Upholding Tradition of Consensus, Sixth Committee Concludes Seventy-Eighth Session, Approving 16 Draft Resolutions, Two Draft Texts
Concluding its seventy-eighth session today, the Sixth Committee (Legal) approved without a vote 16 draft resolutions, one draft decision and a draft letter, as speakers, welcoming the opening of the Trusteeship’s curtains, also expressed diverging views on the Committee’s tradition of consensus.
Spotlighting how consensus impacted negotiations on the text concerning the expulsion of aliens, El Salvador’s representative, also speaking for Brazil, Colombia and Costa Rica, pointed out that the Sixth Committee’s tradition demonstrated how that practice often means blocking proposals that aim for more interactive dialogue.
On the contrary, underscored the representative of Slovakia, the draft resolution on “Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)” demonstrates that the Committee “is capable of fulfilling its mandate while maintaining consensus even in situations of seemingly irreconcilable views among delegations”.
Mexico’s representative countered that stance, declaring: “In the Sixth Committee’s practice, we have never seen such a watered-down resolution.” The minority of States abused consensus to prevent any mention of the International Law Commission’s draft conclusions and recommendations, he added, noting that the text on jus cogens neglects to reflect the positions of many delegations.
Building on that and speaking for a group of countries, Lebanon’s delegate said: “To be clear, consensus should not be a means of translating the opposition of a vocal minority into the general will of the international community.” Expressing concern about the consequences of the process, he noted that it sends a negative signal to the Commission.
The representative of Mauritius also highlighted such implications for the Commission, recalling the withdrawal of a proposal concerning a possible study of universal jurisdiction by the Commission because of the inability to achieve consensus. For that reason, a technical update of the text was considered a better option, she said.
The Sixth Committee also underlined the importance of a continued practice of discussions between members of both the Committee and the Commission throughout the year, approving the resolution on the International Law Commission’s report dedicated to the work of its seventy-fourth session. It would also underline the need to allow sufficient time for the Sixth Committee’s consideration of the Commission’s report.
In that regard, to ensure that International Law Week will take place during the week of 21 October 2024, the next session of the Committee will start earlier, said Enrico Milano (Italy), Vice-Chair of the Sixth Committee for its seventy-eighth session, introducing the draft decision “Provisional programme of work of the Sixth Committee for the seventy-ninth session”.
The Sixth Committee also adopted numerous draft resolutions pertaining to the work of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law. Their texts concern, inter alia, documents on mediation for international investment disputes, codes of conduct for arbitrators and judges in the resolution of such disputes as well as a guide on access to credit for micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises.
At the close of the meeting, Mr. Milano reported that the Sixth Committee discussed 26 substantive agenda items over the course of 37 meetings during the main part of its session this year. The Committee adopted 17 draft resolutions and 10 draft decisions, also approving one letter on an agenda item allocated jointly with the Fifth Committee.
Congratulating all delegations on this session’s outcomes, he said that, because of their flexibility and cooperation, the Committee was able to conclude its session on time while preserving its tradition of consensus.
The Sixth Committee will resume its session in April 2024 to continue its consideration on the topic “Crimes against humanity”.
Introduction and Action on Draft Resolutions and Decisions
The Sixth Committee turned to the draft resolution “Criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission” (document A/C.6/78/L.6).
The representative of Bangladesh, introducing the draft resolution, noted that the current text largely reiterates and further strengthens the previous resolution. Updates of references to the previous resolution in preambular paragraph 22 and operative paragraph 15 were accepted. In addition, a number of paragraphs were amended with technical updates.
By the text, the General Assembly would express concern over all alleged crimes on the part of United Nations officials and experts on mission and welcome the Secretary-General’s reaffirmation that there will be no tolerance for any corruption at the United Nations. The Assembly would express concern over the low rate of response from States to referred allegations, particularly the significant number of instances where States to which allegations have been referred have failed to advise the UN on any steps taken in response. It would further urge States to ensure that crimes by such officials and experts do not go unpunished and to consider establishing jurisdiction over certain crimes committed by their nationals while serving as UN officials or experts on mission. The General Assembly would also stress the importance of ensuring that victims of criminal conduct are made aware of available victim assistance and support — including from a gender perspective.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The representative of Canada, speaking in explanation of position after action, and on behalf of a group of States and the European Union, expressed regret that, despite broad support, the Sixth Committee was once again unable to achieve consensus on any of the constructive proposals made by delegations during negotiations. Among them was Canada’s proposal to request the Secretary-General to look at potential practices to improve the screening and vetting procedures for UN personnel. Such practices include transparent mechanisms jointly owned by the Organization and States, through a whole-of-system approach. Strengthening the measures ahead of deployment would contribute to the safety of both UN staff and civilians. Opposition comes from a very small minority, he noted.
The Sixth Committee then turned to the draft resolution “Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its fifty-sixth session” (document A/C.6/78/L.7).
The representative of Austria, introducing the draft resolution, detailed its operative paragraphs, stressing that the text represents a consensus of all delegations.
By the text, the General Assembly would request the Secretary-General to continue to operate, through the Commission’s Secretariat, the repository of published information as a continuation of the project until the end of 2024, to be funded by voluntary contributions. It would endorse the Commission’s conviction that the implementation and use of modern private law standards in international law are essential for advancing good governance, economic development and eradication of poverty and hunger. It would further reiterate its call to the Secretary-General that any invitation to limit, where appropriate, the length of documents should not adversely affect either the quality of the presentation or the substance of the documents and would also request him to continue the publication of Commission standards and the provision of summary records of its meetings.
The Sixth Committee then approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The Committee then turned to the draft resolution titled “Model Provisions on Mediation for International Investment Disputes and Guidelines on Mediation for International Investment Disputes of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law” (document A/C.6/78/L.8).
The representative of Singapore, introducing the text, said that the resolution is based on relevant decisions adopted by the Commission earlier in 2023. Detailing its terms, he said that the text represents a consensus among delegations.
By the text, the General Assembly would recommend the use of the Model Provisions by States and other relevant stakeholders involved in the negotiation of international investment instruments, along with their incorporation into such instruments. It would also recommend the use of the Guidelines by States, investors, mediators, interested institutions and other relevant stakeholders to foster a better understanding of mediation with regard to resolution of international investment disputes. Further, the Assembly would request the Secretary-General to ensure that the Model Provisions and the Guidelines become generally known and available by disseminating them broadly to Governments and other interested bodies.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The Sixth Committee then turned its attention to the draft resolution “Code of Conduct for Arbitrators in International Investment Dispute Resolution and Code of Conduct for Judges in International Investment Dispute Resolution with respective commentary of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law” (document A/C.6/78/L.9).
The representative of Austria introduced the resolution that related to relevant decisions adopted by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) earlier this year and recommended its adoption without a vote.
Through the text’s provisions, the General Assembly would recommend the use of the Code of Conduct for Arbitrators by arbitrators, former arbitrators, candidates and disputing parties, as well as administering institutions, regarding international investment disputes and would recommend the use of the Code of Conduct for Judges by standing mechanisms. Further, it would recommend that Governments and other relevant stakeholders involved in the negotiation of international investment instruments and the enactment of legislation governing foreign investments make reference to the Code of Conduct for Arbitrators and the Code of Conduct for Judges. To that end, the Assembly would request the Secretary-General to ensure that these publications become generally known and available by disseminating them broadly to Governments and other interested bodies.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The Sixth Committee then turned to the draft article “Guide on Access to Credit for Micro-, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law” (document A/C.6/78/L.10).
The representative of El Salvador, introducing the draft resolution, said the document is based on the text adopted by UNCITRAL earlier this year and represents a consensus among delegations.
Further to the text, the General Assembly would request the Secretary-General to publish the Guide as part of its micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises series, including electronically, in the United Nations six official languages, and to disseminate it, together with any relevant information materials, to Governments and other interested bodies. It would further recommend that States give due consideration to the Guide when adopting or revising legislation relevant to access to credit by micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises, and would encourage States to ensure that all such enterprises have equal access to credit.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The Sixth Committee then turned to the draft resolution “United Nations Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination and Wider Appreciation of International Law” (document A/C.6/78/L.19).
The representative of Ghana, introducing the text, said that operative paragraphs 2, 5, 6 and 17 would provide a mandate in 2024 for the organization of and the award of fellowships for the United Nations Regional Courses, the International Law Fellowship Programme and further development of the United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law for the publication and dissemination of legal texts and websites maintained by the Office of Legal Affairs.
By the text, the draft resolution would, among other things, provide for the award of the Hamilton Shirley Amerasinghe Memorial Fellowship on the Law of the Sea in 2024, subject to the availability of funds. Furthermore, the General Assembly would encourage the Codification Division to cooperate with the African Institute of International Law on the second International Law Seminar for African Universities, to be held in Ethiopia in 2024, and would appoint 25 Member States as members of the Advisory Committee on the United Nations Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination and Wider Appreciation of International Law for a period of four years, beginning on 1 January 2024.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The Committee then turned to the draft resolution titled “Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its seventy-fourth session” (document A/C.6/78/L.12).
The representative of Colombia, introducing the text, said that the draft resolution contains technical updates, along with those that reflect the Commission’s work at its seventy-fourth session. Detailing several specific changes, she recalled that the draft programme of work for the Sixth Committee during the seventy-ninth session of the General Assembly was sent to all delegations on 14 November. She then proposed an oral amendment to operative paragraph 44 to include the date on which the Committee’s debate on the Commission’s report will begin during that session — 25 October 2024.
By the text, the General Assembly would stress the desirability of further enhancing dialogue between the Commission — particularly its special rapporteurs — and the Committee and, in this context, encourage the continued practice of discussions between the members of both bodies throughout the year. It would also encourage delegations, during the debate on the Commission’s report, to consider presenting concise, focused statements, as well as underline the need to allow sufficient time for the consideration of the report in the Committee. The Assembly would also request the Secretary-General to continue providing the International Law Seminar with adequate services and encourage him to continue considering ways to improve the Seminar’s structure and content. In addition, the Assembly would encourage the Commission to continue considering ways in which specific issues — on which the views of Governments would be of particular interest to it — could be framed to help Governments have a better appreciation of the issues on which responses are required.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution, as orally revised, without a vote.
The Committee then turned to the draft resolution titled “Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)” (document A/C.6/78/L.21).
The representative of Slovakia, introducing the resolution, said there is common acceptance that this draft resolution should not become an established practice to consider future International Law Commission products. “It is my firm and informed belief that the draft resolution reflects the views and positions of all delegations expressed in consultations over the last year to the extent possible to maintain the consensual decision-making practice of this Committee and represents a sensible and broadly accepted compromise,” he added. Thanking all delegations for their constructive engagement and, at times, limitless flexibility, he also noted: “This draft resolution demonstrates that this Committee is capable of fulfilling its mandate while maintaining consensus even in situations of seemingly irreconcilable views among delegations.”
By the text, the General Assembly would welcome the conclusion of the International Law Commission’s work on such peremptory norms and take note of its adoption of the draft conclusions on the identification and legal consequences of such norms. Also expressing its appreciation to the Commission for its continuing contribution to the codification and progressive development of international law, the Assembly would take note of such draft conclusions. Further, it would take note of the range of comments and observations on the draft conclusions — whether submitted by Governments in writing or expressed in the Committee’s debates — including those made at the Assembly’s seventy-seventh session.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The representative of Lebanon, speaking for a group of countries in explanation of position after action, said the peremptory norms of international law represent fundamental principles of general international law and several are codified in the Charter of the United Nations. They are fundamental norms and their violation entails an aggravated regime of State responsibility under the law of State responsibility. The manner in which the Sixth Committee began negotiations on this topic and some delegations’ approach to the Commission’s work is very concerning. “It sends a negative signal to the outside world on the commitment to those fundamental rules,” he said. Rather than allowing positions on the content of Commission products to be dealt with by States individually, when applying or implementing it, this time delegations’ positions on the topic were reflected in the corresponding resolution.
He also added that he is extremely concerned with the consequence of this process, which sends the Commission a negative signal regarding its work. It is concerning for the progressive development and codification of international law, especially a few months away from the Commission’s seventy-fifth session. “We reiterate our disappointment with the outcome of this negotiation,” he said, also stressing: “To be clear, consensus should not be a means of translating the opposition of a vocal minority into the general will of the international community.” The countries for which he speaks will continue to uphold and strive for an effective and efficient Sixth Committee, representative of the views of delegations, which contributes substantively to the strengthening of the rule of law in international relations, he emphasized.
The representative of China, noting that this is the second year the resolution has been considered, added that she appreciated the work of all delegations. However, she also noted that she does not believe the text faithfully reflects the concerns of all parties. The Charter serves as a guideline for international law. The criteria for identifying peremptory norms should not be lower than customary norms for international law. Her delegation opposed lowering the criteria for peremptory norms, she said, stressing that there should not be a pushing of a text in which a consensus had not been reached.
The representative of Argentina said that while his delegation deeply values the work of the Commission on the codification of international law, it was regrettable that an annex was included with examples of such norms, including the right to self-determination. In no way was he rejecting the existence of the right to self-determination, he stressed. However, in the context of decolonization, self-determination is not a right applicable to any human community, but only to peoples subjected to foreign subjugation, domination and exploitation, as established in the first paragraph of the General Assembly’s 1960 resolution, "Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples". His delegation supported the draft resolution in the interests of consensus, bearing in mind that it was a balanced text that referred not only to the Commission's conclusions, but observations and comments that States made on that draft, he said.
The representative of Singapore said that, while his country joined the consensus, the approach taken on that resolution and the resolution on the responsibility of international organization should not be taken as acceptance of any change of the Sixth Committee’s working methods and practices. That pertains particularly to placing a draft text of a resolution under a silence procedure before adoption, he said, welcoming the coordinator’s confirmation that the present resolution should not become an established practice in considering future products of the International Law Commission.
The representative of Morocco underscored that his country’s final position on the resolution in no way changes its official observations and comments communicated in August and reiterated in October 2023 on some substantial aspects of the draft conclusions. Despite the complex nature of jus cogens, the draft articles were adopted in record time, not allowing the subject to mature. New concepts, such as fundamental rules of international humanitarian law, were inserted without having enjoyed the unanimity of States. Unfortunately, the comments communicated in writing were not all appropriately reflected in the final wording of the draft conclusions, in particular, conclusions 3, 7, 9, 16, 22 and 23. He reiterated the need to maintain guarantees that should be granted to the progressive development of international law by using purely convention-based instruments, thereby privileging the sovereign equality of States.
The representative of India expressed belief that peremptory norms of international law are hierarchically superior to other norms of international law. For its codification as peremptory, a norm should be well established or acknowledged by international community as a whole, devoid of any differences. Some of the non-exhaustive norms are not well-defined in international law and do not enjoy absolute consensus of States, she pointed out, noting that the grounds and evidence in support of listed norms are ambiguous and unclear. The interpretation of their applicability differs among States. While expressing disappointment that India’s request to delete the non-exhaustive list could not be accommodated, she said that her country joined the consensus because of the topic’s importance.
The representative of the United Kingdom, pointing out that the resolution represents a fair balance between different views, noted the importance of the Sixth Committee not taking the negotiations into another session. Nevertheless, the draft conclusions do not in all respects reflect current law or practice. The United Kingdom’s position remains as set out in the submissions to the International Law Commission as well as the statement to the Committee during its previous session. It is essential that the draft conclusions are taken forward alongside the views of States, he emphasized, welcoming that paragraph 4 of the resolution takes note of their comments.
The representative of Mexico, noting that the draft resolution is “completely unbalanced”, said that it neglects to reflect the positions of many delegations. “In the Sixth Committee’s practice, we have never seen such a watered-down resolution,” he added. Stressing that the minority of States led the practice of consensus to the “extreme” to prevent any mention of the Commission’s draft conclusions and recommendations, he observed that the “abuse of consensus” has prevailed. He further expressed concern about the negative message the Committee is sending to the Commission that reduces its work to the very minimum and ignores its recommendations. Thus, he disassociated himself from the consensus on the text.
The representative of Saudi Arabia said that her delegation joined the consensus, while expressing reservations regarding the proposal mentioned in paragraph 41 of the report on the draft conclusions. In that regard, the draft conclusions did not consider all commentaries of States. Pointing to the ambiguity of the concept of “basic values”, she said it might create ambiguity in determining jus cogens. Also, observing that the concept “the majority of States” is not clear, she said that the respective conclusion also runs counter to the definition of peremptory norms. Stressing the need for acceptance and recognition of all States to achieve a legal impact, she said that draft conclusion 23 should be limited to determining the nature of jus cogens without adding a list of norms.
The representative of Cameroon said it would have been better to consider jus cogens further rather than transposing the previous work from 1969, noting that this principle “protects humanity”. Stressing that “it is better to have a poor arrangement than a very long process”, he said that for this reason his delegation joined consensus. Also noting that it would be better to mention one element of jus cogens, he expressed his solidarity with paragraph 31. Observing that the International Law Commission is the “legal advisor of all legal advisors”, he underscored that it is not a parliament and not a church. For this reason, Member States go through the work in extreme detail and provide their opinions. Delegations represent their States in the Sixth Committee, he emphasized, calling for vigilance in considering nations’ sensitivities and peculiarities.
The Committee then turned to the draft resolution titled “Expulsion of aliens” (document A/C.6/78/L.16).
The representative of Haiti, introducing the text, said that it broadly reflects — and further strengthens — resolution 75/137 of 15 December 2020. He also reported that, during three rounds of informal consultations, numerous bilateral negotiations and several small-group meetings, delegations examined several proposals regarding operative paragraph 3. Noting that the final text of that paragraph represents a compromise, he added that several other paragraphs contain technical updates. The text as a whole reflects consensus between delegations.
By its terms, the General Assembly would express its appreciation to the Commission for its continuing contribution to the codification and progressive development of international law. It would also acknowledge the comments expressed by Governments in the Committee at the Assembly’s seventy-eighth session on the subject and decide to include this item in the provisional agenda of its eighty-first session with a view to examining the question of the form that might be given to the relevant draft articles, or any other appropriate action. Further, the Assembly would invite Member States to further engage on the subject and to address in their interventions not only this question, but also their views on the content of the draft articles.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The representative of El Salvador, also speaking for Brazil, Colombia and Costa Rica in explanation of position after action, emphasized that review of this topic is “intimately linked” to the norms of international human rights law, and should be undertaken in light of States’ obligation to guarantee the human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons within their jurisdictions. However, negotiations on this draft resolution were an example of how the practice of consensus often means blocking proposals that aim for more interactive dialogue. While recognizing that a long cycle of technical postponements has been broken, she nevertheless stated that operative paragraph 3 represents “a small step forward”. Expressing hope that delegations will be able to reach a common understanding on the appropriate future for the draft articles on this topic, she underscored that only a candid exchange thereon will bring positions together on an issue that requires coordinated action from the international community.
The Assembly then turned to the draft resolution “Report of the Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on the Strengthening of the Role of the Organization” (document (A/C.6/78/L.5).
The representative of Egypt, introducing the draft resolution, said the text is based on the resolution adopted last year, with necessary technical updates, especially paragraph 2 of the annex regarding the mandate of the Special Committee and paragraph 5(b) regarding subtopics of the thematic debate in future sessions. It reflects a consensus among delegates.
By the text, the General Assembly would request the Special Charter Committee to continue its consideration of all proposals concerning the question of the maintenance of international peace and security in all its aspects to strengthen the UN role. It would also ask it to consider the implementation of the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations to third States affected by the application of sanctions and would request the Secretary-General to brief the Special Committee about their implementation. Further terms would have the General Assembly recognize the important role of the International Court of Justice in adjudicating disputes among States, and would request the Secretary-General to distribute, in due course, the advisory opinions requested by the principal organs of the United Nations as official documents. The Assembly would also encourage the continued updating of the websites for the Repertory and for the Repertoire.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The Committee then turned to the draft resolution titled “The rule of law at the national and international levels” (document A/C.6/78/L.14).
The representative of Mexico, introducing the draft resolution, noted that the text, among necessary technical updates, includes several new elements, such as in preambular paragraphs 12 and 13 as well as operative paragraph 7. The delegations also agreed on the subtopic “The full, equal and equitable participation at all levels in the international legal system” to focus their comments during the Sixth Committee debate at the seventy-ninth session of the General Assembly, she said.
By the text, the General Assembly would stress the importance of adherence to the rule of law at the national level, along with the need to strengthen support to Member States, upon their request, in the domestic implementation of their respective international obligations. Such support would include enhanced technical assistance and capacity-building to develop, reinforce and maintain domestic institutions active in the promotion of the rule of law at the national and international levels, subject to national ownership, strategies and priorities. It would also call on the Secretary-General and the United Nations system to systematically address aspects of the rule of law in relevant activities, including the participation of women in rule-of-law-related activities, and recognize the importance of the rule of law to virtually all areas of United Nations engagement. Further, the Assembly would stress the importance of promoting the sharing of national practices and of inclusive dialogue.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The representative of Syria, speaking in explanation of position after action, noted that his country disassociates from any consensus regarding paragraph 3 of the draft resolution. His reservations concern references to the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism in the Secretary-General’s report. Such references are imbalanced, inappropriate and not something that the Secretary-General should have mentioned. Joining consensus on the resolution does not mean that his delegation approves that Mechanism, its mandate or its activities that are completely illegitimate, he underscored.
The Sixth Committee then turned to the draft resolution titled “The scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction” (document A/C.6/78/L.15).
The representative of Mauritius, introducing the text and highlighting the proposal by some delegations concerning a possible study of universal jurisdiction by the International Law Commission, said Member States were not able to reach consensus on this proposal. For this reason, the proponent delegation withdrew their proposal, and a technical update of the text was considered a better option, she explained.
By the text, the General Assembly would decide that the Committee shall continue its consideration of the scope and application of universal jurisdiction, without prejudice to the consideration of this topic and related issues in other United Nations forums. For this purpose, it would reiterate its decision to establish, at its seventy-ninth session, a working group in the Committee to continue a thorough discussion of this item. The Assembly, in this context, would invite that working group to consider and comment “on the relevant elements of a working concept of universal jurisdiction”. Further, it would invite Member States and relevant observers, as appropriate, to submit — before 26 April 2024 — information and observations on this item, including information on the relevant applicable international treaties and on their national legal rules and judicial practice. The Assembly would also decide that the working group shall be open to all Member States, and that relevant observers will be invited to participate in its work.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The representative of Cameroon, speaking in explanation of position after action, reiterated that in 2022 his delegation clearly said that for his country there was a problem of understanding the subject of universal jurisdiction. Although he was reassured that this idea would be properly reflected, it was not the case. Stressing that universal jurisdiction is an African initiative, he expressed regret that “Africa does not see itself in this initiative”. Noting that universal jurisdiction does not mean that State “X” has leeway when State “Y” does something else, he underscored that one State has a latitude to prosecute the national of the other State.
The Committee then turned to the draft resolution titled “Responsibility of international organizations” (document A/C.6/78/L.18).
The representative of Brazil, introducing the text, recalled the diverging positions expressed by Member States during the Committee’s debate on this topic. Following five rounds of informal consultations, smaller-group meetings and numerous bilateral consultations, he said that the draft resolution strikes a compromise and reflects a balance between the views expressed by delegations.
Through the resolution, the General Assembly would take note, once again, of the draft articles on the responsibility of international organizations. It would also request the Secretary-General to update the compilation of decisions of international courts, tribunals and other bodies referring to the articles and to invite Governments and international organizations to submit information on their practice in this regard, as well as written comments on any future action regarding the articles. In this context, the Assembly would request the Secretary-General to submit this material well in advance of its eighty-first session and, further, would invite States to engage in substantive dialogue on this topic on an informal basis during intersessional periods. Additionally, the Assembly would decide to include this item in the provisional agenda of its eighty-first session and invite the Committee to consider, at a later stage, the framework in which it could continue its examination of this topic.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The representative of Iran, speaking in explanation of position after action, said that — while his delegation constructively participated in negotiations and joined consensus — its position on preambular paragraph 4 must be clarified. The subject of responsibility of international organizations is of major importance, not only in the context of the relationship between States and international organizations, but also in that of the relationship between individuals and such organizations. He therefore stressed that this issue must be duly considered by the International Law Commission and Member States in the future.
The General Assembly then turned to the draft resolution “Strengthening and promoting the international treaty framework” (document A/C.6/78/L.4).
The representative of Singapore, introducing the resolution, said this item was first included during the Assembly’s seventy-third session in 2018 to give Member States an opportunity to address shortcomings in treaty registration, exchange views regarding their treaty-making practices, identify trends and share best practices, and discuss other treaty-related topics. The draft resolution contains a number of substantive updates since the technical updates made in 2021, including calling on the Secretary-General to strengthen the capacity of the Treaty Section to carry out its functions and responsibilities under the Charter.
By its terms, the General Assembly would call on the Secretary-General to strengthen the capacity of the Treaty Section to perform its responsibilities and functions and to meet the increasing demands in the performance of these functions. It would also decide to undertake a regular thematic debate in the Sixth Committee to foster a technical exchange of views on practice relating to the strengthening and promoting of the international treaty framework. The Assembly would further invite Member States to focus their comments during the debate at the eightieth session of the General Assembly on the subtopic “The role of technology in shaping treaty-making practice”. It would also request the Secretary-General to strengthen the capacity of the Treaty Section to support the regular thematic debate, including for the preparation of the report on the subtopic selected for each session.
The Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The Committee then turned to the draft resolution titled “Measures to eliminate international terrorism” (document A/C.6/78/L.13).
The representative of Canada, introducing the draft resolution, noted that the general sense among delegations was to avoid a replication of the efforts undertaken at the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy earlier in 2023. Accordingly, the draft resolution is mostly a technical update of last year’s resolution, she said, detailing changes in preambular paragraphs 2, 3 and 19, as well as the deletion of operative paragraph 23.
By its terms, the General Assembly would reiterate that criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are unjustifiable in any circumstances. Further, the Assembly would reiterate its call on States to refrain from financing, encouraging, providing training for or otherwise supporting terrorist activities. It would also express concern over the increase in incidents of kidnapping and hostage-taking with demands for ransom or political concessions by terrorist groups and over the acute, growing threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters. Additionally, the Assembly would urge all States and the Secretary-General, in their efforts to prevent international terrorism, to make the best use of existing United Nations institutions. The Assembly would, as well, decide to recommend that the Committee — at the Assembly’s seventy-ninth session — establish a working group with a view to finalizing the process on the draft comprehensive convention on international terrorism.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The Committee then turned to the agenda item “Administration of Justice at the United Nations”.
The representative of Hungary, introducing a draft letter from the Chair of the Sixth Committee to the President of the General Assembly on that topic, stated that the text, among other things, renews its interest in improving the regulatory framework and measures to address racism and promote dignity for all at the United Nations, while also supporting the consideration of various mechanisms to increase the use of mediation for workplace disputes. Furthermore, the Committee requested the Internal Justice Council to provide more information on its proposal for a pilot programme of judicial mediation and continued to address the issue of staff representation and voluntary supplemental funding mechanism of the Office of Staff Legal Assistance.
Further by the text, the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) is encouraged to regularize the pilot project concerning access by non-staff personnel to services provided by the Office of the Ombudsman and Mediation Services. Taking note of the Secretary-General’s revised proposal to amend article 9 of the statute of the United Nations Dispute Tribunal by adding a new paragraph 4, the Sixth Committee also recommended the approval of several amendments to the rules of procedure of the Dispute Tribunal. In addition, it suggested to postpone the decision on the three remaining amendments to the seventy-ninth session of the General Assembly.
The Vice-Chair then recommended the letter be signed by the Chair of the Sixth Committee and be sent to the President of the General Assembly and noted that, following past practice, the letter would contain a request that it be brought to the attention of the Chair of the Fifth Committee and circulated as a document of the General Assembly.
The Sixth Committee authorized the Chair to sign the letter and forward it to the President of the General Assembly.
The Committee then turned to the draft resolution titled “Report of the Committee on Relations with the Host Country” (document A/C.6/78/L.11).
The representative of Cyprus, introducing the text, detailed several major changes and spotlighted operative paragraph 2 that notes the serious concerns raised by Member States regarding the host country’s inappropriate treatment and screening of certain high-level officials. Further, while operative paragraph 10 acknowledges that actions taken in 2023 have led to a relative reduction in processing times for entry visas for certain missions, it also expresses concern that certain staff members of other missions and the Secretariat continue to be adversely impacted by processing times. After informal consultations, the draft resolution reflects consensus among delegations, he added.
By the text, the General Assembly would strongly urge the host country to remove all travel restrictions imposed by it on staff of certain missions and staff members of the Secretariat of certain nationalities. It would also express serious concern over multiple cases of denial and non-issuance of entry visas, emphasizing the importance of the full participation of all delegations in the work of the United Nations. Further, it would stress the need for permanent missions and the United Nations to benefit from appropriate banking services, anticipating that the host country will continue to assist the permanent missions accredited to the United Nations and their staff in obtaining such services. The Assembly, additionally, would reiterate its request to the Secretary-General to now give the most serious consideration and take any appropriate steps under section 21 of the Headquarters Agreement and intensify efforts to expedite resolution of issues.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.
The Sixth Committee then considered the draft decision “Provisional programme of work of the Sixth Committee for the seventy-ninth session” (document A/C.6/78/L.17) under the agenda item “Revitalization of the work of the General Assembly”.
ENRICO MILANO (Italy), Vice-Chair of the Sixth Committee, noted the session will start earlier on 2 October 2024 to ensure that International Law Week will take place during the week of 21 October. He also noted that, for the first time, the annual consideration of the revitalization of the General Assembly’s work will take place in two parts. The annual debate will take place on the session’s opening day next year. Further consideration will continue towards the end of the session to give delegations time to reflect on the working methods of next year’s session and comment on the proposal for the programme of work for the following eightieth session of the General Assembly.
The Sixth Committee approved the draft decision without a vote.
Election of Officers
The Vice-Chair of the Sixth Committee then turned to the item on the election of the officers of the Main Committees, noting that, as per General Assembly resolution 72/313, concerning the “pattern for the rotation of the Chairs of the Main Committees of the General Assembly”, the Chair of the Sixth Committee for the seventy-ninth session will come from the Western European and other States group. The Committee will meet one more time during the present session of the General Assembly in approximately early June 2024 to elect the Bureau for the seventy-ninth session, he said, proposing that regional groups hold consultations in due course to ensure that the Committee will be in a position to elect its next Chair, three Vice-Chairs and a Rapporteur.
Closing Remarks
ENRICO MILANO (Italy), Vice-Chair of the Sixth Committee, reported that the Sixth Committee discussed 26 substantive agenda items over the course of 37 meetings during the main part of its session this year. The Committee adopted 17 draft resolutions and ten draft decisions, also approving one letter on an agenda item allocated jointly with the Fifth Committee. He also announced that the Committee will resume its session in April 2024 to continue its consideration on the topic, “crimes against humanity”. Congratulating all delegations on the seventy-eighth session’s outcomes, he thanked them for their support, cooperation, professionalism and understanding. Because of delegations’ flexibility and cooperation, the Committee was able to conclude its session on time while preserving its tradition of reaching agreement by consensus, he said.