|
THIRD COMMITTEE APPROVES DRAFT RESOLUTION URGING
SUPPORT FOR PALESTINIAN QUEST FOR SELF-DETERMINATION
Committee Approved 9 Other Drafts on Human Rights, Girl Child, Women,
Refugees, Children, Migrants, Torture, Self-Determination
NEW YORK, 21 November (UN Headquarters) -- Among the 10 draft resolutions taken up this morning by the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural), delegations approved a text on the right of Palestinian people to self-determination by a vote of 152 in favour to 2 against (Israel, United States). By that draft, the Assembly would urge all States and the specialized agencies and organizations of the United Nations to continue to support and assist the Palestinian people in their quest for self determination.
Further by that draft, the Assembly would also express its hope for an immediate resumption of negotiations within the Middle East peace process and for the speedy achievement of a final settlement between the Palestinian and Israeli sides. That sentiment was reflected in the statements made by several delegations taking the floor following the vote. Noting the resolution’s clear-cut language, they reaffirmed their full commitment to the ongoing negotiations as well as to ensuring equal security for all States and people of the region.
Also this morning, a draft on the equitable geographical distribution on the membership of the human rights treaty bodies was approved by a recorded vote of 97 in favor to 44 against, with five abstentions. By that text, the Assembly would decide to encourage States parties to the human rights instruments to establish quota distribution systems by geographical region for the election of members to the treaty bodies.
Opponents of the draft contended, however, that appointment of members to the six United Nations human rights monitoring bodies was a matter for the States parties to the respective conventions. Several stressed that equitable geographical distribution on the treaty bodies would be enhanced by achieving universal ratification of the treaties themselves. That should be the aim of the Assembly.
While the Committee approved a draft resolution on the girl child without a vote, delegations showed their support with a vote of 148 in favour to 2 against (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, United States) for a key provision in that text. That paragraph would have the Assembly stress the full and urgent implementation of the rights of the girl child as guaranteed in the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, as well as the need for universal ratification of those instruments.
The Committee approved seven other drafts this morning, all without a vote. Those included texts on improvement of the situation of women in rural areas; enlargement of the Executive Committee of the Programme of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; the rights of the child; universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination; torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; international covenants on human rights; and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.
As the Committee returned to its debate on matters related to refugees, returnees and displaced persons, the representatives of Ethiopia and the United Republic of Tanzania spoke.
The Committee will meet again this afternoon to conclude its consideration of matters relating to refugees.
Background
The Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) met this morning to continue its consideration of questions related to refugees, returnees and displaced persons and humanitarian questions.
The Committee was also expected to take action on a host of draft resolutions on items related to the advancement of women, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the promotion and protection of the rights of children, the rights of peoples to self-determination and human rights questions.
On the advancement of women, the Committee was expected to take up a resolution on the improvement of the situation of women in rural areas (document A/C.3/56/L.24/Rev.1), by which the Assembly would stress the need for specific studies to identify the best experience and practices for ensuring that rural women have better access to and better integration in the field of information and communication technologies. It would also invite the International Telecommunication Union to consider that matter in connection with the preparations for the World Summit on the Information Society.
The Committee was also expected to consider a draft resolution on enlargement of the Executive Committee of the Programme of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (document A/C.3/56/L.39), by which the Assembly would decide to increase the number of members of the Executive Committee of the Programme of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees from 57 to 61 States.
On the protection and promotion of the rights of the child, the Committee would consider two resolutions. The first text is on the rights of the child (document A/C.3/56/L.28/Rev.1). By that text the Assembly would welcome the convening of the Second World Congress against Commercial Exploitation of Children, at Yokohama, Japan, from 17 to 20 December.
The second resolution on that item was on the girl child (document A/C.3/56/L.29) by which the Assembly would call upon all States to take all necessary measures to address the obstacles that continued to affect the achievement of the goals set forth in the Beijing Platform for Action, including the strengthening of national mechanisms to implement policies and programmes for the girl child. It would also urge States to enact and enforce legislation to protect girls from all forms of violence, including female infanticide, prenatal sex selection, female genital mutilation and rape, among others.
On the right to self-determination, the Committee was expected to take up two draft resolutions. The first is on universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination (document A/C.3/56/L.32), by which the Assembly would request the Commission on Human Rights to continue to give special attention to the violation of human rights, especially the right to self-determination, resulting from foreign military intervention, aggression or occupation.
The second draft resolution to be considered under that item would be on the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination (document A/C.3/56/L.33). By that text, the Assembly would reaffirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including the right to an independent State. It would urge all States, specialized agencies and organizations of the United Nations system to continue supporting and assisting the Palestinian people in their quest for self-determination.
The Committee was also expected to take up several draft resolutions on human rights questions, including the implementation of human rights instruments and the protection of migrants.
The first of those would be on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (document A/C.3/56/L.34), by which the Assembly would urge States parties to comply strictly with their obligations under the Convention, including their obligation to submit reports in accordance with article 19, in view of the high number of reports not submitted. Also States parties are invited to incorporate a gender perspective and information concerning children and juveniles when submitting reports to the Committee against Torture.
Another would be on International Covenants on Human Rights (document A/C.3/56/L.36), by which the Assembly would urge States parties to take duly into account, in implementing the provisions of the International Covenants on Human Rights, the recommendations and observations made at the consideration of their reports by the Human Rights Committee and by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as well as the views adopted by the Human Rights Committee under the first Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The Committee would also take action on a draft resolution on International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (document A/C.3/56/L.37), by which the Assembly would express its deep concern at the growing manifestations of racism, xenophobia and other forms of discrimination and inhuman and degrading treatment directed against migrant workers in different parts of the world.
The final draft resolution under consideration this morning would be on equitable geographical distribution on the membership of the human rights treaty bodies (document A/C.3/56/L.38), by which the Assembly decides to encourage States parties to the United Nations human rights instruments to establish quota distribution systems by geographical region for the election of the members of the treaty bodies.
Action on Drafts
The Committee began its work this morning by taking action on 10 draft resolutions on items related to the advancement of women, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the promotion and protection of children's rights, the rights of peoples to self-determination and human rights questions.
The Committee first took up a draft on the advancement of women, approving without a vote a resolution on the improvement of the situation of women in rural areas (document A/C.3/56/L.24/Rev.1), which had been orally amended by the representative of Mongolia when it was introduced.
Explaining its position before the vote, the Sudan said the delegation forwarded constructive proposals on this matter, which reflected the negative effect of globalization on rural women. Unfortunately, those were not taken into account. Globalization negatively affected rural women in many ways in the developing world. It was unfortunate that the draft resolution did not include such references. The Sudan regretted it could not co-sponsor the resolution.
Next, the Committee approved without a vote a resolution on the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (document A/C.3/56/L.39).
The Committee then took up two draft resolutions on the promotion and protection of the rights of children.
The first one, which was on the rights of the child (document A/C.3/56/L.28/Rev.1), was orally amended by the delegate of Belgium at the time it was adopted. It was approved without a vote.
Explaining her delegation's position on that draft resolution, the representative of Singapore said it urged State parties to review reservations with a view to withdrawing them. Like all other international treaties, the Convention on the Rights of the Child was subject to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and that distinguished between permissible and impermissible reservations. The Vienna Convention explicitly permitted reservations that were compatible with the object and purpose of the relevant Convention. Therefore, it was inappropriate to suggest that State parties should be obliged to review permissible reservations, with a view to withdrawing them.
The other resolution was on the girl child (document A/C.3/56/L.29). Although it was adopted without a vote, before it was approved, the representative of the United States requested a recorded vote on operative paragraph 1, by which the Assembly would stress the full and urgent implementation of the rights of the girl child as guaranteed in the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, as well as the need for universal ratification of those instruments.
The representative of Namibia described his attempts to reach consensus within the Committee, and said he was surprised when the United States proposed changes to the text yesterday.
Operative paragraph 1 was adopted by a vote of 148 in favour and 2 against (United States and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea) (see Annex I for voting details).
The representative of the United States thanked the representative of Namibia for his efforts at trying to achieve consensus on the resolution. He informed the Committee that his delegation would indeed join consensus as an extension of its concern for the protection and promotion of the rights of the girl child. This was particularly necessary in light of the situation in Afghanistan where the Taliban regime had consistently violated the rights of girl children and women. It was important now for the international community to speak in one voice.
Still, he continued, the United States had strong reservations concerning certain paragraphs of the text, particularly operative paragraph 1. Since the United States was not a party to either of the conventions mentioned, it could not agree that it was urgent to implement them. The United States had no legal obligation under those conventions. He added that the primary obligation for the promotion and protection of children was with Member States.
When the Committee turned to consider draft resolutions on the right of peoples to self determination, the representative of Cuba said that his delegation had been informed last Monday that the Committee would take action on such matters. But a resolution Cuba had earlier introduced, on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination (document A/C.3/56/L.31) was not on the agenda today. He noted that a similar resolution linking mercenaries to terrorism had been acted on quickly by the Security Council. He did not understand why the Committee was not taking action on that draft text today.
The Chairman of the Committee, FUAD MUBARAK AL-HANAI, said that while it had indeed been announced that action would be taken on that resolution today, he had been informed that there would be a statement of budget implications associated with it. Once that statement had been prepared, he would inform the Committee so that it could take action on the draft immediately.
In addition, Committee members adopted addressed texts on the right to self-determination. The first was on universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination (document A/C.3/56/L.32), and adopted it without a vote.
The delegate of Argentina, explaining her position after the vote, said self-determination was an absolute right, and nothing could affect or change the right.
The other, dealing with the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination (document A/C.3/56/L.33), was approved by a vote of 152 in favour and 2 against (United States and Israel) (Annex II).
The representative of Israel, explaining his delegation's vote, said the desire of the Palestinians for self-determination could be achieved through negotiations. The right to self-determination could not be realized through terrorism. There should be a resolution that did not seek to prejudge the outcome of negotiations. Bombs would not achieve peace.
The representative of Canada, explaining his delegation's vote, said he fully supported the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people as well as the creation of a Palestinian State. However, it would be in the interest of the Palestinian people and the region as a whole if that were achieved through negotiation. Canada had supported the resolution because it affirms the negotiation process. Canada echoed the resolution’s call for immediate resumption of the negotiations within the Middle East peace process.
The representative of Guatemala, explaining her delegation's vote, said the Government of Guatemala recognized the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people, and it voted for the resolution. However, Guatemala also believed this right should not violate the right to self-determination of the Government of Israel.
The representative of the Russian Federation, explaining his delegation's vote, said his delegation supported the resolution. As one of the co-authors of the Middle East peace process, Russia was fully committed to the ongoing negotiations as well as ensuring equal security for all States and peoples of the region as well as the creation of a Palestinian State.
The representative of Australia, explaining his delegation's vote, said this resolution represented a clear and important restatement of the right of self-determination of the Palestinian people. If the vote had been taken paragraph by paragraph, Australia would have abstained on operative paragraph 1. Australia believed a just settlement could only be achieved with the cooperation of both parties.
The observer for Palestine, making a general comment, said for the first time the number of co-sponsors had surpassed 102. The adoption of the resolution was an important development, as it reaffirmed the right of Palestinians to self-determination, including the right to an independent State. The overwhelming vote was a very important step towards the major goal of the Palestinian people.
It had been unfortunate that once again the United States had voted against the resolution, she said. She hoped the United States policy would soon reflect the positive comments made by President George Bush during the Assembly’s general debate last week, and the comments earlier this week by Secretary of State Colin Powell. She added that the right of Palestinians to self-determination was inalienable, and not based on any existing agreements.
The representative of Egypt, making a general comment, said it was hoped this year would be the last that the Third Committee would take up such a resolution, and that next year, the Palestinian people would be able to exercise their right to self-determination. Where was the peace process right now? Some had said bombs would not achieve peace. That was correct. At the same time, would rockets, aerial bombardments and assassinations achieve peace?
The representative of Belgium, speaking on behalf of the European Union and making a general comment, said the Union had voted in favour of the resolution, as it had last year, as well. The Union reaffirmed the hope that the right to self-determination would be realized as soon as possible. He expressed the Union’s conviction that creation of a Palestinian State based on existing agreements would be best for peace and security within the region. The right of the Palestinian people to build a sovereign, democratic and independent State was inviolable. He called on all parties to continue with the negotiation process. He hoped that all such negotiation would be reflective of the Mitchell recommendations as well as Security Council resolutions 242 and 338.
Under the agenda item on "human rights questions: implementation of human rights instruments", the Committee approved four resolutions, the first three without votes. The first one was on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (document A/C.3/56/L.34), which was orally amended by the representative of Denmark when it was introduced. In addition, the Committee Secretary read out a note from the Office of the Controller of the United Nations on budgetary implications.
The representative of China, explaining his delegation's position before the vote, said a revised text containing negotiated language on operative paragraph 13 -- on the establishment of a pre-sessional working group to enhance the method of work of the Committee against Torture -- had been distributed. However, when the resolution had been introduced yesterday, the main sponsor had withdrawn that compromise text and reinserted the original. He questioned the legal basis of the Assembly to authorize the Committee against Torture to establish a subsidiary working group. China was a party to that convention and had fulfilled its obligations to that convention. It was therefor not opposed to the adoption of the resolution by consensus but would express its reservations of operative paragraph 13.
The representative of the United States, explaining his delegation's position before the vote, said it would join consensus. But it could not support the calls to support legislation against the export of devices that could be used for torture because the language was too vague.
The representative of Japan, explaining his delegation's position after the vote, said the Government was fully committed to the education about and prevention of torture. However, it was difficult to accept operative paragraph 11 because it could not concretely understand what the language was referring to. Regarding operative paragraph 13, the Government of Japan hoped that as a result of establishing a working group, the Committee against Torture could examine periodic reports and take care of the backlog without delay. Japan strongly hoped the Committee would make further efforts to enhance its methods of work to improve its efficiency and effectiveness.
A resolution on International Covenants on Human Rights (document A/C.3/56/L.36) also accompanied by a note from the Office of the United Nations Controller on budgetary implications, was approved without a vote. Technical amendments were made to the resolution by the representative of Sweden. Further, the representative of Syria called for technical corrections in the Arabic translation of the text.
Another draft on the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (document A/C.3/56/L.37) was approved without a vote.
The representative of Chile asked for a roll call vote on the last draft, on the equitable geographical distribution on the membership of the human rights treaty bodies (document A/C.3/56/L.38).
The representative of Canada, explaining his delegation's position before the vote, speaking on behalf of Iceland, Norway, United States, Australia, New Zealand and San Marino, expressed concerns about operative paragraphs of the resolution on the importance of giving consideration to equitable distribution in the treaty bodies. While it was true that some regions of the world were underrepresented, it was also true that women were underrepresented. In the absence of an amendment to the treaties themselves, those were only factors to be considered, not mandatory requirements. All must be careful to avoid giving the impression that by making recommendations on that subject, either in the Assembly or in the Commission on Human Rights, that a quota system was being created. His delegation believed that equitable geographical distribution on the treaty bodies would be enhanced by achieving universal ratification of the treaties themselves.
The representative of Belgium, speaking on behalf of the European Union and explaining the Union's position before the vote, said the responsibility of the geographical distribution to these treaty bodies was with the member States of the treaties, and not with the General Assembly. The General Assembly should strive for the universal ratification of these treaties. The European Union was not in a position to support the proposed draft.
The representative of Israel associated his delegation with the statements made by Canada and Belgium on behalf of the European Union.
By a recorded vote of 97 in favour to 44 against, with 5 abstentions (Argentina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Senegal and The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia), the draft resolution on equitable geographic representation in the treaty bodies (document A/C.3/56/L.38) was adopted (Annex III).
The representative of Chile, explaining his delegation's position after the vote, said his Government voted against it because it was not appropriate to bring before the General Assembly matters that were pertinent to State Parties to the human rights treaty bodies. There was also the issue of presenting a draft that gave addressed issues within the Commission on Human Rights. Therefore, this was not helping the Third Committee in discharging its duties
The representative of the Republic of Korea, explaining his delegation's position after the vote, said his Government fully concurred with the statement of Canada and was of the view that election of membership in the treaty bodies should be governed by the States parties to the treaties themselves. Allowing such elections to be handled by the Assembly might interfere with the independent nature of those important bodies.
The representative of Cuba, making a general statement, said the number of countries who supported this demonstrated the majority of the international community believed there was an imperative need to act here. It was hoped this would be put into practice during the periodic review of the practices of the human rights treaty bodies. Very often, matters that came before the Commission on Human Rights also were voted on in the Committee. And some delegations who objected to this resolution had cast votes in favour of the other resolutions that came before both bodies. All regions of the world had the same rights. They had candidates that were just as ready and just as qualified to guarantee the universality of human rights.
The representative of Bolivia said he delegation would have voted in favour of the resolution.
Statements on Refugees
TADDESSE YAZE (Ethiopia) said the proliferation of armed conflicts and deteriorating economic conditions compelled millions of people to flee their homes and become refugees. The majority of refugees fled from one poor country to another, and the receiving poor country had difficulties in affording the housing of those refugees. There were more 5 million refugees and more than 20 million internally displaced persons in Africa. The problem of refugees and internally displaced persons had become one of the most pressing challenges on the Continent.
He said Ethiopia welcomed the efforts of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to harmonize its activities with development agencies such as the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the World Bank. Ethiopia also appreciated the High Commissioner's "reach out" process, in which the UNHCR, non-governmental organizations and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) worked together to develop the necessary skills and knowledge in relation to the protection of refugees. However, the result of that partnership, particularly concerning the implementation of concrete activities, was far satisfactory. To improve the efficiency of the implementation process, there should be greater collaboration in coordinating the time and areas of each agency's involvement.
CHRISTINE KAPALATA (United Republic of Tanzania) said the world had changed since 1951. Causes of conflict, as well as the nature of conflict, had evolved significantly in the last five decades. Increasingly, civilians, the majority of whom were women and children, were becoming targets in armed conflict. For years, children fleeing the atrocities of war had been known as unaccompanied refugee minors. The Secretary-General's report gave an interesting definition of unaccompanied minors and separated children as distinct categories. It would therefore be useful to arrive at a common understanding of all categories of persons of concern.
She said Tanzania continued to be concerned by the security of refugees and those who worked with them. That was a challenge that her Government had had to face in recent years. While the security of refugees had to be ensured, most developing countries, such as Tanzania, did not have the wherewithal to ensure it. In that connection, her Government welcomed UNHCR’s assistance to Tanzania. For a Government that hosted close to a million refugees, insecurity in and around refugee camps could spell disaster to the local population, and more seriously, to the legitimacy of the Government in power. Tanzania was ready to continue collaborating with the UNHCR to address the security situation in and around refugees camps.
(annexes follow)
ANNEX I
Vote on Implementation of Rights of Girl Child
Operative paragraph 1 of the draft resolution on the girl child (document A/C.3/56/L.29) was approved by a recorded vote of 148 in favour to 2 against, with no abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syria, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, United States.
Abstain: None.
Absent: Albania, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Gabon, Grenada, Haiti, Honduras, Kiribati, Liberia, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.
(END OF ANNEX I)
ANNEX II
Vote on Right of Palestinian People to Self-Determination
The draft resolution on the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination (document A/C.3/56/L.33) was approved by a recorded vote of 152 in favour to 2 against, with no abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syria, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Israel, United States.
Abstain: None.
Absent: Albania, Benin, Burundi, Comoros, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Gabon, Grenada, Honduras, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.
(END OF ANNEX II)
ANNEX III
Vote on Equitable Geographic Distribution of Membership of Human Rights Treaty Bodies
The draft resolution on equitable geographical distribution of membership of the human rights treaty bodies (document A/C.3/56/L.38) was adopted by a recorded vote of 97 in favour to 44 against, with 5 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chad, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Andorra, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom, United States, Yugoslavia.
Abstaining: Argentina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Senegal, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
Absent: Albania, Barbados, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Comoros, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Grenada, Honduras, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Vanuatu.
* *** *
|
