THIRD COMMITTEE APPROVES NINE DRAFT RESOLUTIONS ON HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES, INCLUDING TEXTS ON MIGRANTS, VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN

Fifty-eighth General Assembly

Third Committee

55^th & 56^th Meetings (AM & PM)

THIRD COMMITTEE APPROVES NINE DRAFT RESOLUTIONS ON HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES,

INCLUDING TEXTS ON MIGRANTS, VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN

Five Recorded Votes Taken Regarding Right to Food,

Peace, Electoral Processes, Impact of Globalization, Turkmenistan

Five draft resolutions were approved by recorded votes today as the Third Committee (Social, Cultural, and Humanitarian) approved nine drafts on human rights questions, the advancement of women, and the promotion and protection of the rights of children.

Among other issues, the drafts addressed mass exoduses, violence against women, the right to food, electoral processes, the promotion of peace, the protection of migrants, the consequences of globalization.

By a recorded vote of 72 in favour to 37 against, with 53 abstentions (see Annex V), the Committee approved a draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Turkmenistan.  The draft would have the General Assembly call upon the Government of Turkmenistan to implement the recommendations outlined in the March 2003 report of the rapporteur of the Moscow Mechanism of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), and to work constructively with the various institutions of the Organization, including through the facilitation of further visits.  The Government would also be called upon to grant the International Committee of the Red Cross, as well as lawyers and relatives, immediate access to detained persons.

Explaining her vote, the representative of Turkmenistan said her Government was cooperating with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the OSCE, the European Union and the European Commission on human rights issues.  She stressed that human rights dialogue and technical assistance would make a better contribution to human rights in Turkmenistan than the draft resolution.

In a vote of 156 in favour, to 1 against (United States), and Fiji and Israel abstaining (see Annex I), the Committee approved a draft resolution on the right to food, which noted that there were currently 840 million people around the world suffering from hunger and malnutrition.  By its terms, the General Assembly would reaffirm that hunger constituted a violation of human dignity.  All States were urged to take steps to achieve the full realization of the right to food, and international financial and development institutions were urged to provide necessary funding to realize the aim of halving by 2015 the proportion of people who suffered from hunger.

Deeply concerned that the widening gap between the developed and the developing countries had contributed to increasing poverty, the Committee approved a related text on globalization and its impact on the full enjoyment of all human rights, in a vote of 113 in favour, to 50 against, with four abstentions, (Brazil, Chile, Guatemala, and Singapore) (see Annex IV).

A draft resolution on respect for the principles of national sovereignty of democratic systems in electoral processes as they related to the promotion and protection of human rights was approved by a recorded votes of 100 in favour, with 51 abstentions, to nine against (Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, Israel, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland and the United States) (see Annex II).

By a vote of 108 in favour to 50 against, with 10 abstentions (Argentina, Chile, Guatemala, India, Nauru, Paraguay, Samoa, Singapore, Timor-Leste, Uruguay), a draft resolution on the promotion of peace as vital for human rights was also approved (see Annex III)

Without a vote, the Committee approved a draft on the elimination of domestic violence against women, which would have the Assembly express its concern that women continued to be victims of domestic violence and at failures to prosecute and punish the perpetrators.  In addition, the Assembly would express its concern that domestic violence, including sexual violence in a marriage, was still treated as a private matter in some countries.  States would be called upon to adopt, strengthen and implement legislation that prohibited domestic violence.  Although the draft was approved without a vote, several delegations expressed concern about specific provisions of the text.

Also today, the Committee approved draft resolutions without a vote on human rights and mass exoduses, the protection of migrants, as well as a draft that would request the Secretary-General to conduct an in-depth study on all forms and manifestations of violence against women.

The Committee heard the representative of Italy, speaking on behalf of the European Union, introducing a draft on the situation of human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.  In addition, the representative of New Zealand introduced an amendment to a draft on the importance of the role of parents in the care, development and well-being of children.

The Committee will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 26 April, to take action on remaining draft resolutions.

The representative of Switzerland, in a general statement, said her delegation wished to address concerns raised in the previous week by Switzerland and other delegations about the rationalization of the Committee’s work.  The comments were made in the interest of transparency and applied to all resolutions without any selectivity, including those they had sponsored and co-sponsored, as well as those for which they voted in favour, against, or abstained.  She said it was the prerogative of States to present one or more draft resolutions to the Committee.  Her delegation was not speaking to try to impose its opinion, but was just encouraging delegations to consider various options to rationalize the Committee’s work. 

Action on Draft Resolutions

Before the Committee was a draft resolution on human rights and mass exoduses (document A/C.3/58/L.49) that would have the General Assembly urge the Secretary-General to continue to give high priority to the consolidation and strengthening of emergency preparedness and response mechanisms, including early warning activities in the humanitarian area, so that effective action was taken to identify all human rights abuses that contributed to mass exoduses of persons.  States would be called upon to ensure the effective protection of refugees by respecting the principle of non-refoulement and to emphasize the responsibility of all States and international organizations to cooperate with those countries, particularly developing ones, affected by mass exoduses of refugees and displaced persons. 

In addition, States would be urged to uphold the civilian and humanitarian character of refugee camps and settlements, consistent with international law, through effective measures to prevent the infiltration of armed elements.  The General Assembly would also condemn all incidents of sexual exploitation and abuse, and violence against refugees and internally displaced persons and encourage governments to adopt and implement initiatives aimed at preventing and addressing allegations of sexual exploitation. 

The draft was approved without a vote.

Before the Committee was a draft resolution on the in-depth study on all forms of violence against women (document A/C.3/58/L.66), which would have the General Assembly request the Secretary-General to conduct an in-depth study, within existing available resources, on all forms of violence against women, in order to provide a statistical overview to evaluate the scale of such violence, and to identify its causes, costs and consequences. 

The draft resolution was adopted without a vote, as orally revised. 

A draft resolution, before the Committee on the right to food (document A/C.3/58/L.70) noted that there are currently 840 million people around the world suffering from hunger and malnutrition.  Under its terms, the General Assembly would reaffirm that hunger constitutes a violation of human dignity and requires the adoption of urgent measures at the national, regional and international levels for its elimination.  The draft would encourage all States to take steps to achieve the full realization of the right to food and to take action to address discrimination against women where it contributed to the malnutrition of women and girls.  The Assembly would invite international financial and development institutions and relevant United Nations agencies to prioritize and provide necessary funding to realize the aim of halving by 2015 the proportion of people who suffered from hunger.

The representative of the United States had requested a recorded vote on this draft.

The draft was approved by a recorded vote of 156 in favour, to 1 against (United States), with Israel and Fiji abstaining (see Annex I).

The representative of Gabon said he would have voted in favour of the draft had he been present.

A representative of Iran said that he also would have voted in favour of the draft if he had participated in the vote.

Before the Committee was a draft resolution on 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 draft resolution would have the General Assembly reaffirm that all peoples have the right to self-determination, by virtue of which they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. 

The draft was approved by a vote of 100 in favour to 9 against (Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, Israel, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, United States), with 51 abstentions (see Annex II).

After the vote, the representative of Niger said his delegation had voted in favour of the draft as an expression of its devotion to respect for the principles of national sovereignty and self-determination of peoples and their right to forge their own destiny.  When it spoke of a democratic system, his delegation referred to a multi-party system that respected free and transparent elections.  There would also be respect for the separation of powers among the executive, legislative and judicial branches, while ensuring the independence of the judicial branch.  Those were the principles his delegation had in mind when it cast its vote in favour of the draft.

The representative of Cuba, in a general statement after the vote, thanked all delegations that had supported the text of the draft.

Also before the Committee was a draft resolution on the protection of migrants (document A/C.3/58/L.74) that would have the General Assembly call on States to promote and protect fully the human rights of migrants, as contained in the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action.  It would strongly condemn acts of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance against migrants and would urge States to apply the existing laws when such acts occurred in order to eradicate impunity for the perpetrators of such acts.  The draft would also urge all States to adopt effective measures to put an end to the arbitrary arrest and detention of migrants and would request that all States prosecute violations of labour law regarding migrant workers’ conditions of work.

The draft was approved as orally revised without a vote.

After its approval, the representative of Singapore explained his delegation’s position on provisions of the draft urging States to consider reviewing and revising national immigration policies.  His country took the welfare of migrants seriously and respected the contributions made by migrants.  However, the Government required that migrants entered the country through legal channels.  Immigration policies must depend on each country’s particular situation.  Singapore would not get in the way of consensus. 

The representative of the United States said that she had joined consensus on the draft.  However, she disapproved of the lengthy additions to the draft.  The United States was a nation of immigrants, she said, adding that her Government welcomed legal immigrants.  The United States also urged its own citizens to respect legal migration, rules and laws when in other countries and encouraged other States to do the same.

The representative of Canada said that her country was a strong supporter of human rights and the protection of migrants.  She welcomed the coming into force of relevant international instruments on this topic.

The Committee had before it 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).  It would have the General Assembly stress that peace was a vital requirement for the promotion and protection of all human rights for all and affirm that all States should promote the establishment, maintenance and strengthening of international peace and security and an international system. 

In explanation of vote before the vote, the representative of Italy, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said the European Union believed some issues raised in the draft were better addressed in other forums already dealing with those issues.  For that reason the European Union was voting against the draft.

The draft was approved by a vote (see Annex III) of 108 in favour, to 50 against, with 10 abstentions (Argentina, Chile, Guatemala, India, Nauru, Paraguay, Samoa, Singapore, Timor-Leste and Uruguay).

Before the Committee, there was 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 in which poor people and countries had a more effective voice.  In addition, it would affirm that globalization is a complex process of structural transformation, with numerous interdisciplinary aspects, which has an impact on the enjoyment of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development.  The General Assembly would therefore underline the need to continue to analyze the consequences of globalization for the full enjoyment of all human rights. 

A recorded vote had been requested, and the draft was approved in a vote of 113 in favour, to 50 against, with four abstentions, (Brazil, Chile, Guatemala, and Singapore).  (See Annex IV).

On behalf of the European Union, the representative of Italy, explaining its position, said the European Union was not convinced that globalization had an impact on all human rights.  Moreover, the interdependence did not imply that a violation of human rights led to the violation of all human rights.  The draft did not address the effects of globalization on human rights, she said, and stressing that generalized assertions were not constructive to the work of the Third Committee. 

Globalization also represented a great opportunity for all peoples to achieve development and prosperity, she continued.  The European Union was ready to continue to discuss the issue in the appropriate forum.  She regretted that the views of the European Union had not been taken into account in the draft and therefore urged co-sponsors to reflect seriously before tabling a similar draft next year. 

Making a general statement, the representative of Egypt expressed his gratitude to those delegations that had voted in favour in the draft.  He stressed that the draft was not meant to indict or praise globalization, and regretted that such an important issue had not achieved consensus within United Nations.       

The Committee had before it a draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Turkmenistan (A/C.3/58/L.67), which would have the General Assembly call on the Government of Turkmenistan to implement fully the recommendations outlined in the March 2003 report of the Rapporteur of the Moscow Mechanism of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), to work constructively with the various institutions of the Organization and to facilitate further visits of the Personal Envoy of the Organization’s Chairman-in-Office for participating States in Central Asia and of the Organization’s High Commissioner on National Minorities.  It would also call on the Government to grant immediate access by independent bodies, as well as lawyers and relatives, to detained persons.

Before the vote, the representative of Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the Member States of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said the practice of submitting resolutions that were selectively critical of some developing and Islamic countries, transformed the work of the Committee into a political exercise and did not advance the cause of human rights.  The Government of Turkmenistan had extended an invitation to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to visit Turkmenistan.  That was evidence of the Government’s commitment to working with OHCHR on human rights issues and to deepen the dialogue on those issues.  The members of the OIC would not support the draft.

In explanation of vote before the vote, the representative of Turkmenistan said her Government had begun to cooperate with the High Commissioner for Human rights, the OSCE, the European Union and the European Commission on human rights issues.  Turkmenistan intended to continue efforts to make progress in the area of human rights, and was prepared to work with all United Nations structures and other organizations.  Her delegation had cooperated with the co-sponsors, but its proposals had not been considered.  Dialogue, cooperation and technical assistance would make a contribution to human rights.  Her delegation disapproved of the draft and would vote against it, and called on other States to support Turkmenistan’s position.

The representative of China said the draft totally ignored facts and contained groundless claims.  In recent years, the Government of Turkmenistan had made substantial progress in improving the human rights situation.  His delegation opposed country-specific human rights resolutions and would vote against the draft.

The representative of Cuba said his delegation considered that in no way did the draft seek to promote human rights.  It was selective and politically motivated and reflected the double standards and lack of objectivity of the European Union.  His delegation rejected this approach and would vote against the draft.

The draft was approved by a vote of 72 in favour to 37 against, with 53 abstentions (see Annex V).

Introduction of Draft Resolutions

Speaking on behalf the European Union, the representative of Italy, introduced a draft resolution on the situation of human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (document A/C.3/58/L.79) and made a number of revisions to the draft.  He said that this year’s text reflected a number of positive developments on the ground.  There seemed to be a political will on the part of the Government to promote democracy.  At the same time, major challenges lay ahead.  The situation in many parts of the country remained volatile due to the lack of security and the atrocities committed.  Several areas faced a pervasive abuse of the most basic human rights, and he stressed the need for the Government to combat impunity.  It was hoped that the draft would be adopted without a vote.

The representative of Cape Verde said that she had wanted to abstain on the vote on draft resolution on Turkmenistan.

A representative of Egypt, speaking on behalf of a number of countries, said that the draft on the human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, once again, made reference to the abolition of the capital punishment.  There was no international consensus on that issue, and she hoped that other members would oppose the draft resolution.

The representative of Greece said that had he voted on the draft concerning the right to food, he would have voted in favour.

A representative of Singapore said, regarding the draft on the Democratic Republic of the Congo, that his delegation was not in favour of country-specific draft resolutions, since they were often politically motivated.  The political considerations this time extended to references to the capital punishment.  That was not a human rights issue, he said.

The representatives of Pakistan, Nigeria and Iran associated themselves with the statement made by the representative of Egypt.

A representative of Uganda announced that Uganda had been included in the list of co-sponsors of the draft resolution in document A/C.3/58/L.58.  The signature was not that of a Ugandan delegate, a clear mistake.  Uganda was not a co-sponsor to the draft.

A representative of Lebanon announced that Lebanon wanted it to be known that his delegation would have voted in favour of the drafts on access to medication and the right to food.

The Committee continued hearing introductions of draft resolutions and amendments at its afternoon meeting.

The representative of New Zealand introduced an amendment (document A/C.3/58/L.83) to the draft resolution contained in document A/C.3/58/L.23/Rev.1 on the role of parents in the care, development and well-being of their children.  He said the amendment responded to concerns about elements missing from the draft resolution, including the drafts’ reluctance in endorsing the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the absence of a statement recognizing that the family was the basic unit of society, and that more than one form of the family existed.  It also failed to deal with the rights of children related to specific rights of parents.  He noted the amendments proposed were based on agreed language that had been adopted previously.

The representative of Benin said the draft resolution, before the amendments, had mentioned the rights of the child and had tried to take those rights into account.  The amendments brought forward paragraphs that were deemed to be essential, but which were already contained in the body of the draft resolution.  Her delegation regretted that further amendments had been introduced and hoped discussions could resume until the final draft was approved.

Action on Draft Resolution

The Committee had before it a draft resolution on the elimination of domestic violence against women (document A/C.3/58/L.22/Rev.1), which would express the General Assembly’s concerns regarding the continuing occurrence of domestic violence in all regions of the world and at failures to prosecute and punish the perpetrators.  It would call on States to adopt, strengthen and implement legislation prohibiting domestic violence, prescribe punitive measures and establish adequate legal protection.

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

The representative of the United States said the draft and its adoption by consensus made a strong statement against a problem that had no place in civilized society.  The United States supported general goals of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, but the issue of the Convention’s ratification was still under review by the United States.  Its decision to join the consensus should not be seen as a change in United States policy regarding the Convention.

The representative of Iran said the draft was helpful in combating manifestations of violence against women, including domestic violence.  However, the content of operative paragraph 7(n) was not a balanced expression of the factual situation on the ground.  He pointed out that not all causes of violence against women arose from invoking customs or religious practices.  Prostitution and pornography or abusing women as sexual objects were also manifestations of violence against women.  Some States invoked the freedom of expression to justify these evil manifestations, thereby strengthening and promoting trafficking and the sexual exploitation of women.  His delegation reserved the right to address this matter the next time the resolution came before the Committee.

The representative of the Gambia said his delegation was happy that some of its concerns had been taken on board.  His Government was committed to supporting the elimination of all forms of violence against women.

The representative of the Sudan said her delegation supported all initiatives regarding the elimination of all forms of violence against women, including domestic violence.  However, her delegation still had concerns about certain paragraphs in the draft, including preambular paragraph 8, which singled out a specific aspect of women’s health, namely sexual and reproductive health, in the context of violence against women.  It should refer to all aspects of health including, psychological and physical health.

Her delegation regretted that emphasis had been given to only one specific aspect of women’s health, as it was concerned with women’s health in general, she said.  Furthermore, regarding operative paragraph 7(n), her Government was not convinced that customs or religions were the only factors that would be linked to violence against women.  There were other considerations, such as the freedom of expression.  Her delegation believed that this paragraph was not balanced.

The representative of Syria said her delegation had joined the consensus in keeping with its belief that national legislation had to be strengthened to deal with this problem.  Her delegation felt that operative paragraph 7(n) was not sufficiently balanced, especially in light of the changes that had been taking place.  The elements mentioned were unbalanced, and her delegation would support statements made by Iran and Sudan in that respect, and reserved the right to consider this issue the next time the resolution was brought to the Committee for consideration.

The representative of Iceland, speaking on behalf of the Nordic Countries –- Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden -- said the Nordic Countries believed that violence against women was a human rights issue and welcomed the adoption of the resolution on the elimination of domestic violence against women.  She reiterated the Nordic Countries’ understanding that marital rape and other sexual violence within marriage fell under operative paragraph 7(b) of the resolution, meaning that countries had to make such violence, as with all other violence against women, a criminal offence.

ANNEX I

Vote on Right to Food

The draft resolution on the right to food (document A/C.3/58/L.70) was approved by a recorded vote of 156 in favour to 1 against, with 2 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lesotho, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  United States.

Abstain:  Fiji, Israel.

Absent:  Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Greece, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Iran, Iraq, Kiribati, Lebanon, Liberia, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Nauru, Nicaragua, Palau, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu.

ANNEX II

Vote on Respect for Diversity in Human Rights Promotion

The draft resolution on respect for sovereignty and diversity of democratic systems in human rights promotion (document A/C.3/58/L.73) was approved by a recorded vote of 100 in favour to 9 against, with 51 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, China, Colombia, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Ghana, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, Israel, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, United States.

Abstain:  Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Monaco, Nepal, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay.

Absent:  Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Iraq, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Nicaragua, Palau, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Tajikistan, Tonga, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu.

ANNEX III

Vote on Peace as Vital to Human Rights

The draft resolution on peace as a vital requirement for human rights enjoyment (document A/C.3/58/L.76) was approved by a recorded vote of 108 in favour to 50 against, with 10 abstentions, as follows:

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

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

Abstain:  Argentina, Chile, Guatemala, India, Nauru, Paraguay, Samoa, Singapore, Timor-Leste, Uruguay.

Absent:  Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Iraq, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Marshall Islands, Palau, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Tonga, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu.

ANNEX IV

Vote on Impact of Globalization on Human Rights

The draft resolution on the impact of globalization on human rights (document A/C.3/58/L.77) was approved by a recorded vote of 113 in favour to 50 against, with 4 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Grenada, 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, Nauru, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

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

Abstained:  Brazil, Chile, Guatemala, Singapore.

Absent:  Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Iraq, Kiribati, Liberia, Marshall Islands, Palau, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu.

ANNEX V

Vote on Human Rights in Turkmenistan

The draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Turkmenistan (document A/C.3/58/L.67) was approved by a recorded vote of 72 in favour to 37 against, with 53 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay.

Against:  Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, China, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Egypt, Georgia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Morocco, Myanmar, Niger, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Republic of Moldova, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.

Abstain:  Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Ghana, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Suriname, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Zambia.

Absent:  Afghanistan, Armenia, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Iraq, Israel, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Mongolia, Palau, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Tonga, Turkey, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Yemen.

* *** *