Objections made on April 24, 2015:
With regard to the interpretative declaration made by the Democratic Republic of the Congo:
"The Permanent Mission of Sweden to the United Nations presents its compliments to the Secretary-General of the United Nations acting in his capacity as treaty depositary and has the honour to refer to the Secretary-General's note C.N.221.2014.TREATIES-XXI.6 (Depositary Notification) of 29 April 2014, communicating an interpretative declaration and declarations under articles 287 and 298 to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) made by the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
The Government of Sweden has examined the interpretative declaration made by the Democratic Republic of the Congo to UNCLOS.
The Government of Sweden recalls that the designation assigned to a statement whereby the legal effect of certain provisions of a treaty is excluded or modified does not determine its status as a reservation to the treaty. The Government of Sweden considers that the interpretative declaration made by the Democratic Republic of the Congo may in substance constitute a reservation limiting or modifying the scope of the Convention.
The Government of Sweden also recalls that according to article 309 of UNCLOS no reservations or exceptions may be made to the Convention unless expressly permitted in the Convention. If the interpretative declaration in any way intends to deviate from the provisions of the Convention, it will have no effect on the content and extent to which the Democratic Republic of the Congo is bound by the Convention.
The Government of Sweden also recalls that declarations or statements under Article 310 of the Convention may only be made when signing, ratifying or acceding to the Convention and that Article 310 only permits declarations or statements made with a view, inter alia, to harmonizing States' domestic laws and regulations with the provisions of the Convention, and provided that such declarations or statements do not purport to exclude or modify the legal effects of the provisions of the Convention in their application to these States.
The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the interpretative declaration made by the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the extent that any part of it constitutes a reservation not otherwise permitted by the Convention or purports to exclude or modify the legal effects of any of the provisions of the Convention in their application to the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
This objection shall not affect the continued application of the Convention between Sweden and the Democratic Republic of the Congo."
Objections made on October 18, 2013:
With regard to the declaration made by Ecuador upon accession:
"The Government of Sweden has examined the declaration made by Ecuador upon accession to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, UNCLOS.
The Government of Sweden recalls that the designation assigned to a statement whereby the legal effect of certain provisions of a treaty is excluded or modified does not determine its status as a reservation to the treaty. The Government of Sweden considers that significant parts of the declaration made by Ecuador in substance aims at constituting a reservation limiting or modifying the scope of the Convention.
The Government of Sweden recalls that according to article 309 of UNCLOS no reservations or exceptions may be made to the Convention unless expressly permitted in the Convention. Already on this ground, those parts of the Declaration that in any way deviate from the provisions of the Convention have no effect on the content and extent to which Ecuador is bound by the Convention.
It is worth recalling that the sovereignty of a State extends, beyond its land territory and internal waters, to the territorial sea and, in the case of an archipelagic state, its archipelagic waters, the airspace over the territorial sea as well as to its bed and subsoil. This general rule is reflected in UNCLOS art 2. Under International Law, ‘territory’ cannot be defined otherwise and the sovereignty of a State does not extend beyond these areas.
The rights and duties of States in the EEZ are expressly described by UNCLOS. The Convention is also clear on the fact that for residual rights, those rights that are not attributed, there is no presumption in favour of either the Coastal State or other States. Any conflict between the interests of the coastal State and any other State or States shall be resolved on the basis of equity and in light of all relevant circumstances.
The freedom of navigation is a longstanding rule and principle recognized in international law, including in UNCLOS. On the high seas and exclusive economic zone, all States enjoy the freedom of navigation. The right of a ship to navigate is subject only to the jurisdiction of their flag State and the coastal States jurisdiction as determined by UNCLOS. Navigation cannot be restricted in any other way by the coastal State. Hence, no vessels or aircraft need to notify or seek prior authorization from the Coastal State when exercising its right under the principle of the freedom of the high seas, including the freedom of navigation outside the territorial sea. The Government of Sweden would like to stress its firm conviction that the freedom of navigation encompasses all activities by ships, including warships and naval auxiliaries, which are lawful under international law and conducted in accordance with UNCLOS.
Furthermore, no vessels or aircraft need to notify or seek prior authorization from the Coastal State to exercise the right of innocent passage in accordance with the provisions of UNCLOS.
The Government of Sweden has studied the baselines described by Ecuador in its Declaration. According to the provisions of UNCLOS the normal baseline is the low-water line along the coast. Straight baselines may be employed if the coast is deeply indented or cut into, or if there is a fringe of islands along the coast in its immediate vicinity. The drawing of straight baselines must not depart to any appreciable extent from the general direction of the coast. The Ecuadorian coastline is stable and even, and the baselines described by Ecuador deviates from the main rules included in UNCLOS provisions. The baselines of islands shall be drawn according to the same criteria. The baselines surrounding the Galapagos Islands, creating a large area of internal waters not connected to the mainland is not in accordance with UNCLOS.
According to customary international law, as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation that is prohibited by the treaty against which it is formulated or that is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Treaty shall not be permitted. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties are respected as to their object and purpose, by all parties, and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations under the treaties.
The Government of Sweden therefore objects to the aforesaid declaration made by Ecuador to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Government of Sweden is particularly concerned that the elements of the declaration referred to above, in substance aims at constituting a reservation with the aim of limiting the scope of the Convention.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between Sweden and Ecuador."
Declaración formulada en el momento de la ratificación:
"De conformidad con el artículo 287 de la Convención, el Gobierno del Reino de Suecia elige, por la presente, a la Corte Internacional de Justicia para la solución de controversias respecto de la interpretación o aplicación de la Convención y del Acuerdo relativo a la aplicación de la Parte XI de la Convención.
El Reino de Suecia recuerda que, como miembro de la Comunidad Europea, ha transferido a la Comunidad la competencia con respecto a ciertas cuestiones reguladas por la Convención. A su debido tiempo se hará una declaración detallada de la índole y extensión de la competencia transferida a la Comunidad Europea de conformidad con lo dispuesto en el Anexo IX de la Convención."
Traducción facilitada por la OMPI, © 2014
Declaración formulada en el momento de la firma y confirmada en el momento de la ratificación:
"El Gobierno de Suecia entiende que la excepción al régimen de paso en tránsito por los estrechos prevista en el artículo 35.c) de la Convención se aplica al estrecho que separa a Suecia de Dinamarca (Oresund) y también al estrecho que separa a Suecia de Finlandia (islas Aland). Dado que el paso por ambos estrechos está reglamentado en su totalidad o en parte por convenciones internacionales de larga data aún vigentes, el régimen jurídico actual de ambos estrechos no cambiará una vez que entre en vigor la Convención."
Traducción facilitada por la OMPI, © 2014
Declaración formulada en el momento de la firma:
"En lo que atañe a las partes de la Convención relativas al paso inocente por el mar territorial, el Gobierno de Suecia tiene la intención de seguir aplicando el régimen actual en lo que respecta al paso de buques de guerra extranjeros y otros buques de propiedad estatal que se utilicen con fines no comerciales a través del mar territorial de Suecia, dado que dicho régimen es plenamente compatible con la Convención.
El Gobierno de Suecia entiende también que la Convención no afecta a los derechos y las obligaciones de los Estados neutrales estipulados en la Convención XIII relativa a los Derechos y Deberes de las Potencias Neutrales en caso de Guerra Marítima, aprobada en La Haya el 18 de octubre de 1907."
Traducción facilitada por la OMPI, © 2014