Sometimes that was expressly stated in the text, sometimes not.

GATS commitments, it was stated, are not an all or nothing issue .

Austria stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

Brazil stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

Canada stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

Chile stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

Croatia stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

Kuwait stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

Morocco stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

Myanmar stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

Poland stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

Portugal stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

Slovakia stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

Sweden stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

Tunisia stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

Turkey stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

Other delegations stated that the elimination of the veto was not a realistic proposition.

Costa Rica stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

South Africa stated that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

China stated in its reservation that it was not bound by article 35, paragraph 2.

It was stated that it was not possible to understand the rationale for protecting third party holders of non negotiable instruments.

It was stated that the phenomenon was not confined to any region or group of States but had assumed global proportions.

China stated, for the Mainland Region, that extradition was not conditional on the existence of a treaty.

It is stated that the judgement was uphold by the cassation instance (date and instance not provided).

The source also stated that Ms. Bakhmina was not allowed to have a defence lawyer present during her interrogation.

The Philippines stated that its central authority was

Portugal stated that the designated central authority was

Austria stated that the acceptable language was German.

Belize stated that the acceptable language was English.

Botswana stated that English was the acceptable language.

Chile stated that the acceptable language was Spanish.

Croatia stated that the acceptable language was English.

Jamaica stated that the acceptable language was English.

Myanmar stated that the acceptable language was English.

Namibia stated that the acceptable language was English.

Austria stated that its central authority was as follows

Canada stated that its central authority was as follows

Croatia stated that its central authority was as follows

Cyprus stated that its central authority was as follows

Egypt stated that its central authority was as follows

Jamaica stated that its central authority was as follows

Morocco stated that its central authority was as follows

Myanmar stated that its central authority was as follows

Namibia stated that its central authority was as follows

Tunisia stated that its central authority was as follows