经济、社会及文化权利国际公约

批准时的声明：
“根据中华人民共和国第九届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第二十届会议的决定，中华人民共和国主席特此批准秦华孙先生代表中华人民共和国于1997年10月27日签署了《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》，并声明如下：
1.中华人民共和国在适用公约第8条第(1)款(a)项时应符合《中华人民共和国宪法》、《中华人民共和国贸易联盟法》和《中华人民共和国劳动法》的相关规定…… ”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

签署时提出、批准时确认的声明：
“台湾当局于1967年10月5日盗用“中国”国名签署上述公约为非法、无效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

2005年3月17日提出的反对意见：
“丹麦政府审查了巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国签署1966年《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》时作出的声明。
声明指出，上述公约条款在适用时要符合巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国宪法的规定。这项规定让巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国认为其受公约义务约束的程度变得模糊，由此也对巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国对公约的目标和宗旨作出的承诺提出质疑。
丹麦政府认为，巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》的声明实际上已成为一项保留意见，而这一保留意见不符合公约的目标和宗旨。
基于上述原因，丹麦政府对巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国的声明表示反对。但是，虽然巴基斯坦不能从其声明中获益，这一反对意见并不妨碍巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国和丹麦之间的公约生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

In a communication received on January 14, 1976, the Government of Denmark notified the Secretary-General that it withdraws its reservation made prior with regard to article 7(a)(i) on equal pay for equal work.

Declaration made upon ratification:
"The Government of Denmark cannot, for the time being, undertake to comply entirely with the provisions of article 7(a)(i) on equal pay for equal work and article 7(d) on remuneration for public holidays."

签署时作出且在批准时确认的声明：
“乌克兰苏维埃社会主义共和国声明，《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第26条第(1)款和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第48条第(1)款的规定带有歧视性，因为根据这些规定，一些国家不能加入这些公约，并认为依照国家主权平等原则，公约应当开放给所有有关国家加入，没有任何歧视或限制。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

加入时的声明：
“也门人民民主共和国加入本公约绝不表示承认以色列或作为与以色列建立任何形式的关系的依据。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

在秘书长相应于1969年7月10日和1971年3月23日收到的两份通函中，以色列政府声明，它“注意到伊拉克政府在签署批准上述公约时发表的声明的性质。以色列政府认为，这两部公约不是发表这种政治声明的适当场所。以色列政府将就问题实质采取完全对等的态度。
秘书长相应于1969年7月9日和1970年6月29日收到了以色列政府分别针对叙利亚政府加入时的声明和利比亚政府加入时的声明发来的内容完全相同的来函。在第二份来函中，以色列政府还指出，有关声明绝不能影响阿拉伯利比亚共和国已承担的一般国际法规定的义务。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

签署时发表且在批准时确认的声明：
“ 伊拉克共和国加入《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》绝不意味着承认以色列，也不会根据上述两部公约的规定承担对以色列的任何义务。
伊拉克共和国加入上述两部公约不得意味着该国加入《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》任一议定书。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

批准时的声明：
“ 伊拉克的批准绝不意味着承认以色列，也不会促使与以色列发生上述公约规定的此种交易。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

在签署时作出且在批准时确认的声明：
“苏维埃社会主义共和国联盟声明，《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第26条第1款和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第48条第1款的规定，带有歧视性，因为根据其中的规定，许多国家不能加入这些公约，并认为，根据各国主权平等之原则，公约应当对所有相关国家开放供加入，不应具有任何歧视或加以任何限制。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

批准时的声明：
“保加利亚人民共和国认为有必要强调指出，《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第48条第1款和第3款以及《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第26条第1款和第3款具有歧视性，因为根据这些条款，一些国家被剥夺了加入公约的机会。这些规定也与公约宗旨不符。它们具有普遍性的特点，应当开放给所有国家加入。根据主权平等原则，任何国家均无权阻止其他国家加入此种公约。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

批准时的声明：
“凡国家政策以《联合国宪章》的宗旨和原则为指导的国家，均有权加入对国际社会的利益产生影响的公约。依照这一原则，几内亚共和国政府认为，《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第26条第1款的规定违反了国际条约具有普遍性这一原则，也与国际关系民主化背道而驰。
同样，几内亚共和国政府还认为，公约第1条第3款和第14条的规定违反了《联合国宪章》的总体规定，尤其违反了给予殖民国家和人民独立的联合国决议。
上述规定还违反了大会第2625 (XXV)号决议所载的各国之间关于建立友好关系及合作之国际法原则的宣言。根据该宣言，各国均有责任促进实现人民权利平等和人民自决，以结束殖民主义。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

On March 21, 2001, the Government of the Congo informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its reservation made upon accession which read as follows:
Reservation:
"The Government of the People's Republic of the Congo declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 13, paragraphs 3 and 4 ...
Paragraphs 3 and 4 of article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights embody the principle of freedom of education by allowing parents the liberty to choose for their children schools other than those established by the public authorities. Those provisions also authorize individuals to establish and direct educational institutions.
In our country, such provisions are inconsistent with the principle of nationalization of education and with the monopoly granted to the State in that area."

加入时的声明：
“ 阿拉伯利比亚共和国的接收和加入绝不意味着承认以色列，也不意味着将促使阿拉伯利比亚共和国按公约的规定与以色列进行此种交易。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 21, 2019)
"The Government of Canada has carefully examined the reservation and statement made by the Government of Qatar upon ratification of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
The Government of Canada notes that the reservation made by the Government of Qatar, addressing an essential provision of the Covenant and aiming to exclude the obligations under that provision, is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant, and thus inadmissible under article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
The Government of Canada notes that the statement made by the Government of Qatar aims at applying a provision of the Covenant only in conformity with domestic law or Islamic Sharia. However, the Covenant is to be applied in accordance with international law. The Government of Canada considers that this statement is a reservation in disguise, incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant, and thus inadmissible under article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
The Government of Canada considers that a reservation consisting of a general reference to national law or Islamic Sharia makes it impossible to identify the modifications to obligations under the Covenant, which it purports to introduce. With this reservation, the other States Parties do not know the extent to which Qatar has accepted the obligations to ensure the equal rights of men and women. This uncertainty is unacceptable, especially in the context of a human rights treaty.
It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become Party are respected as to their object and purpose by all Parties and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations under the treaties.
The Government of Canada therefore objects to the reservation and statement made by the Government of Qatar. This objection does not preclude the entry into force in its entirety of the Covenant between Canada and Qatar."

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 14, 2019)
"Hungary has examined the reservation and statement made by the State of Qatar upon ratification of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights done in New York on 16 December 1966.
The reservation to Article 3 of the Covenant make[s] the application of this provision subject to the Islamic Sharia. The statement to Article 8 of the Covenant make[s] the application of this provision subject to the national legislation. Hungary considers the statement to Article 8 made by the State of Qatar by its nature also as a reservation.
Hungary is of the view that making the application of Article 3 of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia and Article 8 of the Covenant subject to the national legislation raises doubts as to the extent of Qatar's commitment to meet its obligations under the Covenant and are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant, that is to promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all economic, social and cultural rights by all individuals.
Hungary considers the aforementioned reservations inadmissible as they are not permitted under Article 19 sub-paragraph (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, thus objects to these reservations. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between Hungary and the State of Qatar. The Covenant will thus become operative between the two States without the State of Qatar benefitting from its reservations."

批准时的声明：
“匈牙利人民共和国总统委员会声明，《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第48条第1款和第3款的规定以及《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第26条第1款和第3款的规定违反了公约的普遍性。根据各国主权平等这一原则，它认为，公约应当开放给所有国家加入，没有任何歧视和限制。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Declaration made upon signature:
"The Government of the Hungarian People's Republic declares that paragraph 1 of article 26 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and paragraph 1 of article 48 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights according to which certain States may not become signatories to the said Covenants are of a discriminatory nature and are contrary to the basic principle of international law that all States are entitled to become signatories to general multilateral treaties. These discriminatory provisions are incompatible with the objectives and purposes of the Covenants."

Declaration under article 13(2)(a) made upon ratification:
"The Government of the Republic of South Africa will give progressive effect to the right to education, as provided for in Article 13(2)(a) and Article 14, within the framework of its National Education Policy and available resources."

Reservation made upon accession:
"The State of Qatar does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 3 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, for they contravene the Islamic Sharia with regard to questions of inheritance and birth."

Statement made upon accession:
"The State of Qatar shall interpret that what is meant by "trade unions" and their related issues stated in Article 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Right[s], is in line with the provisions of the Labor Law and national legislation. The State of Qatar reserves the right to implement that article in accordance with such understanding."

On December 15, 2008, the Government of Rwanda informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservation made upon accession. The reservation reads as follows:
"The Rwandese Republic [is] bound, however, in respect of education, only by the provisions of its Constitution."

加入时的声明：
“I. 关于《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第1条和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第1条，印度共和国政府声明，[本条中]出现的‘自决权’一词仅适用于外国统治下的人民，不适用于主权独立国家，也不适用于一个民族或一个国家的一部分，而这才是国家完整的本质。
II. 关于《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第9条，印度共和国政府认为，在适用本条规定时，应与印度宪法第22条第(3)款至第(7)款的规定保持一致。此外，根据印度的法律制度，对自称是国家非法逮捕或拘禁的受害者的人没有强制执行赔偿的权利。
III. 关于《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第13条，印度共和国政府保留适用有关适用外侨的法律规定的权利。
IV. 关于《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第4条和第8条,以及《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第12条、第19条第(3)款、第21条和第22条，印度共和国政府声明，在适用上述[条款]的规定时，将遵守《印度宪法》第19条的规定。
V. 关于《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第7条(c)项，印度共和国政府声明，在适用上述条款的规定时将遵守《印度宪法》第16条第(4)款的规定。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

加入时的声明：
“ 关于《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第1条，印度尼西亚共和国政府声明，根据《给予殖民地国家和人民独立宣言》、《关于各国依联合国宪章建立友好关系和合作的国际法原则宣言》和1993年通过的《维也纳宣言和行动纲领》相关段落，本条款中出现的“自决权”一词不适用于主权独立的国家的人民，也不能被解释为授权或鼓励可以采取任何行动，破坏或损害，无论是完全损害还是部分损害，主权和独立国家的领土完整或政治统一。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

签署时的声明：
“古巴共和国特此声明，是革命让人们享有《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》所载的权利。
美利坚合众国及其敌对、侵略政策强加给古巴的经济、商业和金融封锁对古巴人民享有公约所载的权利造成了最严重的障碍。
公约赋予的保护已体现在《共和国宪法》和国家立法之中。国家政策和纲要保证所有古巴人民均能切实行使并保护这些权利。
关于该国际文书一些条款的范围和实施情况，古巴将在适当时机发表保留意见或解释性声明。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

批准时的声明：
“土耳其共和国声明，该国将根据《联合国宪章》(尤其是第1条和第2条)规定的义务履行公约所规定的义务。
土耳其共和国声明，该国仅对与其建立外交关系的国家履行公约的规定。
土耳其共和国声明，公约仅对土耳其共和国宪法和法律行政法令适用的国家领土批准。
土耳其共和国保留依照土耳其共和国宪法第3条、第14条和第42条的规定解释和适用公约第13条第(3)款和第(4)款的规定的权利。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

批准时的声明：
“…… 考虑到伊斯兰教教法的规定以及这些规定与文书附加案文并不冲突这一事实，我们接受、支持并批准这部公约。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

2003年11月26日发表的反对意见：
“…… 塞浦路斯共和国政府希望对土耳其共和国于2003年9月23日批准时对1966年12月16日在纽约签署的《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》作出的声明表示反对。
塞浦路斯共和国政府认为，关于仅对与土耳其共和国建立外交关系的国家履行公约规定的声明，以及内容涉及公约“仅对土耳其共和国宪法和法律行政法令适用的国家领土批准”的声明属于保留意见。这些保留意见让缔约方对土耳其承担公约规定的义务的程度不确定，也对土耳其对上述公约的目标和宗旨作出的承诺提出了质疑。
塞浦路斯共和国政府反对土耳其共和国发表的上述保留意见，并声明，这些保留意见或反对意见并不妨碍塞浦路斯共和国政府与土耳其共和国之间的公约生效。
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

加入时的声明：
“墨西哥在加入《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》时认为，墨西哥共和国适用公约第8条时应依据墨西哥合众国政治宪法和相关执行立法的适用规定所确定的条件和程序。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 16, 2019)
"The Government of Austria has carefully examined the reservation and statement made by the State of Qatar upon accession to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Austria considers the statement concerning Article 8 to amount to a reservation as it aims at applying a provision of the Covenant only in conformity with national legislation. However, the Covenant is to be applied in accordance with international law, not only in accordance with the legislation of a particular state.
By referring to its national legislation or to the Islamic sharia, Qatar's reservations to Article 3 and Article 8 of the Covenant are of a general and indeterminate scope. These reservations do not clearly define for the other States Parties the extent to which the reserving state has accepted the obligations of the Covenant. Furthermore, the reservation to Article 3 seeks to exclude, at least partly, the application of one of the most central provisions which is related to all rights set forth in the Covenant.
Austria therefore considers both reservations to be incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant and objects to them. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Republic of Austria and the State of Qatar. The Covenant will thus become operative between the two states without Qatar benefitting from the aforementioned reservations."

Objection with regard to the declaration made by Myanmar upon ratification: (May 16, 2018)
"The Government of Austria has carefully examined the declaration made by the Republic of the Union of Myanmar upon ratification of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 16 December 1966. It considers this declaration to amount to a reservation of a general and indeterminate scope, as it aims at applying a provision of the Covenant only in conformity with the Constitution of Myanmar. However, the Covenant is to be applied in accordance with international law, not in accordance with the legislation of a particular state.
For this reason, Austria considers the reservation to be incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant and objects to it. This objection shall however not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Republic of Austria and the Republic of the Union of Myanmar. The Covenant will thus become operative between the two states without Myanmar benefitting from the aforementioned reservation.
Finally, Austria wishes to point out that it does not share the narrow interpretation of the right of self-determination expressed by Myanmar, i.e. that it were excluded that this right 'apply to any section of people within a sovereign independent state'. At the same time, Austria also underlines the fundamental difference between the right of self-determination and a claim to secession, taking into account the various ways of exercising the right of self-determination including by way of autonomy within a sovereign state."

With regard to the declaration made by Pakistan upon signature, the Secetary-General received a communication from Austria (November 25, 2005):
"The Government of Austria has examined the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan upon signature of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
The application of the provisions of the Covenant has been made subject to provisions of national law. This makes it unclear to what extent the Islamic Republic of Pakistan considers itself bound by the obligations of the treaty and therefore raises concerns as to the commitment of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to the object and purpose of the Covenant.
The Government of Austria considers that the declaration made by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to the Covenant in substance constitutes a reservation and that this reservation is incompatible with the object and the purpose of the Covenant.
The Government of Austria therefore objects to the reservation made by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to the Covenant.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Republic of Austria."

加入时的声明：
“第1条：孟加拉人民共和国政府认为，本条中出现的‘人民自决权’一词适用于殖民统治、管理、外国控制、占领和类似情形。
第2条和第3条：孟加拉人民共和国政府将根据宪法相关规定，特别是继承法中经济权利的某些规定，在男女平等方面适用第2条和第3条。
第7条和第8条：孟加拉人民共和国政府将根据各项要求以及孟加拉宪法和相关立法规定的程序适用第7条和第8条。
第10条和第13条：孟加拉人民共和国政府原则上接受公约第10条和第13条的规定，不过该国将根据现有的经济条件和国家发展规划逐步实施上述规定。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

批准时的声明：
“巴哈马政府把国籍歧视解释为不一定意味着各国有义务自动保证外国人享有与其国民同样的权利。该术语应当被理解为，依据民主社会通行的原则消除任何任意行为，而不是基于客观合理的考虑消除差别待遇。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

On April 17, 2008, the Government of Pakistan informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the declaration made upon signature. The declaration reads as follows:
"While the Government of Islamic Republic of Pakistan accepts the provisions embodied in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, it will implement the said provisions in a progressive manner, in keeping with the existing economic conditions and the development plans of the country. The provisions of the Covenant shall, however, be subject to the provisions of the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan."

“巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府反对印度共和国对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第1条和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第1条的声明。
《联合国宪章》中规定以及公约所载的自决权利适用外国占领和外国统治下的所有人民。
巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府认为以违反所涉规定的明确文字的方式对自决权给予的解释为无效。此外，所述保留意见也与公约的目标和宗旨不符。这种反对意见并不妨碍巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国与印度之间的公约生效，印度不能从其保留意见中获益。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

批准时提出的保留意见：
“用一切适当方法，逐渐达到本公约中所承认的权利的充分实现。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

批准时的声明：
“巴巴多斯政府声明，它保留权利推迟：
(a) 适用公约第7条第(1)款(a)项有关男女同工同酬的规定；
(b) 适用第10条第(2)款有关对母亲在产前和产后的合理期间给予保护的规定；以及
(c) 适用公约第13条第(2)款(a)项有关初等教育的规定；因此，尽管巴巴多斯政府完全接受这些条款所载的规定，承诺采取必要措施全面实施，但是问题是现阶段不能保证这些规定全部实施。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Declaration made upon accession:
"The obligation of the Kingdom of Bahrain to implement article 8, paragraph 1 (d), of the Covenant shall not prejudice its right to prohibit strikes at essential utilities."

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 21, 2019)
"The Government of the Hellenic Republic has examined the reservation and the statement made by the State of Qatar upon accession to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 16 December 1966 (hereinafter 'the Covenant').
In the above reservation, the State of Qatar states that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 3 of the Covenant 'for they contravene the Islamic Sharia with regard to questions of inheritance and birth'.
Moreover, in the statement made upon accession to the Covenant, the Government of the State of Qatar declares that it shall implement Article 8 of the Covenant based on the understanding that 'what is meant by 'trade unions' and their related issues [...] is in line with the provisions of the Labor Law and national legislation'. However, in the view of the Government of the Hellenic Republic, this statement in fact amounts to a reservation as it limits the scope of application of Article 8 solely to the extent that it does not contravene the relevant national legislation of Qatar.
The Government of the Hellenic Republic notes that the above reservations are of a general and indeterminate scope, as they purport to subject the application of the aforementioned provisions of the Covenant to the Islamic sharia and national legislation, without, however, specifying the content thereof, and are, accordingly, contrary to the object and purpose of the Covenant, since they do not clearly define for the other States Parties the extent to which Qatar has accepted the obligations of the Covenant.
For the above reasons, the Government of the Hellenic Republic considers the aforesaid reservations of Qatar impermissible as contrary to the object and purpose of the Covenant, according to customary international law, as codified by the Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties.
The Government of the Hellenic Republic, therefore, objects to the abovementioned reservations made by the State of Qatar upon accession to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Hellenic Republic and the State of Qatar."

2004年10月11日提出的反对意见：
“希腊政府审查了土耳其共和国在批准《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》时作出的声明。
土耳其共和国声明，它将仅对与其建立外交关系的国家实施公约的规定。
希腊政府认为，这种声明实际上构成了保留意见。这种保留意见与国家间的互惠不在 涉及赋予个人权利的人权条约中占有一席之地这一原则不符，因此，这种声明违反了公约的目标和宗旨。
土耳其共和国还声明，公约仅对土耳其共和国宪法和法律与行政法令适用的国家领土批准。
希腊政府认为，这种声明实际上构成了保留意见。这种保留意见与缔约方尊重和确保公约对在该缔约方的权利或有效控制范围内的任何人规定的权利的义务不符，即使这个人不在该缔约国的领土。因此，这种保留意见违反了公约的目标和宗旨。基于这些原因，希腊政府反对土耳其共和国对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》提出的上述保留意见。
这种反对意见并不妨碍希腊共和国和土耳其共和国之间的公约生效。因此，公约在两国之间生效，土耳其共和国并不能从这些保留意见中获益。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Objection to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (25 January 2019)
"The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has carefully examined the reservation and statement made by the State of Qatar with regard to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 16 December 1966.
Both the reservation to Article 3 and the statement concerning Article 8 make the application of these provisions of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia or national legislation. The statement concerning Article 8 is thus of its nature also a reservation.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is of the opinion that by making the application of Article 3 and Article 8 of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia or national law, the State of Qatar has submitted reservations which raise doubts concerning the extent to which it intends to fulfil its obligations under the Covenant.
The above-mentioned reservations are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant and are accordingly not permitted under Article 19 sub-paragraph (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 23 May 1969. The Federal Republic of Germany thus objects to these reservations.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Federal Republic of Germany and the State of Qatar."

Objection with regard to the declaration made by Myanmar upon ratification (September 26, 2018):
"The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany is of the opinion that by granting its Constitution precedence over a provision of the Covenant as well as by restricting the term self-determination contained in Article 1 of the Covenant, Myanmar has made a reservation which makes it unclear to what extent Myanmar accepts being bound by the Covenant.
If Myanmar grants its Constitution precedence then this is a reservation of general and indeterminate scope. What is important when it comes to applying the provisions of the Covenant is conformity with international law and not with the national legislation of the state which has acceded to the Covenant.
The right to self-determination anchored in the United Nations Charter and in the Covenant applies to all peoples and not only to peoples under foreign rule. All peoples therefore have the inalienable right to freely determine their political status and to freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. The German Government cannot regard as legally valid an interpretation of the right to self-determination which is at variance with the clear meaning of the provision in question. Furthermore, it considers that any restriction of its applicability to all peoples is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany therefore objects to this reservation, which is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant and thus impermissible.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Federal Republic of Germany and Myanmar."

2005年11月8日提出的反对意见：
“德意志联邦共和国政府认真审查了巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府在签署《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》时发表的声明。
巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府声明，“它将根据其现有的经济条件和国家规划逐步实施（……)的规定”。《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》规定的一些根本义务，其中尤其包括第2条第(2)款所载的非歧视性原则，不应被逐步实施，要立即得到保证，因此，该声明显明了巴基斯坦承诺保证公约所述人权的重大资格问题。
巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府还声明，“不过，公约的各项规定应受巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国宪法的规定制约”。德意志联邦共和国政府认为，这让巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国认为其在何种程度上受公约规定的义务约束变得模糊。
因此，德意志联邦共和国政府认为上述声明属于保留意见，违反了公约的目标和宗旨。
由此，德意志联邦共和国政府反对巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》提出的上述保留意见。这种反对意见并不妨碍德意志联邦共和国与巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国之间的公约生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

2004年10月13日提出的反对意见：
“土耳其共和国政府声明，它将仅对与其建立了外交关系的国家履行公约的规定，此外还声明，它仅对土耳其共和国宪法和法律和行政指令适用的国家领土批准公约。此外，土耳其共和国政府保留依照《土耳其共和国宪法》第3条、第14条和第42条的规定解释并适用公约第13条第(3)款和第(4)款的规定的权利。
“德意志联邦共和国政府回顾指出，各国都希望，各国选择加入的条约的目标和宗旨得到各方的尊重和适用，各国准备为遵守这些条约规定的义务而进行所需的立法改革。因此，德意志联邦共和国政府对土耳其共和国对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》发表的声明和保留意见表示关注。
不过，德意志联邦共和国政府认为，这些声明并不是要把公约的范围限定在与土耳其建立了公约规定的关系的国家，也不是要强加公约未规定的任何其他限制。德意志联邦共和国政府高度重视公约第13条第(3)款和第(4)款承认的自由。德意志联邦共和国政府认为，土耳其共和国政府想要说明的是，应以保护所保证的有关自由的本质的方式解释和适用该条款。
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

1999年12月17日提出的反对意见：
“德意志联邦共和国政府注意到，对第1条的声明构成了保留意见，提出了国际法未规定的所有人民行使自决权的条件。附加这种条件可能会破坏自决权的定义，也会严重削弱其被普遍接受的特征。
德意志联邦共和国政府还指出，有关第2条和第3条、第7条和第8条，以及第10条和第13条的声明构成了一般性保留意见，因为声明指出，公约的规定可能与孟加拉国宪法、立法、经济条件和发展规划相抵触。
德意志联邦共和国政府认为，这些一般性保留意见对孟加拉国对公约的目标和宗旨的全部承诺提出了质疑。各国都希望，它们选择加入的条约的目标和宗旨受到所有各方尊重，，各国准备为遵守这些条约规定的义务而进行必须的立法改革。
“德意志联邦共和国政府反对孟加拉人民共和国政府对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》提出的上述保留意见。这种反对意见并不妨碍德意志联邦共和国与孟加拉人民共和国之间的公约生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

1997年7月10日提出的反对意见：
“德意志联邦共和国政府注意到，第2条第(2)款和第3条受国家法律的一般性保留意见制约，并认为这些一般性保留意见对科威特对公约的目标和宗旨作出的承诺提出了质疑。
德意志联邦共和国政府认为对第9条作出的解释性声明对公约的目标和宗旨产生了质疑。关于第8条第(1)款(d)项，科威特政府持有不行使公约明确规定的罢工的权利。对第9条作出的声明指出，社会保障仅适用于科威特人。它尤其认为，对第9条的声明不能以公约第2条第(3)款为依据。根据该声明，在科威特工作的诸多外国人原则上将被完全排除在社会保障保护之外。一部条约的目标和宗旨应当受到各方尊重是所有各方的共同利益。
因此，德意志联邦共和国政府反对[上述]一般性保留意见和解释性声明。
这种反对意见并不妨碍科威特和德意志联邦共和国之间的公约生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

“关于阿尔及利亚的解释性声明，秘书长于1990年10月25日收到了德国政府作出的声明，内容如下：“德意志联邦共和国在解释对第2款的声明时指出，该声明并不意在取消阿尔及利亚的义务来确保《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第8条第1款和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第22条保障的权利可仅因上述条款提到的原因受限，且此种限制应当由法律规定。
它在解释对第4款的声明时指出，阿尔及利亚在提到其国内法律制度时并不意在限制其义务来确保采取适当步骤以保护缔婚双方在缔婚、结婚期间和解除婚约时的权利和责任平等。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

1980年8月15日提出的反对意见：
“德意志联邦共和国政府强烈反对印度政府对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第1条和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第1条的声明。
《联合国宪章》规定的且在各项公约中体现的自决权适用于所有人民，而不仅仅是外国统治下的人民。因此，所有人民均享有自由决定其政治地位、自由谋求其经济、社会、文化发展的不可剥夺的权利。联邦政府视违反有关条款明确规定的对自决权的任何解释为无效，此外，还认为限制适用所有国家与公约的目标和宗旨不符。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Declaration made by the German Democratic Republic upon ratification:
"The German Democratic Republic considers that article 26, paragraph 1, of the Covenant runs counter to the principle that all States which are guided in their policies by the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter have the right to become parties to conventions which affect the interests of all States."

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 21, 2019)
"The Government of the Italian Republic has carefully examined the reservation and statement by the State of Qatar with regard to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 16 December 1966.
Both the reservation to Article 3 and the statement concerning Article 8 make the application of these provisions of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia or national legislation. The statement concerning Article 8 is thus of its nature also a reservation.
The Government of the Italian Republic is of the opinion that by making the application of Article 3 and Article 8 of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia or national law, the State of Qatar has submitted reservations which raise doubts concerning the extent to which it intends to fulfil its obligations under the Covenant.
The above-mentioned reservations are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant and are accordingly not permitted under customary international law, as codified in Article 19 sub-paragraph (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 23 May 1969. The Italian Republic thus objects to these reservations.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Italian Republic and the State of Qatar."

1997年7月25日提出的反对意见：
“意大利政府认为这些保留意见违反了这部国际公约的目标和宗旨。意大利政府指出，上述保留意见收入了对国内法的规定提出的一般性保留意见。
因此，意大利政府反对科威特政府对上述公约提出的上述保留意见。
这种反对意见并不妨碍科威特国与意大利共和国之间的公约整体生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

In a communication received on May 10, 1982, the Government of Solomon Islands declared that Solomon Islands maintains the reservations entered by the United Kingdom save in so far as the same cannot apply to Solomon Islands.

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 15, 2019)
"The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the reservation and the statement made by the State of Qatar upon ratification of the 1966 Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights.
The Republic of Latvia considers that Article 3 of the Covenant forms the very basis of the Covenant and its main purpose, thus no derogations from those obligations can be made. In addition, the statement regarding the provisions of Article 8 of the Covenant making the application of these provisions subject to national law is in its own nature also a reservation.
The reservations made by the State of Qatar regarding Article 3 and Article 8 [exclude] the legal effect of central provision[s] of the Covenant, thus the reservations are incompatible with the object and the purpose of the Covenant and therefore inadmissible under Article 19 (c) of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Republic of Latvia and the State of Qatar. Thus, the Covenant will become operative between the two States without the State of Qatar benefitting from its reservations."

Objection with regard to the declaration made by Myanmar upon ratification (October 5, 2018):
"The Government of the Republic of Latvia has carefully examined the declaration made by the Republic of the Union of Myanmar upon ratification of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
In the view of the Government of the Republic of Latvia, this declaration amounts to a reservation. Article 1 of the Covenant forms the very basis of the Covenant and its main purpose, thus no derogations from those obligations can be made.
Moreover, a reservation which subordinates any provision of the Covenant in general to the Constitution of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar constitutes a reservation of general scope which is likely to cast doubt on the full commitment of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar to the object and purpose of the Covenant.
Reservation made by the Republic of the Union of Myanmar seeks to limit the scope of the Covenant on a unilateral basis thus the reservation is incompatible with the object and the purpose of the Covenant and therefore inadmissible under Article 19(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Therefore, the Government of the Republic of Latvia objects to this reservation.
However, this objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Republic of Latvia and the Republic of the Union of Myanmar. The Covenant will thus become operative between the two States without the Republic of the Union of Myanmar benefitting from its declaration."

2005年11月10日提出的反对意见：
“拉托维亚共和国政府认真审查了巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国在加入时对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》作出的声明。
拉托维亚共和国政府认为，这个声明载有对国家法律的一般提及，促使国际公约的规定服从巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国国家法律的规定。
因此，拉托维亚共和国政府认为，这种声明其实是一种单方面行为，被认为限制了国际公约的适用范围，因此应被视为保留意见。
此外，拉托维亚共和国政府指出，该保留意见没有说清楚巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国认为其受国际公约的规定约束的程度，也没有阐明履行国际公约的规定时是否要遵守国际公约的目标和宗旨。
拉托维亚共和国政府回顾到，《维也纳条约法公约》中编撰的国际习惯法，特别是第19条 (c)项规定，不得提出违反条约的目标和宗旨的保留意见。
因此，拉托维亚共和国政府反对巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》提出的上述保留意见。
但是，这种反对意见并不妨碍拉托维亚共和国政府与巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国之间的国际公约生效。因此，国际公约将在巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国不能从保留意见中获益的情况下生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 20, 2019)
"... the Government of the Kingdom of Norway has carefully examined the reservation and the statement made by the State of Qatar upon accession to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 16 December 1966.
The reservation to Article 3 and the statement concerning Article 8 make these provisions subject to the Islamic Sharia or national legislation. Both declarations are thus formulated as reservations.
The Government of the Kingdom of Norway is of the view that by making the application of Article 3 and Article 8 of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia or national law, the State of Qatar has submitted reservations which raise doubts as to the full commitment of the State of Qatar to the object and purpose of the Covenant.
The Government of the Kingdom of Norway thus objects to these reservations. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Kingdom of Norway and the State of Qatar."

2005年11月17日提出的反对意见：
“挪威王国政府审查了巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府于2004年11月3日在签署《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》(1966年12月16日于纽约)时作出的声明。根据声明第一部分，巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府“将根据该国现有的经济条件和发展计划逐步实施(公约所载的)规定”。由于公约所载的一些基本义务，其中尤其包括第2条第(2)款的不歧视原则，是不易于逐步实施的，须立即给予保证，因此挪威王国政府认为，这部分声明对巴基斯坦是否有明显的资格承诺保证实施公约所载的规定提出了质疑。
根据声明第二部分，“但是，公约规定应受巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国宪法的规定制约。”挪威王国政府指出，一般性提及国家法律而未明确内容并没有清晰地向公约其他缔约国说明保留国接受公约义务的程度。
挪威王国政府认为，巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府的声明试图单方限制公约的范围，因此构成了保留意见。挪威王国政府认为这两种保留意见均与公约的目标和宗旨不符，因此反对巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府提出的保留意见。
这种反对意见并不妨碍挪威王国与巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国之间的公约完全生效，巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国也不能从其保留意见中获益。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

2002年4月23日提出的反对意见：
“挪威政府审查了中华人民共和国在批准《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》时作出的声明。
挪威政府认为，中国的声明实质上构成了保留意见，因此对其表示反对。
根据声明第一段，适用公约第8条第1款(a)项时应与国家立法相关规定保持一致。这种在援引国家立法时而没有进一步说明内容会让其他国家无法明白声明的意图。此外，相关规定的内容本身不仅极为重要，而且如果不能得到落实，也会降低公约其他条款的实施力度，如第6条和第7条。
基于上述原因，挪威政府反对中华人民共和国作出的上述声明内容，因为这与公约的目标和宗旨不符。
这种反对意见并不妨碍挪威王国与中华人民共和国之间的公约完全生效。因此，公约会让挪威与中国开展合作而不能使中国从保留意见中获益。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

1997年7月22日提出的反对意见：
“挪威政府认为，缔约国通过援引国内法一般原则来试图限制它的责任的声明可能会对保留国对公约的目标和宗旨的承诺提出质疑，另外也会损害国际条约法的基础。根据公认的条约法，一国不得援引国内法作为其不能履行条约义务的理由。此外，挪威政府认为，对第8条第1款(d)项和第9条提出的保留意见就公约的目标和宗旨而言有问题。基于上述原因，挪威政府反对科威特政府提出的上述保留意见。
挪威政府认为这种反对意见并不妨碍挪威王国与科威特国之间的公约生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

批准时的声明：
“受对第8条第1款(d)项提出的保留意见制约”，大意是挪威目前在根据议会法案有关特定冲突的规定把劳资冲突提交国家工资委员会(这是一个处理工资问题的常设三方委员会)解决，这种作法并不被视为与罢工权利冲突，挪威对这一权利也予以了充分认可。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 20, 2019)
"The Government of the Czech Republic has examined the reservation and statement formulated by the State of Qatar upon its accession to the International Covenant· on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
The Government of the Czech Republic is of the view that both the reservation formulated by the State of Qatar with respect to Article 3 of the Covenant and the statement with respect to Article 8 of the Covenant amount to reservations of general and vague nature, since they make the application of specific provisions of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia and national law and their character and scope cannot be properly assessed.
The Government of the Czech Republic wishes to recall that the reservations may not be general or vague and that the Covenant is to be applied and interpreted in accordance with international law.
The Government of the Czech Republic therefore considers the aforementioned reservations to be incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant and objects to them. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Czech Republic and the State of Qatar, without the State of Qatar benefitting from the reservations."

Declaration made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification:
"The Czechoslovak Socialist Republic declares that the provisions of article 26, paragraph 1, of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights are in contradiction with the principle that all States have the right to become parties to multilateral treaties governing matters of general interest."

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 21, 2019)
"The Government of the Republic of Moldova has carefully examined the reservation and statement made by the State of Qatar on May 21, 2018 upon accession to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 16 December 1966.
Both the reservation to Article 3 and the statement concerning Article 8 make the application of these provisions of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia or national legislation. The statement concerning Article 8 is thus of its nature also a reservation.
The Republic of Moldova considers that the reservations regarding Articles 3 and 8 of the Covenant are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant since these articles form an essential element of the Covenant, and are accordingly not permitted under Article 19 sub-paragraph (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 23 May 1969.
Therefore, the Republic of Moldova objects to the aforementioned reservations made by the State of Qatar.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Republic of Moldova and the State of Qatar. The Covenant enters into force in its entire[t]y between the Republic of Moldova and the State of Qatar, without the State of Qatar benefiting from its reservation."

签署时发表且在批准时证实的声明和保留意见：
“ 王国政府声明，它将第2条第2款所载的不得对国籍产生歧视之原则解释为不一定意味着各国自动有义务保证外侨拥有与其国民相同的权利。
王国政府还声明，第6条、第9条、第11条和第13条不得对制约外侨获得工作权的规定构成障碍，也不得对为授予一定的社会利益而规定居住条件的条款构成障碍。
王国政府声明，它认为第8条第1款(a)项、(b)项和(c)项关于行使工会权利应与确保工会的代表性有效并促进劳动关系和谐的关于手续、条件和程序的适当的立法规定保持一致。
王国政府声明，在履行第8条关于行使罢工权的规定时，应当考虑到依法规定的要求、条件、限制和约束，这对民主社会保障他人的权利和自由或维护公共秩序、保护国家安全、公共卫生或道德是必要的。
第8条第2款应解释为适用于警察部队的成员、国家机构、社区和公共企业。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

2009年4月9日提出的反对意见：
“斯洛伐克共和国政府仔细审查了巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府在批准1966年12月16日通过的《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》时提出的保留意见，根据该保留意见，“用一切适当方法，逐渐达到本公约中所承认的权利的充分实现。”
斯洛伐克共和国政府认为，该保留意见过于笼统，内容也不明确，因此对巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国对由其履行公约的目标和宗旨的义务而作出的承诺提出了质疑。
为此，斯洛伐克共和国政府反对巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府在批准《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》时提出的上述保留意见。
这种反对意见并不妨碍斯洛伐克共和国和巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国之间的《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》生效。《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》在斯洛伐克共和国和巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国之间完全生效，巴基斯坦不能从其保留意见中获益。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

批准时的声明：
“新西兰政府保留在下列情况下不适用第8条的权利，即：为确保有效地代表工会并鼓励有序的劳资关系而实施的现有立法措施可能与该条款规定不完全一致。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

On September 11, 2012, the Government of Japan informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the following reservation made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification:
"In applying the provisions of sub-paragraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 of article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Japan reserves the right not to be bound by 'in particular by the progressive introduction of free education' referred to in the said provisions."

Reservations and declarations made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification:
"1. In applying the provisions of paragraph (d) of article 7 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Japan reserves the right not be bound by 'remuneration for public holidays' referred to in the said provisions.
2. Japan reserves the right not to be bound by the provisions of sub-paragraph (d) of paragraph 1 of article 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, except in relation to the sectors in which the right referred to in the said provisions is accorded in accordance with the laws and regulations of Japan at the time of ratification of the Covenant by the Government of Japan.
3. In applying the provisions of sub-paragraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 of article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Japan reserves the right not to be bound by 'in particular by the progressive introduction of free education' referred to in the said provisions.
4. Recalling the position taken by the Government of Japan, when ratifying the Convention (No. 87) concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, that 'the police' referred to in article 9 of the said Convention be interpreted to include the fire service of Japan, the Government of Japan declares that 'members of the police' referred to in paragraph 2 of article 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as well as in paragraph 2 of article 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights be interpreted to include fire service personnel of Japan."

批准时的解释性声明：
“1. 关于第2条第2款，比利时政府把国籍歧视解释为不一定意味着各国有义务自动保证外国人享有与其国民同样的权利。该术语应当被理解为，依据民主社会通行的原则消除任何任意行为，而不是基于客观合理的考虑消除差别待遇。”
2. 关于第2条第3款，比利时政府认为，这一规定不能侵犯征用或国有化情况下的公平补偿原则。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

With regard to the reservation made by Pakistan upon ratification, the Secetary-General received the following communication from France (April 16, 2009):
"The Government of the French Republic has examined the reservation made by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan upon ratification of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which was adopted on 16 December 1966. The reservation states that "Pakistan, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized in the present Covenant, shall use all appropriate means to the maximum of its available resources." Although this declaration has been referred to as a "reservation", it simply reformulates the content of article 2, paragraph 1, of the Covenant. Furthermore, it cannot have the effect of modifying the other provisions of the Covenant without constituting a reservation of general scope that is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant. The Government of the French Republic therefore considers the "reservation" by Pakistan to be a mere declaration that is devoid of legal effect."

2005年11月11日提出的反对意见：
“法兰西共和国政府审查了巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府在批准1966年12月16日通过的《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》时提出的保留意见。保留意见声明，“巴基斯坦将用一切适当方法，尤其包括用立法方法，逐渐达到本公约中所承认的权利的充分实现。”尽管该声明被称为“保留意见”，但是它其实只是重新构建了公约第2条第1款的内容。此外，它不具有修改公约其他规定的效力，也不属于与公约的目标和宗旨不符的一般范围的保留意见。因此，法兰西共和国政府认为，巴基斯坦的“保留意见”仅仅是一项“声明”，不具有法律效力。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

1999年9月30日提出的反对意见：
“法国政府指出，孟加拉国的‘声明’实际上构成了保留意见，因为声明的目的是妨碍或修改条约的一些规定的法律效力。关于对第1条的声明，保留意见强调的是行使《联合国宪章》没有规定的人民自决权的条件。对第2条和第3条以及第7条和第8条的声明指出，公约承认的个人权利应当服从国内法，这属于一般性的保留意见，损害了条约的目标和宗旨。特别是，国家的经济条件和发展前景不应当影响缔婚必须经男女双方自由同意，应为一切儿童和少年采取特殊的保护和协助措施，不得因出生或其他条件而有任何歧视，也不得影响父母或法律监护人为儿童选择学校的自由。经济困难或发展问题不能成为一个缔约国完全免除承担公约规定的义务的理由。为此，孟加拉国须依照公约第10条第3款的规定，采取特殊的保护和协助措施，保护儿童和少年免受经济和社会的剥削。雇佣他们做对他们的道德或健康有害的工作，依法应受惩罚。孟加拉国还应规定限定的年龄，凡雇佣这个年龄以下的童工，应依法予以禁止。因此，法国政府对上述一般范围的保留意见表示反对。不过，这种反对意见并不妨碍孟加拉国与法国之间的公约生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

1980年11月4日提出的反对意见：
“共和国政府反对印度政府对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第1条持有的保留意见，这条保留意见附加了《联合国宪章》所未曾规定的行使自决权的条件。本声明不应被视为会妨碍法兰西共和国和印度共和国之间的公约生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

加入时的声明：
“(1)共和国政府认为，依照《联合国宪章》第103条，若公约规定的义务与宪章（尤其是第1条和第2条）规定的义务相冲突时，将以宪章规定的义务为准。
(2) 共和国政府声明，第6条、第9条、第11条和第13条不应被解释为不遵守制约外国人就业的规定，也不应被解释成为分配某些社会福利而制定了居住地要求。
(3)共和国政府声明，它将依照《欧洲社会宪章》第6条第4款以及宪章附件对其的解释实施公约第8条有关权利的规定。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Objection with regard to the reservation and declaration made by Qatar upon accession (20 March 2019):
"The Government of the Republic of Poland has carefully examined the [reservation] to the Article 3 and the declaration to the Article 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, done in New York on December 16, 1966, done upon its [accession] on May 21, 2018.
The Government of the Republic of Poland considers the reservation that the Qatar does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 3 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, for they contravene the Islamic Sharia with regard to questions of inheritance and birth and the statement according to which the Qatar shall interpret that what is meant by 'trade unions' and their related issues stated in Article 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, is in line with the provisions of the Labor Law and national legislation and that the Qatar reserves the right to implement that article in accordance with such understanding is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant. Therefore the Government of the Republic of Poland objects to them.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the [Covenant] between the Republic of Poland and the State of Qatar."

加入时的声明：
“泰国王国政府声明，在解释公约第1条第(1)款中出现的“自决”一词时应与世界人权会议1993年6月25日通过的《维也纳宣言和行动纲领》中的内容相符。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 20, 2019)
"Ireland welcomes the accession of Qatar to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights on 21 May 2018.
Ireland has examined the reservation and statement made by Qatar to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights at the time of its accession.
Ireland is of the view that the reservation by Qatar, purporting to exclude its obligations under Article 3, is contrary to the object and purpose of the Covenant.
Ireland is furthermore of the view that the statement by Qatar, purporting to subject the implementation of Article 8 to national law, in substance constitutes a reservation limiting the scope of the Covenant.
Ireland considers that such reservations, which purport to subject the reserving State's obligations under an international agreement to national law without specifying the content thereof and which do not clearly specify the extent of the derogation from the provisions of the international agreement, may cast doubt on the commitment of the reserving State to fulfil its obligations under the international agreement. Ireland is furthermore of the view that such a reservation may undermine the basis of international treaty law and is incompatible with the object and purpose of the international agreement. Ireland recalls that under international treaty law a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the international agreement shall not be permitted.
Ireland therefore objects to the aforesaid reservations made by Qatar to Articles 3 and 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between Ireland and Qatar."

Objection with regard to declaration made by Myanmar upon ratification (October 4, 2018):
"Ireland has examined the declaration made by Myanmar to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights at the time of its ratification on 6 October 2017.
Ireland is of the view that the declaration of Myanmar, purporting to subject the application of the term "the right of self-determination" to the provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar, in substance constitutes a reservation limiting the scope of the Covenant.
Ireland considers that a reservation which consists of a general reference to the Constitution of the reserving State and which does not clearly specify the extent of the derogation from the provision of the Covenant may cast doubt on the commitment of the reserving state to fulfil its obligations under the Covenant. Ireland is furthermore of the view that such a reservation may undermine the basis of international treaty law and is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant. Ireland recalls that under international treaty law a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant shall not be permitted.
Ireland therefore objects to the aforesaid reservation made by Myanmar to Article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between Ireland and Myanmar."

批准时的保留意见：
“ 第2条第2款：在政府政策借助一切适当手段加强、促进、鼓励使用爱尔兰语这一背景下，爱尔兰保留要求或鼓励某些职业掌握爱尔兰语的权利。
第13条第2款 (a)项：爱尔兰承认父母有为孩子提供教育的不可剥夺的权利和责任，尽管承认国家有义务提供免费初等教育，并要求儿童得到最低限度的教育，但是该国还是保留允许父母为他们的孩子提供家庭式教育的权利，但条件是要遵守最低标准。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 8, 2019)
"The Government of Estonia has carefully examined the reservation made by the State of Qatar to Article 3 and the statement concerning Article 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Estonia considers that the reservation as well as the statement make the application of these provisions of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia or national legislation. The statement concerning Article 8 is thus of its nature also a reservation. Estonia is of the opinion that by making Article 3 and Article 8 of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia or national law, the State of Qatar has submitted reservations which raise doubts concerning the extent to which it intends to fulfil its obligations under the Covenant. Thus, Estonia considers the reservation and the statement to be incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant and objects to them.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Republic of Estonia and the State of Qatar."

加入时的声明：
“关于公约第8条第(1)款(d)项和第8条第(2)款，特立尼达和多巴哥政府保留对根据工业关系法或根据特立尼达和多巴哥宪法的规定通过的任何替代章程从事主要服务的人员行使上述权利加以合法或合理的限制这一权利。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

The Secretary-General received the following communication(s) related to the reservations made by Qatar: (May 22, 2019)
"The Government of Sweden has examined the statement and the reservation made by the State of Qatar upon accession to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. In this context the Government of Sweden would like to recall, that under well-established international treaty law, the name assigned to a statement whereby the legal effect of certain provisions of a treaty is excluded or modified, does not determine its status as a reservation to the treaty. Thus, the Government of Sweden considers that the statement made by the State of Qatar concerning Article 8, in the absence of further clarification, in substance constitutes a reservation to the [Covenant].
The Government of Sweden notes that the interpretation and application of Article 3 and Article 8 are made subject to in general terms to Islamic sharia and/or national legislation. The Government of Sweden is of the view that such reservations, which does not clearly specify the extent of the derogations, raises doubt as to the commitment of the State of Qatar to the object and purpose of the [Covenant].
According to customary international law, as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of the [Covenant] shall not be permitted. It is in the common interest of states that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties are respected, as to their object and purpose, by all parties and that states are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations under the treaties.
For this reason, the Government of Sweden objects to the aforementioned reservations made by the Government of Qatar. The [Covenant] shall enter into force in its entirety between the two States, without Qatar benefitting from its reservations."

Objection with regard to the declaration made by Myanmar upon ratification (October 4, 2018):
"The Government of Sweden has examined the declaration made by the Government of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar upon ratification to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights by which, with reference to Article 1, it declared that the term 'right to self-determination' does not apply to any section of people within a sovereign independent state and cannot be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of a sovereign and independent state and also that the provision of the Covenant will only be applied in conformity with the Constitution of Myanmar.
In this context the Government of Sweden would like to recall, that under well-established international treaty law, the name assigned to a statement whereby the legal effect of certain provisions of a treaty is excluded or modified, does not determine its status as a reservation to the treaty. Thus, the Government of Sweden considers that the declaration made by the Government of Myanmar, in the absence of further clarification, in substance constitutes a reservation to the Covenant.
The declaration concerning Article 1 places conditions on the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination not provided for in international law. To attach such conditions could undermine the concept of self-determination itself and would thereby seriously weaken its universally acceptable character.
Furthermore, the Government of Sweden notes that the declaration implies that Article 1 of the Covenant is made subject to a general reservation referring to domestic law of Myanmar.
Consequently, the Government of Sweden is of the view that the declaration raises doubts as to the commitment of Myanmar to the object and purpose of the Covenant and would recall that, according to customary international law, as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted. It is in the common interest of States that treaties to which they have chosen to become parties are respected as to their object and purpose, by all parties, and that States are prepared to undertake any legislative changes necessary to comply with their obligations under the treaties.
For this reason, the Government of Sweden objects to the aforementioned reservation made by the Government of Myanmar. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the treaty between Sweden and Myanmar. The treaty enters into force in its entirety between Myanmar and Sweden without Myanmar benefiting from its reservation."

2005年3月1日提出的反对意见：
“瑞典政府希望回顾到，借助声明使用的名称使一部条约中某些规定的法律效力被排除或修改的，不可根据这一名称来确定其是否属于条约的保留意见。
瑞典政府认为，尽管公约第2条第(1)款允许逐渐实现公约规定，但是不可将其援引为歧视的基础。
适用公约的规定时是受《巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国宪法》的规定制约的，这会让人不明白，巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国认为其受条约义务约束的程度如何，因此也会对巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国对公约之目标和宗旨作出的承诺提出质疑。瑞典政府认为，巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》作出的声明实质上构成了保留意见。
各国均希望各方都尊重它们选择加入的条约，各国也准备在必要时对立法作出修改，以与条约规定的义务保持一致。根据《维也纳条约法公约》中的国际习惯法，各国不得提出违反一部条约的目标和宗旨的保留意见。
因此，瑞典政府反对巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》提出的保留意见。
这种反对意见并不妨碍巴基斯坦与瑞典之间的公约生效，巴基斯坦也不能从其保留意见中获益。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

2004年6月30日提出的反对意见：
瑞典政府审查了土耳其共和国在批准《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》时发表的声明和保留意见。
土耳其共和国声明，该国将仅对与其建立了外交关系的缔约国履行公约的规定。瑞典政府认为，这项声明实际上构成了保留意见。土耳其共和国的保留意见让人不明白，土耳其共和国认为其受条约义务约束的程度如何。因此，由于缺乏进一步的明确说明，这个保留意见对土耳其共和国对公约之目标和宗旨作出的承诺提出了质疑。
瑞典政府注意到，在诠释和适用公约第13条第(3)款和第(4)款时要受涉及土耳其共和国宪法若干规定的保留意见制约，同时这种保留意见也没有明确指出具体内容。因此，瑞典政府认为，由于缺乏进一步明确说明，这种没有明确指明土耳其共和国减损履行所涉规定的程度的保留意见对土耳其共和国对公约之目标和宗旨作出的承诺提出了严重质疑。
根据《维也纳条约法公约》中公认的国际习惯法，各国不得提出违反一部条约的目标和宗旨的保留意见。各国均希望，它们选择加入的条约的目标和宗旨得到各方的尊重，各国也准备为履行这些条约规定的义务而进行必须的立法改革。
因此，瑞典政府反对土耳其共和国对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》提出的上述保留意见。
这种反对意见并不妨碍土耳其共和国与瑞典之间的公约生效。公约在两国间完全生效，土耳其共和国不能从其保留意见中获益。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

2002年4月2日提出的反对意见：
“瑞典政府审查了这份声明，并希望回顾到，根据公认的国际条约法，借助声明使用的名称使一部条约中某些规定的法律效力被排除或修改的，则不能根据这一名称来确定声明是否属于条约的保留意见。瑞典政府认为，中华人民共和国政府对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第8条第1款(a)项作出的声明实质上构成了保留意见。
瑞典政府注意到，适用公约第8条第1款(a)项时要受涉及国家立法规定的声明制约。根据《维也纳条约法公约》，加入一部条约的缔约方不可援引其国内法作为其不遵守条约的理由。此外，人人有权组织工会和参加他所选择的工会是公约的基本原则之一。瑞典政府希望回顾到，根据《维也纳条约法公约》中的国际习惯法，各国不得提出与一部条约的目标和宗旨不符的保留意见。
因此，瑞典政府反对中华人民共和国对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》提出的保留意见。该公约是在中国不能从保留意见中获益的条件下生效的。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

1999年12月14日提出的反对意见：
“为此，瑞典政府希望回顾到，根据公认的国际条约法，借助声明使用的名称使一部条约中某些规定的法律效力被排除或修改的，则不能根据这一名称来确定声明是否属于条约的保留意见。因此，瑞典政府认为，由于缺乏进一步的明确说明，孟加拉国政府的声明实质上构成了公约的保留意见。
关于第1条的声明提出的国际法未规定的行使人民自决权的条件，附加这种条件可能会损害自决权这一概念，由此也会严重削弱其被普遍接受的特征。
此外，瑞典政府指出，有关第2条和第3条以及第7条和第8条的声明意味着公约的这些条款要受涉及孟加拉国国内法相关规定的一般性保留意见制约。
因此，瑞典政府认为，由于缺乏进一步的明确说明，因此这些声明对孟加拉国对公约之目标和宗旨作出的承诺提出了质疑。该国还希望回顾到，根据公认的国际法，各国不得提出与一部条约的目标和宗旨不符的保留意见。
各国均希望，各方都尊重它们选择加入的条约的目标和宗旨，各国也准备在必要时对立法作出修改，以与条约规定的义务保持一致。
因此，瑞典政府反对孟加拉国政府对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》提出的上述一般性保留意见。
这种反对意见并不妨碍孟加拉国与瑞典之间的公约生效。因此公约将使两国之间开展合作，孟加拉国不能从其声明中获益。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

1997年7月23日提出的反对意见：
“瑞典政府认为，这些一般性保留意见可能对科威特对公约之目标和宗旨作出的承诺提出了质疑。
瑞典政府认为，关于科威特政府提出的有权不履行公约明确规定的罢工权利的保留意见以及关于人人有权享受社会保障的第9条仅适用科威特人的解释性声明就公约的目标和宗旨而言有问题。该国尤其认为，关于第9条的声明将原则上完全把在科威特境内工作的许多外国人排除在社会保障保护之外，而这个声明是不能依据公约第2条第(3)款作出的。
各国均希望，一部条约的目标和宗旨得到各方的尊重。
因此，瑞典政府反对上述一般性保留意见和解释性声明。
这种反对意见并不妨碍科威特与瑞典之间的公约完全生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

批准时的声明：
“瑞典就公约第7条(d)项有关公共假日报酬事宜提出了一项保留意见。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 17, 2019)
"The Swiss Federal Council has examined the reservation and the statement made by the State of Qatar upon accession to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 16 December 1966.
The Swiss Federal Council considers that the declaration of Qatar concerning article 8 of the Covenant amounts, in fact, to a reservation. Reservations subjecting all or part of article 3 and article 8 of the Covenant in general terms to Islamic Sharia and/or national legislation constitute reservations of general scope which raise doubts about the full commitment of the State of Qatar to the object and purpose of the Covenant. The Swiss Federal Council recalls that, according to sub-paragraph (c) of article 19 of the Vienna Convention of 23 May 1969 on the Law of Treaties, reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant are not permitted.
It is in the common interest of States that instruments to which they have chosen to become parties be respected in their object and purpose by all parties, and that States be prepared to amend their legislation in order to fulfil their treaty obligations.
Henceforth, the Swiss Federal Council objects to these reservations of the State of Qatar. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant, in its entirety, between Switzerland and the State of Qatar."

On September 30, 1992, the Government of Belarus notified the Secretary-General its decision to withdraw the reservation made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification:
"The Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic declares that the provisions of paragraph 1 of article 26 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and of paragraph 1 of article 48 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, under which a number of States cannot become parties to these Covenants, are of a discriminatory nature and considers that the Covenants, in accordance with the principle of sovereign equality of States, should be open for participation by all States concerned without any discrimination or limitation."

Declarations made upon accession:
Interpretative declaration regarding article 2, paragraph 2, and article 3:
"Although the Government of Kuwait endorses the worthy principles embodied in article 2, paragraph 2, and article 3 as consistent with the provisions of the Kuwait Constitution in general and of its article 29 in particular, it declares that the rights to which the articles refer must be exercised within the limits set by Kuwaiti law."
Interpretative declaration regarding article 9:
"The Government of Kuwait declares that while Kuwaiti legislation safeguards the rights of all Kuwaiti and non-Kuwaiti workers, social security provisions apply only to Kuwaitis."
Reservation concerning article 8, paragraph 1 (d):
"The Government of Kuwait reserves the right not to apply the provisions of article 8, paragraph 1 (d)."

Declaration made upon ratification:
"With reference to article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Government of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar declares that, in consistence with the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action of 1993, the term "the right of self-determination" appearing in this article does not apply to any section of people within a sovereign independent state and cannot be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of a sovereign and independent state. In addition, the term shall not be applied to undermine Section 10 of the Constitution of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar, 2008."

Objection with regard to the reservation and declaration made by Qatar upon accession: (May 20, 2019)
"Romania has examined the reservation and the declaration made upon [accession] by the State of Qatar to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (New York, 1966).
Romania considers that the reservation aiming to interpret the Article 3 of the Covenant in the light of the Islamic sharia and the declaration aiming at interpreting the Article 8 of the Covenant in the light with the national legislation qualifies them as reservations of undefined character, inadmissible under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. In accordance with Article 27 of Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, it is the duty of States Parties to a treaty to ensure that their internal law allows the application and observance of the treaty.
Moreover, the general nature of the reservations limits the understanding as to the extent of the obligations assumed by State of Qatar under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Therefore, Romania objects to the reservations formulated by State of Qatar to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as being incompatible with the scope and purpose of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as required by the Article 19 (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
This objection shall not affect the entry into force of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights between Romania and State of Qatar."

批准时作出的声明：
“(a)罗马尼亚社会主义共和国国务院认为，《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第26条第1款的规定与其宗旨涉及国际社会整体的多边国际条约须开放供各国参与这一原则不符。
(b)罗马尼亚社会主义共和国国务院认为，《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第1条第3款和第14条提及的负责管理非自治领土的国家与《联合国宪章》和联合国通过的有关给予殖民地国家和人民独立的文书不符，其中包括联合国大会在其第2625(XXV)号决议(1970年)中一致通过的《关于各国依联合国宪章建立友好关系和合作的国际法原则宣言》，后者庄重宣布，各国有义务促进实现人民平等权利和自决权，迅速终结殖民主义。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

签署时作出的声明：
“罗马尼亚社会主义共和国政府声明，《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第26条第1款的规定与各国均有权加入有关各国普遍关心的事宜的多边条约这一原则有出入。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 21, 2019)
"The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has examined the reservation and declaration made by the State of Qatar on ratification of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights ('the Covenant'), done at New York on 16 December 1966, which read:
Reservation
The State of Qatar does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 3 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, for they contravene the Islamic Sharia with regard to questions of inheritance and birth.
Declaration
The State of Qatar shall interpret that what is meant by "trade unions" and their related issues stated in Article 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Right[s], is in line with the provisions of the Labor Law and national legislation. The State of Qatar reserves the right to implement that article in accordance with such understanding.
In respect of the reservation to Article 3, the Government of the United Kingdom understands this to mean that the State of Qatar considers itself bound by the provisions of Article 3, except with regard to questions of inheritance and birth, and will interpret the State of Qatar's obligations under the Covenant accordingly.
The Government of the United Kingdom considers that the Government of the State of Qatar's declaration in respect of Article 8, which seeks to subject its obligations under the Covenant to the provisions of its own national legislation, is a reservation which seeks to limit the scope of the Covenant on a unilateral basis. The Government of the United Kingdom notes that a reservation to a convention which consists of a general reference to national law without specifying its contents does not clearly define for the other States Parties to the convention the extent to which the reserving State has accepted the obligations of the convention. The Government of the United Kingdom therefore objects to this reservation made by the Government of the State of Qatar.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the State of Qatar."

2005年8月17日提出的反对意见：
“联合王国政府审查了巴基斯坦政府2004年11月3日在签署《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》(1966年12月16日在纽约缔结)时作出的声明。
联合王国政府认为，巴基斯坦政府的声明试图使公约规定的义务受该国宪法的规定制约，属于一种试图单方限制公约范围的保留意见。联合王国政府指出，如果一种保留意见一般性提及国家法律而不明确其内容，就不能够向公约其他缔约国清晰地界定保留国接受公约规定的义务的程度，因此，联合王国政府反对巴基斯坦政府提出的保留意见。
这种反对意见并不妨碍大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国与巴基斯坦之间的公约生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

批准时的声明：
“首先，联合王国政府维持其在签署公约时对第1条作出的声明。
联合王国政府声明，在英属维尔京群岛、开曼群岛、吉尔伯特群岛、皮特凯恩群岛、圣赫勒拿岛及附属岛屿、特克斯和凯科斯群岛以及图瓦卢履行第2条第(3)款的决定，因为上述领土为发展中国家。
联合王国政府保留诠释第6条的权利，不排除根据出生地或居住地资格，为保护该地区或领土的工人就业机会之目地而制定有关在该地区或领土就业的限制的规定。
联合王国保留推迟适用第7条第(a)款(i)项的权利，因为该条款涉及在泽西岛、根西岛、马恩岛、百慕达、香港和所罗门群岛的私人部门工作的男人女人同工同酬的规定。
联合王国政府保留不对香港适用第8条第1款(b)项的权利。
联合王国政府尽管根据第9条承认人人有权享受社会保障，但是仍保留推迟在开曼群岛和福克兰群岛履行这一权利的权利，因为这些领土资源短缺。
联合王国政府保留推迟对所罗门群岛少数习俗婚姻适用第10条第1款以及对百慕达和福克兰群岛适用第10条第2款关于带薪产假的权利。
联合王国政府保持推迟在吉尔伯特群岛、所罗门群岛和图瓦卢适用第13条第2款(a)项和第14条关于要求实施义务性的初等教育的权利。
最后，联合王国政府声明，公约的规定将不适用南罗得西亚，除非且直到该地区向联合国秘书长通知，它们能够确保公约对该领土规定的义务能够完全履行。
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

签署时的声明：
“首先，联合王国政府声明，该国认为，依据《联合国宪章》第103条的规定，联合国会员国在本宪章下之义务与其依公约第1条所赋之义务有冲突时，其在本宪章下(尤其是第1条、第2条和第73条)之义务应居优先。
其次，联合王国政府声明，该国须保留推迟适用公约第7条第(a)款(i)项的权利，因为该条款涉及男女同工同酬的规定。尽管该国完全接受这一原则，并承诺将努力尽早完全履行，但是问题是目前并不能够保证完全履行。
第三，联合王国政府声明，关于公约第8条，该国须保留不对香港适用第1条(b)款的权利，因为该条款涉及不从事同一行业或产业的工会有权成立联合会或协会。
最后，联合王国政府声明，公约的规定将不适用南罗得西亚，除非且直到该国已向联合国秘书长通知，它们能够确保公约对该领土规定的义务能够完全履行。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

加入时的声明：
“ 尽管肯尼亚政府承认并赞同公约第10条第2款规定的原则，但是目前的情况下，肯尼亚认为通过立法实施这些原则没有必要，也不是适当时机。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 14, 2019)
"The Government of Finland is pleased to learn that the State of Qatar has become party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. However, the Government of Finland has carefully examined the reservation to Article 3 and the statement concerning Article 8 made by the State of Qatar upon accession, and is of the view that they raise certain concerns. In fact, also the statement amounts to a reservation that purports to subject the application of one of the Covenant's provisions to national legislation.
Both reservations make the application of these provisions of the Covenant subject to the Islamic Sharia or national legislation. Thus, the Government of Finland is of the opinion that the State of Qatar has submitted reservations which cast doubts on the commitment of Qatar to the object and purpose of the Covenant. Such reservations are, furthermore, subject to the general principle of treaty interpretation according to which a party may not invoke the provisions of its domestic law as justification for a failure to perform its treaty obligations.
The above-mentioned reservations are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant and are accordingly not permitted under Article 19 sub-paragraph (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Therefore, the Government of Finland objects to these reservations. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Republic of Finland and the State of Qatar. The Covenant will thus enter into force between the two states without Qatar benefitting from the aforementioned reservation."

Objection with regard to declaration made by Myanmar upon ratification (September 25, 2018):
"The Government of Finland is pleased to learn that the Republic of Myanmar has become party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. However, the Government of Finland has carefully examined the declaration made by the Republic of the Union of Myanmar upon ratification, and is of the view that it raises certain concerns. In fact, the declaration amounts to a reservation that purports to subject the application of one of the core articles of the Covenant to the Constitution of Myanmar.
Reservation of such an indeterminate and general scope as that made by Myanmar is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant and as such one that is not permitted. Therefore Finland objects to it. This objection shall not preclude the continued validity of the Covenant between the Republic of Finland and the Republic of the Union of Myanmar. The Covenant will thus continue to operate between the two states without Myanmar benefitting from the aforementioned reservation."

2005年11月15日提出的反对意见：
“芬兰政府认真审查了巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》作出的声明。芬兰政府注意到，根据巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府的声明，公约规定应受巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国宪法规定制约。
芬兰政府指出，这种保留意见只是总体提到了国家法律，而并未明确指出有关具体内容，因此没有清晰地告知公约其他缔约方保留国承诺遵守公约的程度，也对接受国履行公约义务的承诺造成了严重的忧虑。此外，这种保留意见应受条约解释的一般原则制约。根据这种原则，一方不可援引其国内法的规定，作为不能履行其条约义务的理由。
因此，芬兰政府反对巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府对公约作出的上述声明。不过，这种反对意见并不妨碍巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国与芬兰之间的公约生效。由此，公约应让两个国家开展合作，而不是让巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国从其声明中获益。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

2004年10月13日提出的反对意见：
“芬兰政府审查了土耳其共和国对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》发表的声明和保留意见。芬兰政府注意到，土耳其共和国保留依照土耳其共和国宪法第3条、第14条和第42条的规定解释和适用公约第13条第3款和第4款的规定的权利。
芬兰政府强调说，《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第13条第3款和第4款规定的权利非常重要。仅提及土耳其共和国宪法的一些条款，内容空泛，也没有明确指出保留意见的内容，因此，芬兰政府希望声明，它假设土耳其共和国政府会保证实施公约承认的权利，会尽最大努力让其国家立法与公约规定的义务保持一致，并撤销保留意见。不过，该声明并不妨碍土耳其共和国与芬兰之间的公约生效。
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

1999年12月13日提出的反对意见：
“芬兰政府审查了孟加拉国政府对第2条、第3条、第7条、第8条、第10条和第13条作出的声明。它注意到，这些声明构成了保留意见的内容，因为这些声明似乎要修改孟加拉国对上述条例的义务。
芬兰政府指出，这种保留意见只是总体提到了国家法律，而并未明确指出有关具体内容，因此没有清晰地告知公约其他缔约方保留国承诺遵守公约的程度，也对接收国履行公约义务的承诺造成了严重的忧虑。此外，这种保留意见应受条约解释的一般原则制约。根据这种原则，一方不可援引其国内法的规定，作为不能履行其条约义务的理由。
因此，芬兰政府反对孟加拉国政府提出的上述保留意见。不过，这种反对意见并不妨碍孟加拉国与芬兰之间的公约生效。由此，公约应当让两国开展合作，而不是让孟加拉国从这些保留意见中获益。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

1997年7月25日提出的反对意见：
“芬兰政府注意到，依照对第2条第2款和对第3条的解释性声明，上述公约条款在适用时总体上要参照国家法律。芬兰政府认为，这种解释性声明属于一种一般性保留意见。芬兰政府认为，这种一般性保留意见对科威特对公约的目标和宗旨作出的承诺提出了质疑。芬兰政府还回顾说，各国不可提出与公约的目标和宗旨不符的保留意见。
芬兰政府还认为，对第9条的解释性声明属于一种保留意见，并认为根据公约的目标和宗旨，这种保留意见以及对第8条第1款(d)项作出的保留意见均有问题。
各国都希望它们选择加入的条约的目标和宗旨得到各方尊重，也希望各国做好准备，为遵守条约规定的义务而对相关立法进行所需的修改。
芬兰政府还认为，科威特政府提出的那种一般性保留意见没有明确指出不遵守公约规定的程度，对国际条约法的基础造成了危害。
因此，芬兰政府反对科威特政府对上述公约提出的上述保留意见。
但是，这种反对意见并不妨碍科威特与芬兰之间的公约生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 15, 2019)
"The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands has carefully examined the reservation and the statement made by the State of Qatar upon accession to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as communicated by the Secretary-General via depositary notification C.N.260.2018.TREATIES-IV.3 of 21 May 2018, and wishes to communicate the following.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands notes that Qatar does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article 3 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, for they contravene the Islamic Sharia with regard to questions of inheritance and birth.
Further, the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the statement made by the State of Qatar with respect to Article 8 of the Covenant in substance constitutes a reservation limiting the scope of the rights of trade unions in Article 8 of the Covenant, by applying that provision only in conformity with the national legislation of the State of Qatar.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that such reservations, which seek to limit the responsibilities of the reserving State under the Covenant by invoking provisions of the Islamic Sharia and national legislation, are likely to deprive the provisions of the Covenant of their effect and therefore must be regarded as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands recalls that according to customary international law, as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to the reservations of the State of Qatar to the Covenant.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the State of Qatar."

Objection with regard to the declaration made by Myanmar upon ratification (October 3, 2018):
"The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands has carefully examined the declaration made by the Republic of the Union of Myanmar upon ratification on 6 October 2017 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that the declaration made by the Republic of the Union of Myanmar in substance constitutes a reservation limiting the scope of the right of self-determination of all peoples in Article 1 of the Covenant, by applying that provision only in conformity with the Constitution of Myanmar.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands considers that such a reservation, which seeks to limit the responsibilities of the reserving State under the Covenant by invoking provisions of its domestic law, is likely to deprive the provisions of the Covenant of their effect and therefore must be regarded as incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands recalls that according to customary international law, as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, reservations incompatible with the object and purpose of a treaty shall not be permitted.
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands therefore objects to the reservation of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar to the Covenant. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Republic of the Union of Myanmar."

With regard to the reservation made by Pakistan upon ratification, the Secetary-General received the following communication from the Netherlands (April 15, 2009):
"The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands has carefully examined the reservation made by the Government of Pakistan upon ratifying the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. It is the understanding of the Kingdom of the Netherlands that the reservation of Pakistan does not exclude or modify the legal effect of the provisions of the Covenant in their application to Pakistan."

2005年10月7日提出的反对意见：
“荷兰王国政府审查了巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国2004年11月3日在签署1966年12月16日于纽约缔结的《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》时作出的声明。
荷兰王国政府希望回顾，声明的状态并不是由指定名称决定的。适用《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》的规定时是受《巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国宪法》的规定制约的。
这会让人不明白，巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国认为其受条约义务约束的程度如何。各国均希望各方都尊重他们选择加入的条约，各国也准备在必要时对立法作出修改，以与条约规定的义务保持一致。因此，巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国提出的保留意见可能会损害国际条约法的基础。
荷兰王国政府认为，巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》作出的声明实质上构成了保留意见。
因此，荷兰王国政府反对巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》作出的声明。
这个反对意见并不妨碍荷兰王国与巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国之间的公约生效，巴基斯坦也不能从其声明中享受到益处。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

2002年4月23日提出的反对意见：
“……中华人民共和国政府对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第8条第1款(a)项作出了声明。
荷兰王国政府审查了这份声明，并希望回顾到，根据公认的国际条约法，借助声明使用的名称使一部条约中某些规定的法律效力被排除或修改的，则不能根据这一名称来确定声明是否属于条约的保留意见。荷兰王国政府认为，中华人民共和国政府对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第8条第1款(a)项作出的声明实质上构成了保留意见。
荷兰王国政府注意到，适用公约第8条第1款(a)项时要受涉及国家立法规定的声明制约。根据《维也纳条约法公约》，加入一部条约的缔约方不可援引其国内法作为其不遵守条约的理由。此外，人人有权组织工会和参加他所选择的工会是公约的基本原则之一。
因此，荷兰王国政府反对中华人民共和国对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》提出的保留意见。这种反对意见并不妨碍荷兰王国与中国之间的公约生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

1999年12月20日提出的反对意见：
“荷兰王国政府审查了孟加拉国政府在加入《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》时作出的声明，并认为关于第1条、第2条和第3条以及第7条和第8条的声明为保留意见。
荷兰王国政府反对孟加拉国政府对上述公约第1条发表的保留意见，因为公约体现的自决权是赋予所有人的。不仅两部公约共同的第1条的文字如此规定，有关法律的最权威的声明也作出了这样的规定，如《关于各国依联合国宪章建立友好关系和合作的国际法原则宣言》。任何限制权利的范围或附加相关文书未曾规定的条件的行为均会损害自决这一概念，由此也会严重削弱其被普遍接受的特性。
此外，荷兰王国政府反对孟加拉国政府对上述公约第2条、第3条、第7条和第8条提出的保留意见。
荷兰王国政府认为，这些保留意见在通过援引国内法律试图限制保留国对公约的责任，因此可能对该国对公约的目标和宗旨的承诺提出质疑，而且也会损害国际条约法的基础。各国都期望它们选择加入的条约之目标和宗旨得到各方的尊重。
因此 荷兰王国政府反对孟加拉国政府提出的上述保留意见。
这些反对意见并不妨碍荷兰王国与孟加拉国之间的公约生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Objection with regard to the declarations and the reservations made by Kuwait upon accession (July 22, 1997):
[Same objection identical in essence, mutatis mutandis, as the one made for Algeria.]

1991年3月18日提出的反对意见：
“荷兰王国政府认为，关于《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第13条第3款和第4款的解释性声明须被视为对公约的保留意见。从公约的案文和历史可以看出，阿尔及利亚政府对第13条第3款和第4款发表的保留意见与公约的目标和宗旨不符。因此，荷兰王国政府认为该保留意见不可接受，并对其正式提出反对。
这种反对意见并不妨碍荷兰王国与阿尔及利亚之间的[公约]生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

1981年1月12日提出的反对意见：
“荷兰王国政府反对印度共和国政府对《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第1条和《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第1条作出的声明，因为公约体现的自决权是赋予给所有人的。不仅两部公约共同的第1条的文字如此规定，有关法律的最权威的声明也作出了这样的规定，如《关于各国依联合国宪章建立友好关系和合作的国际法原则宣言》。任何限制权利的范围或附加相关文书未曾规定的条件的行为均会损害自决这一概念，由此也会严重削弱其被普遍接受的特性。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Objection with regard to the reservation and statement made by Qatar upon accession: (May 20, 2019)
"The Government of the Portuguese Republic has examined the contents of the reservation to Article 3 and of the statement regarding Article 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights made by the State of Qatar.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that the reservation to Article 3 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is contrary to the object and purpose of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Furthermore, it considers that the statement regarding Article 8 of the Covenant is in fact a reservation that seeks to limit the scope of the Covenant on a unilateral basis.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that reservations by which a State limits its responsibilities under [the] International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights by invoking the domestic law or/and religious beliefs and principles [raise] doubts as to the commitment of the reserving State to the object and purpose of the Convention, as such reservations are likely to deprive the provisions of the Convention of their effect and are contrary to the object and purpose thereof.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic recalls that, according to customary international law as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant shall not be permitted.
Thus, the Government of the Portuguese Republic objects to these reservations.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Portuguese Republic and the State of Qatar."

Objection with regard to the declaration made by Myanmar upon ratification (September 7, 2018):
"The Government of the Portuguese Republic has examined the declaration made by the Government of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar to Article I of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and considers that it is in fact a reservation that seeks to limit the scope of the Covenant on a unilateral basis.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that reservations by which a State limits its responsibilities under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights by invoking the domestic law or/and religious beliefs and principles raise doubts as to the commitment of the reserving State to the object and purpose of the Convention, as such reservations are likely to deprive the provisions of the Convention of their effect and are contrary to the object and purpose thereof.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic recalls that, according to customary international law as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant shall not be permitted.
Furthermore, the Government of the Portuguese Republic does not share the interpretation of "the right of self-determination" expressed by the Government of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar which limits the content of this right and is not in line with the definition enshrined in International Law.
Thus the Government of the Portuguese Republic objects to this reservation.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Covenant between the Portuguese Republic and the Republic of the Union of Myanmar."

2004年10月13日提出的反对意见：
“葡萄牙政府认为有关一国通过一般性援引国家法律若干规定而限制其根据《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》(ICESCR)应承担的责任可能会对保留国对公约的目标和宗旨作出的承诺提出质疑，此外也会损害国际法的基础。各国均希望，它们选择加入的条约的目标和宗旨得到各方的尊重，各国也准备为遵守这些条约规定的义务而进行必须的立法改革。
因此，葡萄牙政府反对土耳其对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》提出的保留意见。这种反对意见并不妨碍葡萄牙和土耳其之间的公约生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

1990年10月26日提出的反对意见：
“葡萄牙政府在此对阿尔及利亚政府在批准《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》和《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》时作出的解释性说明正式表示反对。葡萄牙政府审查了上述声明的内容，认为这些声明可被视为保留意见，因此应视为无效，且与公约的宗旨和目标不符。
这种反对意见并不妨碍葡萄牙与阿尔及利亚之间的公约生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

签署时发表且在批准时证实的声明：
“蒙古人民共和国声明，《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第26条第1款和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第48条第1款的规定带有歧视性，因为根据这些规定，一些国家不能加入上述公约，并认为依照国家主权平等原则，公约应当开放给所有国家加入，没有任何歧视和限制。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

2005年11月15日提出的反对意见：
“西班牙王国政府审查了巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府在2004年11月3日签署1966年12月16日的《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》时作出的声明。
西班牙王国政府指出，无论称为什么，一国出于排除或改变一部适用该国的条约的若干规定的法律效力之目的而作出的单方声明都构成保留意见。
西班牙王国政府认为，巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府作出的声明试图让公约规定在适用时受巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国宪法的规定制约，因此这项声明属于一种试图限制适用巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国的公约的法律效力的保留意见。如果一种保留意见一般性提及国家法律而不明确其内容，就不能够清晰的确定巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国接受公约义务的程度，因此便对巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国对公约之目标和宗旨作出的承诺产生了质疑。
西班牙王国政府认为，巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府的声明旨在令其对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》承担的义务受其宪法的规定制约，因此属于一种保留意见，这种保留意见与公约之目标和宗旨不符。
根据《维也纳条约法公约》中的国际习惯法，各国不得提出违反一部条约的目标和宗旨的保留意见。
因此，西班牙王国政府反对巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国政府对《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》提出的保留意见。
这种反对意见并不妨碍西班牙王国与巴基斯坦伊斯兰共和国之间的公约生效。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

加入时提出的保留意见：
“赞比亚共和国政府声明，它保留推迟适用公约第13条第(2)款(a)项关于初等教育的规定的权利，因为，尽管赞比亚共和国政府完全接受该条款所载的原则，并承诺采取必要措施完全履行，但是履行时遇到的问题，尤其是财政方面的问题，让适用所涉原则在现阶段不能得到保证。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

加入时的声明:
“《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第48条第1款和《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第26条第1款具有歧视性，因为依照这些规定，一些国家被剥夺了加入公约的机会。越南社会主义共和国政府认为，根据各国主权平等的原则，公约应当开发给所有国家加入，而不应加以任何歧视和限制。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

加入时的声明：
“阿富汗民主共和国革命委员会主席声明，《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第48条第1款和第3款以及《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第26条第1款和第3款规定，一些国家不能加入上述公约，这违背了上述条约的国际性质。所有国家均享有主权平等的权利，因此这两部公约应当开放给所有国家加入。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

批准时的解释性声明：
“1. 阿尔及利亚政府将两部公约共同的第1条解释为，在任何情况下均不得损害各国人民的自决权以及处置他们的天然财富和资源的权利，这些权利不可剥夺。
它还认为，两部公约的第1条第3款和《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第14条所指的各国负责管理一些非自治领土违背了联合国的宗旨和原则、联合国组织宪章，也违背了《给予殖民地国家人民独立宣言》[大会第 1514 (XV)号决议]。
2. 阿尔及利亚政府将《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第8条和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第22条解释为，让法律成为各国促进组织和行使组织权利的行动框架。
3. 阿尔及利亚政府认为，《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第13条第3款和第4款的规定在任何情况下均不能损害自由管理教育机构的权利。
4. 阿尔及利亚政府将《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第23条第4款有关缔婚双方在缔婚、结婚期间和解除婚约时的权利和责任的规定解释为，决不能损害阿尔及利亚法律制度的根基。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

加入时的声明：
“1.阿拉伯叙利亚共和国加入这两部公约绝不表示承认以色列或与其在受上述两部公约管辖的事宜方面建立某种关系。
2.阿拉伯叙利亚共和国认为，《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》第26条第(1)款和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第48条第(1)款与上述公约的宗旨和目标不符，因为这些规定并不允许所有国家在不问区别、不受歧视的情况下有机会加入上述公约。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Reservation made upon accession:
" … [the Government of Oman makes] a reservation in respect of article 8, paragraph 1, subparagraphs (a) and (d) of that Covenant, regarding the right to form trade unions and the right to strike, in so far as the employees of government units are concerned."

批准时的声明：
“第13条 - 马耳他政府声明，它赞成坚持“保证他们的孩子能按照他们自己的信仰接受宗教和道德教育”词语中确定的原则。不过，考虑到绝大多数马耳他人是罗马天主教徒，因此鉴于财政和人力资源有限，还是很难根据少数人的特定宗教或道德信仰提供这种教育的，这些情况在马耳他也非常特殊。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO

Upon ratification, the Government of Malta indicated that it had decided to withdraw its reservation made upon signature to paragraph 2, article 10:
"The Government of Malta recognises and endorses the principles laid down in paragraph 2 of article 10 of the Covenant. However, the present circumstances obtaining in Malta do not render necessary and do not render expedient the imposition of those principles by legislation."

批准时的声明：
“ 马达加斯加政府声明，它保留推迟适用公约第13条第2款的权利，尤其是涉及到初等教育的规定，因为尽管马达加斯加政府完全接受上述条款体现的原则，并采取必要的措施尽早完全适用这些原则，但是实施问题，特别是财政问题，让现阶段完全履行有关原则不能得到保证。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO