Algeria
Reservations:
The Government of the Algerian People's Democratic Republic does
not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 15,
paragraph 2, of this Protocol, which provides that any dispute
between two or more States concerning the interpretation or
application of the said Protocol that cannot be settled through
negotiation shall, at the request of one of those States, be
submitted to arbitration or referred to the International Court of
Justice.
The Government of the Algerian People's Democratic Republic
believes that any dispute of this kind can only be submitted to
arbitration or referred to the International Court of Justice with
the consent of all parties to the dispute.
Declarations:
Ratification of this Protocol by the Algerian People's Democratic
Republic in no way signifies recognition of Israel.
Such ratification cannot be construed as leading to the
establishment of any kind of relations with Israel.
Australia
Upon signature:
Declaration:
"The Government of Australia hereby declares that nothing in the
Protocol shall be seen to be imposing obligations on Australia to
admit or retain within its borders persons in respect of whom
Australia would not otherwise have an obligation to admit or retain
within its borders."
Azerbaijan
Declaration:
"The Republic of Azerbaijan declares that it is unable to
guarantee the application of the provisions of the Protocol in the
territories occupied by the Republic of Armenia until these
territories are liberated from that occupation."
Reservation:
"In accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 15 of the Protocol,
the Republic of Azerbaijan declares that it does not consider itself
bound by paragraph 2 of Article 15."
Bahrain
Reservation:
"... the Kingdom of Bahrain does not consider itself bound by
paragraph 2 of article 15 of the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and
Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children."
Belgium
Upon signature:
Declaration:
The French, Flemish and German-speaking Communities and the
Regions of Wallonia, Flanders and Brussels-Capital are also bound by
this signature.
Bolivia
Declaration:
The Republic of Bolivia declares that it does not consider itself
bound by the provisions of paragraph 2 of article 15, which deals
with the settlement of disputes concerning this Protocol.
Colombia
Reservation:
In accordance with article 15, paragraph 3, of the Protocol,
Colombia declares that it does not consider itself bound by
paragraph 2 of that article.
Ecuador
Reservation:
Exercising the powers referred to in article 15, paragraph 3, of
the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons,
Especially Women and Children, the Government of Ecuador makes a
reservation with regard to article 15, paragraph 2, relating to the
settlement of disputes.
El Salvador
Upon signature:
Reservation:
The Government of the Republic of El Salvador does not consider
itself bound by paragraph 2 of article 15, inasmuch as it does not
recognize the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of
Justice.
Upon ratification:
Reservation:
With respect to the provisions of article 15, paragraph 3, the
Government of the Republic of El Salvador declares that it does not
consider itself bound by article 15, paragraph 2, inasmuch as it
does not recognize the compulsory jurisdiction of the International
Court of Justice.
Lao People's Democratic Republic
Reservation:
"In accordance with paragraph 3, Article 15 of the Protocol to
Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially
Women and Children, Supplementing the United Nations Convention
Against Transnational Organized Crime, the Lao People's Democratic
Republic does not consider itself bound by paragraph 2, Article 15
of the present Protocol. The Lao People's Democratic Republic
declares that to refer a dispute relating to interpretation and
application of the present Protocol to arbitration or [the]
International Court of Justice, the agreement of all parties
concerned in the dispute is necessary."
Lithuania
Reservation:
"AND WHEREAS, it is provided in paragraph 3 of Article 15 of the
Protocol, the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania would like to
declare that the Republic of Lithuania does not consider itself
bound by paragraph 2 of Article 15, which provides that any State
Party may refer any dispute concerning the interpretation or
application of the said Protocol to the International Court of
Justice."
Malawi
Declarations:
"The Government of the Republic of Malawi in its efforts to curb
and stamp out offences related to trafficking in persons especially
women and children has embarked upon various social and legal
reforms to incorporate obligations emanating from this Protocol
(Article 16 (4)).
Further, declares expressly its acceptance of Article 15 (2) on
settlement of disputes concerning interpretation and application of
this Protocol.
The Competent Authority charged with the responsibility of
coordinating and rendering of mutual legal assistance is:
The Principal Secretary
Ministry of Home Affairs and Internal Security
Private Bag 331, Lilongwe 3. MALAWI
Fax: 265 1 789509 Tel: 265 1 789 177
The Official Language of communication is English."
Myanmar
Reservation:
"The Government of the Union of Myanmar wishes to express
reservation on Article 20 and does not consider itself bound by
obligations to refer disputes relating to the interpretation or
application of this Protocol to the International Court of
Justice".
Saudi Arabia
Upon signature:
Declaration and reservation:
The public order of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia prohibits
trafficking in persons for the purpose referred to in paragraph (a)
of Article 3 of the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress, and Punish
Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children.
The Kingdom does not consider itself bound by paragraph 2 of
Article 15 of the said Protocol. It makes reservations regarding the
contents of paragraph 3d of Article Six and paragraph 1 of Article 7
of the said protocol.
South Africa
Reservation:
"AND WHEREAS pending a decision by the Government of the Republic
of South Africa on the compulsory jurisdiction of the International
Court of Justice, the Government of the Republic does not consider
itself bound by the terms of Article 15 (2) of the Protocol which
provides for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court
of Justice in differences arising out of the interpretation or
application of the Protocol. The Republic will adhere to the
position that, for the submission of a particular dispute for
settlement by the International Court, the consent of all the
parties to the dispute is required in every individual case."
Tunisia
Reservation:
In ratifying the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish
Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children, supplementing
the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime,
adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 15 November
2000, declares that it does not consider itself bound by article 15,
paragraph 2, of the Protocol and affirms that disputes concerning
the interpretation or application of the Protocol may be referred to
the International Court of Justice only after it has given its prior
consent.
United States of America
Reservation:
" (1) The United States of America reserves the right not to
apply in part the obligation set forth in Article 15,
paragraph 1 (b), of the United Nations Convention Against
Transnational Organized Crime with respect to the offenses
established in the Trafficking Protocol. The United States does not
provide for plenary jurisdiction over offenses that are committed on
board ships flying its flag or aircraft registered under its laws.
However, in a number of circumstances, U.S. law provides for
jurisdiction over such offenses committed on board U.S. - flagged
ships or aircraft registered under U.S. law. Accordingly, the United
States will implement paragraph 1 (b) of the Convention to the
extent provided for under its federal law.
(2) The United States of America reserves the right to assume
obligations under this Protocol in a manner consistent with its
fundamental principles of federalism, pursuant to which both federal
and state criminal laws must be considered in relation to conduct
addressed in the Protocol. U.S. federal criminal law, which
regulates conduct based on its effect on interstate or foreign
commerce, or another federal interest, such as the Thirteen
Amendment's prohibition of "slavery" and "involuntary servitude,"
serves as the principal legal regime within the United States for
combating the conduct addressed in this Protocol, and is broadly
effective for this purpose. Federal criminal law does not apply in
the rare case where such criminal conduct does not so involve
interstate or foreign commerce, or otherwise implicate another
federal interest, such as the Thirteenth Amendment. There are a
small number of conceivable situations involving such rare offenses
of a purely local character where U.S. federal and state criminal
law may not be entirely adequate to satisfy an obligation under the
Protocol. The United States of America therefore reserves to the
obligations set forth in the Protocol to the extent they address
conduct which would fall within this narrow category of highly
localized activity. This reservation does not affect in any respect
the ability of the United States to provide international
cooperation to other Parties as contemplated in the Protocol.
(3) In accordance with Article 15, paragraph 3, the
United States of America declares that it does not consider
itself bound by the obligation set forth in Article 15, paragraph
2."
Understanding:
"The United States of America understands the obligation to
establish the offenses in the Protocol as money laundering predicate
offenses, in light of Article 6, paragraph 2 (b) of the United
Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime, as
requiring States Parties whose money laundering legislation sets
forth a list of specific predicate offenses to include in such list
a comprehensive range of offenses associated with trafficking in
persons."
NOTES
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. With a territorial exclusion in respect of
the Faroe Islands and Greenland.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. For the Kingdom in Europe
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. With the following territorial exclusion:
".....consistent with the constitutional status of Tokelau and
taking into account the commitment of the Government of New Zealand
to the development of self-government for Tokelau through an act of
self-determination under the Charter of the United Nations, this
ratification shall not extend to Tokelau unless and until a
Declaration to this effect is lodged by the Government of New
Zealand with the Depositary on the basis of appropriate consultation
with that territory....."
|