Objection with regard to the declaration made by Libya upon ratification: (14 February 2019)
"The Government of the Czech Republic has examined the declaration made by the State of Libya with regard to article 25 (a) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The Government of the Czech Republic is of the view that the declaration made by the State of Libya is of general and vague nature and, therefore, its character and scope cannot be properly assessed. The declaration leaves open the question whether the State of Libya purports to exclude or modify the legal effect of article 25 (a) of the Convention in its application to the State of Libya, and, if so, to what extent the State of Libya commits itself to the obligations under this article and the Convention as a whole.
Therefore, the Government of the Czech Republic recalls that reservations may not be general or vague, since such reservations, without indicating in precise terms their scope, make it impossible to assess whether or not they are compatible with the object and purpose of the treaty."
Objection with regard to the reservations made by Brunei Darussalam upon ratification: (20 December 2016)
"The Government of the Czech Republic has examined the contents of the reservation made by the Government of Brunei Darussalam on 18 April 2016 upon ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, according to which 'Brunei Darussalam would not consider itself bound by any provisions of the Convention contrary to the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and to the beliefs and principles of Islam'.
The Government of the Czech Republic is of the view that the reservation to any provision of the Convention contrary to the Constitution of Brunei Darussalam and to the beliefs and principles of Islam has a general and indeterminate scope, since it does not sufficiently specify to what extent Brunei Darussalam considers itself bound by the provisions of the Convention. Furthermore, the Czech Republic considers it unacceptable under the customary international law, as codified in Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, to support a reservation to a treaty by references to domestic law. Thus, this general reservation referring to domestic and religious laws without specifying its contents also raises concern regarding the extent to which Brunei Darussalam is committed to the object and purpose of the Convention.
The Government of the Czech Republic wishes to recall that, according to article 46 paragraph 1 of the Convention, as well as 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 and that such a reservation is null and void and therefore devoid of any legal effect.
The Government of the Czech Republic, therefore, objects to the aforementioned reservation made by Brunei Darussalam. This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Czech Republic and Brunei Darussalam. The Convention enters into force in its entirety between the Czech Republic and Brunei Darussalam, without Brunei Darussalam benefiting from its reservation."
反对伊朗伊斯兰共和国加入时作出的声明：(2010年7月28日)
“捷克共和国审查了伊朗伊斯兰共和国2009年10月23日在加入《残疾人权利公约》（以下称‘公约’）时作出的声明。
捷克共和国指出，一项有意修改或排除条约某些条款法律效力的声明的标题不单独决定这种声明作为保留或声明的状态。捷克共和国的观点是，伊朗伊斯兰共和国所作的声明实际上构成了一种保留。
捷克共和国发现这一保留没有明确伊朗伊斯兰共和国在何等程度上愿意依据‘公约’履行其义务，因为它不认为其自身受‘公约’任何可能不符合其适用规则的条款的约束。
捷克共和国认为这一保留有悖于‘公约’的目的和宗旨。根据‘公约’第四十六条第一款和《维也纳条约法公约》规定的习惯国际法，这种保留应是不允许的。所有缔约国尊重它们已经选择作为缔约国的条约，并遵从其目的和宗旨，而且各国准备好做任何必要的立法变化以遵守条约规定的义务，这符合各国的共同利益，。
因此，捷克共和国反对伊朗伊斯兰共和国的上述保留，并认为这一保留无效。这项反对将不妨碍‘公约’在捷克共和国和伊朗伊斯兰共和国之间生效，伊朗伊斯兰共和国不得益于其保留。 "
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO
反对泰国批准公约时作出的解释性声明：（2009年11月30日）
“捷克共和国审查了泰王国2008年7月29日在批准《残疾人权利公约》时所作的解释性声明。
捷克共和国认为泰王国所作的解释性声明事实上构成了对公约第十八条的保留。
捷克共和国注意到，这一保留为泰王国在何等程度上承诺本身对公约第十八条的义务留下了不确定性，而这引起了对泰王国恪守有关与自由迁徙和国籍的权利相关的公约目的和宗旨的承诺的质疑。所有缔约国尊重它们已经选择作为缔约国的条约，并遵从其目的和宗旨，而且各国准备好做任何必要的立法变化以遵守条约规定的义务，这符合各国的共同利益，。
根据‘公约’第四十六条第一款和《维也纳条约法公约》规定的习惯国际法，保留不得有悖于条约目的和宗旨。因此，捷克共和国反对泰王国做出的上述保留，这一反对将不妨碍’公约’在捷克共和国和泰王国之间生效，泰王国不得益于其保留。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO
反对萨尔瓦多批准公约时作出的保留：（2009年11月30日）
“捷克共和国审查了萨尔瓦多共和国签署《残疾人权利公约》时提出并在批准时确认的保留。
捷克共和国指出，这一保留使萨尔瓦多共和国认为自身应在何等程度上受公约义务的约束显得不清楚，因为萨尔瓦多共和国通过这一保留使’公约’服从于“任何载于萨尔瓦多共和国宪法中的戒律、原则和准则的有关条款。”
捷克共和国认为这一保留与‘公约’的目的和宗旨不符，根据‘公约’第四十六条第一款和《维也纳条约法公约》规定的习惯国际法，不允许有这种保留。
因此，捷克共和国反对萨尔瓦多共和国对‘公约’做出的上述保留。这一反对不妨碍‘公约’在捷克共和国和萨尔瓦多共和国之间生效，萨尔瓦多不得益于其保留。”
鸣谢：译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO
| 法 | 条款 | 签字 | 文书 | 生效 |
|---|