet Nam
  3 Dec 1964 a
Zimbabwe
  1 Dec 1998 d
Declarations and Reservations
(Unless otherwise indicated, the declarations and reservations
were made upon ratification, accession or succession.)
Andorra

Reservation:

       Having seen the provisions of article 431 of the Penal Code of Andorra and article 2 (a) of the Organic Law on Extradition, the extradition envisaged in article 10 of this Convention shall be granted in the case of persons who, having knowingly received counterfeit currency, attempt to place it in circulation or have placed it in circulation after realizing that it was not authentic.
Belarus

Declaration:

       The Republic of Belarus is not to be bound by the reservation on Article 20 of the Convention concerning the special order of transmitting the instrument of ratification to the Depositary and the declaration on Article 19 of the Convention concerning the non-recognition of jurisdiction of the Permanent Court of International Justice and of a Court of Arbitration as the means of the Settlement of Disputes between States, made by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic on signing the Convention.
Luxembourg

Declaration:

       The public prosecutor is designated to act as the central office in the meaning of article 12 of the International Convention for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency signed at Geneva on 20 April 1929.
       The designation of the public prosecutor as central office shall not prejudice the execution of the mission specified in articles 12 to 16 of the International Convention for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency or in the community legislative acts relating to the protection of the euro against counterfeiting by the authorities or legally authorized national organs, subject to the procedure to be determined, if necessary, by the public prosecutor in his capacity as central office.
Notifications made under article 12 and 15 (Unless otherwise indicated the declarations and reservations were made upon ratification accession or succession.)
Austria<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Austria

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]


Belgium<right>2 March 2006</right>Belgium, a Member State of the European Union, has given the European Police Office (hereinafter referred to as Europol) a mandate to combat euro counterfeiting.In order for the Geneva Convention of 1929 to function more effectively, Belgium shall in future fulfil its obligations as follows:1. With regard to euro counterfeiting, Europol shall perform - in the framework of its objective according to the Council Act of 26 July 1995 on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention) [OJ C 316, 27.11.1995, p. 1] - the following central office functions within the meaning of Articles 12 to 15 of the Geneva Convention of 1929.1.1. Europol shall centralise and process, in accordance with the Europol Convention, all information of a nature to facilitate the investigation, prevention and combating of euro counterfeiting and shall forward this information without delay to the national central offices of the Member States.1.2. In accordance with the Europol Convention, in particular in accordance with Article 18 thereof and the Council Act of 12 March 1999 adopting the rules governing the transmission of personal data by Europol to third States and third bodies [OJ C 88, 30.3.1999 p. 1. Council Act as amended by Council Act of 28 February 2002 (OJ C 76, 27.3.2002, p. 1)], Europol shall correspond directly with the central offices of third countries to fulfil the tasks set down in points 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5 of this Declaration.1.3. Europol shall, insofar as it considers it expedient, forward to the central offices of third countries a set of specimens of actual euro.1.4. Europol shall regularly notify the central offices of third countries, giving all necessary particulars, of new currency issued and the withdrawal of currency from circulation.1.5. Except in cases of purely local interest, Europol shall, insofar as it considers it expedient, notify the central offices of third countries of:any discovery of counterfeit or falsified Euro currency. Notification of the counterfeit or falsification shall be accompanied by a technical description of the counterfeit, to be provided solely by the institution whose notes have been counterfeited. A photographic reproduction or, if possible, a specimen counterfeited note should be transmitted. In urgent cases, a notification and a brief description made by the police authorities may be discreetly communicated to the central offices interested, without prejudice to the notification and technical description mentioned above;details of discoveries of counterfeiting, stating whether it has been possible to seize all the counterfeit currency put into circulation.1.6. As central office for the Member States, Europol shall participate in conferences dealing with euro counterfeiting within the meaning of Article 15 of the Geneva Convention.1.7. Where Europol is unable to carry out the tasks specified in points 1.1. to 1.6. in accordance with the Europol Convention, the national central offices of the Member States shall retain competence.2. With regard to the counterfeiting of all other currencies and for central office functions not delegated to Europol in accordance with point 1, the existing competencies of the national central offices shall remain in effect.
Belgium

2 March 2006


       Belgium, a Member State of the European Union, has given the European Police Office (hereinafter referred to as Europol) a mandate to combat euro counterfeiting.
       In order for the Geneva Convention of 1929 to function more effectively, Belgium shall in future fulfil its obligations as follows:
       1. With regard to euro counterfeiting, Europol shall perform - in the framework of its objective according to the Council Act of 26 July 1995 on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention) [OJ C 316, 27.11.1995, p. 1] - the following central office functions within the meaning of Articles 12 to 15 of the Geneva Convention of 1929.
       1.1. Europol shall centralise and process, in accordance with the Europol Convention, all information of a nature to facilitate the investigation, prevention and combating of euro counterfeiting and shall forward this information without delay to the national central offices of the Member States.
       1.2. In accordance with the Europol Convention, in particular in accordance with Article 18 thereof and the Council Act of 12 March 1999 adopting the rules governing the transmission of personal data by Europol to third States and third bodies [OJ C 88, 30.3.1999 p. 1. Council Act as amended by Council Act of 28 February 2002 (OJ C 76, 27.3.2002, p. 1)], Europol shall correspond directly with the central offices of third countries to fulfil the tasks set down in points 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5 of this Declaration.
       1.3. Europol shall, insofar as it considers it expedient, forward to the central offices of third countries a set of specimens of actual euro.
       1.4. Europol shall regularly notify the central offices of third countries, giving all necessary particulars, of new currency issued and the withdrawal of currency from circulation.
       1.5. Except in cases of purely local interest, Europol shall, insofar as it considers it expedient, notify the central offices of third countries of:
       any discovery of counterfeit or falsified Euro currency. Notification of the counterfeit or falsification shall be accompanied by a technical description of the counterfeit, to be provided solely by the institution whose notes have been counterfeited. A photographic reproduction or, if possible, a specimen counterfeited note should be transmitted. In urgent cases, a notification and a brief description made by the police authorities may be discreetly communicated to the central offices interested, without prejudice to the notification and technical description mentioned above;
       details of discoveries of counterfeiting, stating whether it has been possible to seize all the counterfeit currency put into circulation.
       1.6. As central office for the Member States, Europol shall participate in conferences dealing with euro counterfeiting within the meaning of Article 15 of the Geneva Convention.
       1.7. Where Europol is unable to carry out the tasks specified in points 1.1. to 1.6. in accordance with the Europol Convention, the national central offices of the Member States shall retain competence.
       2. With regard to the counterfeiting of all other currencies and for central office functions not delegated to Europol in accordance with point 1, the existing competencies of the national central offices shall remain in effect.
Bulgaria<right>5 November 2007</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Bulgaria

5 November 2007


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Cyprus<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the one made under Belgium.] </i> </center>
Cyprus

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the one made under Belgium.]

Czech Republic<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Czech Republic

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Denmark<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Denmark

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Estonia<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Estonia

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Finland<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Finland

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

France<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
France

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Germany<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Germany

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Greece<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Greece

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Hungary<right>8 January 2007</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Hungary

8 January 2007


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]


Ireland<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Ireland

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Italy<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Italy

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Kazakhstan“In the frameworks of the present International convention[,] the Republic of Kazakhstan exercises cooperation on matters of mutual legal assistance, prosecution and extradition with the central bureaus of other states through the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Kazakhstan.” In accordance with Article 22 of the Convention, “[i]f within six months of the date of the communication of the Secretary-General no objections have been received, the participation in the Convention of the country making the reservation shall be deemed to have been accepted by the other High Contracting Parties subject to the said reservation.” In accordance with its Article 26, the Convention shall enter into force for Kazakhstan “on the ninetieth day from the date of [the receipt by the Secretary-General of its instrument of ratification] […]”.
Kazakhstan

       “In the frameworks of the present International convention[,] the Republic of Kazakhstan exercises cooperation on matters of mutual legal assistance, prosecution and extradition with the central bureaus of other states through the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Kazakhstan.” In accordance with Article 22 of the Convention, “[i]f within six months of the date of the communication of the Secretary-General no objections have been received, the participation in the Convention of the country making the reservation shall be deemed to have been accepted by the other High Contracting Parties subject to the said reservation.” In accordance with its Article 26, the Convention shall enter into force for Kazakhstan “on the ninetieth day from the date of [the receipt by the Secretary-General of its instrument of ratification] […]”.
Latvia<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center><right>31 August 2010</right><i>Notification under article 12</i>"Central office in accordance with Article 12:Economic PoliceDepartment of the Central Criminal PoliceDepartment of the State PoliceAddress:Cierkurkalna 1st line 1, K-4Rïga, LV-1026LatviaPhone: +371 67075212Fax: +371 67075053e-mail: epb@vp.gov.lv"
Latvia

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

31 August 2010


       Notification under article 12
       "Central office in accordance with Article 12:
       Economic Police
       Department of the Central Criminal Police
       Department of the State Police
       Address:
       Cierkurkalna 1st line 1, K-4
       Rïga, LV-1026
       Latvia
       Phone: +371 67075212
       Fax: +371 67075053
       e-mail: epb@vp.gov.lv"
Lithuania"... in accordance with Article 12 of the said Convention, the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania designates the Police Department under the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Lithuania as a Central Authority to discharge the duties imposed by the Convention;... it is provided in Article 16, paragraph 4, of the Convention, the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania declares that requests under Article 16 shall be communicated to its authorities only through its Central Authority."
Lithuania

       "... in accordance with Article 12 of the said Convention, the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania designates the Police Department under the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Lithuania as a Central Authority to discharge the duties imposed by the Convention;
       ... it is provided in Article 16, paragraph 4, of the Convention, the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania declares that requests under Article 16 shall be communicated to its authorities only through its Central Authority."
Luxembourg<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Luxembourg

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Montenegro<right>15 December 2015</right>“[The] Ministry of Justice is the state administration body to which letters of request relating to criminal offences referred to in Article 3 of the Convention should be transmitted.”
Montenegro

15 December 2015


       “[The] Ministry of Justice is the state administration body to which letters of request relating to criminal offences referred to in Article 3 of the Convention should be transmitted.”
Netherlands<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Netherlands

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Poland<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Poland

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Portugal<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Portugal

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Slovakia<right>25 July 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Slovakia

25 July 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]


Slovenia<right>2 February 2007</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Slovenia

2 February 2007


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Spain<right>12 June 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
Spain

12 June 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]


United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland<right>9 February 2006</right><center> <i>[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.] </i> </center>
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

9 February 2006


       
[Same notifications as the ones made by Belgium.]

Territorial Application
Participant
 Date of receipt of the notification
 Territories
Netherlands 22 Mar 1954 Netherlands Antilles and Suriname
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 28 Jul 1959 Channel Islands and Isle of Man
  13 Oct 1960 Antigua, Bahamas, Basutoland, Bechuanaland Protectorate, Bermuda, British Guiana, British Honduras, British Solomon Islands, British Virgin Islands, Dominica, Falkland Islands (Malvinas), Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, Fiji, Gambia, Gibraltar, Gilbert and Ellice Islands, Grenada, Jamaica, Kenya, Mauritius, Montserrat, North Borneo, St. Christopher-Nevis and Anguilla, St. Lucia, St. Vincent, Sarawak, Sierra Leone, State of Singapore, Swaziland, Tanganyika, Trinidad, Uganda, Zanzibar
  7 Mar 1963 Barbados and its dependencies
End Note
1

League of Nations,  Treaty Series , vol.112, p.371.
2

See note 1 under “Czech Republic” and note 1 under “Slovakia” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
3

According to a Declaration made by the Danish Government when ratifying the Convention, the latter was to take effect in respect of Denmark only upon the coming into force of the Danish Penal Code of April 15th, 1930.  This Code having entered into force on January 1st, 1933, the Convention has become effective for Denmark from the same date.
4

In a notification received on 21 February 1974, the Government of the German Democratic Republic stated that the German Democratic Republic had declared the reapplication of the Convention as of 6 June 1958.

In this connection, the Secretary-General received, on 2 March 1976, the following communication from the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany:

With reference to the communication by the German Democratic Republic of 31 January 1974, concerning the application, as from 6 June 1958, of the International Convention of 20April 1929 for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency, the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany declares that in the relation between the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic the declaration of application has no retroac tive effect beyond 21 June 1973.

Subsequently, in a communication received on 17 June 1976, the Government of the German Democratic Republic declared:

"The Government of the German Democratic Republic takes the view that in accordance with the applicable rules of international law and the international practice of States the regulations on the reapplication of agreements concluded under international law are an internal affair of the successor State concerned.  Accordingly, the German Democratic Republic was entitled to determine the date of reapplication of the International Convention for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency, April 20th, 1929 to which it established its status as a party by way of succession."

See also note 2 under “Germany” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
5

The reservation by Norway has not given rise to any objection on the part of the States to which it was communicated in accordance with Article 22, it may be considered as accepted.
6

Instrument deposited in Berlin.
7

See note 1 under “former Yugoslavia” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume
8

See note concerning signatures, ratifications and accession made on behalf of China (note 1 under “China” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume).
9

The Republic of Viet-Nam had acceded to the Convention and the Protocol on 3 December 1964.  See also note 1 under “Viet Nam” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume
10

With the following reservation, which is deemed to have been accepted by the other Contracting Parties in accordance with article 22 of the Convention:

The Democratic and Popular Republic of Algeria does not consider itself bound by article 19 of the Convention, which confers upon the International Court of Justice jurisdiction with respect to any disputes concerning the Convention.

The jurisdiction of international tribunals may be accepted, by way of exception, in cases with respect to which the Algerian Government shall have expressly given its consent.
11

With the following reservation, which is deemed to have been accepted by the other Contracting Parties in accordance with article 22 of the Convention:

"The Government of the Republic of Indonesia does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 19 of this Convention but takes the position that any dispute relating to the interpretation or application of the Convention may be submitted to arbitration or to the International Court of Justice for decision, only with the agreement of all the parties to the dispute.
12

With the following reservation, which is deemed to have been accepted by the other Contracting Parties in accordance with article 22 of the Convention:

"The Government of Malaysia does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 19 of the Convention."
13

With the following reservation, which is deemed to have been accepted by the other Contracting Parties in accordance with article 22 of the Convention: The Kingdom of Morocco does not consider itself bound by article 19 of the Convention which provides that any disputes which might arise relating to the said Convention shall be settled by the Permanent Court of International Justice.

However, it may accept the jurisdiction of the International Court, by way of exception, in cases where the Moroccan Government expressly states that it accepts such jurisdiction.
14

With the following reservation, which is deemed to have been accepted by the other Contracting Parties in accordance with article 22 of the Convention:

"Articles 5 and 8 of the Convention shall be inoperative with respect to the Philippines unless and until Article 163 of the Revised Penal Code and Section 14 (a), Rule 110, of the Rules of the Court in the Philippines, shall have been amended to conform to the said provisions of the Convention."
15

See note 1 under “Yugoslavia”, “former Yugoslavia” et "Serbia and Montenegro" and   in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
16

In a communication received on 14 August 1964, the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic, referring to Presidential decree No.1147 of 20 June 1959, pursuant to which the application of the Convention for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency and Protocol, done at Geneva on 30 April 1929, was extended to the Syrian Province of the United Arab Republic, and to décret-loi No.25 promulgated on 13 June 1962 by the President of the Syrian Arab Republic (see also note 1 under “United Arab Republic (Egypt and Syria)” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume) has informed the Secretary-General that the Syrian Arab Republic considers itself a party to the said Convention and Protocol as from 20 June 1959. See also note 1 under “United Arab Republic (Egypt and Syria)” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.