LEGAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS NEW ANTI-TERRORISM CONVENTION MAKING IT A CRIME TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR TERRORIST ACTS

Press Release
GA/L/3138

LEGAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS NEW ANTI-TERRORISM CONVENTION MAKING IT A CRIME TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR TERRORIST ACTS

Member States would be urged by the General Assembly to sign and ratify an international convention designed to cut off the sources of funding for terrorist activities, according to a draft resolution approved without a vote this morning by the Sixth Committee (Legal).

Known as the Convention on the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, the 28-article text would require States to criminalize the provision or collection of funds for acts defined as offences by previous anti-terrorism conventions or as further defined in the new convention. States parties would have to criminalize such funding activities under their domestic law, and to cooperate with other States parties in investigations and extraditions in respect of such offences. Funds known to be allocated for terrorist purposes would have to be frozen or seized.

The draft convention is intended to supplement the eleven existing anti-terrorism conventions, which cover such issues as bombings, hostage-taking and hijackings.

Speaking in explanation of position on that draft were the representatives of Japan, Syria, Lebanon, Cuba, Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen, Sudan and France. The representative of the United States spoke on a point of order.

The draft was approved this morning after the Committee finished its debate on international terrorism, hearing statements by the representatives of Viet Nam, Saudi Arabia, Azerbaijan, Haiti, United States, Ethiopia, New Zealand and Australia. The representatives of Armenia and Azerbaijan spoke in exercise of the right of reply.

After concluding its debate on the report of the Committee on Relations with the Host Country, the Committee approved a draft resolution, also without a vote, which requests the host country [the United States] to continue to try to resolve parking-related problems and to consider lifting the travel restrictions it has imposed on staff of certain diplomatic missions and United Nations staff members of certain nationalities.

Sixth Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/L/3138 35th Meeting (AM) 18 November 1999

Speaking in that debate were the representatives of Finland (on behalf of the European Union), Japan, Malaysia, Libya, China, Russian Federation and United States.

In other action, the Committee approved without a vote a draft resolution by which the Assembly would continue to consider an agenda item on “nationality of natural persons in relation to succession of States” next year, with a view to adopting draft articles on the issue as a declaration at its next regular session.

The Committee also approved without a vote a draft decision, by which the Assembly would keep the review of the Statute of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal its agenda for next year. The representative of the United Kingdom introduced the text, voting that it replaced an earlier proposal by which the Assembly would have amended the Tribunal’s statute.

Explanations of position on that text were made by representatives of Nigeria, Sierra Leone and Cuba.

The Committee meet again tomorrow, Friday, 19 November at 10 a.m. to take action on the remaining draft resolutions before it.

Committee Work Programme

The Sixth Committee (Legal) met this morning to conclude its discussion of measures to eliminate international terrorism and to take up the report of the Committee on Relations with the Host Country (document A/54/26).

The Committee is also expected to take action on several draft resolutions.

By a draft decision on the Review of the Statute of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal (document A/C.6/54/L.20), the General Assembly would simply decide to include the subject in the agenda of its next regular session.

Also before the Committee is a draft resolution on the report of the Committee on Relations with the Host country (document A/C.6/54/L.17), by which the Assembly would endorse the recommendations and conclusions contained in that report, most of which are reiterated in the draft resolution. Bulgaria, Canada, Cote d’Ivoire and Cyprus are the sponsors.

The General Assembly would ask the host country [the United States] to continue to take all measures to prevent any interference with the functioning of missions accredited to the United Nations, considering that the maintenance of appropriate conditions for their normal work was in the interest of the Organization and all Member States. In particular, it would ask the host country to strive to resolve the problem relating to the parking of diplomatic vehicles in a fair, balanced and non-discriminatory way, responding to the growing needs of the diplomatic community, and to consult with the Host Country Relations Committee on that issue.

Further by the text, the Assembly would ask the host country to consider removing the travel controls it has imposed on the staff of certain missions and Secretariat staff members of certain nationalities, and would take note of the positions of the affected States, the Secretary-General and the host country on the matter.

The Assembly would express its appreciation for the efforts of the host country, and its hope that the issues raised in the Host Country Relations Committee would continue to be resolved in a spirit of cooperation and in accordance with international law.

Along with those recommendations, the report also stresses the importance of permanent missions, their personnel and Secretariat personnel meeting their financial obligations. It states that problems related to the financial indebtedness of those claiming diplomatic immunity have also arisen in other host countries and require a system-wide approach to their resolution.

The Committee was established in 1971 to deal with issues arising under the Headquarters Agreement, including the security of missions and safety of their personnel, as well as the responsibilities of missions to the host country.

By a draft resolution on the draft declaration on nationality of persons in relation to the succession of States (document A/C.6/54/L.6), the General Assembly would aim to consider the Commission’s draft articles on the topic next year, with a view to their adoption as a declaration at that time. In the longer term, the draft would invite Governments to submit comments and observations on the question of a convention on nationality of natural persons in relation to the succession of States, with a view to elaboration of such a text at a later date. The text was submitted by the officers of the Sixth Committee.

The Committee also has before it a draft resolution on a draft International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (document A/C.6/54/L.16). By that text, the Assembly would adopt the convention (annexed to the resolution) and ask the Secretary-General to open it for signature at Headquarters from 10 January 2000 until 31 December 2001, while urging all States to become parties to it.

The draft convention would make an offence for any person unlawfully and intentionally to finance a person or an organization in the commission of an act that constitutes a terrorist offence -– either within the scope of the draft or as defined in nine terrorism-related treaties, namely:

-- Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft (The Hague, 1970);

-- Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation (Montreal, 1971).

-- Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents (General Assembly, 1973).

-- International Convention against the Taking of Hostages (General Assembly, 1979).

-- Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (Vienna, 1980).

-- Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence at Airports Serving International Civil Aviation, supplementary to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation (Montreal, 1988).

-- Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (Rome, 1988).

-- Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Fixed Platforms located on the Continental Shelf (Rome, 1988).

-- International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings (General Assembly, 1997).

An offence is also committed if financing is provided for an act intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to any other person not taking part in armed conflict.

Other offences under the convention would include participation in an offence as an accomplice, or organizing or directing others to commit an offence.

Each State party would be required to adopt measures to criminalize the offences outlined in the convention under its domestic laws. Furthermore, those offences would be deemed as extraditable offences, and State parties would undertake to include them in every extradition treaty concluded between them. There are similar provisions for cooperation and assistance among States parties with respect to criminal investigations in connection with the listed offences, and to efforts made to prevent the offences being committed. The final outcome of prosecution of offences under the Convention would be communicated to the Secretary-General for transmission to other States parties.

There are also specified measures to be taken to identify, detect and freeze or seize any funds used or allocated for the purpose of committing such offences. States parties are to consider establishing mechanisms to use funds thus seized to compensate victims of terrorist offences, or their families. States parties would call on financial institutions to pay special attention to unusual or suspicious transactions and to report to the Government those that stemmed from criminal activity.

The Convention would specify that its provisions were to be implemented without prejudice to the rights of third parties acting in good faith. The nature of contributions, financing of activities that endanger lives and property, and contributions made in good faith, would also be specified.

Statements

PHAM TRUONG GIANG (Viet Nam) said terrorism could be suppressed by collective international effort, within a legal framework. Viet Nam welcomed the Indian proposal for a convention that would embrace all aspects of terrorism. The elaboration of a draft convention for the suppression of acts of nuclear terrorism was timely, he said, commending the Russian Federation for its initiative on that question. He welcomed the results achieved on the international convention for the suppression of the financing of terrorism and also commended France for initiating it.

Viet Nam believed that in the common struggle against terrorism, fundamental principles of international law, particularly those provided for in the Charter, must be fully observed, he said. Preventive measures should be undertaken at the local and regional levels. Viet Nam had signed a number of anti-terrorist treaties. It had always cooperated with States in and outside Asia in the fight against terrorism, and urged the inclusion of the item “Measures for Suppression of International Terrorism,” on the provisional agenda of the next session of the General Assembly.

MAHMOUD AL-NAMAN (Saudi Arabia) said his country reaffirmed the position of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries on international anti-terrorist instruments. In particular, it shared the view that the military activities of States that constituted state terrorism should also be covered. Terrorist acts undermined friendly inter-State relations and international peace and security. Saudi Arabia would take steps to incorporate the latest international conventions and declarations against terrorism into its domestic legislation.

FARID SHAFIYEV (Azerbaijan) said his country had, for the past 10 years suffered the nightmares of terrorism, which had caused the destruction of transport infrastructure and the killing of more than 2,000 of its citizens. It was not an accident that the increase in terrorist activities had begun since Armenia had claimed its territory and occupied about 20 per cent of it. More than one million people had consequently become refugees and displaced persons. He said investigations had confirmed the involvement of Armenian intelligence services in acts of terrorism in Azerbaijan. He pointed to the need to combat the illegal trade in arms and supplies.

He recalled the recent shootings of leaders of the Armenian government and parliament by terrorists, however, saying it proved that no State could be secure from the threat of terrorism.

Azerbaijan reaffirmed its commitments to the General Assembly’s 1994 Declaration on measures to eliminate terrorism, he said. Its parliament had adopted a special bill on combating terrorism. In addition, it was taking measures to deprive terrorists of the opportunity to use Azerbaijan as a transit route or place of asylum.

BOCCHIT EDMOND (Haiti) said that, despite major efforts by the international community, terrorism continued to cause incalculable damage. Unfortunately, women and children, the most vulnerable groups, were most often the victims. Haiti condemned terrorism in all forms. He noted the recent Security Council resolution on terrorism. Terrorist acts had recently gained ground, however. Their new sophisticated weapons made detection difficult.

Haiti had signed six of the anti-terrorism conventions and ratified one, he said. Haiti was of the opinion that the best way to combat international terrorism was to prevent it. There should be a legal definition of terrorism; an international conference should be organized to formulate a collective response, as only concerted efforts would eradicate it. He fully supported the drafts on nuclear terrorism and financing of terrorism.

ROBERT ROSENSTOCK (United States) said that in recognition of the inherent difficulties and differences of reaching agreement on a universal definition of terrorism, the Committee had focused on drafting treaties that criminalized specific manifestations of terrorism. The eleven conventions, and the new drafts on nuclear terrorism and financing of terrorism, did not require an abstract definition of terrorism in order to be functional or fair.

All delegations had made compromises to achieve the finalization of the draft on financing, he stressed. “Were the conclusion of this instrument to stall, particularly given the breadth of consensus on the need to combat the menace of terrorist financing, we would seriously question the continued ability of this Committee to undertake such projects productively in the future.” As far as the Russian draft on nuclear terrorism was concerned, the Committee was “within an eyelash of agreement”. To try at the same time to solve the issues covered by the Russian draft, and the issues of use and possession of nuclear weapons by the nuclear powers, was to ensure that neither problem was dealt with.

It was only when the international community had turned from a general approach to specific conduct, that it had begun to make progress on terrorism, he said. Great caution was needed to avoid sliding backwards. However, the United States shared the concerns that had motivated India to put forward its proposal, which in some respects marked a significant new direction. After work on the drafts on financing and nuclear terrorism was completed, the Ad Hoc Committee could be asked to begin to consider developing a comprehensive legal framework.

“Finally, I note with regret that some have seen fit to abuse the item before us to make statements criticizing my country by name”, he said. “These falsehoods do not merit a reply and we do not wish to take the bait and distract the Committee from the positive work before it.”

BERHANEMESKEL NEGA (Ethiopia) said his country had in the past been a victim of terrorist acts, organized and financed from abroad. Those continued at present -- the latest being an attack against a train near the Ethiopian border town of Dire Dawa less than a week ago. Two persons had been killed. A certain country in the sub-region had a deliberate policy of armed confrontation against its neighbours, including Ethiopia. Faced with that challenge, Ethiopia remained resolved to defend itself and to combat and suppress any terrorist activities. He drew attention to the agreement reached with Djibouti and Kenya on preventing and combating terrorist acts.

At the regional level, his Government fully supported activities within the framework of the Organization of African Unity to combat terrorism in Africa. It had signed the OAU Convention on the prevention and combating of terrorism adopted at its Algiers summit on 14 July 1999. International cooperation to combat terrorism must be enhanced through practical, collective measures, including the exchange of information and other forms of mutual assistance.

While Ethiopia commended the progress made in addressing specific aspects and types of terrorist acts through the sectoral approach, it would prefer the elaboration of a comprehensive convention. It therefore welcomed the Indian draft, which should serve as a basis for negotiation, he said.

VICTORIA HALLUM (New Zealand) supported the step-by-step approach that the international community had been taking to develop a network of multilateral instruments to combat terrorism. Those agreements had significantly improved the capacity of Governments to work closely and effectively together to prevent and combat terrorist activities. In the last year, New Zealand had become a party to several of the conventions.

Only by strengthening the network of anti-terrorism instruments could the international community effectively ensure that terrorists found no safe haven by which they could continue their activities, she said. She supported the efforts being made to resolve the remaining differences on the draft on nuclear terrorism.

CATE STEAINS (Australia), briefing the Committee on the progress made by the working group on the draft on nuclear terrorism, said that as that group’s coordinator, she had conducted consultations on a bilateral basis with a number of delegations. She was anxious to ensure that no member delegation felt left out of the process. She had asked all those interested in the issue to approach her and had made clear her willingness to discuss the issues in small groups.

Given that positions were not yet sufficiently close to enable agreement on a text that could be the basis for negotiations in open-ended informal consultations, she had decided not to convene such consultations during the current session of the Committee, she explained. She expressed confidence, however, that if the Committee intensified its efforts and worked constructively, it would be possible to adopt an acceptable text during the Ad Hoc Committee’s meetings next year.

Statements in right of reply

ANNA AGHADJANIA (Armenia), exercising the right of reply, said she was shocked and saddened by the characterization given by the representative of Azerbaijan to the recent killing of Armenian leaders. Individual acts of terrorism should not be placed in the same category with state terrorism. She asked who had been the beneficiary of the killing of her Prime Minister. She also said her country had suffered from the loss of energy supplies as result of the blockade imposed by Azerbaijan.

Mr. SHAFIYEV (Azerbaijan), replying, said his county had produced evidence of Armenian involvement in terrorism there.

OMER DAHUB (Sudan) said the United States Secretary of State had met recently with John Garang, leader of a Sudanese rebel movement, whose organization had been responsible for the killing of four aid workers in May. That meeting had taken place three months after the May incident. At a press conference, Secretary of State had described Garang as sophisticated, dynamic, dedicated and determined.

Ms. AGHADJANIA (Armenia) said this was not the first time that Azerbaijan had attempted to use Armenia as a scapegoat for its problems.

Introduction of Report on Host Country Relations Committee

SOTIRIOS ZACKHEOS (Cyprus), Chairman of the Committee on Relations with the Host Countries, introduced the report of that Committee.

MARJA LEHTO (Finland), speaking on behalf of the European Union, welcomed the efforts made by the United States to accommodate the interests and requirements of the diplomatic community in New York. The issues before the Host Country Relations Committee -- including the security of missions and safety of their personnel, the acceleration of immigration and customs procedures, housing, transportation, financial indebtedness and health-related questions -– were of great interest to all Member States.

Noting that there had been no new developments over the past year on the problem of diplomatic indebtedness, she stressed the importance of sustained efforts to resolve the problem in the interests of good relations between the diplomatic community, the United Nations and the host country, especially the people of the city of New York. The indebtedness of some members of the diplomatic community contributed to other problems -- in the area of housing, for example. She also emphasized the importance of ensuring sufficient parking space for diplomatic vehicles, as necessary for the functioning of missions.

HIROSHI KAWAMURA (Japan) said his delegation had had problems with the local police during the period of the Assembly’s general debate, While he understood that heightened police security measures were indispensable when a number of Heads of State and Government were present at the United Nations, respect for the diplomatic community should also be observed. He stressed the importance of proper arrangements being made to ensure that information regarding security measures was conveyed to all missions in a timely fashion.

Furthermore, he said members of his mission had recently been unable to rent certain apartments because of the landlords’ hesitation to rent to diplomats. There had been instances in which colleagues had been asked to sign letters revoking their diplomatic immunity as a condition of renting. He looked forward to an early solution being devised for those problems. He expressed appreciation to the host country, saying he hoped it would take further steps to solve the remaining problems.

MOHAMMAD RAMEEZ YAHAYA (Malaysia) said he was pleased to note that the United States was committed to extending to the diplomatic community the full scope of immunities and privileges available under international law. In return, the host country had a right to expect diplomats not to abuse those privileges and immunities to the extent of disregarding the laws of the host country. There should be continuous dialogue. The Committee on Host Country Relations provided the appropriate forum and should be strongly supported by all Member States.

The travel restrictions placed on certain missions and United Nations staff members of certain nationalities were in breach of the host country’s obligations, he said. He called for the host country to observe last year’s Assembly resolution requesting it to remove those restrictions.

Citing a connection between discriminatory rental practices against diplomats and some diplomats defaulting on their rents, he said it should be made clear to the owners and building operators that diplomats and the Governments they represented had for the most part been responsible in discharging their financial obligations in respect of rental of offices and residences in the city. He urged the Committee to study the matter. On parking questions, he said the host country should consult the diplomatic community before implementing any policy that had an impact on it. Meanwhile, members of the diplomatic corps must observe local traffic laws, he stressed.

ABDUSSALAM SERGIWA (Libya) wanted to see the host country create the environment for the normal work of the diplomatic missions accredited to the United Nations. He expressed concern about the discriminatory treatment to which members of certain diplomatic missions and United Nations staff of certain nationalities were subjected. He also expressed concern about travel restrictions imposed on persons from certain countries, including his own, which had rendered Libya unable to accept invitations to participate in conferences held outside New York. Visa restrictions imposed by the host country created difficulties for Libyan mission staff and their families.

Libya was a small country that did not pose a threat to the national security interests of the United States, he said. He hoped the Committee on Relations with the Host Country would continue to work on the issues raised in its report, and would seek to ensure that the United States carried out its obligations under the Headquarters Agreement. The actions of the host country were contrary to international law.

He also hoped the safety of missions and their staff and indebtedness of some missions would continue to be considered by the Committee.

GAO FENG (China) applauded the recent expansion of the Host Country Relations Committee by four members. It had been achieved on the basis of consensus, in accordance with the principle of equitable distribution.

The Committee was unique and had a good tradition of conducting its work on the basis of consensus, she said. It had shown flexibility in allowing observers to attend its meetings, thus guaranteeing transparency of its work. Much work remained to be done to ensure proper working conditions for missions, however. He expressed the hope that the newly constituted Committee would make progress in resolving the traditional problems related to parking, travel restrictions and indebtedness.

ALEXANDRE ZMEEVSKI (Russia) said that the Committee on the Host Country was required to act as a kind of collective lawyer on many issues. He welcomed its recent expansion. The success of the Committee was directly attributable to the cordial and cooperative atmosphere which prevailed in its work. He paid tribute to the cooperative efforts of the United States Government. Nevertheless, there were still problems that complicated the work of the United Nations and the missions accredited to it, he said, citing in particular the issue of travel restrictions.

Those restrictions were discriminatory and ran counter to international law, he said. He called for them to be rescinded, describing them as "a relic of the old days". Noting that parking affected the interests of most missions, he said that no progress had yet been made on the problem. He hoped that New York City would show a constructive attitude on the matter, adding that perhaps the federal authorities could bring some influence to bear on the matter. He favoured the adoption of the draft resolution on the Host Country Relations Committee.

CAROLYN L. WILSON (United States) said her country was happy to serve as host to the Organization, and was proud of its record in doing so. Since 1946, United States Governments had fulfilled the country’s obligations and remained committed to them. The meetings of the Committee on Relations with the Host Country and its working groups had provided an opportunity to ascertain the concerns of Member States and address them together.

She expressed appreciation for the cooperation of the Secretariat and missions accredited to the Organization. The United States remained committed to addressing the concerns of missions on problems related to parking. On travel restrictions, she said the position of the United States did not violate international law. The missions had unrestricted access to the Headquarters district. The United States was not required under the Headquarters Agreement to provide for travel that was not connected with official United Nations business.

The United States would continue to help diplomats with housing problems, she said. She expressed appreciation for the guidance her mission had received from the Office of Legal Affairs.

Introduction of Draft on Host Country

CONSTANTINE MOUSHOUTAS (Cyprus) introduced the draft resolution on the report of the Host Country Relations Committee, saying it touched on the main concerns of the diplomatic community, such as security of missions, respect for the privileges and immunities of the diplomatic community, travel restrictions and parking. The draft noted the spirit of cooperation which guided the work of the Committee and expressed appreciation to the host country.

Action on Draft

The Committee then approved the draft without a vote, as orally revised.

Introduction of Draft Decision on Administrative Tribunal

SUSAN DICKSON (United Kingdom) introduced the draft decision on the Administrative Tribunal (document A/C.6/54/L.20), noting that it replaced an earlier draft resolution on the Tribunal (document A/C.6/54/L.13), which was being withdrawn to allow more time for consultations. [The earlier text had proposed revision to the Tribunal’s Statute that would have formalized the qualifications for Tribunal judges and lengthened their term of service.]

Explanations before the vote

The representative of Nigeria expressed concern about attempts to transform the Tribunal. He advised the draft’s sponsors and the consultation coordinators on the issue to try to continue discussions, as it was a “touchy issue” for many.

The representative of Sierra Leone expressed appreciation for the sensible approach taken by the sponsors.

The representative of Cuba said the revised draft decision represented the best way forward on the issue of the Tribunal. During the coming year, there would be more time for the views of more Member States to be taken into consideration.

The Committee approved the draft without a vote.

Action on draft on nationalities

The Committee next took up the draft text on nationality of natural persons in relation to the succession of States contained in document A/C.6/54/L.6.

VICTORIA HALLUM (New Zealand), introducing the text, recommended its approval without a vote.

The Committee approved it without a vote.

Action on Convention Against Financing of Terrorists

The Committee then took up the draft resolution on the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (document A/C.6/54/L.16).

JOHN HOLMES (Canada), introducing the text, proposed revision that would include a reference to previous relevant General assembly resolutions in the first preambular paragraph.

The representative of Japan, explaining its position before action on the draft, said Japan understood that States Parties were obliged to criminalize the financing of acts of terrorism. As far the definition of "contribution" to such financing was concerned, Japan maintained the same position it had expressed during the adoption of the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings in 1997. On that understanding, it supported the adoption of the draft international convention for the suppression of the financing of terrorism. The representative of Syria welcomed the revision. Syria still believed that there should have been a distinction made between terrorism as a crime and the legitimate struggle of peoples for self-determination. It had joined in the consensus because of the inclusion of the reference to previous relevant resolutions, however. That was a positive addition although it did not cover all of Syria’s concerns. Syria wanted a legal definition of terrorism adopted.

The representative of Lebanon reaffirmed his country’s attachment to international cooperation to suppress terrorism and uphold international humanitarian law and human rights. He interpreted the reference to previous relevant resolutions of the General Assembly as a reaffirmation that the convention would be applied without prejudice to Charter and other applicable international law. Nothing in it should in any way be used as a basis to characterize resistance against the Israeli occupation of Lebanese territory as terrorism. Nor should the text provide any excuse for the continuation of the Israeli occupation of Lebanese territory and the arbitrary actions against the Lebanese people. He called for international assistance to secure the release of hostages and prisoners held in Israeli prisons.

The representative of Cuba welcomed the amendment and said her country condemned all forms of terrorism, including those backed by a State. She also supported the need for a legal definition that would draw a clear distinction between acts of terrorism and the legitimate struggle of peoples for self-determination. The draft had certain gaps which would have to be filled in the future.

The representative of Pakistan also supported the amendment, but expressed disappointment that the text included no definition of terrorism. Pakistan had joined in the consensus in the hope that future work on a comprehensive convention would consider that question.

The representative of Iraq said that this text, lacking a definition of terrorism, including State terrorism, left open the possibility of abuse. The legitimate struggle of a people for self- determination should not be equated with acts of terrorism.

The representative of Yemen stressed the importance of host countries ensuring that asylum-seekers were not terrorists and had not been previously involved in terrorist acts.

The representative of the United States, on a point of order, said there was no provision in the rules of procedure for resolutions to be sponsored by a coordinator of consultations or the Committee's offices.

The Committee then approved the resolution without a vote.

The representative of the Sudan said that since 1996, his delegation had introduced provisions in anti-terrorist instruments calling States not to finance terrorist activities. The approval of the text before the Committee was a realization of his country’s initiatives.

The representative of France thanked delegations for the support given to his country’s proposal for this draft convention.

* *** *