Convención sobre los Humedales de Importancia Internacional, especialmente como Hábitat de Aves Acuáticas

Date and location: 2 de Febrero de 1971  -
Ramsar, Irán
Entrada en vigor El 21 de diciembre de 1975, de conformidad con el Artículo 10
Depositario UNESCO
Registración a la ONU El 17 de febrero de 1976, n° 14583
Tema: Natural Sciences
Tipo de instrumento: Other

Texto

 

Solo en inglés o en francés.

 

Declaraciones y Reservas

Bulgaria

"The Government of the People's Republic of Bulgaria considers it necessary to state that Article 9 of the Convention restricts the possibility of some States to become parties to it and contradicts the universally recognized principle of the sovereign equality of States."

(Translation)

(See letter LA/Depositary/1975/5 of 21 November 1975) 

Denmark

"...in spite of the great importance attached by the Danish Government to the Vadehavet (a marshy maritime plain situation in the southern part of the west coast of Jutland) as a wetland, it has decided not to include the Vadehavet for the time being in the above-mentioned List. 

This decision has been taken on account of the negotiations under way between the Governments of the Kingdom of Denmark and the Federal Republic of Germany concerning the construction of an advanced dyke in that area, and also on account of the trilateraI negotiations between the Governments of Denmark, the Netherlands and the Federal Republic of Germany concerning a special agreement for the protection of the Vadehavet. The Danish Government is convinced, however, that the Vadehavet, or certain parts thereof, should be included in the aforesaid List once the above-mentioned negotiations have been concluded." 

(Translation)

(See letter LA/Depositary /1977/27 of 30 December 1977.)

Germany (Federal Republic of)

"The Federal Republic of Germany in becoming a party to the Convention interprets and understands the provisions of this Convention as being of a nature not to prevent measures to be taken to protect the population of the regions concerned against floods nor to interfere with well-established rights the inhabitants of these regions may have." 

(See letter LA/Depositary/1976/13 of 21 June 1976)

Hungary

"Article 9 of the Convention, which restricts the freedom of certain countries to become Parties to the Convention, contradicts the generally accepted principle of the sovereignty of States." 

(See letter LA/Depositary/1979/12 of 13 July 1979)

Mauritius

On 14 January 2020, the Director-General received from the Government of Mauritius the following communication: 

"The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Regional Integration and International Trade of the Republic of Mauritius presents its compliments to the Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and has the honour to register its strong objection against the extension by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the so-called "British Indian Ocean Territory", of the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat, Ramsar, 2 February 1971 in respect of which the Director-General is the depositary. 

The Government of the Republic of Mauritius considers that by extending the Convention to the so-called “British Indian Ocean Territory” on 8 September 1998, the United Kingdom purported to exercise sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago - a claim which is untenable under international law. 

The Government of the Republic of Mauritius wishes to reiterate in emphatic terms that it does not recognize the so-called “British Indian Ocean Territory”. The fact that the Chagos Archipelago is, and has always been, part of the territory of the Republic of Mauritius, and that the United Kingdom has never had sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago, has been authoritatively established by the International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion of 25 February 2019, on the Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965. 

In this authoritative legal determination, the Court declared that the decolonization of the Republic of Mauritius had not been lawfully completed in 1968, since the Chagos Archipelago had been unlawfully detached in 1965, in violation of the right of self-determination of peoples and the Charter of the United Nations, as applied and interpreted in accordance with UN General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, resolution 2066 (XX) of 16 December 1965, resolution 2232 (XXI) of 20 December 1966 and resolution 2357 (XXII) of 19 December 1967. Accordingly, it went on to hold that the United Kingdom's ongoing administration of the Chagos Archipelago, as the so-called "British Indian Ocean Territory", was an internationally wrongful act, of a continuing nature, that engaged the State responsibility of the United Kingdom. It determined that the United Kingdom is under a legal obligation to terminate its unlawful colonial administration "as rapidly as possible". 

The Court further determined that all UN Member States have an obligation to cooperate with the United Nations in facilitating the completion of the decolonization of the Republic of Mauritius as rapidly as possible, including an obligation not to support the continuing wrongful conduct of the United Kingdom in maintaining its colonial administration in the Chagos Archipelago. 

On 22 May 2019, the General Assembly, by an overwhelming majority of 116 votes to 6, adopted resolution 73/295. By this resolution, it endorsed the Court's Advisory Opinion, affirmed that the Chagos Archipelago forms an integral part of the territory of the Republic of Mauritius, and demanded that the United Kingdom terminate its unlawful colonial administration within a maximum of six months, that is, by no later than 22 November 2019. That deadline has now expired. 

Moreover, the General Assembly in its resolution called upon Member States to "cooperate with the United Nations to ensure the completion of the decolonization of Mauritius as rapidly as possible" and to refrain from conduct that might impede or delay the completion of decolonization. It further called upon the United Nations and all its specialized agencies to recognize that the Chagos Archipelago forms an integral part of the territory of the Republic of Mauritius, to support the decolonization of the Republic of Mauritius as rapidly as possible, and to refrain from impeding that process by recognizing the so-called "British Indian Ocean Territory". Lastly, the resolution also called upon “all other international, regional and intergovernmental organizations, including those established by treaty,” to recognize that the Chagos Archipelago forms an integral part of the territory of the Republic of Mauritius, to support its speedy decolonization, and to "refrain from impeding that process" by recognizing the so-called "British Indian Ocean Territory". 

The Republic of Mauritius has, over the years, consistently asserted, and hereby reasserts, its full sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago. The Government of the Republic of Mauritius therefore unequivocally protests against the United Kingdom's extension of the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat to the so-called "British Indian Ocean Territory" and against the purported exercise by the United Kingdom of any sovereignty, rights or jurisdiction within the territory of the Republic of Mauritius. 

For the above stated reasons, which arise from established principles of international law as authoritatively interpreted and applied by the International Court of Justice and endorsed by the UN General Assembly, the Government of the Republic of Mauritius does not recognize the United Kingdom's extension of the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat to the so-called "British Indian Ocean Territory", reserves all its rights in this regard, and calls upon all Contracting Parties to the Convention to reject the United Kingdom's extension of the Convention to the so-called "British lndian Ocean Territory". 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Regional Integration and International Trade of the Republic of Mauritius kindly requests that the present objection be duly recorded, circulated and registered with the Secretariat of the United Nations pursuant to Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations. 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Regional Integration and International Trade of the Republic of Mauritius avails itself of his opportunity to renew to the Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization the assurances of its highest consideration."

[Original: English] 

Syrian Arab Republic

"Accession to this Convention shall not under any circumstances be taken to mean that Syria recognizes Israel or establishes with it any relations that may derive from the provisions of this Convention".

(See letter LA/Depositary/1998/05)

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics [at the time of signature]

"The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics deems it necessary to declare that the provisions of Article 9 of the Convention. restricting the possibility of some countries becoming Parties to it, contradict the universally recognized principle of the sovereign equality of States."

(See letter CL/2365 of 28 May 1974.) 

ln its instrument of ratification, the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics indicated that it ratified the Convention while maintaining that declaration.

(Translation)

(See letter LA/Depositary/1976/18 of 31 December 1976.)

Notes

1. Notification of the Netherlands (16 January 1986, Letter LA/DEP/1986/5):

The island of Aruba, which is at present still part of the Netherlands Antilles, will obtain internal autonomy as a country within the Kingdom of Netherlands as of 1 January 1986. Consequently the Kingdom will from then on no longer consist of two countries, namely the Netherlands (The Kingdom in Europe) and the Netherlands Antilles (situated in the Caribbean region), but will consist of three countries, namely the said two countries and the country of Aruba. As the changes being made on 1 January 1986 concern a shift only in the internal constitutional relations within the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and as the Kingdom as such will remain the subject under international law with treaties are concluded, the said changes will have no consequences in international law regarding to treaties concluded by the Kingdom which already apply to the Netherlands Antilles, including Aruba. These treaties will remain in force for Aruba in its capacity of country within the Kingdom. Therefore these treaties will as of 1 January 1986, as concerns the Kingdom of the Netherlands, apply to the Netherlands Antilles (without Aruba) and Aruba. Consequently the treaties referred to in the annex, to which the Kingdom of the Netherlands is a party and which apply to the Netherlands Antilles, will as of 1 January 1986 as concerns the Kingdom of the of the Netherlands apply to the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba. 

2. By a communication dated 26 July 1976, the Government of Argentina, with regard to the United Kingdom's declaration, made it known that:

The Government of Argentina contested the mention, in the instrument deposited by the United Kingdom, of the Malouines Islands, the South Georgia Islands and the South Sandwich Islands under the erroneous denomination of "Falkland Islands and dependencies" and their being presented as part of the overseas territories which the United Kingdom administrates, and it declared that this mention in no way affected the Argentine Government's rights over these islands, which are an integral part of its territory and which are under forceful occupation by a foreign power, a situation concerning which the General Assembly of the United Nations, by Resolutions 2065(XX) and 3160(XXVIII) noted a conflict of sovereignty over the archipelago and asked that negotiations be opened immediately between the Argentine Republic and the occupying State in order to find a definitive solution to that conflict.

(See letter LA/Depositary/1976/25 of 18 November 1976.) 

3. By a communication dated 6 August 1979, the Government of the United Kingdom made it known that:

"The United Kingdom's interpretation of paragraph 2 of Article 10 is that the Convention will come into force for Hong Kong from 10 September 1979." 

(See letter LA/States Parties/1979/19 of 12 October 1979.)

Recursos adicionales

Otras Traducciones: