SOCIAL COMMITTEE SEEKS COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT EFFORT TO NARROW "UNACCEPTABLY WIDE" GAP BETWEEN RICH AND POOR NATIONS

Press Release
GA/SHC/3570

SOCIAL COMMITTEE SEEKS COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT EFFORT TO NARROW ‘UNACCEPTABLY WIDE’ GAP BETWEEN RICH AND POOR NATIONS

Session Ends With Action on Human Rights Texts on Kosovo, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Democratic Republic of the Congo

Reaffirming the right development as an integral part of fundamental human rights, the General Assembly -– by a resolution approved tonight by its Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) -– would call upon States to implement comprehensive development programmes, in view of the unacceptably wide gap between the developed and developing countries.

The resolution was approved by a recorded vote of 98 in favour to 10 against (Hungary, Germany, Denmark, Canada, Iceland, United States, Netherlands, Japan, Sweden and Liechtenstein) with 32 abstentions. (For further details of vote, see Annex XIII)

The draft was one of six approved by the Committee, as it met to conclude its work for the current Assembly session.

By the text, the Assembly would further express deep concern at the difficulties faced by developing countries when participating in the globalization process. The Assembly would recommend proper consideration of the humanitarian effects of sanctions, which undermined and affected the right to development.

Before approving the resolution as a whole, the Committee also approved:

-- a preambular paragraph referring to sanction, by a vote of 90 in favour to 39 against with 2 abstentions (Annex VI)

-- a preambular paragraph referring to “economic conditionalities”, by a vote of 91 in favour to 40 against with no abstentions (Annex VII)

-– an operative paragraph regarding a global context for the right to development, by a vote of 94 in favour to 38 against with 2 abstentions (Annex VIII)

Third Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/SHC/3570 56th Meeting (Night) 22 November 1999

-- an operative paragraph on broading participation of developing countries in international economic decision-making, by a vote of 96 in favour to 36 against with no abstentions (Annex IX)

-- an operative paragraph on the humanitarian effects of sanctions, by a vote of 92 in favour to 41 against with no abstentions (Annex X)

-- an operative paragraph concerning a convention on the right to development, by a vote of 90 in favour to 41 against with 2 abstentions (Annex XI)

-- an operative paragraph on reports from the independent expert on the right to development, by a vote of 93 in favour to 39 against with no abstentions (Annex XII).

By another draft approved by the Committee tonight, without a vote, the Assembly would call upon the international community to recognize and respect cultural diversity. An amendment to the resolution noted the United Nations Year of Dialogue among Civilizations to be observed in 2001. Also approved without a vote was a draft on enhancing international cooperation in the field of human rights, asking the Assembly to call for inter-cultural dialogue and consultations to promote human rights.

Recorded votes were taken on three drafts on human rights situations. A draft on the Democratic Republic of the Congo, was approved by a vote of 80 in favour to 8 against (Democratic Republic of the Congo, Cuba, Iran, Zimbabwe, Myanmar, China, Sudan and Chad), with 47 abstentions (Annex V). A draft on the situation in Kosovo, was approved by a vote of 101 in favour to three against (Russian Federation, Belarus and India), with 36 abstaining (Annex I).

After separate votes on its different sections, a third draft on human rights, regarding Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), was approved by a vote of 112 in favour to 2 against (Belarus and Russian Federation) with 26 abstentions (Annex IV). Sections of the draft on Bosnia and Herzegovina and on Croatia were approved by a vote of 107 in favour to none against with 28 abstentions (Annex III). The section on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was approved by a vote of 105 in favour to 3 against (Belarus, China and Russian Federation), with 26 abstentions (Annex II).

In other action tonight, the Committee decided to approve an addendum to the report of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, containing programme budget implications and to remit the report back to the Committee on Racial Discrimination for further consideration. It also decided to approve its organization of work and its draft biennial programme of work for 2000-2001. It decided to ask the Assembly to take note of the Secretary-General’s report on human rights and unilateral coercive measures along with its addendum, and of the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Committee also took note of the 1999 report of the Economic and Social Council.

Committee Work Programme

The Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) met this evening to complete its work for the current General Assembly session and to take action on draft resolutions. (For more complete summaries of resolutions, see Press Release GA/SHC/3567 of 19 November.)

The Committee has before it the report of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (document A/54/18), describing activities at its fifty-fourth session (1-19 March) and its fifty-fifth session (2-27 March). The addendum containing programme budget implications (document A/54/18/Add.1) is expected to be approved as part of the report.

The Committee also has before it the report of the Economic and Social Council (document A/C.3/54/L.100) containing the organization of work of the Third Committee and the draft biennial programme of work of the Committee for 2000-2001, which the Committee is expected to approve before the end of its current session.

The Committee has before it a number of draft resolution on which action is expected. One of those concerns human rights and cultural diversity (document A/C.3/54/L.62), by which the Assembly would call upon the international community to recognize and respect cultural diversity and uphold the principle that all peoples and nations have the right to hold, develop and preserve their cultures. Amendments (document A/C.3/54/L.101) to the resolution would note the United Nations Year of Dialogue among Civilizations to be held in 2001, and the issue of human rights and cultural diversity, emphasising the role of States.

A draft on enhancing international cooperation in the field of human rights (document A/C.3/54/L.84) would have the Assembly call on the United Nations system and intergovernmental organizations to carry out inter-cultural dialogue as a salient part of the dialogue among civilizations and to continue consultations to enhance understanding and promote human rights and fundamental freedoms.

By a draft text on the right to development (document A/C.3/54/L.85), the Assembly would express deep concern that the gap between the developed and developing countries remains unacceptably wide. It would urge States to eliminate all obstacles to development at all levels by promoting and protecting all rights, and by implementing comprehensive development programmes at the national level. It would also recommend consideration of the humanitarian effects of sanctions.

By terms of a 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 in the situation of human rights in that country, including the Lusaka ceasefire agreement and the appointment of a Human Rights Minister by the Democratic Republic. The Assembly would also express concern at the adverse impact of continuing conflict in the eastern part of the country, as well as the excess of small arms and the persecution of human rights defenders and their organizations.

By terms of a draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Kosovo (document A/C.3/54/L.82), the Assembly would demand that the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) comply with requests regarding missing and detained persons of Kosovo, stressing the responsibility of all parties to create a secure environment to allow refugees and displaced persons to return to Kosovo. An amendment to that draft (document A/C.3/54/L.97) would change the title of the draft to read, "The situation of human rights in Kosovo, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia" and a preambular paragraph would reaffirm commitment to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and other States.

By a draft on the situation of human rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) (document A/C.3/54/L.86), the Assembly would urge all States and parties to the Peace Agreement to meet their obligations to cooperate fully with the International Tribunal for the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law in the territory since 1991.

Part I of the draft, on Bosnia and Herzegovina, would acknowledge progress but would condemn, in the strongest terms, the complicity by local governments in perpetrating violence against minority refugees and internally displaced persons returning to their homes.

By Part II of the text, on the Republic of Croatia, the Assembly would note and welcome initiatives to improve the situation of human rights but would express deep concern that Government commitments to improve freedoms remain unfulfilled.

By Part III of the draft, on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), the Assembly would strongly condemn the presence of indicted war criminals in the hierarchy of the Government, and would demand that the Government hand them over to the Tribunal. It would insist that the Government support activities of the international community and the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo to rebuild and facilitate a multi-ethnic society. An amendment (document A/C.3/54/L.96) to the draft would reaffirm the territorial integrity of States in the region.

Action on Draft

The Committee took up the draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Kosovo (document A/C.3/54/L.82) and the amendments contained in an addendum (A/C.3/54/L.97). The Secretary read out the oral revisions made on introduction of the draft: in the fifth preambular paragraph, the word “their” would be added before the words “full and equal rights”; operative paragraph 9 would end at the eighth line with the words “human rights standards” and the lines which followed would be deleted.

The representative of the United States said Croatia, Israel and Poland had become additional co-sponsors. Also, he said much work had gone into achieving a text that could command the broadest possible support. As a result of the latest consultations, there was an additional change. A preambular paragraph would be inserted after the second in the existing text, as follows: “Recalling, against the background of years of repression, intolerance and violence in Kosovo, the challenge to build a multi-ethnic society on the basis of substantial autonomy, respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Serbia and Montenegro, pending final settlement in accordance with United Nations Security Council resolution 1999/1244.”

The representative of Syria made a correction to the Arabic text only, saying the same word for “ethnic” should be used in operative paragraphs 7 and 13.

The representative of the Russian Federation withdrew the amendments in the addendum since, he said, the oral amendment by the United States addressed the issues raised in the addendum. Further, he said that within the framework of territorial integrity, including that of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), the attempt to build a multi-ethnic Kosovo could be a myth. There were serious concerns about wording in the text, for example, the archaic wording referring to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The wording was selective with regard to the overall situation in Kosovo. Many violations were being committed by non-State subjects and the Special Rapporteur himself had noted that in the south of Kosovo, not a single Serb would ultimately be left. Ignoring the harsh realities of Kosovo today would not help to restore human rights. Therefore, he asked for a recorded vote on the draft resolution and he would vote against it. The negative vote, however, did not apply to the oral amendments made by the United States reaffirming territorial integrity.

The representative of Cuba, said she would abstain because the draft did not have an updated, objective approach to the question of human rights in Kosovo. It dealt with one region and not the entirety of a State. The draft before the Committee expressly reinforced the military intervention that had occurred in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which had brought greater devastation and which had violated human rights and the Charter. It presented a pale image of the violations against Serbs and other ethnic minorities. Rather than the present draft, there should be an analysis of the situation of all minorities in Kosovo because timely actions had not been taken. The problem needed an integrated approach.

The Committee then approved the draft on the situation of human rights in Kosovo by 101 in favor to three against (Russian Federation, India and Belarus), with 36 abstaining. (For details of vote, see Annex I.)

After the vote, the representative of China said he would explain his vote in the General Assembly.

The representative of Japan said he shared the concerns of others about the human rights situation in Kosovo. All relevant actors in Kosovo should implement the present resolution and should cooperate with the United Nations Mission there. Protection of the human rights of refugees and the internally displaced was vitally important. Rehabilitation of Kosovo was important if the people of Kosovo were to return to their homes. Too much bloodshed had occurred and rights continued to be trampled. Japan would provide assistance toward the international community rectifying the situation together.

Next, the Committee took up the draft resolution entitled “Situation of human rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)” (document A/C.3/54/L.86) and the related amendment contained in document A/C.3/54/L.96. The following countries added their sponsorship to that draft: Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, France, Italy, Austria, Greece, Spain, United Kingdom, Germany, Liechtenstein, San Marino, Monaco, Iceland, Israel, Honduras, Jordan, Malta, Canada, Morocco, Lithuania, Czech Republic, New Zealand and Norway.

The representative of the United States added a new preambular paragraph to the draft.

The representative of the Russian Federation said he would withdraw his country’s amendment contained in document A/C.3/54/L.96. He said the draft resolution was prejudicial with regard to events that had taken place, especially section three of the draft (on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia). It ignored an historical link and was setting specific tragic events outside the framework. Furthermore, the use of the name Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, with the addition, in parenthesis, of Serbia and Montenegro, was inappropriate. He asked for a separate recorded vote for that section, as well as for sections I (Bosnia and Herzegovina) and II (Republic of Croatia). His Government would abstain from approving those sections. Also, he requested a recorded vote on the draft as a whole, and said he would vote against.

The representative of Syria said corrections should be made to the word “ethnic” in operative paragraphs 11 and 13.

The Committee approved to retain section III of that draft by a vote of 105 in favour to 3 against (China, Belarus and the Russian Federation) with 26 abstentions. (See Annex II.)

The Committee approved section I and section II of that draft by a vote of 107 in favour to none against, with 28 abstentions. (See Annex III.)

The Committee approved that orally revised draft as a whole by a vote of 112 in favour, 2 against (Belarus and the Russian Federation) with 26 abstentions. (See Annex IV.)

The representative of Croatia said for the first time in eight years her Government was not able to support the draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The preambular section of the draft as well as other operative paragraphs did not appropriately reflect the situation of human rights in her country. Also, the human rights situation should be the only criteria for keeping or excluding a country from the “package arrangement” (consideration of three countries together). Her country’s human rights situation had greatly improved and it had opened the way for its membership to the Council of Europe. The human rights situation in the South-Eastern region had once again been turmoil. For those reasons, the focus of human rights monitoring under the present mandate of the Special Rapporteur varied significantly from country to country.

The Committee then took up the resolution on the situation of human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (document A/C.3/54/L.63).

The representative of Finland said he regretted having no further revisions to the text.

The representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo said the draft resolution had benefited from concessions on his delegation’s part. He had wanted to include a paragraph that would call upon the “non-invited forces” in the eastern part of the country to put an end to their occupation. That had not been agreed to, which left the draft too far afield from the conditions noted by the Special Rapporteur. Had his paragraph been accepted, the draft would have been equitable. He had asked only to have it acknowledged that “troops from uninvited countries”, as the Security Council had labelled them, were in his country. The European Union had remained unmoved about that acknowledgment in their concern that the Rwandans not be offended. Further, the European Union had demanded that the Democratic Republic of the Congo be wholly cooperative with the Rwandan Tribunal, whereas Rwanda had refused to cooperate just this morning.

He said the heinous attack on the Congolese on the east side of the country was unacceptable. He would depart from consensus and demand a recorded vote. If the European Union had wanted to be accommodating, they could have been. If a resolution was passed that protected the rights of only some people in his country, he would not feel bound by it until it protected all people there.

The representative of Finland said the effort to negotiate had been sincere and constructive. A number of proposals had been presented to address the concerns expressed on Friday and today by the Democratic Republic. Some of the approaches had seemed to bring consensus nearer. Some of the formulations suggested by the Democratic Republic had not allowed agreement. However, the text had been greatly improved.

The representative of Rwanda said the resolution concerned not his country but the Democratic Republic. That country should not blame Rwanda for its problems. If the Democratic Republic was cooperating with criminals, it should take responsibility for that.

The representative of Uganda said he was committed to peace in the Democratic Republic. Uganda had no territorial interest there, beyond the course of natural trade. He supported the Lusaka Peace Agreement with all its components, including making the Joint Military Commission operational. The problem in the Democratic Republic of the Congo was the issue of human rights. This year’s text confused the political situation in the Democratic Republic with its human rights situation, particularly in paragraph 2Bi concerning massacres. He could not join consensus on that paragraph and would abstain from voting.

The representative of Burundi said that although his country had not signed the Lusaka Agreement, it was a neighbor of the Democratic Republic and was concerned. Burundi had expressed concern about the situations at its border with the Democratic Republic. All signatories of the Lusaka accord, whether referred to as “invited” or “uninvited” parties, were involved in the process of making peace in the Democratic Republic. The position of that country on the draft before the Committee was a step backward from the Lusaka Agreement. The Democratic Republic should join its neighbors in the new spirit of peace.

The Committee then approved the draft as orally revised on introduction, by a vote of 80 in favor to 8 against (Democratic Republic of the Congo, Cuba, Iran, Zimbabwe, Myanmar, China, Sudan and Chad), with 47 abstentions. (See Annex V.)

The Committee then took up the draft resolution entitled "Human rights and cultural diversity" (document A/C.3/54/L.62 and the related amendments, contained in document A/C.3/54/L.101). The following countries added their sponsorship to that draft: El Salvador, Indonesia, Morocco, Kenya and Libya.

The representative of Finland, also speaking for the European Union, said he joined consensus on the draft and would withdraw the amendments to it contained in document A/C.3/54/L.101.

The Committee approved that orally revised text without a vote.

The representative of Japan said his Government gave great importance to human rights and cultural diversity. The great difficulty of the original draft had been the notion of cultural rights on nations.

The Committee took up the draft on "Enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights" (document A/C.3/54/L.84). The representative of South Africa, also speaking on behalf of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, introduced oral revisions to the text. In the second line of operative paragraph two "to continue to carry out" should be added after "organizations". Also in that paragraph, the following should be deleted: "intercultural" and "as a salient part of the dialogue among civilizations".

The Committee approved that orally revised draft resolution without a vote.

Next, the Committee took up the draft on "The right to development" (document A/C.3/54/L.85).

The representative of Finland, also speaking for the European Union, said the text had been unacceptable for some time. Many contested views had been introduced such as sanctions, conditionality and a proposed convention on the right to development. He proposed a recorded vote on block for the eighth and thirteenth preambular paragraphs together with operative paragraphs 3c, 3e, 13, 21, and 22.

The representative of Chile said the way to approach the matter was through consensus. The right to development benefited especially developing countries. The question of sanctions was not relevant to the right to development. The main responsibility fell on States which would be responsible for lifting the sanctions. Sanctions were established by the Charter of the United Nations. Sanctions had been applied in South Africa during the period of apartheid. Also, reference to conditionality was not necessary and it deprived the international community of a useful tool for the promotion and respect for human rights.

The representative of Norway said her Government actively supported development-related programmes. It also assisted in the building of democracy. Several elements in the draft resolution such as sanctions and microeconomy were not appropriate. There seemed to be a selective listing in operative paragraphs 21 and 22.

The representative of the Russian Federation asked whether a separate vote on each paragraph could take place.

The Committee approved retaining the eighth preambular paragraph of that draft (relating to sanctions) by a vote of 90 in favour to 39 against with 2 abstentions (Croatia and the Republic of Korea). (See Annex VI.)

The Committee approved retaining the thirteenth preambular paragraph of that draft (relating to the consequences of measures taken on behalf of human rights) by a vote of 91 in favour to 40 against with no abstentions. (See Annex VII.)

The Committee approved retaining operative paragraph 3c of that draft (on the need for a global approach to the right to development) by a vote of 94 in favour, to 38 against with 2 abstentions (Cyprus and the Republic of Korea). (See Annex VIII.)

The Committee approved retaining operative paragraph 3e –- on the participation of developing countries in international economic decision-making -- by a vote of 96 in favour to 36 against and no abstentions. (See Annex IX.)

The Committee approved retaining operative paragraph 13 of the draft –- on the humanitarian effects of sanctions -- by a vote of 92 in favour to 41 against with no abstentions. (See Annex X.)

The Committee approved retaining operative paragraph 21 of the draft -- on elaborating a convention on the right to development -- by a vote of 90 in favour to 41 against with 2 abstentions (Russian Federation and Ukraine). (See Annex XI.)

The Committee approved retaining operative paragraph 22 of the draft –- on reports from the independent expert on the right to development -- by a vote of 93 in favour to 39 against with no abstentions. (See Annex XII.)

The representative of Australia said he would abstain from the vote on the basis of substantive matters. One issue concerned the Working Group on the Right to Development, which would be meeting in Geneva within weeks; agreement had been close and more time might have brought consensus. The views of many were not reflected in the present text, but a broad measure of agreement had been achieved. The main issue on which no agreement had been reached was that of a Convention, which would be taken up by the Working Group. If the right to development could be implemented as a resolution, it would have been done already. Work on the issue would continue to be difficult until there was agreement at the ground level among delegations. Delegations should concern themselves with figuring out what they wanted with regard to the right to development.

The representative of Canada said he regretted no consensus had been reached. He had voted against the paragraphs and would vote against the overall text as well. The right to development was associated in the text with countries, particularly in regard to developing countries. However, he said, the right to development referred to the right of individuals to development, and in regard to that, the responsibility of countries was to ensure the civil, political, social and economic rights that would enable individuals to achieve that.

The representative of the Congo said she had not been able to participate in the vote on the paragraphs but she cast a vote in favor of them.

The representative of Japan said he would vote against the draft. In a few weeks, the Working Group would meet and consensus would have been a significant step of endorsement for its work. However, preambular paragraphs 8 and 13, concerning sanctions, needed careful consideration. Also, paragraph 13 referred to human rights as related to economic conditionalities in a way he could not agree with. Nor could he agree with the view of the resolution as a whole when it referred to human rights only from the macroeconomic perspective.

The representative of Algeria asked which delegation was requesting a vote on the proposal as a whole.

The Chairman said when parts of a resolution were voted on, the entire resolution was to be voted on automatically. The representative of Canada said that procedural issue could be discussed all night. Instead, he would call for a recorded vote.

The Committee then approved the draft on the right to development by a vote of 98 in favor to 10 against (Hungary, Germany, Denmark, Canada, Iceland, United States, Netherlands, Japan, Sweden and Liechtenstein), with 32 abstentions. (See Annex XIII.)

The representative of Finland said he would explain his vote in the plenary.

The Committee then decided to recommend to the Assembly that it take note of the Secretary-General's report on unilateral coercive measures (document A/54/222 and Add.1) and the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (document A/54/36).

The Committee then took up the report of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (document A/54/18 and Add.1), along with a draft decision that had been proposed by the Chairman and circulated throughout the Committee. The Committee then decided it would refer the decision within the report back to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination for further consideration in light of the programme budget implications contained in the Addendum.

LIXIAN XIONG, Chief of the Documentation, Programming and Monitoring Unit of the Department of General Assembly Affairs and Conference Services, introduced the Committee’s organization of work and draft biennial programme of work for 2000-2001 (document A/C.3/54/L.100), which he said had been revised and updated in light of the Committee’s work this session and the resolutions approved.

The representatives of Algeria, Slovenia and Mongolia made procedural comments about the organization of work and draft biennial programme of work.

The Committee approved the draft resolution on its organization of work and its draft biennial programme of work (document A/C.3/54/L.100).

The Committee then took note of the report of the Economic and Social Council (document A/54/3).

The representatives of United Kingdom, Algeria, Viet Nam, Antigua and Barbuda, Finland and Croatia expressed appreciation for the work of the session.

(ANNEXES FOLLOW)

ANNEX I

Vote on human rights situation in Kosovo

The draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Kosovo (document A/C.3/54/L.82) was approved by a recorded vote of 101 in favour to 3 against, with 36 abstentions.

In favour: Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia, Federated States of Micronesia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Paraguay, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Sweden, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Against: Belarus, India and Russian Federation.

Abstain: Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, China, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Jamaica, Kenya, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic, Libya, Mali, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Panama, Peru, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Singapore, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda, Ukraine, United Republic of Tanzania and Venezuela.

Absent: Afghanistan, Armenia, Bahamas, Bolivia, Burundi, Central African Republic, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Iraq, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen and Yugoslavia.

(END OF ANNEX I)

ANNEX II

Vote on human rights in Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

The Third Committee approved Section III of (document A/C.3/54/L.86 -– relating to human rights in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) -– by a recorded vote of 105 in favour to 3 against, with 26 abstentions.

In favour: Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia, Federated States of Micronesia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Sweden, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Against: Belarus, China and Russian Federation.

Abstain: Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cuba, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, India, Kenya, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic, Libya, Mexico, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Singapore, South Africa, Togo, Uganda and United Republic of Tanzania.

Absent: Afghanistan, Armenia, Bahamas, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Burundi, Central African Republic, Comoros, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea- Bissau, Honduras, Iraq, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen and Yugoslavia.

(END OF ANNEX II)

ANNEX III

Vote on human rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia

The Third Committee approved Sections I and II of Document A/C.3/54/L.86 –- on the human rights situations in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Croatia by a recorded vote of 107 in favour to none against, with 28 abstentions:

In favour: Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia, Federated States of Micronesia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Latvia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Sweden, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Against: None.

Abstain: Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Belarus, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, China, Croatia, Cuba, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, India, Kenya, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Singapore, South Africa, Togo, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania.

Absent: Afghanistan, Armenia, Bahamas, Belize, Bolivia, Botswana, Burundi, Central African Republic, Comoros, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea- Bissau, Honduras, Iraq, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen and Yugoslavia.

(END OF ANNEX III)

ANNEX IV

Vote on rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro).

The draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), (document A/C.3/54/L.86) was approved as a whole by a recorded vote of 112 in favour to 2 against with 26 abstentions:

In favour: Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia, Federated States of Micronesia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Latvia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Sweden, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Against: Belarus and Russian Federation.

Abstain: Angola, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, China, Croatia, Cuba, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of Korea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guinea, India, Kenya, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic, Mali, Mexico, Myanmar, Namibia, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Singapore, Togo, Uganda and United Republic of Tanzania.

Absent: Afghanistan, Armenia, Bahamas, Bhutan, Bolivia, Burundi, Central African Republic, Comoros, Congo, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Iraq, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen and Yugoslavia.

(END OF ANNEX IV)

ANNEX V

Vote on human rights in Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The draft resolution on human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (document A/C.3/54/L.63) was approved by a recorded vote of 80 in favour to 8 against, with 47 abstentions:

In favour: Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, Federated States of Micronesia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kuwait, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay and Venezuela.

Against: Chad, China, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iran, Myanmar, Sudan and Zimbabwe.

Abstain: Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania and Zambia.

Absent: Afghanistan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bolivia, Burundi, Central African Republic, Comoros, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Honduras, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Morocco, Nauru, Niger, Oman, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen and Yugoslavia.

(END OF ANNEX V)

ANNEX VI

Vote on preambular paragraph in text an right to development

The eighth preambular paragraph of the draft resolution on the right to development (document A/C.3/54/L.85) -– relating to sanctions –- was approved by a recorded vote of 90 in favour to 39 against, with 2 abstentions.

In favour: Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao Peoples’ Democratic of Republic, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, The former Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Against: Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom and United States.

Abstain: Croatia and Republic of Korea.

Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Honduras, Iraq, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Republic of Moldova, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Suriname, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu and Yugoslavia.

(END OF ANNEX VI)

ANNEX VII

Vote on preambular paragraph in text on right to development

The thirteenth preambular paragraph of the draft resolution on the right to development (document A/C.3/54/L.85) -- relating to the consequences of measures taken on behalf of human rights -- was approved by a recorded vote of 91 in favour to 40 against, with no abstentions, as follows:

In favour: Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameron, Cape Verde, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Against: Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom and United States.

Abstain: None.

Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea- Bissau, Honduras, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Republic of Moldova, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Suriname, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu and Yugoslavia.

(END OF ANNEX VII)

ANNEX VIII

Vote on paragraph on global approach to right to development

The Third Committee approved operative paragraph 3(c) in the draft resolution on the right to development (document A/C.3/54/L.85) -- relating to realizing the right to development within a global context -- by a record vote of 94 in favour to 38 against, with 2 abstentions:

In favour: Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Against: Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom and United States.

Abstain: Cyprus and Republic of Korea.

Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Republic of Moldova, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Suriname, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu and Yugoslavia.

(END OF ANNEX VIII)

ANNEX IX

Vote on paragraph on economic decision-making

The Third Committee approved operative paragraph 3(e) in the draft resolution on the right to development (document A/C.3/54/L.85) -- on the participation of developing countries in economic decision-making -- by a recorded vote of 96 in favour to 36 against, with no abstentions:

In favour: Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Georgia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Against: Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and United Kingdom.

Abstain: None.

Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Republic of Moldova, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Suriname, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu and Yugoslavia.

(END OF ANNEX IX)

ANNEX X

Vote on paragraph on humanitarian effects of sanctions

The Third Committee approved operative paragraph 13 of the draft resolution on the right to development (document A/C.3/54/L.85) –- on the humanitarian effects of sanctions –- by a recorded vote of 92 in favour to 41 against, with no abstentions:

In favour: Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation , Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Against: Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom and United States.

Abstain: None.

Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea- Bissau, Honduras, Iraq, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Suriname, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu and Yugoslavia.

(END OF ANNEX X)

ANNEX XI

Vote on paragraph on convention on right to development

The Third Committee approved operative paragraph 21 of the draft resolution on the right to development (document A/C.3/54/L.85) -– on the elaboration of a convention -– by a recorded vote of 90 in favour to 41 against, with 2 abstentions:

In favour: Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Against: Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom and United States.

Abstain: Russian Federation and Ukraine.

Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Iraq, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Suriname, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu and Yugoslavia.

(END OF ANNEX XI)

ANNEX XII

Vote on paragraph on report from independent expert

The Third Committee approved operative paragraph 22 of the draft resolution on the right to development (document A/C.3/54/L.85) -– on reports from the independent expert on the right to development -- was approved by a recorded vote of 93 in favour to 39 against, with no abstentions:

In favour: Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Georgia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao Peoples’ Democratic of Republic, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Against: Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom and United States.

Abstain: None.

Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Iraq, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Republic of Moldova, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Suriname, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu and Yugoslavia.

(END OF ANNEX XII)

ANNEX XIII

Vote on right to development

The overall draft resolution on the right to development (document A/C.3/54/L.85) was approved by a recorded vote of 98 in favour to 10 against, with 32 abstentions:

In favour: Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao Peoples’ Democratic of Republic, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

Against: Canada, Denmark, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Japan, Liechtenstein, Netherlands, Sweden and United States.

Abstain: Andorra, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Greece, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and United Kingdom.

Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Bahamas, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Iraq, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Nauru, Niger, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Suriname, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu and Yugoslavia.

* *** *