Sixty-first General Assembly

Plenary

82^nd Meeting (AM)

Concluding consideration of Third Committee reports, General Assembly

adopts convention on enforced disappearance

 

Defers Action on Indigenous Peoples’ Declaration; Adopts Texts on Kidnapping,

Trafficking in Persons, UN Crime Programme, African Institute, World Drug Problem

The General Assembly today adopted an International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and deferred action on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as it adopted the remaining seven resolutions and three decisions recommended by its Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural).

The Convention, which had been co-sponsored by more than 100 Member States and adopted by the newly-established Human Rights Council in June, would recognize the right of persons not to be subjected to enforced disappearance, regardless of circumstances, and the right of victims to justice and reparation.  It would commit States party to it to criminalize enforced disappearance, to bring those responsible to justice and to take preventive measures.

The representative of Honduras called the day an historic and hopeful one, on which the Assembly had taken a meaningful step forward in international law.  States and Governments were shouldering an important commitment with a full sense of responsibility, aiming to leave behind the days of horror that had been the scourge of so many countries.  The adoption of the Convention was the dawn of a new age of actual implementation of human rights and the end of impunity.

The representative of France, which sponsored the draft, said that the new instrument was emblematic of United Nations action to benefit individuals.  While the practice of enforced disappearances unfortunately remained a tangible reality, the Convention’s innovative follow-up mechanism of a Committee on Enforced Disappearances would assume a preventive function by making urgent appeals and conducting field visits, when necessary, even alerting the Secretary-General in the event of massive and systematic violations.

The representative of Argentina noted that today’s adoption of the Convention on Enforced Disappearances represented a marked departure from the 1970s, when the military dictatorship in his country had carried out the abhorrent practice and the former United Nations Human Rights Commission had offered no condemnation.  He hoped that the adoption would not mark the end of the road, but the beginning of a new phase in the promotion and protection of human rights.

While the resolution was adopted by consensus, its consideration was not without controversy.  As they had yesterday, the representatives of Japan and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea again traded accusations over allegations of abductions.

The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea said that, despite Japan’s denials, that country had abducted citizens from his nation.  As proof, he read out a letter written in 1992 by a young man who had reportedly been kidnapped and was being held inside Japan.

The representative of Japan insisted that his Government had never been involved in any such abductions.  Meanwhile, there were at least 17 Japanese citizens that had been abducted, and his Government would like a sincere and honest response as to their whereabouts.

In other business, the Assembly adopted a resolution on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, by which it decided to defer consideration of and action on that document until sometime before the end of the current session.  The deferment had been sought by delegations who had expressed concerns about the Declaration’s potential effects on national sovereignty and land rights, though several other Member States, mainly from Latin America, had noted during the Committee’s meetings that, after 24 years of drafting and revisions to address the concerns of many delegations, it was time to make the Declaration a reality.

That resolution was adopted by a recorded vote of 85 in favour to none against, with 89 abstentions (see annex).

In addition, the Assembly adopted, without a vote, texts on international cooperation in the prevention, combating and elimination of kidnapping and in providing assistance to victims; improving the coordination of efforts against trafficking in persons; strengthening the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme, in particular its technical cooperation capacity; the United Nations African Institute for the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders; and international cooperation against the world drug problem.

It also approved the Third Committee’s draft 2008-2009 biennial programme of work, and, in a series of decisions, took note of the relevant reports before the Committee during its 2006 session.

The representatives of Bangladesh, United Kingdom, Finland (on behalf of the European Union) and Chile also made statements this morning.

The Assembly will meet again at 3 p.m. today.

Background

The General Assembly met this morning to conclude taking action on reports of the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural).

Report of the Human Rights Council

The Committee’s report on the report of the Human Rights Council (document A/61/448, and Corr.1 and Corr.2) contains two draft resolutions, two annexes and one draft decision.

Draft resolution I on the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance would have the Assembly adopt the treaty and open it for signature, ratification and accession.  The Assembly would recommend that the Convention be opened for signature at a signing ceremony in Paris.

Draft resolution II on the working group of the Commission on Human Rights to elaborate a draft declaration in accordance with paragraph 5 of General Assembly resolution 49/214 of 23 December 1994 would have the Assembly decide to defer consideration and action on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, to allow time for further consultations thereon, and to conclude its consideration of the Declaration before the end of its sixty-first session.

Included in the report were two annexes, one containing the text of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and the other containing the text of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The draft decision on the report of the Human Rights Council would have the Assembly take note of that report (document A/61/53).

Comprehensive Implementation of and Follow-Up to the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action

Addendum 4 to the Committee’s report on the promotion and protection of human rights (document A/61/443/Add.4) states that no action was taken by the Third Committee under its sub-item on the comprehensive implementation of and follow-up to the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action.

Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice

The Committee’s report on crime prevention and criminal justice (document A/61/444) contains four draft resolutions and one draft decision.

Draft resolution I on international cooperation in the prevention, combating and elimination of kidnapping and in providing assistance to victims would have the Assembly vigorously condemn and reject once again kidnapping under any circumstances and for any purpose.  It would further call upon Member States that had not yet done so to strengthen measures against money-laundering and to cooperate in tracing, detecting, freezing and confiscating the proceeds of kidnapping, as well assist and protect victims of kidnapping and their families.

Draft resolution II on improving the coordination of efforts against trafficking in persons would have the Assembly underline the importance of bilateral, subregional and regional partnerships in counter-trafficking efforts and encourage their development.  It would also urge Member States that had not yet done so to ratify or accede to relevant treaties, including the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and its Protocol; the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution, and child pornography; the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; and Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery.

Draft resolution III on strengthening the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme, in particular its technical cooperation capacity, would have the Assembly urge all States and competent regional economic integration organizations that had not done so to sign, ratify and accede to the United Nations Convention against Trans-national Organized Crime (Palermo Convention) and its Protocols, the United Nations Convention against Corruption and the international conventions and protocols related to terrorism.  Further, the Assembly would encourage States parties to fully support the Conference of the Parties to the Palermo Convention and to the Convention against Corruption.  Further to the draft, the Assembly would invite all States to increase their support to the operational activities of the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme.

Draft resolution IV on the United Nations African Institute for the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders would have the Assembly, noting that the Institute’s financial situation had greatly affected its capacity to deliver effective services to African Member States, urge the States members of the Institute to make every possible effort to meet their obligations to the Institute.  It would also call upon all Member States and non-governmental organizations to continue supporting the Institute in the development of the requisite capacity and the implementation of its programmes and activities.  It would further request the Secretary-General to intensify efforts to mobilize all relevant entities of the United Nations system to provide the necessary financial and technical support to the Institute and to continue his efforts to mobilize the financial resources necessary to maintain the Institute with the core professional staff required to enable it to function effectively.

The draft decision on documents considered by the General Assembly in connection with the question of crime prevention and criminal justice would have the Assembly take note of the report of the Secretary-General on strengthening international cooperation and technical assistance in promoting the implementation of the universal conventions and protocols related to terrorism within the framework of the activities of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (document A/61/178) and the note by the Secretary-General transmitting the reports of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime on its first and second sessions (document A/61/96).

International Drug Control

The Committee’s report on international drug control (document A/61/445) contains one draft resolution.

The draft on international cooperation against the world drug problem would have the Assembly, gravely concerned that the drug problem continued to constitute a serious threat to public health and safety and the well-being of humanity despite increased efforts to combat it, urge all States to implement the outcome of the twentieth special session of the Assembly on the world drug problem and to strengthen national efforts to counter the abuse of illicit drugs.  It would further urge States to implement comprehensive policies and programmes to achieve a significant and measurable reduction of drug abuse by the time of the 10-year assessment of the implementation of the goals of that special session, scheduled for 2008.

Further, the Assembly would call on States to strengthen international cooperation among judicial and law enforcement authorities, in order to combat illicit drug trafficking, including by establishing and strengthening regional mechanisms.  The Assembly would also urge all Governments to provide the fullest possible financial and political support to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime by widening its donor base and increasing voluntary contributions.

Revitalization of the Work of the General Assembly

The Committee’s report on the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly (document A/61/446) contains one draft decision.

The draft on the programme of work for the Third Committee for the sixty-second session of the General Assembly would have the Committee take up 11 agenda items during its sixty-second session.  They would include social development –- including implementation of the outcome of the World Summit for Social Development and of the twenty-fourth special session of the General Assembly; social development, including questions relating to the world social situation and to youth, ageing, disabled persons and the family; and Follow-up to the International Year of Older Persons:  Second World Assembly on Ageing.  They would also include crime prevention and criminal justice; international drug control; the advancement of women, including implementation of the outcome of the Fourth World Conference on Women and of the twenty-third special session of the General Assembly; promotion and protection of the rights of children, including follow-up to the outcome of the special session on children; and indigenous issues, including the Second International Decade of the World’s Indigenous People.

Also included on the agenda would be promotion and protection of human rights, including implementation of human rights instruments; human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms; human rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs and representatives; and comprehensive implementation and follow-up to the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action.

Further, the agenda would include items on elimination of racism and racial discrimination, including Comprehensive implementation of and follow-up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action; the right of peoples to self-determination; the report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, questions relating to refugees, returnees and displaced persons and humanitarian questions; and revitalization of the work of the General Assembly.

Programme Planning

The Committee’s report on programme planning (document A/61/447) contains one draft decision and one annex.

The decision on programme planning would have the Assembly decide to approve programme 19 (Human Rights) of the proposed strategic framework for the period 2008-2009.

The annex contains the text of programme 19 (Human Rights) of the proposed strategic framework for the period 2008-2009.

Action on Third Committee Texts

The Assembly first took up the Committee’s report on the report of the Human Rights Council (documents A/61/448, A/61/448/Corr.1, and A/61/448/Corr.2), which contained two draft resolutions, two annexes and one draft decision.

Action on the draft decision on the report of the Human Rights Council, by which the Assembly would take note of that report (document A/61/53), was postponed to a later date in order to allow the Fifth Committee time to review the programme budget implications of draft proposals contained in that report.

The Assembly then turned to draft resolution I (L.17) on the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.

Statement by Assembly President

General Assembly President Sheikha HAYA RASHED AL KHALIFA ( Bahrain) said that the plenary had met today to adopt the International Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance.  The practice of enforced disappearances was still widespread throughout the world.  Unfortunate victims were abducted, and their families were kept in the dark, uninformed of their well-being or fate.  Even worse, some of those who disappeared were subjected to torture and extrajudicial killing.  She said that since 1980, there had been more than 51,000 enforced disappearances in more than 90 countries.  More than 500 cases had been registered in 2005 alone.

Adopting the Convention could help prevent enforced disappearances and bring perpetrators to justice and would also provide justice for victims and their families who had suffered.  The Convention also contained an innovative follow-up mechanism to ensure effective implementation.  Moreover, the adoption of the treaty would send a signal that the Human Rights Council could deliver concrete outcomes that had a worldwide impact, she said, adding that she hoped the Assembly would be able to adopt the Convention by consensus.  She also called on Member States to take early steps to ensure its full implementation.

The Assembly then adopted the draft resolution without a vote.

Explanations of Position

The representative of the United Kingdom, welcoming the adoption of the draft on enforced disappearance, said that his Government considered the definition of enforced disappearance to be comprised the following elements:  an arrest, detention, abduction, or any other form of depriving one’s liberty; such acts committed by agents of the State or by persons or groups acting with authorization, support or acquiescence of the State; the act followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the whereabouts of the disappeared person; and placement of the disappeared person outside the protection of the law.

Furthermore, he understood the term “outside the protection of the law” to mean that the person’s detention was not within the scope of relevant domestic legal rules governing detention, or that those rules were not compatible with applicable international law.  On article 43 of the draft, he understood that provision to confirm that a State party’s obligations under international law remained the lex specialis in situations of armed conflict and other situations to which international humanitarian law applied.  Finally, on article 25(4), he said that did not entail an obligation to provide a legal procedure which would lead to an automatic review of the adoption, nor did it require the automatic annulment of an adoption which stemmed from an enforced disappearance.

The representative of Finland, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that her delegation welcomed the consensus adoption of the Convention as one of the Assembly’s major achievements this year.  For more than 25 years, victims’ families, non-governmental organizations, along with many Governments and international organizations, had pushed the United Nations to adopt an international instrument against enforced disappearances and to lead the charge against that heinous and inhuman affliction.  “And finally, here we are!”

The Convention was a significant step forward in the promotion and protection of human rights, as the instrument recognized the right of victims and their relatives to justice and reparation.  She said enforced disappearance was qualified as a crime both in peace and wartime, and no exceptional circumstances, whether a state of war, internal political instability or any public emergency, could be invoked as justification for enforced disappearance.  In the Convention, States parties pledged to criminalize enforced disappearances and, accordingly, to try the perpetrators and masterminds.

Moreover, under the Convention, States parties would undertake to prohibit secret detentions and unofficial places of detention, as well as reaffirm their obligation to provide legal guarantees in cases of deprivation of liberty.  Such legal commitments were key to preventing situations where a person could be relegated to total vulnerability at the hands of the perpetrators of the crime, deprived of all his or her rights and placed outside the protection of the law.  She said the adoption of the Convention by consensus filled a substantial gap in international human rights law, and sent a strong political signal that the international community believed that the shameful and still widespread practice must come to an end.  The European Union was fully convinced that the Convention would serve as a powerful tool to prevent enforced disappearances and torture, and to fight impunity for those crimes in the future.

France’s representative said the Convention was at the crossroads of human rights, international humanitarian law and international criminal law.  The new instrument was emblematic of United Nations action to benefit individuals and recognized in international law the shameful practice of causing a person “to disappear” without any form of due process.  The practice remained, unfortunately, a tangible reality, as, by United Nations count, there had been 535 victims in 2005 and 41,000 cases around the world had been recorded since 1980 without clarification on the fate of the victims.

The Convention had the two aims of “prevention and justice”, he said, but prevention was its primary purpose.  By acceding to the Convention, States would prohibit secret detentions and unofficial places of detention.  They would also strengthen the procedural guarantees surrounding detentions.  States would make enforced disappearances an offence and would bring perpetrators to justice.  The innovative follow-up mechanism of the Committee on Enforced Disappearances would assume a preventive function by making urgent appeals and conducting field visits, when necessary, even alerting the Secretary-General in the event of massive and systematic violations.

As an instrument of justice, he continued, the Convention would provide for the relatives of “disappeared” persons to claim their right to know the truth.  Victims and families would be entitled to reparations and any child adoption having its origin in an enforced disappearance would be illegal.

The adoption of the treaty by consensus, with the support of over 100 countries that were co-authors, allowed for the hope of universal ratification.  For it to enter into force as soon as possible, the Finance Minister of France would host a signing ceremony in Paris on 6 February 2007.

The representative of Argentina said that the Convention was an instrument of utmost importance.  In particular, he wished to highlight the role played by the organizations of civil society and by the associations of relatives and victims of human rights violations during the Convention’s drafting, negotiation, and approval.  The Argentine “Grandmothers and Mothers of Plaza de Mayo” had exerted much effort and sacrifice, as well.

Referring to his country’s past and disappeared persons, he said that the military dictatorship there had carried out the abhorrent practice since the 1970s, but unfortunately, Argentina had not received a public condemnation by the former Human Rights Commission.  Indeed, the Convention, once in force, would be an essential tool in the prevention of enforced disappearances and in the fight against the scourge.  He, therefore, hoped that the adoption would not mark the end of the road, but the beginning of a new phase in the promotion and protection of human rights, and tangible progress in the fight against impunity.

The representative of Chile recounted the story of a friend from secondary school who had been detained and tortured in 1974 and whose disappearance had been hidden, along with that of hundreds of other people, as part of a shameful intelligence operation of the Chilean dictatorship and other neighbouring countries.  He noted that his friend’s remains had never been found.  That was why today was an important day for human rights.  The Assembly’s adoption of the Convention held for his country a profound ethical sense of historical acknowledgement, in addressing a reality that affected hundreds of his compatriots before restoration of democracy in 1990, on the sole basis of political dissent.

He said that the Convention just adopted filled an important gap in international law.  Within the set of recognized rights, he highlighted the right to obtain information on the person deprived of liberty, the right of all victims to know the truth regarding the circumstances of the enforced disappearance, the progress and results of the investigation and the fate of the disappeared person.  He believed that the Convention was sufficiently equipped while imposing specific obligations on States, to protect the rights of victims and their families.

Japan’s representative said his Government believed that no one should be subjected to enforced disappearance and had participated actively in the negotiations on the text.  Enforced disappearance was a heinous practice, and now the international community had an important tool with which to fight it.  Japan hoped that the international community would support the Convention and ensure its early entry into force.

The representative of Honduras said the Assembly had taken a meaningful step forward in international law.  States and Governments were shouldering an important commitment with a full sense of responsibility, aiming to leave behind the days of horror that had been the scourge of so many countries.  The adoption of the Convention on the protection of all persons from enforced disappearance was the dawn of a new age of actual implementation of human rights and the end of impunity.  He said the adoption of the Convention was a day of hope for all.

The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea said abduction issues that Japan so vainly tried to get support for at every opportunity were already being taken care of by the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.  This was really an agenda driven by the Japanese Government and had nothing to do whatsoever with human rights.  The only reason Japan tried to press the issue was to cover its crimes during World War II, when it kidnapped some 8.4 million Korean citizens and forced more than 200,000 Korean women into sexual and military slavery.

He then read out a letter –- the most recent case of a person leaving the country against his will -- that had been written in 1992 by a young man who had reportedly been abducted and was, at that time, very ill, and was being held at a location unknown to him inside Japan.  He said the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, along with the young man’s family, had tried through bilateral channels, including the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), to discover the young man’s whereabouts, but their pleas had been met with indifference.  He called on Member States to press Japan, which cared so much about the Convention just adopted, to actually abide by it, and actively try to ensure that the abductee and his family were reunited.

Point of Order

The representative of Bangladesh said that she had joined consensus on the draft, but her country had been erroneously recorded on the list of co-sponsors.  She, therefore, requested that it be deleted from that list.

Statements in Right of Reply

The representative of Japan said that regrettably, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had made false allegations on the issue of abduction today, a day that marked the adoption of the Convention.  Its allegations were unsubstantiated and its figures exaggerated.  He reiterated that, in fact, his Government had never been involved in the abduction of any nationals.  Furthermore, the world community needed to make the best use of the Convention to prevent the practice from happening anywhere in the world.

The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea said that the abduction issue had become somewhat internationalized by Japan, as that Government wished to abuse it for its political agenda.  That was well-known, he added.  As for unsubstantiated allegations, the abduction of citizens of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea by Japanese nationals was real.  Japan pursued acts of repression without precedent against Koreans residing in Japan, and he believed those acts were an infringement of national sovereignty and part of a conspiracy to overthrow the regime in his country.  He asked how the Japanese could welcome the Convention’s adoption while performing inhuman and anti-humanitarian acts at the same time.  If they wished to cover up their past like that, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea would make sure to let the international community know what was happening.

In response, Japan’s representative reiterated that his Government had never, ever, been involved in the abduction of foreign nationals.  As for issues of the past, he said that issue had been resolved.  But, he would urge the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea not to confuse issues of the past with matters related to its abduction of Japanese citizens.  Indeed, the Government of Japan could never accept that the issue of forced abduction of its citizens had been resolved, as the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had said.  There were at least 17 Japanese citizens that had been abducted, and his Government would ask the Government to respond sincerely and honestly to its request as to their whereabouts.

Responding, the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea said that, once again, Japan was trying to walk away from its historical and legal responsibility to answer for its past crimes.  The truth was that many elderly people in Korea today still remembered the crimes committed by the Japanese military during its brutal occupation of the country.  Rather than reading out misleading information, Japan should try to sincerely apologize to the Korean people for its crimes -- past, present and, perhaps even future, no one knew what would happen.  The reason many people did not know about Japan’s abduction of Korean citizens today was because that country was exercising its influence -– using its money and political pressure to cover up its acts.  He again called on Japan to live up to its obligations.

Action on Drafts

The Assembly next turned to draft resolution II on the working group of the Commission on Human Rights to elaborate a draft declaration in accordance with paragraph 5 of General Assembly resolution 49/214 of 23 December 1994, adopting it by a recorded vote of 85 in favour to none against, with 89 abstentions (see annex).

The Assembly then took note of addendum 4 to the Committee’s report on the promotion and protection of human rights (document A/61/443/Add.4), which stated that no action was taken by the Third Committee under its sub-item on the comprehensive implementation of and follow-up to the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action.

The Assembly next turned to the Committee’s report on crime prevention and criminal justice (document A/61/444), which contained four draft resolutions and one draft decision.

Without a vote, the Assembly adopted draft resolutions on international cooperation in the prevention, combating and elimination of kidnapping and in providing assistance to victims; improving the coordination of efforts against trafficking in persons; on strengthening the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme, in particular its technical cooperation capacity (L.9/Rev.1); and on the United Nations African Institute for the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders.

Also, without a vote, it adopted a draft decision on documents considered by the General Assembly in connection with the question of crime prevention and criminal justice, by which the Assembly took note of the report of the Secretary-General on strengthening international cooperation and technical assistance in promoting the implementation of the universal conventions and protocols related to terrorism within the framework of the activities of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (document A/61/178) and the note by the Secretary-General transmitting the reports of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime on its first and second sessions (document A/61/96).

The Assembly then took up the Committee’s report on international drug control (document A/61/445), which contained one draft resolution.  It adopted without a vote the draft on international cooperation against the world drug problem.

The Assembly then turned to the Committee’s report on the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly (document A/61/446), which contained one draft decision.  Without a vote, the Assembly adopted the draft decision on the programme of work for the Third Committee for the sixty-second session of the General Assembly.

Lastly, the Assembly took up the Committee’s report on programme planning (A/61/447), which contained one draft decision.  Without a vote, it adopted the decision on programme planning.

ANNEX

Vote on Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Draft resolution II to defer action on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (document A/61/448) was adopted by a recorded vote of 85 in favour to none against, with 89 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Belarus, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Indonesia, Iraq, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kiribati, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Micronesia (Federated States of), Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  None.

Abstain:  Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burundi, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay.

Absent:  Belize, Cambodia, Chad, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Equatorial Guinea, Iran, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Maldives, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record