Chairs of Security Council Subsidiary Bodies, in Briefing, Underscore Importance of Inter-Panel Coordination, Regular Appraisal of Working Methods
|Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York|
6128th Meeting (AM & PM)
chairs of Security Council subsidiary bodies, in briefing, underscore importance
of inter-panel coordination, regular appraisal of working methods
Speakers Stress Human Rights of People under Occupation,
Warn against Collective Condemnation in Anti-Terrorism Struggle
The Chairs of the three committees created by the Security Council to enforce its counter-terrorism measures and related sanctions stressed today that coordination between the panels, regular “stocktaking” of their working methods, and strong backing from United Nations Member States were of key importance in ensuring effective and efficient implementation of their respective mandates.
“Terrorism and proliferation continue to be a daily reality and a threat to international peace and security, faced equally by States and individuals alike,” Thomas Mayr-Harting (Austria) told the Council, as he spoke on behalf of the heads of the subsidiary bodies established pursuant to, respectively, resolution 1267 (1999) on Al-Qaida and Taliban sanctions; resolution 1373 (2001) on Counter-terrorism; and resolution 1540 (2006) on the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
In a presentation at the opening of a joint briefing on the work of the Committees over the past six months, Mr. Mayr-Harting, Chair of the Counter-Terrorism Committee, stressed that cooperation was a crucial element in the effort to answer the threat of terrorism, including that from the use of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons for terrorist purposes. The Committees and their respective expert groups were committed to cooperating and coordinating their work so as to contribute to an effective and efficient approach within the overall United Nations framework, as well as broader global efforts.
In his capacity as 1267 Committee Chair, he said the review process was crucial to that panel’s work, particularly with regard to the names on its Consolidated List of individuals and entities subject to restrictions. As of today, that List comprised 508 names ‑‑ 397 persons (255 associated with Al-Qaida and 142 associated with the Taliban) and 111 entities. The review was essential to ensure the List was as current and accurate as possible, and to help States effectively implement the sanctions.
A serious challenge facing the Committee was the growing number of cases before national and regional courts filed by listed individuals and entities who had taken legal action against the sanctions, he said. “The review is, therefore, an important step towards both improving due process and strengthening the regime. By either removing names from the List where listing is no longer appropriate, or adding new identifiers and information regarding names remaining on the List, the review will help to improve due process and the quality of the Consolidated List, and to implement the sanctions regime more effectively.”
Jean-Pierre Lacroix (France), Acting Chair of the Counter-Terrorism Committee established under resolution 1373 (2001), said stocktaking allowed that panel to enhance its regular dialogue with Member States and further identify areas where the implementation of its founding resolution was still inadequate. That exercise would form a major part of the Committee’s work in the coming months.
He said the Committee had also continued to organize visits to Member States as a fundamental component of its activities for the effective monitoring of the implementation of resolution 1373 (2001). Along with comprehensive visits, the revised organizational plan of the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate envisaged a more flexible approach, allowing shorter visits focused on one or two aspects of the concerned State’s counter-terrorism measures. The plan also laid out the basis for regional visits and for missions that would examine examples of good practice, as well as vulnerabilities.
Jorge Urbina ( Costa Rica), Chair of the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1540 (2004), said a major focus of its work in 2009 would be to organize a comprehensive review of the implementation status of the resolution, to be completed no later than 31 January 2010. In order to implement the 2009 programme more efficiently, the Committee had established four working groups ‑‑ on national implementation and monitoring, assistance, cooperation and transparency, and outreach.
He went on to state that requests for technical assistance received this year had included requests for help in drafting legislation, convening workshops on border and export controls and providing a regional 1540 coordinator. Those requests had been referred to Member States and organizations that might be in a position to help. The Committee was also making efforts to increase cooperation with other bodies and organizations, particularly through the Chair’s visits to Washington, D.C., and Vienna.
Libya’s representative stressed the importance of addressing serious human rights violations against people living under occupation, adding that the international community must be careful not to condemn an entire group of people by portraying them as terrorists. In addition, many on the 1267 Committee’s Consolidate List were still subject to sanctions despite their being dead, which had prevented relatives from claiming their inheritance. The Council’s measures should not amount to collective punishment against the families of persons listed or otherwise.
Moreover, more than 50 people should not be on the List at all, and still others lacked the necessary identifiers or other requisite information, he continued. The Committee must rectify those anomalies, chiefly by locating all the correct information and delisting those individuals or entities that did not belong there. While the Council had adopted resolutions to streamline the delisting process, it was clear that much more remained to be done.
Among the nearly 30 delegations taking the floor during the debate, Liechtenstein’s representative raised what was a key concern among most speakers: the need to ensure due process and respect for human rights in the Council’s terrorism-related activities. Liechtenstein and Mexico had hosted a presentation at Headquarters two weeks ago on the findings of the Eminent Jurists’ panel on “Terrorism, Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights”.
That report showed very clearly that security and human rights were not mutually exclusive, he said. Human rights standards inherently balanced sometimes competing interests and provided important guidance where difficult choices had to be made. In recent years, that balance had been sorely lacking in many parts of the world, and Liechtenstein, therefore, echoed the jurists’ call for the United Nations, especially the Security Council, to take a leadership role in restoring respect for human rights to the counter-terrorism efforts of its agencies and Member States.
Qatar’s representative also highlighted a key concern of several non-Council members who spoke when he noted that, while there had been some progress in the work of the Committees, several areas required a closer look, including the ongoing lack of a definition for terrorism, the necessity to respect due process and human rights, and the lack of coordination with other relevant organizations and United Nations bodies.
The work of all United Nations organs, including the Security Council and its subsidiary bodies, should be guided by the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, adopted by the General Assembly in 2006, he said, stressing the need to consider its objectives, including taking international humanitarian law into account. Indeed, the Global Strategy had not been adopted as a guide solely for the Assembly. Resolution 1373 (2001) also pointed to the need to respect human rights in counter-terrorism efforts.
Pakistan’s representative expressed hope that the Council would combine various anti-terrorism initiatives into one comprehensive sanctions regime. The biggest challenge to the Al-Qaida and Taliban sanctions regime came from the increasing number of court cases, some of them from Pakistani courts. To win those cases, the exclusive sharing of verifiable evidence with the courts and a time limit for listings might be considered. While Pakistan had joined in the consensus that had led to the creation of the “1540 Committee”, that arrangement should not be perpetuated at the cost of the revival and effectiveness of the wider global multilateral disarmament machinery.
Also speaking today were the representatives of Turkey, Viet Nam, China, Uganda, Japan, United States, Croatia, United Kingdom, Burkina Faso, Mexico, Russian Federation, New Zealand, Switzerland, Australia, Syria, Brazil, Czech Republic (on behalf of the European Union), Cuba, Norway, Morocco, Israel, Argentina and Venezuela.
The meeting began at 10:15 a.m. and suspended at 1:05 p.m. Reconvening at 3:20 p.m., it ended at 5:10 p.m.
The Security Council met this morning to hear briefings by the Chairpersons of its subsidiary bodies.
THOMAS MAYR-HARTING (Austria), spoke first on behalf of the Chairs of the Council Committees established pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999) on Al-Qaida and Taliban Sanctions; resolution 1373 (2001) on Counter-terrorism; and resolution 1540 (2004) on non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
Reviewing the work of the three panels over the past six months, he said they had continued their cooperation, as well as the coordination of the activities of their respective groups of experts. The Committees welcomed the continuing efforts of the expert groups ‑‑ the Monitoring Team, the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED), and the 1540 Committee Experts ‑‑ to develop common strategies in areas of common concern, organize joint workshops, coordinate their participation in conferences and joint country visits, and exchange information on their activities.
He said the Committees encouraged their expert groups to further enhance their information exchange and coordination with regard to capacity-building, assistance requests and delivery of technical assistance. The expert groups had also continued to implement the common strategy on dealing with non-reporting or late-reporting States through the exchange of information and joint visits, and in helping Member States submit their responses to the three Committees on their implementation of the relevant Security Council resolutions.
In response to the adoption of resolutions 1805 (2008), 1810 (2008) and 1822 (2008), the three groups had recently presented another common strategy to engage with international, regional and subregional organizations and entities, he said. The objectives of that new strategy were to increase coherence and coordination in the counter-terrorism efforts of the three Committees in their relations with such regional organizations, and to facilitate their efforts to cooperate with the relevant expert groups. The Committees had welcomed the presentation of a second common strategy as further evidence of the close relationship between the expert groups. The Committees were currently considering that joint proposal.
“Terrorism and proliferation continue to be a daily reality and a threat to international peace and security,” he said, stressing that cooperation was, therefore, a crucial element in the effort to counter the threat of terrorism, including that from the use of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons for terrorist purposes. The three subsidiary bodies and their respective expert groups remained committed to cooperating and coordinating their work in order to contribute to an effective and efficient approach within the overall United Nations framework, as well as broader global efforts.
Speaking in his capacity as Chairman of the Al-Qaida and Taliban Sanctions Committee (1267 Committee), he said that almost 10 years since the adoption of resolution 1267 (1999), the threat posed by those two entities continued worldwide, especially in South Asia, although the threats had evolved considerably. The Committee remained committed to ensuring that the sanctions regime under its purview became even more relevant and effective in fighting terrorism. All Member States had a role to play in helping to ensure, through timely listing and de-listing proposals, that the Committee’s Consolidated List remained a dynamic instrument which accurately reflected current threats.
He went on to recall that in December 2008, after intensive negotiations under its previous Chairmanship, the Committee had adopted a thoroughly revised version of the guidelines for the conduct of its work. Two new sections had been added, respectively, on review of the Consolidated List of individuals and entities subject to sanctions, and on exemptions from the travel ban. Moreover, substantive changes had been introduced in existing sections and an updated version was currently available on the Committee’s website.
Turning to the status of the Committee’s ongoing review of the Consolidated List, he said that process was one of the panel’s top priorities as it concerned the 488 names on the List prior to 30 June 2008. The Committee had begun sending letters to Member States in December, requesting them to submit, within three months, any updated information on reasons for listing, as well as any additional identifying or other information. Reviewing States were also requested to indicate whether they deemed specific listings appropriate. As of today, the Committee had sent out two batches of names initiating the review of 158 names – 125 individuals and 33 entities ‑‑ on the Consolidated List. A third batch of some 120 names would be circulated shortly.
Urging all States to review each name thoroughly and submit replies to the Committee within the stated time period, he said that, once the replies had been received, all available information would be circulated to members of the Committee and the Monitoring Team for possible further input within a one-month period. At the end of the overall process, the respective names would be placed on the Committee’s agenda. To that end, on 4 May, the first five names had been placed on the Committee’s agenda. In the course of the review, the Committee had evaluated all available information and considered whether listing was appropriate, as well as updating the List and/or narrative summaries on the basis of the information provided. In cases where a Committee member determined that a listing was no longer appropriate, a de-listing request could be submitted in accordance with procedures set out in the guidelines, and the wider Committee would decide whether to remove the name from the List.
As of today, the Consolidated List comprised 508 names ‑‑ 397 persons (255 associated with Al-Qaida and 142 associated with the Taliban) and 111 entities, he said. Since the last briefing, the Committee had added to the List the names of seven individuals associated with Al-Qaida. During the same period, it had approved one de-listing request but had not approved four others. The Committee had also approved 46 amendments to improve and update the List.
Finally, he stressed that the 1267 sanctions regime faced serious challenges. A growing number of cases had been filed in national and regional courts by listed individuals and entities who had taken legal actions against sanctions measures. The ongoing review process was, therefore, an important step towards both improving due process and strengthening the regime. Further steps towards ensuring and strengthening fair and clear procedures might be sought in the Council’s next resolution on the Committee, due at the end of 2009. At the same time, the Committee could not successfully carry out the review and the remainder of its work without the cooperation and involvement of all Member States, especially designating States and States of nationality or residence. In order to complete the review by 2010, it was essential that all States involved did their utmost to provide all information within the time frame set by the Committee.
JEAN-PIERRE LACROIX (France), Acting Chairman of the Counter-Terrorism Committee, established pursuant to Security Council resolution 1373 (2001), said that in the past six months, the panel had continued to analyse Preliminary Implementation Assessments. Since last November it had approved 21 of them and adopted 19 thus far. The Committee should formally approve the remaining two in the coming months. Its stocktaking exercise had been one of the major initiatives undertaken during the reporting period. While receiving their preliminary assessments in 2007 and 2008, Member States had also been given time to send their comments and updates.
He said the Committee had continued to organize visits to Member States as a fundamental component of its activities for the effective monitoring of the implementation of its founding resolution. Along with comprehensive visits, the revised organizational plan by the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate envisaged a more flexible approach by allowing shorter visits focused on one or two aspects of the concerned State’s counter-terrorism measures. The plan also laid out the basis for regional visits and for missions that would examine examples of good practice, as well as vulnerabilities.
A total of 99 States had submitted reports on their efforts to implement resolution 1373 (2001), he continued, encouraging those that had not yet reported to do so. The Committee had also played its part in the implementation of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, under the guidance of which its Executive Directorate had continued to participate actively in, and support all relevant activities of, the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force. The Executive Directorate had also participated in the work of three Task Force working groups on countering terrorist financing, human rights and counter-terrorism, and integrated assistance for countering terrorism.
The Committee would need to accomplish several major tasks in the next six months, as requested in resolution 1805 (2008), he said. Among them was an interim review of the Executive Directorate by 30 June 2009. The Committee had begun informal consultations on that issue, and was working towards submitting to the Security Council a report on the review before the stipulated deadline.
Speaking in his national capacity, he said his country was “very committed” to full implementation of resolution 1540 (2004) and considered its obligations to be “common sense”. Compliance significantly benefited public health, taxes and security. Having just taken the chairmanship of the 1540 Committee’s working Group on Assistance, France would spare no effort in ensuring that States received all necessary assistance to implement the resolution fully.
JORGE URBINA ( Costa Rica), Chairman of the Committee established pursuant to Security Council resolution 1540 (2004), reported on the adoption of that body’s annual programme of work and outreach and assistance activities, and on its cooperation with other organizations. The work programme sought to increase reporting by Member States, organize outreach events at the regional, subregional and national levels, and enhance cooperation with the 1267 and 1373 Committees. It also sought to strengthen its role in facilitating technical assistance, in part by matching offers and requests for assistance.
A major focus of the Committee’s work in 2009 would be to organize a comprehensive review of the implementation status of resolution 1540 (2004), to be completed no later than 31 January 2010, he said. In order to implement the 2009 programme more efficiently, the Committee had established four working groups, on national implementation and monitoring, assistance, cooperation and transparency, and outreach. Requests for technical assistance received this year included requests for help in drafting legislation, convening workshops on border and export controls and providing a regional 1540 coordinator. Those requests had been referred to Member States and organizations that might be in a position to help. The Committee was also making efforts to increase cooperation with other bodies and organizations, particularly through the Chairman’s visits to Washington, D.C., and Vienna.
BAKI İLKIN ( Turkey) said it was crucial to remain vigilant against terrorism and for that reason the work of the three Committees reporting today was critical. Turkey was satisfied with the efforts described, but noted that implementation of resolution 1373 (2001) lagged far behind. Lack of capacity, political will or clear understanding of what must be done continued to undermine efforts to put up a strong and united front against terrorism.
The Committee’s work should, therefore, be re-energized through a greater focus on the identified shortcomings, including the unfulfilled obligations of individual countries, in candid exchanges, he said, adding that a consolidated list, similar to that of the 1267 Committee, should be considered. Turkey underscored the importance of resolution 1540 (2004) and welcomed the recent intensification of efforts to implement it. Outreach was of paramount importance and Turkey looked forward to the comprehensive review called for in resolution 1810 (2008).
LE LUONG MINH ( Viet Nam) expressed appreciation for the work being done by the three Committees, affirming the importance of the 1276 Committee keeping its Consolidated List up to date. On the Counter-Terrorism Committee, Viet Nam welcomed its interim review and expected the Council to be able to agree on its recommendations for improving the work of the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate. Viet Nam also welcomed the work programme of the 1540 Committee and supported all three bodies’ efforts to strengthen their coordinated actions within the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force to help promote implementation of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy.
LA YIFAN ( China) welcomed improvements in the 1267 Committee’s listing process and encouraged all Member States to provide all needed information. With regard to the Counter-Terrorism Committee, it was important to make it more reflective of the needs of Member States. The 1267 Committee should continue to promote achievement of the goals mentioned in its programme of work. China also supported the work of the 1540 Committee. However, terrorism continued unabated despite the efforts of all three Committees. China supported further coordination among them and greater attention to the needs of developing countries in implementing the relevant resolutions.
RUHAKANA RUGUNDA ( Uganda) said that terrorism and the proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, as well as their means of delivery, remained a threat to international peace and security. Uganda would continue to support the Council’s efforts to strengthen its work to curb and end such threats, and welcomed the continued and increasing cooperation, information exchange and outreach among the three Committees and their respective groups of experts, including country visits.
At the same time, he said, the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate must be able to make an in-depth assessment of what it had been able to achieve and what it had not, or how it intended to participate in interactive initiatives with other expert groups and Committees. Having had to confront terrorist groups such as the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), Uganda had worked closely with some of its neighbours to carry out the edicts of relevant Security Council resolutions, including resolution 1373 (2001), and reiterated its continuing support the fight against terrorism, as well as all Council efforts towards international security.
NORIHIRO OKUDA ( Japan) said the three Committees played a significant role in fighting terrorism and should continue their efforts to develop further effective measures. In respect of the 1267 Committee, Japan strongly requested relevant States to give serious consideration to requests for information so that the Consolidated List could be kept up to date.
Describing his country’s efforts to help improve the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan, he said each Member State needed to strengthen its counter-terrorism capacity. Assistance for capacity-building in that regard was a matter of urgency. During its 2008 term as Chair of the Group of Eight (G-8), Japan had taken the initiative to strengthen cooperation between the Counter-Terrorism Action Group and the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate, and commended Italy, the 2009 Chair, for furthering that effort.
He said it was important to differentiate the Directorate’s work from that of the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force, with the former facilitating assistance to Member States and the latter ensuring overall coordination of anti-terrorism efforts. Japan welcomed the assessment of the Counter-Terrorism Committee, as well as United States President Barack Obama’s proposal to strengthen control over nuclear materials. In implementing resolution 1540 (2004), it would be useful for the relevant Committee to hold a dialogue with other actors. Japan would continue and enhance such a dialogue through the forums in which it was involved.
ROSEMARY DICARLO ( United States) stressed that global terrorism and the possibility of non-State actors obtaining weapons of mass destruction were threats to the entire international community and no State was immune. That was why the international community, through the United Nations, had created an interlocking and forward-looking counter-terrorism strategy encompassing the Council’s Sanctions Committees and their expert groups, as well as the General Assembly’s Counter-Terrorism Strategy.
Turning to the work of the 1267 Committee, she praised its ongoing review of the Consolidated List and urged equitable and clear procedures in that exercise. All those concerned with the strengthening of the 1267 regime should pay close attention to the nature of the sweeping reforms that Committee was carrying out. It now faced a “mountain” of work and the United States was committed to ensuring that it could effectively implement its mandate. The United States urged the Committee to remove outdated listings, especially because the List must be able to withstand intense scrutiny, and called on all States to help ensure that the 1267 Committee was able to respond effectively and nimbly to current challenges.
Commending the excellent work carried out by the Counter-Terrorism Committee and its Executive Directorate, she expressed full support for the latter’s focused country visits, adding that regional visits were an effective way to address many concerns at once, as well as a wise use of travel funds. As for the 1540 Committee, the establishment of four working groups to help it more effectively carry out its work was also welcome. The United States would chair the Working Group on Transparency and Media Outreach.
Outside the United Nations, the United States was seeking expansion of the global partnership of the G-8 to support that Committee’s aims, she continued, noting that it had partnered with a range of regional organizations to that end. Effective non-proliferation was not the work of just one Committee or a few States ‑‑ it was the responsibility of all. With that in mind, the United States called on all Member States to share the burdens and reap the rewards, by ensuring that all the Council’s subsidiary bodies operated efficiently and effectively.
RANKO VILOVIĆ (Croatia), associating himself with the statement to be made on behalf of the European Union, stressed that all anti-terrorism efforts should be accomplished within international humanitarian law. With regard to the 1267 Committee, updating the Consolidated List was critical and all Member States must assume their responsibilities.
Noting that implementation reviews were critical for the Counter-Terrorism Committee, he expressed appreciation for the assistance provided to his country by its Executive Directorate. Croatia looked forward to the results of the revised survey of the implementation status of resolution 1373 (2001). It was to be hoped that the Directorate would gain guidance on how better to fulfil its mandate. Regarding resolution 1540 (2004), cooperation between organizations at all levels was critical, and Croatia saluted the Committee for facilitating assistance on implementation, while looking forward to the review of its activities and the state of the threats it confronted.
THOMAS HURD ( United Kingdom) welcomed the cooperation among the three subsidiary bodies and the use of joint consultations and other efforts towards coherence within United Nations counter-terrorism efforts. On resolution 1540 (2004), there was a need for a greater focus on implementation assistance in countries where it lagged. Similarly, it was necessary to step up dialogue with countries that had difficulties in implementing resolution 1373 (2001). As for sanctions against Al-Qaida and the Taliban, the United Kingdom affirmed the importance of updating the Consolidated List, and pledged to work with other countries in ensuring that the regime remained credible, while also working towards a new resolution for that purpose by the end of the year.
ABDELRAZAG GOUIDER ( Libya) said the briefings showed how the Organization’s counter-terrorism strategy had evolved over the past few years. Libya appreciated the efforts of the Counter-Terrorism Committee and its Executive Directorate to guarantee compliance with the relevant resolutions, as well as its country visits and cooperation with other subsidiary bodies and regional organizations. Efforts to build capacity in developing countries were also welcome, and Libya hoped further technical assistance would be provided in the form of bilateral aid. Combating the financing of terrorism was crucial in the overall fight against the scourge and, therefore, deserved more attention.
Stressing the importance of addressing human rights and refugee concerns that might be at the root of many acts of tension and violence, he said it was also necessary to address serious violations of human rights committed against people living under occupation. The international community must be careful not to condemn an entire group of people by portraying them as terrorists. Many on the 1267 Committee’s Consolidate List were still subject to sanctions despite their being dead, which had prevented relatives from claiming their inheritance. The Council had determined that its measures should not amount to collective punishment against the families of persons listed or otherwise.
Moreover, there were more than 50 people who should not be on the List at all, and still others who lacked necessary identifiers or other requisite information, he continued. The Committee must rectify those anomalies, chiefly by locating all the correct information and delisting those individuals or entities that did not belong there. While the Council had adopted resolutions to streamline the delisting process, it was clear that much more remained to be done. As for the 1540 Committee, the total elimination of weapons of mass destruction was the best way to ensure they did not fall into the hands of non-State actors.
MICHEL KAFANDO ( Burkina Faso) welcomed the adoption of the 1540 Committee’s work programme and expressed appreciation of its outreach efforts and focused country visits. The Committee’s recent focused strategy for South-East Asia was a positive step, and it was to be hoped that the proposed strategy for Africa would be equally successful in familiarizing concerned States with the resolution and identifying challenges and assistance needs. Regarding the 1373 Committee its country visits and review process demonstrated its commitment and dedication.
Turning to the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate, he said his delegation had been comforted by the current reforms under way, including the establishment of four working groups to help it more effectively carry out its mandate. The provision of technical assistance to developing countries remained a “heightened need” and Burkina Faso was pleased that talks were under way to bolster such aid. On the work of the 1267 Committee, the review of the Consolidated List should lead to a reliable and clear procedure for listing, de-listing and waivers on humanitarian grounds. Taking national and regional views might help make the Committee’s work more dynamic.
He concluded by stating that, because the fight against terrorism must be fully-fledged in order to be effective, there was a need for urgent steps to address the growth of terrorism in Africa, particularly West Africa. The subregion, with its porous borders, lack of monitoring mechanisms and other challenges, must by the focus of targeted counter-terrorism measures. The relevant Council subsidiary bodies must address those issues and strengthen cooperation with subregional bodies such as the Economic Community of West African Sates (ECOWAS).
CLAUDE HELLER ( Mexico) noted with approval the growing cooperation among the three Committees and their outreach to States, and suggested that, to further improve counter-terrorism activities, greater coordination with regional organizations was needed. The main challenge facing the Committees was accomplishing their respective missions in compliance with the rule of international human rights law. The procedures of the 1267 Committee had been improved greatly, which was crucial because effectiveness and legitimacy went hand-in-hand, he said, adding that the Consolidated List should be dynamic and not static. However, a great deal of work remained to finish the review process by June 2010.
The 1373 Committee had also strengthened its work, he said, adding that the stock-taking task was of great magnitude and should identify the concrete needs of each country. Mexico encouraged the Committee to continue its country visits and other means of contacting national authorities. As for resolution 1540 (2004), it was to be hoped that countries’ requests for assistance in implementing it would soon be met with offers from donor countries. Mexico requested the Committee to follow those requests closely.
VITALY CHURKIN (Russian Federation) affirmed the crucial importance of further cooperation between the Committees, and welcomed the Counter-Terrorism Committee’s first round of stock-taking in respect of the implementation of resolution 1373 (2001). Bilateral mechanisms and country visits were important in identifying capacity, and the Russian Federation welcomed the cooperation between the 1373 Committee and regional organizations. It was particularly important to implement resolution 1624 (2005), countering terrorist ideology, and to pursue regular reviews of all mechanisms under the Counter-Terrorism Committee.
Urging all States unswervingly to put in place measures against listed individuals under the Taliban and Al-Qaida sanctions regime, he emphasized the importance of updating the Consolidated List. The success of common efforts against the two organizations would depend on the efforts of individual Member States. With regard to the 1540 Committee, it was to be hoped that its review process and working groups would enhance the effectiveness of measures against the proliferation of threats. The Russian Federation would continue to make focused efforts to set up a reliable system to counter black-market weapons of mass destruction.
ROSEMARY BANKS ( New Zealand) said the United Nations, through the work of the Security Council, General Assembly and its relevant agencies, was the best framework in which to address the scourge of terrorism. New Zealand was encouraged by the work of the 1267 Committee and applauded the solid steps it was taking to review the Consolidate List and make narrative summaries of the reasons for listing available on the Committee’s website. Those efforts would do much to streamline the listing and de-listing process while enhancing public confidence in the overall process.
She went on to say that her country was working at home and in its own region to address terrorism. To that end, its research had revealed that, among Pacific island States, the political will to tackle terrorism was firm but resources were limited. At the same time, New Zealand was encouraged by the progress made and welcomed the work of United Nations agencies in the Pacific. The country would continue to help Pacific island nations, as well as countries in South-East Asia, where, among other things, it had helped launch a campaign focused on media, education and youth, with the aim of preventing recruitment for terrorist activity. At home, New Zealand continued to improve its legislative policy and looked forward to an upcoming visit by the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate in July, which would provide an opportunity to examine whether national legislation was consistent with United Nations counter-terrorism strategies.
HEIDI GRAU (Switzerland) said that legal challenges in some countries, including her own, against implementation of resolution 1267 (1999) showed the continuing relevance of a 2008 proposal by Switzerland and others to establish an expert panel appointed by the Security Council to help the Sanctions Committees in the consideration of de-listing requests. In the new resolution that would review the measures set forth in resolution 1822 (2008) by the end of this year, the Security Council might wish to take into account growing concerns about respect for human rights in the struggle against terrorism.
To help ensure coordination between the three Committees and other relevant international stakeholders, Switzerland had launched the International Process on Global Counter-Terrorism Cooperation in 2007, she said. Through that effort, the country envisaged, with the support of United Nations bodies, informal international and regional meetings among national authorities either involved in combating terrorism or responsible for coordinating national counter-terrorism policies.
ANDREW GOLEDZINOWSKI ( Australia) welcomed recent development in the work of the Committees, including the review of all names on the 1267 Committee’s Consolidated List, and the attention given by the 1540 Committee to institutional issues. Australia encouraged the Committees and their expert bodies to continue exploring ways to work more closely together, particularly by pursuing streamlined reporting regimes, assessment missions and the facilitation of technical assistance. It was also important that the Committees continued to cooperate with the General Assembly through close engagement with the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force and the broader United Nations system.
Commending the work of the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate, he welcomed its upcoming visit to Australia in July and other efforts to build constructive relations with Member States. An effective legal framework was of fundamental importance in countering the global terrorist threats, and Australia had ratified most relevant international instruments, as well as being in compliance with them. It was to be hoped that the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy would continue to provide impetus for the adoption of practical measures to facilitate cooperation by way of extradition, prosecution, information-sharing and capacity-building. Australia pledged its full support for those efforts.
NASSIR ABDULAZIZ AL-NASSER ( Qatar) said that, although the work of the Council’s sanctions committees was of interest to the general United Nations membership, the only chance for Member States to comment on that work was in one of the Council’s biannual meetings. It was clear that, while there had been some progress in the work of the Committees, several areas required a closer look, including the ongoing lack of a definition of terrorism, the necessity to respect due process and human rights, and the lack of coordination with other relevant organizations.
Participants at the recent Arab Summit in Doha had condemned terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, whatever its source, motives and reasons, he recalled. They had stressed the need to tackle the root causes of terrorism and asserted their full awareness of the difference between terrorism and struggles for liberation from foreign occupation under international law. On behalf of that meeting, Qatar called on all Member States to work professionally during next month’s review of the draft global convention on terrorism, which would deal with the question of definition.
Emphasizing that the work of all United Nations organs, including the Security Council and its subsidiary bodies, should be guided by the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, adopted by the General Assembly three years ago, he stressed also the need to consider its objectives and elements, including the need to take human rights and international law into account in combating terrorism. Indeed, the Global Strategy had not been adopted as a guide for the Assembly alone. Resolution 1373 (2001) also pointed to the need to respect human rights in counter-terrorism efforts. The Organization must step up efforts to strengthen system-wide coherence, especially when actual coordination with the General Assembly would be a key element of Security Council reform.
BASHAR JA’AFARI ( Syria) said his country had suffered under the scourge of terrorism and had been one the earliest nations to call for the international community to formulate a broad strategy to tackle it. Syria had long called for an international conference to define terrorism and ensure that it could be combated on all fronts. Syria also understood that terrorism differed from the right of self-defence, which was guaranteed under international law. Any effort to tackle terrorism must address the crimes committed by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and against the Syrian people in the occupied Syrian Golan.
“That is the real terrorism,” he continued, adding that Israel had stepped up its efforts to perfect the “art of State terrorism”, culminating with its recent assault on Gaza. It had used the most sophisticated weapons to terrorize the innocent civilians in that territory. Israel’s actions had touched everyone in Gaza equally as its aggression had wrecked lives ranging from the Palestinian sitting in his home to the United Nations employee carrying out his duties to protect the besieged population. The international consensus was that Israel had carried out terrorist acts against the people of Gaza, including the bulldozing of land, expulsion of residents, and expansion of illegal settlements. “If these acts are not terrorism, then what is?”
He went on to say that his country joined in the General Assembly’s consensus adoption of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy because it was an important tool to combat terrorism. At the same time, Syria had reaffirmed that the fight against terrorism required comprehensive and coherent national, regional and international measures. It had also reaffirmed the need to combat terrorism in all its manifestations, including its root causes, in order to come up with the best global weapon to combat it. The United Nations played a central role in the global fight against terrorism, as well as in building an international consensus in that regard. Syria supported the work of the Council’s three subsidiary Committees and did not have, nor wish to possess, weapons of mass destruction.
PAULO ROBERTO CAMPOS TARRISSE DA FONTOURA ( Brazil) stressed his country’s commitment to the fight against terrorism and its compliance with resolutions 1267 (1999), 1373 (2001) and 1540 (2004), noting that there had been considerable progress in the work of the three Committees since late 2008. In particular, improvement of the process for listing and de-listing individuals and entities under resolution 1267 (1999) was fundamental to enhancing the legitimacy and effectiveness of its sanctions regime.
Welcoming also the progress made by the 1540 and 1373 Committees, he affirmed the importance of adequate standards and criteria for determining the degree of implementation by Member States. In respect of resolution 1267 (1999), the Counter-Terrorism Committee could further enhance its procedures with regard to transparency and the right of individuals and entities to present a defence. Brazil agreed that the Committee might consider useful the opinions of national courts that evaluated the reasons for the listings, particularly if they undertook their own fact-finding procedures. Finally, Brazil stressed the continuing importance of improving coordination among all bodies dedicated to the fight against terrorism.
MARTIN PALOUŠ (Czech Republic), speaking on behalf of the European Union, reiterated the importance of upholding human rights law in the fight against terrorism, as well as the need for a balanced and holistic implementation of all four pillars of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. The European Union also welcomed greater coordination among the three Committees and stressed the importance of cooperation among their respective expert groups, as well as between the Committees and international and regional organizations. The bloc also placed high value on the Preliminary Implementation Assessments and stocktaking exercise being performed by the Counter-Terrorism Committee, while encouraging deeper integration of human rights elements into its work. As major providers of assistance, the European Union and its member States welcomed the Committee’s revised assistance strategy.
Turning to the 1267 Committee, he welcomed the improved fairness and clarity of its procedures for listing and de-listing. As for recent European Union court cases on implementation of sanctions against Al-Qaida and the Taliban, the European Union was presently adapting its procedures to comply not only with the relevant resolutions, but also the requirements of the European Court of Justice. The resolution to be adopted by the end of December 2009 would be helpful in that respect. With regard to the implementation of resolution 1540 (2004), the regional organization welcomed the proposed review and open-ended meeting scheduled for autumn, which would enable Member States to exchange views and best-practices.
ABELARDO MORENO FERÁNDEZ (Cuba) reiterated that the way in which the United States Government was addressing the Luis Posada Carriles case constituted a clear and flagrant violation of resolution 1373 (2001), other relevant resolutions and several international terrorism-related legal instruments. Cuba called on the United States authorities to try Mr. Posada Carriles as a terrorist or extradite him to Venezuela. Cuba supported the position of the Non-Aligned Movement in opposing unilateral lists accusing States of sponsoring terrorism, which were incompatible with international law, and firmly rejected its own inclusion on a list compiled by the United States.
Condemning all terrorist acts, methods and practices, he said it was in the United States, not Cuba, where a terrorist mafia operated with impunity against his country. The United States Government had been involved in continuous terrorist actions that have cost the Cuban people 3,478 deaths, 2,099 injured and $54 billion in material damages. Cuba’s proposals for a bilateral programme to fight terrorism, offered to the previous United States Administration, had been rejected. If the new Administration truly wished to prove its commitment to fighting terrorism, there was now a chance to act firmly against terrorist organizations that had been attacking Cuba, and to free Cuban anti-terrorist fighters held in United States prisons. Cuba was willing to make a more detailed presentation on those matters to the Counter-Terrorism Committee. Double standards in fighting terrorism must not prevail.
MONA JUUL ( Norway) said that, while her delegation was fully aware that today’s topic was the work of the Council’s subsidiary Committees, it could also be useful to touch on the work of the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force. Terrorism continued to pose a threat around the globe, and the attacks carried out served as reminders of the need for more effective counter-terrorism measures. The Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy was an important tool, due especially to its wide backing and comprehensive approach. The shared will of all countries to work together towards a common goal was of great value and something to be safeguarded. In order for the international community to succeed in its efforts, it needed the coordinated, strategic and sustained engagement of all relevant parts of the United Nations system.
The Task Force had an important role to play in coordinating such efforts within the United Nations and mobilizing support among Member States, she said, noting with satisfaction that the counter-terrorism bodies associated with the Security Council were well integrated into the Task Force. Norway was also pleased that the Task Force had received more resources. In responding to terrorism, short-term efforts must not undercut long-term goals. “Our ability to resist shortcuts and leniency when observing human rights is a value that we need to defend at all times.” Stepping away from those values would undermine the rule of law, energize those wishing to harm society at large and strengthen the hand of terrorists and their networks. There was no contradiction between security and human rights; indeed, measures taken by the international community must always comply with the rule of law, particularly international human rights and humanitarian law.
MOHAMMED LOULICHKI ( Morocco) said the three Committees represented an important strategy on the part of the Council to combat terrorism, as well as an important link in the chain of the wider Organization’s architecture to address the scourge. Morocco reiterated its unshakable commitment to the global fight against terrorism, and was equally committed to protecting its own civilians. All such efforts must be comprehensive and consonant with the principles of international human rights and humanitarian law.
He went on to say that the Maghreb region and the neighbouring Sahel region were well aware that terrorism posed a significant threat to all States. To that end, global initiatives must take into account regional, as well as subregional efforts to not only counter terrorism, but to combat transnational organized crime as well. Morocco had undertaken significant measures to tackle the financing of terrorism and would continue to carry out and support all efforts to eradicate terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.
GABRIELA SHALEV ( Israel) said that, as the world continued to see terrorists use civilians as targets, shields and weapons, it must unanimously and unequivocally condemn terrorism, irrespective of motivation. In that light, Syria’s statement in the current debate deserved condemnation as Syria supported terrorists.
Welcoming the work of the three subsidiary bodies, including improvements in their working methods, she said country visits under the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate had been particularly effective and valuable in enhancing technical assistance. Israel called for a similar emphasis on implementation of resolutions 1373 (2001) and 1624 (2005). Israel welcomed progress towards promoting clearer and fairer listing by the 1267 Committee, and urged further improvements when its mandate was next renewed.
She called on all Member States to ensure compliance with the critical work of the 1540 Committee, saying that periodic briefings by that body’s Expert Coordinator could help enhance Member States’ understanding of its work. Close cooperation between all counter-terrorism bodies should also be encouraged. Israel underlined the threat posed by the transfer of weapons and capabilities by Member States to terrorist organizations, particularly in the Middle East. Ongoing efforts by Iran and Syria to provide Hamas and Hizbullah with sophisticated and deadly weapons were in violation of numerous Council resolutions.
JORGE ARGÜELLO ( Argentina) said the world was made aware every day that the use of force could not and must not be the only response to terrorism. With that in mind, Argentina had ratified the 12 United Nations conventions on terrorism and adopted the pertinent domestic measures. It had also ratified the Inter-American Convention against Terrorism and signed the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism. Argentina’s commitment to the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery was a clear commitment to international peace and security, allowing at the same time the domestic development and application of duel technologies for peaceful use in the country’s pursuit of socio-economic development.
In compliance with its obligations under resolutions 1540 (2004) and 1810 (2008), Argentina had submitted its report, which had been followed by subsequent updates, he said. At the domestic level and with the initial support of the United States Department of Energy, the country had established a technical group for training foreign invited experts on technologies involved in the identification of sensitive goods. The last course had taken place in 2008 and had included experts from Chile, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay.
Turning to the work of the 1267 Committee, he said the review of its listing guidelines could serve as a guide for the other Committees and would go a long way towards fulfilling the mandate given to the Council by the General Assembly 2005 World Summit to secure clear and fair measures for inclusion, as well as exclusion by granting humanitarian exemptions from the Consolidated List. The international community must double its efforts to ensure respect for the basic elements of due process and human rights.
JORGE VALERO ( Venezuela) reiterated his country’s full condemnation of terrorism and reaffirmed its commitment to countering it through strict adherence to human rights and humanitarian law. Declarations against terrorism by the Organization of American States (OAS), with Venezuela’s support, emphasized that all States should deny safe haven to those who financed, planned and committed or supported terrorist acts. Venezuela reiterated the call on the Security Council and the Counter-Terrorism Committee to activate all mechanisms available to them to demand the extradition from the United States to Venezuela of Luis Posada Carriles, a principal in the 1976 terrorist bombing of an airliner which had killed 73 people, after his escape from a Venezuelan prison with outside help.
ABDULLAH HUSSAIN HAROON ( Pakistan) said his country was confronting terrorists with a solemn determination to defeat them. The reinvigorated campaign of the past three weeks against those who challenged the writ of the Government and tormented people in the regions they tried to dominate had been succeeding, but it had also brought about the biggest internal dislocation in the country’s history as those people tried to escape being used as human shields.
He said that, since the 2007 visit of the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate, Pakistan had done much to counter the financing of terrorism through legislation, the monitoring of banks, compliance with international instruments, the freezing of 128 bank accounts and other measures. Pakistan was also working on other important recommendations of the CTED report, though some legal recommendations required further study. It was to be hoped that the Counter-Terrorism Committee and its Executive Directorate would soon be able to deliver the assistance it had promised for capacity-building, since Pakistan’s law enforcement agencies were in dire need of basic counter-terrorism equipment.
He also expressed hope that the Council would combine various anti-terrorism initiatives into one comprehensive sanctions regime. The biggest challenge to the Al-Qaida and Taliban sanctions regime came from the increasing number of court cases, some of them from Pakistani courts. To win those cases, the exclusive sharing of verifiable evidence with the courts and a time limit for listings might be considered. Pakistan was doing its best to ensure effective implementation of the sanctions regime, and had benefited from visits by the Al-Qaida and Taliban Sanctions Monitoring Team in that regard. As for resolution 1540 (2004), Pakistan had joined the consensus on that decision, but the arrangement should not be perpetuated at the cost of the revival and effectiveness of the multilateral disarmament machinery.
CHRISTIAN WENAWESER ( Liechtenstein) recalled that in January, his country had submitted its sixth report to the Counter-Terrorism Committee, in response to comments contained in the Preliminary Implementation Assessment prepared by the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate. Liechtenstein appreciated the Assessment as a useful tool for measuring success in implementing resolution 1373 (2001). Recent measures taken by its Government to that end included the recent adoption of legislation aimed at preventing the use of financial systems for money-laundering and terrorism-financing. Liechtenstein would continue to take all necessary measures, in conformity with the rule of law and applicable human rights standards, to prevent any potential abuse of its financial sector for purposes of terrorism.
Due process in the Council’s terrorism-related sanctions was only one among a range of issues that must be addressed to ensure the global fight was in conformity with international human rights and humanitarian law, he continued. In that spirit, Liechtenstein and Mexico had hosted a presentation at Headquarters two weeks ago on the findings of the Eminent Jurists’ panel on “Terrorism, Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights”. That report showed very clearly that security and human rights were not mutually exclusive and that human rights were a necessary basis for legitimate and effective action against terrorism. Human rights standards inherently balanced sometimes competing interests and provided important guidance where difficult choices had to be made. In recent years, that balance had been sorely lacking in many parts of the world. Liechtenstein, therefore, echoed the call of the jurists for the United Nations, especially the Security Council, to take a leadership role in restoring respect for human rights in the counter-terrorism efforts of its agencies and Member States.
Taking the floor for the second time in response to a statement by the representative of Cuba, the representative of the United States said that, contrary to comments made earlier, the United States Government had taken a number of actions regarding Luis Posada Carriles. Most recently, it had obtained an indictment against Posada Carriles, charging him with violation of immigration laws. The case was currently scheduled for trial later this year.
Also taking the floor for a second time was the representative of Syria, whosaid nothing could justify terrorism, which his country denounced very firmly, regardless of its forms, motives and justification. That was an international position, in line with the General Assembly’s Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. Syria supported and continued to support that Strategy. So, with that in mind, the “nonsensical attempt by the representative of Israel to confuse terrorism and the right of resistance carried out by populations under foreign occupation did not deceive anyone”.
The principal purpose of those comments was to distract attention from Israel’s own acts of terrorism in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the occupied Syrian Golan and in Southern Lebanon, he said, adding that the international community did not consider Palestinian refugees to be terrorists. Syria called for the full implementation of resolutions aimed at ensuring the refugees were allowed to return home. The annals of United Nations history were full of examples of Israel’s terrorist acts, and humanity would not forget. Israel was “the master of terrorism”.
Also taking the floor a second time, in response to the United States, a representative of Cuba said Mr. Posada Carriles had never been charged with terrorist activities by the United States, and was being charged with more minor infractions. However, there was ample evidence of his terrorist activities, and he should be returned to Venezuela. Cuba reiterated that the new United States Administration had a chance to end its support for terrorist activities, remove Cuba from its list of terrorism-supporting countries, and move towards cooperation and away from confrontation.
* *** *For information media • not an official record