GERMANY

CERD

RESERVATIONS AND DECLARATIONS

(Unless otherwise indicated, the reservations and declarations were made upon ratification, accession or succession)

Note

The German Democratic Republic had acceded to the Convention on 23 March 1973 with a reservation and a declaration. For the text of the reservation and declaration, see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 883, p. 190.

[Ed. note: as follows:

The German Democratic Republic does not consider itself bound by article 22 of the Convention, under which any dispute between two or more States Parties with respect to the interpretation or application of the Convention is, at the request of any of the parties to the dispute, to be referred to the International Court of Justice for decision, and declares that, in each individual case, the consent of all parties to such a dispute is necessary for referral of the dispute to the International Court of Justice.

The German Democratic Republic deems it necessary to state that article 17, paragraph 1, of the Convention deprives a member of States of the opportunity to become Parties to the Convention. As the Convention regulates matters affecting the interests of all States, it should be open to participation of all States whose policies are guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.]

Moreover, on 26 April 1984, the Government of the German Democratic Republic had made an objection with regard to the ratification made by the Government of the Democratic Kampuchea. For the text of the objection, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1355, p. 327.

            [Ed. note: as follows:

"The German Democratic Republic does not recognize the so-called Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea and therefore regards its instrument of ratification concerning the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination of [7 March 1966] as being without legal force. The only legitimate representative of the people of Kampuchea is the Government of the People’s Republic of Kampuchea. It has the exclusive right to act in the name of Kampuchea in the international arena, including the right to sign and to ratify international agreements."]

See also note 2 under “Germany” in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of [the electronic version on the website of the Multilateral Treaties Deposited with the Secretary-General; http://treaties.un.org/pages/HistoricalInfo.aspx].

[Ed. note: Note 2 under Germany is as follows:

            Germany

            Note 2

In a communication dated 3 October 1990, the Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Federal Republic of Germany notified the Secretary-General of the following:

"... Through the accession of the German Democratic Republic to the Federal Republic of Germany with effect from 3 October 1990, the two German States have united to form one sovereign State, which as a single Member of the United Nations remains bound by the provisions of the Charter in accordance with the solemn declaration of 12 June 1973. As from the date of unification, the Federal Republic of Germany will act in the United Nations under the designation ‘Germany'."

The former German Democratic Republic was admitted to the Organization on 18 September 1973 by Resolution No. 3050 (XXVIII). For the text of the declaration of acceptance of the obligations contained in the Charter dated 12 June 1973 made by the German Democratic Republic (registered under No. 12758), see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 891, p. 103.

[Ed. note: as follows:

On behalf of the Council of Ministers of the German Democratic Republic, I solemnly declare that the German Democratic Republic is willing to accept and conscientiously carry out the obligations contained in the Charter of the United Nations.

Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the German Democratic Republic

Berlin, 12 June 1973.]

Consequently, and in the light of articles 11 and 12 of the Treaty of 31 August 1990 (Unification Treaty) between the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic, entries in status lists pertaining to formalities (i.e., signatures, ratifications, accessions, declarations and reservations, etc.) effected by the Federal Republic of Germany will now appear under "Germany" and indicate the dates of such formalities.

As regards treaties in respect of which formalities had been effected by both the Federal Republic of Germany and the former German Democratic Republic prior to unification, the entry will similarly indicate in the corresponding table the type of formality effected by the Federal Republic of Germany and the date on which it took place, while the type of formality effected by the former German Democratic Republic and the date thereof will appear in a footnote.

Finally, as regards the treatment of treaties in respect of which formalities were effected by the former German Democratic Republic alone, article 12, para. 3 of the Unification Treaty contains the following provision: "Should the united Germany intend to accede to international organizations or other multilateral treaties of which the German Democratic Republic but not the Federal Republic of Germany is a member, agreement shall be reached with the respective contracting parties and with the European Communities where the latter's competence is affected". Accordingly, a footnote indicating the date and type of formality effected by the former German Democratic Republic will be included in the status of the treaties concerned, the corresponding footnote indicator being inserted next to the heading "Participant".]

(Note 3, Chapter IV.2, Multilateral Treaties Deposited with the Secretary-General)

*****

Note

See note 1 under “Germany” regarding Berlin (West) in the “Historical Information” section in the front matter of [the electronic version on the website of the Multilateral Treaties Deposited with the Secretary-General; http://treaties.un.org/pages/HistoricalInfo.aspx.]

[Ed. note: as follows:

            Germany

            Note 1.

1. Prior to the formation of one sovereign German State through the accession of the German Democratic Republic to the Federal Republic of Germany (effective from 3 October 1990), the Secretary-General received numerous communications relating to the application of international instruments to West Berlin.

2. In each case (noted here), the initial communication took the form of a note, letter, or declaration from the Federal Republic of Germany, in, accompanying or in connection with its instrument of accession, acceptance or ratification of an Amendment, Agreement, Convention or Protocol, to the effect that the relevant Amendment, Agreement, Convention or Protocol would also apply to "Land Berlin" or "Berlin (West)" (as noted here) with effect from the date on which it entered into force for the Federal Republic of Germany.

            [...]

- Note (re: "Land Berlin") accompanying the instrument of ratification (deposited 16 May 1969) of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 7 March 1966.

- Declaration (re: "Berlin (West)") accompanying the instrument of ratification (deposited 17 December 1973) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 16 December 1966.

- Declaration (re: "Berlin (West)") accompanying the instrument of ratification (deposited 17 December 1973) of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966.

- Note (re: "Berlin (West)") accompanying the instrument of ratification (deposited 10 July 1985) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, 18 December 1979.

- Letter (re: "Berlin (West)") accompanying the instrument of ratification (deposited 1 October 1990) of the Convention Against Torture: and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 10 December 1984.

            [...]

3. In the case of the following Amendments, Agreements, Conventions or Protocols, communications from other States were received by the Secretary-General in response to the application of the relevant amendment, agreement, convention or protocol to West Berlin by the Federal Republic of Germany to the effect that the application to West Berlin by the Federal Republic of Germany had no legal validity on the ground that West Berlin was not a "Land" of, or part of the territory of, the Federal Republic of Germany and could not be governed by it.

            [...]

- International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 7 March 1966; communications from the Governments of Bulgaria (received 16 September 1969), Czechoslovakia (received 3 November 1969), Mongolia (received 7 January 1970), Poland (received 20 June 1969), the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (received 10 November 1969) and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (received 4 August 1969).

            [...]

5. For a number of amendments, agreements, conventions or protocols (noted here), including some of those noted at points 3 and 4, the initial communication from the Federal Republic of Germany gave rise to communications to the effect that the initial communication was invalid because it was in contradiction to the Quadripartite Agreement of 3 September 1971 between the Governments of France, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America. The Quadripartite Agreement was said to confirm that West Berlin was not a "Land" (where this term had been used) or constituent part of the Federal Republic of Germany and could not be governed by it, and that treaties affecting matters of security and status could not be extended to West Berlin by the Federal Republic of Germany. The initial communication of the Federal Republic of Germany was said, in the case of almost every instrument noted here, to contradict or be incompatible with one or a combination of these stipulations (in one case, for the specific reason that it encroached on an area of competence of the German Democratic Republic) (as noted here). In the one exception to this rule (as noted here), the communication was said to encroach on an area of responsibility reserved for the authorities of France, the United Kingdom and the United States.

            [...]

- International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 7 March 1966; communication (received 27 December 1973) from the German Democratic Republic (re: government).

- International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 16 December 1966; communications from the Governments of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (received 5 July 1974, and reaffirming position, 13 February 1975), the German Democratic Republic (received 12 August 1974) and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (received 16 August 1974) (re: security and status).

- International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966; communications from the Governments of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (received 5 July 1974, and reaffirming position, 13 February 1975), the German Democratic Republic (received 12 August 1974) and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (received 16 August 1974) (re: security and status).

- Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, 18 December 1979; communication from the Governments of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (received 15 April 1986) and the German Democratic Republic (received 22 April 1987) (both re: security and status).

            [...]

8. For the amendments, agreements, conventions or protocols noted in point 5 (as listed here), and for a number of such instruments noted in point 3 (as listed here), some of the related communications objecting to the initial declaration of the Federal Republic of Germany on the basis of the provisions of the Quadripartite Agreement or otherwise gave rise to further communications from the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States of America (as noted here). At the essence of these communications was, in one case (as noted here), a denial that the material content of the relevant instrument could affect matters of security and status, and in all cases, the claim that the extension of the relevant instrument by the Federal Republic of Germany was valid and continued to have full effect because it had received proper prior authorization from the authorities of France, the United Kingdom and the United States which had followed established procedures endorsed under the Agreement to ensure matters of security and status were not affected, and integral elements of the Agreement allowed for the limited extension of instruments to West Berlin where matters of security and status were not affected. Communications of this nature were often followed closely by communications from the Federal Republic of Germany indicating its solidarity with the position taken (as noted here).

            [...]

- International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 7 March 1966; communications from the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States of America (received 17 June 1974) and the Federal Republic of Germany in support (received 15 July 1974).

- International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 16 December 1966; communications from the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States of America (received 5 November 1974) (including denial re: security and status) and the Federal Republic of Germany in support (received 6 December 1974).

- International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966; communications from the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States of America (received 5 November 1974) (including denial re: security and status) and the Federal Republic of Germany in support (received 6 December 1974).

- Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, 18 December 1979; communications from the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States of America (received 20 March 1987).

            ...

9. For a number of the instruments noted in points 5 and 8 (as listed here), the relevant communications from the Governments of France, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, and the Federal Republic of Germany gave rise to further communications from the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (noted here), and in some cases also the Government of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (also noted here). These communications expressed solidarity with the position taken by the Government of the German Democratic Republic in the communications noted in point 5, and/or emphasized similar objections to those referred to in point 5 regarding the impropriety and invalidity of the use of the term "Land" in extending the relevant instrument to West Berlin (as noted here). In some cases, the communications also reasserted the breach of the "security and status" provisions of the Quadripartite Agreement described in point 5 (as noted here). In exceptional cases, rather than expressing solidarity with the Government of the German Democratic Republic, the communications expressed the same conditional acceptance of the extension of the relevant instrument to West Berlin as described in point 6 (as noted here).

            [...]

- International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 7 March 1966; communications from the Governments of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (received 12 September 1974, and reaffirming position, 8 December 1975) and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (received 19 September 1974) (both re: solidarity and "Land").

            [...]

10. For some of the instruments noted at point 9 (as listed here), the communications from the Governments of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, which had expressed solidarity with the German Democratic Republic and protested the extension of the relevant instrument to "Land Berlin", provoked responding communications from the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States of America (noted here). In essence, the communications responding to those of the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics asserted that the extension of the relevant instrument by the Federal Republic of Germany was valid and continued to have full effect for the same reasons of proper authorization detailed in point 6, and also defended the legitimacy under the Quadripartite Agreement of the terminology ("Land Berlin") used by the Federal Republic of Germany in its extension of the relevant instrument to the Western Sectors of Berlin. The communications responding to those of the Government of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic asserted that this Government was not competent to comment authoritatively on the provisions of the Quadripartite Agreement because it was not a party to the agreement. The communications were followed closely by communications from the Federal Republic of Germany indicating its solidarity with the position taken.

            ...

- International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 7 March 1966; communications from the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States of America (two received 8 July 1975) (responding to the preceding communications of the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the Government of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic respectively), and from the Federal Republic of Germany in support (received 19 September 1975).

            [...]

11. For a number of the amendments, agreements, conventions or protocols noted in points 5, 6, 8 and 9, relevant communications provoked further communications from the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States of America with different combinations of content to those described above (noted here). These communications made, in one case (as noted here) a denial of the Government of the German Democratic Republic's assertion of competence for the subject matter of the relevant instrument (as noted here), and in all cases: the same assertion regarding the authorization of the extension of the relevant instrument by the Federal Republic of Germany as described in points 6 and 10 (as noted here); and/or the same assertion regarding the use of terminology in that assertion as described in point 10 (as noted here); and/or the same assertion regarding the competence of the makers of the preceding communications as described in point 10; and/or the same allegation regarding the making of a misleading reference to the Quadripartite Agreement as described in point 7 (as noted here). Each variety of communication was followed closely by communications from the Federal Republic of Germany indicating its solidarity with the position taken (as noted here).

            [...]

- International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 16 December 1966; communications from the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States of America (received 8 July 1975) (re: competence and authorization), and from the Federal Republic of Germany in support (received 19 September 1975).

- International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966; communications from the Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States of America (received 8 July 1975) (re: competence and authorization), and from the Federal Republic of Germany in support (received 19 September 1975).

            [...]]

(Note 10, Chapter IV.2, Multilateral Treaties Deposited with the Secretary-General)

OBJECTIONS MADE TO OTHER STATES PARTIES RESERVATIONS AND DECLARATIONS

(Ed. note: for the text targeted by the following objections, see the Reservations and Declarations of the State which is the subject of the objection)

8 August 1989

With regard to reservations made by Yemen concerning article 5 (c) and article 5 (d) (iv), (vi) and (vii):

"These reservations relate to the basic obligations of States Parties to the Convention to prohibit and eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone to equality before the law and include the enjoyment of such fundamental political and civil rights as the right to take part in the conduct of public life, the right to marriage and choice of spouse, the right to inherit and the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. As a result, the reservations made by Yemen are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention within the meaning of article 20, paragraph 2 thereof."

*****

3 February 1998

With regard to the general reservation made by Saudi Arabia upon accession:

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is of the view that this reservation may raise doubts as to the commitment of Saudi Arabia to the object and purpose of the Convention.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany would like to recall that, according to paragraph 2 of article 20 of the Convention, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany therefore objects to the said reservation.

The objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Saudi Arabia and the Federal Republic of Germany.

*****

29 April 2003

With regard to the interpretative declaration made by Thailand upon accession:

"The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has examined the General Interpretative Declaration to the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination made by the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand at the time of its accession to the Convention.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany considers that the General Interpretative Declaration made by Thailand is in fact a reservation that seeks to limit the scope of the Convention on an unilateral basis.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany notes that a reservation to all provisions of a Convention which consists of a general reference to national law without specifying its contents does not clearly define for the other State Parties to the Convention the extend to which the reserving state has accepted the obligations out of the provisions of the Convention.

The reservation made by the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand in respect to the applications of the provisions of the Convention therefore raises doubts as to the commitment of Thailand to fulfill its obligations out of all provisions of the Convention.

Hence the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany considers this reservation to be incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and objects to the General Interpretative Declaration made by the Government of the Kingdom of Thailand.

This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Kingdom of Thailand."

*****

(Ed. note: for other objections, see Notes under Reservations and Declarations, above)

DECLARATION RE: ARTICLE 14

30 August 2001

The Federal Republic of Germany hereby declares that pursuant to Article 14 paragraph 1 of the Convention it recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within her jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the Federal Republic of Germany of any of the rights set forth in this Convention. However, this shall only apply insofar as the Committee has determined that the same matter is not being or has not been examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement.