Multilateral treaties deposited with the Secretary-General- TREATY I-VI--18.asp

15. Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961

New York, 30 March 1961


Entry into force:	13 December 1964, in accordance with article 41.
Registration:	13 December 1964, No. 7515.
Status:	Signatories: 62 ,Parties: 143.
Text:	United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 520, p. 151, vol. 557, p. 280 (corrigendum to the Russian text), vol. 570, p. 346 (procès-verbal of rectification of the authentic Russian text), and vol. 590, p. 325 (procès-verbal of rectification of the authentic Spanish text).

Note: The Convention was adopted and opened for signature by the United Nations Conference for the Adoption of a Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, held at United Nations Headquarters, New York, from 24 January to 25 March 1961. The Conference was convened pursuant to resolution 689 J (XXVI)¹ of 28 July 1958 of the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. The Conference also adopted the Final Act and five resolutions for the text of which, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 520, p. 151. For the proceedings of the Conference, see Official Records of the United Nations Conference for the Adoption of a Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs volumes I and II, United Nations publications, Sales Nos. 63.XI.4 and 63.XI.5.

PARTICIPANTS


Participant²	Signature	Ratification, Accession (a), Succession (d)
Afghanistan	30 Mar 1961	19 Mar 1963
Algeria		7 Apr 1965 a
Antigua and Barbuda		5 Apr 1993 a
Argentina	31 Jul 1961	10 Oct 1963
Australia	30 Mar 1961	1 Dec 1967
Austria		1 Feb 1978 a
Azerbaijan		11 Jan 1999 a
Bahamas		13 Aug 1975 d
Bangladesh		25 Apr 1975 a
Barbados		21 Jun 1976 d
Belarus	31 Jul 1961	20 Feb 1964
Belgium	28 Jul 1961	17 Oct 1969
Benin	30 Mar 1961	27 Apr 1962
Botswana		27 Dec 1984 a
Brazil	30 Mar 1961	18 Jun 1964
Brunei Darussalam		25 Nov 1987 a
Bulgaria	31 Jul 1961	25 Oct 1968
Burkina Faso		16 Sep 1969 a
Cambodia	30 Mar 1961
Cameroon		15 Jan 1962 a
Canada	30 Mar 1961	11 Oct 1961
Chad	30 Mar 1961	29 Jan 1963
Chile	30 Mar 1961	7 Feb 1968
China³
Colombia		3 Mar 1975 a
Congo	30 Mar 1961
Costa Rica	30 Mar 1961	7 May 1970
Côte d'Ivoire		10 Jul 1962 a
Croatia		26 Jul 1993 d
Cuba		30 Aug 1962 a
Cyprus		30 Jan 1969 a
Czech Republic⁴		30 Dec 1993 d
Democratic Republic of the Congo	28 Apr 1961	19 Nov 1973
Denmark	30 Mar 1961	15 Sep 1964
Dominica		24 Sep 1993 a
Dominican Republic		26 Sep 1972 a
Ecuador		14 Jan 1964 a
Egypt	30 Mar 1961	20 Jul 1966
El Salvador	30 Mar 1961	26 Feb 1998
Ethiopia		29 Apr 1965 a
Fiji		1 Nov 1971 d
Finland	30 Mar 1961	6 Jul 1965
France		19 Feb 1969 a
Gabon		29 Feb 1968 a
Gambia		23 Apr 1996 a
Germany^5,6	31 Jul 1961	3 Dec 1973
Ghana	30 Mar 1961	15 Jan 1964
Greece		6 Jun 1972 a
Guatemala	26 Jul 1961	1 Dec 1967
Guinea		7 Oct 1968 a
Guinea-Bissau		27 Oct 1995 a
Haiti	3 Apr 1961	29 Jan 1973
Holy See	30 Mar 1961	1 Sep 1970
Honduras		16 Apr 1973 a
Hungary	31 Jul 1961	24 Apr 1964
Iceland		18 Dec 1974 a
India	30 Mar 1961	13 Dec 1964
Indonesia	28 Jul 1961	3 Sep 1976
Iran (Islamic Republic of)	30 Mar 1961	30 Aug 1972
Iraq	30 Mar 1961	29 Aug 1962
Ireland		16 Dec 1980 a
Israel		23 Nov 1962 a
Italy	4 Apr 1961	14 Apr 1975
Jamaica		29 Apr 1964 a
Japan	26 Jul 1961	13 Jul 1964
Jordan	30 Mar 1961	15 Nov 1962
Kazakhstan		29 Apr 1997 a
Kenya		13 Nov 1964 a
Kuwait		16 Apr 1962 a
Kyrgyzstan		7 Oct 1994 a
Lao People's Democratic Republic		22 Jun 1973 a
Latvia		16 Jul 1993 a
Lebanon	30 Mar 1961	23 Apr 1965
Lesotho		4 Nov 1974 d
Liberia	30 Mar 1961	13 Apr 1987
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya		27 Sep 1978 a
Liechtenstein⁷	14 Jul 1961	31 Oct 1979
Lithuania		28 Feb 1994 a
Luxembourg	28 Jul 1961	27 Oct 1972
Madagascar	30 Mar 1961	20 Jun 1974
Malawi		8 Jun 1965 a
Malaysia		11 Jul 1967 a
Mali		15 Dec 1964 a
Marshall Islands		9 Aug 1991 a
Mauritius		18 Jul 1969 d
Mexico	24 Jul 1961	18 Apr 1967
Micronesia (Federated States of)		29 Apr 1991 a
Monaco		14 Aug 1969 a
Mongolia		6 May 1991 a
Morocco		4 Dec 1961 a
Mozambique		8 Jun 1998 a
Myanmar	30 Mar 1961	29 Jul 1963
Netherlands⁸	31 Jul 1961	16 Jul 1965
New Zealand	30 Mar 1961	26 Mar 1963
Nicaragua	30 Mar 1961	21 Jun 1973
Niger		18 Apr 1963 a
Nigeria	30 Mar 1961	6 Jun 1969
Norway	30 Mar 1961	1 Sep 1967
Oman		24 Jul 1987 a
Pakistan	30 Mar 1961	9 Jul 1965
Panama	30 Mar 1961	4 Dec 1963
Papua New Guinea		28 Oct 1980 d
Paraguay	30 Mar 1961	3 Feb 1972
Peru¹⁰	30 Mar 1961	22 Jul 1964
Philippines	30 Mar 1961	2 Oct 1967
Poland	31 Jul 1961	16 Mar 1966
Portugal^11,21	30 Mar 1961	30 Dec 1971
Republic of Korea	30 Mar 1961	13 Feb 1962
Republic of Moldova		15 Feb 1995 a
Romania		14 Jan 1974 a
Russian Federation	31 Jul 1961	20 Feb 1964
Saint Kitts and Nevis		9 May 1994 a
Saint Lucia		5 Jul 1991 d
Sao Tome and Principe		20 Jun 1996 a
Saudi Arabia		21 Apr 1973 a
Senegal		24 Jan 1964 a
Seychelles		27 Feb 1992 a
Singapore		15 Mar 1973 a
Slovakia⁴		28 May 1993 d
Solomon Islands		17 Mar 1982 d
Somalia		9 Jun 1988 a
South Africa		16 Nov 1971 a
Spain	27 Jul 1961	1 Mar 1966
Sri Lanka		11 Jul 1963 a
Sudan		24 Apr 1974 a
Suriname		29 Mar 1990 d
Sweden	3 Apr 1961	18 Dec 1964
Switzerland	20 Apr 1961	23 Jan 1970
Syrian Arab Republic		22 Aug 1962 a
Thailand	24 Jul 1961	31 Oct 1961
the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia⁹		13 Oct 1993 a
Togo		6 May 1963 a
Tonga		5 Sep 1973 d
Trinidad and Tobago		22 Jun 1964 a
Tunisia	30 Mar 1961	8 Sep 1964
Turkey		23 May 1967 a
Turkmenistan		21 Feb 1996 a
Uganda		15 Apr 1988 a
Ukraine	31 Jul 1961	15 Apr 1964
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland¹⁸	30 Mar 1961	2 Sep 1964
United States of America		25 May 1967 a
Uruguay		31 Oct 1975 a
Venezuela	30 Mar 1961	14 Feb 1969
Yugoslavia	30 Mar 1961	27 Aug 1963
Zambia		12 Aug 1965 a
Zimbabwe		1 Dec 1998 d

DECLARATIONS

Declarations and Reservations

(Unless otherwise indicated, the declarations and reservations were made

upon ratification, accession or succession.)

Algeria

The Democratic and Popular Republic of Algeria does not approve the present wording of article 42 which might prevent the application of the Convention to "non-metropolitan" territories.

The Democratic and Popular Republic of Algeria does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 48, paragraph 2, which prescribe the compulsory referral of any dispute to the International Court of Justice.

The Democratic and Popular Republic of Algeria declares that the agreement of all parties to a dispute shall in every case be necessary for the referral thereof to the International Court of Justice.

Argentina¹²

Reservation to article 48, paragraph 2:

The Argentine Republic does not recognize the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice.

Austria

"The Republic of Austria interprets article 36, paragraph 1, as follows: The obligation of the Party contained therein may also be implemented by administrative regulations providing adequate sanction for the offences enumerated therein."

Bangladesh

"[Subject to the reservations] referred to in article 49 (1) (a), (d) and (e) of the Convention, namely, subject to the right of the Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh to permit temporarily in its territory:

(a) The quasi-medical use of opium,

(d) The use of cannabis, cannabis resin, extracts and tinctures of cannabis for non-medical purposes, and

(e) The production and manufacture of and trade in the drugs referred to under (a) and (d) above for the purposes mentioned therein."

Belarus

The Government of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic will not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 12, paragraphs 2 and 3; article 13, paragraph 2; article 14, paragraphs 1 and 2; and article 31, paragraph 1 (b) of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs as applied to States not entitled to become Parties to the Single Convention on the basis of the procedure provided for in article 40 of that Convention.

The Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic deems it essential to draw attention to the discriminatory character of article 40, paragraph 1, of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, under the terms of which certain States are not entitled to become Parties to the said Convention. The Single Convention concerns matters which are of interest to all States and has as its objective the enlistment of the efforts of all countries in the struggle against the social evil of the abuse of narcotics. The Convention should therefore be open to all countries. According to the principle of the sovereign equality of States, no States have the right to deny to other countries the possibility of participating in a Convention of this type.

Bulgaria¹³

Declaration

"The People's Republic of Bulgaria considers it necessary to stress that the wording of article 40, paragraph 1; article 12, paragraphs 2 and 3; article 13, paragraph 2; article 14, paragraphs 1 and 2; and article 31, paragraph 1 "b" has a discriminatory character as it excludes the participation of a certain number of States. These texts are obviously inconsistent with the character of the Convention, aiming at unifying the efforts of all Parties with a view to achieving regulation of the questions, affecting the interests of all countries in this field."

Czech Republic⁴

Egypt¹⁴

France

The Government of the French Republic declares that it accedes to this Convention while reserving the possibility provided for in article 44, paragraph 2 in fine of continuing in force article 9 of the Convention for the Suppression of the Illicit Traffic in Dangerous Drugs, signed at Geneva on 26 June 1936.

Hungary¹⁵

"(2) As regards countries which have been deprived of the possibility of becoming parties, on the basis of the provisions of article 40 of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, to the Convention, the Government of the Hungarian People's Republic does not consider as obligatory upon herself points 2 and 3 of article 12, point 2 of article 13, points 1 and 2 of article 14 and sub-point 1 (b) of article 31.

"The Hungarian People's Republic deems it necessary to state that the provisions in article 40 of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs by which certain States are barred from becoming Parties to the Convention are at variance with the principle of sovereign equality of States and are detrimental to the interests attached to the universality of the Convention."

India

Reservations:

"Subject to the reservations referred to in Article 49 (1) (a), (b), (d) and (e) of the Convention, namely, subject to the right of the Government of India to permit temporarily in any of its territories:

"(a) The quasi-medical use of opium,

"(b) Opium smoking,

"(d) The use of cannabis, cannabis resin, extracts and tinctures of cannabis for non-medical purposes, and

"(e) The production and manufacture of and trade in the drugs referred to under (a), (b), and

" (d) above for the purposes mentioned therein.

Declarations:

"Since the Government of India do not recognise the Nationalist Chinese authorities as the competent Government of China, they cannot regard signature of the said Convention by a Nationalist Chinese Representative as a valid signature on behalf of China."

Indonesia¹⁶

Reservation made upon signature and confirmed upon ratifica tion:

"(1) . . .

"(2) . . .

"(3) With respect to article 48, paragraph 2, the Indonesian Government does not consider itself bound by the provisions of this paragraph which provide for a mandatory reference to the International Court of Justice of any dispute which cannot be resolved according to the terms of paragraph 1. The Indonesian Government takes the position that for any dispute to be referred to the International Court of Justice for decision the agreement of all the parties to the dispute shall be necessary in each individual case."

Liechtenstein

The Principality of Liechtenstein maintains in force article 9 of the Convention for the Suppression of the Illicit Traffic in Dangerous Drugs, signed at Geneva on 26 June 1936.

Myanmar

Reservation made upon signature and confirmed upon ratifica tion:

"Subject to the understanding that the Shan State is being allowed to have reservation of the right:

"(1) To allow addicts in the Shan State to smoke opium for a transitory period of 20 years with effect from the date of coming into force of this Single Convention;

"(2) To produce and manufacture opium for the above purpose;

"(3) To furnish a list of opium consumers in the Shan State after the Shan State Government has completed the taking of such list on the 31st December, 1963."

Netherlands

In view of the equality from the point of view of public law between the Netherlands, Surinam and the Netherlands Antilles, the term "non-metropolitan" mentioned in article 42 of this Convention no longer has its original meaning so far as Surinam and the Netherlands Antilles are concerned, and will consequently be deemed to mean "non-European".

Pakistan

"The Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan will permit temporarily in any of its territories:

"(i) The quasi-medical use of opium;

"(ii) The use of cannabis, cannabis resin, extracts and tinctures of cannabis for non-medical purposes, and

"(iii) The production and manufacture of and trade in the drugs referred to under (i) and (ii) above."

Papua New Guinea¹⁷

"In accordance with article 50, paragraph 2, the Government of Papua New Guinea hereby lodges a reservation in relation to article 48, paragraph 2, which provides for reference of a dispute to the International Court of Justice."

Poland

"The Government of the Polish People's Republic does not consider itself being bound by the provisions of article 12, paragraphs 2 and 3, article 13, paragraph 2, article 14, paragraphs 1 and 2 and article 31, paragraph 1 (b) of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, and concerning States deprived of the opportunity to participate in the above Convention.

"In the opinion of the Government of the Polish People's Republic it is inadmissible to impose obligations contained in the mentioned provisions, upon States which in result of other provisions of the same Convention may be deprived of the opportunity to adhere to it.

"The Polish People's Republic deems it appropriate to draw the attention to the discriminatory character of article 40, paragraph 1, of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, on the basis of which certain States have been deprived of the opportunity of becoming Parties to this Convention. The Single Convention deals with the question of interest to all States and is meant to mobilize efforts of all countries in the struggle against the social danger which is the abuse of narcotic drugs. This Convention therefore should be open to all States. In accordance with the principle of sovereign equality of States, no State has the right to deprive any other State of the opportunity to participate in a Convention of such type."

Romania

Reservations:

(a) The Socialist Republic of Romania declares that it does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 48, paragraph 2, whereby any dispute between two or more Contracting Parties with respect to the interpretation or application of the Convention which is not settled by negotiation or by any other means shall, at the request of one of the Contracting Parties concerned, be referred to the International Court of Justice.

The Socialist Republic of Romania considers that such disputes may be referred to the International Court of Justice only with the consent of all parties to the dispute in each individual case.

(b) The Socialist Republic of Romania does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 12, paragraphs 2 and 3; article 13, paragraph 2; article 14, paragraphs 1 and 2; article 31, paragraph 1 (b), in so far as those provisions refer to States which are not Parties to the Single Convention.

Declarations:

(a) The Council of State of the Socialist Republic of Romania considers that the maintenance of the state of dependence of certain territories to which the provisions of article 42 and article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention apply is not in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the documents adopted by the United Nations concerning the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples, including the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, unanimously adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in its resolution 2625 (XXV) of 1970, which solemnly proclaims the obligation of States to promote realization of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples in order to bring an end to colonialism without delay.

(b) The Council of State of the Socialist Republic of Romania considers that the provisions of article 40 of the Convention are not in accordance with the principle that international multilateral treaties, the aims and objectives of which concern the international community as a whole, should be open to participation by all States.

Russian Federation

The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics will not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 12, paragraphs 2 and 3, article 13, paragraph 2, article 14, paragraphs 1 and 2 and article 31, paragraph 1 (b) of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs as applied to States not entitled to become Parties to the Single Convention on the basis of the procedure provided for in article 40 of that Convention.

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics deems it essential to draw attention to the discriminatory character of article 40, paragraph 1, of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, under the terms of which certain States are not entitled to become Parties to the said Convention. The Single Convention concerns matters which are of interest to all States and has as its objective the enlistment of the efforts of all countries in the struggle against the social evil of the abuse of narcotics. The Convention should therefore be open to all countries. According to the principle of the sovereign equality of States, no States have the right to deny to other countries the possibility of participating in a Convention of this type.

Saudi Arabia¹⁹

"The accession of the Government of Saudi Arabia to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs shall not be construed as implying recognition of the so-called State of Israel nor does the accession, in any way, imply the intention of the Government of Saudi Arabia to enter into any intercourse whatsoever with the latter in matters bearing on this Convention."

Slovakia⁴

South Africa

"Subject to a reservation in respect of article 48 of the Convention, as provided for in article 50, paragraph 2."

Sri Lanka

The Government of Ceylon notified the Secretary-General that in respect of article 17 of the Convention, "the existing administration will be maintained for the purpose of applying the provisions of the Convention without setting up a ‘special administration' for the purpose."

The Government added that this was to be considered a statement and not a reservation.

Switzerland

Switzerland maintains in force article 9 of the Convention for the Suppression of the Illicit Traffic in Dangerous Drugs, signed at Geneva on 26 June 1936.

Ukraine

The Government of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic will not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 12, paragraphs 2 and 3; article 13, paragraph 2; article 14, paragraphs 1 and 2; and article 31, paragraph 1 (b) of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs as applied to States not entitled to become Parties to the Single Convention on the basis of the procedure provided for in article 40 of that Convention.

The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic deems it essential to draw attention to the discriminatory character of article 40, paragraph 1, of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, under the terms of which certain States are not entitled to become Parties to the said Convention. The Single Convention concerns matters which are of interest to all States and has as its objective the enlistment of the efforts of all countries in the struggle against the social evil of the abuse of narcotics. The Convention should therefore be open to all countries. According to the principle of the sovereign equality of States, no States have the right to deny to other countries the possibility of participating in a Convention of this type.

Territorial Application


Participant	Date of receipt of the notification	Territories
Australia	1 Dec 1967	All non-metropolitan territories for the international relations of which Australia is responsible, namely, the territories of Papua, Norfolk Island, Christmas Island, Cocos (Keeling) Islands, Heard and MacDonald Islands, Ashmore and Cartier Islands, the Australian Antarctic Territory and the Trust Territories of New Guinea and Nauru
France	19 Feb 1969	The whole of the territory of the French Republic
India	13 Dec 1964	Sikkim
Netherlands	16 Jul 1965	For the Kingdom in Europe, Surinam and the Netherlands Antilles
New Zealand	26 Mar 1963	Cook Islands (including Niue) and the Tokelau Islands, being non-metropolitan territories for the international relations of which the Government of New Zealand is responsible
United Kingdom^18,20	26 Jan 1965	Antigua, Bahamas, Basutoland, Bechuanaland Protectorate, Bermuda, British Guiana, British Honduras, British Solomon Islands, Brunei, Cayman Islands, Dominica, Falkland Islands, Fiji, Gambia, Gibraltar, Gilbert and Ellice Islands, Grenada, Hong Kong, Mauritius, Montserrat, St. Helena, St. Lucia, St. Christopher-Nevis-Anguilla, St. Vincent, Seychelles, Southern Rhodesia, Swaziland, Tonga, Turks and Caicos Islands, Virgin Islands
	27 May 1965	Aden and Protectorate of South Arabia
	3 May 1966	Barbados
	24 Jun 1977	Channel Islands and Isle of Man
United States of America	25 May 1967	All areas for the international relations of which the United States is responsible

NOTES

1. Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, Twenty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 1 (E-3169), p. 17.

2. The Republic of Viet-Nam had acceded to the Convention on 14 September 1970. In this regard, see also note 32 in chapter I.2 and note 1 in chapter III.6.

In a communication received by the Secretary-General on 23 November 1970, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Albania had stated that the Albanian Government considered the above-mentioned accession to be without any legal validity, since the only representative of the people of South Viet-Nam qualified to speak on its behalf and to enter into international commitments were the Provisional Revolution ary Government of the Republic of South Viet-Nam.

A similar communication was received by the Secretary-General on 11 January 1971 from the Permanent Representative of the Mongolian People's Republic to the United Nations.

3. Signed and ratified on behalf of the Republic of China on 30 March 1961 and 12 May 1969 respectively. See note concerning signatures, ratifications, accessions, etc. on behalf of China (note 4 in chapter I.1). See also the declaration made by the Government of India upon ratification.

4. Czechoslovakia had signed and ratified the Convention on 31 July 1961 and 20 March 1964, respectively, with reservations. For the text of the reservations, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 520, pp. 361 and 412. See also note 11 in chapter I.2.

5. The German Democratic Republic had acceded to the Convention on 2 December 1975 with reservations and declarations. For the text of the reservations and declarations see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 987, p. 425.

The Secretary-General had also received on 15 March 1976 a communication from the Government of the German Democratic Republic stating in part as follows:

In acceding to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 30 March 1961, the German Democratic Republic started solely from the provisions on accession to this Convention as set forth in its article 40. There was no intention of acceding to the Convention as amended by the Protocol of 25 March 1972.

Later, upon its accession to the 1972 Protocol, the Government of the German Democratic Republic declared that the said communication was to be considered as withdrawn. See also note 14 in chapter I.2.

6. In a letter accompanying the instrument of ratification the Permanent Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany to the United Nations made the following declaration on behalf of his Government:

". . . The said Convention shall also apply to Berlin (West) with effect from the date on which it enters into force for the Federal Republic of Germany."

In this connection, the Secretary-General received on 3 May 1974 a communication from the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics stating as follows:

The Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs,1961, contains as is well known, provisions relating to both the territories of the States parties and the exercise by them of their jurisdiction. As a result of the unconditional extension by the Federal Republic of Germany of the operation of that Convention to Berlin (West), matters concerning the status of the western sectors of Berlin would be affected, which would be contrary to the Quadripartite Agreement of 3 September 1971, in accordance with which the western sectors of Berlin are not a part of the Federal Republic of Germany and will not be governed by it in the future.

In the light of the foregoing, the Soviet Union can take note of the statement of the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany concerning the extension of the operation of the aforesaid Convention to Berlin (West) only on the understanding that it will be so extended subject to conformity with the Quadripartite Agreement of 3 September 1971 and to observance of the established procedure and that the application of the provisions of that Convention to the western sectors of Berlin will not affect matters of status.

An identical communication in essence, mutatis mutandis, was received on 6 August 1974 from the Government of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

Upon accession, the Government of the German Democratic Republic made the following declaration:

Concerning the application of the Convention to Berlin (West), the German Democratic Republic states, in conformity with the Quadripartite Agreement of 3 September 1971 between the Governments of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United States of America and the French Republic, that Berlin (West) is no constituent part of the Federal Republic of Germany and must not be governed by it.

In the light of the foregoing, the German Democratic Republic takes note of the declaration of the Federal Republic of Germany concerning the extension of the operation of the Convention to Berlin (West) only on the understanding that it will be so extended in conformity with the Quadripartite Agreement and that the application of the provisions of the Convention to Berlin (West) will not affect matters of the status of Berlin (West).

See also note 3 above.

7. By a communication received by the Secretary-General on 11 March 1980, the Government of Liechtenstein confirmed that it was not its intention to become a Party to the Convention as modified by the Protocol of 23 March 1972.

8. For the Kingdom in Europe, Surinam and the Netherlands Antilles.

9. On 12 April 1994, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Greece the following communication:

"Accession of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to the Single [Convention on] Narcotic Drugs of the United Nations of 1961 does not imply its recognition on behalf of the Hellenic Republic."

10. In the instrument of ratification, the Government of Peru withdrew the reservation made on its behalf at the time of signing the Convention; for the text of that reservation, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 520, p. 376.

11. In a communication received by the Secretary-General on 15 February 1972, the Chargé d'Affaires a.i. of the Republic of Uganda to the United Nations informed him of the following:

"It is the understanding of the Government of the Republic of Uganda that in ratifying the said Convention, the Government of Portugal did not purport to act on behalf of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea-Bissau which are distinct and separate political entities for which Portugal lacks any legal, moral or political capacity to represent."

In a communication received by the Secretary-General on 25 April 1972, the Permanent Representative of Portugal to the United Nations informed him as follows with respect to the above-mentioned communication:

"The Government of Portugal is surprised that communications containing meaningless statements such as that from the Chargé d'Affaires of Uganda should be circulated, since they show clear ignorance of the fact that Portugal was admitted to the membership of the United Nations with the territorial composition that it has today,and including Angola, Mozambique and Portuguese Guinea."

12. In a communication received by the Secretary-General on 24 October 1979, the Government of Argentina declared that it withdrew the reservation relating to article 49 of the Convention. (For the text of that reservation, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 520, p. 353.)

13. For the text of reservations as formulated by the Government of Bulgaria in respect of the same articles of the Convention at the time of its signature, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 520, p. 355.

In a notification received on 6 May 1994, the Government of Bulgaria notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservations made by Bulgaria upon ratification with respect to article 48 (2). For the text of the reservations, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 649, p. 362.

14. In a notification received on 18 January 1980, the Government of Egypt informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the declaration relating to Israel. For the text of the said declaration, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 568 p. 364. The notification indicates 25 January 1980 as the effective date of the withdrawal.

A communication was received by the Secretary-General on 21 September 1966 from the Government of Israel with reference to the above-mentioned declaration. For the text of the communication see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 573,p. 347.

15. In a communication received on 8 December 1989, the Government of Hungary notified the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw the reservation in respect of article 48 (2) of the Convention made upon ratification. For the text of the reservation, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 520, p. 364.

16. In its instrument of ratification the Government of Indonesia withdraws the declarations made upon signature regarding its intention to make reservations with respect to article 40 (1) and article 42 of the said Convention. For the text of these declarations, corresponding to paragraphs 1 and 2, see United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 520, p. 368.

17. Inasmuch as the reservation in question was not formulated by Australia at the time the Convention was originally extended to Papua and New Guinea, it will become effective on the date when it would have done so, pursuant to article 41 (2) and 50 (2) of the Convention, had it been formulated on accession, that is to say the thirtieth day after the deposit of the notification of succession by the Government of Papua New Guinea, i.e., on 27 November 1980.

18. On 10 June 1997, the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland notified the Secretary-General of the following:

[Same notification as the one made under note 4 in chapter IV.1.]

19. In a communication received by the Secretary-General on 23 May 1972 the Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations made the following declaration:

"The Government of Israel has noted the political character of the reservation made by the Government of Saudi Arabia on that occasion. In the view of the Government of Israel, this Convention is not the proper place for making such political pronouncements. Moreover, the said pronouncement by the Government of Saudi Arabia cannot in any way affect whatever obligations are binding upon Saudi Arabia, under general international law or under particular treaties. The Government of Israel will, in so far as concerns the substance of the matter, adopt towards the Government of Saudi Arabia an attitude of complete reciprocity."

20. On 3 October 1983, the Secretary-General received from the Government of Argentina the following objection :

[The Government of Argentina makes a] formal objection to the declaration of territorial extension issued by the United Kingdom with regard to the Malvinas Islands (and dependencies), which that country is illegally occupying and refers to as the "Falkland Islands".

The Argentine Republic rejects and considers null and void the [said declaration] of territorial extension.

With reference to the above-mentioned objection the Secretary-General received, on 28 February 1985, from the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland the following declaration:

For the text of the declaration see note 25 in chapter IV.1.]

21. On 27 April 1999, the Government of Portugal informed the Secretary-General that the Convention would apply to Macau.

Subsequently, the Secretary-General received, on 21 October 1999, from the Government of Portugal, the following communication:

In accordance with the Joint Declaration of the Government of the Portuguese Republic and the Government of the People's Republic of China on the Question of Macau signed on 13 April 1987, the Portuguese Republic will continue to have international responsibility for Macau until 19 December 1999 and from that date onwards the People's Republic of China will resume the exercise of sovereignty over Macau with effect from 20 December 1999.

From 20 December 1999 onwards the Portuguese Republic will cease to be responsible for the international rights and obligations arising from the application of the Convention to Macau."