About Intellectual Property IP Training Respect for IP IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships AI Tools & Services The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars IP Enforcement WIPO ALERT Raising Awareness World IP Day WIPO Magazine Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA UPOV e-PVP Administration UPOV e-PVP DUS Exchange Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Webcast WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO Translate Speech-to-Text Classification Assistant Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
Laws Treaties Judgments Browse By Jurisdiction

IP Treaties Collection
Contracting Parties Latvia

Dates Signature: July 18, 2008 Ratification: March 1, 2010 Entry into force: March 31, 2010

Declarations, Reservations

Objection with regard to the reservation made by Libya upon ratification: (5 February 2019)
"The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the declaration made by Libya upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
In the view of the Government of the Republic of Latvia, declaration made by Libya according to which Article 25 (a) of the Convention will be interpreted in a manner that does not contravene the Islamic sharia and national legislation, amounts to a reservation.
Moreover, a reservation which subordinates any provision of the Convention in general to the Islamic sharia and national legislation constitutes a reservation of general scope, which is likely to cast doubt on the full commitment of Libya to the object and purpose of the Convention.
The reservation made by Libya seeks to limit the scope of the Convention on a unilateral basis thus the reservation is incompatible with the object and the purpose of the Convention and therefore inadmissible under Article 19(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia objects to this reservation.
However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Republic of Latvia and Libya. The Convention will thus become operative between the two States without Libya benefitting from its declaration."

On 28 April 2017, the Secretary-General received the following communication from the Government of Latvia with regard to the reservation made by Brunei Darussalam upon ratification:
"The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the reservation made by the Sultanate of Brunei Darussalam upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The Republic of Latvia considers that this reservation consists of a general reference to a system of law without specifying its contents and therefore does not clearly define the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations of the Convention.
Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia considers that the reservation made by the Sultanate of Brunei Darussalam seeks to limit the responsibilities of the reserving State under the Convention and is likely to deprive the provisions of the Convention of their effect and, hence, must be regarded as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. Furthermore, under Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention are not permitted.
Consequently, the Government of the Republic of Latvia objects to the reservation made by the Sultanate of Brunei Darussalam concerning the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention, in its entirety, between the Republic of Latvia and the Sultanate of Brunei Darussalam."

Objection with regard to the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon accession: (22 October 2010)
"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."