Fifty-eighth General Assembly

Third Committee

32^nd Meeting (PM)

SOCIAL COMMITTEE HEARS FROM COUNTRIES HOSTING REFUGEE POPULATIONS

OF EFFORTS AT REPATRIATION, DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE

More Aid from International Community, Regional

Organizations Called For; Also Strengthened Role for UNHCR

As the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) continued its review of issues relating to refugees, returnees and internally displaced persons this afternoon, many delegations shared their national experiences as host countries and the approaches used by their governments to address protracted refugee situations, many of which were a direct result of armed conflicts.  The Committee was considering the report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

Explaining the refugee situation in his country, the representative of Zambia said the number of refugees had grown from 100,000 in the 1980s to approximately 270,000 today.  Positive developments had taken place in 2002 in repatriation, effective emergency preparedness and development assistance for refugees.  So far, 15,000 Angolan refugees in Zambia had been successfully repatriated.  Unfortunately, the repatriation of Rwandan refugees had not been as encouraging.

Voluntary repatriation remained the most logical, preferred and durable solution to the refugee problem, said the representative of the United Republic of Tanzania.  She said the policy of development through local integration was not feasible for refugees or host countries in situations involving large numbers of refugees.  Her Government had found it viable to integrate 3,000 refugees from Somalia through local integration; however, this would not be possible for the nearly 1 million refugees from the Great Lakes region. 

The Government of Croatia, its representative told the Committee, had used an approach aimed at the creation of sustainable conditions and harmonious reintegration of all refugees and internally displaced persons into areas of previous settlements.  The fundamental objectives, he said, were the normalization of life for all displaced persons; the establishment of democratic stability in regions of special State welfare, with the priority placed on the return of national minorities (primarily Croatian citizens of Serbian ethnicity), and the elimination of all forms of discrimination.

He told the Committee there were now almost 80,000 returnees and approximately 25,000 reconstructed housing units, and also that 4,500 families had received temporary accommodation.  The Government had spent substantially to alleviate the plight of refugee and displaced persons, but more aid from regional organizations and the international community would be required to resolve the matter more quickly.

The representative of Serbia and Montenegro said that although conflicts in the territory of the former Yugoslavia ended years ago, Serbia and Montenegro still provided shelter to about 400,000 refugees from Croatia and from Bosnia and Herzegovina.  Over the past year, there had been some positive developments related to their repatriation.  However, there were also more than 260,000 internally displaced persons from Kosovo and Metohija.  The pace of their return was unacceptably slow; the prospects for further returns remained slim.

Other speakers stressed that the changing global refugee landscape required a strengthened capacity and role for the UNHCR.  Given the protracted nature of certain refugee situations, and the continually evolving refugee problems throughout the world, they supported the strengthening of the UNHCR and said that sufficient funding was a prerequisite for the effective fulfilment of its mandate. 

Also this afternoon, the Committee heard introductions of draft resolutions.  The representative of the United States introduced a draft on women and political participation, and Italy, for the European Union and others, introduced a text on the rights of the child.

Also speaking this afternoon were representatives of Japan, Republic of Korea, India and Algeria,

The Permanent Observer for the Holy See also addressed the Committee.

The Committee meets again at 10 a.m. tomorrow, Wednesday 5 November, to continue its consideration of refugees, returnees and internally displaced persons.

Background

The Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) met this afternoon to continue its consideration of the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, questions related to refugees, returnees and displaced persons and humanitarian questions.  (For background see Press Release GA/SHC/3757 of 3 November).  The Committee was also to receive two draft resolutions, one on the advancement of women and the other on the rights of children.

Introduction of Draft Resolutions

Introducing a draft resolution on women and political participation (document A/C.3/58/L.17/Rev.1), the representative of the United States said the draft outlined concrete steps that the international community, States, the private and civil society could take to improve women’s participation in political life.  She said that it was hoped that the provisions of the draft would be implemented as quickly as possible.

The representative of Italy, on behalf of the European Union, associated States and the Latin American group of countries, introduced a draft resolution on the rights of the child (document A/C.3/58/L.29) and said it emphasized the importance of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, as well as its associated Protocols, and welcomed the appointment of the Independent Expert by the Secretary-General on violence against children as well as his upcoming study on the topic.

Statements

SHIGEYUKI SHIMAMORI (Japan) said special importance should be attached to assisting returnees to reintegrate themselves into a revitalized local community and to providing them with a chance to participate in the reconstruction of their countries.  Japan, he continued, intended to play an active role in pursuing the “Convention Plus” strategies along with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other international actors.  Such strategies included effective coordination between efforts to protect refugees and the provision of development assistance in regions experiencing refugee outflows.

He said his country welcomed the admission of the UNHCR to the United Nations Development Group and hoped that it would further the development of cooperative relations between the UNHCR and other United Nations agencies.  Such collaboration among various agencies could exemplify the conceptual framework of the “4Rs” -– repatriation, reintegration, rehabilitation and reconstruction –- as well as “DAR”, or development assistance for refugees and “DLI”, development through local integration.

DARKO GOETTLICHER (Croatia) said the Croatian Government had taken an approach aimed at the creation of sustainable conditions and harmonious reintegration of all refugees, including internally displaced persons, into the areas of their previous settlements.  The Government’s policy vis-à-vis the return process had several fundamental objectives.  Among those were the normalisation of life and living conditions for all refugees and displaced persons; the establishment of democratic stability in regions of special State welfare, with the priority placed on the return of national minorities (primarily Croatian citizens of Serbian ethnicity); the elimination of all forms of discrimination, and cooperation and support from central governmental institutions to local returnee communities.

Additional activities, as well as funds, were being directed towards the parallel acceleration of economic revitalisation in areas of return, landmine clearance, systemizing of land registers and the establishment of a social security system for returnees immediately after their return.  Activities had also been undertaken in property restitution.  Those and many other measures had resulted in considerable progress in the return process.  There had been almost 80,000 returnees, with 25,000 reconstructed housing units and the accommodation of 4,500 temporary occupant families.  The Croatian Government had spent substantially to alleviate the plight of refugee and displaced persons.  Even so, more aid from regional organizations and the international community would be required to resolve the matter more quickly.

JEONG-HYUN RYU (Republic of Korea) said while it was encouraging to note that the total number of refugees had decreased, the overall number of people of concern to the UNHCR had grown.  The changing global refugee landscape required a strengthened capacity and role for the UNHCR.  Given the protracted nature of certain refugee situations, and the continually evolving refugee problems throughout the world, the Republic of Korea supported the indefinite continuation of the mandate of the UNHCR.  Removing the time limitation on the mandate would be a practical step towards promoting its efficient functioning.

He said the 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol were the foundations of the international regime for the protection of refugees.  The Convention remained an essential framework for refugee rights.  However, it was clear that the Convention alone was not sufficient for addressing the contemporary situation of refugees.  As the linkage between post-conflict management, humanitarian assistance and development policies became increasingly complicated and necessary, the UNHCR must be given additional tools with which to fulfil its mandate.

The UNHCR was suffering from a chronic budget deficit, he said.  Sufficient funding was a prerequisite for the effective fulfilment of its mandate.  This year, the Republic of Korea had paid $1.1 million in regular contributions to the UNHCR.  It had also contributed $10 million in total to various international programmes for humanitarian assistance in Iraq, of which $2 million in financial assistance and in-kind contributions were provided through the UNHCR.  His country would make every effort to further increase its contribution in the future.

BERNARD MPUNDU (Zambia) said the refugee situation in Zambia started over 30 years ago, mainly as a factor of the liberation struggles in southern Africa. The second wave of refugees came about as a result of civil wars in neighbouring countries.  Therefore, Zambia had had to shelter refugees from many of its neighbours and other countries in the region.  The number of refugees in the country had now grown from 100,000 in the 1980s to approximately 270,000.

Zambia, he said, welcomed the positive developments that had taken place in 2002 in the areas of repatriation, effective emergency preparedness and development assistance for refugees.  So far, 15,000 Angolan refugees in Zambia had been successfully repatriated.  However, the process had slowed down due to Angola’s limited absorption capacity for refugees.  Much assistance would be needed from the international community for it to succeed.  With regard to the repatriation of Rwandan refugees, progress had not been as encouraging; so far fewer than 100 refugees had been successfully repatriated.

He noted that the prolonged hosting of a large number of refugees had not been without its problems for Zambia.  Some communities, particularly those in the rural areas, had been negatively affected with added pressure on social services.  However, with the assistance of the UNHCR, the Zambian Government had developed an integrated approach for refugee management.  The programme was designed to integrate refugees in the development agenda and to help in the implementation of the “4Rs” by providing training that would enable refugees to reintegrate into their communities.

CHRISTINE KAPALATA (United Republic of Tanzania) said her Government believed that voluntary repatriation remained the logical, preferred and most durable solution to the refugee problem.  On the concept of development through local integration, the position of her Government was that local integration of large numbers of refugees might not be sustainable, either for the refugees or for the hosting countries.  Despite this, the Government had been practising a form of local integration long before the concept gained currency in the international community.

She said her country had been faced with both large and small groups of refugees.  With regard to the 3,000 refugees from Somalia, the Government had found it feasible to integrate those people into the local community.  However, development through local integration was not viable with regard to the nearly 1 million refugees from countries of the Great Lakes region.  Such integration would not be practicable and could cause unintended demographic imbalances with serious political, security and economic consequences.  Development through local integration must not be mandatory, nor must it be an excuse for the international community to discharge its responsibility of burden- and responsibility-sharing in assisting countries of asylum in refugee-impacted areas.  Local integration must therefore be considered on a case-by-case basis.

P.M. TRIPATHI (India) said that in the face of competing demands and limited resources, prioritization of the activities of the UNHCR was a hard and inescapable reality.  The UNHCR should maintain its focus on those persons of concern who had the first call on its mandate and, even more, on its limited resources:  the refugees.  Internally displaced persons were the responsibility of Member States, he added.  Therefore, the role of the UNHCR in situations involving such people should be on the basis of explicit requests by the Member States concerned.

He welcomed the priority attached by the High Commissioner to enhancing the accountability and transparency of the UNHCR’s working methods.  It was vital for the UNHCR to preserve impartiality in its operations, and its non-political character.  This had become all the more necessary following the proposal to remove the time-limitation on the continuation of his Office.

EL AMINE BENCHERIF (Algeria) called for responsible donors, the equitable division of financial assistance, better coordination among the international community and more attention to those humanitarian catastrophes that failed to attract media attention and financial aid.

He noted that most host countries were developing countries and said their contributions should be quantified.  Many Algerians had confronted exile during the most difficult times of its war of liberation, he continued, and it was therefore a country that had welcomed refugees from Africa, Asia and Latin America.  For decades, thousands of Palestinian refugees had settled in Algeria and were completely integrated into the country’s social makeup, he added.  Algeria would continue to supply humanitarian aid to the refugees from Western Sahara and to support their right to self-determination of the Saharawi people.

DEJAN ŠAHOVIĆ (Serbia and Montenegro) said the UNHCR should continue to pursue age- and gender-sensitive approaches by developing and implementing strategies that took into account the special needs of children and women refugees.

He noted that although the conflicts in the territory of the former Yugoslavia ended years ago, Serbia and Montenegro still provided shelter to about 400,000 refugees from the Republic of Croatia and from Bosnia and Herzegovina.  Over the past year, he added, there had been some positive developments related to the repatriation of some refugees.  However, in addition to a large number of refugees in Serbia and Montenegro, there were also more than 260,000 internally displaced persons from Kosovo and Metohija.  The pace of their return to the province was unacceptably slow, and the prospects for further returns remained slim.

CELESTINO MIGLIORE, Permanent Observer for the Holy See, welcomed the call from the UNHCR for effective cooperation in burden sharing and the search for durable solutions.  He noted the advantages of greater linkages between the UNHCR and partners within and outside the United Nations system, including collaboration with the United Nations Development Group and with the informal Geneva Migration Group.

He said the Holy See acknowledged the connection between migration management and development, and believed that migrants possessed innate potentials and capacities to make their own contributions to society.

* *** *