Verdrag

Aanvullend protocol bij de Verdragen van Genève van 12 augustus 1949, betreffende de aanvaarding van een aanvullend onderscheidend embleem (Protocol III)

PartijenPartijen met een link hebben een voorbehoud.

Partij Ondertekening RatificatieO=Ondertekening zonder voorbehoud of vereiste van ratificatie R=Bekrachtiging, aanvaarding, goedkeuring of kennisgeving T=Toetreding VG=Voortgezette gebondenheid NB=Niet bekend In werking Opzegging Buiten werking
Albanië 06-02-2008 (T) 06-08-2008
Andorra 19-06-2025 (T) 19-12-2025
Angola 14-03-2006
Argentinië 13-03-2006 16-03-2011 (R) 16-09-2011
Armenië 12-08-2011 (T) 12-02-2012
Australië 08-03-2006 15-07-2009 (R) 15-01-2010
Belarus 31-03-2011 (T) 30-09-2011
België 08-12-2005 12-05-2015 (R) 12-11-2015
Belize 03-04-2007 (T) 03-10-2007
Bolivia 08-12-2005
Bosnië en Herzegovina 14-03-2006
Brazilië 14-03-2006 28-08-2009 (R) 28-02-2010
Bulgarije 14-03-2006 13-09-2006 (R) 13-03-2007
Burkina Faso 07-12-2006 07-10-2016 (R) 07-04-2017
Burundi 08-12-2005
Canada 19-06-2006 26-11-2007 (R) 26-05-2008
Chili 08-12-2005 06-07-2009 (R) 06-01-2010
Colombia 08-12-2005
Congo, Republiek 08-12-2005
Cookeilanden 07-09-2011 (T) 07-03-2012
Costa Rica 08-12-2005 30-06-2008 (R) 30-12-2008
Cyprus 19-06-2006 27-11-2007 (R) 27-05-2008
Denemarken 08-12-2005 25-05-2007 (R) 25-11-2007
Dominicaanse Republiek 26-07-2006 01-04-2009 (R) 01-10-2009
Duitsland 13-03-2006 17-06-2009 (R) 17-12-2009
Ecuador 08-12-2005 06-10-2020 (R) 06-04-2021
El Salvador 08-03-2006 12-09-2007 (R) 12-03-2008
Estland 14-03-2006 28-02-2008 (R) 28-08-2008
Ethiopië 13-03-2006
Fiji 30-07-2008 (T) 30-01-2009
Filipijnen 13-03-2006 22-08-2006 (R) 22-02-2007
Finland 14-03-2006 14-01-2009 (R) 14-07-2009
Frankrijk 08-12-2005 17-07-2009 (R) 17-01-2010
Georgië 28-09-2006 19-03-2007 (R) 19-09-2007
Ghana 14-06-2006
Griekenland 08-12-2005 26-10-2009 (R) 26-04-2010
Guatemala 08-12-2005 14-03-2008 (R) 14-09-2008
Guyana 21-09-2009 (T) 21-03-2010
Haïti 06-12-2006
Honduras 13-03-2006 08-12-2006 (R) 08-06-2007
Hongarije 19-06-2006 15-11-2006 (R) 15-05-2007
Ierland 20-06-2006
IJsland 17-05-2006 04-08-2006 (R) 04-02-2007
Israël 08-12-2005 22-11-2007 (R) 22-05-2008
Italië 08-12-2005 29-01-2009 (R) 29-07-2009
Jamaica 05-12-2006
Kaapverdië 10-01-2006
Kameroen 23-09-2021 (T) 23-03-2022
Kazachstan 24-06-2009 (T) 24-12-2009
Kenia 30-03-2006 28-10-2013 (R) 28-04-2014
Kirgizië 25-01-2019 (T) 25-07-2019
Kroatië 29-05-2006 13-06-2007 (R) 13-12-2007
Lesotho 06-01-2020 (T) 06-07-2020
Letland 20-06-2006 02-04-2007 (R) 02-10-2007
Liechtenstein 08-12-2005 24-08-2006 (R) 24-02-2007
Litouwen 06-12-2006 28-11-2007 (R) 28-05-2008
Luxemburg 08-12-2005 27-01-2015 (R) 27-07-2015
Madagaskar 08-12-2005 10-07-2018 (R) 10-01-2019
Malta 08-12-2005
Mauritius
Mexico 16-11-2006 07-07-2008 (R) 07-01-2209
Moldavië 13-09-2006 19-08-2008 (R) 19-02-2009
Monaco 15-03-2006 12-03-2007 (R) 12-09-2007
Nauru 27-06-2006 04-12-2012 (R) 04-06-2013
Nederlanden, het Koninkrijk der 14-03-2006 13-12-2006 (R) 13-06-2007
Nepal 14-03-2006
Nicaragua 08-03-2006 02-04-2009 (R) 02-10-2009
Nieuw-Zeeland 19-06-2006 23-10-2013 (R) 23-04-2014
Noord-Macedonië 18-05-2006 14-10-2008 (R) 14-04-2009
Noorwegen 08-12-2005 13-06-2006 (R) 14-01-2007
Oekraïne 23-06-2006 19-01-2010 (R) 19-07-2010
Oost-Timor 08-12-2005 29-07-2011 (R) 29-01-2012
Oostenrijk 08-12-2005 03-06-2009 (R) 03-12-2009
Palestina 04-01-2015 (T) 04-01-2015
Panama 19-06-2006 30-04-2012 (R) 30-10-2012
Paraguay 14-03-2006 13-10-2008 (R) 13-04-2009
Peru 08-12-2005 09-10-2018 (R) 09-04-2019
Polen 20-06-2006 26-10-2009 (R) 26-04-2010
Portugal 08-12-2005 22-04-2014 (R) 22-10-2014
Roemenië 20-06-2006 15-05-2015 (R) 15-11-2015
Russische Federatie 07-12-2006
San Marino 19-01-2006 22-06-2007 (R) 22-12-2007
Servië 31-03-2006 18-08-2010 (R) 18-02-2011
Sierra Leone 20-06-2006
Singapore 02-08-2006 07-07-2008 (R) 07-01-2009
Slovenië 19-05-2006 10-03-2008 (R) 10-09-2008
Slowakije 25-04-2006 30-05-2007 (R) 30-11-2007
Spanje 23-12-2005 10-12-2010 (R) 10-06-2011
Suriname 25-06-2013 (T) 25-12-2013
Tanzania 08-12-2005
Togo 26-06-2006
Tsjechië 12-04-2006 23-05-2007 (R) 23-11-2007
Turkije 07-12-2006
Uganda 21-05-2008 (T) 21-11-2008
Uruguay 13-03-2006 19-10-2012 (R) 19-04-2013
Verenigd Koninkrijk 08-12-2005 23-10-2009 (R) 23-04-2010
Verenigde Staten van Amerika 08-12-2005 08-03-2007 (R) 08-09-2007
Zuid-Korea 02-08-2006
Zuid-Sudan 25-01-2013 (T) 25-01-2013
Zweden 30-03-2006 21-08-2014 (R) 21-02-2015
Zwitserland 08-12-2005 14-07-2006 (R) 14-01-2007

Uitbreiding

Verenigd Koninkrijk

Uitgebreid tot In werking Buiten werking
Akrotiri en Dhekelia (Soevereine Basis Gebieden op Cyprus) 15-12-2011
Anguilla 15-12-2011
Bermuda 15-12-2011
Brits Antarctisch Territorium 15-12-2011
Brits Territorium in de Indische Oceaan 15-12-2011
Britse Maagdeneilanden 15-12-2011
Caymaneilanden 15-12-2011
Ducie en Oeno-eilanden 15-12-2011
Falklandeilanden 15-12-2011
Guernsey 15-12-2011
Henderson 15-12-2011
Jersey 07-07-2013
Man 15-12-2011
Montserrat 15-12-2011
Pitcairneilanden 15-12-2011
Sint-Helena, Ascension en Tristan da Cunha 15-12-2011
Turks- en Caicoseilanden 15-12-2011
Zuid-Georgië en de Zuidelijke Sandwicheilanden 15-12-2011

Partijen met voorbehouden, verklaringen en bezwaren

Partij Voorbehoud / verklaring Bezwaren
Canada Ja Nee
Israël Ja Nee
Moldavië Ja Nee
Turkije Ja Nee
Verenigd Koninkrijk Ja Ja
Verenigde Staten van Amerika Ja Nee
Zweden Ja Nee
Zwitserland Ja Nee

Canada

26-11-2007

Article 6(2) provides inter alia that the High Contracting Parties may permit prior users of the third Protocol emblem, or of any sign constituting an imitation thereof, to continue such use, provided that "the rights to such use were acquired before the adoption of this Protocol". Given that Canadian legislation enacted to implement Protocol III does not have retroactive application and will enter into force on the date of Canada's ratification of Protocol III, Canada will permit prior users of the third Protocol emblem, or of any sign constituting an imitation thereof, to continue such use, provided that the rights to such use were acquired before the date of Canada's ratification of Protocol III.


21-01-2015

L'Ambassade du Canada [...] a I'honneur de se référer [...] a la communication du Conseil fédéral suisse du 9 janvier 2015 [...] concernant Ie Protocole II et le Protocole III. L'Ambassade du Canada constate que cette communication a été faite par le Conseil fédéral suisse en sa qualité de dépositaire du Protocole II et du Protocole III. L'Ambassade du Canada tient à noter que le dépositaire joue un rôle de nature technique et administrative, et qu'il appartient aux États parties à un traité, et non au dépositaire, de se prononcer sur toute question de droit rattachée aux instruments diffusés par le dépositaire. Dans ce contexte, l'Ambassade du Canada note que la "Palestine" ne remplit pas les critères voulus pour être considérée comme un État en droit international et n'est donc pas reconnue comme tel par le Canada. Par conséquent, pour éviter toute ambigüité, l'Ambassade du Canada tient à énoncer sa position selon laquelle la "Palestine" n'a pas qualité pour adhérer au Protocole II et au Protocole III, de sorte que sa prétendue adhésion à ces Protocoles n'a aucune valeur juridique ni aucune incidence sur les relations conventionnelles du Canada avec l'"État de Palestine".

Israël

22-11-2007

The Government of Israel declares that while respecting the inviolability of the additional distinctive emblem provided for in the "Protocol additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Adoption of an Additional Distinctive Emblem (Protocol III)', it is the understanding of the Government of Israel that the ratification or the implementation of this protocol does not affect any rights acquired pursuant to reservations made by Israel to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949.


05-11-2008

The Embassy of the State of Israel presents its compliments to the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs and has the honour to refer to the declaration made by Israel upon ratification of the Third Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions. In response to questions raised in relation to this declaration, the State of Israel wishes to confirm that this declaration is not intended to enable Israel to derogate from any of the provisions of the Protocol. It also recognizes that under the terms of the Protocol, the Red Crystal, when used as a protective emblem, may not incorporate any additional emblems or combine them as part of the protective emblem.


16-01-2015

The Embassy of Israel [...] refers to the communication by the depositary dated 9 January 2015, regarding the Palestinian request to accede to [Protocol III]. 'Palestine' does not satisfy the criteria for statehood under international law and lacks the legal capacity to join the aforesaid convention both under general international law and the terms of bilateral Israeli-Palestinian agreements. The Government of Israel does not recognize 'Palestine' as a State, and wishes to place on record, for the sake of clarity, its position that it does not consider 'Palestine' a party to the Protocol and regards the Palestinian request for accession as being without legal validity and without effect upon Israel's treaty relations under the Protocol.

Moldavië

19-08-2008

Until the full re-establishment of the territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova, the provisions of the Convention will be applied only on the territory controlled effectively by the authorities of the Republic of Moldova.

Turkije

07-12-2006

Regarding the "Protocol additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and
relating to the Adoption of an Additional Distinctive Emblem (Protocol III)" and taking into
consideration the references to the 1977 Additional Protocols I and II thereof, the Republic
of Turkey declares that it is not party to the Additional Protocols I and II.

Verenigd Koninkrijk

15-06-2011

Her Britannic Majesty's Embassy has the honor to declare, on behalf of the Government of the United Kingdom, that its ratification of Protocol III extends to the following territories for whose international relations it is responsible: Anguilla; Bailiwick of Guernsey; Bermuda; British Antarctic Territory; British Indian Ocean Territory; Cayman Islands; Falkland Islands; Isle of Man; Montserrat; Pitcairn, Henderson, Ducie and Oeno Islands; South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands; St Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha; Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia; Turks and Caicos Islands; Virgin Islands.

Bezwaar Argentinië, 04-08-2011

The Argentine Republic rejects the British claim to extend the application of the Protocol to the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands.
The Protocol applies to the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands as being an integral part of the territory of the Argentine Republic, by virtue of the ratification of the Protocol by the Argentine Government on 16 March 2011.
In relation to the question of the Falkland Islands, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the resolutions 2065 (XX), 3160 (XXVIII), 31/49, 37/9, 38/12, 39/6, 40/21, 41/40, 42/19 and 43/25, recognizing the existence of a dispute over sovereignty and requesting the Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to re-initiate negotiations with a view to finding the means to resolve peacefully and definitively the dispute, with the good offices of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who will inform the General Assembly on the progress made. The United Nations Special Committee on decolonization has repeatedly expressed the same view, most recently in the resolutions adopted on 24 June 2010 and 21 June 2011. Likewise, the General Assembly of the Organization of American States has adopted, on 8 June 2010 and on 7 June 2011, new declarations on the question in similar terms.
The Argentine Republic reaffirms its right of sovereignty over the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime space.

Bezwaar Mauritius, 10-01-2020

[...] has the honour to register its strong objection against the extension by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the so-called "British Indian Ocean Territory", of the Agreements listed at Annex and in respect of which the Government of Switzerland is the depositary.
The Government of the Republic of Mauritius considers that by extending these Agreements to the so-called "British Indian Ocean Territory", the United Kingdom purported to exercise sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago - a claim which is untenable under international law.
The Government of the Republic of Mauritius wishes to reiterate in emphatic terms that it does not recognize the so-called "British Indian Ocean Territory". The fact that the Chagos Archipelago is, and has always been, part of the territory of the Republic of Mauritius, and that the United Kingdom has never had sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago, has been authoritatively established by the International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion of 25 February 2019, on the Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965.
In this authoritative legal determination, the Court declared that the decolonization of the Republic of Mauritius had not been lawfully completed in 1968, since the Chagos Archipelago had been unlawfully detached in 1965, in violation of the right of self-determination of peoples and the Charter of the United Nations, as applied and interpreted in accordance with UN General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, resolution 2066 (XX) of 16 December 1965, resolution 2232 (XXI) of 20 December 1966 and resolution 2357 (XXII) of 19 December 1967. Accordingly, it went on to hold that the United Kingdom's ongoing administration of the Chagos Archipelago, as the so-called "British lndian Ocean Territory", was an internationally wrongful act, of a continuing nature, that engaged the State responsibility of the United Kingdom. It determined that the United Kingdom is under a legal obligation to terminate its unlawful colonial administration "as rapidly as possible".
The Court further determined that all UN Member States have an obligation to cooperate with the United Nations in facilitating the completion of the decolonization of the Republic of Mauritius as rapidly as possible, including an obligation not to support the continuing wrongful conduct of the United Kingdom in maintaining its colonial administration in the Chagos Archipelago.
On 22 May 2019, the General Assembly, by an overwhelming majority of 116 votes to 6, adopted resolution 73/295. By this resolution, it endorsed the Court's Advisory Opinion, affirmed that the Chagos Archipelago forms an integral part of the territory of the Republic of Mauritius, and demanded that the United Kingdom terminate its unlawful colonial administration within a maximum of six months, that is, by no later than 22 November 2019. That deadline has now expired.
Moreover, the General Assembly in its resolution called upon Member States to "cooperate with the United Nations to ensure the completion of the decolonization of Mauritius as rapidly as possible" and to refrain from conduct that might impede or delay the completion of decolonization. It further called upon the United Nations and all its specialized agencies to recognize that the Chagos Archipelago forms an integral part of the territory of the Republic of Mauritius, to support the decolonization of the Republic of Mauritius as rapidly as possible, and to refrain from impeding that process by recognizing the so-called "British Indian Ocean Territory". Lastly, the resolution also called upon "all other international, regional and intergovernmental organizations, including those established by treaty," to recognize that the Chagos Archipelago forms an integral part of the territory of the Republic of Mauritius, to support its speedy decolonization, and to "refrain from impeding that process" by recognizing the so-called "British Indian Ocean Territory".
The Republic of Mauritius has, over the years, consistently asserted, and hereby reasserts, its full sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago. The Government of the Republic of Mauritius therefore unequivocally protests against the extension by the United Kingdom of the Agreements listed at Annex to the so-called "British Indian Ocean Territory" and against the purported exercise by the United Kingdom of any sovereignty, rights or jurisdiction within the territory of the Republic of Mauritius.
For the above stated reasons, which arise from established principles of international law as authoritatively interpreted and applied by the International Court of Justice and endorsed by the UN General Assembly, the Government of the Republic of Mauritius does not recognize the extension by the United Kingdom of the Agreements listed at Annex to the so-called "British Indian Ocean Territory", reserves all its rights in this regard, and calls upon all States Parties to the Agreements listed at Annex to reject the United Kingdom's extension of these Agreements to the so-called "British Indian Ocean Territory".
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Regional Integration and International Trade of the Republic of Mauritius kindly requests that the present objection be duly recorded, circulated and registered with the Secretariat of the United Nations pursuant to Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations.


07-01-2013

Her Britannic Majesty's Embassy has the honor to declare, on behalf of the Government of the United Kingdom, that its ratification of the above Protocols extends to the Bailiwick of Jersey, in addition to the territories to which they have already been extended.
In this respect, both the statements lodged on 2 July 2002 in respect of the extension of Protocol I and the Government's declaration of 17 May 1999 in respect of recognition of the competence of the International Fact Finding Commission shall also apply.

Verenigde Staten van Amerika

21-01-2015

The Embassy of the United States of America [...] refers to the Federal Department's notification, dated January 9, 2015, regarding the purported accession of the 'State of Palestine' to [Protocol III] for which the Swiss Federal Council is depositary. The Government of the United States of America does not believe the 'State of Palestine' qualifies as a sovereign State and does not recognize it as such. Accession to Protocol III is limited to sovereign States. Therefore, the Government of the United States of America believes that the 'State of Palestine' is not qualified to accede to Protocol III and affirms that it will not consider itself to be in a treaty relationship with the 'State of Palestine' under Protocol III.

Zweden

26-11-2008

The Government of Sweden has closely examined the declaration made by the Government of Israel on 22 November 2007, when ratifying the Protocol Additional III to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, with subsequent clarification in its declaration on 5 November 2008 as well as the following communication made by [Switzerland] on 7 November 2008. In the light of these communications it is the understanding of Sweden that Israel will adhere to the Protocol in its entirety and solely use the Red Crystal as its distinctive emblem. It is the expectation of Sweden that all states, in accordance with the object and purpose of Protocol III, join in the effort to disseminate the knowledge of the Protocol and to strengthen the respect of the new additional emblem.

Zwitserland

07-11-2008

The Federal Department of Foreign Affairs presents its compliments to the Embassy of the State of Israel and acknowledges receipt of the Embassy's note verbale dated 3.11.08 by which the Government of the State of Israel clarifies its declaration made at the ratification, on 22 November 2007, of the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Adoption of an Additional Distinctive Emblem (Protocol III). The Federal Department thanks the Embassy for this note which makes it clear that the State of Israel respects the Protocol III in its entirety and will therefore solely use the Additional Emblem (Red Crystal) as the distinctive emblem in accordance with said Protocol.

Naar boven