4. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights New York, 16 December 1966

Declarations recognizing the competence of the Human Rights Committee under article 41 36

(Unless otherwise indicated, the declarations were made

upon ratification, accession or succession.)

Algeria

[The Government of the Democratic People's Republic of Algeria] recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee referred to in article 28 of the Covenant to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant.

Argentina

The instrument contains a declaration under article 41 of the Covenant by which the Government of Argentina recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee established by virtue of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Australia

28 January 1993

"The Government of Australia declares that it recognizes, for and on behalf of Australia, the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the aforesaid Convention."

Austria

10 September 1978

[The Government of the Republic of Austria] declares under article 41 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that Austria recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Belarus

30 September 1992

The Republic of Belarus declares that it recognizes the competence of the Committee on Human Rights in accordance with article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant.

Belgium

5 March 1987

The Kingdom of Belgium declares that it recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee under article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

18 June 1987

The Kingdom of Belgium declares, under article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, that it recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee established under article 28 of the Covenant to receive and consider communications submitted by another State Party, provided that such State Party has, not less than twelve months prior to the submission by it of a communication relating to Belgium, made a declaration under article 41 recognizing the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications relating to itself.

Bosnia and Herzegovina

"The Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina in accordance with article 41 of the said Covenant, recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications submitted by another State Party to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant."

Bulgaria

12 May 1993

"The Republic of Bulgaria declares that it recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party which has made a declaration recognizing in regard to itself the competence of the Committee claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant."

Canada

29 October 1979

"The Government of Canada declares, under article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, that it recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee referred to in article 28 of the said Covenant to receive and consider communications submitted by another State Party, provided that such State Party has, not less than twelve months prior to the submission by it of a communication relating to Canada, made a declaration under article 41 recognizing the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications relating to itself."

Chile

7 September 1990

As from the date of this instrument, the Government of Chile recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee established under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in accordance with article 41 thereof, with regard to all actions which may have been initiated since 11  March 1990.

Congo

6 July 1989

Pursuant to article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Congolese Government recognizes, with effect from today's date, the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State party is not fulfilling its obligations under the above-mentioned Covenant.

Croatia

12 October 1995

The Government of the Republic of Croatia declares under article 41 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that the Republic of Croatia recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Czech Republic 6

Denmark 35

19 April 1983

"[The Government of Denmark] recognizes, in accordance with article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, opened for signature in New York on December 19, 1966, the competence of the Committee referred to in article 41 to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant."

Ecuador

6 August 1984

The Government of Ecuador recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the aforementioned Covenant, as provided for in paragraph 1 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g) and (h) of that article.

This recognition of competence is effective for an indefinite period and is subject to the provisions of article 41, paragraph 2, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Finland

"Finland declares, under article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, that it recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee referred to in article 28 of the said Covenant, to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under this Covenant."

Gambia

9 June 1988

"The Government of the Gambia hereby declares that the Gambia recognises the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the present Covenant."

Germany 8

27 December 2001

The Federal Republic of Germany now recognizes for an unlimited period the competence of the Human Rights Committee under Article 41(1) of the Covenant to receive and consider communications to the effect that at State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant.

Ghana

7 September 2000

"The Government of the Republic of Ghana recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to consider complaints brought by or against the Republic in respect of another State Party which has made a Declaration recognising the competence of the Committee at least twelve months before Ghana becomes officially registered as Party to the Covenant.

[The Government of the Republic of Ghana] interprets Article 41 as giving the Human Rights Committee the competence to receive and consider complaints in respect of violations by the Republic of any rights set forth in the said Covenant which result from decisions, acts, commissions, developments or events occurring AFTER the date on which Ghana becomes officially regarded as party to the said Covenant and shall not apply to decisions, acts, omissions, developments or events occurring before that date."

Guyana

10 May 1993

"The Government of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana hereby declares that it recognises the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the aforementioned Covenant."

Hungary

7 September 1988

The Hungarian People's Republic [...] recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee established under article 28 of the Covenant to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant.

Iceland

22 August 1979

"The Government of Iceland [...] recognizes in accordance with article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights the competence of the Human Rights Committee referred to in article 28 of the Covenant to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant."

Ireland

"The Government of Ireland hereby declare that in accordance with article 41 they recognise the competence of the Human Rights Committee established under article 28 of the Covenant."

Italy

15 September 1978

The Italian Republic recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee, elected in accordance with article 28 of the Covenant, to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State party claims that another State party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant.

Liechtenstein

"The Principality of Liechtenstein declares under article 41 of the Covenant to recognize the competence of the Human Rights Committee, to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State party claims that another State party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant."

Luxembourg

18 August 1983

"The Government of Luxembourg recognizes, in accordance with article 41, the competence of the Human Rights Committee referred to in article 28 of the Covenant to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State party claims that another State party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant."

Malta

"The Government of Malta declares that under article 41 of this Covenant it recognises the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications submitted by another State Party, provided that such other State Party has, not less than twelve months prior to the submission by it of a communication relating to Malta, made a declaration under article 41 recognising the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications relating to itself."

Netherlands

11 December 1978

"The Kingdom of the Netherlands declares under article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that it recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee referred to in article 28 of the Covenant to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant."

New Zealand

28 December 1978

"The Government of New Zealand declares under article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that it recognises the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications from another State Party which has similarly declared under article 41 its recognition of the Committee's competence in respect to itself except where the declaration by such a state party was made less than twelve months prior to the submission by it of a complaint relating to New Zealand."

Norway

31 August 1972

"Norway recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee referred to in article 28 of the Covenant, to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant."

Peru

9 April 1984

Peru recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in accordance with article 41 of the said Covenant.

Philippines

"The Philippine Government, in accordance with article 41 of the said Covenant, recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee set up in the aforesaid Covenant, to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant."

Poland

25 September 1990

"The Republic of Poland recognizes, in accordance with article 41, paragraph 1, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant."

Republic of Korea

[The Government of the Republic of Korea] recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee under article 41 of the Covenant.

Russian Federation

1 October 1991

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics declares that, pursuant to article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, it recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications submitted by another State Party, in respect of situations and events occurring after the adoption of the present declaration, provided that the State Party in question has, not less than 12 months prior to the submission by it of such a communication, recognized in regard to itself the competence of the Committee, established in article 41, in so far as obligations have been assumed under the Covenant by the USSR and by the State concerned.

Senegal

5 January 1981

The Government of Senegal declares, under article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, that it recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee referred to in article 28 of the said Covenant to receive and consider communications submitted by another State Party, provided that such State Party has, not less than twelve months prior to the submission by it of a communication relating to Senegal, made a declaration under article 41 recognizing the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications relating to itself.

Slovakia 6

Slovenia

"[The] Republic of Slovenia, in accordance with article 41 of the said Covenant, recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications submitted by another State Party to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant."

South Africa

"The Republic of South Africa declares that it recognises, for the purposes of article 41 of the Covenant, the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under present the Covenant."

Spain 40

11 March 1998

The Government of Spain declares that, under the provisions of article 41 of the [Covenant], it recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant.

Sri Lanka

"The Government of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka declares under article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that it recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant, from another State Party which has similarly declared under article 41 its recognition of the Committee's competence in respect to itself."

Sweden

26 November 1971

"Sweden recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee referred to in article 28 of the Covenant to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant."

Switzerland 41

25 April 1997

The Swiss Government declares, pursuant to article 41 (1) of the [said Covenant], that it shall recognize for a further period of five years, as from 18 September 1997, the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the present Covenant.

Tunisia

24 June 1993

The Government of the Republic of Tunisia declares that it recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee established under article 28 of the [said Covenant] ..., to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that the Republic of Tunisia is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant.

The State Party submitting such communications to the Committee must have made a declaration recognizing in regard to itself the competence of the Committee under article 41 of the [said Covenant].

Ukraine

28 July 1992

In accordance with article 41 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Ukraine recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that any State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant.

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

"The Government of the United Kingdom declare under article 41 of this Covenant that it recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications submitted by another State Party, provided that such other State Party has, not less than twelve months prior to the submission by it of a communication relating to the United Kingdom made a declaration under article 41 recognizing the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications relating to itself."

United States of America

"The United States declares that it accepts the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications under article 41 in which a State Party claims that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant.

Zimbabwe

20 August 1991 *

"The Government of the Republic of Zimbabwe recognizes with effect from today's date, the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State Party claims that another state party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant [provided that such State Party has, not less than twelve months prior to the submission by it of a communication relating to Zimbabwe, made a declaration under article 41 recognizing the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications relating to itself]." ( * The text between brackets was received at the Secretariat on 27 January 1993.)"

Notifications under Article 4 (3) of the Covenant (Derogations)

(Taking into account the important number of these declarations, and in order not to increase excessively the number of pages of the present publication, the text of the notifications has in some cases, exceptionally, been abridged. Unless otherwise indicated, when the notification concerns an extension, the said extension affects those articles of the Covenant originally derogated from, and was decided for the same reasons. The date on the right hand, above the notification, is the date of receipt.)

Algeria

19 June 1991

In view of public disturbances and the threat of deterioration of the situation [...] a state of siege has been proclaimed, beginning at midnight in the night of 4/5 June 1991, for a period of four months throughout Algerian territory.

The Government of Algeria subsequently specified that these disturbances had been fomented with a view of preventing the general elections to be held on 27 June 1991 and to challenge the ongoing democratic process; and that in view of the insurrectional situation which threatened the stability of the institutions, the security of the people and their property, and the normal operation of the public services, it had been necessary to derogate from the provisions of articles 9 (3), 12 (1), 17, 19 (2) and 21 of the Covenant.

The said state of siege was terminated throughout Algeria on 29 September 1991.

14 February 1992

(Dated 13 February 1992)

In view of the serious threats to public order and the safety of individuals over the past few weeks, the growth of such threats during the month of February 1992 and the dangers of aggravation of the situation, the President of the High State Council, [...], has issued Presidential decree No. 92-44 of 9 February 1992, decreeing a state of emergency, throughout the national territory, with effect from 9 February 1992 at 2000 hours for a duration of twelve months, in accordance with articles 67, 74 and 76 of the Algerian Constitution. [The Government of Algeria has specified that the articles of the Covenant which are derogated from are articles 9(3), 12, 17 and 21].

The establishment of the state of emergency, which is aimed essentially at restoring public order, protecting the safety of individuals and public services, does not interfere with the democratic process inasmuch as the exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms continues to be guarantied.

The state of emergency may, however, be lifted ahead of schedule, once the situation which prompted its establishment has been resolved and normal conditions of life in the nation have been restored.

Argentina

7 June 1989

(Dated 7 June 1989)

Proclamation of the state of siege throughout the national territory for a period of 30 days in response to events [attacks and looting of retail shops, vandalism, use of firearms] whose seriousness jeopardizes the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms by the entire community. (Derogation from articles 9 and 21.)

12 July 1989

(Dated 11 July 1989)

Termination of the state of siege as from 27 June 1989 throughout the national territory.

26 December 2001

(Dated 21 December 2001)

By decree No. 1678/2001 of 19 December 2001, proclamation of a State of siege for 30 days in the territory of Argentina.

By decree No. 1689/2001 of 21 December 2001, suspension of the State of seige declared by Decree No. 1678/2001.

(Dated 23 December 2001)

By Decrees Nos. 16, 18 and 20/2001 of 21 December 2001, declaration of a 10-day siege in the provinces of Buenos Aires, Entre Rios and San Juan.

4 January 2002

(Dated 4 January 2002)

Cessation, as from 31 December 2001, of martial law that had been imposed in the provinces of Buenos Aires, Entre Rios and San Juan.

21 January 2002

(Dated 18 January 2002)

Communication concerning the state of siege declared by Decree No. 1678/2001 and the lifting of the state of siege by Decreee No. 1689/2001; and the state of siege declared by Decrees Nos. 16/2002, 18/2001 and 20/2001 and the cessation of the state of siege. [For the text of the communication, see depositary notification C.N.179.2002.TREATIES-3 of 27 February 2002.]

Azerbaijan

16 April 1993

Proclamation of the state of emergency for a period of 60 days as from 6 a.m. on 3 April 1993 until 6 a.m. on 3 June 1993 in the territory of the Azerbaijani Republic. The Government of the Azerbaijani Republic declared that the measures were taken as a result of the escalating aggression by the armed forces of Armenia threatening the very existence of the Azerbaijani State.

(Derogation from articles 9, 12, 19, 21 and 22.)

Extension of the State of emergency for a period of 60 days as from 2 August 1993.

27 September 1993

Lifting of the state of emergency proclaimed on 2 April 1993 as from 22 September 1993.

7 October 1994

(Dated 5 October 1994)

Proclamation of a 60 day state of emergency in Baku by Decree of the President of 4 October 1994 with effect from 20 hours on 4 October 1994 owing to the fact that in September 1994, terrorist groups wounded two prominent Azerbaijani politicians followed by a series of terrorist acts in densely populated districts of the city which caused loss of life. These acts, designed to destabilize the social and political situation in the country were preliminary to the subsequent direct attempt to overthrow by force of arms the constitutional order of the Azerbaijani Republic and the country's democratically elected leader.

The Government of Azerbaijan specifed that the rights set forth in articles 9, 12, 19, 21 and 22 of the Covenant were derogated from.

27 October 1994

(Dated 21 October 1994)

Declaration of a state of emergency in the city of Gyanja for a period of 60 days as from 11 October 1994 by Decree of the President of the Azerbaijani Republic dated 10 October 1994 following an attempted coup d'état in Gyanja since on 4 October 1994, control of the organs of State was seized by criminal groups and acts of violence were perpetrated against the civilian population. This action was the latest in a series of terrorist acts designed to destabilize the situation in Baku. A number of the criminals involved in the insurrection are continuing their activities directed against the state system of Azerbaijan and are endeavouring to disrupt public order in the city of Gyanja.

It was specified that the rights set forth in articles 9, 12, 19, 21 and 22 of the Covenant were derogated from.

15 December 1994

(Dated 13 December 1994)

Extension of the state of emergency in Baku, as from 2000 hours on 4 December 1994 in view of the incomplete elimination of the causes that served as the basis for its imposition.

20 December 1994

(Dated 17 December 1994)

Extension of the state of emergency in the town of Gyandzha for a period of 60 days as from 2400 hours on 11 December 1994 in view of the incomplete elimination of the causes that served as the basis for its imposition.

23 February 1995

(Dated 23 February 1995)

First notification:

By Decree by the President of the Republic dated 2 February 1995, extension of the state of emergency in Baku, for a period of 60 days, as from 2300 hours on 2 February 1995.

Second notification:

By Decree by the President of the Republic dated 2 February 1995 on the extension of the state of emergency in the town of Gyandzha, for a period of 60 days, as from 2400 hours on 9 February 1995.

The extension of the state of emergency in Baku and Gyandzha has been declared, as indicated by the Government of Azerbaijan, bearing in mind the need to maintain social order, to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens and to restore legality and law and order and in view of the incomplete elimination of the causes that served as the basis for the imposition in October 1994 of the state of emergency in the cities of Baku and Gyandzha.

It is recalled that the provisions from which it has been derogated are articles 9, 12, 19, 21 and 22 of the Covenant.

17 April 1995

(Dated 8 April 1995)

Extension of the state of emergency in Baku for a period of 60 days, by Decree of the President of the Republic dated 2 April 1995 as from 2000 hours on 3 April 1995. The extension of the state of emergency in Baku has been declared, as indicated by the Government of Azerbaijan, due to an attempted coup d'état which took place on 13-17 March 1995 in the city of Baku and to the fact that notwithstanding the suppression of the rebellion, criminal elements in the city of Baku are continuing activities inconsistent with the will of the people and endeavouring to disrupt public order. The Government of Azerbaijan also confirmed that the extension was decided in order to protect the constitutional order of the country, to maintain public order in the city of Baku, to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens and to restore legality and law and order.

21 April 1995

(Dated 17 April 1995)

Termination, as from 11 April 1995, on the basis of a decision of the Milli Mejlis (Parliament) of the Azerbaijani Republic dated 11 April 1995, of the State of emergency in the city of Gyanja declared on 11 October 1994.

Bolivia

1 October 1985

By Supreme Decree No. 21069, the Government of Bolivia declared a temporary state of siege throughout the country, with effect from 18 September 1985.

The notification specifies that this measure was adopted to ensure the maintenance of the process of economic recovery initiated by the Government so as to save Bolivia from the scourge of hyperinflation and to counter the social unrest which sought to supplant the legitimate authorities by establishing itself as an authority which publicly proclaimed the repudiation of the law and called for subversion, and to counter the occupation of State facilities and the interruption of public services. The Government of Bolivia has specified that the provisions of the Covenant from which it is derogated from concern articles 9, 12 and 21.

9 January 1986

(Dated 6 January 1986)

... The guarantees and rights of citizens had been fully restored throughout the national territory, with effect from 19 December 1985 and, accordingly, the provisions of the Covenant were again being implemented in accordance with the stipulations of its relevant articles.

29 August 1986

(Dated 28 August 1986)

The notification indicates that the state of emergency was proclaimed because of serious political and social disturbances, inter alia , a general strike in Potosi and Druro which paralyzed illegally those cities; the hyperinflationary crisis suffered by the country; the need for rehabilitation of the Bolivian mining structures; the subversive activities of the extreme left; the desperate reaction of the drug trafficking mafia in response to the government successful campaign of eradication; and in general plans aiming to overthrow the Constitutional Government.

28 November 1986

(Dated 28 November 1986)

Notification, identical in essence, mutatis mutandis , as that of 9 January 1986. With effect from 29 November 1986.

17 November 1989

(Dated 16 November 1989)

Proclamation of a state of siege throughout the Bolivian territory. The notification indicates that this measure was necessary to restore peace which had been seriously breached owing to demands of an economic nature, but with a subversive purpose that would have put an end to the process of economic stabilization. The provisions of the Covenant from which it is derogated concern articles 9, 12 and 21 of the Covenant.

22 March 1990

(Dated 18 March 1990)

Termination of the state of emergency as from 15 February 1990.

19 April 1995

(Dated 19 April 1995)

Declaration of a state of siege throughout the nation by Supreme Decree No. 23993 on 18 April 1995 for a period of 90 days.

The reasons for the declaration of this state of siege, as indicated by the Government of Bolivia, were due to the fact that leaders, particularly from the teaching profession and from political groups having close ties to trade union leaders have organized strikes, embargoes and violence against individuals and property, in an effort to bypass existing laws and disrupt the public order and peace in the country. Moreover, assemblies of people openly disregarding the Constitution of the State and the laws have arrogated to themselves the sovereignty of the people, seeking to create bodies outside the supreme law of the national and the other laws.

The articles which were being derogated from were articles 12(3), 21(2) and 22 (2).

26 July 1995

(Dated 26 July 1995)

Extension of the state of siege, declared on 19 April 1995, by Supreme Decree No. 24701 until 15 October 1995.

16 August 1995

(Dated 10 August 1995)

Termination as from 31 July 1995 of the provisional detention of all persons so detained or confined as a result of the proclamation of martial law in Bolivia.

25 October 1995

(Dated 23 October 1995)

Termination, as from 16 October 1995, of the state of siege which had been in force throughout the nation from 18 April 1995.

Chile

7 September 1976

[Chile] has been under a state of siege for reasons of internal defence since 11 March 1976; the state of siege was legally proclaimed by Legislative Decree No. 1.369.

The proclamation was made in accordance with the constitutional provisions concerning state of siege, which have been in force since 1925, in view of the inescapable duty of the government authorities to preserve public order and the fact that there continue to exist in Chile extremist seditious groups whose aim is to overthrow the established Government.

As a consequence of the proclamation of the state of siege, the rights referred to in articles 9, 12, 13, 19 and 25 (b) of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights have been restricted in Chile.

23 September 1986

(Dated 16 September 1986)

By Decree No. 1.037, the Government of Chile declared a state of siege throughout the national territory from 8 September to 6 December 1986, for as long as circumstances warrant. The notification specifies that Chile has been subjected to a wave of terrorist aggression of alarming proportions, that an alarming number of attacks have taken the lives of a significant number of citizens and armed forces personnel, massive stockpiles of weapons were discovered in terrorists hands, and that for the first time in the history of the Republic, a terrorist attack was launched on H.E. the President of the Republic.

The notification specifies that the rights set forth in articles 9, 12, 13 and 19 of the Covenant would be derogated from.

29 October 1986

(Dated 28 October 1986)

Termination of State of siege by Decree No. 1074 of 26 September 1986 in the Eleventh Region and by Decree No. 1155 of 16 October 1986 in the 12th Region (with the exception of the Commune of Punta Arenas), in the Province of Chiloé in the Tenth Region, and in the Province of Parinacota in the First Region.

20 November 1986

(Dated 20 November 1986)

Termination of the state of siege in the Provinces of Cardenal Caro in the 6th Region, Arauco in the 8th Region and Palena in the 10th Region.

29 January 1987

(Dated 20 January 1987)

Termination of the state of siege throughout Chile as at 6 January 1987.

31 August 1988

Termination of the state of emergency and of the state of danger of disturbance of the domestic peace in Chile as from 27 August 1988, [...] thereby bringing to an end all states of ex ception in the country, which is now in a situation of full legal normality.

Colombia

18 July 1980

The Government, by Decree 2131 of 1976, declared that public order had been disturbed and that all of the national territory was in a state of siege, the requirements of the Constitution having been fulfilled, and that in the face of serious events that disturbed the public peace, it had become necessary to adopt extraordinary measures within the framework of the legal régime provided for in the National Constitution for such situations (art. 121 of the National Constitution). The events disturbing the public peace that led the President of the Republic to take that decision are a matter of public knowledge. Under the state of siege (art. 121 of the National Constitution) the Government is empowered to suspend, for the duration of the state of siege, those provisions that are incompatible with the maintenance and restoration of public order.

On many occasions the President of the Republic has informed the country of his desire to terminate the state of siege when the necessary circumstances prevail.

It should be observed that, during the state of siege in Colombia, the institutional order has remained unchanged, with the Congress and all public bodies functioning normally. Public freedoms were fully respected during the most recent elections, both the election of the President of the Republic and the election of members of elective bodies.

11 October 1982

By Decree No. 1674 of 9 June 1982, the state of siege was terminated on 20 June of 1982.

11 April 1984

(Dated 30 March 1984)

The Government of Colombia had declared a breach of the peace and a state of siege in the territory of the Departments of Caquetá, Huila, Meta and Cauca in response to the activities in those Departments of armed groups which were seeking to undermine the constitutional system by means of repeated publidisturbances.

Further to Decree No. 615, Decree Nos. 666, 667, 668, 669 and 670 had been enacted on 21 March 1984 to restrict certain freedoms and to take other measures aimed at restoring public order. (For the provisions which were derogated from, see in fine notification of 8 June 1984 hereinafter.)

8 June 1984

(Dated 7 May 1984)

The Government of Colombia indicated that it had, through Decree No. 1038 of 1 May 1984, declared a state of siege in the territory of the Republic of Colombia owing to the assassination in April of the Minister of Justice and to recent disturbances of the public order that occurred in the cities of Bogotá, Cali, Barranquilla, Medellín, Acevedo (Department of Huila), Corinto (Department of Cauca), Sucre and Jordon Bajo (Department of Santander), Giraldo (Department of Antioquia) and Miraflores (Comisaría of Guaviare).

Pursuant to the above-mentioned Decree No. 1038,the Government had issued Decrees Nos. 1039 and 1040 of 1 May 1984 and Decree No. 1042 of 2 May 1984, restricting certain freedoms and enacting other measures to restore public order. The Government of Colombia, in a subsequent communication dated 23 November 1984, indicated that the decrees affected the rights referred to in articles 12 and 21 of the Covenant.)

12 December 1984

(Dated 11 December 1984)

Termination of derogation from article 21.

13 August 1991

(Dated 9 August 1991)

Termination as of 7 July 1991 of the state of siege and of the measures adopted on 1 and 2 May 1984, which were still in force through the national territory.

21 July 1992

(Dated 16 July 1992)

By Legislative Decree No. 1155 of 10 July 1992, which was to remain in force until 16 July 1992, the Government of Colombia declared a state of emergency throughout the national territory.... The state of emergency was proclaimed in order to preserve public order by preventing the cartels responsible for the most serious assaults on public order from evading justice. The prospect of a torrent of releases on parole of persons, many of which "awaiting trial for a wide variety of terrorist activities, ... in addition to the acts perpetrated by the drug-trafficking cartels which might have taken place under the provisions of a newly promulgated Code of Penal Procedure", in disregard of the applicability of special legislation, was causing "serious disturbances of public order".

The provisions of the Pact which were derogated from are articles 12, 17, 21 and 22.

20 November 1992

(Dated 10 November 1992)

By legislative Decree No. 1793 of 8 November 1992 which was to remain in force until 6 February 1993, the Government of Colombia declared a state of emergency throughout the national territory for a period of 90 days.... The state of emergency was due to the fact that "in recent weeks, the public order situation in the country ... has grown significantly worse because of terrorist activities by gorilla organizations and organized crime ... Those criminal groups have also managed to obstruct and evade judicial action because the criminal justice is unable to use military forces as a judicial police organ to gather the necessary evidence".

The provisions of the Pact which were derogated from are articles 12, 17, 21 and 22.

29 March 1993

(Dated 5 March 1993)

In accordance with Legislative Decree No. 261, extension for a period of 90 days from 5 February 1993 until 7 May 1993 of the state of emergency in effect throughout the national territory. The extension was made necessary due to a continuation of the public order disturbances described above. The provisions of the Pact which were derogated from are articles 12, 17, 21 and 22.

27 May 1994

(Dated 6 May 1994))

By legislative Decree No. 874 of 1 May 1994 which is to remain in force until 10 May 1994, declaration of the state of emergency throughout the national territory for the following reasons:

Since November 1993, there has been a significant increase in the number of investigations carried out by the Procurator-General's Office. It has become necessary to take steps to ensure that the efforts made by the Procurator-General's Office to conclude on-going investigations are not hampered through improper situations such as obstructing an agreement, requesting the postponement of formal proceedings, etc.

The large number of cases in which prior circumstances have prevented characterisation within the stipulated time-limit constitutes an unforeseen situation which is generating social insecurity, public anxiety, a lack of trust in the administration of justice and strengthening of the criminal and guerilla warfare organizations committed to disrupting law and order and destabilizing the institutions of government.

In view of the foregoing, measures must be adopted to ensure that the difficulties that have arisen do not affect institutional stability, national security and civil harmony, a judicial emergency must be declared and consequently, transition measures must be adopted in the area of administration and penal procedure.

8 June 1994

(Dated 27 May 1994)

Termination of the state of civil unrest and extension of the applicability of the provisions relating to the judicial emergency. Pursuant to the Decree No. 874 of 1 May 1994 and in exercise of the powers conferred on the Government under article 213 of the Political Constitution, the Government enacted Legislative Decree No. 875 of 1 May 1994, "by means of which a judicial emergency has been declared and measures have been adopted with regard to penal procedure". Because of the declaration of judicial emergency, it was decided to suspend for two months, in respect of cases involving offences under the jurisdiction of regional and National Court judges, the time-limits established for obtaining release on bail.

By means of Decree No. 951 of 10 May 1994, measures were adopted to strengthen the functioning of the justice system.

The Government of Colombia has specified that the provision from which it has derogated is article 9 (3) of the Covenant.

7 November 1995

(Dated 3 November 1995)

By Decree No. 1900 of 2 November 1995, declaration of a State of internal disturbance throughout the national territory for a period of ninety (90) days. The state of internal disturbance by the National Government is justified by the fact that acts of violence attributed to criminal and terrorist organizations have occurred in difference regions of the country and are seriously and manifestly disturbing public order.

25 March 1996

(Dated 21 March 1996)

First notification:

By Legislative Decree No. 1901 of 2 November, the Government limits or restricts fundamental rights or freedoms laid down in the [said] Covenant.

Second notification:

By Decree No. 205 of 29 January 1996, the state of internal disturbance was extended for 90 calendar days, starting on 31 January 1996.

The Government of Colombia has specified that the provision from which it has derogated are articles 17 and 9 respectively of the Covenant.

7 May 1996

(Dated 21 March 1996)

Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Decree No. 0717 of 18 April 1996, the guarantee set forth in article 12 of the Covenant was to be restricted.

The measure was adopted in connection with Decree No. 1900 of 2 November 1995 whereby the state of internal disturbance was declared throughout the national territory (see notification of 7 November 1995 above).

21 June 1996

(Dated 18 June 1996)

First notification:

By Decree No. 777 of 29 April 1996, the state of internal disturbance (proclaimed by Decree No. 1900 of 2 November 1995) was extended for a further period of 90 calendar days, starting on 30 April 1996.

Second notification:

By Decree No. 900 of 22 May 1996, measures were adopted to control the activities of criminal and terrorist organizations in special public-order zones. The provisions of the Pact which were derogated from are articles 9 (1) and 12.

31 July 1996

(Dated 30 July 1996)

By Decree No. 1303 of 25 July 1996, lifting of the state of internal disturbance (proclaimed by Decree No. 1900 of 2 November 1995) and extension of some of the measures instituted by means of Decree No. 1901 of 2 November 1995, Decree No. 208 of 29 January 1996 and Decree No. 777 of 29 April 1996.

13 August 2002

(Dated 12 August 2002)

Transmission of Decree No. 1837 dated 11 August 2002, which declared a state of internal disturbance throughout the national territory, and Decree No. 1838 dated 11 August 2002, which introduced a special tax to meet the necessary expenditure under the country's General Budget to maintain democratic security.

19 November 2002

(Dated 8 November 2002)

Transmisison of Decree No. 2555 dated 8 November 2002, which extended the state of internal disturbance declared by Decree 1837 of 11 August 2002 for ninety (90) calendar days, as from 9 November 2002.

25 February 2003

(Dated 12 February 2003)

Transmission Decree 245 of 5 February 2003, concerning the second extension of the declaration of internal disturbance decreed on 5 February 2003 throughout the national territory.

Ecuador

12 May 1983

The Government declared the extension of the state of emergency as from 20 to 25 October 1982 by Executive Decree No. 1252 of 20 October 1982 and derogation from article 12 (1) owing to serious disorders brought about by the suppression of subsidies, and termination of the state of emergency by Executive Decree No. 1274 of 27 October 1982

20 March 1984

Derogation from articles 9 (1) and (2); 12 (1) and (3); 17; 19 (2) and 21 in the provinces of Napo and Esmeraldas by Executive Decree No. 2511 of 16 March 1984 owing to destruction and sabotage in these areas.

29 March 1984

Termination of the state of emergency by Executive Decree No. 2537 of 27 March 1984.

17 March 1986

(Dated 14 March 1986)

Declaration of the State of emergency in the provinces of Pichincha and Manabi due to the acts of subversion and armed uprising by a high-ranking officer no longer on active service, backed by extremist groups; thereby derogations from articles 12, 21 and 22, it being understood that no Ecuadorian may be exiled or deported outside the capitals of the provinces or to a region other than the one in which he lives.

19 March 1986

(Dated 18 March 1986)

End of State of emergency as from 17 March 1986.

29 October 1987

(Dated 28 October 1987)

Declaration of a state of national emergency throughout the national territory, effective as of 28 October 1987. [Derogation from articles 9 (1) and (2); 12 (1) and (2); 19 (2); and 21.]

The notification states that this measure was made necessary as a result of an illegal call for a national strike which would lead to acts of vandalism, offences against persons and property and would disrupt the peace of the State and the proper exercise of the civic rights of Ecuadorians.

30 October 1987

Termination of the state of emergency throughout the national territory as from 0 hour on 29 October 1987.

3 June 1988

(Dated 1 June 1988)

Declaration of a state of national emergency throughout the national territory, effective as of 9 p.m. on 31 May 1988. [Derogation from articles 9 (1) and (2); 12 (1) and (2); 19 (2); and 21.]

The notification states that this measure is the necessary legal response to the 24 hour strike called for by the United Workers Front, which would result in acts of vandalism, violation of the security of persons and attacks on public and private property.

(Dated 2 June 1988)

Termination of the state of emergency throughout the national territory as from 1 June 1988.

14 January 1999

(Dated 12 January 1999) Declaration of a state of emergency in Guayas province, indicating the the measures were prompted by the serious internal disturbance resulting from the massive crime wave in Guayas Province. Subsequently, the Government of Ecuador specified that the provisions from which it has derogated are articles 12 (1) and 17 (1) of the Covenant.

16 March 1999

(Dated 15 March 1999)

Decree No. 681 by the President of the Republic dated 9 March 1999 by which a state of national emergency was declared and the entire territory of the Republic established as a security zone, as from 9 March 1999.

12 April 1999

(Dated 22 March 1999)

Decree No. 717 by the President of the Republic dated 18 March 1999 by which the state of national emergency declared by Decree No. 681 dated 9 March 1999, was lifted as from 18 March 1999.

10 September 1999

(Dated 27 August 1999)

Decree No. 1041 of 5 July 1999 by the President of the Republic, establishing a state of emergency in Ecuador in respect of public and private transport system throughout the country during the month of July 1999;

Decree No. 1070 of 13 July 1999 by the President of the Republic (following the revocation of Decree No. 1041 by the National Congress on 13 July 1999), declaring a state of national emergency and establishing the entire territory of the Republic as a security zone; and

Decree No. 1088 of 17 July 1999 by the President of the Republic, lifting the state of national emergency and rescinding Decree No. 1070. Subsequently, the Government of Ecuador specified that the provisions from which it had derogated were articles 17 (1), 12 (1), 21 and 22 of the Covenant.

28 December 1999

(Dated 9 December 1999)

Establishment of the State of Emergency in the Guayas Province by Decree No. 1557 of 30 November 1999 by the President of the Republic indicating that the measure was taken in response to the serious internal disturbance which produced a massive crime wave that continues to affect that province. The Decree states that "since the state of emergency declared in the Guayas Province in January 1999 (see notification of 14 January 1999) , was ended there has been an increase in criminal activity which as made it clear that extraordinary measures must once again be taken..., it is necessary to attenuate the serious repercussions of the ciminal activity in Guayas Province in order to prevent any change in the normal pattern of civil life...".

Subsequently, on 28 January 2000, the Government of Ecuador specified that the provisions from which it has derogated are articles 12 (1) and 17 (1) of the Covenant.

1 February 2000

(Dated 6 January 2000)

On 5 January 2000, by Executive Decree, the President declared a state of national emergency establishing the entire territory of the Republic as a security zone. This measure was motivated by the serious internal unrest caused by the economic crisis which Ecuador is experiencing.

The Government of Ecuador specifed that the provisions from which it has derogated are articles 12 (1), 17 (1), 21 and 22 (1).

On 21 February 2001, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Ecuador a notification dated 16 February 2001, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, transmitting the text of Executive Decree No. 1214 by the President of the Republic dated 2 February 2001, by which a state of national emergency was declared and the entire territory of the Republic was established as a security zone, as from 2 February 2001. The said Decree stipulates that this measure was adopted to overcome the adverse consequences of the economic crisis affecting Ecuador which has created a situation of serious internal unrest.

The Government of Ecuador specified that the provisions from which it has derogated are articles 12, 17 and 21 of the Covenant.

On 21 February 2001, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Ecuador a notification dated 16 February 2001, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, transmitting the text of Executive Decree No. 1228 by the President of the Republic dated 9 February 2001, by which the state of national emergency, declared by Decree No. 1214 of 2 February 2001, was lifted as from 9 March 2001.

17 July 2002

Sir,

In accordance with article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, of which Ecuador is a State Party, and on behalf of the national Government, I am writing to notify you of the declarations of a state of national emergency this year declared by Dr. Gustavo Noboa Bejarano, President of the Republic, in accordance with the provisions of articles 180 and 181 of the Ecuadorian Constitution in force, and when they were lifted. The details of these declarations follow:

Executive Decree No. 2404 of 26 February 2002 (Official Register No. 525): A state of emergency is declared in Sucumbios and Orellana provinces. The reason for this measure is the serious situation arising out of problems of the Colombian conflict on the frontiers;

Executive Decree No. 2421 of 4 March 2002: The state of emergency in Sucumbios and Orellana provinces is declared over, and accordingly Executive Decree 2404 of 22 February 2002 is abrogated;

Executive Decree No. 2492 of 22 March 2002: State of emergency in Esmeraldas, Guayas Los Ríos, Manabí and El Oro provinces. The reason for this measure is the severe storm on the Ecuadorian coast. The state of emergency was lifted on 22 May pursuant to the legal provision embodied in article 182, paragraph 2, of the Ecuadorian Constitution to the effect that "a decree of a state of emergency shall remain in force for up to a maximum of 60 days";

Executive Decree No. 2625 of 7 May 2002 (Official Register No. 575 of 14 May 2002): State of national emergency in respect of land transport. (This state of emergency has not been lifted but, will last until 7 July, unless the President declares that it is lifted in advance.)

Accept, Sir, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration.

(Signed) Dr. Heinz Moeller Freile

Minister for Foreign Affairs

18 August 2005

On 18 August 2005, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Ecuador a notification made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, notifying of the declaration of a state of emergency in Sucumbios and Orellana Provinces, decreed by the President of the Republic on 17 August 2005, in accordance with the provisions of articles 180 and 181 of the Ecuadorian Constitution in force.

The Government of Ecuador specified that this measure was motivated by the serious internal unrest caused by crime waves in the aforementioned provinces. The declaration of emergency was made by means of Executive Decree No. 426 of 17 August 2005. Moreover, the articles of the Covenant which were derogated from were not indicated.

22 August 2005

On 22 August 2005, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Ecuador notifications made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, notifying of the declaration of a state of emergency in the Canton of Chone, Manabi Province, decreed by the Constitutional President of the Republic on 19 August 2005, in accordance with articles 180 and 181 of the Political Constitution of Ecuador.

The Government of Ecuador specified that this measure was taken in response to serious internal unrest, which has led to a crime wave and to widespread looting in the aforementioned canton. The declaration of emergency was made by means of Executive Decree No. 430 of 19 August 2005. Moreover, the Government of Ecuador specified that during the state of emergency the rights established in article 23, paragraphs 9, 12, 13, 14 and 19, and article 23 of the Political Constitution of the Republic were suspended.

18 April 2006

Declaration of a state of emergency in a number of Ecuadorian provinces, issued on 21 March through Executive Decree No. 1269 which was suspended on 7 April 2006 through Executive Decree No. 1329.

El Salvador

14 November 1983

(Dated 3 November 1983)

The Government has declared an extension for a period of 30 days of the suspension of constitutional guarantees by Legislative Decree No. 329 dated 28 October 1983. The constitutional guarantees have been suspended in accordance with article 175 of the Political Constitution because of disruption of public order. In a complimentary notification dated 23 January 1984 and received on 24 January 1984, the Government of El Salvador specified the following:

1) The provisions of the Covenant from which it is derogated are articles 12 and 19 by Decree No. 329 of 28 August 1983, and article 17 (in respect of interference with correspondence);

2) The constitutional guarantees were first suspended by Decree No. 155 dated 6 March 1980, with further extensions of the suspension for a total of 24 months. Decree No. 155 was modified by Decree No. 999 dated 24 February 1982, which expired on 24 March 1982. By Decree No. 1089 dated 20 April 1982, the Revolutionary Government Junta again suspended the constitutional guarantees. By Legislative Decree No. 7 dated 20 May 1982, the Constituent Assembly extended the suspension for an additional period of 30 days. The said Legislative Decree No. 7 was itself extended several times until the adoption of the above-mentioned Decree No. 329 dated 28 October 1983, which took effect on that date.

3) The reasons for the adoption of the initial suspension decree (No. 155 of 6 March 1980) were the same as for the adoption of the subsequent decrees.

18 June 1984

(Dated 14 June 1984)

By Legislative Decree No. 28 of 27 January 1984, previous measures were amended to the effect that political parties would be permitted to conduct electoral campaigns, and were thus authorized to engage in partisan campaigning and electoral propaganda activities. The said Decree was extended for successive 30-day periods until the promulgation of Decree No. 97 of 17 May 1984, which rescinded the afore-mentioned change which had allowed political parties to conduct electoral campaigns.

The provisions of the Covenant from which it is derogated are articles 12, 19, 17 (in respect of interference with correspondence) and 21 and 22. As regards article 22, the suspension refers to the right of association in general, but does not affect the right to join professional associations (the right to form and join trade unions).

2 August 1985

(Dated 31 July 1985)

[...] the Government of El Salvador has for successive periods extended martial law by the following legislative decrees:

Decrees No. 127 of 21 June 1984, No. 146 of 19 July 1984, No. 175 of 24 August 1984, No. 210 of 18 September 1984, No. 234 of 21 October 1984, No. 261 of 20 November 1984, No. 277 of 14 December 1984, No. 322 of 18 January 1985, No. 335 of 21 February 1985, No. 351 of 14 March 1985, No. 386 of 18 April 1985, No. 10 of 21 May 1985, No. 38 of 13 June 1985, and the most recent, Decree No. 96 of 11 July 1985 which extended the martial law for an additional period of 30 days beyond that date.

The provisions of the Covenant that are thus suspended are those of articles 12, 17 (in respect of interference with correspondence) and 19 (2).

The notification specifies that the reasons for the suspension of constitutional guarantees continue to be those originally indicated, namely: the need to maintain a climate of peace and tranquility, which had been disturbed through the commission of acts designed to create a state of instability and social unrest which affected the economy and the public peace by persons seeking to obstruct the process of structural change, thus seriously disrupting public order.

19 December 1989

(Dated 13 November 1989)

Suspension for a period of 30 days as from 12 November 1990 of various constitutional guarantees. (Derogation from articles 12, 17, 19, 21 and 22 of the Covenant.)

The notification indicates that this measure became necessary owing to the use of terror and violence by the Frente Farabundo Marti to obtain the political authority, in complete disregard of previous elections.

France

15 November 2005

On 15 November 2005, the Secretary-General received from the Government of France a notification signed by the Permanent Representative dated 15 November 2005, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, declaring a state of emergency had been established pursuant to the Decree dated 8 November 2005.

12 January 2006

On 12 January 2006, the Secretary-General received from the Government of France a notification declaring the termination of the state of emergency established pursuant to the Decree dated 8 November 2005, with effect from 4 January 2006.

Georgia

7 mars 2006

Excellency,

In conformity with Article 4 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 15 of the Law on the State of Emergency of Georgia, I have to inform you that the President of Georgia on February 26, 2006 has issued the Decree No. 173 on "State of Emergency in the Khelvachauri district" which has been approved by the Parliament of Georgia on February 28, 2006.

The Decree is aimed at preventing further spread throughout Georgia of the H5N1 virus (bird flu) that has been recently detected in the district in question.

The restrictions imposed upon by the Decree are fully in line with provisions of Article 21, paragraphs 2 and 3 (on the restrictions related to property rights) and Article 22, paragraph 3 (on the restrictions related to the freedom of movement) and Article 46 (on the restrictions related to constitutional rights and freedoms) of the Constitution of Georgia and respective provisions of the Law on the State of Emergency of Georgia.

You will be informed in due course when the above Decree is abolished.

Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.

(Signed) Gela Bezhuashvili

23 March 2006

(Dated 23 March 2006)

"In conformity with Article 4 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 15 of the Law of the State of Emergency of Georgia, I have to inform you that the President of Georgia on March 15, 2006 has issued the Decree No. 199 on "Abolishment of the State of Emergency in the Khelvachauri district", which has been approved by the Parliament of Georgia on March 16, 2006.

According to the above Decree, the Presidential Decree No. 173 of February 26, 2006 "On State of Emergency in the Khelvachauri district" has been declared null and void."

8 November 2007

In conformity with Article 4 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights I would like to inform you that the President of Georgia on November 7, 2007 has issued the Order #621 on "the Declaration of the State of Emergency on the entire territory of Georgia"and Decree N.1 "On the measures to be undertaken in connection with the declaration of the state of emergency on the entire territory of Georgia"which will be approved by the Parliament of Georgia within next 48 hours. Introduction of the state of emergency became necessary because of the extreme deterioration of the situation in Tbilisi as a result of the attempted coup d'état and massive disobedience and violent resistance to the law enforcement authorities. Due to the state of emergency, pursuant to Article 73, paragraph 1, subparagraph 'h', and Article 46 paragraph 1 of the Constitution of Georgia and Article 2, paragraph 1 of the Law of Georgia on the State of Emergency, right to receive and disseminate information (Article 24 of the Constitution of Georgia), freedom to assembly and manifestation (Article 25) and right to strike (Article 33) are restricted for the duration of the state of emergency. You will be informed in due course when the above Order and Decree are abolished.

Guatemala

23 November 1998

(Dated 20 November 1998)

By Decree No. 1-98 of 31 October 1998, declaration of the state of public disaster throughout the national territory for a period of thirty (30) days, in order to resolve the hazardous situation caused by Hurricane Mitch and to mitigate its effects.

26 July 2001

(Dated 26 July 2001)

By Government Decree No. 2-2001, extension of the state of emergency established by Government Decree No. 1-2001, for an additional 30 days throughout the national territory.

The Government Decree No. 1-2001 was not supplied to the Secretary-General. Moreover, the articles of the Covenant which were derogated from were not indicated.

2 August 2001

(Dated 2 August 2001)

By Government Decree No. 3-2001, establishment of a state of emergency for a period of 30 days in the Department of Totonicapán with immidiate effect. The articles of the Covenant which were derogated from were not indicated.

10 August 2001

(Dated 6 August 2001)

State of emergency declared by Decree No. 3-2001 has been rescinded by Government Decree No. 4-2001 with immediate effect.

14 October 2005

On 14 October 2005, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Guatemala a notification made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, notifying of a derogation from obligations under the Covenant.

The decision was adopted by the Congress of Guatemala on 6 October 2005 in Legislative Decree No. 70-2005, and it entered into force on 10 October 2005. The Decree recognizes a state of national disaster in the affected areas for a period of 30 days.

The Government of Guatemala specified that it has derogated from the provisions relating to the right of liberty of movement and the right of freedom of action, except for the right of persons not to be harassed for their opinions or for acts which do not violate the law. Moreover, the articles of the Covenant which were derogated from were not indicated.

5 September 2006

On 5 September 2006, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Guatemala a notification made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, notifying a declaration of a state of emergency in the municipalities of Concepción Tutuapa, Ixchiguán, San Miguel Ixtahuacán, Tajumulco and Tejuela, in the Department of San Marcos of the Republic of Guatemala.

The State of emergency was declared by Governmental Decree No. 1-2006 of 28 August 2006.

18 September 2006

On 18 September 2006, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Guatemala a communication informing him of Government Decree No. 2-2006 of 31 August 2006, which repeals article 4, paragraph (d), of Government Decree No. 1-2006, which was sent earlier.

Israel

3 October 1991

"Since its establishment, the State of Israel has been the victim of continuous threats and attacks on its very existence as well as on the life and property of its citizens.

"These have taken the form of threats of war, of actual armed attacks, and campaigns of terrorism resulting in the murder of and injury to human beings.

"In view of the above, the State of Emergency which was proclaimed in May 1948 has remained in force ever since. This situation constitutes a public emergency within the meaning of article 4 (1) of the Covenant.

"The Government of Israel has therefore found it necessary, in accordance with the said article 4, to take measures to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, for the defence of the State and for the protection of life and property, including the exercise of powers of arrest and detention.

"In so far as any of these measures are inconsistent with article 9 of the Covenant, Israel thereby derogates from its obligations under that provision."

Jamaica

28 September 2004

On 28 September 2004, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Jamaica a notification dated 28 September 2004, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, transmitting a Proclamation declaring a state of emergency in the island. The proclamation shall remain in effect for an initial period of 30 days, unless the Governor-General is advised to repeal it or an extension is granted by the House of Representatives.

22 October 2004

In a note received on 22 October 2004, the Government of Jamaica informed the Secretary-General that during the state of emergency, the provisions from which it may derogate are articles 12, 19, 21 and 22 (2) of the Covenant.

27 October 2004

On 27 October 2004, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Jamaica a notification, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, transmitting text of sections 26 (4) - (7) of the Constitution by which the proclamation of a state of public emergency issued by the Governor-General on 10 September 2004 terminated on 8 October 2004.

Furthermore, the Government of Jamaica informed the Secretary-General that the possible derogation from the rights guaranteed by Articles 12, 19, 21 and 22 (2) by Jamiaca ceased on 8 October 2004.

24 August 2007

On 24 August 2007, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Jamaica a notification dated 23 August 2007, made under article 4 (3) of the above Covenant, transmitting a proclamation declaring a State of Public Emergency in the Island issued by the Governor on 19 August 2007. The proclamation shall remain in effect for an initial period of 30 days, unless the Governor-General is advised to repeal it.

27 August 2007

In a note received on 27 August 2007, the Government of Jamaica informed the Secretary-General that the State of public emergency issued by the Governor on 19 August 2007 has since been lifted effective Friday 24 August 2007.

Namibia

6 August 1999

(Dated 5 August 1999)

Proclamation No. 23 by the President of the Republic of Namibia, establishing a state of emergency in the Caprivi region for an initial period of thirty (30) days, indicating that the measures were prompted by circumstances arisen in this region causing a public emergency threatening the life of the nation and the constitutional order;

Proclamation No. 24 by the President of the Republic of Namibia, setting out the emergency regulations to the Caprivi region.

14 September 1999

Derogation from articles 9 (2) and 9 (3) of the Covenant.

14 September 1999

(Dated 10 September 1999)

Proclamation No. 27 by the President of the Republic, revoking the declaration of state of emergency and emergency regulations in the Caprivi region promulgated by Proclamations No. 23 of 2 August 1999 and No. 24 of 3 August 1999.

Nepal

8 March 2002

"..... in view of the serious situation arising out of terrorist attacks perpetrated by the Maoists in various districts, killing several security and civilian personnel and attacking the government installations, a state of emergency has been declared in the entire Kingdom effective from 26 November 2001, in accordance with the Article 115 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 2047 (BS). Accordingly, His Majesty the King, on the recommendation of the Council of Ministers, has suspended the right to freedom of opinion and expression (Article 12.2a), freedom to assemble peacefully without arms (12.2b) and to move throughout the Kingdom (12.2d). Press and publication right (13.1), right against preventive detention (Article 15), right to information (Article 16), right to property (Article 17), right to privacy (Article 22) and right to constitutional remedy (Article 23) have also been suspended. However, the right to the remedy of habeas corpus has not been suspended.

The Permanent Representative also would like to inform the Secretary-General that, while suspending the rights and freedoms, His Majesty's Government has fully observed the provision of Article 4, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the above mentioned Covenant. Accordingly, the rights and freedoms as contained in Articles 6, 7, 8 (1), 11, 15, 16 and 18 of the Covenant, which are also guaranteed by the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, remain in effect."

31 May 2002

"... following the dissolution of the Parliament, which was done in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal - 2047, His Majesty's Government of Nepal has decided to hold the general elections on November 13, 2002 in a free and fair manner. In view of the current security situation in the country prompted by the Maoist insurgency, the Government has also extended the state of emergency by three more months. The Government, however, is committed to lifting the emergency as soon as there is an improvement in the security situation to facilitate free and peaceful general elections.

... in spite of these steps, the Government will stay the course in respect to development programs and socio-economic reforms."

21 November 2002

(Dated 19 November 2002)

"... With reference to [...] note 0076/2002 dated 22 February 2002 and pursuant to clause 3 of Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966, .... [the Government of Nepal] lifted the state of emergency in the country, effective from 20 August 2002."

16 February 2005

"The Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of Nepal to the United Nations presents its compliments to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and, pursuant to Paragraph 3 of Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), has the honour to inform him that in view of a grave emergency threatening the sovereignty, integrity and security of the Kingdom of Nepal, His Majesty the King has, in accordance with clause (1) of Article 115 (1) of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 1990 (2047), issued an order of a State of Emergency in respect of the whole of the Kingdom of Nepal on 1 February 2005 with immediate effect. As the situation in the country had reached a point where the survival of multiparty democracy and the nation's sovereignty had been seriously threatened and the people of Nepal had to go through a miserable period of time due to untold sufferings brought about by the rise in terrorist activities throughout the country, and as the governments formed during the past few years had not been serious enough about initiating a dialogue with terrorists, His Majesty as the protector of the Constitution and the symbol of national unity, had no alternative but to declare a state of emergency to meet the exigencies in exercise of His State authority and in keeping with the spirit of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 1990 and taking into account Article 27 (3) of the Constitution, to protect and preserve the sovereignty of the Nation. His Majesty the King has also, in accordance with clause (8) of Article 115 of the Constitution, suspended sub-clauses (a) freedom of thought and expression, (b) freedom to assemble peaceably and without arms, and (d) freedom to move and reside in any part of Nepal, of clause (2) of Article 12; clause (1) of Article 13 press and publication right which provides that no news item, article or any other reading material shall be censored; and Article 15: right against private detention; Article 16: right to information; Article 17: right to property; Article 22: right to privacy; and Article 23: and the right to constitutional remedy (with the exception of the right to the remedy of habeus corpus) of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 1990 (2047).

The Permanent Mission would further like to inform the Secretary-General that such measures are not inconsistent with Nepal's other obligations under international law and do not involve discrimination solely on the ground of race, colour, sex, language, religion or social origin.

The Permanent Mission would also like to inform the Secretary-General that the non-derogable rights as set forth in Articles 6, 7, 8 (paragraphs 1 and 2), 11, 15, 16 and 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which are guaranteed by the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 1990, have been kept intact."

29 march 2005

"…. following the declaration of a State of Emergency throughout the Kingdom of Nepal on 1 February 2005, [the Government of Nepal] has derogated itself from the obligations under the articles, mentioned below, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) for a period of the State of Emergency in the country. 1. Derogation from Article 19 of the ICCPR following the suspension of sub-clause (a) of Clause 2 of Article 12, Clause (1) of Article 13 and Article 16 of the Constitution (freedom of opinion and expression, right to press and publication and right to information respectively). 2. Derogation from Articles 12.1 and 12.2 of the ICCPR following the suspension of sub-clause (d) of Clause 2 of Article 12 of the Constitution (freedom to move and reside in any part of the Kingdom of Nepal). 3. Derogation from Article 17 of the ICCPR following the suspension of Article 22 of the Constitution (right to privacy). 4. Derogation from Article 2.3 of the ICCPR following the suspension of Article 23 of the Constitution (right to constitutional remedy except the writ of habeas corpus)."

5 May 2005

On 5 May 2005, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Nepal a notification, dated the same, informing him that, as required by Article 4 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, that His Majesty the King has, in accordance with clause (11) of Article 115 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 1990 (2047), revoked the Order of State of Emergency proclaimed on 1 Feburary 2005 in respect to fthe whole of the Kingdom of Nepal.