IRAN (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF)

DISABILITY

RESERVATIONS AND DECLARATIONS

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

Declaration:

“... with regard to Article 46, the Islamic Republic of Iran declares that it does not consider itself bound by any provisions of the Convention, which may be incompatible with its applicable rules.”

OBJECTIONS MADE TO STATE PARTY’S RESERVATIONS AND DECLARATIONS

(Unless otherwise indicated, the objections were made upon ratification, accession or succession)

Austria, 1 November 2010

With regard to the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon accession:

“The Government of Austria has examined the declaration made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran upon its accession to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 13 December 2006.

The Government of Austria considers that in aiming to exclude the application of those provisions of the Convention which are deemed incompatible with applicable national rules, the Islamic Republic of Iran has made a reservation of general and indeterminate scope. This reservation does not clearly define for the other States Parties to the Convention the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations of the Convention.

The Government of Austria therefore considers the reservation of the Islamic Republic of Iran incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and objects to it.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Austria and the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

*****

Belgium, 28 June 2010

Objection to the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon accession:

Belgium has examined the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran when it acceded to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The vagueness and general nature of the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran, which does not feel itself bound by any of the provisions of the Convention that are deemed potentially incompatible with Iranian laws, leaves open the extent of the commitment of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Convention and therefore raises serious doubts about its commitment to fulfil its obligations under the Convention. Reservations of such unspecified nature may contribute to undermining the bases of international human rights treaties. This reservation should therefore be considered as being incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. Belgium recalls that under article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty is not permitted. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Belgium.

*****

Czech Republic, 28 July 2010

Objection to the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon accession:

“The Czech Republic has examined the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon its accession to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (hereinafter the ‘Convention’) on October 23, 2009.

The Czech Republic points out that the title of a statement intended to modify or exclude the legal effects of certain provisions of a treaty does not alone determine the status of such statement as a reservation or declaration. The Czech Republic is of the opinion that the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran constitutes, in fact, a reservation.

The Czech Republic finds that the reservation does not make it clear to what extent the Islamic Republic of Iran is willing to honour its obligations under the Convention, since ‘it does not consider itself bound by any provisions of the Convention which may be incompatible with its applicable rules’.

The Czech Republic believes that this reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. According to Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention and customary international law codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, such reservations should not be permitted. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties are respected as to their object and purpose, by all parties, and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations under the treaties.

The Czech Republic, therefore, objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran and considers the reservation null and void. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Czech Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran, without the Islamic Republic of Iran benefiting from its reservation.”

*****

France, 30 March 2010

With regard to the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon upon accession:

The Government of the French Republic has examined the declaration made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran upon its adherence to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 13 December 2006. The Government of the French Republic considers that, in aiming to exclude the application of those provisions of the Convention that are deemed incompatible with Iranian laws, the Islamic Republic of Iran has in effect made a reservation of general and indeterminate scope. This reservation is vague, failing to specify the relevant provisions of the Convention or the domestic laws to which the Islamic Republic of Iran wishes to give preference. Consequently, it does not allow other States parties to know the extent of the commitment of the Islamic Republic of Iran and could render the Convention ineffective. The Government of the French Republic considers that this reservation runs counter to the purpose and goals of the Convention and raises an objection to it. This objection does not prevent the entry into force of the Convention between the Islamic Republic of Iran and France.

*****

Germany, 1 November 2010

With regard to the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon accession:

“The Federal Republic of Germany has carefully examined the declaration made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran upon its accession to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 13 December 2006.

The Federal Republic of Germany is of the opinion that by excluding the application of those provisions of the Convention which may be incompatible with applicable national rules the Islamic Republic of Iran in fact has made a reservation which leaves it unclear to what extent the Islamic Republic of Iran accepts being bound by the obligations under the Convention.

The Federal Republic of Germany objects to this reservation as being incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and thus impermissible according to Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

*****

Latvia, 22 October 2010

With regard to the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon accession:

“The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Convention.

The Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that the declaration contains general reference to national law, making any provision of the Convention subject to the national law of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia is of the opinion that the declaration is in fact a unilateral act deemed to limit the scope of application of the Convention and therefore, it shall be regarded as a reservation.

Moreover, the Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that the reservation named as a declaration does not make it clear to what extent the Islamic Republic of Iran considers itself bound by the provisions of the Convention and whether the manner of application of the rights prescribed by the Convention are in line with the object and purpose of the Convention.

Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia recalls that the provisions of Article 46 of the Convention set out that the reservations that are incompatible with object and purpose of the Convention are not permitted.

Consequently, the Government of the Republic of Latvia therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations made by the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Convention.

However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Republic of Latvia and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Thus, the International Covenant will become operative without the Islamic Republic of Iran benefiting from its reservation.”

*****

Mexico, 22 October 2010

With regard to the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon accession:

Having examined the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran with respect to the Convention, the United Mexican States has concluded that the declaration is, in fact, a reservation. This reservation, which aims to exclude the legal effects of certain provisions of the Convention, is incompatible with the object and purpose of that instrument. Indeed, the declaration is worded in such a way that it could hinder the realization of normative provisions of the Convention, including those of articles 4 and 1, and thus is in breach of article 46 of the Convention and article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. It should be noted that article 27 of the Vienna Convention codified the principle of international law whereby a party may not invoke the provisions of its domestic law as justification for its failure to comply with a treaty. The claim that domestic laws take precedence over the provisions of treaties that are in force for the Parties is therefore inadmissible.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United Mexican States.

*****

Portugal, 2 November 2010

With regard to the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon accession:

“The Government of the Portuguese Republic has examined the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran on 23 October 2009 upon accession to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

The Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that the reservation subjects the Convention’s application to domestic law, which is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention, insofar as it disregards the fundamental principles of International Law and the principles that shape the core of the Convention.

According to International Law, a reservation which is incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted.

The Government of the Portuguese Republic therefore objects to the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran on 23 October 2009 upon accession to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

This objection does not preclude the entry into force of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities between the Portuguese Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

*****

Note

On 4 November 2010, the Secretary-General received the following communication from the Government of Slovakia regarding the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon accession:

“The Slovak Republic has examined the interpretative declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon its accession to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on 23 October 2009 according to which:

‘...with regard to Article 46, the Islamic Republic of Iran declares that it does not consider itself bound by any provisions of the Convention which may be incompatible with its applicable rules.’

The Slovak Republic believes that the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran constitutes in fact a reservation to the Convention.

The Slovak Republic notes that this reservation makes it unclear to what extent the Islamic Republic of Iran is willing to fulfil its obligations under the Convention, since ‘it does not consider itself bound by any provisions of the Constitution which may be incompatible with its applicable rules.’

According to Article 46 paragraph 1 of the Convention and according to customary international law as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation that is incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted.

The Slovak Republic, therefore, objects to the aforesaid reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Convention. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Slovak Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran, without the Islamic Republic of Iran benefiting from its reservation.”

(Note 6, Chapter IV.15, Multilateral Treaties Deposited with the Secretary-General)