Yleissopimus ulkomaisten yleisten asiakirjojen laillistamisvaatimuksen poistamisesta
Convention abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents
Konvention om slopande av kravet på legalisation av utländska allmänna handlingar
- Treaty type
- II Monenväliset sopimukset
- 6. Valtio
- 6.3. oikeudellinen yhteistyö, rikollisuuden torjuminen, huumeet
- Name of the Treaty Party
- HAAGIN KANSAINVÄLISEN YKSITYISOIKEUDEN KONFERENSSI
- Entry into Force Information
- Treaty Depositary
- Alankomaat
- Date of Entry Into Force
- Date of Entry Into Force International
- Note
- Suomi on 28.10.2009 vastustanut Mongolian liittymistä sopimukseen. Sopimus ei siten tule voimaan Suomen ja Mongolian välillä. Suomi on vastustanut Pakistanin liittymistä 12.12.2022.
- Date of Entry Into Force International
- Signing
- Haag
- Date Ratified
- R
Alankomaat
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Albania
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Andorra
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Antigua ja barbuda
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Argentiina
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
The Argentine Government declares that the extension of the Convention Abolishing the Requirement of Legalization for Foreign Public Documents (5-10-1961), made by the United Kingdom of the Islas Malvinas, Georgias del Sur and Sandwich del Sur, identified by Great Britain as Falkland Islands and its Dependencies, does not affect the Rights of the Argentine Republic on the mentioned archipelago. The illicitness of the action of the United Kingdom (occupation by force of the Islands in 1833 and expulsion of the local inhabitants) has been constantly pointed out by the Republic of Argentina. Likewise, the U.N. in its G.A. resolutions 2065(XX), 3160(XXVIII) and 31/49 has urged both Governments to accelerate the negotiations on the existing sovereignity dispute, so as to put an end to the present colonial situation. La Rep?blica Argentina rechaza, asimismo, la extensi?n de la Convenci?n al llamado "Territorio Ant?rtico Brit?nico", formulada en la misma fecha, a la par que reafirma los derechos de la Rep?blica al Sector Ant?rtico Argentino, incluyendo los relativos a su soberan?a o jurisdicci?n mar?tima correspondiente. Recuerda, adem?s, las salvaguardias sobre reclamaciones de soberan?a territorial en la Ant?rtida previstas en el art?culo IV del Tratado Ant?rtico, suscripto en Washington el 1 de diciembre de 1959, del cual son Partes la Rep?blica Argentina y el Reino Unido de Gran Bretana e Irlanda del Norte.
Armenia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Australia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
Alueellinen soveltaminen: Sovelletaan kaikkiin Australian hallinnassa oleviin alueisiin.
Azerbaidzhan
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Bahama
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Bahrain
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Barbados
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Belgia
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Belize
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Bolivia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Bosnia-hertsegovina
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Botswana
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Brasilia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
The Government of the Federative Republic of Brazil further states that Brazil's accession to the Convention does not imply the recognition of sovereign rights over territories to which the Convention's application has been or will be extended under the terms of Article 13.
Brunei
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Bulgaria
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Chile
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Cookinsaaret
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Costa rica
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Dominica
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Dominikaaninen tasavalta
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Ecuador
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
"(...) , the above-mentioned Ecuadorian Ministry has decided to change the design of the current "Apostille" used in Ecuador for a new design, more practical and simplified. This new seal will be issued with a 10 American dollar stamp and will be implemented as from the second quarterly of 2006."
El salvador
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Espanja
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
By Note No 89 dated 4 August 1997, the Embassy of Spain informed the depositary of the following declaration concerning Gibraltar: "La Embajada de Espa?a saluda atentamente al Ministerio Real de Asuntos Exteriores y tiene el honor de poner en su conocimiento que la Colonia de Gibraltar viene expidiendo apostillas del Convenio de La Haya n?mero XII de 5.10.1961 en las que, como "pa?s", figura el nombre del citado territorio. El Reino de Espa?a considera que el modelo de apostilla utilizado por las Autoridades del Reino Unido en Gibraltar implica una clara violaci?n del Convenio de La Haya citado, cuyo art?culo 13 s?lo permite a los Estados-parte del mismo extender dicho Convenio a todos los territorios de cuyas relaciones internacionales est?n encargados, pudiendo en consecuencia estos territorios expedir apostillas, pero nunca como "pa?ses", tal y como aparece en las expedidas por Gibraltar. Gran Breta?a, en efecto, extendi? en su momento la aplicaci?n territorial del Convenio a Gibraltar, que tiene la consideraci?n, seg?n las propias Autoridades brit?nicas, de territorio dependiente y no de "pa?s". La autoproclamaci?n en el modelo de apostilla citado de Gibraltar como "pa?s" no s?lo no es aceptable por Espa?a, sino que no refleja el actual estatuto que dicho territorio posee desde el punto de vista del Derecho Internacional. En consecuencia, el Reino de Espa?a declara que no acepta la validez de las apostillas expedidas por el Reino Unido en Gibraltar en las que aparezca el nombre de la Colonia como "pa?s". El Reino de Espa?a solicita al Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores de los Pa?ses Bajos que comunique esta decisi?n a los Estados-parte del citado Convenio. (...)".
Etelä-afrikka
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Etelä-korea
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Fidzhi
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Filippiinit
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Georgia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
This Convention does not apply to the documents issued by the de facto illegitimate authorities and officials of the regions of Georgia: Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia and the former Autonomous District of South Ossetia.
Grenada
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Guatemala
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
The accession and the implementation of this Convention, does not imply the recognition from the Republic of Guatemala of any territory as sovereign State and any regime as Legal Government, that to the present date, are not recognized by the Republic of Guatemala, neither implies the establishment nor reestablishment of the diplomatic relations with those countries with which they do not maintain currently.
Guyana
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Honduras
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Hongkong
Sitoutumispäivä:
Intia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Irlanti
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Islanti
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Iso-britannia
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
AUTHORITIES United Kingdom, 24-08-2020 Competent Authority: ??? [???] from 1 September 2020, the Competent Authority for the United Kingdom will be known as the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.???
Israel
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Italia
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Itävalta
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Japani
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Kap verde
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Kazakstan
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
Attachment: The Hague Convention dd 05.10.1961 abolishing the legalisation for foreign public documents stipulates the apostille of 9 x 9 cm in size. It is expedient to have a stamp of the apostille, which size is 13 x 13 cm. A script of the text can be enlarged for the comfort of its representation and reading. It is not allowed to change (translate) a language document, text and its order of placing on the stamp. The stamp can be fulfilled in the language of the Republic of Kazakhstan only."
Kiina
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
AUTHORITIES AND DECLARATIONS China, 08-03-2023 ???1. In accordance with Article 6 of the Convention, the Government of the People's Republic of China designates the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China as the competent authority to issue the certificate referred to in the first paragraph of Article 3 of the Convention for the People's Republic of China. Unless otherwise stated by the Government, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China issues the certificates to public documents emanated in the territory of the People's Republic of China. Authorized by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China, the Foreign Affairs Offices of provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the Central Government can issue the certificates to public documents emanated within the respective administrative areas. 2. The Convention will not be applicable between the People's Republic of China and those Contracting States that China does not recognize as sovereign states. 3. In accordance with the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China and the Basic Law of the Macao Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China, the Government of the People's Republic of China has decided that the Convention will continue to apply to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the Macao Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China. In accordance with Article 6 of the Convention, it designates each of the following as the competent authorities in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to issue the certificate referred to in the first paragraph of Article 3 of the Convention: the Administrative Secretary, the Registrar of the High Court, the Senior Deputy Registrar of the High Court and the Deputy Registrar of the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. In accordance with Article 6 of the Convention, it designates each of the following as the competent authorities in the Macao Special Administrative Region to issue the certificate referred to in the first paragraph of Article 3 of the Convention: the Secretary for Administration and Justice, the Director and the Deputy Directors of Justice Affairs Department of the Macao Special Administrative Region. The other Declarations previously made by the Government of the People's Republic of China for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the Macao Special Administrative Region continue to be effective
Kirgisia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Kolumbia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
... as of December 15th of 2004, the apostille issued by the Coordination of Legalizations and Apostille of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia will no longer be attached to its respective documents in the form of a sticker, but mechanically with a metallic staple. As of December 15th of 2004, the apostille format will also include a space at the bottom reserved for identifying the document for which the apostille is issued and for the names and surnames of its holder. Declaration received on 22 April 2005: ...as of May 1st 2005, the signature which appears on the Colombian Apostille format, will no longer be written in ink, but will be scanned.
Kosovo
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Kreikka
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Kroatia
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Kypros
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Latvia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Lesotho
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Liberia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Liechtenstein
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Liettua
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
Notification pursuant to Article 15 of the Convention DECLARATION Lithuania, 16-06-2020 ???The Government of the Republic of Lithuania takes note of the Declarations submitted by Ukraine on 16 October 2015 regarding the application of the Convention on Civil Procedure (1954), the Convention Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents (1961), the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (1965), the Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters (1970), the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (1980) and the Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Co-operation in Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children (1996) to the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol and of the Declarations submitted by the Russian Federation on 19 July 2016 in relation to the Declarations made by Ukraine. In relation to the Declarations made by the Russian Federation, the Government of the Republic of Lithuania declares, in line with the conclusions of the European Council of 20/21 March 2014, that it does not recognize the illegal referendum in Crimea and the illegal annexation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol to the Russian Federation. As regards the territorial scope of the above Conventions, the Government of the Republic of Lithuania therefore considers that the conventions in principle continue to apply to the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol as part of the territory of Ukraine. The Government of the Republic of Lithuania further notes the Declaration by Ukraine that the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol are temporarily not under the control of Ukraine and that the application and implementation by Ukraine of its obligations under the Conventions is limited and not guaranteed in relation to this part of Ukraine's territory, and that only the central authorities of Ukraine in Kyiv will determine the procedure for relevant communication. As a consequence of the above, the Government of the Republic of Lithuania declares that it will not engage in any direct communication or interaction with authorities in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol and will not accept any documents or requests emanating from such authorities or through the authorities of the Russian Federation, but will only engage with the central authorities of Ukraine in Kyiv for the purposes of the application and implementation of the said conventions.??? The Hague, 19 June 2020
Luxemburg
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Macao
Sitoutumispäivä:
Makedonia
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Malawi
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Malta
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Marokko
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Marshallinsaaret
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Mauritius
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Meksiko
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Moldova
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Monaco
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Mongolia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Montenegro
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Namibia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Nicaragua
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Niue
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Norja
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Oman
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
DECLARATION Oman, 23-03-2021 ???[???] the Government of the Sultanate of Oman represented by its Ministry of Foreign Affairs has the pleasure to notify [???] its desire to confirm its position regarding Article 1 of the Convention. The Sultanate considers that the provisions of the Convention do not apply to commercial and customs documents, whatever their type, origin or value, nor do they apply to documents issued by Diplomatic or Consular Agents. In the view of the Sultanate the Convention applies only to civil public documents, pursuant to paragraphs a, b, c and d, of the aforementioned Article.???
Palau
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
In accordance with Article 12, second paragraph, the accession will have effect only as regards the relations between the Republic of Palau and those Contracting States which will not have raised an objection to its accession in the six months after receipt of the present notification. This six-month period will end on 24 April 2020. The Convention will, in accordance with its Article 12, third paragraph, enter into force between the Republic of Palau and the other Contracting States, which have not raised an objection to its accession, on 23 June 2020.
Panama
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Peru
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Portugali
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
AUTHORITIES Portugal, 19-10-2021 (modification) Additional competent authority as of 1 October 2021: The Court of Appeal of Guimar??es (Tribunal da Rela????o de Guimar??es)
Puola
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Ranska
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
Alueellinen soveltaminen: Sovelletaan koko Ranskan tasavallan alueella.
Romania
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Ruotsi
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Saint kitts ja nevis
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Saint lucia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Saint vincent ja grenadiinit
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Saksa
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
AUTHORITIES Germany, 06-12-2021 (modification) (Translation) ???Since 4 September 2021, the person responsible for issuing the apostille for public documents of the Higher Regional Court of the State of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania is the President of the Higher Regional Court [???].??? *************************** OBJECTION Germany, 22-03-2022 ???The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has carefully examined the declaration dated 5 October 2021 made by the Government of the Republic of Indonesia on the occasion of the accession of the Republic of Indonesia to the Convention of 5 October 1961 Abolishing the Requirement of Legalization for Foreign Public Documents (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"). The declaration by the Government of the Republic of Indonesia pursuant to which it is bound by the provisions of Article 1 on the scope of public documents in the Convention, provided that the documents issued by the prosecutor office as the prosecuting body in the Republic of Indonesia are not included in public documents whose requirements of legalization have been abolished as set forth in this Convention, constitutes a reservation, since the purpose of the declaration made by the Government of the Republic of Indonesia is to limit the legal effect of Article 1 of the Convention as applied to the Republic of Indonesia. Article 1(2) of the Convention provides that documents emanating from a public prosecutor shall be deemed to be public documents, unless the documents are executed by diplomatic or consular agents or relate to administrative documents dealing directly with commercial or customs operations. Public prosecutors are an authority or an official connected with the courts or tribunals of the State; consequently, documents issued by them in this capacity are to be deemed as public documents covered by the Convention within the meaning of Article 1. A reservation excluding these documents from exemption from legalization is not compatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. The reservation made by the Republic of Indonesia is therefore inadmissible. The Federal Republic of Germany objects to this reservation by the Republic of Indonesia. This objection does not prevent the entry into force of the Convention between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Republic of Indonesia.???
Samoa
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
San marino
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Sao tome ja principe
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Saudi-arabia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Senegal
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Varauma:
AUTHORITIES Senegal, 13-07-2022 (Translation) ???[???] the following officials of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Senegalese Abroad of the Republic of Senegal are designated, ex officio, to issue the certificate referred to in article 3 (1) : - Director of Legal and Consular Affairs (Directeur des Affaires juridiques et consulaires); - Head of the Chancellery Division (Chef de la Division Chancellerie); - Head of the Civil Registry Office (Chef du Bureau de l'Etat Civil). ??
Serbia
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
By Note dated 24 January 2003, the Embassy of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia informed the depositary of the following: "The Embassy of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia presents its compliments to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of The Netherlands and with the reference to the misunderstandings concerning the application of the Convention Abolishing the Requirement of Legalization for Foreign Public Documents, signed at The Hague on 5 October 1961 and ratified by the Federative People's Republic of Yugoslavia on 21 May 1961, and the Convention On the Issue of Multilingual Extracts from Civil Status Records, signed in Vienna on 8 September 1976 and ratified by the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, to the succession of which the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia signed the declarations on 19 April 2001 and 16 October 2001 respectively, and, in that connection, the competencies of Yugoslav institutions to legalize public documents, has the honour to inform of the following: 1) Yugoslavia has legalized public documents in the sense of the Hague Convention under the Law on the Legalization of Public Documents in International Traffic (??Official Gazette of the SFRY??, No.6, 8 February, 1973) since its adoption. Under the article. 8 of the said Law, the courts of the first instance and the Ministries of Justice of the constituent Yugoslav Republics provide apostilles, i.e. authorize Yugoslav documents, for use in the States Parties to the Hague Convention. Under the Law, municipal courts have primary competence to certify documents issued by institutions resident in the areas under the jurisdiction of the courts. Republican and Provincial justice administration authorities are competent to authorize, as an alternative, documents issued by institutions resident in the areas under their jurisdiction if not authorized by competent courts of the first instance. Bearing that in mind, only one authorization, i.e. apostille, by the competent court of the first instance or, exceptionally, by a Republican or Provincial justice administration authority will suffice for the authorization/acceptance of Yugoslav documents in international legal traffic. The insistence therefore on a cumulative authorization of documents by one or more Yugoslav institutions is in contravention of the provisions of the Hague Convention and the goals for the promotion of which it was signed and acceded to by a large number of countries, Yugoslavia included, as a source of international law. 2) Furthermore, and with reference to the said Note, the Embassy has noticed that the competent authorities of the Kingdom of the Netherlands frequently request that multilingual extracts from Yugoslav civil status records be legalized by alternative Yugoslav authorities (Ministries of Justice of the Republic of Serbia and the Republic of Montenegro). That practice is contrary to the provisions of Article 8, para 2, of the Vienna Convention and Article 6, para 1, of the Hague Convention. They also request that extracts from Yugoslav civil status records in Serbian undergo the entire gamut of possible legalizations by various Yugoslav and Dutch authorities, which runs counter to the letter and spirit of Article 1 of The Hague Convention which provides for the obligation of the States Parties to accept extracts from civil status records of all States Parties, defined as public documents, if they are supplied by an apostille alone. In advising the Ministry of the above, the Embassy of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia would appreciate if it interceded with the competent authorities of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, as the depository of the Hague Convention, to change the existing practice and align it with the provisions of the Hague Conventions and to advise thereof the other States Parties to the Convention. (...)" 29-05-2017 The Embassy of the Republic of Serbia to the Kingdom of the Netherlands presents its compliments to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and recalling the UN Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999), has the honour to notify esteemed Ministry that the present extension ratione loci of the applicability of the 1961 Convention Abolishing the Requirement of Legislation for Foreign Public Documents (hereinafter the Apostille Convention) to the territory of the Serbia's Province of Kosovo and Metohija has to be interpreted in accordance with Article 13 of the Apostille Convention. Furthermore, in conformity with above mentioned Resolution 1244 and the Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government of Kosovo established by the UNMIK regulation 2001/9 of 15 May 2001, which was confirmed by the ICJ Advisory Opinion of 22 July 2010 to be in force, all references to the Province of Kosovo and Metohija and its provisional institutions need to be designated accordingly and in conformity with the UN practice. The Embassy of the Republic of Serbia would highly appreciate if the Ministry, acting in its capacity as Depositary, brings this Note Verbale containing declaration of extension to the attention of all Contracting States to the Apostille Convention and to the Permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference on Private International Law.
Seychellit
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Singapore
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
AUTHORITIES Singapore, 18-01-2021 Competent Authority: Singapore Academy of Law
Slovakia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Slovenia
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Surinam
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Sveitsi
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Swazimaa
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Tadzhikistan
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
The Convention will, in accordance with its Article 12, third paragraph, enter into force between Tajikistan and the other Contracting States, which have not raised an objection to its accession, on 31 October 2015.
Tanska
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
Alueellinen soveltaminen: Ei sovelleta F??rsaariin eik?? Grönlantiin. EXTENSION Faroe Islands, 14-10-2021 Denmark extended the Convention to the Faroe Islands on 14 October 2021. The Convention will, in accordance with Article 13, second and third paragraph, enter into force for the Faroe Islands on 13 December 2021. DECLARATION Denmark, 14-10-2021 ???The Convention should now be applied to the Faroe Islands. The Kingdom of Denmark thus withdraws its territorial declaration with regard to the Faroe Islands in accordance with Article 13 of the Convention.???
Tonga
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
Declaration ...all Apostilles issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Tonga and its designated Diplomatic Missions shall now be subject to an administrative fee before issuance.
Trinidad ja tobago
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Tshekki
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
AUTHORITIES Czechia, 14-10-2021 (modification) ???The Czech Republic declares pursuant to Article 6 paragraph 2 of the Convention, taking into account the recent legislative change, that the authorities competent to issue the certificate referred to in the first paragraph of Article 3 of the Convention are: 1. Ministry of Justice of the Czech Republic (International Civil Department) for documents issued by judicial authorities; 2. Notarial Chamber of the Czech Republic for documents issued or certified by notaries; 3. Ministry of Foreign Affairs for other than judicial documents.???
Tunisia
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Turkki
Sitoutumispäivä: R
Voimaantulopäivä:
Ukraina
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Unkari
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
The Hungarian People's Republic declares that the provisions of Article 13 of the Convention Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents, done at The Hague on October 5, 1961, are contrary to resolution 1514/XV/ on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on December 14, 1960.
Uruguay
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Uusi-seelanti
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
Alueellinen soveltaminen: Ei sovelleta Tokelauhun. ...and designates the New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs as its competent authority for the purposes of Article 6 of the Convention.
Uzbekistan
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Valko-venäjä
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Venezuela
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Venäjä
Sitoutumispäivä: VS
Voimaantulopäivä:
Viro
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Yhdysvallat
Sitoutumispäivä: L
Voimaantulopäivä:
Varauma:
On the occasion of the deposit by the United States of America of its instrument of accession to the Convention Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents, concluded October 5, 1961 (1961 Convention), the Department of State wishes to draw the attention of States currently Parties to the Convention, and eventually of those becoming so in the future, to the provisions of Title 18, United States Code, Section 3190 relating to documents submitted to the United States Government in support of extradition requests. It does so for the purpose of preventing possible misunderstandings by stipulating that the 1961 Convention does not supersede or override the provisions of Section 3190. Section 3190 provides. Section 3190 Evidence on (Extradition) hearing Depositions, warrants, or other papers or copies thereof offered in evidence upon the hearing of any extradition case shall be received and admitted as evidence on such hearing for all the purposes of such hearing if they shall be properly and legally authenticated so as to entitle them to be received for similar purposes by the tribunals of the foreign country from which the accused party shall have escaped, and the certificate of the principal diplomatic or consular officer of the United States resident in such foreign country shall be proof that the same, so offered, are authenticated in the manner required. The requirement of Section 3190 is satisfied by the certification of the principal United States diplomatic or consular officer resident in the State requesting extradition that the documents are in such form as to be admissible in the tribunals of that State. The certification by apostille under the 1961 Convention does not satisfy this requirement, as it only certifies the signature, the capacity of the signer, and the seal on the documents. It does not certify the admissibility of the documents. Thus, the requirement of Section 3190 is not deemed by the United States to be overridden by operation of Article 8 of the 1961 Convention. It should be noted, however, that a certification by the principal diplomatic or consular officer of the United States as set out in Section 3190 has also served to legalize such documents, and will continue to do so without the need for any other legalization by United States officials or certification by the apostille under the 1961 Convention. In light of the above, it is recommended that States party to the 1961 Convention continue as before to cover documents supporting extradition requests directed to the United States with the special certification provided for by Section 3190. Failure to cover extradition documents in this recommended manner could regrettably result in a finding by the United States judge or magistrate hearing the extradition request that the documents do not meet the requirements of Section 3190 and thus are not entitled to be received and admitted as evidence. Such a finding could, in turn, result in the irrevocable rejection of the extradition request.