Tractatenblad 1996, 188

A. TITEL

Verdrag inzake de rechten van het kind;

New York, 20 november 1989¹

B. TEKST

De Engelse en de Franse tekst zijn geplaatst in Trb. 1990, 46.

Voor wijziging van het Verdrag zie rubriek J hieronder.

Voor de ondertekeningen zie Trb. 1990, 46 en 170 en Trb. 1995, 92. Behalve voor de aldaar genoemde Staten is het Verdrag nog ondertekend voor:

de Verenigde Staten van Amerika	16 februari 1995
Andorra	2 oktober 1995

C. VERTALING

Zie Trb. 1990, 46.

D. PARLEMENT

Zie Trb. 1995, 92.

E. BEKRACHTIGING

Zie Trb. 1990, 170 en Trb. 1995, 92¹.

Behalve de aldaar genoemde hebben nog de volgende Staten in overeenstemming met artikel 47 van het Verdrag een akte van bekrachtiging bij de Secretaris-Generaal van de Verenigde Naties nedergelegd:

Qatar[2]	3 april 1995
Turkije[3]	4 april 1995
Haïti	8 juni 1995
Zuid-Afrika	16 juni 1995
Swaziland[4]	7 september 1995
Liechtenstein[5]	22 december 1995
Andorra[6]	2 januari 1996

F. TOETREDING

Zie Trb. 1990, 46 en Trb. 1995, 92.

Behalve de aldaar genoemde hebben nog de volgende Staten in overeenstemming met artikel 48 van het Verdrag een akte van toetreding bij de Secretaris-Generaal van de Verenigde Naties nedergelegd:

Botswana[1]	14 maart 1995
Solomon-eilanden	10 april 1995
Maleisië[2]	17 februari 1995
Tuvalu	22 september 1995
Singapore[3]	5 oktober 1995
Tonga	6 november 1995
Kiribati[4]	11 december 1995
Niue	20 december 1995
Brunei Darussalam[5]	27 december 1995
Saoedi-Arabië[6]	26 januari 1996

G. INWERKINGTREDING

Zie Trb. 1990, 46 en Trb. 1995, 92.

H. TOEPASSELIJKVERKLARING

Zie Trb. 1995, 92¹

J. GEGEVENS

Zie Trb. 1990, 46, 170 en Trb. 1995, 92.

Wijziging van het Verdrag

In overeenstemming met artikel 50, eerste lid, van het Verdrag heeft de Secretaris-Generaal van de Verenigde Naties op 22 mei 1995 de tekst van de door de Regering van Costa Rica voorgestelde wijziging van artikel 43, tweede lid, van het Verdrag ter kennis gebracht van de Verdragsluitende Partijen.

De Staten die Partij zijn bij het Verdrag hebben op een op 12 december 1995 gehouden vergadering besloten artikel 43, tweede lid, van het Verdrag te wijzigen.

De Engelse en de Franse tekst¹ van de voorgestelde wijziging luiden als volgt:

Amendment to article 43, paragraph (2) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child Adopted at the Conference of the States parties on 12 December 1995

Decides to adopt the amendment to article 43, paragraph (2) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, replacing the word “ten" by the word “eighteen".

Amendement au paragraphe 2 de l'article 43 de la Convention relative aux droits de l'enfant Adopté à la Conférence des Etats parties le 12 décembre 1995

Décide d'appuyer l'amendement qu'il est proposé d'apporter au paragraphe 2 de l'article 43 de la Convention relative aux droits de l'enfant, à savoir remplacer le mot «dix» par le mot «dix-huit».

De vertaling in het Nederlands luidt:

Wijziging van artikel 43, tweede lid, van het Verdrag inzake de rechten van het kind Aangenomen op de Conferentie van de Staten die Partij zijn bij het Verdrag op 12 december 1995;

Besluit de wijziging van artikel 43, tweede lid, van het Verdrag inzake de rechten van het kind aan te nemen, en het woord „tien" te vervangen door het woord „achttien".

De Algemene Vergadering van de Verenigde Naties heeft de wijziging op haar Vijftiende Zitting bij Resolutie 50/155 van 21 december 1995 goedgekeurd.

De wijziging behoeft ingevolge artikel 91 van de Grondwet de goedkeuring van de Staten-Generaal, alvorens het Koninkrijk de wijziging kan aanvaarden.

De wijziging zal ingevolge artikel 50, tweede lid, van het Verdrag in werking treden wanneer deze is aanvaard door een tweederde meerderheid van Staten die Partij zijn bij het Verdrag.

Uitgegeven de tweeëntwintigste juli 1996

De Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken,

H. A. F. M. O. VAN MIERLO

---

1 Op 19 september 1995 heeft de Regering van Noorwegenmedegedeeld het ten tijde van de bekrachtiging gemaakte voorbehoud met betrekking tot artikel 40, tweede lid, letter b, (v), van het Verdrag in te trekken.

De Regering van Duitsland heeft op 11 augustus 1995 naar aanleiding van het door Iran bij de bekrachtiging van het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehoud het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has examined the reservation contained in the instrument of ratification by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which reads as follows: “The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran reserves the right not to apply any provisions or articles of the Convention that are incompatible with Islamic Laws and the internal legislation in effect."

This reservation, owing to its unlimited scope and undefined character, is inadmissible under international law. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany, therefore, objects to the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention as between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Federal Republic of Germany. (vertaling)De Regering van Zweden heeft op 1 september 1995 naar aanleiding van het door Iran bij de bekrachtiging van het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehoud het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:“Reservations are subject to the general principles of treaty law, according to which a party may not invoke its internal law as a justification for not performing its treaty obligations. It is the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties are also respected, as to the object and purpose, by other parties and that States are prepared to undertake the legislative changes necessary to comply with such treaties. A reservation that is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention on the Rights of the Child shall according to Article 51 of the Convention not be permitted.

In this context the Government of Sweden also wishes to recall that according to Article 4 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child States shall undertake all appropriate legislative, administrative and other measures for the implementation of the rights recognized by the Convention.

In order to enable other parties to a convention to establish the scope of their treaty relations with the reserving State, and whether a reservation is compatible with the object and purpose of a treaty, the reservation should satisfy some basic criteria of specificity. The reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran does not as now formulated identify, in a way discernible to other parties to the Convention, which particular provisions of the Convention the Islamic Republic of Iran intends to apply.

Consequently, the Government of Sweden finds the reservation, which can not alter or modify obligations arising from the Convention in any respect, to be inadmissible and against the object and purpose of the treaty.

Moreover, reservations of a comprehensive and unspecified nature contribute to undermining the basis of international human rights treaties.

In view of the above, the Government of Sweden objects to the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran."De Regering van Finland heeft op 5 september 1995 naar aanleiding van het door Iran bij de bekrachtiging van het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehoud het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:“In the view of the Government of Finland, the unlimited and undefined character of the [said] reservation leaves open to what extent the reserving State commits itself to the Convention and therefore creates serious doubts about the commitment of the reserving State to fulfil its obligations under the Convention. The reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran does not clearly identify which particular provisions of the Convention the Islamic Republic of Iran does not intend to apply. In the view of the Government of Finland, reservations of such comprehensive and unspecified nature may contribute to undermining the basis of international human rights treaties.

The Government of Finland also recalls that the said reservation is subject to the general principle of the observance of treaties according to which a party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform its treaty obligations. It is in the common interest of States that contracting parties to international treaties are prepared to undertake the necessary legislative changes in order to fulfill the object and purpose of the treaty. Moreover, the internal legislation is also subject to changes which might further expand the unknown effects of the reservation.

In its present formulation the reservation is clearly incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and therefore inadmissible under Article 51, paragraph 2, of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Therefore, the Government of Finland objects to such reservation. The Government of Finland further notes that the reservation made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran is devoid of legal effect.

The Government of Finland recommends the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran to reconsider its reservations to the Convention on the Rights of the Child."De Regering van Ierland heeft op 5 september 1995 naar aanleiding van het door Iran bij de bekrachtiging van het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehoud het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:

“The reservation poses difficulties for State parties to the Convention in identifying the provisions of the Convention which the Islamic Government of Iran does not intend to apply and consequently makes it difficult for State Parties to the Convention to determine the extent of their treaty relations with the reserving State.

The Government of Ireland hereby formally makes objection to the reservation by the Islamic Republic of Iran."De Regering van Noorwegen heeft op 5 september 1995 naar aanleiding van het door Iran bij de bekrachtiging van het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehoud het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:“A reservation by which a State Party limits its responsibilities under the Convention by invoking general principles of internal law may create doubts about the commitment of the reserving State party to the object and purpose of the Convention. Furthermore, under well-established international treaty law, a State party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty. It is in the common interest of States that a treaty is respected by all parties as to its object and purpose. Norway maintains that the Iranian reservation, due to its unlimited scope and undefined character, is inadmissible under international law. For these reasons, the Government of Norway objects to the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The Government of Norway does not consider this objection to preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of Norway and the Islamic Republic of Iran."De Regering van Oostenrijk heeft op 6 september 1995 naar aanleiding van het door Iran bij de bekrachtiging van het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehoud het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:“Under article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties – which is reflected in article 51 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child – a reservation, in order to be admissible under international law, has to be compatible with object and purpose of the Treaty concerned. A reservation is incompatible with object and purpose of a treaty if it intends to derogate provisions the implementation of which is essential to fulfilling its object and purpose.

The Government of Austria has examined the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Given the general character of this reservation a final assessment as to its admissibility under international law cannot be made without further clarification.

Until the scope of the legal effects of this reservation is sufficiently specified by the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Republic of Austria considers this reservation as not affecting any provision the implementation of which is essential to fulfilling the object and purpose of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Austria, however, objects to the admissibility of the reservation in question if the application of this reservation negatively affects the compliance by the Islamic Republic of Iran with its obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child essential for the fulfilment of its object and purpose.

Austria could not consider the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran as admissible under the regime of Article 51 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and Article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the law of treaties unless Iran, by providing additional information or through subsequent practice ensures that the reservation is compatible with the provisions essential for the implementation of the object and purpose of the Convention on the Rights of the Child."De Regering van Italië heeft op 25 september 1995 naar aanleiding van het door Iran bij de bekrachtiging van het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehoud het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:“This reservation, owing to its unlimited scope and undefined character, is inadmissible under international law. The Government of the Italian Republic, therefore, objects to the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention as between the Islamic Republic of Iran and (the) Italian Republic."De Regering van Denemarken heeft op 16 oktober 1995 naar aanleiding van het door Djibouti, Iran, Pakistan en Syrië bij de bekrachtiging van het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehouden het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:“The Government of Denmark has examined the reservations made by Djibouti, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan and the Syrian Arab Republic upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Because of their unlimited scope and undefined character these reservations are incompatible with the object and purpose of the convention and accordingly inadmissible and without effect under international law. Therefore, the Government of Denmark objects to these reservations. The convention remains in force in its entirety between Djibouti, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, the Syrian Arab Republic respectively and Denmark.

It is the opinion of the Government of Denmark that no time limit applies to objections against reservations, which are inadmissible under international law.

The Government of Denmark recommends the governments of Djibouti, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan and the Syrian Arab Republic to reconsider their reservations to the Convention on the Rights of the Child."

2 Onder het volgende voorbehoud:

“[The State of Qatar] enter(s) a ... general reservation by the State of Qatar in respect of any provisions that conflict with the provisions of the Islamic Sharia." (vertaling).De Regering van Portugal heeft op 11 januari 1996 naar aanleiding van het door Qatar bij de bekrachtiging van het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehoud het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:

“The Government of Portugal has examined the contents of the reservation made by Qatar to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, according to which the State of Qatar enters a general reservation in respect of any provisions that conflict with the provisions of the Islamic.

In view of the Government of Portugal, a reservation by which a state limits its responsibilities under the Convention in a broad and vague manner, and by invoking general principles of International Law may create doubts on the commitment of the reserving state to the object and purpose of the Convention, and contribute to undermining the basis of International Law. It is the common interest of states that treaties to which they have freely chosen to become parties are respected, as to the object and purpose, by all parties. The Government of Portugal therefore objects to this reservation.

This objection does not constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between Portugal and Qatar."De Regering van het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden heeft op 11 juni 1996 naar aanleiding van de door Qatar bij de bekrachtiging van het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehoud het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:“The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers, with regard to the reservation made by Qatar relating to the Convention on the Rights of the child, that such reservation, which seek to limit the responsibilities of the reserving State under the Convention by invoking general principles of national law, may raise doubts as to the commitment of this State to the object and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contibute to undermining the basis of international treaty law. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties should be respected, as to object and purpose, by all parties. The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to this reservation.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Qatar."

3 Onder de volgende voorbehouden:

“The Republic of Turkey reserves the right to interpret and to apply the provisions of Articles 17, 29 and 30 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in conformity with the work and spirit of the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey and of the Treaty of Lausanne of 24 July 1923."De Regering van het Koninkrijk der Nederlandenheeft op 14 juni 1996 naar aanleiding van de door Turkije bij de bekrachtiging van het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehoud het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:“The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers, with regard to the reservation made by the Republic of Turkey relating to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, that such reservations, which seek to limit the responsibilities of the reserving State under the Convention by invoking national law, may raise doubts as to the commitment of this State to the object and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties should be respected, as to object and purpose, by all parties. The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to this reservation.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Republic of Turkey."

4 Onder de volgende verklaring:

“The Convention on the Rights of the Child being a point of departure to guarantee child rights; taking into consideration the progressive character of the implementation of certain social, economic and cultural rights; as recognized in article 4 of the convention, the Government of the Kingdom of Swaziland would undertake the implementation of the right to free primary education to the maximum extent of available resources and expects to obtain the co-operation of the international Community for its full satisfaction as soon as possible." (vertaling)>

5 Onder de volgende verklaring en voorbehouden:

“Declaration concerning Article 1:

According to the legislation of the Principality of Liechtenstein children come of age with 20 years. However, the Liechtenstein law provides for the possibility to prolong or to shorten the duration of minority.

Reservation concerning Article 7:

The Principality of Liechtenstein reserves the right to apply the Liechtenstein legislation according to which Liechtenstein nationality is granted under certain conditions.

Reservation concerning Article 10:

The Principality of Liechtenstein reserves the right to apply the Liechtenstein legislation according to which family reunification for certain categories of foreigners is not guaranteed."

6 Onder de volgende verklaringen:

“A. The Principality of Andorra deplores the fact that the Convention on the Rights of the Child does not prohibit the use of children in armed conflicts. It also disagrees with the provisions of article 38, paragraphs 2 and 3, concerning the participation and recruitment of children from the age of 15.

B. The Principality of Andorra will apply the provisions of articles 7 and 8 of the Convention without prejudice to the provisions of part II, article 7 of the Constitution of the Principality of Andorra, concerning Andorran nationality.

Article 7 of the Constitution of the Principality of Andorra provides that:

A Llei Oualificada shall determine the rules pertaining to the acquisition and loss of nationality and the legal consequences thereof. Acquisition or retention of a nationality other than Andorran nationality shall result in the loss of the latter in accordance with the conditions and limits established by law."(vertaling)

1 Onder het volgende voorbehoud:

“The Government of the Republic of Botswana enters a reservation with regard to the provisions of Article 1 of the Convention and does not consider itself bound by the same in so far as such may conflict with the Laws and Statutes of Botswana."De Regering van het Koninkrijk der Nederlandenheeft op 14 juni 1996 naar aanleiding van de door Botswana bij de toetreding tot het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehouden het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:

“The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers, with regard to the reservation made by Botswana relating to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, that such reservations, which seek to limit the responsibilities of the reserving State under the Convention by invoking general principles of national law, may raise doubts as to the commitment of this State to the object and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties should be respected, as to object and purpose, by all parties. The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to this reservation.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Botswana."

2 Onder de volgende voorbehouden:

“The Government of Malaysia accepts the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child but expresses reservations with respect to articles 1, 2, 7, 13, 14, 15, 22, 28, 37, 40, paras. 3 and 4, 44 and 45 of the Convention and declares that the said provisions shall be applicable only if they are in conformity with the Constitution, national laws and national policies of the Government of Malaysia."De Regering van Portugal heeft op 4 december 1995 naar aanleiding van de door Maleisië bij de bekrachtiging van het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehouden het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:

“The Government of Portugal has examined the contents of the reservation made by Malaysia, according to which `the Government of Malaysia accepts the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child with respect to articles 1, 2, 7, 13, 14, 15, 22, 28, 37, 40, paras. 3 and 4, 44. and 45 of the Convention and declares that the said provisions shall be applicable only if they are in conformity with the constitution, national laws and national policies of the Government of Malaysia'. A reservation by which a state limits its responsibilities under the Convention in a broad and vague manner and by invoking its internal law and national policies may raise doubts as to the commitment of that state to the objectives and purposes of the Convention, and contribute to undermining the basis of international law. It is in the common interest of states that treaties to which they have freely chosen to become parties are respected, as to their objectives and purposes, by all parties.

The Government of Portugal, therefore objects to this reservation. This objection shall not constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between Portugal and Malaysia."De Regering van Duitsland heeft op 20 maart 1996 naar aanleiding van de door Maleisië bij de bekrachtiging van het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehouden het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:“The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has examined the contents of the reservation of the Government of Malaysia contained in the instrument of ratification of the Convention of the Rights of the Child. According to the said reservation the Government of Malaysia enters a reservation in respect of all central provisions of the Convention that conflict with provisions of national laws and national policies of the Government of Malaysia. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany considers that such a reservation, which seeks to limit the responsibilities of Malaysia under the Convention by invoking practically all principles of national law and national policy, may raise doubts as to the commitment of Malaysia to the object and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contributes to undermining the basis of international treaty law. It is the common interest of states that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties should be respected, as to object and purpose, by all parties, the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany therefore objects to the said reservation. This objection does not constitute an obstacle to the entry into force of the Convention between the Federal Pepublic of Germany and Malaysia." (vertaling)De Regering van het Koninkrijk der Nederlandenheeft op 25 juni 1996 naar aanleiding van de door Maleisië bij de bekrachtiging van het Verdrag gemaakte voorbehouden het volgende bezwaar gemaakt:“The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers, with regard to the reservations made by Malaysia relating to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, that such reservations, which seek to limit the responsibilities of the reserving State under the central provisions of the Convention by invoking the Constitution, national laws and national policies, raise serious doubts as to the commitment of this State to the object and purpose of the Convention and, moreover, contribute to undermining the basis of international treaty law. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties should be respected,as to object and purpose, by all parties. The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to these reservations.

This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Malaysia."

3 Onder de volgende verklaringen en voorbehouden:

“1. The Republic of Singapore considers that a child's rights as defined in the Convention, in particular the rights defined in articles 12 to 17, shall in accordance with articles 3 and 5 be exercised with respect for the authority of parents, schools and other persons who are entrusted with the care of the child and in the best interests of the child and in accordance with the customs, values and religions of Singapore's multi-racial and multi-religious society regarding the place of the child within and outside the family.

2. The Republic of Singapore considers that articles 19 and 37 of the Convention do not prohibit;

a) the application of any prevailing measures prescribed by law for maintaining law and order in the Republic of Singapore;

b) measures and restrictions which are prescribed by law and which are necessary in the interests of national security, public safety, public order, the protection of public health or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others; or

c) the judicious application of corporal punishment in the best interests of the child.

3. The Constitution and the laws of the Republic of Singapore provide adequate protection and fundamental rights and liberties in the best interests of the child. The accession to the Convention by the Republic of Singapore does not imply the acceptance of obligations going beyond the limits prescribed by the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore nor the acceptance of any obligation to introduce any right beyond those prescribed under the Constitution.

4. Singapore is geographically one of the smallest independent countries in the world and one of the most densely populated. The Republic of Singapore accordingly reserves the right to apply such legislation and conditions concerning the entry into, stay in and departure from the Republic of Singapore of those who do not or who no longer have the right under the laws of the Republic of Singapore, to enter and remain in the Republic of Singapore, and to the acquisition and possession of citizenship, as it may deem necessary from time to time and in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Singapore.

5. The employment legislation of the Republic of Singapore prohibits the employment of children below 12 years old and gives special protection to working children between the ages of 12 years and below the age of 16 years. The Republic of Singapore reserves the right to apply article 32 subject to such employment legislation.

6. With respect to article 28.1(a), the Republic of Singapore;

a) does not consider itself bound by the requirement to make primary education compulsory because such a measure is unnecessary in our social context where in practice virtually all children attend primary school; and

b) reserves the right to provide primary education free only to children who are citizens of Singapore."

4 Onder de volgende voorbehouden:

“The instrument of ratification by the Government of the Republic of Kiribati contains reservations in respect of, article 24 paragraph (b, c, d, e & f), article 26 and article 28 paragraph (h, c & d), in accordance with Article 51 paragraph 1 of the Convention."

En de volgende verklaring:

“The Republic of Kiribati considers that a child's rights as defined in the Convention, in particular the rights defined in Articles 12–16 shall be exercised with respect for parental authority, in accordance with the 1-Kiribati customs and traditions regarding the place of the child within and outside the family".

5 Onder de volgende voorbehouden:

“The Government of His Majesty the Sultan and Yang Di-Pertuan of Brunei Darussalam expresses its reservations on the provisions of the said Convention which may be contrary to the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and to the beliefs and principles of Islam, the State religion, and without prejudice to the generality of the said reservations, in particular expresses its reservations on Articles 14, 20 and 21 of the Convention."

6 Onder het volgende voorbehoud:

“... entering reservations with respect to all such articles as are in conflict with the provisions of Islamic law."(vertaling)

1 “The Government of Argentina rejects the extension of the application of the `Convention on the Rights of the Child', done in New York on 20 November 1989 to the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, effected by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on 7 September 1994, and reaffirms its sovereignty over those islands, which are an integral part of its territory." (vertaling)Op 16 januari 1996 heeft de Regering van het Verenigd Koninkrijk van Groot-Brittannië en Noord-Ierland naar aanleiding van het door Argentinië gemaakte bezwaar het volgende verklaard:

“The Government of the United Kingdom has no doubt about the sovereignty of the United Kingdom over the Falkland Islands and over South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and its consequential right to extend the said Convention to these Territories. The United Kingdom Government rejects as unfounded the claims by the Government of Argentina and is unable to regard the Argentinian objection as having any legal effect."

1 In Trb. 1995, 92 staat ten onrechte „december" vermeld.

1 De Arabische, de Chinese, de Russische en de Spaanse tekst zijn niet afgedrukt.