BRIDGING GAP BETWEEN RELIEF, DEVELOPMENT, CRUCIAL IN POST-CONFLICT REHABILITATION, COMMITTEE HEARS

Press Release
GA/SHC/3560

BRIDGING GAP BETWEEN RELIEF, DEVELOPMENT, CRUCIAL IN POST-CONFLICT REHABILITATION, COMMITTEE HEARS

Eight Draft Resolutions Introduced As Representatives Discuss Assistance to Refugees, Migrant Policies

East Timor would have been the perfect opportunity to test new models for closing up the gap between relief and development efforts, the Observer for the International Organization for Migration (IOM) told the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) this afternoon when it met to continue considering questions related to refugees and other displaced persons.

Bridging the gap between relief and development efforts was a key element in post-conflict rehabilitation, the Observer continued. Progress had been made in the complex process of bridging relief and development efforts and involving players with very different working methods, tools and time frames. The situation in East Timor had contained the flash appeal of necessity, with constraints more demanding than traditional humanitarian appeals. A joint assessment mission, however, needed to move exceptionally quickly to evaluate longer-term structural and development needs under the particular circumstances.

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), he continued, was involved in protection work, while the IOM essentially offered operational support for the movement of persons in need of migration assistance. Collaborative efforts had in the past been concentrated in refugee resettlement. Increasingly, they had expanded to encompass broad cooperation on repatriation programmes. Most recently, there had been growing collaboration in capacity- building, which was helping to close the gap between relief and development efforts.

Recalling the special note the High Commissioner on Human Rights had taken of Mexico’s tripartite approach towards Guatemalan refugees, which had enabled them to choose citizenship, the representative of Argentina said that was a model which could be applied elsewhere. Refugee status was a human right that could lead to migratory patterns, but did not necessarily do so.

Also this afternoon, the Committee heard the introduction of a number of drafts. Those included one on human rights and cultural diversity, and another on the United Nations Decade for Human Rights Education (1995-2004), including public information activities in the field of human rights. Other drafts

Third Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/SHC/3560 46th Meeting (PM) 15 November 1999

concerned promoting the Declaration on the rights of minorities; human rights in the administration of justice; protecting and assisting internally displaced persons; the Declaration on the right and responsibility to protect human rights and freedoms; globalization and its impact on human rights; and the human rights situation in Iran.

The representatives of Liechtenstein, China, Ukraine, Sudan, Colombia, Yemen and Croatia also addressed the Committee.

The representative of the World Bank made a statement.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m tomorrow to continue its consideration of questions related to refugees.

(page 2 follows(

Committee Work Programme

The Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) met this afternoon to continue its consideration of the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, as well as questions relating to refugees, returnees and displaced persons, along with humanitarian questions. (For background information, see Press Release GA/SHC/3558 of 12 November.)

The Committee has before it a number of draft resolutions expected to be introduced.

By the terms of a 13-Power draft resolution on human rights and cultural diversity (document A/C.3/54/L.62), the Assembly would call upon States, international organizations, United Nations agencies and non-governmental organizations, for the purpose of advancing the objectives of peace, development and universally accepted human rights, to recognize and respect cultural diversity and uphold the principle that all peoples and nations have the right to hold, develop and preserve their culture.

That draft is sponsored by Afghanistan, Bahrain, China, Cuba, Egypt, India, Iran, Malaysia, Myanmar, Pakistan, Sudan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan.

By the terms of a 46-Power draft resolution on the United Nations Decade for Human Rights Education, 1995-2004, and public information activities in the field of human rights (document A/C.3/54/L.64), the Assembly would urge all governments to contribute further to the implementation of the Plan of Action, in particular, by establishing broadly representative national committees for human rights education responsible for the development of comprehensive, effective and sustainable national plans of action for human rights education and information, taking into consideration the guidelines for national plans of action for human rights education developed by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights within the framework of the Decade. Also, governments would be urged to encourage, support and involve national and local non-governmental and community-based organizations in the implementation of their national plans of action.

Also by that draft, the Assembly would urge the Department of Public Information of the Secretariat to continue to utilize United Nations information centres for the timely dissemination of basic information, reference and audio- visual materials on human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the reports of States parties under international human rights instruments, and, to this end, to ensure that the information centres are supplied with adequate quantities of those materials. Also, governments and intergovernmental and non- governmental organizations would be urged to contribute to the mid-term global evaluation, to be undertaken by the Office of the High Commissioner in 2000, of progress made towards the achievement of the objectives of the Decade by providing appropriate information on steps undertaken in this regard.

That text is sponsored by Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bolivia, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cyprus, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Greece, Guatemala, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Mali, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Swaziland, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay and Zimbabwe.

Under a 54-Power draft on the effective promotion of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (document A/C.3/54/L.65), the Assembly would urge States and the international community to promote and protect the rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, as set out in the Declaration, including through the facilitation of their participation in all aspects of the political, economic, social, religious and cultural life of society and in the economic progress and development of their country. States would also be urged to take, as appropriate, all the necessary constitutional, legislative, administrative and other measures to promote and give effect to the Declaration.

That draft is sponsored by the following countries: Afghanistan, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Finland, Georgia, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Panama, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sudan, Sweden, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Ukraine, United Kingdom and Uruguay.

Before the Committee is a 54-Power draft resolution on human rights in the administration of justice (document A/C.3/54/L.66). By the terms of that draft, the Assembly would stress the special need for national capacity-building in the field of the administration of justice in post-conflict situations, in particular, through reform of the judiciary, the police and the penal system. Also, it would call upon the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, as well as mechanisms of the Commission on Human Rights and its subsidiary bodies, to continue to give special attention to questions relating to the effective promotion of human rights in the administration of justice and provide, where appropriate, specific recommendations in this regard, including proposals for measures to provide advisory services and technical assistance.

The draft is sponsored by the following: Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Cape Verde, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Sweden, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Ukraine and the United Kingdom.

By the terms of a 28-Power draft resolution on the protection of migrants (document A/C.3/54/L.67), the Assembly would strongly condemns all forms of racial discrimination and xenophobia as regards access to employment, vocational training, housing, schooling, health services and social services, as well as services intended for use by the public, and would welcome the active role played by governmental and non-governmental organizations in combating racism and assisting individual victims of racist acts, including migrant victims.

Also by that draft, the Assembly would call upon all States to review and, where necessary, revise immigration policies with a view to eliminating all discriminatory policies and practices against migrants and to provide specialized training for governmental policy-making and law enforcement, immigration and other concerned officials, thus, underlining the importance of effective action to create conditions that foster greater harmony and tolerance within societies.

That draft is sponsored by Angola, Argentina, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Cape Verde, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Russian Federation, Senegal and Uruguay.

By the terms of a 31-Power draft resolution on protection of and assistance to internally displaced persons (document A/C.3/54/L.68), the General Assembly would urge all relevant United Nations humanitarian assistance and development organizations concerned to enhance their collaboration with the representative of the Secretary-General, by developing frameworks of cooperation, especially through the inter-agency Standing Committee, to promote protection, assistance and development for internally displaced persons and to provide all possible assistance and support to him. Also, the Secretary-General would be requested to give all necessary assistance to the representative to carry out his mandate effectively.

The following countries are sponsors of that draft: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Canada, Chile, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco, Norway, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa and Sweden.

By a 48-Power draft resolution, the General Assembly would call upon governments, specialized agencies and relevant intergovernmental and non- governmental organizations to submit proposals and ideas contributing to further work on the implementation of the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individual, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (document A/C.3/54/L.69).

The following countries are sponsors of that draft: Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, El Salvador, Finland, France, Germany, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Senegal, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States and Venezuela.

A 28-Power draft on human rights and terrorism (document A/C.3/54/L.70) would have the Assembly condemn the violations of the right to live free from fear and of the right to life, liberty and security. It would also condemn the incitement of ethnic hatred, violence and terrorism. It would reiterate its unequivocal condemnation of the acts, methods and practices of terrorism as activities aimed at destroying human rights, fundamental freedoms and democracy, threatening the security of States, destabilizing governments, undermining pluralistic civil society, and having adverse consequences for development. It would urge cooperation in fighting terrorism at the regional and international levels and would urge States to take steps towards bringing to trial those involved in terrorist acts.

The draft is sponsored by Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Georgia, India, Kyrgyzstan, Mauritania, Morocco, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Russian Federation, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tajikistan, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey and Turkmenistan.

By a 10-Power draft on globalization and its impact on the full enjoyment of all human rights (document A/C.3/54/L.71), the Assembly would emphasize that narrowing the gap between rich and poor within and between countries should be an explicit global goal. It would underline the need to analyse the consequences of globalization, and would affirm the importance of establishing an open, accountable, development-oriented and non-discriminatory global system of economic relations. It would express concern that globalization held the promise of prosperity, but had not touched the vast majority of the world's population. It would stress the need to manage and monitor globalization with a view to enhancing its positive impact and alleviating its negative consequences, affirming that it was a complex historical process of structural transformation with numerous interdisciplinary aspects.

The draft is sponsored by Algeria, Bangladesh, China, Cuba, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, Malaysia and Pakistan.

A 31-Power draft resolution on the human rights situation in Iran (document A/C.3/54/L.59) would have the Assembly welcome progress in a number of important human rights areas in Iran, noting with interest the increased presence of women in public life. It would express concern that the 15 Khordad Foundation continued to threaten the life of Salman Rushdie and that no invitation had been extended for the Special Representative to visit since 1996. It would also express concern at restrictions on all forms of freedom of expression and at discrimination against religious minorities, in particular, Baha'is. The Assembly would express serious concern at the continuing violation of human rights as reported by the Special Representative, such as executions and torture, calling upon the Government to take steps to end their use and the practice of cruel punishments, such as amputation and stoning.

The draft is sponsored by Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, San Marino, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom and the United States. By a 35-Power draft on the human rights situation in Iraq (document A/C.3/54/L.60), the Assembly would strongly condemn the systematic and extremely grave violations of human rights in Iraq resulting in an all-pervasive repression sustained by widespread terror. It would also strongly condemn the suppression of freedoms, the widespread use of the death penalty, summary and arbitrary executions and widespread, systematic torture. It would call upon the Government to correct those violations and to abide by obligations under human rights treaties, including by bringing security forces into conformity with international standards; by cooperating with United Nations mechanisms, particularly by receiving a return visit by the Special Rapporteur; by establishing independence of the judiciary; by respecting the rights of all ethnic and religious groups, as well as by cooperating with the Tripartite Commission concerning missing persons; and finally, by continuing to cooperate in implementing Security Council resolutions to ensure the equitable distribution of humanitarian supplies purchased under the “oil-for-food” programme.

The draft is sponsored by Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, San Marino, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom and the United States.

By terms of a 20-Power draft on the situation of human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (document A/C.3/54/L.63), the Assembly would welcome numerous improvements, including two visits this year by the Special Rapporteur; activities of the Human Rights Field Office; the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement of 10 July, signed by all parties as at 31 August; the appointment by the Secretary-General of a Special Envoy for the peace process and of a Human Rights Minister by the Democratic Republic, along with the Government's commitment to cooperate in demobilizing and reintegrating child soldiers into society. The Assembly would express its concern at the adverse impact of continuing conflict and the preoccupying situation of human rights in the eastern part of the country, along with violations of rights throughout it, including through massacres, summary or arbitrary executions, and the trial of civilians and the imposition of the death penalty by the Military Court. Also of concern would be the excess of small arms and the persecution of human rights defenders and their organizations.

By the draft, the Assembly would urge all parties to the conflict to implement the Lusaka Agreement and to re-establish the authority of the Government, stressing the need for all Congolese to engage in an all-inclusive political dialogue, with a view towards national reconciliation and democratic elections. It would urge those same parties to protect human rights and respect humanitarian law; to ensure the security and freedom of movement of United Nations and associated personnel; to cease all military activity and end violations of human rights, making sure there was no impunity for offenders; and to cooperate with the National Commission of Inquiry and all others concerned in investigating alleged massacres of refugees. Finally, the Assembly would call upon the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to take steps to protect its people and promote the democratic process through such actions as complying with obligations under human rights commitments, upholding its commitment to reform and restoration of the judicial system, ending impunity and cooperating fully with the International Criminal Tribunal.

The draft is sponsored by Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Chile, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

By a 48-Power draft resolution on a high-level Political Signing Conference for the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (document A/C.3/54/L.21/Rev.1), the Assembly would accept with appreciation Italy's offer to host a high-level political signing conference in Palermo for the Convention and would also decide to hold the conference. It would request the Secretary-General to schedule the conference for a period of up to one week before the end of the Millennium Assembly in 2000. It would request the United Nations Centre for International Crime Prevention to propose the agenda, including opportunities to discuss matters related to the draft Convention and its protocols.

The draft is sponsored by Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Estonia, Federated States of Micronesia, Greece, Grenada, Honduras, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Liberia, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malta, Monaco, Mongolia, Nicaragua, Niger, Norway, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Solomon Islands, Spain, Tajikistan, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, United Kingdom and the United States.

A draft resolution on the draft United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the draft protocols thereto (document A/C.3/54/L.88) contains amendments proposed by the United States to a resolution transmitted by the Committee (document A/C.3/54/L.4). By both drafts, the Assembly would take note of results achieved by the Ad Hoc Committee on elaborating a Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the draft protocols addressing the issues of trafficking in women and children, illicit firearms and illegal trafficking in migrants. The Assembly would decide that the international instrument being prepared by the Ad Hoc Committee addressing trafficking in women and children should address trafficking in all persons, but especially women and children. It would also decide that the Ad Hoc Committee would be convened in 2000, holding no fewer than four sessions of two weeks each. The proposed amendment would further decide that the Ad Hoc Committee in Vienna should submit the final texts of the draft Convention and protocols to the General Assembly for early adoption prior to a high-level signing conference.

The Committee also has before it a number of draft resolutions on which action is expected to be taken. One, originally a 13-Power draft, concerns the Third Decade to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination and the convening of the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance (document A/C.3/54/L.28/Rev.1). By the first of the draft's four parts, the Assembly would urge governments to take all necessary measures to combat new forms of racism, as one way of implementing the Programme of Action for the Third Decade. The Assembly would also urge States to become parties to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and to limit reservations lodged against it. Further, it would urge worldwide implementation of the Programme of Action, with particular attention to indigenous people, strongly underlining the importance of education as a significant means of eradicating racism and racial discrimination.

By part two of the draft, concerning the World Conference against racism and related intolerance, the Assembly would decide that the World Conference and the sessions of its Preparatory Committee should be open to participation by all States members and specialized agencies, regional organizations and commissions, as well as to other organizations and bodies who would participate as observers. It would also decide that the Conference would be action-oriented, focusing on practical measures to eradicate racism, including through measures of prevention, education and protection and with remedies that took into consideration the existing human rights instruments.

Also, by part two of the draft, the Assembly would request the High Commissioner for Human Rights, among others, to undertake preparatory activities for the World Conference, also requesting the Preparatory Committee to begin drafting a final document containing specific goals, objectives and timetables. The Assembly would welcome the offer by the Government of South Africa to host the Conference in 2001, appealing to all Member States to contribute generously to the Voluntary Fund for the conference and also calling for the holding of national and regional meetings and other initiatives raising awareness about the Conference.

By part three of the draft, the Assembly would strongly reaffirm the proclamation of 2001 as the International Year of Mobilization against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, calling for observance of the Year, including through programmes of action. By part four of the draft, the Assembly would consider the item of elimination of racism and racial discrimination as a matter of high priority.

The draft is sponsored by Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Guyana (on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China) Mexico, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Turkey and the United Kingdom. The following became sponsors when the draft was introduced by Guyana on 9 November: Australia, Belgium, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg and Norway.

By what was originally a 19-Power draft resolution on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding self-determination (document A/C.3/54/L.27), the Assembly would urge all States to take the necessary steps, and to exercise the utmost vigilance, against the menace posed by the activities of mercenaries. It would also urge them to take legislative measures to ensure that their territories and their nationals were not used for any activities related to mercenary actions. States would be urged to cooperate with the Special Rapporteur on mercenaries. In addition, the Assembly would request the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to take actions publicizing the adverse effects of mercenaries and to provide advisory services to States affected by mercenary activities. It would request the Secretary- General to invite governments to make proposals towards a clearer definition of mercenaries, requesting the High Commissioner for Human Rights to convene expert meetings on the matter.

The draft proposal is sponsored by Algeria, Angola, China, Costa Rica, Cuba, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, India, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Nigeria, Sudan and the United Arab Emirates. Iceland became a co-sponsor when Cuba introduced the draft on 1 November.

Introduction of Draft Resolutions

The representative of Iran introduced the draft resolution entitled “Human rights and cultural diversity”.

Next, the representative of Namibia introduced the draft resolution entitled “United Nations Decade for Human Rights Education, 1995-2004, and public information activities in the field of human rights”. The following countries were added as sponsors to that draft: Denmark and Malta.

The representative of Austria introduced the draft on “Effective promotion of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities”. Romania was added as a sponsor to that draft.

The representative of Austria then introduced the draft resolution entitled “Human rights in the administration of justice”. The following countries were added as sponsors to that draft: Azerbaijan and Romania.

The Committee next heard the introduction of the draft resolution entitled “Protection of and assistance to internally displaced persons” by the representative of Norway. The additional sponsor to that draft is Malta.

Next, the representative of Norway introduced the draft resolution entitled “Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms”. The following countries were added as sponsors to that draft: Estonia and Greece.

The representative of Egypt introduced the draft entitled "Globalization and its impact on the full enjoyment of all human rights".

The representative of Finland introduced the draft text entitled "Human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran".

Statements

CHRISTIAN WENAWESER (Liechtenstein) said a culture of prevention required, first and foremost, a fundamental change in the mindsets of the international community. That was a lengthy and complex process which required political will.

The erosion of relevant standards of international law needed to stop, he said. “While there are in some areas -- such as internally displaced persons -- gaps in the international legal framework, it is clear that the strict observance of and respect for all existing standards would go a long way to improve the situation of refugees and displaced persons worldwide”, he said. The proliferation of internal armed conflicts had led to an increasingly important role for non-State actors. It was crucial to find ways of holding non-State actors accountable and to ensure their compliance with international standards. Also, the safety of humanitarian personnel continued to be a major concern. There had been several cases where access to persons in need of assistance was restricted or denied. He hoped that the needs assessment mission in the Northern Caucasus would enable the humanitarian agencies to step up their relief efforts.

QI XIAOXIA (China) said refugees had had an impact on the security of various countries and regions. Many countries were no longer willing to sustain the increasingly heavy financial, political, environmental and social burdens that resulted from accommodating vast numbers of refugees. Since it was increasingly difficult to distinguish refugees from other immigrants, many Western nations were adopting a highly restrictive asylum policy. The latter violated internationally recognized principles for refugee protection.

More attention had been given to refugees in Kosovo than those in Africa and Central Asia, she said. A stronger partnership by the international community was required to meet the needs of refugee host countries. The international community needed to give equal treatment to both new and old refugees, irrespective of which region they came from. “No country should adopt a double standard in treating refugees”, she said. Also, external interventions usually intensified rather than restrained conflict. Tension and conflict among States could be reduced and the refugee situation improved when the principles of sovereignty and equality were respected. Her country had hosted and protected 280,000 Indo-Chinese refugees for 20 years. Her Government was now arranging the repatriation of those refugees.

OKSANA BOYKO (Ukraine) recalled the increasing workload of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and the increasing stresses on its resources further complicated by the decreasing willingness of donor communities to fund projects. Her country had never faced the problem of refugees before the 1990s. Then, despite the country’s difficulties in being a country in transition, those from politically unstable countries had found Ukraine attractive. More than half the refugees coming to Ukraine stayed for an extended period or permanently. Refugees from 46 countries now lived in Ukraine.

New legislation had been developed to protect those refugees, she continued, elaborating with examples. As of today, more than 250,000 formerly deported persons had returned. International treaties were being concluded on regional citizenship issues, as, for example, an understanding with Uzbekistan regarding the status of stateless persons. Other agreements and legislation addressed issues such as reintegration of the returnees. Those improvements were made through much coordination with international agencies. Political will and resources were both vital to address the problem of mass displacements occurring in the world today.

AHMED EL AASS (Sudan) said the refugees in his country had suffered much because services were inadequate. Hopefully, the reformed programme that was to begin next year would take care of the problem being caused to the entire area.

Sixty-five per cent of refugees in his countries lived off the camps, he said. The labour market in those vicinities was adversely affected: containing the consequences of such overpopulation doubled the burdens of the State. The Sudan had assisted all those wanting to repatriate to their own countries, and was ready to receive Sudanese who wished to return. Negotiations with agencies and neighbours towards that end were under way, since more than 95 per cent of Sudanese refugees in neighbouring countries had indicated a desire to return home. In all area where great numbers of refugees lived, the environment was being adversely affected and natural resources were dwindling. That was the situation in many African countries. The worst aspect of the armed conflict on the continent was its impact on refugee children, especially those who were unaccompanied.

ANDRES FRANCO (Colombia) said one of the great challenges that his Government faced had been posed by the number of internally displaced persons in the areas affected by the armed conflict. Some internally displaced had opted to cross the border into the territory of other States with which his Government maintained excellent bilateral relations. “With Venezuela, in particular, we have established a successful mechanism to provide full assistance to internally displaced in transit at the borders”, he said.

In January 1999, a memorandum of intention defining the UNHCR’s role in his country with respect to forced displacement had been signed between that institution and his Government. The agreement considered, among other actions, providing guidance and technical support on the different stages of the problem of the displaced; and strengthening international cooperation. He added that effective coordination between national and international agencies had become a pillar of any effective humanitarian response to the specific needs of many people in his country. Coordination was at the heart of any positive result that could be achieved by his Government. The goal was to arrive at one common diagnosis of the problem and one common strategy to deal with it in a coordinated manner.

WALID ABDULWAHED AL-ETHARY (Yemen) said conflicts in the Horn of Africa, Central Africa and Eastern Africa had resulted in the influx of thousands of refugees to his country. Many reached his country’s coasts, but others died in the sea. His Government was providing refugees with security, dignity and housing. Their presence had an impact in the host country’s economy. The great number of refugees was a heavy burden to Yemen. He called upon the international community to help his country in that situation – which became more tragic when refugees could not go back to their countries.

MARIANO SIMON PADROS (Argentina) said more funds should be allocated to African countries so as to dispel the perception that there was less concern for that continent than for other areas of the world. Humanitarian staff should be protected. The bodies concerned with protecting the rights of refugees were of the greatest importance. Refugee status was a human right that could lead to migratory patterns, but did not necessarily do so. Describing programmes of protection in his own country for refugees, he said that, like any other legal resident, refugees received education and health care. They could become citizens. He noted the High Commissioner’s mention of Mexico’s reception of Guatemalan refugees as a model that could be applied elsewhere.

ROBERT PAIVA, Observer for the International Organization for Migration (IOM), said the partnership between the UNHCR and his organization went back nearly 50 years. The UNHCR was involved in protection work, while the IOM essentially offered operational support for the movement of migrants, refugees, displaced and other persons in need of migration assistance. Collaborative efforts had in the past been concentrated in refugee resettlement. Increasingly, it had expanded over the past decade to encompass broad cooperation on repatriation programmes. Most recently, an ever-more complex international migration scene had been characterized by mixed causes of migratory flows, leading to growing collaboration in capacity-building, which was helping to close up the gap between relief and development efforts.

That issue had come to the fore in the context of post-conflict rehabilitation, he said. There were deficiencies in current institutional mechanisms. Still, progress was being made in developing practical solutions and models in the complex partnerships needed to implement the mechanisms bridging relief and development efforts. They were the most difficult to implement because they brought together actors with very different working methods, tools and time frames who were not used to working together. All too frequently, effective coordination, even among humanitarian agencies familiar with each other, was not always straightforward.

East Timor would have been an excellent test case for those developing solutions and models, he concluded. It had contained the flash appeal of necessity, entailing elements and timelines more demanding than traditional humanitarian appeals. Most importantly, a joint assessment mission needed to move exceptionally quickly, yet within the context of circumstances to evaluate longer-term structural and development needs. New models linking immediate circumstances and long-term needs should be developed.

KAZUHIDE KURODA, of the World Bank, said the Bank examined conflict because of its linkage to development. “If a coordinated approach by all involved, whether political, humanitarian or development, is taken, the difficulties are not insurmountable”, he emphasized.

The Bank had supported governments emerging from conflict through a variety of interventions, including emergency budget support in Kosovo, as well as the demobilization and reintegration of ex-combatants in Sierra Leone, he continued. At the policy level, the operational policy on conflict and development assistance would soon be completed. The latter would deal not only with post-conflict reconstruction, but would help those countries with ongoing conflicts and those prone to conflict. That policy was being prepared on the premise that violent conflicts exacerbated poverty and were a major impediment to development. It also took into account the fact that good governance, community participation and transparency must be incorporated in post-conflict programmes.

In Africa, he said, primary commodities were closely linked to conflict. The Bank had participated in technical discussions at peace talks for Sierra Leone and Burundi. In the Balkans, a reconstruction plan for Bosnia had generated some $600 million. Reconstruction had been given a new meaning. It no longer referred only to building infrastructure, but also to supporting teachers in schools, health workers in clinics, and civil servants in government buildings.

DUBRAVKA SIMONOVIC (Croatia) said that since 1995 concerted efforts had resulted in 226,000 refugees and displaced persons returning to their homes in her country. Amongst those returnees were 34,297 mainly Croatian Serbs who had returned from the Former Republic of Yugoslavia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as 28,800 from the Croatian Danube Region. Also, there were approximately 140,000 refugees from Bosnia and Herzegovina, of whom 27,000 had refugee status, and 50,633 were displaced persons. Reconstructing and repairing damaged infrastructure, from the aggression waged against her country during 1991-1995, was essential. Her Government had built approximately 91,000 family houses and flats, as well as 116 schools and 18 churches. However, available funds to continue that work were insufficient. In 1997, international financial assistance had been significantly reduced to below 1 per cent.

Her Government’s return policy was guided by the fundamental principle that the return was voluntary, individual, gradual, organized and secured. If the return process was to succeed, stabilization and post-conflict recovery were essential to ensure the coexistence and reconciliation of divided communities.

* *** *