Sixty-seventh General Assembly
Plenary
60th Meeting (AM)
General Assembly Strongly Condemns Widespread, Systematic Human Rights Violations
in Syria, as it Adopts 56 Resolutions Recommended by Third Committee
Also Calls for Elimination of Female Genital Mutilation, Death Penalty Moratorium;
Other Resolutions Address Broad Range of Human Rights, Humanitarian, Social Issues
The General Assembly today
adopted 56 resolutions and 9 decisions recommended by its Third
Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural), including a text strongly
condemning “widespread and systematic” gross human rights violations by
Syrian authorities and calling on them to immediately end such abuse.
By the resolution on
Syria — adopted by a recorded vote of 135 in favour to 12 against, with
36 abstentions (Annex XV) — the Assembly called on that country to
protect the population and fully comply with its international law
obligations. It urged the immediate release of all persons arbitrarily
detained, stressing its support for a peaceful, democratic and
pluralistic society, and demanding that Syria provide the
international commission of inquiry unfettered access to all areas of
the country.
Speaking before action,
Syria’s delegate said the politicized resolution on her country hindered
the search for peaceful solutions based on the six-point plan and work
of the United Nations and Arab League Envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi.
She refuted the text’s allegations, saying that its co-sponsors —
Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Morocco —had escalated the violence by their
intervention in Syria’s internal affairs. Their support of terrorism
had led to the deaths of thousands of Syrians. Armed groups, backed by
the co-sponsors, continued to target pipelines, strategic food crops and
railways, aiming only to create conditions conducive to the collapse of
State institutions, and ultimately, anarchy. “This is tantamount to a
military attack,” she said.
In other notable action,
the Assembly adopted its first-ever text aimed at ending female genital
mutilation, concluding a determined effort by African States. By its
terms, the Assembly recognized that such mutilations were an
irreparable, irreversible abuse of the human rights of woman and girls,
and reaffirmed it as a serious threat to their health. States were
urged to condemn all such practices, whether committed within or outside
a medical institution, and take measures — including legislation — to
prohibit female genital mutilations, and protect women and girls from
that form of violence. By other terms, the Assembly called for the
continued observance of 6 February as the International Day of Zero
Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation.
Speaking after action, the
representative of Burkina Faso said the degrading practice of
female genital mutilation harmed women’s physical and moral integrity,
and was falsely justified under religious and cultural pretences. The
text’s adoption sent a strong political message, and one of hope for the
millions of women and girls facing that odious practice.
Africa — the resolution’s
standard bearer — had mobilized to combat female genital mutilation, he
said, with Governments showing political will to free women from its
yoke by launching programmes, adopting laws and releasing both human and
financial resources. Civil society was raising awareness and he
welcomed the campaign for a global ban on female genital mutilations
launched by the Inter-African Committee on Traditional Practices.
Indeed, the time had come to recognize women’s rights, break the silence
surrounding female genital mutilation and move towards its
elimination. He called on all co-sponsors to play an active role in
creating a world free of female genital mutilation.
The Assembly also advanced
its call to end the use of the death penalty with the passage — by
recorded vote of 111 in favour to 41 against, with 34 abstentions — of a
text calling on States to establish a moratorium on executions, with a
view to abolishing the practice (Annex XIII). It was the fourth such
text adopted since 2007. By its terms, the Assembly called on States to
progressively restrict the death penalty’s use and not impose capital
punishment for offences committed by persons below 18 years of age and
pregnant women. States were also called on to reduce the number of
offences for which the death penalty might be imposed.
Forty-one texts enjoyed
consensus, including those dealing with social development, women’s
advancement, children’s rights, indigenous peoples, crime prevention and
criminal justice and international drug control. Among them was an
annual omnibus text on rights of the child, which contained a section
devoted to indigenous children. By its terms, the Assembly called on
States to take measures to protect the rights of indigenous children
against all forms of discrimination, violence, abuse and exploitation,
and safeguard their right to access education.
For a second year, the
Assembly adopted a consensus text on combating intolerance, negative
stereotyping, stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to violence and
violence against persons based on religion or belief. Tabled again by
the representative of the United Arab Emirates on behalf of the
Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the Assembly, by the text,
called on States to adopt measures that criminalized incitement to
violence based on religion or belief.
A similarly titled
consensus text on freedom of religion or belief had the Assembly
recognize with deep concern rising violence against members of religious
and other communities in various parts of the world, including cases
motivated by Islamophobia, anti-Semitism and Christianophobia.
States were urged to ensure that no one was discriminated against on
the basis of religion or belief when accessing education, medical care,
employment, humanitarian assistance or social benefits.
Of the other two
country-specific texts adopted today, the historically contentious
resolution on the human rights situation in the Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea passed for the first time without a vote. The other
text on Iran was adopted by a vote of 86 in favour to 32 against, with
65 abstentions (Annex XIV). A similar text on Myanmar was postponed
pending a statement on budget implications by the Fifth Committee
(Administrative and Budgetary), as was a resolution on the Committee
against torture.
Recorded votes were also
required on resolutions concerning an international legal instrument for
older persons (54-5-118) (Annex I); glorification of Nazism (129-3-54)
(Annex II); follow-up to Durban Declaration (133-7-48) (Annex III);
Palestinian self-determination (179-7-3) (Annex IV); use of mercenaries
(128-54-7) (Annex V); human rights training centre (174-1-10)
(Annex VI); globalization (133-54-2) (Annex VII); extrajudicial
executions (117-0-67) (Annex VIII); unilateral coercive measures
(128-54-4) (Annex IX); the right to development (154-4-28) (Annex X);
promotion of peace (127-54-6) (Annex XI); and an equitable international
order (126-53-6) (Annex XII). A decision on programme planning also required a record vote (174-4-5) (Annex XVI).
The representatives of the
Philippines, Belarus, Iran, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,
Nigeria, China, Cuba and Venezuela spoke during action today.
The representatives of
Chile, Uruguay, Malawi, Belgium, Kenya, Viet Nam, Somalia, South
Sudan, Bahrain and South Africa spoke in a point of order.
The General Assembly will
reconvene at 10 a.m. Friday, 21 December, to take action on the reports
of its Second Committee (Economic and Financial).
Background
ial Development
The Assembly first took up the Committee’s report on social development (document
A/67/449), which contains six draft resolutions.
Draft re
The General Assembly met
to consider the 17 reports of the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian
and Cultural) and to take action on 58 draft resolutions and 9 draft
decisions contained therein.
Action on Third Committee Texts
The Assembly moved to take action on the Committee’s reports, which were introduced by Rapporteur Suljuk Mustansar Tarar ( Pakistan).
Soc
solution I on integrating volunteering in the next decade
was adopted without a vote, with the Assembly urging the United Nations
Volunteers to promote a youth volunteer programme called for in the
five-year action agenda of the Secretary-General. The Secretary-General
was requested to report to the seventieth session on the implementation
of the present resolution, including an action plan to be developed by
the United Nations Volunteers to integrate volunteering in peace and
development in the next decade and beyond.
Draft resolution II, entitled towards
a comprehensive and integral international legal instrument to promote
and protect the rights and dignity of older persons, was adopted by a
recorded vote of 54 in favour to 5 against (Canada, Israel, Seychelles,
South Sudan, United States), with 118 abstentions (see Annex I).
By its terms, the Assembly
decided that the open-ended working group on ageing shall — starting
from its fourth session, to be held in 2013 — consider proposals for
such an instrument, based on the holistic approach in the fields of
social development, human rights and non-discrimination, and gender
equality. The working group was requested to propose the main elements
that such an instrument should include. For his part, the
Secretary-General was requested to submit to the working group — by its
fourth session — existing international legal instruments, documents and
programmes addressing the situation of older persons.
Draft resolution III on realizing the Millennium
Development Goals and other internationally agreed development goals
for persons with disabilities toward 2015 and beyond was adopted
without a vote. By its terms, the Assembly welcomed the holding of the
high-level meeting on 23 September 2013 with the theme “The way
forward: a disability inclusive development agenda towards 2015 and
beyond”. States, international and regional organizations, and
financial institutions were urged to include persons with disabilities
and integrate the principle of accessibility in the monitoring of the
Development Goals. The United Nations was requested to facilitate
technical assistance, within existing resources, for the collection of
national and regional statistics on disability.
Draft resolution IV on implementation
of the outcome of the World Summit for Social Development and of the
twenty-fourth special session of the General Assembly also was
adopted without a vote. In so doing, the Assembly emphasized the need
to enhance the role of the Commission for Social Development, expressing
deep concern that attainment of social development objectives was being
hindered by the adverse impact of the world financial and economic
crisis, volatile energy and food prices and climate change challenges.
It called on international financial institutions to support developing
countries in achieving their social development goals by providing debt
relief. Governments were urged to develop social protection systems
that supported labour-market participation and reduced inequality and
social exclusion.
Next, draft resolution V on Preparations for and observance of the twentieth anniversary of the International Year of the Family
was adopted without a vote. By its terms, the Assembly, recognizing
that preparations for and observance of the twentieth anniversary in
2014 would draw attention to the Year’s objectives, urged States to
create a conducive environment to strengthen all families. Gender
equality and respect for the rights of all family members was essential.
Draft resolution VI on Follow-up to the Second World Assembly on Ageing
was also adopted without a vote. In doing so, the Assembly reaffirmed
the Political Declaration and the 2002 Madrid International Plan of
Action on Ageing, encouraging Governments to mainstream ageing issues
into poverty eradication strategies and national development plans.
States should reaffirm the role of United Nations focal points on
ageing, enhance technical cooperation and expand regional commissions’
role on such matters. The Secretary-General was requested to support
the Open-ended Working Group on Ageing within existing resources.
Speaking after action, the representative of the Philippines
recalled an incident which occurred at the time of the adoption of the
resolution entitled “Realizing the Millennium Development Goals and
other internationally agreed development goals for persons with
disabilities toward 2015 and beyond” in the Third Committee. An oral
statement of programme budget implications had been read in connection
with the document, in particular operative paragraph 7(b).
The resolution, as
originally tabled for adoption, had not had any programme budget
implications. The issuance of that statement had been made without
consultation with relevant substantive offices, such as Department of
Economic and Social Affairs and the Statistical Division, which had
earlier assured that no budget implications would arise from any
paragraph in the resolution. His delegation appreciated that the error
had been later rectified with the withdrawal of the oral statement.
However, such an oversight should have been avoided in the first place
to ensure that delegations were not made to take action based on
incorrect information, he said, requesting that such incidents be
avoided in the future.
In a point of order, the delegate of Chile
said he had voted in favour on that resolution, but it had not appeared
on the screen, requesting his country’s vote reflected in the record.
The Secretariat said the results could not be changed, but his request
would be reflected in written record.
Advancement of Women
The Assembly then turned to the Committee’s report on the Advancement of women (document
A/67/450), which contains five draft resolutions and two draft decisions.
Draft resolution I on Intensification of efforts to eliminate all forms of violence against women
was adopted without a vote, with the Assembly stressing that “violence
against women” meant any act of gender-based violence that resulted in
or was likely to result in physical, sexual or psychological harm or
suffering to women. It strongly condemned all violence against women
and girls, urging States to take a more systematic approach to
eliminating all forms of violence against women by establishing an
integrated national plan to combat such abuse. More broadly, the
Assembly called on all United Nations entities and Bretton Woods bodies
to better coordinate their work through joint programming prepared by
the Inter-Agency Task Force on Violence against Women.
Draft resolution II on Trafficking in women and girls,
also adopted without a vote, had the Assembly urge States that had not
yet done so to consider ratifying or acceding to the United Nations
Convention on Transnational Organized Crime and the Protocol to Prevent,
Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and
Children. Governments were urged to devise, enforce and strengthen
gender and age-sensitive measures to eliminate all forms of trafficking
in women and girls, including for sexual and economic exploitation, as
part of a comprehensive anti-trafficking strategy that integrated a
human rights perspective.
Draft resolution III on Intensifying global efforts for the elimination of female genital mutilations
was adopted without a vote, with the Assembly recognizing that female
genital mutilations were an irreparable, irreversible abuse of the human
rights of woman and girls, and a threat to their health. States were
urged to condemn all harmful practices affecting women and girls,
whether committed within or outside a medical institution, and take all
measures — including legislation — to protect women and girls from this
form of violence and end impunity. Punitive measures should be
complemented by awareness-raising and educational processes to promote
consensus towards the elimination of the practice. International
support was urged for a second phase of the Joint Programme on Female
Genital Mutilation/Cutting, due to end in December 2013, and continued
observance on 6 February of the International Day of Zero Tolerance to
Female Genital Mutilation.
Draft resolution IV on Supporting efforts to end obstetric fistula,
also adopted by consensus, had the Assembly stress the need to address
the social issues contributing to obstetric fistula, such as poverty,
lack of education for women and girls and lack of access to sexual and
reproductive health. States were called on to take all measures to
ensure the right to women and girls to enjoyment of the highest
attainable standard of health, including sexual and reproductive health,
and develop health systems, with a view to ensuring access without
discrimination. States and United Nations agencies were called on to
make treatment geographically and financially accessible, invest in
health systems and mobilize funds to provide free or subsidized maternal
health care and obstetric fistula repair.
Draft resolutionV on Follow-up
to the fourth World Conference on Women and full implementation of the
Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action and the outcome of the
twenty-third special session of the General Assembly was also
adopted without a vote. By the text, the Assembly reaffirmed the
commitments to gender equality and women’s advancement made at the
Millennium Summit and the 2005 World Summit. Further, it welcomed the
integration of a gender perspective into the outcome document of the
United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, commending the
United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women
(UN-Women) on its efforts to ensure coherence throughout the United
Nations in that regard. It reiterated the call for the Development
Cooperation Forum of the Economic and Social Council to increase efforts
to mainstream a gender perspective into all issues under their
consideration.
In a related draft
decision I, the Assembly, without a vote, decided to consider the issue
of ending female genital mutilation at its sixty-seventh session under
the agenda item on “Advancement of women”.
In draft decision II, the
Assembly, also without a vote, took note of the report of the Committee
on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women on its forty-ninth,
fiftieth and fifty-first sessions, as well as the Secretary-General’s
note transmitting the report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences.
Speaking after action on the resolution concerning female genital mutilation, the representative of Burkina Faso
said female genital mutilation was among the degrading practices that
harmed women’s physical and moral integrity. It had been justified
under false religious and cultural pretences. The text’s adoption did
not just send a strong political message, but also one of hope for
millions of women and girls facing that odious practice in the name,
falsely, of tradition and religion.
He said Africa — the
resolution’s standard bearer — had mobilized to combat female genital
mutilation at the Government level, which were showing more political
will to free women from the yoke of that practice by putting in place
programmes and projects, adopting laws and releasing both human and
financial resources. That mobilization was also taking place in civil
society, which was raising awareness and he welcomed the campaign for a
global ban on female genital mutilations launched by the Inter-African
Committee on Traditional Practices in that regard.
More than ever, he said,
the time had come to recognize women’s fundamental rights, break the
silence surrounding female genital mutilation and move towards its
elimination. Burkina Faso firmly supported the text and he called on
all co-sponsors to play an active role in the struggle to create a world
free of female genital mutilation.
Refugees
The Committee’s report on
the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), questions
relating to refugees, returnees and displaced persons and humanitarian
questions (document
A/67/451) contains two draft resolutions.
Draft resolution I on the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
was adopted without a vote. By its terms, the Assembly took note of
the activities to protect and assist internally displaced persons,
emphasizing that they should not undermine the Office’s refugee mandate.
It strongly reaffirmed the humanitarian and non-political character of
the Office’s work in providing protection to refugees and seeking
permanent solutions to refugee problems, recalling that solutions
included voluntary repatriation, local integration and resettlement in a
third country. States and others were urged to mobilize resources with
a view to reducing the heavy burden borne by host countries.
Draft resolution II on assistance to refugees, returnees and displaced persons in Africa
was adopted without a vote. By its terms, the Assembly called on
African States that had not yet signed or ratified the African Union
Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced
Persons in Africa to consider doing so as early as possible. States
and other parties to armed conflict were called on to observe
international humanitarian law, bearing in mind that armed conflict was a
principal cause of forced displacement in Africa. Further, States of
refuge, in cooperation with international organizations, were called on
to take all measures to ensure respect for the principles of refugee
protection.
Report of the Human Rights Council
The Assembly adopted the draft resolution contained in the Committee’s report on the Human Rights Council (document
A/67/452), by which it took note of that report, including the addendum thereto and its recommendations.
After action, Belarus’
delegate disassociated her Government from consensus on the report, as
it reflected the Council’s adoption of a politically motivated
resolution on Belarus. It had nothing to do with the actual human
rights situation in her country. The decision had been imposed by
States trying to advance their own agenda. She was concerned about the
selective adoption of country-specific resolutions. The Universal
Periodic Review and dialogue of mutual respect had been replaced by
double standards, which damaged the Council’s reputation. She had high
opinion of the African Group, which had put forward human rights
resolutions. Belarus would continue its constructive interaction with
the Council and with States attempting to bring that body back to a
path of neutrality and impartiality.
Promotion, Protection of Children’s Rights
The Committee’s report on promotion and protection of the rights of children (document
A/67/453) contains one draft resolution and one draft decision.
The draft resolution on the rights of the child
was adopted without a vote, by which the Assembly called on States to
endeavour to ensure child well-being, eliminate violence against
children, eradicate the sale of children, child prostitution and child
pornography, and address the issues of children in armed conflict, child
labour and children with disabilities. The Assembly also called on
States to take measures to protect the rights of indigenous children
against all forms of discrimination, violence, abuse and exploitation,
among other things.
The related draft decision
was also adopted without a vote. By its terms, the Assembly took note
of two reports submitted under the item on “Promotion and protection of
the rights of children”: the Report of the Committee on the Rights of
the Child and the Report of the Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.
Indigenous Peoples
The Committee’s report on the rights of indigenous peoples (document
A/67/454) contains one draft resolution on the
rights of indigenous peoples,
which the Assembly adopted without a vote. In doing so, it reaffirmed
past resolutions on the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples, to be
held on 22 and 23 September 2014, noting its concern about the extreme
disadvantages that indigenous peoples faced across a range of social and
economic indicators. The Secretary-General was requested to prepare a
report on the achievement of the Second International Decade of the
World’s Indigenous Peoples, to be submitted no later than May 2014.
By the related draft decision, also adopted without a vote, the Assembly took note of the Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples.
Elimination of Racism
The Committee’s report on elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance (document
A/67/455) contains three draft resolutions and one draft decision.
Draft resolution I on glorification
of Nazism: inadmissibility of certain practices that contribute to
fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia
and related intolerance was adopted by a recorded vote of 129 in
favour to 3 against (Canada, Palau, United States), with 54 abstentions
(Annex II). By its terms, the Assembly expressed deep concern about the
glorification of the Nazi movement and former members of the Waffen-SS
organization, including by erecting monuments and memorials and holding
public demonstrations that glorified the Nazi past, the Nazi movement
and neo-Nazism. It called on States to take more effective measures, in
accordance with international human rights law, to combat those
phenomena. States also were called on to continue to invest in
education, in order to transform attitudes and correct ideas of racial
hierarchies and superiority promoted by extremist groups.
Malawi’s delegate said she had tried to push the voting button before the machine had locked but that had not worked.
The General Assembly President said he had taken note of Malawi’s vote in favour of the text.
Draft resolution II on global
efforts for the total elimination of racism, racial discrimination,
xenophobia and related intolerance and the comprehensive implementation
of and follow-up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action
was adopted by a recorded vote of 133 in favour to 7 against (Australia,
Canada, Czech Republic, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau, United
States), with 48 abstentions (Annex III).
By that text, the Assembly
expressed grave concern that the objective of racism, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance had not been
attained, notably due to a lack of progress in the implementation of the
Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, in particular
paragraphs 157 to 159 thereof, and that countless people continued to be
victims of such abuses.
Among
other measures laid out in the five-part text, the Assembly requested
the Assembly President, in consultation with others, to launch a
preparatory process for the proclamation of the Decade for People of
African Descent, with the theme “People of African descent:
recognition, justice and development”, with a view to proclaiming it in
2013, and requesting the Secretary-General to report during the
sixty-seventh session on steps to be taken to make the decade effective.
Draft resolution III on the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
was adopted without a vote, with the Assembly taking note of the
reports of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, on
its seventy-eighth, seventy-ninth and eightieth sessions; and the
Secretary-General on the financial situation of that Committee. It also
urged States parties to fully comply with their obligations under the
Convention and to formulate any reservation to it as narrowly as
possible to ensure that none was incompatible with the Convention.
The Assembly then adopted
the related draft decision without a vote, taking note of the
Secretary-General’s report on global efforts for the total elimination
of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, as
well as his note transmitting the interim report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.
Self-Determination
Next, the Assembly turned to the Committee’s report on the right of peoples to self-determination (document
A/67/456), which contains three draft resolutions.
Draft resolution I on the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination
was adopted without a vote. By its terms, the Assembly declared its
firm opposition to foreign military intervention, aggression and
occupation, since such acts had resulted in the suppression of the right
to self-determination and other human rights in certain parts of the
world. It called on those States responsible to cease their military
intervention in and occupation of foreign countries and territories and,
in particular, the inhuman methods reportedly employed for the
execution of those acts against the peoples concerned.
Draft resolution II on the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination
was adopted by a recorded vote of 179 in favour to 7 against (Canada,
Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, United States), with
3 abstentions (Cameroon, Honduras, Tonga) (Annex IV).
By that text, the Assembly
expressed the urgent need for the resumption of negotiations within the
Middle East peace process, based on the relevant resolutions of the
United Nations, the Madrid terms of reference, including the principle
of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet road map to
a permanent two-State solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and
for the speedy achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace
settlement between the Palestinian and Israeli sides. It stressed the
need for preservation of the territorial unity, contiguity and integrity
of all of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East
Jerusalem, and reaffirmed Palestinians’ right to self-determination,
including the right to their independent State of Palestine.
Draft resolution III on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination
was adopted by a recorded vote of 128 in favour to 54 against, with
7 abstentions (Mexico, Tonga, Fiji, Colombia, Gabon, South Sudan,
Switzerland) (Annex V).
By its terms, the Assembly
urged States to exercise the utmost vigilance against the menace posed
by mercenaries and take legislative measures to ensure that their
territories — and territories under their control — were not used for
the recruitment, assembly, financing, training, protection or transit of
mercenaries. It also condemned recent mercenary activities in
developing countries, and requested both the Secretary-General and the
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to provide the
Working Group on the use of mercenaries with all support for the
fulfilment of its mandate.
Promotion and protection of human rights
The Committee’s report on the
promotion and protection of human rights: implementation of human rights instruments (document
A/67/457/Add.1) contains two draft resolutions.
Draft resolution I on the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Optional Protocol thereto was adopted without a vote, with the Assembly authorizing for the Committee two annual pre-sessional
working group meetings of one week each, starting in 2013, to be held
after each of the Committee’s two annual sessions and allowing time for
the consideration of additional reports. The Assembly also authorized
an additional two weeks of meeting time per year to the existing regular
sessions, starting in 2014.
Draft resolution II on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment was adopted without a vote. By its terms, States were called upon to fully implement the absolute and non-derogable
prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment
or punishment. They were also called upon to adopt a victim-oriented
approach in the fight against such abuse, with the Assembly emphasizing
that acts of torture in armed conflict were violations of international
humanitarian law and constituted war crimes; that such acts could
constitute crimes against humanity; and that perpetrators must be
prosecuted. The Assembly urged all States to become parties to the
Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment and consider signing and ratifying the Optional
Protocol thereto.
The Assembly then turned
to the Committee’s report on human rights questions, including
alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human
rights and fundamental freedoms (document
A/67/457/Add.2), which contains 20 draft resolutions. The Vice-President explained that action on the text entitled
Committee against Torture
had been postponed to allow time for review of its programme budget
implications by the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary).
Speaking in explanation of vote before the vote, Syria’s
delegate wondered why Qatar continued to finance the training and
documentation centre for South-West Asia and the Arab Region through the
United Nations budget, given the current financial crisis. The
Organization’s limited resources should be spent more effectively. The
centre had not been active in a way that justified its funding.
Choosing Doha as a host for the centre was not aligned with the
resolution on its creation. Qatar had used the centre to support the
opposition of other countries, away from human rights and the United
Nations Charter. For such reasons, Syria would vote against the text.
Draft resolution I on the United Nations human rights training and documentation centre for South-West Asia and the Arab region
was adopted by a recorded vote of 174 in favour, to 1 against (Syria)
with 10 abstentions (Angola, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Bolivia,
Botswana, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Ecuador, Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea and Zimbabwe) (Annex VI). By its terms, the Assembly
welcomed the training activities and regional consultations conducted
by the centre, and noted the support provided for its establishment by
the host country. The Secretary-General was requested to provide funds
and human resources from the regular budget, beginning in the biennium
2014-2015, to enable the Centre to respond to the growing needs in
South-West Asia and the Arab region.
Draft resolution II on the role of the Ombudsman, mediator and other national human rights institutions in the promotion and protection of human rights
was adopted without a vote. By that text, the Assembly encouraged
States to consider the creation of such institutions at the national
and, where applicable, the local level, and encourage them, where they
exist, to operate in accordance with the principles relating to the
status of national institutions for the promotion and protection of
human rights and other relevant international instruments.
Draft resolution III on human rights and extreme poverty
was adopted without a vote. By that text, the Assembly expressed deep
concern that extreme poverty persisted in all countries of the world,
regardless of their economic, social and cultural situation.
Governments, United Nations bodies and others, including the private
sector, were encouraged to consider the guiding principles on extreme
poverty and human rights, adopted by the Human Rights Council in
September 2012, in their policy formulation and implementation.
The Assembly then turned to draft resolution IV on globalization and its impact on the full enjoyment of all human rights,
adopting it by a recorded vote of 133 in favour to 54 against, with
2 abstentions (South Sudan, Togo) (Annex VII). By that text, the
Assembly emphasized the need to fully implement the global partnership
for development and enhance momentum generated by the 2005 World Summit
to promote fair globalization and the development of productive sectors
in developing countries. It underlined the urgent need to establish an
equitable, transparent and democratic international system to strengthen
the participation of developing countries in international economic
decision-making and norm-setting.
Draft resolution V on human rights in the administration of justice
was also adopted without a vote. By its terms, the Assembly drew
attention to the numerous international standards in the field of the
administration of justice, convinced that the independence and
impartiality of the judiciary and the integrity of the judicial system
were prerequisites for the protection of human rights, the rule of law,
good governance and democracy. States were invited to make use of
technical assistance offered by the United Nations in order to
strengthen national capacities in the field of the administration of
justice. As regards juveniles, the Assembly recognized that every child
and juvenile in conflict with the law must be treated in a manner
consistent with his or her rights.
Draft resolution VI on Committee on the Rights of the Child
was also adopted without a vote, with the Assembly noting that that a
backlog existed of more than 100 reports submitted by States parties to
the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Optional Protocols.
As such, it authorized the Committee — without prejudice to the
Assembly’s intergovernmental treaty body strengthening process — to meet
in parallel chambers for the five working days of one of its three pre-sessional
working group meetings in 2013, and 13 working days of one of its three
regular sessions in 2014, for the purposes of considering State
parties’ reports.
The Assembly then adopted draft resolution VII on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions by a recorded vote of 117 in favour to none against, with 67 abstentions (Annex VIII). By
its terms, the Assembly noted with deep concern that impunity was a
major cause of the perpetuation of human rights violations, including
those practices. It also was deeply concerned at acts that could amount
to extrajudicial summary or arbitrary executions committed against
persons exercising their rights of peaceful assembly and freedom of
expression. Convinced of the need for action to prevent, combat and
eliminate the abhorrent practice of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary
executions, the Assembly strongly condemned all such practices,
demanding that States ensured their end. It also requested the
Secretary-General to provide the Special Rapporteur with adequate human and financial resources.
Draft resolution VIII on enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights,
also adopted without a vote, had the Assembly call on States,
specialized agencies and intergovernmental organizations to continue
carrying out consultations for the enhancement of understanding and
promotion and protection of all human rights and fundamental freedoms.
The Secretary-General, along with the United Nations High Commissioner
for Human Rights, was requested to consult States and non-governmental
organizations on ways to enhance cooperation and dialogue in the United
Nations human rights machinery, including the Human Rights Council.
The Assembly adopted draft resolution IX on human rights and unilateral coercive measures
by a recorded vote of 128 in favour to 54 against, with 4 abstentions
(Chad, Paraguay, Togo, South Sudan) (Annex IX). In doing so, it
stressed that unilateral coercive measures and legislation were contrary
to international law, international humanitarian law, the Charter of
the United Nations and principles governing peaceful relations among
States. States were strongly urged to refrain from promulgating and
applying any unilateral economic, financial or trade measures not in
accordance with international law and the Charter. It also condemned
continuing unilateral application by certain Powers of unilateral
coercive measures.
Draft resolution X on the right to development
was adopted by a vote of 154 in favour to 4 against ( Canada, Israel,
United Kingdom, United States), with 28 abstentions (Annex X). By
its terms, the Assembly stressed that the Vienna Declaration and
Programme of Action reaffirmed the right to development as a universal
and inalienable right and integral to fundamental human rights. It
urged developed countries to make efforts to meet the target of
0.7 per cent of their gross national product (GNP) for official
development assistance (ODA), and 0.15 to 0.2 per cent of their GNP to
least developed countries. It also encouraged developing countries to
build on gains made in ensuring that ODA was used effectively.
Draft resolution XI on protection of migrants
was adopted without a vote. By its terms, the Assembly emphasized the
global character of the migratory phenomenon, and the importance of
international, regional and bilateral cooperation and dialogue in that
regard. It called on States to promote and protect the human rights and
fundamental freedoms of all migrants, regardless of their migration
status. It also encouraged States to take measures to achieve policy
coherence on migration at the national, regional and international
levels, including by ensuring coordinated child protection policies and
systems across borders.
Speaking before action, Belgium’s delegate said that his Government had wished to abstain on the resolution concerning the right to development.
Draft resolution XII on promotion of peace as a vital requirement for the full enjoyment of all human rights by all
was adopted by a vote of 127 in favour to 54 against, with
6 abstentions (Armenia, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Singapore, South Sudan,
Tonga) (Annex XI). By that text, the Assembly reaffirmed that peoples
had a sacred right to peace and that preservation of that right was a
fundamental State obligation. It stressed that the deep fault line
between rich and poor posed a major threat to global prosperity, peace
and security, and stability. It also welcomed the Human Rights
Council’s decision to establish an open-ended working group with the
mandate of negotiating a draft United Nations declaration on the right
to peace.
Acting without a vote, the Assembly adopted draft resolution XIII on the right to food,
reaffirming that hunger violated human dignity and required urgent
measures at the national, regional and international levels for its
elimination. It also reaffirmed the right of everyone to have access to
safe, sufficient, nutritious food, consistent with the right to
adequate food, and to be free from hunger. States were encouraged to
take steps to achieve full realization of the right to food.
Draft resolution XIV on promotion of a democratic and equitable international order
was adopted by a vote of 126 in favour to 53 against, with
6 abstentions (Chile, Costa Rica, Mexico, Peru, Samoa, Togo)
(Annex XII). In so doing, the Assembly expressed deep concern that the
global economic, financial, energy and food crises represented a
scenario that threatened the adequate enjoyment of all human rights and
was widening the gap between developed and developing countries.
Efforts to make globalization fully inclusive and equitable must include
policies and measures at the global level that corresponded to the
needs of developing countries and economies in transition, and that were
formulated and implemented with their effective participation.
Draft resolution XV on moratorium on the use of the death penalty
was adopted by a recorded vote of111 in favour to 41 against, with
34 abstentions. By its terms, the Assembly expressed its deep concern
about the application of the death penalty, calling on States to respect
international standards providing safeguards guaranteeing the
protection of the rights of persons facing the death penalty, as set out
in the annex to Economic and Social Council resolution 1984/50 (1984).
States were called on to not impose capital punishment for offences
committed by persons below 18 years of age and pregnant women. States
were also called on to reduce the number of offences for which the death
penalty might be imposed and establish a moratorium on executions with a
view to abolishing the death penalty.
Speaking after action, Kenya’s
delegate, on the resolution concerning the United Nations human rights
training and documentation centre for South-West Asia and the Arab
region, wished to have his Government’s vote in favour reflected in the
record.
Draft resolution XVII on missing persons
was adopted without a vote, with the Assembly urging States to respect
and ensure respect for international law, as set out in the 1949 Geneva
Conventions. States parties to armed conflict were called on to take
all measures to prevent persons from going missing, account for persons
reported missing, and ensure the investigation and prosecution of
offences linked to missing persons. They also were called on to take
timely measures to determine the identity and fate of persons reported
missing in connection with the conflict, recognizing that the means of
identification and collection of data must be in line with international
and national legal norms.
Draft resolution XVIII on combating
intolerance, negative stereotyping, stigmatization, discrimination,
incitement to violence and violence against persons, based on religion
or belief was adopted without a vote. By its terms, the Assembly
expressed deep concern at derogatory stereotyping, negative profiling
and stigmatization of persons based on their religion or belief,
condemning any advocacy of religious hatred that constituted incitement
to discrimination, hostility or violence. States were called on to
encourage the creation of networks to build mutual understanding and
inspire action towards shared policy goals. They were also called on to
adopt measures criminalizing incitement to violence based on religion
or belief.
Draft resolution XIX on freedom of religion or belief
was adopted without a vote, with the Assembly strongly condemning all
forms of intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief, as
well as violations of freedom of thought, conscience and religion or
belief. The right to such freedoms applied equally to all persons. No
religion should be equated with terrorism. States were urged to ensure
that legislation was not implemented in a discriminatory manner, to end
violations of women’s rights, and ensure that no one was discriminated
against on the basis of religion or belief when accessing education,
medical care, employment, humanitarian assistance or social benefits.
Draft resolution XX on International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance
was adopted without a vote. By that text, the Assembly recalled that
no exceptional circumstance may be invoked to justify enforced
disappearance, and that no one shall be held in secret detention. It
expressed deep concern at the increase in enforced or involuntary
disappearances around the world, and in reports of harassment,
ill-treatment and intimidation of witnesses of disappearances or
relatives of persons who have disappeared. The Convention outlined
victims rights to know the truth regarding the circumstances of enforced
disappearance, results of the investigation and fate of disappeared
persons, setting forth State obligations to take measures in that
regard.
Human Rights Situations
The Assembly then took up the Committee’s report on Promotion and protection of human rights:
human rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs and representatives (document
A/67/457/Add.3), which contains four draft resolutions.
Before proceeding further,
Assembly Vice President said that the draft resolution on “Situation of
human rights in Myanmar” had been postponed to a later date to allow
time for the review of its programme budget implications by the Fifth
Committee (Administrative and Budgetary). The Assembly would take
action on that text as soon as the Fifth Committee report on the budget
implications became available.
Speaking before action on a resolution on the human rights situation in his country, Iran’s
representative said the best approach to promote and protect human
rights across the globe was to engage in a meaningful and sincere
cooperation. “We have a choice of whether to advance the promotion and
protection of human rights through serious engagement, or to set it back
with politicized and unbalanced resolutions,” he said, adding: “Every
distinguished representative here is well aware that the resolution L.51
is not about human rights, but an abuse of the integrity and procedures
of this august body for political purposes.”
The resolution had avoided
any reference to human rights policies of Iran. It was deploring
that, despite the existence of the universal periodic review mechanism
in the Human Rights Council, so-called champions of human rights
advocacy, mainly the United States, Canada and the European Union
member states, continued to abuse the United Nations human rights
mechanisms for short-sighted political expediencies by tabling that
selective country-specific resolution to satiate their political
desires.
Canada had been a
relentless supporter of the Israeli regime’s crimes against the
Palestinians, and had a very questionable human rights record on the
rights of immigrants and indigenous peoples in its territory, he said.
Yet, it now pursued a worn-out policy of introducing the resolution on
the human rights situation in Iran. That text did not change the
ongoing systematic violations of the fundamental principles of human
rights in Canada. “ Iran is a dynamic and progressive society which
has taken a genuine approach to safeguard human rights by ensuring its
full compliance with the national and relevant international
commitments, while upholding the promotion of principles enshrined in
our Constitution,” he said.
Explaining her Government’s position, Syria’s
delegate recalled that the international legal framework was based on
the principle of non-interference in State affairs under any pretext.
That had been consecrated in the United Nations Charter and
resolutions. Adopting politicized resolutions violated Charter
provisions and hindered peaceful solutions in Syria, based on the
six-point plan and the work of Lakhdar Brahimi’s mission.
She reiterated what had
been said on 27 November by Syria’s representative in the Third
Committee. That delegate refuted allegations against her country that
were contained in that text. The sponsors of the text, namely Qatar,
Saudi Arabia and Morocco, were not renowned for their desire to
promote and protect human rights in her country. They had escalated
violence there by their intervention in Syria’s internal affairs.
Their support of terrorism had led to the death of thousands of Syrians
and displacement of tens of thousands of people. They were accomplices
in the killing of thousands of Syrians. They had attempted to implicate
Syrians in the domestic Syrian crisis, to serve the number one enemy of
Syria and Palestinians: Israel.
Armed groups, backed by
the text’s co-sponsors, continued to target fuel and oil pipelines,
strategic food crops and railways. They plundered supermarket depots.
The purpose of that was clear: to create conditions conducive to the
collapse of State institutions and reduce citizens’ trust in the State
and to create anarchy. “This is tantamount to a military attack,” she
said, asking whether resolutions enhanced human rights in Syria. She
wondered about the impact on Syrians of the deprivation of electricity,
food, water, transport, education and health care, wondering how that
promoted human rights in her country. Syria had called for a vote on
the text and she called for Governments to vote against it.
The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
said he had categorically rejected the resolution on the human rights
situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, as it had
nothing to do with human rights in his country. Violations mentioned in
the text had not been allowed to exist in his country. The United
States and Western countries attacked others, with a view to imposing
their values on them. The text was clearly propaganda for a fabricated
human right situation and created pressure on his social system. That
constituted interference in his internal affairs.
It was an act of political
terrorism, he said. It showed double standards. Any consideration of
human rights must be carried out with the principles of objectivity
under the universal periodic review. Developing countries were
targets. The text misled public opinion. He hadn’t seen mass killings
by the United States in Iraq and Afghanistan called into question.
The same was true with their human rights violations, such as sexual
violence or racial discrimination and maltreatment of indigenous
peoples. The main sponsors had worked to destabilize his country by
picking on human rights issues. While it had been adopted without a
vote, it could not be interpreted as by consensus. He opposed the text
and those against Syria, Iran and Myanmar.
Nigeria’s
delegate said that situations of genocide, gender-based violence,
systematic exclusion of segments of societies from participation in
Governments, and racial or ethnic discrimination, cases of torture or
other degrading treatment — those distinctions had been made, mindful of
the universality of human rights. All must be afforded the most
serious consideration. She underlined the importance of the thematic
debate holders who investigated on a case-by-case basis. Those special rapporteurs
should be guided by the code of conduct adopted in the Human Rights
Council. The universal periodic review was another mechanism offering
an opportunity for States to prove their human rights credentials to the
world.
On the Iran text, she
said there had been a visible determination to address issues brought to
that Government’s attention. It had been working with the Human Rights
Council, with six mandate holders having visited the country. She
urged Iran to continue with its cooperation with the United Nations to
address human rights cases. She believed in full enjoyment of women’s
rights in all societies. Cases outstanding would be treated fairly and
expeditiously. The rights of minorities and women were enshrined in
Nigeria’s Constitution. Nigeria would abstain in voting on the texts
on Iran and Syria.
Proceeding to action, the Assembly adopted draft resolution II on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
by consensus, with the 193-member body expressing its deep concern at
the significant deterioration of the human rights situation in that
country, as well as at reports of systematic and grave violations of
civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including
torture, prison camps, limits on the freedom of movement, and sanctions
imposed on citizens who had been repatriated from abroad. It strongly
urged the Government to protect inhabitants, address impunity, tackle
the root causes of refugee outflows, and extend full cooperation to the
Special Rapporteur.
Draft resolution III on the situation of human rights in Iran was adopted by a recorded vote of 86 in favour, to 32 against, with 65 abstentions (Annex XIV). By
its terms, the Assembly expressed deep concern at serious human rights
violations relating to torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment
or punishment, the “alarming” high frequency of use of the death
penalty in the absence of internationally recognized safeguards, and
failure to abolish the execution of minors and persons who were under
the age of 18 at the time of their offence. It strongly urged Iran to
ensure free, fair, transparent and inclusive presidential elections in
2013, calling on it to respect its human rights obligations, in law and
in practice.
Speaking on a point of order after the vote, the delegate of Viet Nam clarified her delegation’s position, saying that she had voted against the resolution.
The delegate of Somalia, also speaking on a point of order, said he had voted against, but the results on the electronic board had shown the opposite.
The Assembly then proceeded to take action on draft resolution IV on the situation of human rights in Syria.
Taking the floor on a point of order during the voting, the delegate of Viet Nam said she wanted to abstain, instead of a dissenting vote being shown on the electronic board. The delegate of Somalia said he abstained, but the board was showing he voted in favour.
The text on Syria was
then adopted by a recorded vote of 135 in favour to 12 against, with
36 abstentions (Annex XV). By its terms, the Assembly strongly
condemned widespread and systematic gross human rights violations by
Syrian authorities, calling on them to immediately end such abuse.
Further, it called on Syria to protect the population and fully comply
with its international law obligations. It also urged the immediate
release all persons arbitrarily detained, stressing its support for a
peaceful, democratic and pluralistic society, and demanding that Syria
provide the international commission of inquiry immediate and
unfettered access to all areas of the country. It also expressed grave
concern at the increasing numbers of refugees and internally displaced
persons as a result of the violence, urging United Nations agencies to
provide coordinated support.
Explaining his position after action, the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
said all human rights issues must be considered in the Universal
Periodic Review. The United Nations could no longer be abused to use
human rights records against others. The resolution against his country
would contribute to the deterioration of relations, including on the
Korean peninsula. The resolution was a political trick that could not
be accepted. As such, his Government did not recognize it.
China’s delegate disassociated her Government from the resolution on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
Syria’s delegate
regretted that some States had insisted on submitting a resolution on
her country for political reasons, which jeopardized the legal terms of
reference in international relations and undermined the credibility of
human rights. Syria was detached from the consensus as regards the
resolution on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
Cuba’s delegate
said her Government was against resolutions that accused other
countries, as they were aimed at political ends. There was no point in
politicizing such issues. Such human rights questions had discredited
the former Human Rights Commission. The Human Rights Council had
considered those issues in good faith. Indeed, the principle of
non-selectivity must be followed. That had not been done today, which
was why Cuba had voted against the texts on Syria and Iran, and had
disassociated from consensus on the text related to the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea.
Venezuela’s
delegate said she had voted against “L.51” and “L.52” and had
disassociated from “L.50”. Political motivations had prompted some
countries to submit resolutions against others. The principles of
non-selectivity and non-politicization should guide human rights work.
The Universal Periodic Review should consider human rights issues
following the principle of non-selectivity.
South Sudan’s
delegate wished corrected his votes to “yes” on the resolutions
concerning the glorification of Nazism, and on globalization and its
impacts.
Bahrain’s
delegate said the voting sheet for the resolution on extrajudicial,
summary or arbitrary executions was incorrect. She asked that it
reflect Bahrain’s abstention on the vote.
South Africa’s delegate said her Government had voted in favour of the resolution on a democratic and equitable world order.
The Committee’s report on Promotion and protection of human rights: comprehensive implementation of and follow-up to the
Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action (document
A/67/457/Add.4)
outlines that the Assembly decided to allocate a sub-item of the same
name, under its item entitled “Promotion and protection of human
rights”, to the Third Committee. The Committee considered that
subitem on 23 October and 6 November 2012.
The Committee’s report on the
Promotion and protection of human rights (document
A/67/457)
contains one draft decision. The Assembly adopted that decision by
consensus, and thereby took note of a number of reports considered in
connection with that agenda item.
The Committee’s report on
Crime prevention and criminal justice (document
A/67/458) contains nine draft resolutions and one draft decision.
Draft resolution I on the Follow-up
to the Twelfth United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal
Justice and preparations for the thirteenth United Nations Congress on
Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice was adopted without a vote.
By its terms, the Assembly decided that the thirteenth Congress should
not exceed eight days, including pre-Congress consultations, and that
its main theme should be: “Integrating crime prevention and criminal
justice into the wider United Nations agenda to address social and
economic challenges and to promote the rule of law at the national and
international levels, and public participation”. The Congress would
adopt a single declaration, to be submitted to the Commission on Crime
Prevention and Criminal Justice.
Also without a vote, the Assembly adopted draft resolution II on Promoting efforts to eliminate violence against migrants, migrant workers and their families,
by which it strongly condemned criminal acts against migrants, migrant
workers and their families in all regions, including those motivated by
racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.
Among other things, the Assembly urged States to adopt measures to
prevent and effectively address violence against migrants and ensure
that victims received humane treatment.
Draft resolution III on Strengthening
the rule of law and the reform of criminal justice institutions,
particularly in the areas related to the United Nations system-wide
approach to fighting transnational organized crime and drug trafficking
was also adopted without a vote. In doing so, the Assembly stressed
the importance of a well-functioning and humane criminal justice system
as the basis for a successful strategy against transnational organized
crime, corruption, terrorism, drug trafficking and other forms of drug
trafficking.
Draft resolution IV on United Nations Principles and Guidelines on Access to Legal Aid in Criminal Justice Systems,
adopted without a vote, had the Assembly adopt the Principles and
Guidelines annexed to the present text as a framework for guiding States
in that regard. States would be invited to strengthen measures to
ensure legal aid was provided in line with the Principles and
Guidelines, bearing in mind the diversity of criminal justice systems
among countries and regions.
Draft resolution V on Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners
was also adopted without a vote. By its terms, the Assembly recognized
that some areas of the Rules could be reviewed so they reflected the
latest advances in correctional science and good practices, provided
that any changes not lower any existing standards. The Expert Group was
authorized to continue its work, with a view to reporting progress to
the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice at its
twenty-second session. States were recommended to reduce overcrowding
in pre-trial detention and promote access to justice mechanisms.
Next, the Assembly adopted without a vote draft resolution VI on Strengthening
the United Nations crime prevention and criminal justice programme, in
particular its technical cooperation capacity. In so doing, it
expressed grave concern at the negative effects of transnational
organized crime — including smuggling of and trafficking in human
beings, narcotic drugs and small arms and light weapons — on
development, peace and security and human rights. The United Nations
Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), in consultation with States and
within existing resources, was requested to continue to support the
enhancement of capacity and skills in the field of forensic sciences.
The importance of providing stable funding to the United Nations crime
prevention and criminal justice programme was reiterated.
Again acting without a vote, the Assembly adopted draft resolution VII on Improving the coordination of efforts against trafficking in persons,
calling on Governments to continue their efforts to criminalize
trafficking in persons in all its forms, and investigate, prosecute,
condemn and penalize traffickers and intermediaries, while providing
protection and assistance to victims. It also welcomed the launch of
the UNODC report on “Trafficking in persons: Global Patterns”, no later
than January 2013.
Recalling its 2010
decision to appraise progress in the implementation of the Global Plan
of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons, the Assembly decided to
convene, within existing resources, a high-level meeting no later than
July 2013, to assess achievements and challenges, including in the
implementation of the relevant legal instruments.
Draft resolution VIII on the United Nations African Institute for the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders
was also adopted without a vote. By its terms, the Assembly noted with
concern that the Institute’s financial situation had greatly affected
its capacity to deliver services in an effective and comprehensive
manner, urging its State members to make every possible effort to meet
their obligations. The Secretary-General was requested to intensify
efforts to mobilize all relevant United Nations entities to provide
financial and technical support to the Institute.
Draft resolution IX on Preventing
and combating corrupt practices and the transfer of proceeds of
corruption, facilitating asset recovery and returning such assets to
legitimate owners, in particular to countries of origin, in accordance
with the United Nations Convention against Corruption was also
adopted without a vote. By its terms, the Assembly condemned corruption
in all its forms, calling on States parties to the Convention that have
not yet done so to designate a central authority for international
cooperation and, where appropriate, focal points for asset recovery. It
also stressed the need for transparency in financial institutions, and
invited States to work on identifying and tracing of financial flows
linked to corruption.
The Assembly then decided
to take note of the Secretary-General’s report on the follow-up to the
twelfth United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice
and preparations for the thirteenth United Nations Congress on Crime
Prevention and Criminal Justice, as well as his note transmitting the
report of the Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations
Convention against Corruption on its fourth session.
The Assembly then turned to the Committee’s report on International drug control (document
A/67/459), which contains one draft resolution on
international cooperation against the world drug problem.
Adopting that text without a vote, the Assembly called on States to
address that problem on the basis of common and shared responsibility.
It decided to convene a special session in 2016 to assess the
achievements and limits of current policy to counter the world drug
problem, including the violence that the production, trafficking and
consumption of drugs generated throughout the world.
Taking up the Committee’s report on the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly (document
A/67/460), the Assembly adopted by consensus the draft decision contained therein on the
programme of work of the Third Committee for the sixty-eighth session.
Finally, the Assembly took up the Committee’s report on
programme planning (document
A/67/461),
adopting by a recorded vote of 174 in favour, to 4 against (Canada,
Israel, Palau, United States), with 5 abstentions (Australia, Belarus,
Eritrea, Iran, Syria), the draft decision of the same name contained
therein without a vote, and thereby approving programme 20, human
rights, of the proposed strategic framework for 2014-2015, as contained
in the report’s annex.
The Assembly agreed to extend the work of its Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) until Friday, 21 December.
Kenya’s delegate wished to have his vote of “yes” on the programme planning text reflected in the record.
ANNEX I
Vote on Legal Instrument for Older Persons
The draft resolution on an
international legal instrument to protect the rights of older persons
(document A/67/449) was adopted by a recorded vote of 54 in favour to
5 against, with 118 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Argentina, Bangladesh, Benin, Bolivia, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam,
Cambodia, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador,
Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia,
Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Kazakhstan,
Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama,
Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Senegal, Singapore, South Africa, Sri
Lanka, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Turkmenistan, United
Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam.
Against: Canada, Israel, Seychelles, South Sudan, United States.
Abstain:
Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda,
Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Belarus,
Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria,
Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic,
China, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the
Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, France, Georgia,
Germany, Greece, Guinea-Bissau, Hungary, Iceland, India, Iran, Iraq,
Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao
People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya,
Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malta,
Mauritania, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar,
Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman,
Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea,
Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Samoa, San
Marino, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon
Islands, Spain, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, The former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia,
Turkey, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom,
Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Absent: Armenia,
Comoros, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Grenada, Kiribati, Marshall Islands,
Micronesia (Federated States of), Namibia, Palau, Saint Kitts and Nevis,
Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe,
Somalia, Suriname.
ANNEX II
Vote on Glorification of Nazism
The draft resolution on
glorification of Nazism: inadmissibility of certain practices that
contribute to contemporary forms of racism (document A/67/455) was
adopted by a recorded vote of 129 in favour to 3 against, with
54 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize,
Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi,
Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile,
China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba,
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo,
Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador,
Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guatemala,
Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran,
Iraq, Israel, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan,
Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar,
Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco,
Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman,
Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian
Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent
and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra
Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Sri Lanka,
Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste,
Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu,
Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay,
Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Canada, Palau, United States.
Abstain: Albania,
Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria,
Burkina Faso, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Fiji,
Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland,
Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg,
Mali, Malta, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway,
Panama, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova,
Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Sudan, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Tonga,
Ukraine, United Kingdom.
Absent: Ghana, Kiribati, Malawi, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Sao Tome and Principe.
ANNEX III
Vote on Follow-Up to Durban Declaration
The draft resolution on
the follow-up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action
(document A/67/455) was adopted by a recorded vote of 133 in favour to
7 against, with 48 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize,
Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina
Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic,
Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte
d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic
Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador,
Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon,
Gambia, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti,
Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan,
Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon,
Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali,
Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar,
Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua
New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation,
Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore,
Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Sudan,
Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo,
Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda,
United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan,
Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau, United States.
Abstain: Albania,
Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria,
Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany,
Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, New
Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of
Moldova, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Tonga,
Ukraine, United Kingdom.
Absent: Ghana, Kiribati, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Sao Tome and Principe.
ANNEX IV
Vote on Palestinian Self-Determination
The draft resolution on
the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination (document
A/67/456) was adopted by a recorded vote of 179 in favour to 7 against,
with 3 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda,
Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain,
Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia,
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria,
Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Central African Republic,
Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire,
Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of
Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica,
Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia,
Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany,
Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti,
Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica,
Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s
Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya,
Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia,
Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia,
Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands,
New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama,
Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar,
Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation,
Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia,
Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon
Islands, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan,
Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand,
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad
and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine,
United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania,
Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia,
Zimbabwe.
Against: Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Palau, United States.
Abstain: Cameroon, Honduras, Tonga.
Absent: Equatorial Guinea, Ghana, Kiribati, Sao Tome and Principe.
ANNEX V
Vote on Use of Mercenaries
The draft resolution on
the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights (document
A/67/456) was adopted by a recorded vote of 128 in favour to 54 against,
with 7 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize,
Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina
Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic,
Chad, Chile, China, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba,
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo,
Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador,
Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau,
Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan,
Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic,
Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia,
Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique,
Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan,
Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian
Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent
and the Grenadines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra
Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Sri Lanka,
Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste,
Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, United
Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan,
Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Albania,
Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria,
Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland,
France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel,
Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta,
Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro,
Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Poland, Portugal,
Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Serbia,
Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, The former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States.
Abstain: Colombia, Fiji, Gabon, Mexico, South Sudan, Switzerland, Tonga.
Absent: Equatorial Guinea, Ghana, Kiribati, Sao Tome and Principe.
ANNEX VI
Vote on Human Rights Training Centre
The draft resolution on
the United Nations Human Rights Training and Documentation Centre for
South-West Asia and the Arab Region (document A/67/457/Add.2) was
adopted by a recorded vote of 174 in favour to 1 against, with
10 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina,
Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh,
Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil,
Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon,
Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China,
Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba,
Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic,
Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France,
Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea,
Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India,
Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan,
Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic,
Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands,
Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco,
Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Myanmar, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal,
Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau,
Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland,
Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania,
Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint
Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Serbia,
Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon
Islands, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan,
Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, The
former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga,
Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda,
Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of
Tanzania, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen,
Zambia.
Against: Syria.
Abstain: Angola,
Bolivia, Botswana, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,
Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, Mozambique, Nicaragua,
Venezuela, Zimbabwe.
Absent: Barbados, Equatorial Guinea, Ghana, Kenya, Kiribati, Madagascar, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal.
ANNEX VII
Vote on Globalization
The draft resolution on
globalization and its impact on human rights (document A/67/457/Add.2)
was adopted by a recorded vote of 133 in favour to 54 against, with
2 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize,
Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina
Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic,
Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte
d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic
Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador,
Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada,
Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India,
Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait,
Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia,
Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania,
Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia,
Nauru, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua
New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation,
Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone,
Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan,
Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Tonga,
Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Arab
Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu,
Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Albania,
Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria,
Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland,
France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel,
Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta,
Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro,
Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Poland, Portugal, Republic of
Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia,
Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States.
Abstain: South Sudan, Togo.
Absent: Equatorial Guinea, Ghana, Kiribati, Sao Tome and Principe.
ANNEX VIII
Vote on Extrajudicial Executions
The draft resolution on
extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions (document A/67/457/Add.2)
was adopted by a recorded vote of 117 in favour to none against, with
67 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Albania, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia,
Austria, Bahrain, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan,
Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cambodia,
Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte
d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica,
Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Fiji,
Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Grenada,
Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland,
Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon,
Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Maldives, Malta, Mexico,
Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco,
Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama,
Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal,
Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, San
Marino, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia,
Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Suriname, Sweden,
Switzerland, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
Timor-Leste, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, United Kingdom,
United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela.
Against: None.
Abstain:
Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Botswana, Brunei
Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, China,
Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Ethiopia,
Guinea, Guyana, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait,
Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar,
Malaysia, Mali, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mozambique, Namibia,
Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saint
Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi
Arabia, Singapore, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Syria,
Tajikistan, Togo, Tonga, Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Arab
Emirates, United States, Uzbekistan, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Absent:
Azerbaijan, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Equatorial
Guinea, Ghana, Haiti, Kiribati, Mauritius, Nauru, Sao Tome and
Principe.
ANNEX IX
Vote on Unilateral Coercive Measures
The draft resolution on
human rights and unilateral coercive measures (document A/67/457/Add.2)
was adopted by a recorded vote of 128 in favour to 54 against, with
4 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize,
Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina
Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic,
Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire,
Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the
Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El
Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gambia, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea,
Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq,
Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s
Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar,
Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico,
Mongolia, Morocco, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria,
Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Qatar,
Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint
Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles,
Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Sri
Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand,
Timor-Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu,
Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay,
Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Albania,
Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria,
Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland,
France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel,
Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta,
Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro,
Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Poland, Portugal, Republic of
Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia,
Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States.
Abstain: Chad, Paraguay, South Sudan, Togo.
Absent: Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Ghana, Kiribati, Mozambique, Nauru, Sao Tome and Principe.
ANNEX X
Vote on Right to Development
The draft resolution on
the right to development (document A/67/457/Add.2) was adopted by a
recorded vote of 154 in favour to 4 against, with 28 abstentions, as
follows:
In favour:
Afghanistan, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina,
Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados,
Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia,
Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China,
Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus,
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo,
Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador,
Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, France, Gabon, Gambia,
Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti,
Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan,
Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic
Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg,
Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania,
Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique,
Myanmar, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman,
Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines,
Portugal, Qatar, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis,
Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal,
Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovenia, Solomon Islands,
Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname,
Swaziland, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo,
Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu,
Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay,
Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Canada, Israel, United Kingdom, United States.
Abstain: Albania,
Australia, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Finland, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Japan, Latvia,
Lithuania, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Republic of
Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Slovakia,
Sweden, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Ukraine.
Absent: Belgium, Ghana, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Palau, Sao Tome and Principe.
ANNEX XI
Vote on Promotion of Peace
The draft resolution on
the promotion of peace as a vital requirement for full enjoyment of
human rights (document A/67/457/Add.2) was adopted by a recorded vote of
127 in favour to 54 against, with 6 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize,
Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina
Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic,
Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire,
Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the
Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El
Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gambia, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea,
Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq,
Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s
Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar,
Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico,
Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal,
Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru,
Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis,
Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal,
Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Sri
Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand,
Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu,
Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay,
Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Albania,
Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria,
Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland,
France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel,
Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta,
Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro,
Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Poland, Portugal, Republic of
Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia,
Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States.
Abstain: Armenia, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Singapore, South Sudan, Tonga.
Absent: Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Ghana, Kiribati, Sao Tome and Principe.
ANNEX XII
Vote on Equitable International Order
The draft resolution on
promoting a democratic and equitable international order (document
A/67/457/Add.2) was adopted by a recorded vote of 126 in favour to
53 against, with 6 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize,
Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina
Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic,
Chad, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti,
Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea,
Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea,
Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq,
Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s
Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar,
Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mongolia,
Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria,
Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Philippines, Qatar,
Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint
Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra
Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname,
Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and
Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Arab Emirates,
United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela,
Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Albania,
Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria,
Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland,
France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel,
Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta,
Marshall Islands, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway,
Palau, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova,
Romania, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine,
United Kingdom, United States.
Abstain: Chile, Costa Rica, Mexico, Peru, Samoa, Togo.
Absent:
Equatorial Guinea, Ghana, Kiribati, Micronesia (Federated States
of), Nauru, Sao Tome and Principe, South Africa, South Sudan.
ANNEX XIII
Vote on Moratorium of Death Penalty
The draft resolution on a
moratorium on the use of the death penalty (document A/67/457/Add.2) was
adopted by a recorded vote of 111 in favour to 41 against, with
34 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia,
Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Canada,
Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Congo,
Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark,
Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France,
Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti,
Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar,
Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of),
Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands,
New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Peru,
Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian
Federation, Rwanda, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone,
Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, Tajikistan, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Ukraine,
United Kingdom, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela.
Against:
Afghanistan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Botswana,
Brunei Darussalam, China, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,
Dominica, Egypt, Ethiopia, Grenada, Guyana, India, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica,
Japan, Kuwait, Libya, Malaysia, Myanmar, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saint
Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi
Arabia, Singapore, Sudan, Swaziland, Syria, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago,
Uganda, United States, Yemen, Zimbabwe.
Abstain: Belarus,
Cameroon, Comoros, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo,
Djibouti, Eritrea, Fiji, Guinea, Indonesia, Jordan, Kenya, Lao
People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi,
Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Papua New
Guinea, Republic of Korea, Senegal, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka,
Suriname, Thailand, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania,
Viet Nam, Zambia.
Absent: Antigua and Barbuda, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Ghana, Kiribati, Mauritius, Sao Tome and Principe.
ANNEX XIV
Vote on Human Rights in Iran
The draft resolution on
the situation of human rights in Iran (document A/67/457/Add.3) was
adopted by a recorded vote of 86 in favour to 32 against, with
65 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain,
Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria,
Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech
Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland,
France, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland,
Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands,
Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Montenegro, Nauru,
Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea,
Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of
Moldova, Romania, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Samoa, San Marino, Senegal,
Serbia, Seychelles, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Sudan,
Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
Timor-Leste, Tonga, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Vanuatu.
Against:
Afghanistan, Armenia, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bolivia, Brunei Darussalam,
Cambodia, China, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Ecuador,
Egypt, Eritrea, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Nicaragua,
Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Russian Federation, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria,
Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.
Abstain: Algeria,
Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Bhutan, Brazil, Burkina Faso,
Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Comoros, Congo, Côte
d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominica,
Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana,
Indonesia, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s
Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius,
Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria,
Philippines, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines,
Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, South Africa, Suriname,
Swaziland, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Tuvalu, Uganda,
United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Yemen,
Zambia.
Absent: Azerbaijan, Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Georgia, Ghana, Kiribati, Madagascar, Myanmar, Sao Tome and Principe, Turkey.
ANNEX XV
Vote on Human Rights in Syria
The draft resolution on
the situation of human rights in Syria (document A/67/457/Add.3) was
adopted by a recorded vote of 135 in favour to 12 against, with
36 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina,
Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados,
Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei
Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Cape
Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, Colombia, Comoros, Costa Rica,
Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti,
Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France, Gabon,
Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea,
Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iraq,
Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya,
Kuwait, Latvia, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg,
Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands,
Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco,
Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Nauru, Netherlands, New
Zealand, Norway, Oman, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru,
Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova,
Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles,
Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Sudan, Spain,
Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia,
Turkey, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United
States, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Yemen, Zambia.
Against: Belarus,
Bolivia, China, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Iran,
Nicaragua, Russian Federation, Syria, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Zimbabwe.
Abstain: Angola,
Armenia, Bhutan, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica,
Ecuador, Eritrea, Fiji, Guyana, India, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s
Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Mali, Namibia, Nepal,
Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and
Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Singapore,
Somalia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Swaziland, Tajikistan,
Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Viet Nam.
Absent: Algeria, Cambodia, Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kiribati, Myanmar, Sao Tome and Principe.
ANNEX XVI
Vote on Programme Planning
The draft decision on
programme planning (document A/67/461) was adopted by a recorded vote of
174 in favour to 4 against, with 5 abstentions, as follows:
In favour:
Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda,
Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh,
Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina
Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic,
Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire,
Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of
Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica,
Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea,
Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia,
Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana,
Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland,
Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao
People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya,
Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia,
Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia,
Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands,
New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama,
Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar,
Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation,
Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia,
Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon
Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname,
Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad
and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United
Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania,
Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia,
Zimbabwe.
Against: Canada, Israel, Palau, United States.
Abstain: Australia, Belarus, Eritrea, Iran, Syria.
Absent: Chad,
Ghana, Kenya, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated
States of), Nauru, Sao Tome and Principe, South Sudan, Tuvalu.
* *** *
