br />
End Note
1. For the purpose of entry into force of the [Convention/Protocol], any instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession deposited by a regional economic integration organization shall not be counted as additional to those deposited by member States of that Organization.
2. Czechoslovakia had signed the Convention on 30 August 1991. See also note 1 under "Czech Republic" and note 1 under "Slovakia" in the "Historical Information" section in the front matter of this volume.
3. Upon signature, the Government of Denmark made the following declaration (which was not confirmed upon approval):
Decision reserved as concerns the application of the Convention to the Faeroe Islands and Greenland.
On 12 December 2001, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Denmark a communication declaring that the Convention shall apply to the Faeroe Islands and Greeland as from 14 March 1997."
4. Upon depositing its instrument of approval, the Government of France declared the following:
The Government of the French Republic declares that the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, signed at Espoo on 25 February 1991, does not apply to the territory of French Polynesia.
5. For the Kingdom in Europe.
6. On behalf of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Bailiwick of Jersey, the Bailiwick of Guernsey, the Isle of Man and Gibraltar.
7. In this regard, the Secretary-General received from the following States, communications on the dates indicated:
Finland (28 May 1999):
In the view of the Government of Finland the general reservation made by the Government of Canada does not adequately clarify to which extent Canada considers itself bound by the Convention. It is of fundamental importance that States are prepared to undertake legislative changes necssary to comply with their obligations under their treaties.
Furthermore, according to article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 23 May 1969 as well as customary international law a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted.
Accordingly, Finland objects to the general reservation of Canada as not compatible with the object and purpose of the [Convention].
Italy (1 June 1999):
The Italian Government notes that the reservation made by the Government of Canada in ratifying the Espoo Convention is of a general nature, since it subordinates the application of the said Convention to certain provisions of Canada's domestic law.
The Italian Government is of the view that this general reservation raises doubts regarding Canada's commitment to the object and purpose of the Convention, and wishes to recall that under article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a State may not formulate a reservation that is incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty to which it refers.
It is in the common interest of States to ensure that the treaties to which they are parties are respected in their entirety by all the Contracting Parties, and that the latter are willing to undertake the legislative changes needed to comply with the obligations arising under such treaties.
Reservations of a general nature like the one made by the Government of Canada, which do not clearly specify the scope of the derogations resulting therefrom, undermine the foundations of international treaty law.
Consequently, the Italian Government opposes the aforesaid general reservation made by the Government of Canada to the [Convention].
France (communicated on 8 June 1999 and confirmed on 15 June 2001)
The Government of the French Republic has considered the reservation made by the Government of Canada with respect to the Conv
> 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7 8
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
