Objection with regard to the declaration made by Libya upon ratification: (12 February 2019)
"The Government of the Portuguese Republic has examined the declaration made by Libya to Article 25 (a) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and considers that it is in fact a reservation that seeks to limit the scope of the Convention on a unilateral basis.
Moreover, the Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that reservations by which a State limits its responsibilities under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities by invoking the domestic law or/and religious beliefs and principles raises 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, and in accordance with Article 46 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted. The Government of the Portuguese Republic thus objects to this reservation.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Portuguese Republic and Libya."
Objection to the reservation made by Brunei Darussalam upon ratification: (21 March 2017)
"The Government of the Portuguese Republic has examined the contents of the reservation made by Brunei Darussalam upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that this reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and, in addition, has a general and indeterminate scope and therefore does not allow States to assess to what extent Brunei Darussalam has accepted the existing commitments to the Convention. Furthermore, such general reservation contributes to undermining the basis of International Treaty Law.
Moreover, the Government of the Portuguese Republic considers that reservations by which a State limits its responsibilities under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 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, and in accordance with Article 46 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention shall not be permitted. The Government of the Portuguese Republic thus objects to this reservation.
This objection shall not preclude the entry into force of the Convention between the Portuguese Republic and Brunei Darussalam."
反对马来西亚在批准时作出的保留:(2011年7月26日)
“葡萄牙共和国政府审查了马来西亚在批准2006年12月13日在纽约通过的《残疾人权利公约》时做出的保留。
葡萄牙共和国政府认为马来西亚对第十五条和十八条做出的保留是一种寻求排除适用这两个条款的保留,这两个条款关系到‘公约’的基本原则,从而单方面地限定了‘公约’的范围并导致破坏国际法的基础。
葡萄牙共和国政府认为现在的保留违背了‘公约’目的和宗旨,‘公约’寻求促进、保护和保证所有残疾人充分和平等享有所有人权和基本自由,并且促进对它们固有尊严的尊重。葡萄牙共和国政府忆及,根据《维也纳条约法公约》规定的习惯国际法,以及依照《残疾人权利公约》第四十六条,保留不得与‘公约’的目的和宗旨不符。
因此,葡萄牙共和国政府反对马来西亚政府对2006年12月13日在纽约通过的《残疾人权利公约》第十五条和十八条作出的上述保留。
然而,这一反对将不妨碍‘公约’在葡萄牙共和国和马来西亚之间生效。”
鸣谢:译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO
反对伊朗伊斯兰共和国加入时作出的声明:(2010年11月2日)
“葡萄牙共和国政府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》时做出的保留。
葡萄牙共和国政府认为保留使‘公约’的适用服从于国内法律,这有悖于‘公约’的目的和宗旨,以致它无视国际法的基本原则和形成‘公约’核心的原则。
根据国际法,保留不得与条约的目的和宗旨不符。
因此,葡萄牙共和国政府反对伊朗伊斯兰共和国2009年10月23日在加入《残疾人权利公约》时作出的保留。
这一反对不妨碍《残疾人权利公约》在葡萄牙共和国和伊朗伊斯兰共和国之间生效。”
鸣谢:译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO
反对萨尔瓦多在批准时作出的声明:(2009年9月23日)
“葡萄牙共和国政府仔细审查了萨尔瓦多共和国政府签署2006年12月13日在纽约通过的《残疾人权利公约》时提出并在批准时确认的保留。
葡萄牙共和国政府认为这一保留使‘公约’的适用服从于在萨尔瓦多生效的宪法法律。这使萨尔瓦多认为自己在何等程度上受‘公约’义务的约束是不清楚的。
葡萄牙共和国政府认为这种保留应被视为与该文书的目的和宗旨不相符合,并且忆及,根据‘公约’第四十六条第一款,保留不得与‘公约’的目的和宗旨不符。
因此,葡萄牙共和国政府反对萨尔瓦多共和国政府对《残疾人权利公约》做出的保留。
这一反对不妨碍‘公约’在葡萄牙共和国和萨尔瓦多共和国之间生效。
鸣谢:译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO
反对泰国在批准时作出的声明:(2009年9月23日)
“葡萄牙共和国政府审查了泰王国在批准2006年12月13日在纽约通过的《残疾人权利公约》时就第十八条做出的解释性声明。
葡萄牙共和国政府认为这一解释性声明构成了使‘公约’第十八条的适用服从于与国家法律、法规和惯例相一致的一种保留。泰王国提出的保留使它认为其自身在何等程度上受‘公约’第十八条义务的约束是不清楚的,这令人质疑泰王国在‘公约’有关自由迁徙和国籍的相关权利的目的和宗旨方面的承诺。
葡萄牙共和国政府忆及,根据‘公约’第四十六条第一款,保留不得与‘公约’的目的和宗旨不符。
因此,葡萄牙共和国政府反对泰王国就《残疾人权利公约》第十八条做出的解释性声明。
这一反对不妨碍‘公约’在葡萄牙共和国和泰王国之间生效。”
鸣谢:译文由WIPO提供。© 2014 WIPO