International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Covenant_on_Civil_and_Political_Rights

Parties and signatories of the ICCPR

  State party

  Signatory that has not ratified

  State party that attempted to withdraw

  Non-party; non-signatory

Type United Nations General Assembly resolution

Drafted 1954

Signed 16 December 1966[1]

Location United Nations Headquarters, New York City

Effective 23 March 1976[1]

Signatories 74[1]

Parties 173[1]

Depositary Secretary-General of the United Nations

Languages French, English, Russian, Chinese, Spanish[2]

Full text at Wikisource

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

1/27
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is a multilateral
treaty that commits states parties to respect the civil and political rights of individuals,
including the right to life, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly,
electoral rights and rights to due process and a fair trial.[3] It was adopted by United Nations
General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI) on 16 December 1966 and entered into force 23
March 1976 after its thirty-fifth ratification or accession.[A] As of June 2022, the Covenant
has 173 parties and six more signatories without ratification, most notably the People's
Republic of China and Cuba;[1] North Korea is the only state that has tried to withdraw.

The ICCPR is considered a seminal document in the history of international law and human
rights, forming part of the International Bill of Human Rights, along with the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights (UDHR).[4]

Compliance with the ICCPR is monitored by the United Nations Human Rights Committee,
[B]
which reviews regular reports of states parties on how the rights are being implemented.
States must report one year after acceding to the Covenant and then whenever the
Committee requests (usually every four years). The Committee normally meets at the UN
Office at Geneva, Switzerland and typically holds three sessions per year.

History
The ICCPR (International Covenant On Civil and Political
Rights) has its roots in the same process that led to the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[5] A "Declaration
on the Essential Rights of Man" had been proposed at the
1945 San Francisco Conference which led to the founding
of the United Nations, and the Economic and Social
Council was given the task of drafting it.[4] Early on in the
process, the document was split into a declaration setting
forth general principles of human rights, and a convention
or covenant containing binding commitments. The former
evolved into the UDHR and was adopted on 10 December
1948.[4]

Drafting continued on the convention, but there remained

significant differences between UN members on the
relative importance of negative Civil and Political versus
positive Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.[6] These International Covenant on Civil
eventually caused the convention to be split into two and Political Rights
separate covenants, "one to contain civil and political
rights and the other to contain economic, social and cultural rights."[7] The two covenants

2/27
were to contain as many similar provisions as possible, and be opened for signature
simultaneously.[7] Each would also contain an article on the right of all peoples to self-
determination.[8]

The first document became the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the
second the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The drafts were
presented to the UN General Assembly for discussion in 1954 and adopted in 1966.[9] As a
result of diplomatic negotiations the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights was adopted shortly before the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights.
Together, the UDHR and the two Covenants are considered to be the foundational
human rights texts in the contemporary international system of human rights.[5]

Articles of the Covenant

The Covenant follows the structure of the UDHR and ICESCR, with a preamble and fifty-
three articles, divided into six parts.[10]

Part 1 (Article 1) recognizes the right of all peoples to self-determination, including the right
to "freely determine their political status",[11] pursue their economic, social and cultural
goals, and manage and dispose of their own resources. It recognises a negative right of a
people not to be deprived of its means of subsistence,[12] and imposes an obligation on those
parties still responsible for non-self governing and trust territories (colonies) to encourage
and respect their self-determination.[13]

Part 2 (Articles 2 – 5) obliges parties to legislate where necessary to give effect to the rights
recognised in the Covenant, and to provide an effective legal remedy for any violation of
those rights.[14] It also requires the rights be recognised "without distinction of any kind,
such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social
origin, property, birth or other status,"[15] and to ensure that they are enjoyed equally by
women.[16] The rights can only be limited "in time of public emergency which threatens the
life of the nation,"[17] and even then no derogation is permitted from the rights to life,
freedom from torture and slavery, the freedom from retrospective law, the right to
personhood, and freedom of thought, conscience, religion and freedom from medical or
scientific experimentation without consent.[18]

Part 3 (Articles 6 – 27) lists the rights themselves. These include rights to:

physical integrity, in the form of the right to life and freedom from torture and slavery
(Articles 6, 7, and 8);
liberty and security of the person, in the form of freedom from arbitrary arrest and
detention and the right to habeas corpus (Articles 9 – 11);

3/27
 procedural fairness in law, in the form of rights to due process, a fair and impartial
trial, the presumption of innocence, and recognition as a person before the law (Articles
14, 15, and 16);
individual liberty, in the form of the freedoms of movement, thought, conscience and
religion, speech, association and assembly, family rights, the right to a nationality, and
the right to privacy (Articles 12, 13, 17 – 24);
prohibition of any propaganda for war as well as any advocacy of national or religious
hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence by law (Article
20);
political participation, including the right to the right to vote (Article 25);
Non-discrimination, minority rights and equality before the law (Articles 26 and 27).

Many of these rights include specific actions which must be undertaken to realize them.

Part 4 (Articles 28 – 45) governs the establishment and operation of the Human Rights
Committee and the reporting and monitoring of the Covenant. It also allows parties to
recognize the competence of the committee to resolve disputes between parties on the
implementation of the Covenant (Articles 41 and 42).

Part 5 (Articles 46 – 47) clarifies that the Covenant shall not be interpreted as interfering
with the operation of the United Nations or "the inherent right of all peoples to enjoy and
utilize fully and freely their natural wealth and resources".[19]

Part 6 (Articles 48–53) governs ratification, entry into force, and amendment of the
Covenant.

Rights to physical integrity

Main articles: Right to life, Torture, and Slavery
Article 6 of the Covenant recognises the individual's "inherent right to life" and requires it
to be protected by law.[20] It is a "supreme right" from which no derogation can be permitted,
and must be interpreted widely.[21] It therefore requires parties to take positive measures to
reduce infant mortality and increase life expectancy, as well as forbidding arbitrary killings
by security forces.[21]

While Article 6 does not prohibit the death penalty, it restricts its application to the "most
serious crimes"[22] and forbids it to be used on children and pregnant women[23] or in a
manner contrary to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide.[24] The UN Human Rights Committee interprets the Article as "strongly
suggest[ing] that abolition is desirable",[21] and regards any progress towards abolition of the
death penalty as advancing this right.[21] The Second Optional Protocol commits its
signatories to the abolition of the death penalty within their borders.

4/27
Article 7 prohibits torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and non-consensual
medical or scientific experimentation.[25] As with Article 6, it cannot be derogated from
under any circumstances.[18] The article is now interpreted to impose similar obligations to
those required by the United Nations Convention Against Torture, including not just
prohibition of torture, but active measures to prevent its use and a prohibition on
refoulement.[26] In response to Nazi human experimentation during WW2 this article
explicitly
[25] includes a prohibition on medical and scientific experimentation without consent.

Article 8 prohibits slavery and enforced servitude in all situations.[27] The article also
prohibits forced labour, with exceptions for criminal punishment, military service and civil
obligations.[28]

Liberty and security of person

Main article: Habeas corpus

Article 9 recognises the rights to liberty and security of the person. It prohibits arbitrary
arrest and detention, requires any deprivation of liberty to be according to law,[29] and
obliges parties to allow those deprived of their liberty to challenge their imprisonment
through the courts.[30] These provisions apply not just to those imprisoned as part of the
criminal process, but also to those detained due to mental illness, drug addiction, or for
educational or immigration purposes.[31]

Articles 9.3 and 9.4 impose procedural safeguards around arrest, requiring anyone
arrested to be promptly informed of the charges against them, and to be brought promptly
before a judge.[32] It also restricts the use of pre-trial detention,[33] requiring that it not be
'the general rule'.[31]

Article 10 requires anyone deprived of liberty to be treated with dignity and humanity.[34]
This applies not just to prisoners, but also to those detained for immigration purposes or
psychiatric care.[35] The right complements the Article 7 prohibition on torture and cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment.[35] The article also imposes specific obligations around
criminal justice, requiring prisoners in pretrial detention to be separated from convicted
prisoners, and children to be separated from adults.[36] It requires prisons to be focused on
reform and rehabilitation rather than punishment.[37]

Article 11 prohibits the use of imprisonment as a punishment for breach of contract.[38]

Procedural fairness and rights of the accused

Main articles: Rights of the accused and Right to a fair trial
Article 14 recognizes and protects a right to justice and a fair trial. Article 14.1 establishes
the ground rules: everyone must be equal before the courts, and any hearing must take place
in open court before a competent, independent and impartial tribunal, with any judgment or
ruling made public.[39] Closed hearings are only permitted for reasons of privacy, justice, or

5/27
national security, and judgments may only be suppressed in divorce cases or to protect the
interests of children.[39] These obligations apply to both criminal and civil hearings, and to all
courts and tribunals.[40] Article 14.3 mandates that litigants must be informed promptly
and in detail in a language which they understand.[41]

The rest of the article imposes specific and detailed obligations around the process of
criminal trials in order to protect the rights of the accused and the right to a fair trial. It
establishes the Presumption of innocence[42] and forbids double jeopardy.[43] It requires that
those convicted of a crime be allowed to appeal to a higher tribunal,[44] and requires victims
of a Miscarriage of justice to be compensated.[45] It establishes rights to a speedy trial, to
counsel, against self-incrimination, and for the accused to be present and call and examine
witnesses.[46]

Article 15 prohibits prosecutions under Ex post facto law and the imposition of
retrospective criminal penalties, and requires the imposition of the lesser penalty where
criminal sentences have changed between the offence and conviction.[47] But except the
criminal according to general principles of law recognized by international community.[48]
(jus cogens)

Article 16 requires states to recognize everyone as a person before the law.[49]

Individual liberties

Main articles: Freedom of movement, Freedom of religion, Freedom of thought, Freedom of

speech, Freedom of assembly, Freedom of association, and Right of Return
Article 12 guarantees freedom of movement, including the right of persons to choose their
residence, to leave and return to a country.[50] These rights apply to legal aliens as well as
citizens of a state,[51] and can be restricted only where necessary to protect national security,
public order or health, and the rights and freedoms of others.[52] The article also recognises a
right of people to enter their own country: the right of return.[53] The Human Rights
Committee interprets this right broadly as applying not just to citizens, but also to those
stripped of or denied their nationality.[51] They also regard it as near-absolute; "there are few,
if any, circumstances in which deprivation of the right to enter one's own country could be
reasonable".[51]

Article 13 forbids the arbitrary expulsion of resident aliens and requires such decisions to
be able to be appealed and reviewed.[54]

Article 17 mandates the right of privacy.[55] This provision, specifically article 17(1), protects
private adult consensual sexual activity, thereby nullifying prohibitions on homosexual
behaviour,[56] however, the wording of this covenant's marriage right (Article 23) excludes
the extrapolation of a same-sex marriage right from this provision.[57]
Article 17 also protects
people against unlawful attacks to their honor and reputation. Article 17 (2) grants the
protection of the law against such attacks.[55]

6/27
Article 18 mandates freedom of religion or belief.[58]

Article 19 mandates freedom of expression.[59]

Article 20 mandates sanctions against inciting war and hatred.[60]

Article 21 mandates freedom of assembly and 22 mandates freedom of association. These

provisions guarantee the right to freedom of association, the right to trade unions and also
defines the International Labour Organization.[61][62]

Article 23 mandates the right of marriage.[63] The wording of this provision neither requires
nor prohibits same-sex marriage.[64]

Article 24 mandates special protection, the right to a name, and the right to a nationality for
every child.[65]

Article 27 mandates the rights of ethnic, religious and linguistic minority to enjoy their own
culture, to profess their own religion, and to use their own language.[66]

Political rights
Article 3 provides an accessory non-discrimination principle. Accessory in the way that it
cannot be used independently and can only be relied upon in relation to another right
protected by the ICCPR.

In contrast, Article 26 contains a revolutionary norm by providing an autonomous equality

principle which is not dependent upon another right under the convention being infringed.
This has the effect of widening the scope of the non-discrimination principle beyond the
scope of ICCPR.

Optional protocols
There are two Optional Protocols to the Covenant. The First Optional Protocol establishes an
individual complaints mechanism, allowing individuals to complain to the Human Rights
Committee about violations of the Covenant.[67] This has led to the creation of a complex
jurisprudence on the interpretation and implementation of the Covenant. As of
September 2019, the First Optional Protocol has 116 parties.[68]

The Second Optional Protocol abolishes the death penalty; however, countries were
permitted to make a reservation allowing for use of death penalty for the most serious crimes
of a military nature, committed during wartime.[69] As of June 2022, the Second Optional
Protocol had 90 parties.[70]

Reservations

7/27
 This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (June 2010)

A number of parties have made reservations and interpretative declarations to their

application of the Covenant.[71]

Argentina will apply the fair trial rights guaranteed in its constitution to the prosecution of
those accused of violating the general law of nations.[1]

Australia reserves the right to progressively implement the prison standards of Article 10,
to compensate for miscarriages of justice by administrative means rather than through the
courts, and interprets the prohibition on racial incitement as being subject to the freedoms of
expression, association and assembly. It also declares that its implementation will be effected
at each level of its federal system.[1]

Austria reserves the right to continue to exile members of the House of Habsburg, and
limits the rights of the accused and the right to a fair trial to those already existing in its legal
system.[1]

Bahamas, due to problems with implementation, reserves the right not to compensate for
miscarriages of justice.[1]

Bahrain interprets Articles 3 (no sexual discrimination), 18 (freedom of religion) and 23

(family rights) within the context of Islamic Sharia law.[1]

Bangladesh reserves the right to try people in absentia where they are fugitives from justice
and declares that resource constraints mean that it cannot necessarily segregate prisons or
provide counsel for accused persons.[1]

Barbados reserves the right not to provide free counsel for accused persons due to resource
constraints.[1]

Belgium interprets the freedoms of speech, assembly and association in a manner

consistent with the European Convention on Human Rights. It does not consider itself
obliged to ban war propaganda as required by Article 20, and interprets that article in light of
the freedom of expression in the UDHR.[1]

Belize reserves the right not to compensate for miscarriages of justice, due to problems with
implementation, and does not plan to provide free legal counsel for the same reasons as
above. It also refuses to ensure the right to free travel at any time, due to a law requiring
those travelling abroad to provide tax clearance certificates.[1]

Congo, as per the Congolese Code of Civil, Commercial, Administrative and Financial
Procedure, in matters of private law, decisions or orders emanating from conciliation
proceedings may be enforced through imprisonment for debt.[1]

8/27
Denmark reserves the right to exclude the press and the public from trials as per its own
laws. Reservation is further made to Article 20, paragraph 1. This reservation is in
accordance with the vote cast by Denmark in the XVI General Assembly of the United
Nations in 1961 when the Danish Delegation, referring to the preceding article concerning
freedom of expression, voted against the prohibition against propaganda for war.[1]

The Gambia, as per its constitution, will provide free legal assistance for accused persons
charged with capital offences only.[1]

Pakistan, has made several reservations to the articles in the convention; "the provisions of
Articles 3, 6, 7, 18 and 19 shall be so applied to the extent that they are not repugnant to the
Provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan and the Sharia laws", "the provisions of Article 12
shall be so applied as to be in conformity with the Provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan",
"With respect to Article 13, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan reserves its
right to apply its law relating to foreigners", "the provisions of Article 25 shall be so applied
to the extent that they are not repugnant to the Provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan"
and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan "does not recognize the competence
of the Committee provided for in Article 40 of the Covenant".

The United States has made reservations that none of the articles should restrict the right
of free speech and association; that the US government may impose capital punishment on
any person other than a pregnant woman, including persons below the age of 18; that "cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment" refers to those treatments or
punishments prohibited by one or more of the fifth, eighth, and fourteenth amendments to
the US Constitution; that Paragraph 1, Article 15 will not apply; and that, notwithstanding
paragraphs 2(b) and 3 of Article 10 and paragraph 4 of Article 14, the US government may
treat juveniles as adults, and accept volunteers to the military prior to the age of 18. The
United States also submitted five "understandings", and four "declarations".[72]

Implementation and effects

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights has 167 states parties, 67 by
signature and ratification, and the remainder by accession or succession. Another five states
have signed but have yet to ratify the treaty.[1]

Australia
The Covenant is not directly enforceable in Australia, but its provisions support a number of
domestic laws, which confer enforceable rights on individuals. For example, Article 17 of the
convention has been implemented by the Australian Privacy Act 1988. Likewise, the
Covenant's equality and anti-discrimination provisions support the federal Disability
Discrimination Act 1992. Finally, the Covenant is one of the major sources of 'human rights'
listed in the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.[73] This law requires most new

9/27
legislation and administrative instruments (such as delegated/subordinate legislation) to be
tabled in parliament with a statement outlining the proposed law's compatibility with the
listed human rights[74] A Joint Committee on Human Rights scrutinises all new legislation
and statements of compatibility.[75] The findings of the Joint Committee are not legally
binding.

Legislation also establishes the Australian Human Rights Commission[76] which allows the
Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) to examine enacted legislation[77] (to suggest
remedial enactments[78]), its administration[79] (to suggest avoidance of practices[80]) and
general compliance[81] with the covenant which is scheduled to the AHRC legislation.[82]

In Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory, the convention can be used by a plaintiff or
defendant who invokes those jurisdiction's human rights charters.[83] While the Convention
cannot be used to overturn a Victorian or ACT law, a Court can issue a 'declaration of
incompatibility' that requires the relevant Attorney-General to respond in Parliament within
a set time period.[85] Courts in Victoria and the ACT are also directed by the legislation to
interpret the law in a way to give effect to a human right,[84] and new legislation and
subordinate legislation must be accompanied by a statement of compatibility.[86] Efforts to
implement a similar Charter at the national level have been frustrated and Australia's
Constitution may prevent conferring the 'declaration' power on federal judges.[87]

Ireland
Ireland's use of Special Criminal Courts where juries are replaced by judges and other special
procedures apply has been found to not violate the treaty: "In the Committee's view, trial
before courts other than the ordinary courts is not necessarily, per se, a violation of the
entitlement to a fair hearing and the facts of the present case do not show that there has been
such a violation."[88]

New Zealand
New Zealand took measures to give effect to many of the rights contained within it by passing
the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act in 1990, and formally incorporated the status of protected
person into law through the passing of the Immigration Act 2009.[89]

Sri Lanka

Sri Lankan author Shakthika Sathkumara was arrested on 1 April 2019 for inciting religious
violence, following a publication of a short story about homosexuality and child abuse at a
Buddhist temple in Sri Lanka. The author had been adjudged the best Sinhala language short
story writer in Sri Lanka's National Youth Literary Festivals of 2010 and 2014, and was twice
the recipient of the north western provincial state literary award. A group of Buddhist monks
had stormed the author's workplace demanding punitive action against him after the story
first appeared on Facebook; the ICCPR prohibits "advocacy of national, racial or religious

10/27
hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence". Human rights
organizations Civicus and the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) have asserted that
the charges are spurious and a clear violation of the author's right to freedom of expression.
[90][91]

United States

Reservations, understandings, and declarations

The United States Senate ratified the ICCPR in 1992, with five reservations, five
understandings, and four declarations.[72] Some have noted that with so many reservations,
its implementation has little domestic effect.[92] Included in the Senate's ratification was the
declaration that "the provisions of Article 1 through 27 of the Covenant are not self-
executing",[93] and in a Senate Executive Report stated that the declaration was meant to
"clarify that the Covenant will not create a private cause of action in U.S. Courts."[94]

Where a treaty or covenant is not self-executing, and where Congress has not acted to
implement the agreement with legislation, no private right of action within the US judicial
system is created by ratification.[95]

As a reservation that is "incompatible with the object and purpose" of a treaty is void as a
matter of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and international law,[96] there is
some
[97] issue as to whether the non-self-execution declaration is even legal under domestic law.

Prominent critics in the human rights community, such as Prof. Louis Henkin[98] (non-self-
execution declaration incompatible with the Supremacy Clause) and Prof. Jordan Paust[99]
("Rarely has a treaty been so abused") have denounced the United States' ratification subject
to the non-self-execution declaration as being a blatant fraud upon the international
community, especially in light of what they allege is its subsequent failure to conform
domestic law to the minimum human rights standards as established in the Covenant and in
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights over the last thirty years.

Constitutionality

It has been argued that Article 20(2) of the ICCPR may be unconstitutional according to
Supreme Court precedent, which is the reason behind the Senate reservations.[100]

Non-compliance

In 1994, the United Nations' Human Rights Committee expressed concerns with compliance:
[101]

11/27
 Of particular concern are widely formulated reservations which essentially render ineffective all
Covenant rights which would require any change in national law to ensure compliance with
Covenant obligations. No real international rights or obligations have thus been accepted. And
when there is an absence of provisions to ensure that Covenant rights may be sued on in
domestic courts, and, further, a failure to allow individual complaints to be brought to the
Committee under the first Optional Protocol, all the essential elements of the Covenant
guarantees have been removed.

Indeed, the United States has not accepted a single international obligation required under
the Covenant. It has not changed its domestic law to conform with the strictures of the
Covenant.[102] Its citizens are not permitted to sue to enforce their basic human rights under
the Covenant.[102] It has not ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture
(OPCAT). As such, the Covenant has been rendered ineffective, with the bone of contention
being United States officials' insistence upon preserving a vast web of sovereign, judicial,
prosecutorial, and executive branch immunities that often deprives its citizens of the
"effective remedy" under law the Covenant is intended to guarantee.

In 2006, the Human Rights Committee expressed concern over what it interprets as material
non-compliance, exhorting the United States to take immediate corrective action:[103]

The Committee notes with concern the restrictive interpretation made by the State party of its
obligations under the Covenant, as a result in particular of (a) its position that the Covenant
does not apply with respect to individuals under its jurisdiction but outside its territory, nor in
time of war, despite the contrary opinions and established jurisprudence of the Committee and
the International Court of Justice; (b) its failure to take fully into consideration its obligation
under the Covenant not only to respect, but also to ensure the rights prescribed by the Covenant;
and (c) its restrictive approach to some substantive provisions of the Covenant, which is not in
conformity with the interpretation made by the Committee before and after the State party's
ratification of the Covenant.
The State party should review its approach and interpret the
Covenant in good faith, in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to its terms in
their context, including subsequent practice, and in the light of its object and purpose. The State
party should in particular (a) acknowledge the applicability of the Covenant with respect to
individuals under its jurisdiction but outside its territory, as well as its applicability in time of
war; (b) take positive steps, when necessary, to ensure the full implementation of all rights
prescribed by the Covenant; and (c) consider in good faith the interpretation of the Covenant
provided by the Committee pursuant to its mandate.

Parties to the Covenant

There
[104] are a total of 173 parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Ratified or Entry into

State party Signed acceded force

12/27
 Ratified or Entry into
State party Signed acceded force

 Afghanistan — 24 January 1983 24 April 1983

 Albania — 4 October 1991 4 January 1992

 Algeria 10 December 12 September 12 December

1968 1989 1989

 Andorra 5 August 2002 22 September 22 December

2006 2006

 Angola — 10 January 1992 10 April 1992

 Antigua and Barbuda — 3 July 2019 3 November

2019

 Argentina 18 February 8 August 1986 8 November

1968 1986

 Armenia — 23 June 1993 23 September

1993

 Australia 18 December 13 August 1980 13 November

1972 1980

 Austria 10 December 10 September 10 December

1973 1978 1978

 Azerbaijan — 13 August 1992 13 November

1992

 Bahamas, The 4 December 23 December 23 March 2009

2008 2008

 Bahrain — 20 September 20 December

2006 2006

 Bangladesh — 6 September 6 December

2000 2000

 Barbados — 5 January 1973 23 March 1976

 Belarus 19 March 1968 12 November 23 March 1976

1973

 Belgium 10 December 12 April 1983 12 July 1983

1968

 Belize — 10 June 1996 10 September

1996

13/27
 Ratified or Entry into
State party Signed acceded force

 Benin — 12 March 1992 12 June 1992

 Bolivia — 12 August 1982 12 November

1982

 Bosnia and Herzegovina[C] — 1 September 6 March 1992

1993

 Botswana 8 September 8 September 8 December

2000 2000 2000

 Brazil — 24 January 1992 24 April 1992

 Bulgaria 8 October 1968 21 September 23 March 1976

1970

 Burkina Faso — 4 January 1999 4 April 1999

 Burundi — 8 May 1990 8 August 1990

 Cambodia[D] 17 October 26 May 1992 26 August 1992

1980

 Cameroon — 27 January 1984 27 April 1984

 Canada — 19 May 1976 19 August 1976

 Cape Verde — 6 August 1993 6 November

1993

 Central African Republic — 8 May 1981 8 August 1981

 Chad — 9 June 1995 9 September

1995

 Chile 16 September 10 February 23 March 1976

1969 1972

 Colombia 21 December 29 October 1969 23 March 1976

1966

 Congo, Democratic — 1 November 1 February 1977

Republic of the 1976

 Congo, Republic of the — 5 October 1983 5 January 1984

 Costa Rica 19 December 29 November 23 March 1976

1966 1968

14/27
 Ratified or Entry into
State party Signed acceded force

 Côte d'Ivoire — 26 March 1992 26 June 1992

 Croatia[C] — 12 October 1992 12 January

1993

 Cyprus 19 December 2 April 1969 23 March 1976

1966

 Czech Republic[E] — 22 February 1 January 1993

1993

 Denmark 20 March 1968 6 January 1972 23 March 1976

 Djibouti — 5 November 5 February 2003

2002

 Dominica — 17 June 1993 17 September

1993

 Dominican Republic — 4 January 1978 4 April 1978

 East Timor — 18 September 18 December

2003 2003

 Ecuador 4 April 1968 6 March 1969 23 March 1976

 Egypt 4 August 1967 14 January 1982 14 April 1982

 El Salvador 21 September 30 November 29 February

1967 1979 1980

 Equatorial Guinea — 25 September 25 December

1987 1987

 Eritrea — 22 January 2002 22 April 2002

 Estonia — 21 October 1991 21 January

1992

 Ethiopia — 11 June 1993 11 September

1993

 Fiji — 16 August 2018 16 November

2018

 Finland 11 October 19 August 1975 23 March 1976

1967

15/27
 Ratified or Entry into
State party Signed acceded force

 France — 4 November 4 February 1981

1980

 Gabon — 21 January 1983 21 April 1983

 Gambia, The — 22 March 1979 22 June 1979

 Georgia — 3 May 1994 3 August 1994

 Germany[F] 9 October 1968 17 December 23 March 1976

1973

 Ghana 7 September 7 September 7 December

2000 2000 2000

 Greece — 5 May 1997 5 August 1997

 Grenada — 6 September 6 December

1991 1991

 Guatemala — 5 May 1992 5 August 1992

 Guinea 28 February 24 January 1978 24 April 1978

1967

 Guinea-Bissau 12 September 1 November 1 February 2011

2000 2010

 Guyana 22 August 1968 15 February 15 May 1977

1977

 Haiti — 6 February 1991 6 May 1991

 Honduras 19 December 25 August 1997 25 November

1966 1997

 Hungary 25 March 1969 17 January 1974 23 March 1976

 Iceland 30 December 22 August 1979 22 November

1968 1979

 India — 10 April 1979 10 July 1979

 Indonesia — 23 February 23 May 2006

2006

 Iran 4 April 1968 24 June 1975 23 March 1976

16/27
 Ratified or Entry into
State party Signed acceded force

 Iraq 18 February 25 January 1971 23 March 1976

1969

 Ireland 1 October 1973 8 December 8 March 1990

1989

 Israel 19 December 3 October 1991 3 January 1992

1966

 Italy 18 January 15 September 15 December

1967 1978 1978

 Jamaica 19 December 3 October 1975 23 March 1976

1966

 Japan 30 May 1978 21 June 1979 21 September

1979

 Jordan 30 June 1972 28 May 1975 23 March 1976

 Kazakhstan 2 December 24 January 2006 24 April 2006

2003

 Kenya — 1 May 1972 23 March 1976

 Korea, North[G] — 14 September 14 December

1981 1981

 Korea, South — 10 April 1990 10 July 1990

 Kuwait — 21 May 1996 21 August 1996

 Kyrgyzstan — 7 October 1994 7 January 1995

 Laos 7 December 25 September 25 December

2000 2009 2009

 Latvia — 14 April 1992 14 July 1992

 Lebanon — 3 November 23 March 1976

1972

 Lesotho — 9 September 9 December

1992 1992

 Liberia 18 April 1967 22 September 22 December

2004 2004

 Libya — 15 May 1970 23 March 1976

17/27
 Ratified or Entry into
State party Signed acceded force

 Liechtenstein — 10 December 10 March 1999

1998

 Lithuania — 20 November 10 February

1991 1992

 Luxembourg 26 November 18 August 1983 18 November

1974 1983

 North Macedonia[C] — 18 January 1994 17 September

1991

 Madagascar 17 September 21 June 1971 23 March 1976

1969

 Malawi — 22 December 22 March 1994

1993

 Maldives — 19 September 19 December

2006 2006

 Mali — 16 July 1974 23 March 1976

 Malta — 13 September 13 December

1990 1990

 Marshall Islands — 12 March 2018 12 June 2018

 Mauritania — 17 November 17 February

2004 2005

 Mauritius — 12 December 23 March 1976

1973

 Mexico — 23 March 1981 23 June 1981

 Moldova — 26 January 1993 26 April 1993

 Monaco 26 June 1997 28 August 1997 28 November

1997

 Mongolia 5 June 1968 18 November 23 March 1976

1974

 Montenegro[C] — 23 October 2006 3 June 2006

 Morocco 19 January 3 May 1979 3 August 1979

1977

18/27
 Ratified or Entry into
State party Signed acceded force

 Mozambique — 21 July 1993 21 October

1993

 Namibia — 28 November 28 February

1994 1995

   Nepal — 14 May 1991 14 August 1991

 Netherlands 25 June 1969 11 December 11 March 1979

1978

 New Zealand 12 November 28 December 28 March 1979

1968 1978

 Nicaragua — 12 March 1980 12 June 1980

 Niger — 7 March 1986 7 June 1986

 Nigeria — 29 July 1993 29 October

1993

 Norway 20 March 1968 13 September 23 March 1976

1972

 Pakistan 17 April 2008 23 June 2010 23 September

2010

 Palestine — 2 April 2014 2 July 2014

 Panama 27 July 1976 8 March 1977 8 June 1977

 Papua New Guinea — 21 July 2008 21 October

2008

 Paraguay — 10 June 1992 10 September

1992

 Peru 11 August 1977 28 April 1978 28 July 1978

 Philippines 19 December 23 October 1986 23 January

1966 1987

 Poland 2 March 1967 18 March 1977 18 June 1977

 Portugal[H] 7 October 1976 15 June 1978 15 September

1978

 Qatar — 21 May 2018 21 August 2018

19/27
 Ratified or Entry into
State party Signed acceded force

 Romania 27 June 1968 9 December 23 March 1976

1974

 Russia 18 March 1968 16 October 1973 23 March 1976

 Rwanda — 16 April 1975 23 March 1976

 Saint Vincent and the — 9 November 9 February 1981

Grenadines 1981

 Samoa — 15 February 15 May 2008

2008

 San Marino — 18 October 1985 18 January

1986

 São Tomé and Príncipe 31 October 10 January 2017 10 April 2017

1995

 Senegal 6 July 1970 13 February 13 May 1978

1978

 Serbia[C] — 12 March 2001 27 April 1992

 Seychelles — 5 May 1992 5 August 1992

 Sierra Leone — 23 August 1996 23 November

1996

 Slovakia[E] — 28 May 1993 1 January 1993

 Slovenia[C] — 6 July 1992 6 October 1992

 Somalia — 24 January 1990 24 April 1990

 South Africa 3 October 1994 10 December 10 March 1999

1998

 Spain 28 September 27 April 1977 27 July 1977

1976

 Sri Lanka — 11 June 1980 11 September

1980

 Sudan — 18 March 1986 18 June 1986

 Suriname — 28 December 28 March 1977

1976

20/27
 Ratified or Entry into
State party Signed acceded force

 Swaziland — 26 March 2004 26 June 2004

 Sweden 29 September 6 December 23 March 1976

1967 1971

  Switzerland — 18 June 1992 18 September

1992

 Syria — 21 April 1969 23 March 1976

 Tajikistan — 4 January 1999 4 April 1999

 Tanzania — 11 June 1976 11 September

1976

 Thailand — 29 October 1996 29 January

1997

 Togo — 24 May 1984 24 August 1984

 Trinidad and Tobago — 21 December 21 March 1979

1978

 Tunisia 30 April 1968 18 March 1969 23 March 1976

 Turkey 15 August 2000 23 September 23 December

2003 2003

 Turkmenistan — 1 May 1997 1 August 1997

 Uganda — 21 June 1995 21 September

1995

 Ukraine 20 March 1968 12 November 23 March 1976

1973

 United Kingdom[I] 16 September 20 May 1976 20 August 1976

1968

 United States 5 October 1977 8 June 1992 8 September

1992

 Uruguay 21 February 21 May 1967 23 March 1976

1967

 Uzbekistan — 28 September 28 December

1995 1995

21/27
 Ratified or Entry into
State party Signed acceded force

 Vanuatu 29 November 21 November 21 February

2007 2008 2009

 Venezuela 24 June 1969 10 May 1978 10 August 1978

 Vietnam — 24 September 24 December

1982 1982

 Yemen — 9 February 1987 9 May 1987

 Zambia — 10 April 1984 10 July 1984

 Zimbabwe — 13 May 1991 13 August 1991

States not party to the Covenant

Most states in the world are parties to the ICCPR. The following 25 states have not become
party to it, but six states have signed the Covenant but not ratified it.[104]

Signatories that have signed and not ratified

State Signed

 China[H][I] 5 October 1998

 Comoros 25 September 2008

 Cuba 28 February 2008

 Nauru 12 November 2001

 Palau 20 September 2011

 Saint Lucia 22 September 2011

States which are neither signatories nor parties

Nonmembers of the UN
1.  Cook Islands
2.  Niue
3.  Taiwan[J]
4.   Vatican City (through the Holy See) [K]

22/27
See also

Notes
1. ^ Article 49 allowed that the covenant would enter into force three months after the
date of the deposit of the thirty-fifth instrument of ratification or accession
2. ^ Not to be confused with the United Nations Human Rights Council.
3. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f  Yugoslavia signed the Covenant on 8 August 1967 and
ratified it on 2 June 1971; it entered into force for Yugoslavia on 23 March 1976.
Following the breakup of Yugoslavia, the following states located in the former
Yugoslavia made declarations regarding that status of the Covenant with regard to
themselves:
 Bosnia and Herzegovina – On 1 September 1993, it declared that the
Covenant was in force for it since 6 March 1992.
 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia – On 12 March 2001, it declared that the
Covenant was in force for it since 27 April 1992. On 4 February 2003, the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia changed its name to Serbia and Montenegro, and on 3
June 2006  Serbia succeeded Serbia and Montenegro. Therefore, for Serbia,
the Covenant has retroactively been in force since 27 April 1992.
 Republic of Macedonia – On 18 January 1994, it declared that the Covenant
was in force for it since 17 September 1991.
 Montenegro – On 23 October 2006, it declared that the Covenant was in
force for it since 3 June 2006.
4. ^ Although Cambodia signed the Covenant when it was known as Democratic
Kampuchea, it filed an instrument of accession, not ratification, on 26 May 1992.
5. ^ Jump up to: a b  Czechoslovakia signed the Covenant on 7 October 1968 and
ratified it on 23 December 1975; it entered into force for Czechoslovakia on 23 March
1976. Following the dissolution of Czechoslovakia, the  Czech Republic declared on
22 February 1993 that the Covenant was in force for it since 1 January 1993 and
 Slovakia declared on 28 May 1993 that the Covenant was also in force for it since 1
January 1993.
6. ^  East Germany signed the Covenant on 23 March 1973 and ratified it on 8
November 1973; it entered into force for East Germany on 23 March 1976. Following
the reunification of Germany on 3 October 1990, East Germany ceased to exist.
7. ^ On 25 August 1997, North Korea notified the Secretary-General of the United Nations
that it was withdrawing from the Covenant. However, the Secretary-General still
considers North Korea a state party to the Covenant because the Covenant does not
allow for withdrawal and therefore withdrawal would only be possible if all other states
parties allowed it, which has not occurred.

23/27
 8. ^ Jump up to: a b Portugal extended the territorial application of the Covenant to
Macau on 27 April 1993. On 3 December 1999, China notified the Secretary-General of
the United Nations that the Covenant would still be in force for Macau following the
transfer of sovereignty on 20 December 1999.
9. ^ Jump up to: a b Both China and the United Kingdom notified the Secretary-General
that the Covenant would continue to remain in force for Hong Kong upon transfer of
sovereignty on 1 July 1997.
10. ^ (the Republic of China) signed the Covenant on 5 October 1967 but did not ratify it at
the time. On 25 October 1971 it lost its United Nations membership. On 31 March 2009
the Legislative Yuan of the Republic of China ratified it along with the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, but the deposit was rejected by the
UN.
11. ^ The Vatican is not a member of the United Nations though it holds observer status.

References
1. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r "UN Treaty Collection - International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights". "Status of ratification"
2. ^ Article 53 of the ICCPR
3. ^ Jump up to: a b c "Fact Sheet No.2 (Rev.1), The International Bill of Human Rights".
UN OHCHR. June 1996. Archived from the original on 13 March 2008. Retrieved 2
June 2008.
4. ^ Jump up to: a b Christopher N.J.Roberts. "William H. Fitzpatrick's Editorials on
Human Rights (1949)". Quellen zur Geschichte der Menschenrechte. Retrieved 4
November 2017.
5. ^ Sieghart, Paul (1983). The International Law of Human Rights. Oxford University
Press. p. 25.
6. ^ Jump up to: a b United Nations General Assembly Resolution 543, 5 February 1952.
7. ^ United Nations General Assembly Resolution 545, 5 February 1952.
8. ^ United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2200, 16 December 1966.
9. ^ The following section summarises the text of the Covenant.
10. ^ ICCPR, Article 1.1.
11. ^ ICCPR, Article 1.2.
12. ^ ICCPR, Article 1.3.
13. ^ ICCPR, Article 2.2, 2.3.
14. ^ ICCPR, Article 2.1.
15. ^ ICCPR, Article 3.
16. ^ ICCPR, Article 4.1.
17. ^ ICCPR, Article 47.
18. ^ ICCPR, Article 6.1.
19. ^ ICCPR, Article 6.2.
20. ^ ICCPR, Article 6.5.

24/27
21. ^ ICCPR, Article 6.3.
22. ^ ICCPR, Articles 8.1, 8.2.
23. ^ ICCPR, Article 8.3.
24. ^ ICCPR, Article 9.1.
25. ^ ICCPR, Article 9.4.
26. ^ ICCPR, Articles 9.2, 9.3.
27. ^ ICCPR, Article 9.3.
28. ^ ICCPR, Article 10.1.
29. ^ ICCPR, Article 10.2.
30. ^ ICCPR, Article 10.3.
31. ^ ICCPR, Article 11.
32. ^ ICCPR, Article 14.1.
33. ^ ICCPR, Article 14.2.
34. ^ ICCPR, Article 14.7.
35. ^ ICCPR, Article 14.5.
36. ^ ICCPR, Article 14.6.
37. ^ ICCPR, Article 14.3.
38. ^ ICCPR, Article 15.
39. ^ ICCPR, Article 15.2.
40. ^ ICCPR, Article 16.
41. ^ ICCPR, Article 12.3.
42. ^ ICCPR, Article 12.4.
43. ^ ICCPR, Article 13.
44. ^ ICCPR, Article 18.
45. ^ ICCPR, Article 19.
46. ^ ICCPR, Article 20.
47. ^ ICCPR, Article 21.
48. ^ ICCPR, Article 22.
49. ^ ICCPR, Article 23.
50. ^ ICCPR, Article 24.
51. ^ ICCPR, Ariticle 27.
52. ^ OP1-ICCPR, Article 1.
53. ^ "OHCHR Dashboard". United Nations. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
54. ^ OP2-ICCPR, Article 2.1
55. ^ "OHCHR Dashboard". United Nations. Retrieved 25 November 2019.
56. ^ Act No. 186 of 2011, Part 3.
57. ^ Act No. 186 of 2011, Part 2
58. ^ Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) s 11(e).
59. ^ Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) s 11(j).
60. ^ Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) s 11(f)(i) – Conciliation & (ii)
– Reporting.
61. ^ Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) s 11(n).

25/27
 62. ^ Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) s 11(k) & (m).
63. ^ Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic); Human Rights Act
2004 (ACT).
64. ^ Joseph Kavanagh v. Ireland, United Nations Human Rights Committee
Communication No. 819/1998, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/71/D/819/1998 (2001).
65. ^ Black, Allinda; Hopkins, June, eds. (2003). "Covenant on Civil and Political Rights".
The Eleanor Roosevelt Papers. Hyde Park, New York: Eleanor Roosevelt National
Historic Site. Retrieved 21 February 2009.
66. ^ 138 Cong. Rec. S4781-84 (1992)
67. ^ S. Exec. Rep. No. 102-23 (1992)
68. ^ Sei Fujii v. State 38 Cal.2d 718, 242 P.2d 617 (1952); also see Buell v. Mitchell 274
F.3d 337 Archived 17 May 2010 at the Wayback Machine (6th Cir., 2001) (discussing
ICCPR's relationship to death penalty cases, citing to other ICCPR cases)
69. ^ Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, art. 19, 1155 U.N.T.S. 331 (entered into
force 27 January 1980) (specifying conditions under which signatory States can offer
"reservations")
70. ^ Louis Henkin, U.S. Ratification of Human Rights Treaties: The Ghost of Senator
Bricker, 89 Am. J. Int'l L. 341, 346 (1995)
71. ^ Jordan J. Paust, International Law As Law of the United States 375 (2d ed. 2003)
72. ^ Greene, Jamal (9 April 2012). "Hate Speech and the Demos". In Herz, Michael;
Molnár, Péter (eds.). The Content and Context of Hate Speech: Rethinking Regulation
and Responses. Cambridge University Press. p. 95. ISBN 978-0-521-19109-8.
73. ^ Jump up to: a b Hain v. Gibson, 287 F.3d 1224 Archived 17 May 2010 at the Wayback
Machine (10th Cir. 2002) (noting that Congress has not done so)

External links
Text of the Covenant
List of signatories and parties
article 2 Bimonthly publication highlighting article 2 of the ICCPR
Introductory note by Christian Tomuschat, procedural history note and audiovisual
material on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in the Historic
Archives of the United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law
Lecture by Ruth Wedgwood entitled The Work of the United Nations Human Rights
Committee: Enforcing the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in the
Lecture Series of the United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law
Christopher N.J. Roberts: William H. Fitzpatrick’s Editorials on Human Rights (1949),
published by Arbeitskreis Menschenrechte im 20. Jahrhundert, published at "Quellen
zur Geschichte der Menschenrechte"

International human rights instruments

26/27
  United Nations

Authority control

27/27