WIPO Lex

乌克兰

Declaration dated 12 October 2015:
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine presents its compliments to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, as the Depositary of the European Convention on Information on Foreign Law of 7 June 1968, the Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Information on Foreign Law of 15 March 1978, the European Convention on the Supervision of Conditionally Sentenced or Conditionally Released Offenders of 30 November 1964, the Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons of 21 March 1983, the Additional Protocol to the Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons of 18 December 1997, the European Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters of 15 May 1972, the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters of 20 April 1959, the Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters of 17 March 1978, the Second Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters of 8 November 2001, the European Convention on Extradition of 13 December 1957, the Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Extradition of 15 October 1975, the Second Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Extradition of 17 March 1978, the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism of 27 January 1977, the Protocol amending the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism of 15 May 2003, the Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism of 16 May 2005, the European Convention on the International Validity of Criminal Judgments of 28 May 1970, the Convention on Cybercrime of 23 November 2001, the Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime, concerning the Criminalisation of Acts of a Racist and Xenophobic Nature committed through Computer Systems of 28 January 2003, the Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime of 8 November 1990, the Council of Europe Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime and on the Financing of Terrorism of 16 May 2005, the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings of 16 May 2005, the European Convention on the Exercise of Children's Rights of 25 January 1996, the Convention on Contact concerning Children of 15 May 2003, the European Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Decisions concerning Custody of Children and on Restoration of Custody of Children of 20 May 1980, the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse of 25 October 2007, the Convention on the Establishment of a Scheme of Registration of Wills of 16 May 1972, the Agreement on Illicit Traffic by Sea, implementing Article 17 of the United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 31 January 1995, the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption of 27 January 1999, the Additional Protocol to the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption of 15 May 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the «Conventions, Protocols, Agreement» respectively), and has the honour to inform of the following.

Declaration dated 12 October 2015: (continued)
In February 2014 the Russian Federation launched armed aggression against Ukraine and occupied a part of the territory of Ukraine – the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, and today exercises effective control over certain districts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine. These actions are in gross violation of the Charter of the United Nations and constitute a threat to international peace and security. The Russian Federation, as the Aggressor State and Occupying Power, bears full responsibility for its actions and their consequences under international law.
The United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/68/262 of 27 March 2014 confirmed the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders. The United Nations also called upon all States, international organizations and specialized agencies not to recognize any alteration of the status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol.
In this regard, Ukraine states that from 20 February 2014 and for the period of temporary occupation by the Russian Federation of a part of the territory of Ukraine – the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol – as a result of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation committed against Ukraine and until the complete restoration of the constitutional law and order and effective control by Ukraine over such occupied territory, as well as over certain districts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine, which are temporarily not under control of Ukraine as a result of the aggression of the Russian Federation, the application and implementation by Ukraine of the obligations under the above Conventions, Protocols, Agreement, as applied to the aforementioned occupied and uncontrolled territory of Ukraine, is limited and is not guaranteed.
Documents or requests made or issued by the occupying authorities of the Russian Federation, its officials at any level in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol and by the illegal authorities in certain districts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine, which are temporarily not under control of Ukraine, are null and void and have no legal effect regardless of whether they are presented directly or indirectly through the authorities of the Russian Federation.
The provisions of the Conventions, Protocols, Agreement regarding the possibility of direct communication or interaction do not apply to the territorial organs of Ukraine in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, as well as in certain districts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine, which are temporarily not under control of Ukraine. The order of the relevant communication is determined by the central authorities of Ukraine in Kyiv.

Declaration made upon ratification:
"In accordance with Article 6, paragraph 2, subparagraph a, of the Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime, Ukraine declares that it shall require that denial or gross minimization referred to in paragraph 1 of that Article is committed with the intention to provoke hatred, discrimination or violence against any person or group of persons based on signs of race, colour, national or ethnic origin as well as faith if [they are] used as a reason for any of those actions."

Declaration dated 18 April 2022: The Permanent Representation of Ukraine to the Council of Europe presents its compliments to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe and has the honour to convey hereby, on behalf of the Government of Ukraine, the list of international treaties concerning international cooperation within the Council of Europe, signed/ratified by Ukraine, as well as to inform about the impossibility to guarantee the implementation by the Ukrainian Side in full of its obligations under the above mentioned international treaties of Ukraine for the period of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine and introduction of martial law on the territory of Ukraine, until full termination of the infringement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and inviolability of borders of Ukraine. - European Convention on Information on Foreign Law (ETS No. 62) - Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Information on Foreign Law (ETS No. 97) - Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons (ETS No. 112) - Additional Protocol to the Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons (ETS No. 167) - European Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters (ETS No. 73) - European Convention on the Supervision of Conditionally Sentenced or Conditionally Released Offenders (ETS No. 51) - Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime (ETS No. 141) - European Convention on Extradition (ETS No. 24) - Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Extradition (ETS No. 86) - Second Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Extradition (ETS No. 98) - Third Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Extradition (CETS No. 209) - Fourth Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Extradition (CETS No. 212) - European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (ETS No. 30) - Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (ETS No. 99) - Second Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (ETS No. 182) - European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism (ETS No. 90) - European Convention on the International Validity of Criminal Judgments (ETS No. 70) - Convention on Cybercrime (ETS No. 185) - Additional Protocol to the Convention on cybercrime, concerning the criminalisation of acts of a racist and xenophobic nature committed through computer systems (ETS No. 189) - Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism (CETS No. 196) - Additional Protocol to the Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism (entry in force 01.07.2017) (CETS No. 217) - Council of Europe Convention against Trafficking in Human Beings (CETS No. 197) - Council of Europe Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime and on the Financing of Terrorism (CETS No. 198) - European Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitation to Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes (ETS No. 82) - European Convention on the Exercise of Children's Rights (ETS No. 160)

Declaration dated 18 April 2022: (continued) - Convention on Contact concerning Children (ETS No. 192) - Convention on the Establishment of a Scheme of Registration of Wills (ETS No. 77) - European Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Decisions concerning Custody of Children and on Restoration of Custody of Children (ETS No. 105) - European Convention on the Legal Status of Children born out of Wedlock (ETS No. 85) - Agreement on Illicit Traffic by Sea, implementing Article 17 of the United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (ETS No. 156) - Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse (CETS No. 201) - European Convention on the Adoption of Children (Revised) (CETS No. 202) - Council of Europe Convention on the counterfeiting of medical products and similar crimes involving threats to public health (CETS No. 211) - Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (ETS No. 173) - Additional Protocol to the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (ETS No. 191) - Civil Law Convention on Corruption (ETS No. 174) - European Agreement on the Transmission of Applications for Legal Aid (ETS No. 92).

冰岛

Reservation dated March 30, 2023: "The Permanent Representation of Iceland to the Council of Europe has the honour to refer to its Note dated 11 January 2023, in which Iceland notified the deposit of its instrument of ratification of the Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime ("the Additional Protocol"). The Permanent Representation of Iceland wishes to inform the Secretary General that due to human error, Iceland's reservations to the Additional Protocol were not included in the note of 11 January 2023. Upon the adoption of necessary legislation amendments which implemented the Additional Protocol in Icelandic legislation, it was noted and reasoned in the explanatory report with the legislation that Iceland intended to make certain reservations to the Additional Protocol. Accordingly, in order to correct this error, Iceland communicates to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, in her capacity as Depositary of the Convention, the following: In accordance with Article 6, paragraph 2, subparagraph b, of the Protocol, Iceland, due to established principles in its national legal system concerning freedom of expression, reserves the right not to apply, in whole or in part, Article 6, paragraph 1."

Reservation dated March 30, 2023: "The Permanent Representation of Iceland to the Council of Europe has the honour to refer to its Note dated 11 January 2023, in which Iceland notified the deposit of its instrument of ratification of the Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime ("the Additional Protocol"). The Permanent Representation of Iceland wishes to inform the Secretary General that due to human error, Iceland's reservations to the Additional Protocol were not included in the note of 11 January 2023. Upon the adoption of necessary legislation amendments which implemented the Additional Protocol in Icelandic legislation, it was noted and reasoned in the explanatory report with the legislation that Iceland intended to make certain reservations to the Additional Protocol. Accordingly, in order to correct this error, Iceland communicates to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, in her capacity as Depositary of the Convention, the following: In accordance with Article 3, paragraph 3, of the Protocol, Iceland reserves the right not to apply paragraph 1 to those cases of discrimination for which, due to established principles in its national legal system concerning freedom of expression, it cannot provide for effective remedies as referred to in the said paragraph 2."

Reservation dated March 30, 2023: "The Permanent Representation of Iceland to the Council of Europe has the honour to refer to its Note dated 11 January 2023, in which Iceland notified the deposit of its instrument of ratification of the Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime ("the Additional Protocol"). The Permanent Representation of Iceland wishes to inform the Secretary General that due to human error, Iceland's reservations to the Additional Protocol were not included in the note of 11 January 2023. Upon the adoption of necessary legislation amendments which implemented the Additional Protocol in Icelandic legislation, it was noted and reasoned in the explanatory report with the legislation that Iceland intended to make certain reservations to the Additional Protocol. Accordingly, in order to correct this error, Iceland communicates to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, in her capacity as Depositary of the Convention, the following: In accordance with Article 5, paragraph 2, subparagraph b, of the Protocol, Iceland due to established principles in its national legal system concerning freedom of expression, reserves the right not to apply, in whole or in part, Article 5, paragraph 1."

塞浦路斯

Objection dated October 17, 2017:
"The Republic of Cyprus has examined the Declaration deposited by the Republic of Turkey upon ratification of the "Council of Europe Convention on the Counterfeiting of Medical Products and Similar Crimes Involving Threats to Public Health" (CETS No. 211) dated 28 October 2011, and registered at the Secretariat General of the Council of Europe on 21 September 2017.
The Republic of Turkey declares that its ratification of the "Council of Europe Convention on the Counterfeiting of Medical Products and Similar Crimes Involving Threats to Public Health" neither amounts to any form of recognition of the "Greek Cypriot Administration's pretention to represent the defunct "Republic of Cyprus", as party to that Convention, nor should it imply any obligation on the part of Turkey to enter into any dealing with the "so-called Republic of Cyprus" within the framework of the said Convention".
The Republic of Cyprus is not a State Party to the "Council of Europe Convention on the Counterfeiting of Medical Products and Similar Crimes Involving Threats to Public Health" (CETS No. 211). However, in the view of the Republic of Cyprus, the content and purported effect of this Declaration makes it tantamount in its essence to a reservation contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention. By such Declaration, the Republic of Turkey purports to evade its obligations under the Convention vis-à-vis another equal and sovereign State Party, namely the Republic of Cyprus. Indeed, the Declaration prevents the realization of cooperation between State Parties foreseen by the Convention.
The Republic of Cyprus therefore strongly rejects the aforesaid Declaration made by the Republic of Turkey and considers such declaration to be null and void. The aforementioned objections by the Republic of Cyprus shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention, in its entirety, between the Republic of Cyprus and the Republic of Turkey.
Regarding the Republic of Turkey's pretension, as expressed in the same Declaration, that "the Greek Cypriot Administration's pretention to represent the defunct "Republic of Cyprus" as party to that Convention, nor should it imply any obligation on the part of Turkey to enter into any dealing with the so-called Republic of Cyprus within the framework of the said Convention", the Republic of Cyprus would like to remind of the following:
Despite, being, through binding international agreements, a guarantor of "the independence, territorial integrity and security of the Republic of Cyprus" (Article II of the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee), the Republic of Turkey illegally invaded Cyprus in 1974 and continues since then occupying 36.2% of the territory of the Republic.
The illegality of such aggression was made manifested by the U.N. Security Council Resolutions 541 (1983) and 550 (1984). Resolution 541's operative paragraph 2 considers "the declaration [of the Turkish Cypriot authorities of the purported secession of part of the Republic of Cyprus] as legally invalid and "calls for its withdrawal". Paragraph 6 then "calls upon all States to respect the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and non-alignment of the Republic of Cyprus" and further at paragraph 7 "calls upon all States not to recognize any Cypriot state other than the Republic of Cyprus". Resolution 550, operative para. 2, also "condemns all secessionist actions, including the purported exchange of Ambassadors between Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot leadership, declares them illegal and invalid, and calls for their immediate withdrawal". Para. 3 then "reiterates the call upon all States not to recognize the purported state of the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus" set up by secessionist acts and calls upon them not to facilitate or in any way assist the aforesaid secessionist entity"."

Objection dated October 17, 2017 (continued):
"The European Court of Human Rights additionally, in its Judgment of 10th May 2001 on the Fourth Interstate Application of Cyprus v. Turkey, found, at para. 77, that Turkey, which has "effective control over northern Cyprus", is responsible for securing all human rights under the European Convention on Human Rights and for violations of such rights by her own soldiers or officials, or by the local administration, which are imputable to Turkey. The responsibilities of the occupying power emanate from international humanitarian law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention.
Turkey is responsible for the policies and actions of the "TRNC" because of the effective control she exercises through her army. Her responsibility is engaged by virtue of the acts of the local administration, which survives by virtue of Turkish military and other support (Cyprus v. Turkey, Judgment, 10 May 2001, at pp. 20-21, reiterating Loizidou). From the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and the Security Council Resolutions on Cyprus, it is evident that the international community does not regard the "TRNC" (Turkey's subordinate local administration in occupied Cyprus, condemned in the strongest terms by the Security Council) as a State under international law (Cyprus v. Turkey, 10 May 2001, para. 61). In contrast, the Republic of Cyprus has repeatedly been held to be the sole legitimate Government of Cyprus, contrary to Turkey's assertions about that Government, which Turkey calls "the Greek Cypriot Administration" with pretences "to represent the defunct Republic". The Turkish assertions constitute a propaganda ploy to divert attention from Turkey's responsibility for the violations in occupied Cyprus. Turkey's assertions and her assorted objections to the Republic of Cyprus' authority, jurisdiction and sovereignty, and her claims on behalf of the Turkish Cypriots and the "TRNC", have repeatedly been rejected by the international community and relevant judicial bodies where such claims were fully argued and then rejected in Cyprus's pleadings. Misrepresentations about the treatment of Turkish Cypriots by the Government of Cyprus were made. In fact, the European Court of Human Rights and the Commission accepted Cyprus arguments and refutation of Turkish assertions and exaggerations about the period prior to Turkey's invasion of Cyprus in July 1974. It refused to pronounce on Turkey's version of the ejection of Turkish Cypriots from offices of State (there was in fact a Turkish boycott).
It is now time for the relevant pronouncement in Resolutions and the decisions therein, as well as in judgments of the European Court of Human Rights to be heard and acted upon. The Court itself insisted in its 12 May 2014 Just Satisfaction Judgment that this must happen once the Court had spoken (Cyprus v. Turkey, p. 23 Joint Concurring Judgment of nine Judges). It should be emphasized that, as recently as 26 July 2016 (Security Council Resolution 2300), the Security Council reaffirmed all its relevant Resolutions on Cyprus, having, over several decades, reiterated their content.
Nevertheless, the Republic of Turkey, not only flagrantly holds in contempt all relevant U.N. Resolutions, International Law rules and the U.N. Charter on the matter, but furthermore she continues violating international legality, by systematically questioning the legitimacy of the Republic of Cyprus and further promoting the illegal secessionist entity in the occupied part of the Republic of Cyprus, including through declarations, as the one at hand."

Objection du 17 octobre 2017 (suite2):
"La Turquie est responsable des politiques et des actions de la "RTCN" en raison du contrôle effectif qu'elle exerce à travers son armée. Sa responsabilité est engagée en vertu des actes de l'administration locale qui survivent en vertu de l'assistance militaire turque et d'autres formes de soutien (Chypre c. Turquie, jugement, 10 mai 2001, pp. 20-21, réitérant Loizidou). Il ressort clairement des arrêts de la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme et des Résolutions du Conseil de sécurité sur Chypre que la communauté internationale ne considère pas la «RTCN» (l'administration locale subordonnée de la Turquie à Chypre occupée, condamnée dans les termes les plus forts par le Conseil de sécurité) en tant qu'Etat de droit international (Chypre c. Turquie, 10 mai 2001, paragraphe 61). En revanche, la République de Chypre a été maintes fois considérée comme le seul gouvernement légitime de Chypre, contrairement aux affirmations de la Turquie au sujet de ce gouvernement, que la Turquie appelle «l'administration chypriote grecque» avec prétention à «représenter la République défunte». Les assertions turques constituent un stratagème de propagande pour détourner l'attention de la responsabilité de la Turquie pour les violations dans la Chypre occupée. Les assertions de la Turquie et ses diverses objections à l'autorité, à la juridiction et à la souveraineté de la République de Chypre, ainsi que ses allégations au nom des Chypriotes turcs et de la "RTCN", ont été rejetées à maintes reprises par la communauté internationale et les organes judiciaires compétents, où de telles allégations ont été pleinement plaidées et ensuite rejetées dans les plaidoiries de Chypre. Des déclarations erronées ont été faites au sujet du traitement des Chypriotes turcs par le Gouvernement chypriote. En fait, la Cour européenne des Droits de l'Homme et la Commission ont accepté les arguments de Chypre et la réfutation des assertions et des exagérations turques concernant la période antérieure à l'invasion turque de Chypre en juillet 1974. Elle a refusé de se prononcer sur la version turque de l'expulsion des Chypriotes turcs des bureaux d'Etat (il y avait en fait un boycott turc).
Il est désormais temps que la décision pertinente dans les Résolutions et les décisions qui y sont prises, ainsi que dans les arrêts de la Cour européenne des Droits de l'Homme soient entendues et prises en considération. La Cour elle-même a insisté, dans son arrêt sur la satisfaction équitable du 12 mai 2014, que cela devait se produire dès lors que la Cour s'était prononcée (Chypre c. Turquie, page 23 Arrêt conjoint de neuf juges). Il convient de souligner que, aussi récemment que le 26 juillet 2016 (Résolution 2300 du Conseil de sécurité), le Conseil de sécurité a réaffirmé toutes ses Résolutions pertinentes concernant Chypre, après avoir rappelé leur contenu durant plusieurs décennies.
Cependant, non seulement la République de Turquie méconnaît toutes les résolutions pertinentes de l'ONU, les règles du droit international et la Charte des Nations Unies en la matière, mais elle continue en outre de violer la légalité internationale en remettant systématiquement en question la légitimité de la République de Chypre et promouvant davantage l'entité sécessionniste illégale dans la partie occupée de la République de Chypre, y compris par des déclarations comme celle qui est en question ici."

网络犯罪公约关于宣告利用计算机系统犯下的种族主义或仇外行为为犯罪行为的附加议定书