Objection with regard to the reservation made by Libya upon ratification: (14 February 2019)
"After considering the declaration made by the State of Libya upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities regarding article 25 (a), the Government of the United States of Mexico has concluded that the said declaration constitutes, in fact, a reservation.
This reservation subjects the application of the above article to Islamic law and to national legislation, which is contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention and violates article 46 (1) of the said international instrument as well as article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the State of Libya and the United States of Mexico. Consequently, the Convention shall enter into force between the two States without the State of Libya benefiting from the said reservation."
Objection with regard to the reservations made by Suriname upon ratification: (29 March 2018)
"Having analysed the declarations made by the Republic of Suriname upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the Government of the United Mexican States has concluded that such declarations in fact constitute reservations.
Such declarations, the object of which is to exclude the legal effects of article 20, paragraph (a); article 24, paragraph 2 (b); and article 26, are contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention, specifically:
- Facilitating the personal mobility of persons with disabilities in the manner and at the time of their choice, and at affordable cost;
- Promoting access to an inclusive, quality and free primary education and secondary education on an equal basis with others in the communities in which they live; and
- Promoting, developing and implementing effective and relevant measures to provide comprehensive habilitation and rehabilitation services and programmes for persons with disabilities.
The above-mentioned reservations are therefore contrary to article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention, as well as to article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
The present objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Republic of Suriname and the United Mexican States. Accordingly, the Convention shall enter into force between the two States without the Republic of Suriname benefiting from the above-mentioned reservation."
On 3 January 2012, the Government of the United Mexican States informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the interpretative declaration made upon ratification. The text of the interpretative declaration reads as follows:
"The Political Constitution of the United Mexican States, in its article 1, establishes that: "(...) any discrimination on the grounds of ethnic or national origin, gender, age, disability, social status, health, religion, opinion, preference, civil status or any other form of discrimination that is an affront to human dignity and is intended to deny or undermine the rights and freedoms of persons is prohibited".
In ratifying this Convention, the United Mexican States reaffirms its commitment to promoting and protecting the rights of Mexicans who suffer any disability, whether they are within the national territory or abroad.
The Mexican State reiterates its firm commitment to creating conditions that allow all individuals to develop in a holistic manner and to exercise their rights and freedoms fully and without discrimination.
Accordingly, affirming its absolute determination to protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities, the United Mexican States interprets paragraph 2 of article 12 of the Convention to mean that in the case of conflict between that paragraph and national legislation, the provision that confers the greatest legal protection while safeguarding the dignity and ensuring the physical, psychological and emotional integrity of persons and protecting the integrity of their property shall apply, in strict accordance with the principle pro homine."
Objection with regard to the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon accession: (22 October 2010)
"Having examined the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Iran with respect to the Convention, the United Mexican States has concluded that the declaration is, in fact, a reservation. This reservation, which aims to exclude the legal effects of certain provisions of the Convention, is incompatible with the object and purpose of that instrument. Indeed, the declaration is worded in such a way that it could hinder the realization of normative provisions of the Convention, including those of articles 4 and 1, and thus is in breach of article 46 of the Convention and article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. It should be noted that article 27 of the Vienna Convention codified the principle of international law whereby a party may not invoke the provisions of its domestic law as justification for its failure to comply with a treaty. The claim that domestic laws take precedence over the provisions of treaties that are in force for the Parties is therefore inadmissible.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United Mexican States."