Home Page

1 Official Records of the General Assembly, Forty-fourth Session, Supplement No. 49 (A/44/49) , p. 166.

2 In the four months following the communication of the proposal of amendment, less than one third of the States Parties indicated that they favoured a conference of States Parties for the purpose of considering and voting upon the proposals in accordance with article 50 (1) of the Convention. Consequently the conference referred to in article 50 (1) of the Convention was not convened.

3On 28 September 2015, the Government of the Republic of Austria notified the Secretary-General of its withdrawal of the reservations to Articles 13, 15 and 17, as well as its declarations to Art. 38 (2) and (3) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, in accordance with Article 51 (3) of the Convention.

The text of the withdrawn reservations read as follows:

"1. Article 13 and article 15 of the Convention will be applied provided that they will not affect legal restrictions in accordance with article 10 and article 11 of the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 4 November 1950.

"2. Article 17 will be applied to the extent that it is compatible with the basic rights of others, in particular with the basic rights of freedom of information and freedom of press."

The text of the withdrawn declarations read as follows:

"1. Austria will not make any use of the possibility provided for in article 38, paragraph 2, to determine an age limit of 15 years for taking part in hostilities as this rule is incompatible with article 3, paragraph 1, which determines that the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.

"2. Austria declares, in accordance with its constitutional law, to apply article 38, paragraph 3, provided that only male Austrian citizens are subject to compulsory military service."

4 The former Yugoslavia had signed and ratified the Convention on 26 January 1990 and 3 January 1991, respectively, with the following reservation:

Reservation:

"The competent authorities (ward authorities) of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia may, under article 9, paragraph 1 of the Convention, make decisions to deprive parents of their right to raise their children and give them an upbringing without prior judicial determination in accordance with the internal legislation of the SFR of Yugoslavia."

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.

5 On 27 April 1999, the Government of Portugal informed the Secretary-General that the Convention would apply to Macao.

Subsequently, the Secretary-General received communications concerning the status of Macao from China and Portugal (see note 3  under “China” and note 1 under “Portugal” regarding Macao in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume). Upon resuming the exercise of sovereignty over Maco, China notified the Secretary-General that the Convention with the reservation made by China will also apply to the Maco Special Administrative Region.

6 On 10 June 1997, the Secretary-General received communications concerning the status of Hong Kong from the Governments of China and the United Kingdom (see also 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). Upon resuming the exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong, China notified the Secretary-General that the Convention with the reservation made by China will also apply to the Hong Kong special Administrative Region.

In addition, the notification made by the Government of China contained the following declaration:

1. The Government of the People's Republic of China, on behalf of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, interprets the Convention as applicable only following a live birth.

2. The Government of the People's Republic of China reserves, for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the right to apply such legislation, in so far as it relates to the entry into, stay in and departure from the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of those who do not have the right under the laws of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to enter and remain in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, and to the acquisition and possession of residentship as it may deem necessary from time to time.

3. The Government of the People's Republic of China interprets, on behalf of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the references in the Convention to "parents" to mean only those persons who, under the laws of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, are treated as parents. This includes cases where the laws regard a child as having only one parent, for example where a child has been adopted by one person only and in certain cases where a child is conceived other than as a result of sexual intercourse by the woman who gives birth to it and she is treated as the only parent.

4. The Government of the People's Republic of China reserves, for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the right not to apply article 32 (2) (b) of the Convention in so far as it might require regulation of the hours of employment of young persons who have attained the age of fifteen years in respect of work in non-industrial establishments.

5. ...

6. Where at any time there is a lack of suitable detention facilities, or where the mixing of adults and children is deemed to be mutually beneficial, the Government of the People's Republic of China reserves, for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the right not to apply article 37 (c) of the Convention in so far as those provisions require children who are detained to be accommodated separately from adults.

In regard to the above-mentioned declaration, by a notification recieved on 10 April 2003, the Government of the People’s Republic of China informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its declaration relating to article 22 of the Convention. The declaration reads as follows:

The Government of the People's Republic of China, on behalf of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, seeks to apply the Convention to the fullest extent to children seeking asylum in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region except in so far as conditions and resources make full implementation impracticable. In particular, in relation to article 22 of the Convention the Government of the People's Republic of China reserves the right to continue to apply legislation in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region governing the detention ofchildren seeking refugee status, the determination of their status and their entry into, stay in and departure from the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

7 Czechoslovakia had signed and ratified the Convention on 30 September 1990 and 7 January 1991, respectively, with the following declaration in respect of article 7 (1):

"In cases of irrevocable adoptions, which are based on the principle of anonymity of such adoptions, and of artificial fertilization, where the physician charged with the operation is required to ensure that the husband and wife on one hand and the donor on the other hand remain unknown to each other, the non-communication of a natural parent's name or natural parents' names to the child is not in contradiction with this provision."

By a communication received on 7 June 1991, the Government of Czechoslovakia had made the following objections with regard to the reservation made by Kuwait upon signature:

"These reservations are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention.  In the opinion of the Czechoslovak Government the said reservations are in contradiction to the generally recognized principle of international law according to which a state cannot invoke the provisions of its own internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.  Therefore the Czech and Slovak Federal 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.

8 On 11 May 1993,  the Government of Denmark notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its declaration with regard to the application of the Convention to Greenland and the Faroe Islands which reads as follows:

"Until further notice the Convention shall not apply to Greenland and the Faroe Islands."

9 On  31 July 2003, the Government of Egypt informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification in respect of articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. The reservation read as follows:

Since The Islamic Shariah is one of the fundamental sources of legislation in Egyptian positive law and because the Shariah, in enjoining the provision of every means of protection and care for children by numerous ways and means, does not include among those ways and means the system of adoption existing in certain other bodies of positive law,

The Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt expresses its reservation with respect to all the clauses and provisions relating to adoption in the said Convention, and in particular with respect to the provisions governing adoption in articles 20 and 21 of the Convention.

10 The German Democratic Republic had signed and ratified the Convention on 7 March 1990 and 2 October 1990, respectively.  See also note 2 under “Germany” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.

11 On 6 February 1995, the Secretary-General received from the Government of the Netherlands the following communication with regard to the reservations made upon upon ratification by Djibouti, Indonesia, Pakistan and the Syrian Arab Republic:

[Same text, mutatis mutandis, as the objection made with regard to Iran (Islamic Republic of) under "Objections".]

Subsequently, on 23 July 1997, the Government of Pakistan informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification which reads as follows:

"Provisions of the Convention shall be interpreted in the light of the principles of Islamic laws and values."

Subsequently, on 2 February 2005, the Government of Indonesia informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation made upon ratification. The reservation reads as follows:

The 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia guarantees the fundamental rights of the child irrespective of their sex, ethnicity or race.  The Constitution prescribes those rights to be implemented by national laws and regulations.

The ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child by the Republic of Indonesia does not imply the acceptance of obligations going beyond the Constitutional limits nor the acceptance of any obligation to introduce any right beyond those prescribed under the Constitution.

With reference to the provisions of articles 1, 14, 16, 17, 21, 22 and 29 of this Convention, the Government of the Republic of Indonesia declares that it will apply these articles in conformity with its Constitution.

12 On 1 October 2009, the Government of Liechtenstein informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the declaration concerning article 1 and the reservation concerning article 7 made upon ratification to the Convention. The text of the declaration withdrawn reads as follows:

“According to the legislation of the Principality of Liechtenstein children come of age with 20 years. However, the Liechtenstein law provides for the possibility to prolong or to shorten the duration of minority.”

The text of the reservation withdrawn reads as follows:

“The Principality of Liechtenstein reserves the right to apply the Liechtenstein legislation according to which Liechtenstein nationality is granted under certain conditions.”

13 See note 1 under "Montenegro" in the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this volume.

14 For the Kingdom in Europe.

Subsequently, on 17 December 1997, the Government of the Netherlands informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to accept the Convention on behalf of the Netherlands Antilles subject to the following reservations and declarations:

Reservations:

" Article 26:

The Kingdom of the Netherlands accepts the provisions of article 26 of the Convention with the reservation that these provisions shall not imply an independent entitlement of children to social security, including insurance.

Article 37:

The Kingdom of the Netherlands accepts the provisions of article 37(c) of the Convention with the reservation that these provisions shall not prevent :

- the application of adult penal law to children of sixteen years and older, provided that certain criteria laid down by law have been met;

- that a child which has been detained will not always be accommodated separately from adults; if the number of children that has to be detained at a certain time is unexpectedly large, (temporary) accommodations together with adults may be unavoidable.

Article 40:

The Kingdom of the Netherlands accepts the provisions of article 40 of the Convention with the reservation that cases involving minor offences may be tried without the presence of legal assistance and that with respect to such offences the position remains that no provision is made in all cases for a review of the facts or of any measures imposed as a consequence.

Declarations:

Article 14 :

It is the understanding of the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands that article 14 of the Convention is in accordance with the provisions of article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 19 December 1966 and that this article shall include the freedom of a child to have or adopt a religion or belief of his or her choice as soon as the child is capable of making such choice in view of his or her age or maturity.

Article 22 :

The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands declares that whereas the Netherlands Antilles are not bound by the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, article 22 of the present Convention shall be interpreted as containing a reference only to such other international human rights or humanitarian instruments as are binding on the Kingdom of the Netherlands with respect to the Netherlands Antilles.

Article 38 :

With regard to article 38 of the Convention, the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands declares that it is of the opinion that States should not be allowed to involve children directly or indirectly in hostilities and that the minimum age for the recruitment or incorporation of children in the armed forces should be above fifteen years.

In times of armed conflict, provisions shall prevail that are most conducive to guaranteeing the protection of children under international law, as referred to in article 41 of the Convention."

Further, on 18 December 2000, the Government of the Netherlands informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to accept the Convention on behalf of Aruba subject to the following rservations and declarations:

Reservations :

"Article 26

The Kingdom of the Netherlands accepts the provisions of article 26 of the Convention with the reservation that these provisions shall not imply an independent entitlement of children to social security, including social insurance.

Article 37

The Kingdom of the Netherlands accepts the provisions of article 37 (c) of the Convention with the reservation that these provisions shall not prevent:

- the application of adult penal law to children of sixteen years and older, provided that certain criteria laid down by law have been met;

- that a child which has been detained will not always be accommodated separately from adults; if the number of children that has to be detained at a certain time is unexpectedly large, (temporary) accommodation together with adults m be unavoidable.

Article 40

The Kingdom of the Netherlands accepts the provisions of article 40 of the Convention with the reservation that cases involving minor offences may be tried without the presence of legal assistance and that with respect to such offences the position remains that no provision is made in all cases for a review of the facts or of any measures imposed as a consequence."

Declarations:

"Article 14

It is the understanding of the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands that Article 14 of the Convention is in accordance with the provisions of Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 19 December 1966 and that this Article shall include the freedom of a child to have or adopt a religion or belief of his or her choice as soon as the child is capable of making such choice in view of his or her age or maturity.

Article 22

Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands declares that whereas Aruba is not bound by the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, Article 22 of the present Convention shall be interpreted as containing a reference only to such other international human rights or humanitarian instruments as are binding on the Kingdom of the Netherlands with respect to Aruba.

Article 38

With regard to Article 38 of the Convention, the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands declares that it is of the opinion that States should not be allowed to involve children directly or indirectly in hostilities and that the minimum age for the recruitment or incorporation of children in the armed forces should be above fifteen years. In times of armed conflict, provisions shall prevail that are most conducive to guaranteeing the protection of children under international law, as referred to in Article 41 of the Convention."

See also note 2 under “Netherlands” regarding Netherlands Antilles in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.

15 The instrument of ratification also specifies that "such ratification shall extend to Tokelau only upon notification to the Secretary-General of the United Nations of such extension".

16 On 12 April 1994, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Greece the following communication:

"Succession of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 20 November 1989, does not imply its recognition on behalf of the Hellenic Republic."

17On 11 August 2017, the Government of the Republic of Korea informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservation in respect of article 21, paragraph (a), made upon ratification.

18 In a communication received on 7 September 1994, the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland indicated that the Convention will apply to the Isle of Man, Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands (Malvinas), Hong Kong, Montserrat, Pitcairn, Henderson, Ducie and Oeno Islands, St. Helena, St. Helena Dependencies, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, Turks and Caicos Islands.

In this regard, the Secretary-General received, on 3 April 1995, from the Government of Argentina the following objection:

The Government of Argentina rejects the extension of the application of the [said Convention] to the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, effected by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on 7 September 1994, and reaffirms its sovereignty over those islands, which are an integral part of its national territory.

Subsequently, on 17 January 1996, the Secretary-General received from the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland the following communication:

"... The Government of the United Kingdom has no doubt about the sovereignty of the United Kingdom over the Falkland Islands and over South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and its consequential right to extend the said Convention to these Territories. The United Kingdom Government rejects as unfounded the claims by the Government of Argentina and is unable to regard the Argentine objection as having any legal effect."

Subsequently, on 5 October 2000, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Argentina the following communication:

[The Argentine Republic] wishes to refer to the report submitted by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to theCommittee on the Rights of the Child, which contains an addendum entitled "Overseas Dependent Territories and Crown Dependencies of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland"(CRC/C/41/Add.9).

In that connection, the Argentine Republic wishes to recall that by its note of 3 April 1995 it rejected the extension of the application of the Convention on the Rights of the Child to the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands effected by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on 7 September 1994.

The Government of Argentina rejects the designation of the Malvinas Islands as Overseas Dependent Territories of the United Kingdom or any other similar designation.

Consequently, the Argentine Republic does not recognize the section concerning the Malvinas Islands contained in the report which the United Kingdom has submitted to the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC/C/41/Add.9) or any other document or instrument having a similar tenor that may derive from this alleged territorial extension.

The United Nations General Assembly has adopted resolutions 2065 (XX), 3160 (XXVIII), 31/49, 37/9, 38/12, 39/6, 40/21, 41/40, 42/19 and 43/25, in which it recognizes that a dispute exists concerning sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands and urges the Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to continue negotiations with a view to resolving the dispute peacefully and definitively as soon as possible, assisted by the good offices of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who is to report to the General Assembly on the progress made.

The Argentine Republic reaffirms its rights of sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime spaces, which are an integral part of its national territory.

Further, on 20 December 2000, the Secretary-General received from the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the following communcation:

“The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland rejects as unfounded the claims made by the Argentine Republic in its communicat to the depositaof 5 October 2000.  The Government of the United Kingdom recalls that in its declaration received by the depositary on 16 January 1996 it rejected the objection by the Argentine Republic to the extension by the United Kingdom of the Convention on the Rights of the Child to the Falkland Islands and to South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands.  The Government of the United Kingdom has no doubt about the sovereignty of the United Kingdom over the Falkland Islands and over South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and its consequential rights to apply the Convention with respect to those Territories."

19 On 29 April 2014, the Secretary-General received from the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland the following notification:

“… the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland wishes the United Kingdom's Ratification of [the Convention] be extended to the territory of the Bailiwick of Jersey for whose international relations the United Kingdom is responsible.

The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland considers the extension of [the Convention] to the Bailiwick of Jersey to enter into force on the date of receipt of this notification by [the Secretary-General] for deposit …”

20On 4 November 2020, the Secretary-General received the following notification from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland:

“… the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland hereby extends the application of the United Kingdom’s Ratification of the Convention […] to Guernsey and Alderney for whose international relations the United Kingdom is responsible.

The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland considers the extension of the Convention […] to Guernsey and Alderney to enter into force on the date of receipt of this notification…”

21 The signature was affixed on behalf of the Yemen Arab Republic.  See also note 1 under “Yemen” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of this volume.

22 Upon ratification, the Government of Andorra made the following declarations:  

A.  The Principality of Andorra deplores the fact that the [said Convention] does not prohibit the use of children in armed conflicts. It also disagrees with the provisions of article 38, paragraphs 2 and 3, concerning the participation and recruitment of children from the age of 15.

B.  The Principality of Andorra will apply the provisions of articles 7 and 8 of the Convention without prejudice to the provisions of part II, article 7 of the Constitution of the Principality of Andorra, concerning Andorran nationality.

Article 7 of the Constitution of Andorra provides that:

A  Llei qualificada shall determine the rules pertaining to the acquisition and loss of nationality and the legal consequences thereof.

Acquisition or retention of a nationality other than Andorran nationality shall result in the loss of the latter in accordance with the conditions and limits established by law.

By a communication received on 1 March 2006, the Government of Andorra notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the following declaration made upon ratification:

B. The Principality of Andorra will apply the provisions of articles 7 and 8 of the Convention without prejudice to the provisions of part II, article 7 of the Constitution of the Principality of Andorra, concerning Andorran nationality.

Article 7 of the Constitution of Andorra provides that:

A  Llei qualificada shall determine the rules pertaining to the acquisition and loss of nationality and the legal consequences thereof.

Acquisition or retention of a nationality other than Andorran nationality shall result in the loss of the latter in accordance with the conditions and limits established by law.

23The Secretary-General received from the Government of Sweden the following communications: on 20 July 1993, with regard to the reservations made upon accession by Thailand concerning articles 7, 22 and 29, upon ratification by Myanmar concerning articles 15 and 37, upon ratification by Bangladesh concerning article 21, upon ratification by Djibouti concerning the whole Convention, and on 29 March 1994, with regard to the reservation made upon signature by Qatar.

24 On 16 September 2008, the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservation made in respect of article 9 (1) of the Convention.  The reservation read as follows:

“The Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina reserves the right not to apply paragraph 1 of article 9 of the Convention since the internal legislation of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina provides for the right of competent authorities (guardianship authorities) to determine on separation of a child from his/her parents without a previous judicial review.”

25 In this regard, on 16 November 1995, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Denmark, the following communication:

"Because of their unlimited scope and undefined character these reservations are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and accordingly inadmissible and without effect under international law. Therefore, the Government of Denmark objects to these reservations. The Convention remains in force in its entirety between Djibouti, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, the Syrian Arab Republic respectively and Denmark.

It is the opinion of the Government of Denmark that no time limit applies to objections against reservations, which are inadmissible under international law.

The Government of Denmark recommends the Governments of Djibouti, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan and the Syrian Arab Republic to reconsider their reservations to the Convention on the Rights of the Child."

On 3 July 1996, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Denmark a communication regarding the reservations made by Botswana and Qatar, identical in essence,  mutatis mutandis , as the one made on 16 November 1995.



On 30 June 2022, the Government of Botswana informed the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the following reservation made upon accession:

"The Government of the Republic of Botswana enters a reservation with regard to the provisions of article 1 of the Convention and does not consider itself bound by the same in so far as such may conflict with the Laws and Statutes of Botswana."

26 On 13 March 1997, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Ireland the following communication with regard to the reservations made by Brunei Darussalam:

[Same objection, mutatis mutandis, as the one made with regard to Saudi Arabia under "Objections".]

27 On 20 March 1997, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Finland communciations with regard to reservations made by Brunei Darussalam and Saudi Arabia upon accession:

[Same text, mutatis mutandis, as the objection made with regard to Singapore under "Objections".]

28 On 13 August 1997, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Sweden the following communications with regard to reservations made by Brunei Darussalam, Kiribati and Singapore upon accession to the Convention:

[Same text, mutatis mutandis, as the one made with regard to Indonesia under "Objections" .

29 On 10 August 2015, the Government of Brunei Darussalam informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to partially withdraw its reservations to articles 20 (1), 20 (2) and 21 (a) made upon accession which read as follow:

"[The Government of Brunei Darussalam] expresses its reservations on the provisions of the said Convention which may be contrary to the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and to the beliefs and principles of Islam, the State, religion, and without prejudice to the generality of the said reservations, in particular expresses its reservation on articles 14, 20 and 21 of the Convention."

30 On 25 March 2009, the Government of the Cook Islands informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservation made upon accession in respect to article 37 of the Convention.  The text of the reservation withdrawn reads as follow:

"The Government of the Cook Islands accepts the general principles of article 37. In relation to the second sentence of paragraph (c), the obligation to separate children from adults in prison is accepted only to the extent that such imprisonment is considered by the responsible authorities to be feasible. The Cook Islands reserves the right not to apply article 37 in so far as those provisions require children who are detained to be accommodated separately from adults."

31 On 26 May 1998, the Government of Croatia informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation made upon succession in respect to article 9, paragraph 1 of the Convention. The reservation read as follows:

The Republic of Croatia reserves the right not to apply paragraph 1 of article 9 of the Convention since the internal legislation of the Republic of Croatia provides for the right of competent authorities (Centres for Social Work) to determine on separation of a child from his/her parents without a previous judicial review."

32 On 7 December 2009, the Government of Djibouti informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservation made upon ratification to the Convention. The text of the reservation withdrawn reads as follows:

... the Government of Djibouti shall not consider itself bound by] any provisions or articles that are incompatible with its religion and its traditional values.

33 Statements delivered by [the Government of Ecuador] on agenda item 108, in the Third Committee on 14 November 1989, particularly as concerns the interpretation to be given to article 24, in the light of the preamble of the Convention, and article 38 (ref: A/C.3/44/SR.41).

34 In a communication received by the Secretary-General on 15 February 1990, the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany indicated that "it was [its] intention to make the [said] declaration on the occasion of the signing of the Convention on the Rights of the Child".

35 On 15 July 2010, the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany notified its withdrawal of the following reservations:

“In accordance with the reservations made by it with respect to the parallel guarantees of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Federal Republic of Germany declares in respect of article 40 (2) (b) (ii) and (v) of the Convention that these provisions shall be applied in such a way that, in the case of minor infringement of the penal law, there shall not in each and every case exist:

a)   a right to have ‘legal or other appropriate assistance’ in the preparation and presentation of the defence, and/or

b)   an obligation to have a sentence not calling for imprisonment reviewed by a ‘higher competent authority or judicial body’.”

36 On 15 July 2010, the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany notified its withdrawal of the following declarations concerning aricles 9, 10, 18, 22 and 38 (2):

"The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany reserves the right to make, upon ratification, such declarations as it considers necessary, especially with regard to the interpretation of articles 9, 10, 18 and 22.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is of the opinion that article 18 (1) of the Convention does not imply that by virtue of the entry into force of this provision parental custody, automatically and without taking into account the best interests of the respective child, applies to both parents even in the case of children whose parents have not married, are permanently living apart while still married, or are divorced.  Such an interpretation would be incompatible with article 3 (1) of the Convention.  The situation must be examined in a case-by-case basis, particularly where the parents cannot agree on the joint exercise of custody.

The Federal Republic of Germany therefore declares that the provisions of the Convention are also without prejudice to the provisions of national law concerning

a)   legal representation of minors in the exercise of their rights;

b)   rights of custody and access in respect of children born in wedlock;

c)   circumstances under family and inheritance law of children born out of wedlock;

This applies irrespective of the planned revision of the law on parental custody, the details of which remain within the discretion of the national legislator.

Nothing in the Convention may be interpreted as implying that unlawful entry by an alien into the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany or his unlawful stay there is permitted; nor may any provision be interpreted to mean that it restricts the right of the Federal Republic of Germany to pass laws and regulations concerning the entry of aliens and the conditions of their stay or to make a distinction between nationals and aliens.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany regrets the fact that under article 38 (2) of the Convention even fifteen-year-olds may take a part in hostilities as soldiers, because this age limit is incompatible with the consideration of a child's best interest (article 3 (1) of the Convention).  It declares that it will not make any use of the possibility afforded by the Convention of fixing this age limit at fifteen years.”

37 On 1 November 2010, the Government of the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its declaration made upon ratification. The text of the withdrawn declaration read as follows:

“The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany declares that it will take the opportunity afforded by the ratification of the Convention to initiate reforms in its domestic legislation that are in keeping with the spirit of the Convention and that it considers appropriate, in line with article 3 (2) of the Convention, to ensure the well-being of the child. The planned measures include, in particular, a revision of the law on parental custody in respect of children whose parents have not married, are permanently living apart while still married, or are divorced.  The principal aim will be to improve the conditions for the exercise of parental custody by both parents in such cases as well.  The Federal Republic of Germany also declares that domestically the Convention does not apply directly.  It establishes state obligations under international law that the Federal Republic of Germany fulfils in accordance with its national law, which conforms with the Convention.”

38 On 24 March 2009, the Government of Iceland informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the declaration made upon ratification with respect to article 9 of the Convention.  the text of the declaration withdrawn reads as follows:

“1. With respect to article 9, under Icelandic law the administrative authorities can take final decisions in some cases referred to in the article. These decisions are subject to judicial review in the sense that it is a principle of Icelandic law that courts can nullify administrative decisions if they conclude that they are based on unlawful premises. This competence of the courts to review administrative decisions is based on Article 60 of the Constitution.”

   

On 20 May 2015, the Government of Iceland informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the declaration made upon ratification with respect to article 37 of the Convention.  the text of the declaration withdrawn reads as follows:

"2. With respect to article 37, the separation of juvenile prisoners from adult prisoners is not obligatory under Icelandic law.  However, the law relating to prisons and imprisonment provides that when deciding in which penal institution imprisonment is to take place account should be taken of,  inter alia , the age of the prisoner.  In light of the circumstances prevailing in Iceland it is expected that decisions on the imprisonment of juveniles will always take account of the juvenile's best interest."

39 In this regard, the Secretary-General received communications from the following States on the dates indicated hereinafter:

Austria (6 September 1995):

Under article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties which is reflected in article 51 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child - a reservation, in order to be admissible under international law, has to be compatible with the object and purpose of the treaty concerned. A reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty if it intends to derogate provisions the implementation of which is essential to fulfilling its object and purpose.

The Government of Austria  has examined the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran to the [said Convention]. Given the general character of this reservation a final assessment as to its admissibility under international law cannot be made without further clarification.

Until the scope of the legal effects of this reservation is sufficiently specified by the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Republic of Austria considers this reservation as not affecting any provision the implementation of which is essential to fulfilling the object and purpose of the [said Convention].

Austria, however, objects to the admissibility of the reservation in question if the application of this reservation negatively affects the compliance by the Islamic Republic of Iran with its obligations under the [said Convention] essential for the fulfilment of its object and purpose.

Austria could not consider the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran as admissible under the regime of article 51 of the [said Convention] and article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties unless Iran, by providing additional information or through subsequent practice, ensures that the reservation is compatible with the provisions essential for the implementation of the object and purpose of the [said Convention]."

Italy (25 September 1995):

"This reservation, owing to its unlimited scope and undefined character, is inadmissible under international law. The Government of the Italian Republic, therefore, objects to the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention as between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Italian Republic."

40 On 9 June 1993, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Finland, the following communication:

"The Government of Finland has examined the contents of the reservation made by Jordan [...].

In the view of the Government of Finland this reservation is subject to the general principle of treaty interpretation according to which a party may not invoke general principles of national law as justification for failure to perform its treaty obligations. For the above reason the Government of Finland objects to the said reservations. However, the Government of Finland does not consider that this objection constitutes an obstacle to the entry into force of the said Convention between Finland and Jordan."

41On 16 September 2015, the Government of the Republic of Kiribati informed the Secretary-General that it withdrew its reservations to articles 24, 26 and 28 made upon accession. The text of the withdrawn reservations read as follows: “The instrument of ratification by the Government of the Republic of Kiribati contains reservations in respect of, article 24 paragraph (b, c, d, e & f), article 26 and article 28 paragraph (b, c & d), in accordance with Article 51 paragraph 1 of the Convention.”

42 On 10 December 2003, the Government of Liechtenstein informed the Secretary-General of the following:

"The Principality of Liechtenstein partially withdraws its reservation concerning article 10 of the Convention as contained in the annex of the instrument of accession of 18 December 1995, namely with regard to paragraph 2 of the article guaranteeing the right of the child to maintain personal relations and direct contacts with both parents."

43 Subsequently, the Government of Malaysia informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation to articles 22, 28 paragraph 1 (b), (c), (d), (e) and paragraphs 2 and 3, article 40 paragraph 3 and 4, articles 44 and 45" made upon accession. It should be noted that, the Secretary-General had received from the following States, communications in regard to the reservations made by the Government of Malaysia upon accession, on the dates indicated hereinafter:

Belgium (1 July 1996):

The Belgian Government believes that this reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and that, consequently, in accordance with article 51, paragraph 2, of the Convention, it is not permitted.

...

Accordingly, Belgium wishes to be bound by the Convention in its entirety as regards [the State of Malaysia] which [has] expressed reservations prohibited by the [said] Convention.

Moreover, as the 12 month period specified in article 20.5 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties is not applicable to reservations which are null and void, Belgium's objection to such reservations is not subject to any particular time-limit.

Denmark (2 July 1996):

"The reservation is covering multiple provisions, including central provisions of the Convention. Furthermore, it is a general principle of international law that internal law may not be invoked as justification for failure to perform treaty obligations. Consequently, the Government of Denmark considers the said reservation as being incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and accordingly inadmissible and without effect under international law. The Convention remains in force in its entirety between Malaysia and Denmark.

It is the opinion of the Government ofDenmark that no time limit applies to objections against reservations, which are inadmissible under international law.

The Government of Denmark recommends the Government of Malaysia to reconsider its reservaion to the said Convention."

44 The declaration of 19 July 2010 modifies the earlier declaration of 23 March 1999.

45 On 20 August 2001, the Government of Malta informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation made upon ratification. The reservation reads as follows:

"Article 26 - The Government of Malta is bound by the obligations arising out of this article to the extent of present social security legislation."

46 On 4 June 2008, the Government of the Republic of Mauritius informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservation made upon accession in respect to article 22 of the Convention.  The text of the reservation reads as follows:

"[Mauritius] having considered the Convention, hereby accedes to it with express reservation with regard to Article 22 of the said Convention."

47 On 19 October 2006, the Government of Morocco informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservation made with regard to article 14 made upon ratificaton. The reservation reads as follows:

The Kingdom of Morocco, whose Constitution guarantees to all the freedom to pursue his religious affairs, makes a reservation to the provisions of article 14, which accords children freedom of religion, in view of the fact that Islam is the State religion.

48 On 19 October 1993, the Government of Myanmar notified the Secretary-General its decision to withdraw the following reservations made upon accession with regard to articles 15 and 37:

"Article 15

"1. The Union of Myanmar interprets the expression `the law' in article 15, paragraph 2, to mean the Laws, as well as the Decrees and Executive Orders having the force of law, which are for the time being in force in the Union of Myanmar.

"2. The Union of Myanmar understands that such restrictions on freedom of association and freedom of peaceful assembly imposed in conformity with the said Laws, Decrees and Executive Orders as are required by the exigencies of the situation obtaining in the Union of Myanmar are permissible under article 15, paragraph 2.

"3. The Union of Myanmar interprets the expression `national security' in the same paragraph as encompassing the supreme national interest, namely, the non-disintegration of the Union, the non-disintegration of national solidarity and the perpetuation of national sovereignty, which constitute the paramount national causes of the Union of Myanmar."

"Article 37

The Union of Myanmar accepts in principle the provisions of article 37 as they are in consonance with its laws, rules, regulations, procedures and practice as well as with its traditional, cultural and religious values.  However, having regard to the exigencies of the situation obtaining in the country at present, the Union of Myanmar states as follows:

"1. Nothing contained in Article 37 shall prevent, or be construed as preventing, the Government of the Union of Myanmar from assuming or exercising, in conformity with the laws for the time being in force in the country and the procedures established thereunder, such powers as are required by the exigencies of the situation for the preservation and strengthening of the rule of law, the maintenance of public order ( ordre public) and, in particular, the protection of the supreme natiolterest, namely, the non-disintegration of the Union, the non-disintegration of national solidarity and the perpetuation of national sovereignty, which constitute the paramount national causes of the Union of Myanmar.

"2. Such powers shall include the powers of arrest, detention, imprisonment, exclusion, interrogation, enquiry and investigation."

49 On 19 September 1995, the Government of Norway notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation with respect to article 40(2)(b)(v) made upon ratification of the Convention.

50 On 9 December 2014, the Secretary-General was notified of the Government of Oman's decision to withdraw the the reservations to articles 7, 9, 21 and 30 made upon accession. The Secretary-General notes that the notification of withdrawal of reservations was signed by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Oman on 9 January 2011 and received by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva on 14 January 2011. The notification, however, was received by the Treaty Section of the Office of Legal Affairs on 9 December 2014. In a note received from the Permanent Mission on 19 May 2015, the Government of Oman informed the Secretary-

General that it considers that the withdrawal took effect on 14 January 2011.

The reservations made upon accession read as follow:

1. The words "or to public safety" should be added in article 9 [, paragraph 4,] after the words "unless the provision of the information would be detrimental to the well-being of the child.

2. A reservation is entered to all the provisions of the Convention that do not accords with Islamic law or the legislation in force in the Sultanate and, in particular, to the provisions relating to adoption set forth in its article 21.

4. The Sultanate considers that article 7 of the Convention as it relates to the nationality of a child shall be understood to mean that a child born in the Sultanate of unknown parents shall acquire Oman Nationality, as stipulated in the Sultanate's Nationality Law.

5. The Sultanate does not consider itself to be bound by those provisions of [...] or those of its article 30 that allow a child belonging to a religious minority to profess is or her own religion.

   

On 9 December 2014, the Secretary-General was notified of the Government of Oman's decision to modify the reservation to article 14 made upon accession which read as follows:

The Sultanate does not consider itself to be bound by those provisions of article 14 of the Convention that accord a child the right to choose his or her religion.



On 30 June 2022, the Government of the Sultanate of Oman notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the following reservation made upon accession: The provisions of the Convention should be applied within the limits imposed by the material resources available.

51 On 4 March 2013, the Government of the Republic of Poland notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the following reservations to articles 7 and 38 of the Convention made upon ratification:

-  With respect to article 7 of the Convention, the Republic of Poland stipulates that the right of an adopted child to know its natural parents shall be subject to the limitations imposed by binding legal arrangements that enable adoptive parents to maintain the confidentiality of the child's origin;

-  The law of the Republic of Poland shall determine the age from which call-up to military or similar service and participation in military operations are permissible.  That age limit may not be lower than the age limit set out in article 38 of the Convention.

52 On 1 July 1996, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Belgium, the following communication:

...

The Belgian Government believes that this reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and that, consequently, in accordance with article 51, paragraph 2, of the Convention, it is not permitted.

Accordingly, Belgium wishes to be bound by the Convention in its entirety as regards the [State of Qatar] which [has] expressed reservations prohibited by the [said] Convention.

Moreover, as the 12 month period specified in article 20.5 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties is not applicable to reservations which are null and void, Belgium's objection to such reservations is not subject to any particular time-limit.

53 On 18 June 1996, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Austria, the following communication with regard to the reservation made by Qatar upon ratification:

[Same text, mutatis mutandis, as the objection made with regard to Malaysia under   "Objections".]

54 On 29 April 2009, the Government of the State of Qatar informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to partially withdraw the general reservation made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification to the Convention.  The text of the general reservation reads as follows:

[The State of Qatar] enter(s) a general reservation by the State of Qatar concerning provisions incompatible with Islamic Law.

55 On 16 October 2008, the Government of the Republic of Korea informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservation in respect of article 9, paragraph 3 made upon ratification.

56 On 28 January 1997, the Government of Yugoslavia informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservation made by the former Yugoslavia upon ratification of the Convention the text of which reads as follows:

Reservation:

"The competent authorities (ward authorities) of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia may, under article 9, paragraph 1 of the Convention, make decisions to deprive parents of their right to raise their children and give them an upbringing without prior judicial determination in accordance with the internal legislation of the SFR of Yugoslavia."

In this regard, the Secretary-General received on 28 May 1997, from the Government of Slovenia, the following communication:

"[The Government of Slovenia] would like to express its disagreement with the content of the [notification by the depositary concerning the withdrawal of the reservation]. The State which in 1991 notified its ratification of the [said Convention] and made the reservation was the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) but the State which on 28 January 1997 notified the withdrawal of its reservation was the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY). In that connection the [Government of Slovenia] would like to draw attention to the resolutions of the Security Council (757, 777) and the General Assembly (47/1), all from 1992, which stated that `the state formerly known as the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has ceased to exist"and to the opinion of the Arbitration Commission of the UN/EC Conference on the former Yugoslavia that "the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) is a new State which cannot be considered the sole successor to the SFRY.'

The [said] notification is therefore incorrect and misleading since it is erroneously suggesting that the State which would like to withdraw the reservation is the same person under international law as the State which made the reservation. It is believed that the Secretary-General should be precise in making references to States Parties to international agreements in respect of which he performs depositary functions. Therefore it is the opinion of the Government of the Republic of Slovenia that the withdrawal of the reservation made by the Government of the FRY cannot be considered valid, since it was made by a State that did not make the reservation. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia should, as one of the successor States of the former SFRY, notify its succession if it wishes to be considered a Party to the Convention."

Further, on 3 and 4 June and 10 October 1997, respectively, the Secretary-General received from the Governments of Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, communications, identical in essence,  mutatis mutandis , as the one made by Slovenia.

On 12 March 2001, the Government of Yugoslavia notified the Secretary-General of its intent to succeed to the Convention and confirmed that it does not maintain the reservation made by the former Yugoslavia upon ratification. See also notes 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.

57 On 3 December 1996, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Portugal the following communication regarding the reservation made by Singapore:

[Same text, mutatis mutandis, as the one made with regard to Myanmar under "Objections".]

58 On 19 January 2004, the Government of Slovenia informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation made upon succession. The reservation reads as follows:

"The Republic of Slovenia reserves the right not to apply paragraph 1 of article 9 of the Convention since the internal legislation of the Republic of Slovenia provides for the right of competent authorities (centres for social work) to determine on separ ation of a child from his/her parents without a previous judicial review."

59 In a communication received on 12 January 2004, the Government of Switzerland notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation in respect of article 40, paragraph 2, subparagraph b (vi) made upon ratification which reads as follows:

The guarantee of having the free assistance of an interpreter does not exempt the beneficiary from the payment of any resulting costs.

Subsequently, on 8 April 2004, the Government of Switzerland informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation in respect of article 5 made upon ratification, which reads as follows:

The Swiss legislation concerning parental authority is unaffected.

Further, on 1 May 2007, the Government of Switzerland informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservations in respect of article 7 (2) and article 40 (2) made upon ratification, which reads as follows:

Article 7 (2):

The Swiss legislation on nationality, which does not grant the right to acquire Swiss nationality, is unaffected.

Article 40 (2):

The federal legislation concerning the organization of criminal justice, which establishes an exception to the right to a conviction and sentence being reviewed by a higher tribunal where the person concerned was tried by the highest tribunal at first instance, is unaffected.

60 On 6 May 1996, the Secretary-General received the following communication from the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic with regard to the objection by the Government of Germany to its reservations made upon ratification:

The laws in effect in the Syrian Arab Republic do not recognize the system of adoption, although they do require that protection and assistance should be provided to those for whatever reason permanently or temporarily deprived of their family environment and that alternative care should be assured them through foster placement and  kafalah , in care centres and special institutions and, without assimilation to their blood lineage  (nasab) , by foster families, in accordance with the legislation in force based on the principles of the Islamic  Shariah .

The reservations of the Syrian Arab Republic to articles 20 and 21 mean that approval of the Convention should not in any way be interpreted as recognizing or permitting the system of adoption to which reference is made in these two articles and are subject to these limitations only.

The reservations of the Syrian Arab Republic to article 14 of the Convention are restricted only to its provisions relating to religion and do not concern those relating to thought or conscience. They concern: the extent to which the right in question might conflict with the right of parents and guardians to ensure the religious education of their children, as recognized by the United Nations and set forth in article 18, paragraph 4, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; the extent to which it might conflict with the right, established by the laws in force, of a child to choose a religion at an appointed time or in accordance with designated procedures or at a particular age in the case where he clearly has the mental and legal capacity to do so; and the extent to which it might conflict with public order and principles of the Islamic Shariah on this matter that are in effet in the Syrian Arab Republic with respect to each case.

61 On 13 June 2012, the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic notified the Secretary-General of its decision to partially withdraw its reservations  to articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. The reservations made upon ratification read as follows:



"The Syrian Arab Republic has reservations on the Convention's provisions which are not in conformity with the Syrian Arab legislations and with the Islamic Shariah's principles, in particular the content of article (14) related to the Right of the Child to the freedom of religion, and articles 20 and 21 concerning the adoption."

62The Government of Thailand made the following reservations upon accession to the Convention:

“The application of Articles 7, 22 and 29 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child shall be subject to the national laws, regulations and prevailing practices in Thailand.”

On 11 April 1997, the Government of Thailand notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation with regard to article 29.

Subsequently, on 13 December 2010, the Government of Thailand notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the reservation to article 7 of the Convention.

Furthermore, on 30 August 2024, the Government of Thailand notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the reservation to article 22 of the Convention.

63 On 1 March 2002, the Government of Tunisia informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the following declaration and reservation made upon ratification:

Declaration:

2. The Government of the Republic of Tunisia declares that its undertaking to implement the provisions of this Convention shall be limited by the means at its disposal.

Reservation:

2. The Government of the Republic of Tunisia regards the provisions of article 40, paragraph 2 (b) (v), as representing a general principle to which exceptions may be made under national legislation, as is the case for some offences on which final judgement is rendered by cantonal or criminal courts without prejudice to the right of appeal in their regard to the Court of Cassation entrusted with ensuring the implementation of the law.

On 23 September 2008,  the Secretary-General received a notification from the Government of Tunisia that it had decided to withdraw the following declaration and reservations made upon ratification:

Declaration:

1. The Government of the Republic of Tunisia declares that it shall not, in implementation of this Convention, adopt any legislative or statutory decision that conflicts with the Tunisian Constitution.

Reservations:

1. The Government of the Republic of Tunisia enters a reservation with regard to the provisions of article 2 of the convention, which may not impede implementation of the provisions of its national legislation concerning personal status, particularly in relation to marriage and inheritance rights.

3. The Government of the Republic of Tunisia considers that article 7 of the Convention cannot be interpreted as prohibiting implementation of the provisions of national legislation relating to nationality and, in particular,to cases in which it is forfeited.

64 On 16 November 1998, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Austria a communication with regard to reservations made by the United Arab Emirates upon accession:

[Same text, identical in essence, as the objection made with regard to Malaysia under “ Objections ”.]

65 On 18 April 1997, the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the following reservation made upon ratification:

" (f) In Scotland there are tribunals (known as `children's hearing') which consider the welfare of the child and deal with the majority of offences which a child is alleged to have committed.  In some cases, mainly of welfare nature, the child is temporarily deprived of its liberty for up to seven days prior to attending the hearing.  The child and its family are, however, allowed access to a lawyer during this period.  Although the decisions of the hearings are subject to appeal to the courts, legal representation is not permitted at the proceedings of the children's hearings themselves. Children's hearings have proved over the years to be a very effective way of dealing with the problems of children in a less formal, non-adversarial manner.  Accordingly, the United Kingdom, in respect of article 37 (d), reserves its right to continue the present operation of children's hearings."

Further, on 3 August 1999, the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland informed the Secretary-General of the following:

[...]  the following reservation entered upon ratification in respect of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is hereby withdrawn:

[(d)] Employment legislation in the United Kingdom does not treat persons under 18, but over the school-leaving age as children, but as `young people'.  Accordingly the United Kingdom reserves the right to continue to apply article 32 subject to such employment legislation.

The United Kingdom's reservations to article 32 in respect of its overseas territories, formerly referred to as `dependent territories', set out in the Declarations dated 7 September 1994, are unaffected."

On 18 November 2008, the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the following reservations made upon ratification:

“…..the Government of the United Kingdom withdraws the following reservations, made at the time of ratification of the Convention:

(c) The United Kingdom reserves the right to apply such legislation, in so far as it relates to the entry into, stay in and departure from the United Kingdom of those who do not have the right under the law of the United Kingdom to enter and remain in the United Kingdom, and to the acquisition and possession of citizenship, as it may deem necessary from time to time.

and

(e) Where at any time there is a lack of suitable accommodation or adequate facilities for a particular individual in any institution in which young offenders are detained or where the mixing of adults and children is deemed to be mutually beneficial, the United Kingdom reserves the right not to apply article 37 (c) in so far as those provisions require children who are detained to be accommodated separately from adults.”

“The withdrawal of these reservations in respect of the territory of the United Kingdom is without prejudice to the continued applicability of the reservation and declarations made by the United Kingdom in respect of its dependent territories.”