Australia
14 March 1968
20 November 1970
6 September 1973
25 January 1977
21 June 1978
22 February 1983
10 February 1987
Bahrain17,18
Belarus
2 November 1977
16 October 1986
11 November 1986
Botswana
Bulgaria
Cambodia
Canada
16 March 1978
China19
Cuba
Denmark
5 August 1970
29 March 1977
Ecuador20
Egypt17,21
France
28 December 1976
29 August 1986
Greece22
Guatemala
23 December 1963
Haiti
9 May 1972
Hungary
7 July 1975
6 September 1978
Iraq
Ireland
17 January 1978
Japan
27 January 1987
Kuwait17
Libya17
Luxembourg
18 January 1965
25 October 1965
Malta
Mongolia23
18 January 1978
Morocco
Mozambique
Nepal
New Zealand
Oman
Poland
3 November 1975
7 March 1978
Portugal24
Qatar17
Romania
Russian Federation
6 June 1972
11 October 1977
7 November 1977
16 February 1982
6 October 1986
6 November 1986
Saudi Arabia17
Sudan17
Syrian Arab Republic17,25
15 March 1979
Ukraine
28 July 1972
24 October 1977
20 October 1986
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
1 September 1964
7 June 1967
29 March 1968
19 June 1968
23 August 1968
10 December 1968
13 March 1973
16 April 1973
4 February 1977
19 February 1987
United States of America
2 July 1974
4 September 1987
Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)26
Viet Nam
Yemen15,17
Bahamas27
Belgium
Czech Republic5
Germany6
Greece
Mongolia
Netherlands (Kingdom of the)
Slovakia5
Thailand
Tonga
United Republic of Tanzania
The 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.
See 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.
See note 3 under "China” and note 1 under “Portugal” regarding Macao in the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this volume.
Signed 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.
Czechoslovakia 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, Treaty Series, 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:
With regard to the reservations made by Yemen concerning articles 27, 36 and 37:
"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."
With regard to reservations made by Qatar concerning article 27, paragraph 3 and article 37, paragraph 2:
"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.
The 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, Treaty Series, vol. 856, p. 231. See also note 2 under “Germany” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
See note 1 under “Germany” regarding Berlin (West) in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
In its notification of succession, the Government of Malta indicated that it considers itself bound by the Convention as from 1 October 1964 [the date of entry into force of the Convention for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland].
See note 1 under “Montenegro” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
For the Kingdom in Europe and the Netherlands Antilles. See also notes 1 and 2 under “Netherlands” regarding Aruba/Netherlands Antilles in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.
See note 1 under "New Zealand" regarding Tokelau 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 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.”
In 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.
The 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.
The 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.
In 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).
In 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, mutatis mutandis, 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.
On 8 July 2021, the Government of Bahrain notified the Secretary-General of its withdrawal of the following reservation made upon accession:
"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."
In 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.
Upon 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.
In 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, Treaty Series , vol. 500, p. 211.
In 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, Treaty Series, vol. 500, p. 186.)
In 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, Treaty Series, vol. 587, p. 352.
In 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, Treaty Series , vol. 645, p. 372.
These 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 "Objections" . 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.
In 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, Treaty Series , vol. 500, p. 202.
In 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 " Objections " .)