ÿWPCõ hí$gu&Ëå¿ÍÄ.8Äh0‡6É{áëþ?IãZPš²defXÆÎë–/t?ÌsiXgûœ5¤ÚQ43òvŠÉHÁ5-¦©Ø†Ü²éUúd'YOèAxÂ\±nè”êqüNü*']Ä÷äÇý ýê¹`=~œudÏ/R² íή²2Zu^ù’K9œûQ°µþÚx# Ð7¿Ðör…ô*§ÏîBᛦ›¨U–¸°ràõJãdÑ’"~Ò]‚¸ R:ÝéC°Y<ìîǸ¡øX§ôXdŽN~•/REY[‹=ç ¬â2ò„´†rØ0 DéÕ=©›UŸ+gâH‹.-Ôólúž‡hx¹‡¹¹Ä·–^ëž4S/–F¡†ŽzƒTnþ¯V å3ŒÖ3¸Æ\y”«²ç'nOÙL 7<`Ó[hÙj4YÙUÍ–Ç…Åê’Ù®HDq80Ï’’¼¤ó•Ô|Ѐ"]¥Œª¦m¯ðÐlfÜE›µd ›ÈˆZÆNšÁÄ9»Ü¾î ø¯9ì!Blä‘+’D]®Hd¦§Ò£-rÚçgâRÙÝÑ´ïõ«.ºE¯Ýíê²ãÞfº“:²†£¢ž/-'t90p ^§aü¡è°#ÁzUN; %‰ 0r^ w 4%4 m6 1‡M 72Ô 0c 0wi 0Šà 0 j 0´ 0Ǿ 0Û… 0ï` 0DO 1u“ 72 1‡: 72ÁNó˜HP LaserJet 6P/6MP - Standard,ä,,,,,ä0(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(J¨$¡¡Ó  ÓÔ€XïXXXÔÔ€XïXXXïÔk€˜, eû*FilÜx¯3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ h‹sCEIMQUY]aAutoList1""""""""i)1)a) "(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à(Oé;$µµà0  àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` (#(#à(b·¤$¶¶à0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#à(xir$··à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àÔ2#Ô(Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0¸ (#¸ (#à(ŒÜ$¸¸à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àÔ2#Ô(Ú  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0h(#(#à(ŸF$¹¹à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àÔ2#Ô(Ú  ÚÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0Àh(#h(#à(³Àô$ººà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àÔ2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0À(#À(#à(ǵ{$»»à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0p(#(#à(F$ïïà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àà0p(#(#àÔ2#ÔÙ ÙÚ  ÚÚ  ÚÙ Ù)Ô3  Ôà0Èp(#p(#àÙ Ù3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i) h›sCEIMQUY]aAutoList2""""""""i)1)a)"Ý ƒ¨!ÝÓ  ÓÔ€XŽXXXÔÔ€XŽXXXŽÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôò òÔ‡¼™»XXŽÔÓ  ÓUNITED€KINGDOM€OF€GREAT€BRITAIN€AND€NORTHERN€IRELANDÔ#†XŽX»¼™x#ÔÐ ° ÐÓ—ÓÌÔUKUS.,ÔGeneral€Comments€-€Government€ResponsesÔUS.,UK., ÔÐ ¸ ÐÌÔ_ÔCCPRÔ_Ô€€€A/50/40€(1995)ó óÐ ˜è ÐÌAnnex€VIÐ x È ÐÌòòObservations€of€States€parties€under€article€40,€paragraph€5,€of€the€Covenantóó*€Ð X ¨ ÐÌòòObservations€on€General€Comment€No.€24€(52),€on€issues€relating€to€reservations€made€uponÐ 8ˆ  Ðratification€or€accession€to€the€Covenant€or€the€Optional€Protocols€thereto,€or€in€relation€toÐ (x  Ðdeclarations€under€article€41€of€the€CovenantóóÐ h  Ð...Ð X  ÐB.€€òòUnited€Kingdom€of€Great€Britain€and€Northern€Irelandóó€òòbóó/Ð øH  ÐÌ1.€€The€United€Kingdom€is€of€course€aware€that€the€general€comments€adopted€by€the€CommitteeÐ Ø( Ðare€not€legally€binding.€They€nevertheless€command€great€respect,€given€the€eminence€of€theÐ È ÐCommittee€and€the€status€of€the€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights.€€The€issue€dealtÐ ¸ Ðwith€in€general€comment€No.€24€(52)€(reservations€to€the€Covenant)€is€one€of€great€importance,€bothÐ ¨ø Ðin€respect€of€the€development€of€the€Covenant€and€the€Committee's€role€under€it€and€in€its€widerÐ ˜è Ðramifications.€€The€United€Kingdom€is€therefore€grateful€for€the€opportunity€provided€under€articleÐ ˆØ Ð40€(5)€of€the€Covenant€to€submit€to€the€Committee€certain€observations€on€the€general€comment.Ð xÈ ÐÌ2.€€These€will€be€divided€into€four€parts:€òòthe€legal€Ô_ÔregimeÔ_Ô€regulating€reservations€to€the€Covenantóó;Ð X¨ Ðòòthe€criteria€for€assessing€compatibility€with€the€object€and€purpose€of€the€Covenantóó;€òòthe€power€toÐ H˜ Ðdetermine€compatibility€with€the€object€and€purposeóó;€òòthe€legal€effect€of€an€incompatible€reservationóó.Ð 8ˆ ÐÌòòThe€legal€Ô_ÔregimeÔ_Ô€regulating€reservations€to€the€CovenantóóÐ h ÐÌ3.€€The€United€Kingdom€shares€the€Committee's€concern€that€the€integrity€of€the€Covenant's€treatyÐ ø H ÐÔ_ÔregimeÔ_Ô€should€not€be€determined€by€too€extensive€a€practice€of€reservations€formulated€by€States€onÐ è!8 Ðbecoming€Party€to€them.€€The€United€Kingdom€agrees€also€that€individual€reservations€may€onÐ Ø"(  Ðoccasion€be€so€widely€drawn€as€to€cast€doubt€on€whether€their€maintenance€is€compatible€with€beingÐ È#! ÐParty€to€the€Covenant.€Regrettable€though€it€may€be,€such€a€situation€is€not€materially€different€fromÐ ¸$ " Ðthat€obtaining€in€other€areas€of€international€relations,€and€would€not€provide€a€justification€for€aÐ ¨%ø # Ðdifferent€legal€Ô_ÔregimeÔ_Ô€to€regulate€reservations€to€human€rights€treaties.€€To€create€such€a€specialÐ ˜&è!$ ÐÔ_ÔregimeÔ_Ô€by€amendment€of€the€Covenant€would€be€a€major€task.€€To€do€so€as€part€of€the€developmentÐ ˆ'Ø"% Ðof€general€international€law€would,€all€other€considerations€aside,€be€undesirable€if€the€effect€wasÐ x(È#& Ðto€fragment€this€aspect€of€the€law€of€treaties€which€is€currently€under€study€by€the€International€LawÐ h)¸$' ÐCommission.Ð X*¨%( Ѐ_______________Ð H+˜&) ÐÓ€  (›sx3Óà  à*€€The€present€annex€is€being€published€as€received,€without€formal€editing.Ð 8,ˆ'* Ðòòà  àbóó/€Observations€transmitted€by€letter€dated€21€July€1995.Ð (-x(+ ÐÔ_Ô4.€€The€modern€law€of€reservations€to€multilateral€treaties€moreover€owes€its€origin€to€the€AdvisoryÐ ° ÐOpinion€of€the€International€Court€of€Justice€of€28€May€1951€on€Reservations€to€the€GenocideÐ  ð ÐConvention.€€The€Genocide€Convention€is€itself€(in€the€Committee's€phrase)€a€human€rights€treatyÐ à Ðconcluded€for€the€benefit€of€persons€within€the€jurisdiction€of€the€States€Parties€to€it.€€As€theÐ €Ð ÐInternational€Court€observed,€the€Genocide€Convention€is€of€a€type€in€which€"the€contracting€StatesÐ pÀ Ðdo€not€have€any€interests€of€their€own;€they€merely€have,€one€and€all,€a€common€interest,€namely€theÐ ` ° Ðaccomplishment€of€those€high€purposes€which€are€the€òòraison€d'treóó€of€the€Convention".€€It€was€in€theÐ P   Ðlight€precisely€of€those€characteristics€of€the€Genocide€Convention,€and€in€the€light€of€the€desirabilityÐ @  Ðof€widespread€adherence€to€it,€that€the€Court€set€out€its€approach€towards€reservations.€€The€UnitedÐ 0 € ÐKingdom€does€not€accordingly€believe€that€rules€different€from€those€foreshadowed€by€theÐ  p  ÐInternational€Court€and€in€due€course€embodied€in€the€Vienna€Convention€on€the€Law€of€TreatiesÐ `  Ðare€required€to€enable€the€international€community€to€cope€with€reservations€to€human€rights€treaties.€Ð P  ÐThe€correct€approach€is€rather€to€apply€the€general€rules€relating€to€reservations€laid€down€in€theÐ ð@  ÐVienna€Convention€in€a€manner€which€takes€full€account€of€the€particular€characteristics€of€the€treatyÐ à0  Ðin€question.Ð Ð  ÐÌ5.€€The€argument€that€the€existing€rules€of€international€law€are€inadequate€to€cope€with€human€rightsÐ ° Ðtreaties€rests€in€any€case,€as€the€United€Kingdom€sees€it,€on€a€mistaken€assumption.€€The€CommitteeÐ  ð Ðsays€in€paragraph€17€that€the€Vienna€Convention's€provisions€on€the€role€of€State€objections€inÐ à Ðrelation€to€reservations€are€inappropriate€to€address€the€problem€of€reservations€to€human€rightsÐ €Ð Ðtreaties.€€This€is€because€such€treaties€"are€not€a€web€of€inter-State€exchanges€of€mutual€obligations"Ð pÀ Ðand€because€"[t]he€principle€of€reciprocity€has€no€place".€€The€United€Kingdom€does€not€find€thisÐ `° Ðto€be€an€adequate€account,€for€various€reasons.€€In€the€first€place,€it€is€not€the€basis€on€which€theÐ P  ÐInternational€Court€of€Justice€approached€the€Genocide€Convention€(para.€3€above).€€In€the€secondÐ @ Ðplace,€it€is€not€the€view€taken€by€other€authoritative€bodies,€such€as€the€European€Court€of€HumanÐ 0€ ÐRights,€which€held€in€1978€òòcóó/€that€at€the€European€Convention€on€Human€Rights€"comprises€òòmoreÐ  p Ðthanóó€mere€reciprocal€engagements€between€Contracting€States.€€It€creates€òòover€and€above€a€networkÐ ` Ðof€mutual€bilateral€understandingsóó,€objective€obligations€which€in€the€words€of€the€preamble€benefitÐ P Ðfrom€a€'collective€enforcement'"€(emphasis€added).€òòdóó/€€In€the€third€place,€both€the€faculty€underÐ ð@ Ðarticle€41€of€the€Covenant€for€bringing€inter-State€complaints€and€the€widespread€practice€of€StatesÐ à0 Ðin€invoking€the€Covenant€as€against€other€States€Parties€in€respect€of€the€treatment€of€individualsÐ Ð  Ðshow€that€in€a€very€real€and€practical€sense€even€the€substantive€provisions€of€the€Covenant€areÐ À! Ðindeed€regarded€as€creating€"a€network€of€mutual€bilateral€undertakings".€€Finally,€it€must€beÐ °"  Ðassumed€that,€in€respect€of€reservations€which€are€clearly€òòcompatible€withóó€the€object€and€purposeÐ  #ð! Ðof€the€Covenant,€the€Committee€accepts€that€States€Parties€exercise€the€rights€and€functions€assignedÐ $à" Ðto€them€by€the€Vienna€Convention.€€If€so,€it€is€not€easy€to€discover€a€logical€ground€for€ruling€outÐ €%Ð # Ðthese€rights€and€functions€for€other€reservations,€including€those€where€there€is€at€least€a€reasonableÐ p&À!$ Ѐmeasure€of€doubt€as€to€whether€the€reservation€is€or€is€not€compatible€with€the€object€and€purposeÐ `'°"% Ðof€the€Covenant.€€Given€therefore€that€the€bilateral€rights€and€general€interests€of€other€Parties€are,Ð P( #& Ðas€indicated,€directly€affected,€the€United€Kingdom€regards€it€as€a€self-evident€proposition€that€theÐ @)$' Ðreaction€of€those€Parties€to€a€reservation€formulated€by€one€of€them€is€of€direct€significance€both€inÐ 0*€%( ÐÌ_____________Ð ,`'* Ðòòà  àcóó/€Ireland€v.€United€Kingdom.Ð -P(+ Ðòòà  àdóó/€Series€A,€No.€25,€p.€90,€para.€Ô_Ô239.Ð ð-@), Їlaw€and€in€practice.€€In€short,€the€legal€effect€of€any€particular€reservation€to€a€human€rights€treatyÐ ° Ðis€an€amalgam€of€the€terms€of€the€treaty€and€the€terms€and€import€of€the€reservation,€in€the€light€ofÐ  ð Ðthe€reactions€to€it€by€the€other€treaty€Parties€and€in€the€light€of€course€of€any€authoritative€third-partyÐ à Ðprocedure€that€may€be€applicable.Ð €Ð ÐÌòòThe€criteria€for€assessing€compatibility€with€the€object€and€purpose€of€the€CovenantÐ ` ° ÐóóÌ6.€€The€United€Kingdom€shares€the€Committee's€view€that€an€automatic€identification€betweenÐ @  Ðnon-Ô_ÔderogabilityÔ_Ô€and€compatibility€with€the€object€and€purpose€is€too€simplistic.€€Derogation€fromÐ 0 € Ða€formally€contracted€obligation€and€reluctance€to€undertake€the€obligation€in€the€first€place€are€notÐ  p  Ðthe€same€thing.€The€United€Kingdom€is€likewise€of€one€mind€with€the€Committee€that€multifacetedÐ `  Ðtreaties€like€the€Covenants€pose€considerable€problems€over€the€ascertainment€of€their€object€andÐ P  Ðpurpose.€€The€problem€is€one€common€to€all€lengthy€treaties€containing€numerous€provisions€ofÐ ð@  Ðcoordinate€status€with€one€another.Ð à0  ÐÌ7.€€The€United€Kingdom€is€however€less€convinced€by€the€argument€that,€because€human€rightsÐ À Ðtreaties€are€for€the€benefit€of€individuals,€provisions€in€the€Covenant€that€represent€customaryÐ ° Ðinternational€law€may€not€be€the€subject€of€reservations.€€It€is€doubtful€whether€such€a€propositionÐ  ð Ðrepresents€existing€customary€international€law;€it€is€not€a€view€shared€by€most€commentators,€andÐ à ÐStates€have€not€expressly€objected€to€reservations€on€this€ground.€€In€the€United€Kingdom's€view,Ð €Ð Ðthere€is€a€clear€distinction€between€choosing€not€to€enter€into€treaty€obligations€and€trying€to€opt€outÐ pÀ Ðof€customary€international€law.€€Such€a€distinction€is€inherent€in€the€Committee's€recognition€thatÐ `° Ðreservations€to€articles€that€guarantee€customary€international€law€rights€are€permitted€provided€thatÐ P  Ðthe€right€is€not€deprived€of€its€basic€purpose.Ð @ ÐÌ8.€€For€broadly€similar€reasons,€the€United€Kingdom€does€not€wholly€share€the€Committee's€concernÐ  p Ðover€reservations€which€exclude€the€acceptance€of€obligations€which€would€require€changes€inÐ ` Ðnational€law€to€ensure€compliance€with€them.€€The€Committee's€comments€that€"no€real€internationalÐ P Ðrights€or€obligations€have€thus€been€accepted"€and€that€"all€the€essential€elements€of€the€CovenantÐ ð@ Ðguarantees€have€been€removed"€miss€the€fact€that€States€Parties,€even€while€entering€suchÐ à0 Ðreservations,€do€at€least€accept€the€Committee's€supervision,€through€the€reporting€system,€of€thoseÐ Ð  ÐCovenant€rights€guaranteed€by€their€national€law.Ð À! ÐÌòòThe€power€to€determine€compatibility€with€the€object€and€purposeóóÐ  #ð! ÐÌ9.€€The€United€Kingdom€shares€the€Committee's€view€as€to€the€seriousness€of€the€issue€ofÐ €%Ð # Ðcompatibility€of€reservations€with€the€object€and€purpose€of€the€treaty€in€question.€€It€does€notÐ p&À!$ Ðhowever€believe€that€this€is€the€central€issue€in€the€law€and€practice€of€reservations€to€multilateralÐ `'°"% Ðconventions.€€The€vast€majority€of€reservations€are€in€practice€dealt€with€satisfactorily€through€theÐ P( #& Ðoperation€of€the€normal€rules€in€the€Vienna€Convention,€it€being€borne€in€mind€that€anotherÐ @)$' ÐContracting€State€always€has€the€right€formally€to€object€even€to€a€reservation€which€is€undoubtedlyÐ 0*€%( Ðadmissible€(except€in€the€special€case€of€a€reservation€expressly€permitted€by€the€treaty).€€TheÐ  +p&) Ðquestion€of€compatibility€with€the€object€and€purpose€is€confined€to€a€small€number€of€extremeÐ ,`'* Ðcases.Ð -P(+ ÐÐ ð-@), Ð10.€€It€is€clear€however€that€a€legal€Ô_ÔregimeÔ_Ô€of€reservations€that€depends€to€any€extent€on€the€generalÐ ° Ðcriterion€of€compatibility€with€the€object€and€purpose€of€a€treaty€as€a€whole€will€be€uncertain€in€itsÐ  ð Ðoperation€in€the€absence€of€an€objective€method€for€determining€whether€the€criterion€is€satisfied.€Ð à ÐThe€availability€of€binding€third-party€procedures€could€be€of€great€importance€in€this€respect,€as€theÐ €Ð ÐInternational€Law€Commission€itself€recognized€at€the€outset.€€This€state€of€affairs€inevitably€raisesÐ pÀ Ða€serious€question€as€to€the€proper€role€which€the€Committee€itself€may€play,€to€which€theÐ ` ° ÐCommittee€has€given€serious€consideration€at€pages€6€and€7€of€the€general€comment.Ð P   ÐÌ11.€€The€United€Kingdom€shares€the€analysis€that€the€Committee€must€necessarily€be€able€to€takeÐ 0 € Ða€view€of€the€status€and€effect€of€a€reservation€where€this€is€required€in€order€to€permit€theÐ  p  ÐCommittee€to€carry€out€its€substantive€functions€under€the€Covenant.€€Thus,€the€Committee€mightÐ `  Ðfind€itself€unable€in€particular€cases€to€deliver€a€report€under€the€special€powers€conferred€upon€itÐ P  Ðby€article€41€or€the€First€Optional€Protocol,€except€on€the€basis€of€a€view€as€to€the€impact€of€a€givenÐ ð@  Ðreservation.€Similarly,€the€Committee€might,€according€to€the€circumstances,€find€it€appropriate€toÐ à0  Ðform€or€express€its€view€on€a€reservation€for€the€purpose€of€questioning€a€State€Party€in€its€reportsÐ Ð  Ðunder€article€40€or€for€the€purpose€of€reporting€its€own€conclusions.€€Paragraph€20€of€the€generalÐ À Ðcomment,€however,€uses€the€verb€"determine"€in€connection€with€the€Committee's€functions€towardsÐ ° Ðthe€status€of€reservations,€and€does€so€moreover€in€the€context€if€its€òòdictumóó€that€the€task€in€questionÐ  ð Ðis€inappropriate€for€the€States€Parties.€€This€would€appear€to€have€implications€which€call€forÐ à Ðcomment.Ð €Ð ÐÌ12.€Without€wishing€to€take€a€final€view€on€the€matter,€the€United€Kingdom€would€make€theÐ `° Ðfollowing€points:€€Ð P  ÐÌ(a)€Even€if€it€were€the€case€(as€the€general€comment€argues€but€the€United€Kingdom€doubts:€seeÐ 0€ Ðparas.€3-5€above)€that€the€law€on€reservations€is€inappropriate€to€address€the€problem€of€reservationsÐ  p Ðto€human€rights€treaties,€this€would€not€of€itself€give€rise€to€a€competence€or€power€in€the€CommitteeÐ ` Ðexcept€to€the€extent€provided€for€in€the€Covenant;€any€new€competence€could€only€be€created€byÐ P Ðamendment€to€the€Covenant,€and€would€then€be€exercisable€on€such€terms€as€were€laid€down;Ð ð@ ÐÌ(b)€No€conclusion€as€to€the€status€or€consequences€of€a€particular€reservation€could€be€properlyÐ Ð  Ðdeterminative€unless€it€were€binding€not€only€on€the€reserving€State€Party€but€on€all€the€Parties€toÐ À! Ðthe€Covenant,€which€would€in€turn€automatically€presuppose€that€the€Parties€had€undertaken€inÐ °"  Ðproper€form€a€prior€legal€obligation€to€accept€it;Ð  #ð! ÐÌ(c)€There€is€a€qualitative€distinction€between€decisions€judicially€arrived€at€after€full€legal€argumentÐ €%Ð # Ðand€determinations€made€without€the€benefit€of€a€judicial€process.Ð p&À!$ ÐÌòòThe€legal€effect€of€an€incompatible€reservationóóÐ P( #& ÐÌ13.€€The€Committee€correctly€identifies€articles€20€and€21€of€the€Vienna€Convention€on€the€Law€ofÐ 0*€%( ÐTreaties€as€containing€the€rules€which,€taken€together,€regulate€the€legal€effect€of€reservations€toÐ  +p&) Ðmultilateral€treaties.€The€United€Kingdom€wonders€however€whether€the€Committee€is€right€toÐ ,`'* Ðassume€their€applicability€to€incompatible€reservations.€€The€rules€cited€clearly€do€apply€toÐ -P(+ Ðreservations€which€are€fully€compatible€with€the€object€and€purpose€but€remain€open€for€acceptanceÐ ð-@), Ðor€objection€(see€para.€9€above).€€It€is€questionable€however€whether€they€were€intended€also€to€coverÐ ° Ðreservations€which€are€inadmissible€òòin€Ô_ÔlimineÔ_Ôóó.€€For€example,€it€seems€highly€improbably€that€aÐ  ð Ðreservation€expressly€òòprohibitedóó€by€the€treaty€(the€case€in€art.€19€(a)€of€the€Vienna€Convention)€isÐ à Ðopen€to€acceptance€by€another€Contracting€State.€And€if€so,€there€is€no€clear€reason€why€the€sameÐ €Ð Ðshould€not€apply€to€the€other€cases€enumerated€in€article€19,€including€incompatibility€with€theÐ pÀ Ðobject€and€purpose€under€19€(c).€€The€òòGenocide€Conventionóó€Advisory€Opinion€did€indeed€dealÐ ` ° Ðdirectly€with€the€matter,€by€stating€that€acceptance€of€a€reservation€as€being€òòcompatibleóó€with€theÐ P   Ðobject€and€purpose€entitles€a€party€to€consider€the€reserving€State€to€be€party€to€the€treaty.€€In€theÐ @  Ðconverse€case€(i.e.€the€case€where€the€reservation€is€òònotóó€compatible€with€the€object€and€purpose)€theÐ 0 € ÐCourt€states€plainly,€"that€State€cannot€be€regarded€as€being€a€party€to€the€Convention".òòeóó/€€€This€isÐ  p  Ðthe€approach€which€the€United€Kingdom€has€consistently€followed€in€its€own€treaty€practice.Ð `  ÐÌ14.€€The€general€comment€suggests,€per€contra,€that€an€"unacceptable"€reservation€will€generally€beÐ ð@  Ðseverable,€in€the€sense€that€the€Covenant€will€be€operative€for€the€reserving€party€as€if€the€reservationÐ à0  Ðhad€not€been€entered.€€The€United€Kingdom€agrees€that€severability€of€a€kind€may€well€offer€aÐ Ð  Ðsolution€in€appropriate€cases,€although€its€contours€are€only€beginning€to€be€explored€in€StateÐ À Ðpractice.€€However€the€United€Kingdom€is€absolutely€clear€that€severability€would€entail€excisingÐ ° Ðboth€the€reservation€and€the€parts€of€the€treaty€to€which€it€applies.€€Any€other€solution€they€wouldÐ  ð Ðfind€deeply€contrary€to€principle,€notably€the€fundamental€rule€reflected€in€Article€38€(1)€of€theÐ à ÐStatute€of€the€International€Court€of€Justice,€that€international€conventions€establish€rules€"expresslyÐ €Ð Ðrecognized€by"€the€Contracting€States.€€The€United€Kingdom€regards€it€as€hardly€feasible€to€try€toÐ pÀ Ðhold€a€State€to€obligations€under€the€Covenant€which€it€self-evidently€has€not€"expressly€recognized"Ð `° Ðbut€rather€has€indicated€its€express€unwillingness€to€accept.€The€United€Kingdom€fears€that,Ð P  Ðquestions€of€principle€aside,€an€approach€as€outlined€in€paragraph€20€of€the€general€comment€wouldÐ @ Ðrisk€discouraging€States€from€ratifying€human€rights€conventions€òòfóó/€(since€they€would€not€be€in€aÐ 0€ Ðposition€to€reassure€their€national€Parliaments€as€to€the€status€of€treaty€provisions€on€which€it€wasÐ  p Ðfelt€necessary€to€reserve)€or€might€even€lead€to€denunciations€by€existing€Parties€who€ratified€againstÐ ` Ða€set€of€assumptions€different€from€those€now€enunciated€in€the€general€comment.Ð P ÐÌ15.€€The€United€Kingdom€believes€that€the€only€sound€approach€is€accordingly€that€adopted€by€theÐ à0 ÐInternational€Court€of€Justice:€€a€State€which€purports€to€ratify€a€human€rights€treaty€subject€to€aÐ Ð  Ðreservation€which€is€fundamentally€incompatible€with€participation€in€the€treaty€Ô_ÔregimeÔ_Ô€cannot€beÐ À! Ðregarded€as€having€become€a€party€at€all€-€unless€it€withdraws€the€reservation.€€The€test€ofÐ °"  Ðincompatibility€is€and€should€be€an€objective€one,€in€which€the€views€of€competent€third€partiesÐ  #ð! Ðwould€carry€weight.€€Ultimately€however€it€is€a€matter€for€the€treaty€parties€themselves€and,€while€Ð $à" Ðthe€presence€or€absence€of€individual€State€"objections"€should€not€be€decisive€in€relation€to€anÐ €%Ð # Ðobjective€standard,€it€would€be€surprising€to€find€a€reservation€validly€stigmatized€as€incompatibleÐ p&À!$ Ðwith€the€object€and€purpose€of€the€Covenant€if€none€of€the€Parties€had€taken€exception€to€it€on€thatÐ `'°"% Ðground.€€For€all€other€reservations€the€rules€laid€down€in€the€Vienna€Convention€do€and€should€applyÐ P( #& Ð-€except€to€the€extent€that€the€treaty€regulates€such€matters€by€its€own€terms.Ð @)$' ÐÌ16.€€The€United€Kingdom€wishes€finally€to€express€its€gratitude€to€the€Committee€for€having€focusedÐ  +p&) Ðattention€on€what€is€undoubtedly€a€real€and€serious€problem€and€for€having€illuminated€theÐ ,`'* Ðunderlying€issues.€Inasmuch€as€these€issues€go€wider€than€the€Covenant€itself,€or€than€human€rightsÐ -P(+ Ðtreaties€in€general,€the€United€Kingdom€proposes€to€reflect€further€on€how€international€Ð ð-@), Ð_________Ð ° Ðòòà  àfóó/€A€similar€point€applies€for€example€to€the€First€Optional€Protocol,€to€which€the€UnitedÐ  ð ÐKingdom€is€not,€however,€a€party.Ð à ÐÌconsideration€of€these€matters€can€best€be€carried€forward.€Ð pÀ ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌ