• (a) Any amendment proposed in accordance with this paragraph shall be considered by the Facilitation Committee of the Organization, provided that it has been circulated at least three months prior to the meeting of this Committee. If adopted by two-thirds of the Contracting Governments present and voting in the Committee, the amendment shall be communicated to all Contracting Governments by the Secretary-General.
• (b) Any amendment to the Annex under this paragraph shall enter into force fifteen months after communication of the proposal to all Contracting Governments by the Secretary-General unless within twelve months after the communication at least one-third of Contracting Governments have notified the Secretary-General in writing that they do not accept the proposal.
• (c) The Secretary-General shall inform all Contracting Governments of any notification received under subparagraph (b) and of the date of entry into force.
• (d) Contracting Governments which do not accept an amendment are not bound by that amendment but shall follow the procedure laid down in article VIII of the present Convention.

(3) A conference of the Contracting Governments to consider amendments to the Annex shall be convened by the Secretary-General upon the request of at least one-third of these Governments. Every amendment adopted by a two-thirds majority of the Contracting Governments present and voting shall enter into force six months after the date on which the Secretary-General notifies the Contracting Government of the amendment adopted.

(4) The Secretary-General shall notify promptly all signatory Governments of the adoption and entry into force of any amendment under this article.

TERRITORIAL APPLICATION

Article XIII

(1) (a) The United Nations in cases where they are the administering authority for a territory, or any Contracting Government responsible for the international relations of a territory, shall as soon as possible consult with such territory in an endeavour to extend the present Convention to that territory, and may at any time by notification in writing given to the Secretary-General declare that the Convention shall extend to such territory.

(b) The present Convention shall from the date of the receipt of the notification or from such other date as may be specified in the notification extend to the territory named therein.

(c) The provisions of Article VIII of the present Convention shall apply to any territory to which the Convention is extended in accordance with the present Article; for this purpose, the expression “its own formalities, documentary requirements or procedures” shall include those in force in that territory.

(d) The present Convention shall cease to extend to any territory one year after the receipt by the Secretary-General of a notification to this effect, or on such later date as may be specified therein.

(2) The Secretary-General shall inform all the Contracting Governments of the extension of the present Convention to any territory under paragraph 1 of this Article, stating in each case the date from which the Convention has been so extended.

[translation] “The Government of the Republic of Cuba considers that the provisions of article X of the Convention, notwithstanding the fact that it deals with matters of interest for all States, are discriminatory in nature in that they withhold from a number of States the right of signature and accession, which is contrary to the principle of universality.

The Government of the Republic of Cuba considers that the application of the provisions contained in article XII of the Convention is at variance with the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples contained in resolution 1514(XV) adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 14 December 1960, which proclaims the necessity of putting a speedy and unconditional end to colonialism in all its forms and manifestations.”

Czechoslovakia

The instrument of accession of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic contains the following paragraph (in the Czechoslovak language):

[translation] “In acceding to the Convention, the Government of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic regard it necessary to call attention to the discriminatory nature of article X of the Convention since its provisions do not provide to all States the equal right to accede to the Convention and in their consequence deprive certain States of the possibility to become Contracting Parties to it. The Convention regulates questions concerning all States and accordingly it should be open to participation of all States without limitations. In harmony with the principle of sovereign equality no States have the right to exclude other States from participation in treaties, especially in treaties of this kind.”

Egypt

The instrument of acceptance of the Arab Republic of Egypt contained the following declaration:

[unofficial translation] “We declare . . . that we accepted, supported and ratified that Convention with reservation that this convention does not contradict the terms of the Constantinople Treaty for the year 1888 concerning the Suez Canal.”

Hungary

The instrument of acceptance of the Hungarian People’s Republic was accompanied by the following statement (in the English language):

“The Presidential Council of the Hungarian People’s Republic declares that article X of the Convention on Facilitation of International Maritime Traffic contains discriminative provisions since it does not give every State an equal right to become a party to the Convention. The Convention regulates such questions which concern all States and, therefore, it should be open for all States, without any restriction and discrimination.”

Iraq

The instrument of accession of the Republic of Iraq contained the following sentence (in the Arabic language):

[translation] “Entry into the above convention by the Republic of Iraq shall, however, in no way signify recognition of Israel or be conducive to entry into any relations therewith.”

Syrian Arab Republic

The instrument of accession of the Syrian Arab Republic contains the following sentence (in the Arab language):

[translation] “…this accession…to this Convention…in no way implies recognition of Israel and does not involve the establishment of any relations with Israel arising from the provisions of this Convention.”

note: The depositary received a communication dated 11 February 1976 from the Chargé d’affaires a.i. of the Embassy of Israel in London. The communication, the full text of which was circulated by the depositary, includes the following:

“The Government of Israel notes that in acceding to the Convention…the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic included in its instruments of accession sentences relating to the State of Israel. This statement by the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic is a political one and it is the view of the Government of Israel that the [International Maritime Organization] and its conventions are not the proper place for making such pronouncements. These pronouncements are, moreover, in flagrant contradiction to the principles, objects and purposes of the Convention in question.

The Government of Israel rejects the said statement as being devoid of any legal validity whatsoever and will proceed on the assumption that it cannot in any way affect the obligations incumbent on the Syrian Arab Republic under the above-mentioned Convention.

The Government of Israel will, in so far as concerns the substance of the matter, adopt towards the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic an attitude of complete reciprocity.”

Uruguay

The instrument of accession of the Eastern Republic of Uruguay was accompanied by the following declaration:

[translation] “Where, during the unloading of goods from ships or on their receipt in national warehouses, differences in packages are found, in terms of plus or minus quantities, in relation to what is stated in the consular cargo manifest, or where differences occur between the cargo of a ship and the manifest originating at the last port of call, unless those documents have been corrected in accordance with the regulations, the seizure of the excess packages shall be declared or a fine equal to the value of the missing goods shall be imposed.

In the case of goods carried in bulk or without packaging, the sanction shall be applied on the plus or minus differences with respect to the weights or quantities declared in the above-mentioned documents.

The determination of these differences shall invariably be subject, for the sole purpose of exemption from the sanction, to a tolerance of up to 5% (five per cent) with respect to the amount declared. This tolerance shall be applied to the amount declared for each ship and for each consignment.

The value of missing goods shall be established on the basis of the original documents, if they are not subject to a tariff, or on the basis of the maximum indicated by the tariff.

If the value cannot be determined, a fine of between $200.00 (two hundred pesos) or $10,000.00 (ten thousand pesos) shall be imposed.

If the difference relates to missing goods, liability shall be invoked only where it appears, from the circumstances of the case, that the shortfall occurred subsequent to the time at which the master took receipt of the goods or effects.

The consular manifest shall contain in generic form all the details provided by the regulations in order to identify the goods.”

U.S.S.R.

The instrument of acceptance of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was accompanied by a letter (in the English language) containing the following paragraph:

“The Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics states that the provision in paragraph 2, article X of the Convention on Facilitation of International Maritime Traffic, 1965, under which the Governments of a number of States are deprived of the opportunity to become Parties to this Convention, is of a discriminatory nature and believes that in accordance with the principle of sovereign equality of States the Convention should be open for participation to all interested nations without any discrimination or limitation.”