UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND

CCPR

RESERVATIONS AND DECLARATIONS

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

Upon signature:

"First, the Government of the United Kingdom declare their understanding that, by virtue of Article 103 of the Charter of the United Nations, in the event of any conflict between their obligations under Article 1 of the Covenant and their obligations under the Charter (in particular, under Articles 1, 2 and 73 thereof) their obligations under the Charter shall prevail.

Secondly, the Government of the United Kingdom declare that:

(a) In relation to Article 14 of the Covenant, they must reserve the right not to apply, or not to apply in full, the guarantee of free legal assistance contained in sub-paragraph (d) of paragraph 3 in so far as the shortage of legal practitioners and other considerations render the application of this guarantee in British Honduras, Fiji and St. Helena impossible;

(b) In relation to Article 23 of the Covenant, they must reserve the right not to apply the first sentence of paragraph 4 in so far as it concerns any inequality which may arise from the operation of the law of domicile;

(c) In relation to Article 25 of the Covenant, they must reserve the right not to apply:

(i) Sub-paragraph (b) in so far as it may require the establishment of an elected legislature in Hong Kong and the introduction of equal suffrage, as between different electoral rolls, for elections in Fiji; and

(ii) Sub-paragraph (c) in so far as it applies to jury service in the Isle of Man and to the employment of married women in the Civil Service of Northern Ireland, Fiji, and Hong Kong.

Lastly, the Government of the United Kingdom declare that the provisions of the Covenant shall not apply to Southern Rhodesia unless and until they inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations that they are in a position to ensure that the obligations imposed by the Covenant in respect of that territory can be fully implemented."

Upon ratification:

"Firstly the Government of the United Kingdom maintain their declaration in respect of article 1 made at the time of signature of the Covenant.

The Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right to apply to members of and persons serving with the armed forces of the Crown and to persons lawfully detained in penal establishments of whatever character such laws and procedures as they may from time to time deem to be necessary for the preservation of service and custodial discipline and their acceptance of the provisions of the Covenant is subject to such restrictions as may for these purposes from time to time be authorised by law.

Where at any time there is a lack of suitable prison facilities or where the mixing of adults and juveniles is deemed to be mutually beneficial, the Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right not to apply article 10 (2) (b) and 10 (3), so far as those provisions require juveniles who are detained to be accommodated separately from adults, and not to apply article 10 (2) (a) in Gibraltar, Montserrat and the Turks and Caicos Islands in so far as it requires segregation of accused and convicted persons.

The Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right not to apply article 11 in Jersey.

The Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right to interpret the provisions of article 12 (1) relating to the territory of a State as applying separately to each of the territories comprising the United Kingdom and its dependencies.

The Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right to continue to apply such immigration legislation governing entry into, stay in and departure from the United Kingdom as they may deem necessary from time to time and, accordingly, their acceptance of article 12 (4) and of the other provisions of the Covenant is subject to the provisions of any such legislation as regards persons not at the time having the right under the law of the United Kingdom to enter and remain in the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom also reserves a similar right in regard to each of its dependent territories.

The Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right not to apply article 13 in Hong Kong in so far as it confers a right of review of a decision to deport an alien and a right to be represented for this purpose before the competent authority.

The Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right not to apply or not to apply in full the guarantee of free legal assistance in sub-paragraph (d) of paragraph 3 of article 14 in so far as the shortage of legal practitioners renders the application of this guarantee impossible in the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, the Falkland Islands, the Gilbert Islands, the Pitcairn Islands Group, St. Helena and Dependencies and Tuvalu.

The Government of the United Kingdom interpret article 20 consistently with the rights conferred by articles 19 and 21 of the Covenant and having legislated in matters of practical concern in the interests of public order (ordre public) reserve the right not to introduce any further legislation. The United Kingdom also reserve a similar right in regard to each of its dependent territories.

The Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right to postpone the application of paragraph 3 of article 23 in regard to a small number of customary marriages in the Solomon Islands.

The Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right to enact such nationality legislation as they may deem necessary from time to time to reserve the acquisition and possession of citizenship under such legislation to those having sufficient connection with the United Kingdom or any of its dependent territories and accordingly their acceptance of article 24 (3) and of the other provisions of the Covenant is subject to the provisions of any such legislation.

The Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right not to apply sub-paragraph (b) of article 25 in so far as it may require the establishment of an elected Executive or Legislative Council in Hong Kong [...].

Lastly, the Government of the United Kingdom declare that the provisions of the Covenant shall not apply to Southern Rhodesia unless and until they inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations that they are in a position to ensure that the obligations imposed by the Covenant in respect of that territory can be fully implemented."

Note

In a communication received on 2 February 1993, the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland notified the Secretary-General of its decision to withdraw the reservation to sub-paragraph c) of article 25 made upon ratification. For the text of the reservation, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1007, p. 394.

[Ed. note: as follows:

The Government of the United Kingdom reserve the right not to apply sub-paragraph (b) of Article 25 in so far as it may require the establishment of an elected Executive or Legislative Council in Hong Kong and sub-paragraph (c) of Article 25 in so far as it relates to jury service in the Isle of Man.]

(Note 38, Chapter IV.4, 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)

24 May 1991

"The Government of the United Kingdom have noted the statement formulated by the Government of the Republic of Korea on accession, under the title "Reservations". They are not however able to take a position on these purported reservations in the absence of a sufficient indication of their intended effect, in accordance with the terms of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and the practice of the Parties to the Covenant. Pending receipt of such indication, the Government of the United Kingdom reserve their rights under the Covenant in their entirety."

*****

17 August 2005

With regard to the declarations made by Mauritania upon accession:

“The Government of the United Kingdom have examined the Declaration made by the Government of Mauritania to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (done at New York on 16 December 1966) on 17 November 2004 in respect of Articles 18 and 23 (4).

The Government of the United Kingdom consider that the Government of Mauritania's declaration that:

'The Mauritanian Government, while accepting the provisions set out in article 18 concerning freedom of thought, conscience and religion, declares that their application shall be without prejudice to the Islamic Shariah...

The Mauritanian Government interprets the provisions of article 23, paragraph 4, on the rights and responsibilities of spouses as to marriage as not affecting in any way the prescriptions of the Islamic Shariah' is a reservation which seeks to limit the scope of the Covenant on a unilateral basis. The Government of the United Kingdom note that the Mauritanian reservation specifies particular provisions of the Convention Articles to which the reservation is addressed. Nevertheless 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 the United Kingdom therefore object to the aforesaid reservation made by the Government of Mauritania.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Mauritania.”

*****

6 September 2007

With regard to the reservation made by Maldives upon accession:

“The Permanent Mission of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the United Nations presents its compliments to the Secretary-General and has the honour to refer to the reservation made by the Government of the Maldives to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which reads:

‘The application of the principles set out in Article 18 [freedom of thought, conscience and religion] of the Covenant shall be without prejudice to the Constitution of the Republic of the Maldives.’

In the view of the United Kingdom a reservation should clearly define for the other States Parties to the Covenant the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations of the Covenant. A reservation which consists of a general reference to a constitutional provision without specifying its implications does not do so. The Government of the United Kingdom therefore object to the reservation made by the Government of the Maldives.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the United Kingdom and the Maldives.”

*****

28 June 2011

With regard to the reservations made by Pakistan upon ratification:

“The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has examined the reservations made by the Government of Pakistan to the [International] Covenant [on Civil and Political Rights] on 23 June 2010, which read:

1. [The] Islamic Republic of Pakistan declares that the provisions of Articles 3, 6, 7, 18 and 19 shall be so applied to the extent that they are not repugnant to the Provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan and the Sharia laws.

2. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan declares that the provisions of Articles 12 shall be so applied as to be in conformity with the Provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan.

3. With respect to Article 13, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan reserves its right to apply its law relating to foreigners.

4. [The] Islamic Republic of Pakistan declares that the provisions of Articles 25 shall be so applied to the extent that they are not repugnant to the Provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan.

5. The Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan hereby declares that it does not recognize the competence of the Committee provided for in Article 40 of the Covenant.

In the view of the United Kingdom a reservation should clearly define for the other States Parties to the Covenant the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations of the Covenant. Reservations which consist of a general reference to a constitutional provision, law or system of laws without specifying their contents do not do so.

In addition, the United Kingdom considers that the reporting mechanism enshrined in Article 40 is an essential procedural requirement of the Covenant, and an integral undertaking of States Parties to the Covenant.

The Government of the United Kingdom therefore objects to the reservations made by the Government of Pakistan.

The United Kingdom will re-consider its position in light of any modifications or withdrawals of the reservations made by the Government of Pakistan to the Covenant.”

*****

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. For text in Bayefsky.com, see Germany, CCPR, Reservations and Declarations, note 9].

(Note 9, Chapter IV.4, Multilateral Treaties Deposited with the Secretary-General)

*****

Note

The reservation was lodged with the Secretary-General on 4 December 2006 by Bahrain, following its accession to the Covenant on 20 September 2006.

In keeping with the depositary practice followed in similar cases, the Secretary-General proposed to receive the reservation in question for deposit in the absence of any objection on the part of any of the Contracting States, either to the deposit itself or to the procedure envisaged, within a period of 12 months from the date of the present depositary notification. In the absence of any such objection, the above reservation would be accepted in deposit upon the expiration of the above-stipulated 12 month period, that is on 28 December 2007.

In view of the below objections, the Secretary-General did not accept the reservation made by Bahrain in deposit. The Secretary-General received the following objections on the dates indicated hereinafter:

...

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (27 December 2007):

“The United Kingdom objects to Bahrain’s reservations as they were made after the date of Bahrain’s accession to the Covenant.

The United Kingdom further objects to the substance of Bahrain’s first reservation, to Articles 3, 18 and 23. In the view of the United Kingdom a reservation should clearly define for the other States Parties to the Covenant the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations of the Covenant. A reservation which consists of a general reference to a system of law without specifying its contents does not do so.

These objections shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Kingdom of Bahrain. However on account of their lateness the reservations shall have no effect as between Bahrain and the United Kingdom.”

(Note 15, Chapter IV.4, Multilateral Treaties Deposited with the Secretary-General)

*****

Note

With regard to the reservation made by the Lao People's Democratic Republic upon ratification, the Secretary-General received, from the following States, communications on the dates indicated hereinafter:

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (21 October 2010):

"The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has carefully examined the reservation made by the Government of the Lao People's Democratic Republic upon ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights.

The United Kingdom considers that with this reservation the application of Article 22 of the Covenant is made subject to national law in force in the Lao People's Democratic Republic. This makes it unclear to what extent the Lao People's Democratic Republic considers itself bound by the obligations under Article 22 of the Covenant.

The United Kingdom considers that a reservation should clearly define for the other States Parties to the Covenant the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations of the Covenant. A reservation which consists of a general reference to national law without specifying its implications does not do so.

The United Kingdom therefore objects to the reservation made by the Government of the Lao People's Democratic Republic to Article 22 of the Covenant. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Lao People's Democratic Republic."

...

(Note 28, Chapter IV.4, Multilateral Treaties Deposited with the Secretary-General)

DECLARATION RE: ARTICLE 41

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

"The Government of the United Kingdom declare under article 41 of this Covenant that it recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications submitted by another State Party, provided that such other State Party has, not less than twelve months prior to the submission by it of a communication relating to the United Kingdom made a declaration under article 41 recognizing the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications relating to itself."

DEROGATIONS: NOTIFICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 4 (3) OF THE COVENANT

17 May 1976

"The Government of the United Kingdom notify other States Parties to the present Covenant, in accordance with article 4, of their intention to take and continue measures derogating from their obligations under the Covenant.

There have been in the United Kingdom in recent years campaigns of organised terrorism related to Northern Irish affairs which have manifested themselves in activities which have included murder, attempted murder, maiming, intimidation and violent civil disturbances and in bombing and fire-raising which have resulted in death, injury and widespread destruction of property. This situation constitutes a public emergency within the meaning of article 4 (1) of the Covenant. The emergency commenced prior to the ratification by United Kingdom of the Covenant and Legislation has, from time to time, been promulgated with regard to it.

The Government of the United Kingdom have found it necessary (and in some cases continue to find it necessary) to take powers, to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, for the protection of life, for the protection of property and the prevention of outbreaks of public disorder, and including the exercise of powers of arrest and detention and exclusion. In so far as any of these measures is inconsistent with the provisions of articles 9, 10 (2), 10 (3), 12 (1), 14, 17, 19 (2), 21 or 22 of the Covenant, the United Kingdom hereby derogates from its obligations under those provisions."

*****

22 August 1984

Termination forthwith of derogations from articles 9, 10 (2), 10 (3), 12 (1), 14, 17, 19 (2), 21 and 22 of the Covenant.

*****

23 December 1988

[The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland] have found it necessary to take or continue measures derogating in certain respects from their obligations under article 9 of the Covenant. (For the reasons of that decision, see paragraph 2 of a previous notification of 17 May 1976, which continue to apply). [Ed. note: see above]

Persons reasonably suspected of involvement in terrorism connected with the affairs of Northern Ireland, or of offences under the legislation and who have been detained for 48 hours may be, on the authority of the Secretary of State, further detained without charge for periods of up to five days.

Notwithstanding the judgement of 29 November 1988 by the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Brogan and Others the Government has found it necessary to continue to exercise the powers described above but to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation to enable necessary enquiries and investigations properly to be completed in order to decide whether criminal proceedings should be instituted. [This notice is given] in so far as these measures may be inconsistent with article 9 (3) of the Covenant.

*****

31 March 1989

(Dated 23 March 1989)

Replacement as from 22 March 1989, of the measures indicated in the previous notification of 23 December 1988 by section 14 of and paragraph 6 of Schedule 5 to the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1989, which make comparable provisions.

*****

18 December 1989

(Dated 12 December 1989)

"The Government of the United Kingdom have [previously] found it necessary to take and continue [various measures], derogating in certain respects from obligations under Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

On 14 November 1989 the Home Secretary announced that the Government had concluded that a satisfactory procedure for the review of detention of terrorist suspects involving the judiciary had not been identified and that the derogation notified under Article 4 of the Covenant would therefore remain in place for as long as circumstances require."

*****

21 February 2001

(Dated 20 February 2001)

Notification to the effect that the derogation from article 9 (3) of the Covenant is terminated with effect from Monday, 26 February 2001.

The notification further states that the termination of the derogation only applies to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and that it is not yet possible to terminate the derogation in respect of the Bailiwick of Jersey, the Bailiwick of Guernsey and the Isle of Man.

*****

18 December 2001

"Notification of the United Kingdom's derogation from article9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: I have the honour to present my compliments, Excellency, and to convey the following information in order to ensure compliance with the obligations of Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom under Article 4 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights adopted by the General Assembly on 16 December 1966.

Public emergency in the United Kingdom

The terrorist attacks in New York, Washington, D.C. and Pennsylvania on 11th September 2001 resulted in several thousand deaths, including many British victims and others from 70 different countries. In its resolutions 1368 (2001) and 1373 (2001), the United Nations Security Council recognised the attacks as a threat to international peace and security.

The threat from international terrorism is a continuing one. In its resolution 1373 (2001), the Security Council, acting under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, required all States to take measures to prevent the commission of terrorist attacks, including by denying safe haven to those who finance, plan, support or commit terrorist attacks.

There exists a terrorist threat to the United Kingdom from persons suspected of involvement in international terrorism. In particular, there are foreign nationals present in the United Kingdom who are suspected of being concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of international terrorism, of being members of organisations or groups which are so concerned or of having links with members of such organisations or groups, and who are a threat to the national security of the United Kingdom.

As a result, a public emergency, within the meaning of Article 4(1) of the Covenant, exists in the United Kingdom.

The Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001

As a result of the public emergency, provision is made in the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, inter alia, for an extended power to arrest and detain a foreign national which will apply where it is intended to remove or deport the person from the United Kingdom but where removal or deportation is not for the time being possible, with the consequence that the detention would be unlawful under existing domestic law powers. The extended power to arrest and detain will apply where the Secretary of State issues a certificate indicating his belief that the person's presence in the United Kingdom is a risk to national security and that he suspects the person of being an international terrorist. That certificate will be subject to an appeal to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission ('SIA'), established under the Special Immigration Appeals Commission Act 1997, which will have power to cancel it if it considers that the certificate should not have been issued. There will be an appeal on a point of law from a ruling by SIAC. In addition, the certificate will be reviewed by SIAC at regular intervals. SIAC will also be able to grant bail, where appropriate, subject to conditions. It will be open to a detainee to end his detention at any time by agreeing to leave the United Kingdom.

The extended power of arrest and detention in the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 is a measure which is strictly required by the exigencies of the situation. It is a temporary provision which comes into force for an initial period of 15 months and then expires unless renewed by Parliament. Thereafter, it is subject to annual renewal by Parliament. If, at any time, in the Government's assessment, the public emergency no longer exists or the extended power is no longer strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, then the Secretary of State will, by Order, repeal the provision.

Domestic law powers of detention (other than under the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001)

The Government has powers under the Immigration Act 1971 ('the 1971 Act') to remove or deport persons on the ground that their presence in the United Kingdom is not conducive to the public good on national security grounds. Persons can also be arrested and detained under Schedules 2 and 3 to the 1971 Act pending their removal or deportation. The courts in the United Kingdom have ruled that this power of detention can only be exercised during the period necessary, in all the circumstances of the particular case, to effect removal and that, if it becomes clear that removal is not going to be possible within a reasonable time, detention will be unlawful (Rv Governor of Durham Prison, ex parte Singh [1984] All ER983).

Article 9 of the Covenant

In some cases, where the intention remains to remove or deport a person on national security grounds, continued detention may not be consistent with Article 9 of the Covenant. This may be the case, for example, if the person has established that removal to their own country might result in treatment contrary to Article 7 of the Covenant. In such circumstances, irrespective of the gravity of the threat to national security posed by the person concerned, it is well established that the international obligations of the United Kingdom prevent removal or deportation to a place where there is a real risk that the person will suffer treatment contrary to that article. If no alternative destination is immediately available then removal or deportation may not, for the time being, be possible even though the ultimate intention remains to remove or deport the person once satisfactory arrangements can be made. In addition, it may not be possible to prosecute the person for a criminal offence given the strict rules on the admissibility of evidence in the criminal justice system of the United Kingdom and the high standard of proof required.

Derogation under Article 4 of the Covenant

The Government has considered whether the exercise of the extended power to detain contained in the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 may be inconsistent with the obligations under Article 9 of the Covenant. To the extent that the exercise of the extended power may be inconsistent with the United Kingdom's obligations under Article 9, the Government has decided to avail itself of the right of derogation conferred by Article 4(1) of the Covenant and will continue to do so until further notice.

Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration."

*****

15 March 2005

(Dated 15 March 2005)

“The provisions referred to in the 18 December 2001 notification, namely the extended power of arrest and detention in the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, ceased to operate on 14 March 2005. Accordingly, the notification is withdrawn as from that date, and the Government of the United Kingdom confirm that the relevant provisions of the Covenant will again be executed as from then.”

TERRITORIAL APPLICATION