Статус Конвенции о борьбе с торговлей людьми и с эксплуатацией проституции третьими лицами (Лейк Саксесс, Нью-Йорк, 21 марта 1950 года) [рус., англ.]

[неофициальный перевод]

СТАТУС КОНВЕНЦИИ

(по состоянию на 29 октября 2026 года)

Вступление в силу: 25.07.1951

CONVENTION FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF THE TRAFFIC IN PERSONS AND OF THE EXPLOITATION OF THE PROSTITUTION OF OTHERS

Lake Success, New York, 21 March 1950

Status as at: 29-10-2026

Entry into force: 25 July 1951, in accordance with article 24.

Registration: 25 July 1951, No. 1342

Status: Signatories: 25. Parties: 83

Text: Certified true copy

United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 96, p. 271.

Note: The Convention was approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in resolution 317 (IV) <2> of 2 December 1949.

DECLARATIONS AND RESERVATIONS

(Unless otherwise indicated, the declarations and reservations were made upon ratification, accession or succession.)

Afghanistan

Reservation:

«Whereas, the Government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan does not agree with the procedure of referring disputes arising between the Parties to the Convention relating to its interpretation of application, to the International Court of Justice, at the request of any one of the Parties to the dispute, therefore, it does not undertake any commitment regarding observation of article 22 of the present Convention.»

Albania

Declaration:

Thanks to the conditions created by the popular democratic régime in Albania, the offences covered by this Convention do not find favourable ground for development there, since the social conditions which give rise to such offences have been eliminated. Nevertheless, in view of the importance of the campaign against these offences in the countries where they still exist and the international importance of that campaign, the People's Republic of Albania has decided to accede to the Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others adopted on 2 December 1949 at the fourth session of the United Nations General Assembly.

Reservation to article 22:

The People's Republic of Albania does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 22 which stipulates that any dispute between the parties to the Convention relating to its interpretation, application or execution shall, at the request of any one of the parties to the dispute, be referred to the International Court of Justice. The People's Republic of Albania declares that with respect to the competence of the International Court in that connexion, it will continue to maintain as in the past that for any dispute to be referred to the International Court of Justice for decision the agreement of all the parties to the dispute shall be necessary in each individual case.

Algeria

The Democratic and Popular Republic of Algeria does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 22 of the Convention, which provides for the compulsory competence of the International Court of Justice and declares that the agreement of all the parties to the dispute shall be necessary in each individual case for any dispute to be referred to the International Court of Justice for decision.

Belarus <10>, <11>, <12>

Bulgaria <12>

Declaration:

The offences referred to in the Convention are unknown under the socialist régime of the People's Republic of Bulgaria, for the conditions favouring them have been eliminated. Nevertheless, since it is important to counteract these offences in the countries where they still exist, and since it is important to the international community that such action should be taken, the People's Republic of Bulgaria has decided to accede to the Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others adopted by the fourth session of the General Assembly of the United Nations on 2 December 1949.

Ethiopia

Reservation:

«Socialist Ethiopia does not consider itself bound by article 22 of the Convention.»

Finland

Reservation to article 9:

«Finland reserves itself the right to leave the decision whether its citizens will or will not be prosecuted for a crime committed abroad to Finland's competent authority;»

France <13>

Hungary <11>, <12>, <14>

Kazakhstan

Reservation:

The Republic of Kazakhstan will implement provisions of articles 1 and 18 of the Convention within the bounds of prevention and suppression of crimes and administrative offences provided by the Legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Lao People's Democratic Republic

The Lao People's Democratic Republic does not consider itself bound by the provisions of article 22 which state that disputes between the Parties to the Convention relating to its interpretation or application shall, at the request of any one of the Parties to the dispute, be referred to the International Court of Justice. The Lao People's Democratic Republic declares that, with respect to the competence of the International Court concerning disputes relating to the interpretation and application of the Convention, for any dispute to be referred to the International Court of Justice the agreement of all the parties to the dispute is necessary.

Malawi

«The Government of Malawi accedes to this Convention with the exception of article 22 thereof, the effects of which are reserved.»

Romania <12>, <15>

Russian Federation <10>

Declaration:

In the Soviet Union the social conditions which give rise to the offences covered by the Convention have been eliminated. Nevertheless, in view of the international importance of suppressing these offences, the Government of the Soviet Union has decided to accede to the Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others adopted on 2 December 1949 at the fourth session of the United Nations General Assembly.

Ukraine <10>

Declaration:

In the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic the social conditions which give rise to the offences covered by the Convention have been eliminated. Nevertheless, in view of the international importance of suppressing these offences, the Government of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic has decided to accede to the Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others adopted on 2 December 1949 at the fourth session of the United Nations General Assembly.

End Note

1. On 20 October 2015, the Government of Ukraine made a communication. The text can be found here: C.N.611.2015.TREATIES-VII.11.a of 20 October 2015.

2. Official Records of the General Assembly, Fourth Session, Resolutions (A/125 and Corr.1 and 2), p. 33.

3. The German Democratic Republic had acceded to the Convention on 16 July 1974 with a reservation and a declaration. For the text of the reservation and declaration see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 943, p. 339. See also note 2 under «Germany» in the «Historical Information» section in the front matter of this volume.

4. On 7 July 1999, the Government of Portugal informed the Secretary-General that the Convention would apply to Macao.

Subsequently, on 18 November and 3 December 1999, the Secretary-General received communications regarding the status of Macao from Portugal and China (see note 3 under «China» and note 1 under «Portgual» in the «Historical Information» section in the front matter of this volume). Upon resuming the exercise of sovereignty over Macao, China notified the Secretary-General that the Convention will also apply to the Macao Special Administrative Region.

5. The former Yugoslavia had signed and ratified the Convention on 6 February 1951 and 26 April 1951, respectively. See also note 1 under «Bosnia and Herzegovina», «Croatia», «former Yugoslavia», «Slovenia», «The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia» and «Yugoslavia» in the «Historical Information» section in the front matter of this volume.

6. Czechoslovakia had acceded to the Convention on 14 March 1958. See also note 1 under «Czech Republic» and note 1 under «Slovakia» in the «Historical Information» section in the front matter of this volume.

7. Accession by the United Arab Republic. See also note 1 under «United Arab Republic» in the «Historical Information» section in the front matter of this volume.

8. See note 1 under «Montenegro» in the «Historical Information» section in the front matter of this volume.

9. The formality was effected by the Yemen Arab Republic. See also note 1 under «Yemen» in the «Historical Information» section in the front matter of this volume.

10. In communications received on 8 March 1989, 19 April 1989 and 20 April 1989, respectively, the Governments of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Belarus and Ukraine, notified the Secretary-General that they had decided to withdraw the reservations relating to article 22 made upon accession. For the texts of the reservations see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 196, p. 349, vol. 1527 and vol. 201, p. 372, respectively.

11. The Government of the Philippines informed the Secretary-General that it objects to the reservations made by the Governments of Belarus and Hungary because it feels that the reference to the International Court of Justice of any dispute relating to the interpretation or application of the Convention should not be made dependent on the consent of all parties.

12. In a communication received on 13 May 1955, the Government of Haiti informed the Secretary-General that it considers that in case of dispute it should be possible for either of the Contracting Parties concerned, without previous agreement between them, to refer a dispute to the International Court of Justice and that consequently it does not accept the reservation entered into by Bulgaria.

On that same date, the Government of South Africa informed the Secretary-General that it regards article 22 as fundamental to the Convention and cannot, therefore, accept the reservation entered into by Bulgaria.

Similar communications were received by the Secretary-General from the Governments of Haiti and South Africa in respect of the reservations made by the Governments of Belarus, Hungary and Romania.

On 24 June 1992, the Government of Bulgaria notified the Secretary-General its decision to withdraw the reservation to article 22 of the Convention made upon accession which reads as follows:

The People's Republic of Bulgaria declares, with respect to the competence of the International Court of Justice in disputes relating to the interpretation or application of the Convention, that the consent of all the parties to the dispute is necessary in each particular case before any dispute whatsoever can be referred to the Court.

13. On 11 March 2005, the Government of France informed the Secretary-General that it had decided to withdraw its declaration made upon accession, which reads as follows:

The Government of the French Republic declares that, until further notice, this Convention will only be applicable to the metropolitan territory of the French Republic.