THIRD COMMITTEE APPROVES SEVEN TEXTS, TWO BY RECORDED VOTE, ON HUMAN RIGHTS QUESTIONS, DISPLACED PERSONS, MINORITIES

Fifty-eighth General Assembly

Third Committee

54^th Meeting (AM)

THIRD COMMITTEE APPROVES SEVEN TEXTS, TWO BY RECORDED VOTE, ON HUMAN RIGHTS

QUESTIONS, DISPLACED PERSONS, MINORITIES

The Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) today, approved seven draft resolutions, two by recorded vote, related to human rights questions, including the human rights situation in Iran, alternative approaches for promoting human rights, the implementation of human rights instruments, and the protection of displaced persons and religious and ethnic minorities.

A text on the human rights situation in Iran, approved by a vote of 73 in favour to 49 against with 50 abstentions (see Annex III), would have the General Assembly express its grave concern about continuing human rights violations in that country.  Also, the Assembly would call on that Government to abide by its obligations under the International Covenants on Human Rights to expedite judicial reform, guarantee the dignity of the individual, ensure the full application of due process of law, by an independent and impartial judiciary, and eliminate discrimination against religious minorities.

Explaining her vote, Iran’s representative said the draft was intrusive and sought to interfere with her country’s internal affairs.  The recent death of an Iranian-Canadian journalist, while in custody was regrettable, and her Government had taken all necessary measures to bring the culprits to justice.  She stressed the incident was not enough to judge that there was no freedom of press in Iran.  The draft undermined the efforts undertaken by Iran to promote human rights. 

By a vote of 105 in favour to 51 against with 19 abstentions (see Annex II), the Committee also approved a draft resolution on the respect for purposes and principles contained in the United Nations Charter to achieve international cooperation in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights, and for fundamental freedoms and in solving international problems of a humanitarian character.  That text would have the Assembly stress the vital role of the United Nations in promoting respect for human rights, and would encourage States to comply with the principles set forth in the Charter.

Speaking before the vote, Italy’s representative, on behalf of the European Union, said the Union did not support the selective use of the principles of the United Nations and did not believe the text would contribute to the promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all. 

In other action, the Committee approved a draft resolution on the International Covenants on Human Rights, by which the Assembly would urge all States to publish the texts of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its Optional Protocols, in as many local languages as possible, in their territories.  Prior to that, an amendment proposed by the United States to that text was rejected by a vote of 116 against to 13 in favour with 24 abstentions (see Annex I).

Among the texts approved without a vote today was a draft resolution on human rights and the administration of justice, which would have the Assembly call on States to review their national legislation to ensure that any national security, State security, counter-terrorism or similar laws are compatible with the provisions of international humanitarian law and applicable international human rights instruments.

The Assembly, by the terms of an approved text on the effective promotion of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, would encourage States to include aspects relating to such minorities in their national plans of action, and urge States to promote the rights of such persons.

A draft resolution on the elimination of all forms of religious intolerance, also approved without a vote, would have the Assembly urge States to ensure that their constitutional and legal systems provided effective guarantees of freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief, including the provision of effective remedies, in cases where such rights are violated. 

Another approved draft resolution, on the protection of and assistance to internally displaced persons would have the Assembly call on Governments to provide protection and assistance to internally displaced persons, and to facilitate the efforts of relevant United Nations agencies and humanitarian organizations, in those respects. 

Also today, draft resolutions were introduced on human rights situations in Cambodia, Myanmar and Turkmenistan; and on human rights concerns related to globalization, the promotion of peace, democracy and national sovereignty; the rights of migrants; and the rights of persons with disabilities.

The Committee will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Monday, 24 November to continue action on outstanding resolutions.

Introduction of Draft Resolutions

Introducing a draft resolution on the respect for the principles of national sovereignty and diversity of democratic systems in electoral processes as an important element for the promotion and protection of human rights, (document A/C.3/58/L.73), the representative of Cuba said the draft reflected fundamental principles of the Charter and international law.  The text further stressed that the United Nations must give electoral assistance only when necessary and requested by a Member State.  It also recognized that there was no universal model for electoral systems and that political systems varied according to history, cultural diversity and political beliefs.

The representative of Mexico introduced a draft resolution on the protection of migrants (document A/C.3/58/L.74) and said that the draft addressed the situation of vulnerability, in which migrants and their families frequently found themselves.  In order to deal with some concerns expressed by one Member State, he stressed that the text aimed at protecting transborder migrants.  He highlighted the constructive spirit in which the draft had been negotiated by Member States, and was confident that the text would be adopted without a vote.

Introducing a draft on the situation of human rights in Cambodia, (document A/C.3/58/L.75), the representative of Japan said that the draft highlighted several positive developments in the country, while expressing remaining concerns.  The draft was a product of negotiations with the Government of Cambodia.  She noted that the text would be the last draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Cambodia.  Concluding, she stressed that the international community must assist Cambodia to allow the country to consolidate the respect for human rights.

The representative of Cuba introduced a draft resolution on the promotion of peace as a vital requirement for the full enjoyment of all human rights by all (document A/C.3/58/L.76).  The draft was based on the belief that life without war was a primary requirement for the well-being and progress of peoples.  A fundamental obligation of every State was to preserve and promote peace, he said.  The co-sponsors of the draft had given it a broad perspective to avoid dealing with certain disarmament issues, which might be considered in a more comprehensive manner in other United Nations bodies.

The representative of Egypt introduced a draft resolution on globalization and its impact on the full enjoyment of all human rights, (document A/C.3/58/L.77), by which the General Assembly would underline the urgent need to establish an equitable, transparent and democratic international system that would give poor people and countries, a more effective voice.  She said her delegation hoped the text would be adopted by consensus.

The representative of Mexico introduced a draft resolution on the Ad Hoc Committee on a Comprehensive and Integral International Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities (document A/C.3/58/L.78).  The draft would have the Assembly endorse the decision of the Ad Hoc Committee to establish a Working Group with the aim of preparing and presenting a draft text, as the basis for negotiations on the draft convention.  She said the draft aimed to promote progress on the work of the Ad Hoc Committee and to encourage the active participation of non-governmental organizations in the Committee’s production of a draft convention.  Her delegation was still carrying out consultations with a view to completing the draft to present it for adoption very soon.

The representative of Egypt introduced amendments (document A/C.3/58/L.81) to draft resolution A/C.3/58/L.30/Rev.2, noting that draft L.30/Rev. 2 was unbalanced and did not reflect the current situation in the Middle East and did not address the situation there in a comprehensive manner. 

The representative of Italy, speaking on behalf of the European Union, introduced a draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Turkmenistan (document A/C.3/58/L.67), expressing his concerns about the human rights situation in that country, which had deteriorated since April.  New laws were restricting the free operations of non-governmental organizations, and imposed onerous legal requirements for organizations that were not in line with international human rights standards.  He said the draft called on the Government of Turkmenistan to improve the human rights situation and to implement recommendations of the Commission on Human Rights. 

The text also called on the Government to work constructively with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to facilitate further visits of the Organization’s High Commissioner on National Minorities and of the Personal Envoy of the Organization’s Chairman-in-Office for participating States in Central Asia.  It also called on the Government to grant the International Committee of the Red Cross, as well as lawyers and relatives, immediate access to detained persons. 

The representative of Italy, speaking on behalf of the European Union, introduced a draft on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, (document A/C.3/58/L.68/Rev.1), saying that the text was the outcome of constructive consultations with interested delegations, including Myanmar.  The European Union regretted that the text had been drafted in the context of a worsening of the human rights situation in Myanmar.  The Government of Myanmar was urged to authorize a full and independent inquiry on the events of May 2003.  The text also expressed concern about the ongoing systematic violations of human rights and urged the Government to restore democracy.  The Government was also urged to immediately release all political prisoners.  The text also contained a number of requests to the Secretary-General stressing the need to continue to closely monitor the human rights situation and restoration of democracy in Myanmar.

The representative of Myanmar said the draft was unacceptable and offensive.  He did, however, appreciate recent amendments made to the draft.  The draft contained elements that had far-reaching consequences on Myanmar and the entire membership of the United Nations.  His delegation had held substantive discussions with the co-sponsors of the resolution, only on the operative paragraphs that had been amended.  However, the draft resolution, as a whole, had not been discussed.  The draft as a whole was, therefore, not acceptable to Myanmar.

Action on Draft Resolution

The Committee had before it a draft resolution on international covenants on human rights (document A/C.3/58/L.44).  The text would have the General Assembly urge all States to publish the texts of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its Optional Protocols in as many local languages as possible, in their territories.  The Assembly would stress the need for improved coordination among relevant United Nations mechanisms and bodies in supporting States parties in implementing the International Covenants on Human Rights and the Optional Protocols.

The draft would also encourage the Secretary-General to continue to assist States parties to the International Covenants on Human Rights in the preparation of their reports, including by convening seminars or workshops at the national level for the training of government officials engaged in the preparation of such reports and by exploring other possibilities available under the programme of services in the field of human rights.

The representative of the United States, in a general statement, said her delegation supported the draft resolution and desired to join the consensus on it.  She, therefore, introduced a small amendment to operative paragraph 3, since the Committee must not urge States to become parties to international instruments, but must urge States to consider becoming parties to international instruments.  Whether the amendment passed or failed, the representative of the United States would not block consensus on the draft resolution, as a whole.

The representative of Argentina said that international covenants were of primary importance in human rights.  He, therefore, appealed to Member States not to accept the amendment proposed by the United States.

The representative of the United Kingdom said he wanted to join the list of co-sponsors for the draft. 

The representative of New Zealand said that the co-sponsors had already made several concessions, and must not further weaken the language of the text, as suggested in the amendment, proposed by the United States. 

The representative of Bolivia joined the list of co-sponsors of the resolution. 

The representative of Sweden, sponsor of the draft, said that the co-sponsors would like to put the amendment, put forward by the United States, to the vote.

The amendment that would have changed operative paragraph 3 from the General Assembly “strongly appeals to all States that have not yet done so to become parties to the International Covenants.” to “strongly appeals to all States that have not yet done so to consider becoming parties to the International Covenants”, was rejected in a recorded vote of 116 against and 13 in favour, with 24 abstentions.

Explaining her vote, the representative of Sudan said that she had voted against the amendment, but reserved the right to propose similar amendments concerning other drafts.

The representative of Syria said she supported the position of the representative of Sudan. 

The draft resolution was then approved without a vote. 

A draft resolution on the protection of and assistance to internally displaced persons, (document A/C.3/58/L.57), was approved without a vote.  The draft would have the Assembly call on governments to provide protection and assistance to internally displaced persons, and to facilitate the efforts of relevant United Nations agencies and humanitarian organizations, in those respects.  It would also urge all governments with situations of internal displacement to facilitate the activities of the Representative of the Secretary-General, and to give serious consideration to inviting the Representative to visit their countries.  The draft expresses particularconcern about the grave problems faced by many internally displaced women and children, including violence and abuse, sexual exploitation, forced recruitment and abduction.

The Committee had before it a draft resolution on the effective promotion of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (document A/C.3/58/L.63).  The draft would have the General Assembly encourage States to include aspects relating to minorities in their national plans of action.  The Assembly would also urge States to promote the rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, as set out in the Declaration, with special attention to the promotion and protection of the human rights of children belonging to minorities.  The Assembly would also encourage intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations to continue to contribute to the promotion and protection of the rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities.

The draft was approved, without a vote, as orally revised. 

Before the Committee was a draft resolution on human rights and the administration of justice, (document A/C.3/58/L.64), which would have the Assembly call on States to review their national legislation to ensure that any national security, State security, counter-terrorism or similar laws are compatible with the provisions of international humanitarian law and applicable international human rights instruments.  The Assembly would also appeal to Governments to include in their national development plans the administration of justice as an integral part of the development process.

The draft was approved without a vote, as orally revised.

After approval of the draft, the representative of the United States said her delegation understood that the human rights standards referred to in operative paragraphs 1 and 2, to be set forth in binding legal instruments, were applicable only to States that were States parties to those instruments, and not to any provisions in non-binding instruments emanating from both the United Nations human rights and crime programmes that were essentially Assembly resolutions or recommendations to Member States.  Furthermore, with regard to the text in operative paragraph 15, her delegation believed that the decisions of the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights had no status or effect, until accepted or endorsed by the Commission on Human Rights.

The representative of India said her delegation had gone along with the draft’s approval because it addressed an important issue.  However, regarding the new language in operative paragraph 3, she believed that the administration of justice was applicable not only to combating terrorism, but to a wide range of issues, including elimination of racism and discrimination against women. 

The Committee had before it a draft resolution on the elimination of all forms of religious intolerance, (document A/C.3/58/L.65), that would have the Assembly urge States to ensure that their constitutional and legal systems provide effective guarantees of freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief, including the provision of effective remedies, in cases where such rights are violated.  States would also be urged to ensure that no one within their jurisdiction is, because of their religion or belief, deprived of the right to life, liberty and security of person, and to ensure that all public officials and civil servants, including members of law enforcement bodies, the military and educators, respect different religions and beliefs and do not discriminate on the grounds of religion.  The draft also urges States to make all appropriate efforts to encourage those engaged in education to cultivate respect for all religions or beliefs, thereby promoting mutual understanding and tolerance.

The draft resolution was approved without a vote.

The Committee had before it a draft resolution on respect for the purposes and principles contained in the Charter of the United Nations to achieve international cooperation in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms and in solving international problems of a humanitarian character (document A/C.3/58/L.72).  The draft would have the Assembly stress the vital role of the United Nations in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.  It would also encourage States to comply with the principles set forth in the United Nations Charter, in particular, respecting the sovereign equality of all States and refraining from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State.

The representative of Italy, speaking on behalf of the European Union, explained his delegation’s vote before the vote.  He said the European Union did not support the selective use of the principles of the United Nations and did not believe the text would contribute to the promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all.  Furthermore, discussions on the competence of the respective organs of the United Nations and questions regarding humanitarian assistance should be considered in the plenary of the General Assembly, which was already dealing with those matters.  That also applied to legal aspects of the implementation of the United Nations Charter that were being addressed by the Sixth Committee.  For those reasons, he would vote against the draft.

The draft was approved by a vote of 105 in favour to 51 against with 19 abstentions.

The Committee had before it a draft resolution on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran (document A/C.3/58/L.69).  The draft would have the Assembly welcome the open invitation extended by the Government of Iran to all human rights thematic monitoring mechanisms in April 2002, the opening of human rights dialogue with a number of countries, and the efforts by the elected Government to foster the growth of civil society. 

However, the Assembly would express its serious concern at the continuing violations of human rights in Iran, the continued deterioration of the situation with regard to freedom of opinion and expression and the continuing executions in the absence of respect for internationally recognized safeguards.  Concern would also be expressed at the use of torture and other forms of cruel punishment, in particular the practice of amputation and public executions, as well as the systematic discrimination against women and girls in the law.  In addition, concern would be expressed about the continuing discrimination against people belonging to minorities, including religious minorities.

The Assembly would also call on the Government to abide by its obligations freely undertaken under the International Covenants on Human Rights, to expedite judicial reform, to guarantee the dignity of the individual and to ensure the full application of due process of law and fair and transparent procedures by an independent and impartial judiciary, and to eliminate all forms of discrimination based on religious grounds or against persons belonging to minorities.

The Committee was told that a recorded vote had been requested.

Making a general statement, the representative of the United States said that he was pleased to co-sponsor the draft.  The United States stood for non-negotiable demands when talking about the right to dignity, freedom of speech and limitations of the absolute power of the State, as well as the respect for women.  While, respecting other nations’ traditions and values, the United States would continue to promote human rights that were universal in value.

Also making a general statement, the representative of Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the member States of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said that the OIC had consistently opposed presenting drafts targeting a few selected developing countries.  The adoption of the draft resolution would not help the spirit of cooperation and momentum created by Iran.  In the last two years, Iran had extended an open-ended invitation to Special Rapporteurs and engaged in human rights dialogue with the European Union.  Encouraged by those developments, the European Union had decided not to table draft resolutions against Iran.  Concerning the situation of human rights on the ground, he said that the Government had enacted a significant amount of human rights measures.  The member States of the OIC would not support the draft.

The representative of Latvia added his country’s name to the list of co-sponsors.

A representative of Yemen, explained his vote before the vote, and said that there was a lack of transparency in the choice of countries that were targeted in the Committee’s draft resolutions.  That was particularly disturbing when there were ongoing tragic violations of human rights in many other countries, including in the occupied Palestinian territories.  The representative of Yemen would, therefore, not participate in the vote.

A representative of China said Iran had invited Special Rapporteurs to Iran, as well as carried out human rights dialogue with other countries.  In recent years, Iran had achieved great progress.  China would vote against the resolution.

The representative of Sudan, also explaining her vote, reaffirmed her delegation’s rejection of attempts to politicise human rights.  It was both perplexing and regrettable that the draft had been submitted in the absence of any report on the situation of human rights in Iran, and despite the view of the European Union that no draft should be submitted this year.  The Commission on Human Rights had also struck the situation of human rights in Iran off its agenda in the last two years.  Based on that, she issued a warning against establishing a practice within the Committee, where only some countries were targeted, and all of them were developing countries.  Sudan would vote against the draft.

Explaining her vote, the representative of Iran said that contrary to what had been stated by Canada –- Canada had kept Iran in the dark about bringing the draft up before the Committee, her delegation had only learned about the text two weeks ago, allowing little time to deliberate in informal consultations.  It was clear that the Government of Canada had sought to prevent Iran from preparing itself and helping co-sponsors understand the reality on the ground in Iran.  The draft and the introduction of the draft by Canada made it clear that Canada was acting based on discontent within Iran and Canada’s bilateral relations.  Concerning the substance of the draft, she said that a journalist, of dual Iranian and Canadian citizenship, had indeed lost her life, while in custody.  That was regrettable, and the Government had taken all necessary measures to bring the culprits to justice.  An inquiry committee on that case had also been established.  The representative of Canada had attempted to present a distorted picture of that incident to the Third Committee.  Ironically, the Canadian Government had still not provided any information about what had happened to an Iranian man in Canada, killed under suspicious circumstances.

She stressed that the incident involving the journalist was not enough to judge and declare that there was no freedom of press in Iran.  The recent student demonstrations, contrary to what had been said by Canada, indicated the political openness in Iran.  The President of Iran had publicly recognized the right of the students to demonstrate.  Canada had also attempted to cast doubt on the freedom of worship in Iran.  She stressed that Assyrians, Zoroastrians and Jews had the right to worship and were represented in the Parliament.  Her Government had expanded its human rights dialogue with the European Union, Japan, Switzerland and Australia, and had held consultations with the High Commissioner for Human Rights.  The current attempt by Canada, therefore, ran counter to the goal of promoting human rights and undermined the efforts already undertaken by her Government in that field.  Moreover, the draft was intrusive and sought to interfere with Iranian domestic affairs.  She asked Member States to vote against the draft resolution before the Committee.

The draft was approved, as orally revised, in a vote of 73 in favour and 49 against, and 50 abstentions.

After the vote, the representative of Brazil said that he had voted in favour of the draft, since he was concerned about the Baha’i community in Iran.  There had been some positive developments, he said, noting that in 2002, Iran had extended a standing invitation to all special mechanisms of the Commission.  His delegation welcomed such developments and encouraged that more such steps be taken to promote the protection of human rights in Iran.  In future consideration of the issue, within the Committee or in other forums, Brazil would take into consideration developments in Iran.

The representative of Argentina said that he had abstained.  He believed that the major efforts of the Iranian Government must be recognized.  The primary objective of international human rights bodies must be to ensure that through international cooperation, States promoted and aimed to ensure the protection of human rights.  Based on generally available information, it could be concluded that the situation of human rights in Iran was disturbing.  The Government must, therefore, pursue its policies to ensure human rights.

The representative of Cuba said he had voted against the draft because it did not promote the genuine goals of human rights.  It was a selective and politically motivated text and underpinned efforts being made by Iran in the area of human rights.  Behind the selectivity was a lack of objectivity and discrimination.  Cuba rejected that form of conduct and, therefore, voted against the draft.

The representative of Nepal said his country was committed to protecting and promoting human rights.  Human rights situations were dependent on socio-economic conditions.  The Committee should desist from calling for votes on resolutions on specific human rights situations.  For that reason, his delegation had abstained from voting on the draft.

ANNEX I

Vote on amendment to operative paragraph 3 of the text on International Covenants on Human Rights

The amendment proposed by the United States to the draft resolution on International Covenants on Human Rights (document A/C.3/58/L.44) was rejected by a recorded vote of 13 in favour to 116 against, with 24 abstentions, as follows: 

In favour:  Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam, Colombia, Cuba, India, Israel, Malaysia, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, United States.

Against:  Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Finland, France, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Abstain:  Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, China, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Madagascar, Nauru, Nepal, Rwanda, Togo, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania.

Absent:  Angola, Bahamas, Bahrain, Burundi, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Liberia, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Qatar, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Viet Nam.

ANNEX II

Vote on respect for Charter to achieve international cooperation in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms

The draft resolution on respect for the purposes and principles contained in the United Nations Charter to achieve international cooperation in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms and in solving international problems of a humanitarian character (document A/C.3/58/L.72) was approved by a recorded vote of 105 in favour to 51 against, with 19 abstentions, as follows: 

In favour:  Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Qatar, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Federated States of Micronesia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain:  Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Fiji, Georgia, Guatemala, Honduras, Nauru, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Thailand, Tuvalu, Uruguay.

Absent:  Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Iraq, Kiribati, Liberia, Marshall Islands, Palau, Republic of Moldova, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Tonga, Uzbekistan.

ANNEX III

Vote on human rights in Iran

The draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Iran (document A/C.3/58/L.69) was approved by a recorded vote of 73 in favour to 49 against, with 50 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Monaco, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Suriname, Sweden, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, United States, Vanuatu.

Against:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Benin, Brunei Darussalam, China, Colombia, Comoros, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Gabon, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Myanmar, Niger, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Somalia, Sudan, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Togo, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.

Abstain:  Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Cyprus, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Nigeria, Republic of Korea, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Zambia.

Absent:  Angola, Armenia, Central African Republic, Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Iraq, Kiribati, Liberia, Mongolia, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Tonga, Turkey, Uzbekistan, Yemen.

* *** *