A/43/PV.37 General Assembly

As announced at yesterday afternoon's meeting, pursuant to a request contained in a letter from the Permanent Representative of the United Republic of Tanzania in his capacity as current Chairman of the African GtOUp {A/43/753), the Assembly will first consider the draft resolution circulated this morning as document A/43/L.l6. I call on the representative of the United Republic of Tanzania in his capacity as Chairman of the African Group to introduce the draft resolution. Mr. CHAGULA (United Republic of Tanzania): On 15 Nov~mber 1983, under a "certificdte of urgency", the Assembly adopted resolution 38/11, entitled "Proposed new racial constitution of SOuth Africa", in which, inter alia, the Assembly, first, declared that the so-called constitutional proposals were contrary to the principles of the United Nations Charter, that the results of the referendum were of no validity whatsoever and that the enforcement of the so-called constitution would inevitably aggravate tension and conflict in South Africa and in southern Africa as a whole. Secondly, it rejected the so-called constitutional proposals and all insidious manoeuvres by the racist minority regime of South Africa further to entrench white minority rule and apartheid. Thirdly, it solemnly declared that only the total eradication of apartheid and the establishment of a non-racial democratic society based on majority rUle, through the full and free exercise of adult suffrage by all the people in a united and non-fragmented South Africa, could lead to a just and lasting solution of the explosive situation in SOuth Africa. Fourthly, it urged all Governments and organizations to take appropriate action, in co-operation with the Organization of African Unity and in acordance with the present resolution, to assist the oppressed people of South Africa in theit legitimate struggle for a non-racial democratic society. Just under five years after the adoption of resolution 38/11 by the General Assembly, on the basis of those so-called constitutional proposals which the Assembly in 1983 declared to be contrary to the principles of the United Nations Charter ~nd intended to entrench white minority rule and apartheid in SOuth Africa, the Pretoria regime is today holding nationwide so-called municipal elections which are based on those very same constitutional proposals of 1983, which the Assembly rejected. As expected, the regime has been taking all possible repressive measures to crush any opposition or campaigning against those so-called elections by anti-spartheid organizations in South Africa, including the bombing of the offices of those organizations, mass arrests and detention of the opponents of those "municipal elections·, which the majority of South Africans do not support. Mr. President, first of all, on behalf of the African Group, I should like to thank you and the General Assembly for acceding to our request to consider this draft resolution, as a matter of urgency, under agenda item 36, entitled ·Policies (Mr. Chagula, United Republic of Tanzania) of apartheid of the Government of South Africa- which will be debated by the 'AsseNbly later in the session. It was considered necessary for tne Assembly to consider this draft resolution not later than todray to voice the concern of the international community at the -municipal eleclions- in South Africa, which are being held today. (Hr. Chagula, Urdted Republic of 'l'tllnzania) The draft resolution in document A/43/L.16Ienti~led "Pretori&'s racial 'Muni~ip&l elections'·, which I have the honour of introducing to this Assembly on behalf of the African Group, is in many ways very similar to resolution 38/11, which the Assembly adopted in November 1983. However, before I introduce it, on behalf of the African Group, its sponsors, I Should like to amend it orally as ~llows: delete the entire operative paragraph 5 from the draft resolution. However, I Should like to emphasize that the deletion of that operative paragraph does not in any way imply that we do not attach much importance to its contents, which we shall be free to utilize elsewhere during tnis session of the Assembly. Briefly, the seven preambular paragraphs in the draft resolution lII&inly echo what the Assembly stated in 1983 in its resolution 38/11. Operative paragraphs 1 and 2 of the present draft resolution are also similar to operative paragraphs 1 and 2 of resolution 38/11 of 1983, with the exception that the words "municipal elections· have replaced the wor~B "constitutional propoaalsR or "constitution". Operative paragraph 3 is new and would simply have the Assembly reject any so-called negotiated settlement based on the outcome of the Rmunicipal elections· and other extensions of the ·constitutional proposals· of 1983. Operative paragraph .. is exactly the same as oper&tive paragraph 4 of General Assembly resolution 38/11 of 1983. Operative paragraph 6 - which now becomes operative paragraph 5 - which would have the Assembly request the security Council, as a matter of urgency, to consider the serious implications of the so-called municipal elections and to take all necessary measures, in accord~nce with the Charter, to aveet the further aggravation of tension and conflict in South Africa and southern Africa as a whole, is exactly the same as operative paragraph 6 of General Assembly resolution 38/11 of 1983. Finally, in view of the grave and deteriorating situution in SOuth Africa as a a:esult of the policy of ~partheid in that country, and in the light of General Assembly resolution 38/11 of 1983, which the ASsembly adopted by an overwhelming majority, it is our sincere hope that the Assembly will adopt this draft resolution without any difficulty.

Before proceeding to take a decisi~n on draft resolution A/43/L.l6, I should like to quote from rule 78 of the rUles of procedure in regard to proposals before the Assembly: RAs a general rUle, no proposal shall be discussed or put to the vote at any meeting of the General Assembly unless copies of it have been circulated to all delegations not later than the day pre~eding the me~ting." In view of the limited time available and the desire of members to dispose of this item expeditiously, I should 1ike to suggest, wi th your concurrance, that "'e proceed to take a decision on the draft resolution just circulated in document A/43/L.16, even though it has been circulated only this Morning. Unless I hear any objectio~s, I shall take it that the Assembly agrees with my proposal. It was so decided. ~ PRESIDENT (interpretation from Spanish): The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/43/L.l6, as orally amended by the representative of the United Republic of Tanzania. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Acgentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Br4~il, Brunei Darussmlam, BUlgaria, Burkina Faso, Burma, aurundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cote d'Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democr~tic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, r~mania, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Pr incipe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra r~one, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Ttinidad and Tbbago, Tunisia, Turkey, Ugan~a, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet SOcialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United RepUblic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, zaire, Zambia, Zimbabwe Ag&inst: None Abstaining: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America Draft resolution A/43/L.16, as amen~ed, was adopted by 146 votes to none, with 2 abstentions (resolution 43/13).*

I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their votes after the voting. * Subsequently the delegations of BarbadoS i Grenada, Malawi, samoa and Soloman Islands advised the Secretariat that they had intended to vote in favour. Ni•• BYRNB (United State. of ~fica): My delegation would like fir.t to expre•• its concern that the late circulation of the te~t of this :esolution .-de it i_po••ible to hold full consultations with other delegations before today's vote. The United States understands the concerns which ~tivate this r.solution. Indeed, the United States shares a nunber of objectives referred to in the resolution. Both pUblicly and through private chan~els, for ex~ple, the un~ted States continue. to pr••• the Gover~nt of SOuth Africa to lift the state of e.ergeooy, to release all political cktaitutes and to rellOVe restrictions on peacefUl opposition activity. None the less, we have serious ~e8ervations about thia resolution that prevented us from 8uppo",Ung it. The resolution is unbalanced and biased in its description of the violence associated with the SOuth African elections. WhUe the United States h~s consistently cundeNned violence directed at ~acefuI opponents of apartheid - including such senseless acts as the bombing ot Khoteo and Rhanya houses - we also condeNn the violence used by opponents of the system to disr~~t these elections. The detonation of bombs in public places, resulting in scores of civilian casualties, and the targeting and assassination of persons participating in the elections should be matters of serioue concern to the international community. This resolution in no way reflects such concerns. We agrse with SOuth African Archbishop De8n~nd Tutu's appeal of yesterday, in which he stated that all South Africans must be allowed to choose freely, without inti.idation from any quarter, between partici~tion and non-participation in the elections, and between partieipation and non-participation in the day of peaceful protest organized by Government opponents. Horcould we support a one-sided resolution whose only practical effect would be to confirm South African suspicions that the united Nations is unwilling to play a constructive role in finding solutions to that country's tragic internal b prObl.... we firll1y b.UiIlve the Unlt.d Nations has such. role to play, but not through the ..diu. of • r••olueion .uch .s this on•• Mr. IBPOS (Greece) I I hew the honour to .peak on behalf of the 12 ••IIb.r State. of the Buropean C~nity. The Tr.lelve are constant and unit.d in th.ir profound opposition to .partheid. We have expr....d this position on lUny occasions in the Gen.ral Ae••llbly and in other int.rnational foruu. we believe that the whole population of SOuth Africa _ust enjoy equal ~nd full political rights as citizens. The 12 ..~.r States of the European C~unity share the und.rlying conc.rn abOut aparth.id ana about any efforts to entrench that system, which ha. led the Group of African Stat.s to initiate the draft resolution just adopted, on which, however, we have r••ervationa with respect to certain for_lation•• Hr. OOS'l'BLLO (Australia) I My delegation has just voted In favour of this re.olution. We have done 80 because of Au.tralia's firm and unwavering opposition to the cruel and abhorrent syst•• of aearthei4 and our coa.itment to its di.mantling. Our delegation would .upport the holding of free and fair municipal election. in SOuth Africa as an opportunity for all SOuth Africans to exercise their demcratic rights. In this case, however, we are faced with lIlutlicipal elections being conducted along racial lin.. that are ~uite inconsistent with a valid, 4emcratic ~xpre.8ion of the will of the people. In keeping with the Australian Gover~nt'. established policy of support for a peacefUl selution to the problem, we would urge all parties to refrain from the use of force Gnd violenc:e. £,ir Crispin TICKBLL (United Kingdoll) I we shall have a l1lIOre appropriate opportunity to con.ider the is.ue of aearth.id when the r.aainder of the debate on agenda iteM 36 talk•• place. The British Govern1lent's abhorrence of mrtheid and it. CCMaitment to peaceful change in SOuth Africa have be.n repeetedly expreoaed in this Assermly. As the Permanent Representative of Greece said a few moments ago in hi,s statement on behalf of the 12 member States of the European COJIIllunity, we share the underlying concern about apartheid which led the African Group to put forward the resolution which the Assembly has just adopted. But I must place on record some reservations about elements in the text. First, I draw attention to the second preambular paragraph uf the resolution. While we do nat underestimate the gravity of the situation in SOuth Africa and agree that apartheid is a serious violation of human rights, it is going too far to describe it as a threat to international peace and security. For this and other reasons, we cannot accept the prejudicial language of operative paragraphs 1 and 5 of the resolution. The British Government shares the international connunityOs commitment to the peaceful abolition of apartheid and seeks to explore every means which could lead to that result. We believe that peace and secur ity in South Afr lea can be ach ieved only throJgh genuine dialogue and fundamental change. The General Assembly shoUld not attempt to pcejudge that process or to take decisions which are proper ly for the SOUth African people themselves. While I understand the sense of urgency which underlies any discussion of the question of apartheid, we regret that it was felt necessary to introduce the resolution at this sensitive time while delicate negotiations are in progress over the future of N~m\hi~. It would be most unfortunate if decisions taken by the General Assembly were to jeopardize or hinder progress on these negotiatiofis. For these and other reasons, my delegation abstained in the voting on the resolution. k ' T Mr. SER~IS (Belgium) (interpretation fro~ French): As it has done on Many occasions, Belgium solemnly reaffirms its complete opposition to the policy of apartheid of SOuth Africa. That is the meaning of the vote that we have cast today. Furthermore, we challenge the propriety of elections organize:l wi thin the context of apartheid, which once again trallple underfoot the rights of the black population. However, my country has reservations with respect to the terminology of the resolution 4!nd certain ptocedural difficulties which it presents. Th;e assertion ~ that ap!rtheid is a th~eat to international peace and security and the request to the security Council to take urgent measures inplies recourse to Chapter VU of the Charter and gives rise to confusion as to the areas of competence of var ious United Nations bodies. Mr. BLANC (France) (interpretati.on from French): France unreservedly condemns the policy of apartheid of SOuth Africa. My coW\try has reaffirmed this on many occasions IJnd in the clearest terms both in thE Assembly and in other forums. We have prOl7ed by our action both at the national level and in the context of the 12 members of the FAJropean COmJ'llunity. Moreover, the French delegation understands full well the concerns of the African Group, which submitted to the General Assembly the draft resolution that we have been considering today. For these reasons, France voted in favour of the resolution, despite our reservations on some of the paSSa9Ss of the text, in particular the second preamblJlar pal:agraph ~nd operative paragraphs 1 and 5. Mr. RIBBIRO-TELLES (Portugal): Portugal's position with regard to the question of !eartheid has been unequivocally expressed lIIany times both here in the General Asseilbly and in other forulMJ. My country participates ser iously in the efforts of the international community to put an end to a system that is profoundly t'~pucUatec1 by the Portuguese people. We deplore the entrenchment of apartheid reforred to in the draft resolution (A/43/L.16) and thereforl! voted in favour of it. Port.ugal must neverthaless point out its reservations with regard to the forillulation of a specific par~CJraph of the draft resolution, namely the sCicond preambular paragraph. Da. Ann HERaJS (New Zeal&nd~: My delegatiQn voted in favour of the draft resolution just adopted by the Assembly. we did so because we agree with the pr inciples on which it is based, principles which underpin our strong cOllllli tment to working foe an end to aparthili in South Africa. Although in its language it does not in all respects reflect my delegation's views, the issues the draft resolution touches on are clearly important ones. My delegation regrets that there was not time for more comprehensive consultations on the text in pursuit of the common goal we all seek. Mr. PAMORG-ANDmSEN (Denmark): I have the honour to spe3k on behalf of the five Nordic countdes, Finland, Iceland, NClCway,Sweden and Denmark. The Nordic countrie~' co~demnation of racism, racial discrimination and the system of institutionalized racial disccimination known as apartheid has been voiced in the Assembly on many occasions. OUr support of draft resolution A/43/L.16 is a logical extensioN of our positive vote on resolution 38/11, which condemned the constitutional framework within which the current municipal elections are being held as undemocratic and unjust. It is our firm conviction that the municipal elections will contribute to further entrenching apartheid, and therefore should be rejected. Rowever, the Nordic oountr fes have reservations with regard to the formulation of some spec! fic paragraphs of the draft resolution. The PRSSmBNT (interpretation from Spanish): We have heard the last statement in explanation of vote. May I remind de1e~ations that consideration of item 36 will be resumed on the roOfn ing of Mcnday, 28 November.

Before calling on the ~irst speaker, I should like to remind representatives that, in accordance wi t.'l the decision taken yesterday afternoon, the list of speakers in the debate on this item will be closed at 4 p.m. I therefore request those representatives wishing to participate in the dEbate to :J.nscribe theiJ:' names as soon as possible. I call on the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Co-operation and Trade of the Comeros, Mr. Said Kafe, who will introduce the draft resolution. Mr. KAFE (Comoros) (interpretation from French): The General Assr&mbly is for the thirteenth consecutive year dealing with the question of the COl1lOf ian Island of Mayotte. As members are aware, this aubject is a problem of the highest importance not only fQr the Comorian people but also for the international community, in that it stems from an injustice and a flagrant violation of international PJblic law as well as French domestic law. In substance, the problem runs counter to the fundamental principle of the in~iolability of the frontiers inherited from the colonial period. It also runs counteI to the aacrosanct rule oZ the indivisibility of overseas territories and (Mr. Faaborq-Ander. se~, Denuf k) colonial entities, which has, however, been recognized by the French Constitution. That is why, as will be recalled, whenever we have debated this question, whether at the united Nations or in any other inter"tional or regional organi3ation, we have always reaffirmed unambiguously and forcefully that Mayotte is, and can only be, a Comorian land. We do this all the more confidently, inasmuch as successive French Governments, invoking history to justify their policies, have repea tedl:l emphasized the need to uphold the terri tor ial u~ity of our country. Consequently, all the laws and administrative ~~rangements adopted during the colonial period have endorsed in the clearest possible manner the unity of the Comoro Archipelago. This unity is not, as some would argue, based on mere administrative conv9nie~ce, but rather derives both its origin and its strength from the common history of the sister islands which make up the Comero Archipelago: the islands of Anjouan, Grand-Comore, Mayotte and HOheli. That ia why the French Secretary of State for Overseas Departments and Territories, on 26 Augu$t 1974 in the French National Assembly, referring to our referendum on self-determination, stated that the French Government had chosen a global consultation for the three following reasons: "The first i6 legal in nature, because under the terms of the rules of interna tional law r a terri tory preserves the frontiers it had as a colony. ~Secondly, it is inconceivable that there could be mUltiple statuses for the var ious islands of the Archipelago. "Lastly, France has no desire at all to turn Comorians against each other. (Hr. Kafe, Comoros) The same speaker went on to point out, "France rejects the fragmentation of the Comoros, whose people are of the same stock and which have the same Islamic religion and the same econolllic intorests. " Two months later these remarks were confirmed by the then President of the French '1epubl1c who, in a press conference held on 24 OCtober 1974, said, "Is it reasonable to en'ITisage a part of the archipelago becoming independent and an island, however sympathetically one may view its inhabitants, preserving a different status? I believe that contemporary reaUties have to be accepted. The Comoros are a single whole and have always been a single whole. It is only natural that their fate should be a common one. On the occasion of the independence of the territory it is not for us to propose the breakup of the unity of what has always been the single Comoros l\rchipelago. ;, Through these remarks it becomes readily apparent that the unity of our country canl~ot give rise to any confusion or challenge. None the less, we have to acknowledge that to this veLy day our national unity is still fragmented, and it goes without saying that the amputation of part of its territory - the Comorian is land of Mayotte - is a deep wound in the soul of the Comor ian people. When one realizes the hOllOgeneity of the Comor ian people, the bonds of blood that have been woven from the most: ancient times between the inhabitants of the var 10us islands, one more readily understands the pain and the tragedy of a people united by the same culture, language and reli9ion - three elements which constitute the fundamental attributes of a nation, as Renan, the eminent nineteenth-eentury French thinker pointed out. The harmful effects of this separation are not merely human in scale. They also gravely impede the development of the archipelago. Indeed, by virtue of the four islands of the Comoras complementing one another, their economy can devolop only as a symbiosis, resulting from the type of production and activities peculiar to each of them. The separation of Mayotte from tbe other sister islands is thus an impedi~dnt to the harmonious development of our country. The development of our islands can be coherent only when one considers the archipelago as a united whole and can achieve a satisfactory pace only within the framework of that unity. In this regard there is a paradox that must be pointed out. Precisely at ~ time when the great States are moving to consolidate ~heir unity in order better to guarantee thG well-being of their people - thus giving effect to the ancient saying, RIn u3ion there is strength W - the Comoros find themselves divided. The problem of the Comorian island of Mayotte is no 6ifferent from those problems which, in various parts of the world, give rise to pointless tensions fraught with turmoil. The wisdom of the Comorian people has taught it the value of a spirit of concord and harmony and the superiority of that spirit over the illusions of force based on iniquity. In order to resolve this prcblem, the Comorian people has thus resolutely chosen the path of dialogue and broad-based agreement, in keeping with the pertinent resolutions and recommenations of the various international organizations. Hence it intends to uphold the principles of peace and justice enshrined in the Charter of our Organiz~tion. Clearly, however, this attitude prompted by wisdom must not be seen as a sign of weakness, our people must not find itself victimized as a result of its conciliatory attitude. At this session we have been pleased to note that confrontation is more and more tending to yield to better understanding, thus enabling us to look forward to the gradual elimination of certain conflicts of concern to the international community. Wo keenly hope that the ~ase of Mayotte may, in this same' atmosphere, (Mr. Kafe, Comoros) also enjoy tha same evolution. Yet, to our very great regret, there still seems to be no prospect of a solution that may lead to a happy outcome, one capable of dispelling the deep anxiGties of the Comorian people. The Comorian GovernnM!nt and people therefor~ look forward with considerable interest to hearing concrete propodals in the very near future so that, within the franevork of friendly relations between France and the Comoros, a solution may be found. Clearly, a just settlement of this question must necessarily involve respect for the unity and territorial integrity of the Islamic Federal Republic of the COIIIOros. We believe that, by doing justice to the rights of our country, France, whose historic influence has always been based on the unity of its great people, would eDerge ennobled from a problem that is quite at variance with its traditions and the image of itself it projected at the time of the decolonization of the other African Territories. The draft resolution now under discussion in the Assembly is not different froll the other resolutions in the sense that it emphasizes the need to accelerate the process of negotiations between the French and Comorian Governments in order to ensure the pranpt return of the island of Ml!lyotte to the Comoros. we ardently hope that it can be adopt~d unanimously. Mr. BADANI (Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic): Egypt's interest in the question of the Comorian island of Mayotte and its wish to see a speedy and just solution to this problem stem from the friendly relations and close co-operation we enjoy with both parties to the dispute. Our unwavering position, which has been stated on many occasions, is based on our commitllent: to the principles on which the United Nations was founded. Egypt has always supported respect for the sovereignty of the Islamic Federal Republic of (Mr • Kafe , Comoros) the Comoros over the island of Mayotte. This position has been reflected in the resolutions of the United Nations and the regional organizations concerned with this problam, j,ncluding those adopted !aot May at the African Summit and in September 1988 at the Ministerial Conference of the Non-Aligned Movement _ all of which advocate the need to respect the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoro Archipelago. On the basis of our ongoing contacts with the two parties to the dispute, we fUlly appreciate the concerns of the Government of the Comoroa over the lack of tangible progress in finding a solution to thie problem. In fact, the situation the United Nations in 1975. has hardly changed since the country achieved independence and became a Member of (Mr. Badawi, !lypt) we consiuer that the persistence of th*s problem poses a threat of political instability which might adversely affect the peaceful climat~ of the entire region. Nevertheless, we believe that there is room for optimism an~ hope that a negotiated and just solution to this problem may be found, particularly in view of the information contained in the secretary-General's report (A/43/648) of 29 September 1988, according to which the two friendly Governments of the Comoros and France continue to display a sincere will to continue dialogue and contacts. There has been, for example, the meeting in June this year in Paris between the Presidents of the two countries, demonstrating their will to intensify efforts to arrive at a solution guaranteeing the territorial integrity of the Comeros and t~king into account the interests of both parties. We take this opportunity to express our support for tha Secretary-General's talks with the two parties and we welcome his efforts to achie~e a peaceful solution to the problem. We therefore continue to hope that the good will of both sides and their tireless efforts will achieve tangible results in the near. future, thus allowing the Government of the Comeros to enjoy full sovereignty over all the islands of the archipelago, including the island of Mayotte, and also making it possible for that brotherly people to focus its efforts and resources on progress and development. ~. KAMAL (Pakistan): The question of the Comerian island of Mayotte has been on the agenda of the United Nations General Assembly since 1976, when Comoros attained independence. Under resolution 31/4 of the General Assembly that year France was called upon to wi thdraw from the island of Mayotte. Since then this Organization has repeatedly appealed to the Government of France to begin negotia tions wi th the Government of the Comoros wi th Cl view to implementing the relevant resolutions of the United Nations The Secretary-General has also maintained close liaison with the Organization of African Unity and has offered hie good offices to its Secretary-General in a search for a peaceful and negotiatied settlement of the problem. This year, as in the past, we nave taken up this important agenda item in an effort to encourage the two parties, which are in disagreement, to institute a constructive and purposeful dialogue with the objective of achieving a just solution to the problem, in keeping with the relevant resolutions of the General Asselllbly. The resolutions of the General Assembly on the question of the island of Mayotte underline the necessity of respecting the unity and territorial integrity of the Comero Archipelago and r~affirm that a lasting solution to the problem can be found only in restoration of the disputed island to the Comoros. The resolutions adopted over the years in other international forums, such as the Non-Aligned Movement, the Organization of African unity and the Organization of the Islamic Conference, have also reaffirmed the territorial integrity and unity of the Comoros as a whole. This position has recently been reflected in the Final Declaration of the Conference of the Foreign Ministers of Non-Aligned Countries held in cyprus in early september this year and in the resolution adopted at the Addis Ababa summ,it meeting of the Organization of African Unity in May 1988. Such a display of support for the Comoros on this question leaves no doubt about the validity of its claim to the island of Mayotte. The problem of the island of Mayotte is not just a bilateral problem between France and the Comoros. It is basically a question of decolonization and thus a problem for all of us to resolve. In this context I would recall General Assembly resolution 3291 (XXIX) of 13 December 1974 and resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, on the granting of independence to colonial countr ies and peoples. Those resolutions clearly maintain that the granting of independence or of the right to exercise self-determination applies to colonial entities as a whole and not selectively. This should have been the case with regard to the Comoro Archipelago. We believe that constructive dialogue and peaceful negotiations are the best means of resolving disputes and differences. In thia context the assertion made by France that it continues to maintain a dialogue at the highest level with the Comoros and the recent visi t of the President of the Comoros to France are positive . signs which may lead to a settlement of the dispute. Such a dialogue, imbued with a spirit of co-operation and understanding, built upon the foundations already laid by the relevant General Assembly resolutions, provides in our view, the best possibility for ~ peaceful solution of the problem. Pakistan has traditional ties of friendship and co-operation with France. At the same time, as a fellow member of the Non-Aligned Movement and of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Pakistan also enjoys close and fraternal ties wi t:h the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros. A dispute between two friendly countries is thus a matter of concern to ~s. My country therefore follows very closely the developments taking place on this issue and maintains a special interest in its expeditious settlement. The draft resolution before the Assembly is both balanced and moderate and reiterates the principled position maintained in the international forums. My delegation supports it and expresses the hope and desire to witness an expeditious process of negotiations, leading to an early solution of the problem on the basis of recognized principles. This would undoubtedly have a beneficial effect on the rel~tions between the two countries and on regional peace and security. We would like to take this opportunity to commend the efforts of the Secretary-Gener~l towards resolving the problem and to join others in requesting him to continue them and to extend his good offices to the Organization of African Unity in the search for a negotiated settlement. United Nations has been considering the question of the Comorian island oi ~yotte and recommending the terms for a just and final solution. The lack of progress towards a negotiated political solution to this question prollpts the United Nations once again to affirm the essential elements of such a settlement - that is, the need to respect the unity and territorial integrity of the Comera Archipelago, composed of the islands of Anjouan, Grande-Comore f Mayotte and Mcheli, fulfilment of the commitments entered into on the eve of the referendum of 22 December 1974 on self-determination for the Comero Archipelago~ and pursuit of a frank, sincere dialogue with a view to accelerating the return of the island of Mayotte to the Comeros. Gabon, my country, which holds the chairmanship of the Ad Roe Committee of Seven of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) on this question, realizes the di fficulty and complexi ty of the pl'oblem. None the less, we believe that the parties concerned should demonstrate the necessary political will if they are to seek together the most appropr iate ways and means of solving this problem, with absolute respect for the full and complete sovereignty of the Comorian State over the whole of the archipelago, including the Comorian island of Mayotte. In this connection, we are gratified to note that France continues to be prepared to engage in dialogue with the Comorian authorities. The OAU Ad Hoc Committee of Seven has continued and will continue to make all the necessary efforts to accelerate a peaceful, negotiated settlement of this question. TO achieve that, it will naturally have to count on the mutual understanding and good will of the two parties. While it is true that the ini tiatives and the demarches of the OAU Ad Roe Committee of Seven are exceedingly important, it is equally ,true that the solidarity of the international community with the Comorian people continues to be decisive. In that regard, we cdl upon the in ternational communi ty, and more particularly the United Nations, to increase the efforts to accelerate the return of the island of Mayotte to the Comoros. My country's unswerving position on this questio~ derives from its dedication to the principles of the Charter, particularly respect for the s~ereignty and territor ial integr ity of States and the peaceful settlement of disputes .. It is our hope that the adoption of the draft resolution in document A/43/L.lS will lend new impetus to the negotiating process that has begun, in order to reach a political settlement of this question. Mr. ~YA (Brunei Darussalam)~ As this is the first opportunity I have had to speak in the General Assembly, I should like to offer my heartfelt congratulations to you, Sir, on your election to the presiden~f of the forty-third session of the General Assembly. I assure you of my delegation!s utmost co-operation as you carry out' you~ important task. I should like also to take this opportunity to express our sympathy to the Philippines and countries in Central America that have been struck b¥ the recent natural disasters. I turn now to the item entitled "Question of the Comorian Island of Mayotte". Since this i tern was placed on the agenda of the General Assenbly in 1975 the international community has given the question sustained attention, in the hope that a final solution to the problem could be worked out by the parties conc9rned. we are gratified to note the efforts made over the years by the Islamic Federal Republic of the Camoras and France, as well as the Organization of African Unity, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries and the United Nations, to bring about a just and honourable settlement of the problem. Despi te those efforts, however, the Secretary-Ge1:'letal, in his report to the General Assembly in document A/43/648, has i~dicated that no significant progress hafl been made in t.he situation regarding this question. We hope that both countries will continue to work towards the achievement of a peaceful, just and lasting settlement of the prOblemo We are confident that both France and the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros wish to resolve the issue amicably and peacefully, in conformity with the principles enshrined in the Charter. In that respect, we should like to express our satisfaction at the good-will gesture made by His Excellency Mr. Ahmed AbduUah Abtleremane, President of the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comeros, during his private visit to France in June this year. We are encouraged by the o~going contacts between the two count~ies and hope that these contacts will provide the necessary impetus. My delegation reiterates its firm position in support of the sovereignty of the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros oyer the island of Mayotte. The overwhelming majority of the international cnmmunity has the same position. That is Shown by the adoption by the General Assembly of successive resolutions on the question of the Comar ian island of Mayotte that reaffirm the necessity of respecting the unity and territoriQl integrity of the Comoro Archipelago, composed of the islands of Anjouan, Grande-Comore o Ma~~tte and Mohsli. The Islamic Federal RepUblic of the Comoros was admitted to the United Nations by a unanimous vote of the General Assembly on its resolution 3385, of 12 November 1975, as a sovereign State made up of the four islands, including Mayotte. It is our hope that the international community will continue to support efforts to bring the Comorian island of Mayotte into the Islamic Federal Republic with the least possible de16Y. " My delegation will support the draft resolution no~ before us in document A/43/L.1S, just as ..It. ilas supported similar draft resolutions in the past. We believe this draft ~esolution reflects the common will of the international community on th~ urgent need to restore the territorial integrity of the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoro~_ Under the draft resolution the General Assembly would endorse the effurts and good will of the parties concerned. We earnestly hope that, with the existing good faith and sincere intenti~ns on both si~es, the desired solution to the problem CBn be achieved in the near future. My delegation takes note that, despite differences of position ~er this issue, the two countries continue to have friendly relations and are working towards a satisfactory and equitable solution to the problem. Brunei Darussal~nl has cord~.al and warm relations bath with the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros and with France. We are happy with the state of friendship and co-operation that exists between the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comeros and France. We believe that such friendship and co-operation can be the . standard-bearer for the resolution of all future conflicts anywhere in the world. Before I conclUde, I should like to place on record our deep appreciation to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and to all the other organizations concerned, for their tireless efforts to create the necessary conditions to facilitate a just and pe~ceful settlement of the problem. time, Sir, that I have the h~our of speaking in -the Gener,~l As~embly, J should like, on behalf of my delegation and my country, to extend to you the most sincere and xriendly congratulatio!)ns on your election as Presidei~t. From the outset of our wo~k everyone here has recognized your great competence in carrying out the important tasks entrusted to you. This year again France cannot but regret the fact that the question of the island of Mayotte is an item on the agenda of the General Assembly. We cannot but vote against the text which is before us, in particular because of operative pak:agraph 1. My delegation has, however, listened with keen attention to the speakers on this question, and it seems that everyone desires a just and lasting solution to t~is question to be found as quickly as possible. This, indeed, is also the position of France. We are involved in an active search for a satisfactory outcome to the problem of Mayotte and we exclude no solution that is in keeping with our Constitution and respects the will of the populations concerned. The French Government is engaged with the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comeros in a spirit of responsibility and openmindedness in a constructive dialogue. This dialogue is based on the solid bonds of friendship and co-operation which exist between our countries and which have recently been strengthened by talks at the highest level. We are convinced that such dialogue, pursued with the unswerving will to achieve conciliation and appeasement, can, despite the difficulties, lead to progress in this common quest for an equitable solution. France, fer its part will spare no effort to this end. a decision on draft resolution ~/43/L.15. I have to inform the Assembly that the Seoretary-General does not r:~resee the implementation of this draft resolution havi ~ any program~ budget implications. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. Afghanistan, Albania, Alger.ia, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Pase, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist RepUblic, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central Af:ican RepUblic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Cote d'Ivoire, Cuba, C~echoslovakia, Democratic Kdmpuchea, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, German Demooratic Republi~, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic RepUblic of), Iraq, Jamaica, Jo,dan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Ne~ zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanna, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Sao Tome and Principe, saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, ~)90, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukcaini~n Soviet Socialist RepUblic, Union of SOviet Sooialist RepUblics, United Arab Emirates, Unite1 RepUblic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia, Zimbabwe Against: France Draft resolution A/43/L.IS was adopted by 127 votea to 1, with 25 abstentions (resolution 43/14).*

This concludes our consideration of agenda item 32. AGENDA ITDl 15 ELECTIONS 'ID FILL ~CANCIES IN PRINeI PAL ORGANS (a) ELECTroN OF FIVE NON-PERMANENT M9IBERS OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL (b) ELECTION OF EIGHTEEN M9mERS OF THE ECOt."OMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL

The Assembly will now proceed to the election of five non-permanent members of the security Council to replace those members whose term of office expires on 31 December 1988. The five outgoing members are the following: Argentina, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan and Zambia. These five States cannot be re-elected and therefore their names should not appear on the ballot papers. Apart from the five permanent members, the Security Council will include in 1989 the following States: Algeria, Brazil, Nepal, Senegal and Yugoslavia. Therefore, the names of those States should not appear on the ballot papers. Of the five non-permanent members which will remain in office in 1989, three are from Africa and Asia, one is from Latin A~erica 2nd the Caribbean, and one is from Eastorn Europe. * Subsequently the delegations of Costa Rica, Ghana and Niger advised the secretariat that they hsd intended to vote in favour. Consequently, pursuant to paragraph 3 of resolu tion 1991 A (XVIII), of 17 December 1963, the five non-permanent members should be elected according to the following pattern~ two from the Africa and Asia Groups, one from the Group of Latin America and Caribbean States and two from the Group of Western European and other States. The ballot paper takes that pattern into account. In accordance with the established practice, there is an understanding that, of the two States to be elected from Africa and Asia, one should be from Africa and one from Asia. I should like to inform the Assembly that the required number of candidates receiving the greatest number of votes and the majority required will be declared elected. In the case of a tie vote for the last seat, there will be a restricted ballot limited to those candidates which h!lve obtained an equal number of votes. May I take it that the General Assembly agrees to thftt procedure? It wa~ so decided.

In accordance with rule 92 of the rulea of procedure, the election shall be held by secret ballot and there shall be no nominations. Ballot papers are now being distributed. I request representatives to use only those ballot papers that have been distributed and to write on them the names of the five States for which they wish to vote. As I have indicated, the ballot papers should not include the names of the five permanent members, the five outgoing non-permanent members or the five States that will remain in office in 1989. For each region, votes for more than the required number of candidates will be declared invalid. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Agstner (Austria), Mr. Rysinski ~nd), Mr. Idris (Sudan) and Mr. Amorin (Uruguay) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot • The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Spanish)z The result of the voting for the election of five non-permanent menbers of the ~curity Council is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 157 Number of invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 157 Abstentions: 0 Number of Members voting: 157 Required two-thirds majority: 105 Number of votes obtained: Colombia Ethiopia Canada Malaysia Finland Greece Bangladesh Somalia Cuba Bahamas Mauritius Sudan Having obtained the required two-thirds majority, the following States were elected non-permanent members o~ the security COWlcil for IS two-year periO! beginning on 1 January 1989: Canada, Colombia and Ethiopia• filled: one by a State from the African and Asian Groups, 4nd one by a State from the Group of Western European and other States. In accordance with established practice, of the two states to be elected from Africa and Asia, onc should be from Africa and one from Asia. Since Ethiopia has already been elected, the remaining seat Should be filled by a State from Asia. We shall therefore now proceed with the second ballot. This ballot will be restricted to the two Asian States, which are Bangladesh and Malaysia, and which obtained the largest number of votes in the last round of voting, but were not elected - that is, Bangladesh and Malaysia - and the two States from the Group of Western European and othe: States, Finland and Gleece, which attained a majority but were not elected. This is in keeping with article 94 of the rules of procedure. Ballot papers will now be distributed. I request representatives to write on the ballot papers the names of those Statea for which they wish to vote. Ballot papers which contain the name of a State from the Asian Group other than that of Bangladesh or Mmlaysia, or which contain the name of a State from the Group of Western European and other States other than that of Finland or Greece, or which contain the name of more than one State from each group will be considered null and void. I call on the representative of Bangladesh on a point of order. Mr. KARIM (Bangladesh): The delegation of H~ngladesh wishes to announce the withdrawal of its candidacy for membership of the Security Council. ~e PRESIDENT (interpretation from Spanish): We shall bear in mind the statsaent ..de by the representative of Bangladesh, but, as indicated in the rules biu States. of procedure, W~ must pr~~ed with the ballot to fill the place from the Group of At the invitation of the President, Mr. Agstner (Austria), Mr. Rysinski Mr. Idris Sudan) and Mr. Amorin (Utu ua ) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot. The meeting was suspended at 5.50 p.m and resumed at 6.15 p.m.

The result of the voting for the election of two non-permanent members of the security Council is as follows: Number of ballot papers: Number at invalid ballots: Number of valid ballots: Abs ten tions : Number of Members voting: Required two-thirds majority: Number of votes obtained: Malaysia Finland Greece Bangladesh Having obtained the required two-thirds majority, Malaysia was elected a non-permanent member of the security Coun~i1 for a two-year periOd beginning on 1 January 1989.

One seat remains to be filled from the Group of western European and other States. In accordance wHh rule 94 of the rules of procedure, we shall proceed to a third ballot, restricted to the two candidates which have obtained the largest number of votes. These two countries·~re Pinland and Greece. Ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the President, Mr. A!;~...ler (Austria), Hr. Rysinski (Poland), Mr. rdfis (Sudan) and Mr. Amori" (Uruguay) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secr.et ballot• o o The meeting was suspended at 6.25 p.m. and resumed at 6.40 p.m.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: Number of invalid ba:llots: :-=='- Number of valid ballots: Abs ten tions: Number of Members voting: Required two-thirds majority: Number of votes obtained~ Finland Greece ~ng obtained the r!luired two-thirds majority, Finland was elected a non-permanent member of the Security Council for a two-year period beginning on 1 January 1989.

I congratulate the states that have been elected non-permanent members of the security Council and I thank the tellers for their co-operation in the election. The Assembly has concluded its consideration of sub-item (a) agenda item 15. The Assembly will now proceed to the election of 18 members of the EconOJllic and Social Council to replace thoge members whose term of office exrires on 31 December 1988. The 18 outgoing members are: Australia, Belgium, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Djibouti, Egypt v Gabon, the German Democratic Republic, Iraq, Italy, Jamaica, Mozambique, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, the Philippines, Sierra Leone, the Syrian Arab RepUblic and the Uni ted States of America. These 18 States are eligible for immediate re-election. 157 o I remind the Assembly that on 1 January 1989 the following States will remain menbers of the Economic and SOcial Council: Belize, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Colollbia, Cuba, Denmark, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, India, the Islamic RepUblic of Iran, Ireland, Japan, Lesotho, Liberia, the Libyan Arab Jaaahiriya, Norway, Oman, peland, Portugal, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, SOmalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Trinidad and Tb~ago, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the united Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Uruguay, Venezuela, YUgoslavia and Zaire. The names of those 36 States should therefore not appear on the ballot papers. Paragraph 4 of Ganer.!l Assembly resolution 284" (XXVI) of 20 December 1971 provides that the 18 members should be elected as follows: fiv~ from the Group of African States, four from the Group of Asian States, three from the Group of L3tin American ~nd Caribbean States, four from the Group of Western European and other States and two from the socialist States of Eastern Europe. The ballot papers take that pattern into account. The candidates receiving the greatest number of votes and the majority required will be declared elected. In case of a tie vote for the last place there will be a restricted ballot limited to those candidates which have obtained an equal number of votes. May I take it that the General Assembly agrees to that procedure? n was so decided.

In accordance ~ith rule 92 of the rules of 'procedure, the election shall be held by secret ballot and there shall be no nominations. The Assembly will recall that in the past the Chairmen of regional groups have been allowed to speak at this stage to clarify the status of the candidates. Acc~rdingly, I call first on the representative of Kuwait, as current Chairman of the Group of Asian Stateso (The President) Mr. AL-SABAH (Kuwait) (interpretation from Arabic): I have pleasure, on behalf of the Group of Asian States, of which Kuwait has the honour to be Chairman for this month, in informing the General Assembly that there are four candidates from the group for membership of the Economic and Social Council: Indonesia, Iraq, Jordan and Thailand.

I call on the representative of Austria g as current Chairman of the Group of Western European and other States. Mrs. BERTRAND (Austria): As Chairman of the Group of Western European and other States we should like to inform the Asselnbly that our Group has an agreed list of candidates for the forthcoming election. There are four candidates for the four seats, all endorsed: Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand and the United States of America.

I call on the representative of th~ Ukrainian SSR to speak on behalf of the socialist States of Eastern Europe. Mr. OUDOVENKO (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (interpretation from Russian): The socialist States of Eastern Europe endorse the candidacy of Czechoslovakia and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic for the two places reserved for our group on the Economic and Social Council.

I call on the representative of the united Republic of Tanzania, as Chairman of the African Group. Mr. KATEKA (United Republic of Tanzania): The African Group has agreed on the following candidates: Cameroon, Kenya, Niger, Tunisia and Zambia.

I new call on the representative of the Dominican Republic, as Cha irman of the La tin American and Caribbean Group. Mrs. De La MAZA (Dominican Republic) (interpretation from Spanish): As Chairman of the Latin American and Caribbean Group, I wish to inform the Assenbly that the Group did not reach a consensus. For its three seats in the Economic and SOcial Council, the Group has the following candidates: Bahamas, Braz il, Nicaragua and Peru.

Ballot papers marked A, B, C, D and E are now being distributed. I request representatives to use only those ballot paper s and to wr i te on them the names of the Member Sta tes for which they wish to vote in each group. Ballot papers containing more names than the nunner assigned to that group will be declared invalid. Names of Member States on a ballot that do not belon9 to that group will not be counted at all. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Agstner (Austria), Hr Mounkh-Orgil (Mongplia), Mr. Gorajewski (Poland), Mr. Idris (SUdan) and Mr. Amorin (Uruguay) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot• The

THe result of the voting for the election of 18 members of the Economic and Social Council is as follows: GROUP A Numer of ballot paper.!!. 158 NUmber of invalid ballots: 1 NUmber of valid ballots: 157 Abs ten tions: 0 Number of Members voting: 157 Rt!quired twO-thirds majority: 105 NUmber of votes obtained: Zanbia 152 Tunisia 150 Kenya 149 Niger 146 Camer.oon 145 Niger ia 4 Libyan Arab Jamahiriya 1 .m. Number of ballot papers: 158 NUmber of invalid ballots: 0 NUmber of valid ballots: 158 Abstentions: 3 Number of Member s voting: 155 Required two-thirds majority: 104 Number of votes obtained: Indonesia Jordan Thailand Iraq Burma Democratic Yemen NUmber of ballot papers: 158 Number of invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ba~~: 158 Abstentions: 1 NUmber of Members votin2: 157 !equired two-thirds ma jori ty : 105 NUmber of votes obtained: Brazil Bahamas Peru Nicaragua Ecuador El Salvador Panama Number of '>allot paper s: 158 Number of invalid ballots: 0 NUmber of valid ballots: 158 Abs ten tions: 2 NUmber of Member s voting: 156 Requ ired two-th irds Ira jor!ty: Number of votes obta ined: New Zealand 149 Netherlands 144 Un i ted Sta tes of Amer iea 136 NUllber of ballot papers: 158 NUmber of inYalid ballots: 0 NUmber of valid ballots, 158 Abs tentions: 8 NUlIlbers of Melllbers voting: 150 Required two-thirds majority: 100 Number of votes obta ined: Ukrainian Soviet SOcialist Republic 144 Czechoslovak ia 142 Byeloru9sian Soviet SOcialist Republic 2 Romania 1 Having obtained the required two-thirds majority, the following St~tes were elected members of the Economic and SOcial Council for a three-year pl!dod beginning on 1 January 1989: Bahamas, Brazil, Cameroon, Czechoslovakia, Indonesia, Iraq, Italy, Jordan, Kenya, Netherlands, New zealand, 5iger, Thailand, Tunisia, Ukrainian SOviet SOcialist Republic, United States of America and Zambia. The mmmENT (interpretation from Spanish): I congratulate the states that have been elected members of the Economic and Social Council. There remaine one seat to be filled from the Latin American and Caribbean Group. We shall therefore proceed to a second ballot, which, given the late hour, will be the last ballot this (!vening on the i tern now before us. In accordance with rule 94 of the rules of procedure, this ballot will be restricted to the two States that received the largest number of votes in the previous ballot - that is, Nicaragua and Peru. The ballot papers are now being distfibuted. I request members to write on them the name of the State for which they wish to vote. Any ballot papers containing the name of a State other than Nicaragua or Peru or containing more than one name will be declared invalid. At the invitation of the President, Mr A9stner (Austria), Mr. Mounkh-orgil (Mongolia), Mr. Gorajewski (Poland), Mr. tdris (SUdan) and Mr Amorin (Uruguay) acted as teller s. . A vote was taken by secret bl\llot. The

The result of the voting is as follows: NUmber of ballot papers: Number of invalid ballots: NUmber of valid ballots: 156 Abs ten dons: -,.....--- o NUmber of Members voting: 156 R!9uired two-thirds majority: Number of votes obtained: 104 Nicaragua 82 Peru 74

This restricted ballot has not produced a positive result. Therefore, in accordance with the rules, we should go on to another restricted ballot. However, taking into account the lateness of the hour and the fact that we still have another i tern to deal wi th, I should like to propose that we postpone the voting to a future meeting and suspend these elections for the time being. If I hear no objection, I shall take it that that is the view of the Assembly. It was s£ decided. at 8.35 P.m. o

I propose that the list of speakers on this item, which includes consideration of the fortieth anniversary of the WOrld Health Organization and the prevention and control of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), be closed tomorrow, 27 OCtober, at 11 a.m. May I take it that the Assembly agrees to that proposal? It was so decided.

We turn now to the request contained in the letter dated 25 OCtober 1988 from the Permanent Representative of Democratic Yemen to the United Nations addressed to the President of the General Assembly (A/43/75l). Members will recall that at its 3rd plenary meeting, held on 23 september 1988, the General Assembly allocated to the Special political Committee agenda item 77, entitled "Repor t of the Specia1 Committee to I nvestiga te Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the OCcupied Territories". The letter before the Assembly sets out a request that Ha special meeting of the General Assembly be held on the uprising in the occupied territories under agenda item 77." (A/43/75l) It is wlderstood, however, that the Special Political Committee would remain seized of the item for its customary consideration. The request now before the Assembly involves reconsideration of the decision taken at our 3rd plenary meeting concerning the allocation of this item. Therefore, a decision is' required under rule 81 of the Assembly's rules of procedure• If there is no objection, I sh~ll talc!! it that the Assenbly agrees to reconsider the <.s_'Qstion of th~ allocation of agenda item 77. It was so decided.

In the light of the decision just taken, 'le may now proceed to consider the request contained in document A/43/751. According to that request, one special plenary meeting would be held, under agenda item 77, on the uprising in the occupied territories, on the understanding that the Special Political Committee would remain seized of the item for its customary consideration. If there ia no objection, t shall take it that the General Assembly agrees to the request set out in document A/43/7Sl. It was so decided. Miss BYRNE (United States of America): My de16gation did not formally object to the decision just taken. That does not mean tha.: we regard this decision as a useful practice or a desirable precedent. The effectheness of the General Asselllbly is enhanced by orderly procedure and the recogni tiora on the part of members of the central role of the Gener~l Committee In ensuring this orderly procedure. On 21 september the General COIII:IIittee unanimously recommended allocation of the item to the Special Political Coftl1littee. On 23 September the plenary Assembly unanimously approved that recommendation. A fairly substantial case must be made to justify reconsideration so 800n after the original decision was taken. In the opinion of my Government, nothing has transpired since 23 September to justi fy alter In9 the decision rude then on this item. Mote~er, the United States delegation believes that orderly and coherent discussion of an item is hampered by breaking the item into parts and handling each part in a different forum. We hope that Member States ~ill refrai1 from this procedure in the future. (The President) The PRESIDENT (interpretation frOll SpaniSh) & All the Generlll A8l1ear:~y h.es agreed to the request Ht out in docu~C!nt A/U/75l, I propoee that on 3 Navellber 1988 the General Assellbly devote one plenary .eting to consideration of agenda i te. 77, on the understanding, of cour.e, that the Special PoUtical COIMittee will re.in .eized of the itelll for ita cuetoury consideration. I have to inforM _lIbere that this efternoon r received a letter frOll the PerlMnent Representative of the Dollinican Republic, as Chair_n for. October of the Group of L@Un AIIeriean Md Caribbean States, inforlling _ that that group requests the inclusion of an 8dditional ite. en the ageft&l of the Asselllbly for thie session, entitled -EIIergency assistance to Nicaragua, Ccsta Rica and other countries affected by hurricane Jean-. That letter will be circulated to delegations and Assembly officers in due co~se and will be discussed at a subsequent meeting, to be announced in the Journal. I have also been inforll8d by the delegation of Nicaragua that its request (A/43/246) fer the inclusion of a new itea on the agenda for this sossion has been withdrawn. The ...tinS rose at 8.55 P•••