«Статус Конвенции о политических правах женщин (Нью-Йорк, 20 декабря 1952 года)» [рус., англ.] (по состоянию на 16.09.2010)

ations addressed to the Secretary-General with reference to the above-mentioned signature and/or ratification, the Permanent Missions to the United Nations of Czechoslovakia, Denmark, India, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Yugoslavia stated that, since their Governments did not recognize the Nationalist Chinese authorities as the Government of China, they could not regard the said signature or ratification as valid. The Permanent Missions of Czechoslovakia and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics further stated that the sole authorities entitled to act for China and the Chinese people in the United Nations and in international relations, and to sign, ratify, accede or denounce treaties, conventions and agreements on behalf of China, were the Government of the People's Republic of China and its duly appointed representatives.
In a note addressed to the Secretary-General, the Permanent Mission of China to the United Nations stated that the Government of the Republic of China was the only legal Government which represented China and the Chinese people in international relations and that, therefore, the allegations made in the above-mentioned communications as to the lack of validity of the signature or ratification in question had no legal foundation whatever.
3. On 10 June 1997, the Governments of China and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland notified the Secretary-General of the following:
China:
[Same notification as the one made under note 6 in chapter V.3.]
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland:
[Same notification as the one made under note 5 in chapter IV.1.]
In addition, the notification made by the Government of China contained the following declaration:
The signature and ratification by the Taiwan authorities in the name of China respectively on 9 June 1953 and 21 December 1953 of the [said Convention] are all illegal and therefore null and void.
4. The former Yugoslavia had signed and ratified the Convention on 31 March 1953 and 23 June 1954, respectively. The former Yugoslavia had also made the following objection:
Objection to the reservations made by the Government of Guatemala, in respect of articles I, II and III, as these reservations "are not in accordance with the principles contained in Article I of the Charter of the United Nations and with the aims of the Convention".
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. Czechoslovakia had signed and ratified the Convention on 31 March 1953 and 6 April 1995, respectively, with reservations, one of which regarding article IX of the Convention, had been withdrawn on 26 April 1991. For the text of the said reservations, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 193, p. 157. Subsequently, on 10 June 1974, the Government of Czechoslovakia formulated an objection to the reservation made by Spain. For the text of the objection, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 940, p. 340. See also note 1 under "Czech Republic" and note 1 under "Slovakia" in the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this volume.
6. The German Democratic Republic had acceded to the Convention with reservations and a declaration on 27 March 1973. For the text of the reservations and declaration, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 861, p. 203. See note 2 under "Germany" in the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this volume.
7. See note 1 under "Germany" regarding Berlin (West) in the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this volume.
8. See note 1 under "Montenegro" in the "Historical Information" secti

> 1 2 3 ... 12 13 14 15 ... 16