A/44/PV.61 General Assembly

Thirty years ago today the General Assembly adopted the Declaration of the Rights of the Child, which in its preamble affirm~d that -mankind oves to the child the best it has to give· (resolution 1386 (XIV)). The 10 principles laid down in that Declaration have served as guideposts and objectives for the work of our Organization since then in promoting and protecting the rights of children throughout the world. Today, with the adoption of the Convention on the Riqhts of the Child, the Assemhly has taken a new and decisive step along the road towards ensuring respect for the dignity and rights of the child, for the rights of the child have now gone from a declaratory statement of purpose into what will become a binding piece of international legislation. The Convention is an important achievement hy the United Nations and shows the positive and constructive results which international co-operation can yield. It protects a wide range of hasic human rights, deals with situations of special concern to children, such 8S reunification with parents, adoption and foater care, and protects the child from such abuses as exploitation for child labour, sexual purpol'Jp's and sale, trafficking and abduction and all other torms of exploitation prejudicial to the child'n welfare. The Convention we have adopted here today is the result of 10 years of dedicated effort, and I wish to express my profound thanks to all who have contributed to this auccess - Government representatives, those of specialized agencies and the United Nations Children's Fund and the non-governmental organizations. The task before us now is to give reality to the promis~s of the Convention by bringing it into force and applying it world-wide. tn this way ve ean respond and give effect to the statement of the Declaration that mankind OW0S the child the best it has to give. We have now conclUded our consideration of ag~nda item 108.

The sixth report of the General Committee concerns a request by the Secretary-General for the inclusion in the agenda of the current session of an additional su~-item eptitled wFinancing of the United Nations Observer Group in Central Americaw• The General Committee decided to recommend to the General Assembly that the 8ub-item be included in the aqenda. May 1 take it that the General Assembly de~ldes to include in its agenda the additional sub-item entitled wFinancing of the United Nations Observer Group in Central Amer!~aW? It was so decided.

The General Coram!ttee decided alRe to recommend to the Assembly that this item be allocated to the Fifth Committee. May I take it that the (~neral Assembly decides to adopt this recommendation? It was so decided. (The President)

This repof:t also concerns a reauest by the Secretary-General for the inclusion in the agenda of the current session under an additional sUb-item entitled "Election of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refuqee~" and for the amendment of the title of agenda item 16 to read "Elections to fill vacancies in subsidiary o~gans and other elections". The General Committee decided to recommend to the General Assembly that the 8ub-item be included in the agenda and that the title of agenda item 16 be amended accordingly. May I take it that the General Assembly decides to include in it~ agenda an additional sub-item entitled "Election of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees" and alao to amend tbe title of agenda item 16 to read "Elections to fill vacancies in subsidiary organs and other elections"? .!! was so decided.

The General Committee also decided to recommend to the Assembly tbat this suh-item be considered directly in plenary meeting. ~ay I take it that the General Assembly adopts that recommendation? It was so decided. AGENDA ITDt 30 LAW OF THE SEA (a) REPORTS OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL (A/44/461 c'!lnd Corr.l, A/44/650) (b) DRAFT RESOLUTION A/44/L.42 The PRESIDENT' If there is no objection, the list of speakers in the dfthate on this item will be closed today at 1 p.m. It was so decided. The PRESIDENT, ! ~eQueBt those representatives wishing to participate in . the debate to inscribe their names on the list as soon as possible. I call on the representative of Cape Verde, who, in his capacity as Cha1~man of the P~epa~atory Commission fo~ the Inte~national Sea-Bed Autho~ity and fo~ the International T~ibunal fo~ the Law of the Sea, wishes to introduce the draft resolution in the cou~se of his statement. Mr. JESUS (Cape Verde), Chairman of the Preparatory Commission for the International Sea-Bed Authority and for the International Tribunal for the Law of th~ Sea, One of the most remarkable achievements of the international community in the field of codification and p~ogresslve development of international law is undoubtedly the new legal regime applicable to the oceans established in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The negotiations that led to the adoption of the Convention remain a monument to co-ope~ation and the willingness of States to settle their conflicting inte~ests hy peaceful means. Complex as it is, the Convention strikes a halance of different interests of States 1n the use and exploitation of the oceans' resources. It is this eauilibrium of diffA.~ent inte~eBtB, reflected in the Convention as a whole, that explains the fact that many national legislations are being enacted o~ Updated to take the Convention's p~ovisions into account although it is not yet in fo~ce. At D time when co-operation and peacefUl relations among States sp,em to be a fundamental and an unavoidable dr.lving fo~ce in modern-day international politics, to preserve the integrity of the Convention and to strengthen the prospect of its full and effective implementation a~e, In our view, the obligation of all nations ~ea]ly interested in shaping a modern world based on co-operation, fairness and peaceful sharing of the planet's resources. As the number of ,ratifications of the Convention on the Law of the Sea increases, 'i:ts' entry into force, it seems, will be .?i ",r~ali ty in a mat ter of a few years from now. Having in mind the eno~mous contribution of the Convention in establishing agreed rules of conduct for the peaceful use and orderly eX~loitationof the oceans' resources among States, it is inCUmbent upon all of us to take all necessary steps to ensure that, by the entry into force of the Convention, all States and the international community in general will lend their ~upport to what has been considered one of the most important multilateral legal instruments ever negotiated. In this regard, the work of the Preparatory Commission for the International Sea-Bed Au~~rity and for the International ~ribunal fo~ the Law of the Sea is of paramount importance. The effectiveness of the Convention goes hand in hand with the work of the Preparatory Commission - so much RO that, as we see it, a failure in the implementation of the Preparatory Commission's mandate would immensely jeop&rdi~e that effectiveness and would even give grounds for the proliferation of different and conflicting national interpretations of the provisions of the Convention. The Third Conference on the Law of the Sea, in its resolution I, decided that all possible measures should he taken to ensurp. the entry into effective operation ,.,ithout undue delay of the Authority and the Tribunal and that all necessary arrangements be made for the commencement of their functions and also decided ·t~at (Mr. Jesus, Chairman, ~epar&tory COmmission for the International Sea-Bed Authority and for the International Tribunal for the Law of the sea) o DEeperatDry CoBBl.slon should be established for the fulfilment of these It ls with th18 In alnd that I, as Chairman of the Preparato~y Commission, fl:IJ1B:ittber with ttle Chair.en of the four Special Commiasions, have taken steps to @e~~nls. our wor~ In tha Preparatory Commission in such a way as to enable us to ~~~l.h our ..ndate before the entry into force of, the Convention, for I strongly ~~i.ve that the successful and tt.ely concl~~ion of our work in the Preparatory C~~!1••1ap would l...nsely ~trengthen ~he prospect for an early and universal c'i!lG~~)l'ence to the Law of the Sea Convention.* • NI'. Jay. (Brunei DarulIsalall), Vice-President, tC'Ok the Chair. (Mr. Jesus, Chairman, Preparatory Oommiaslon for the International Sea-Bed Authority and for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea) It is my firm conviction that within the time-frame available to lJS we can properly deal with and solve all issues before us. I say this because past experience in our work in the Preparatory Commission has shown that the pragmatic approach to the ongoing negotiations and the spirit of flexibility have made progress in our work possible. In effect, not only have we made substantial progress in drafting rules, regulations ald procedures that will enable the Sea-Bed Authority II1d the law of the sea Tribunal to ~tart their functions upon the entry into force of the Convention, but also we have already taken important decisions that led to the registration of France, India, Japan and the Soviet Union as pioneer investors, and to the designa tien 0 f reserved sites for the Enterprise - decis ions that are to be seen as landmark achievements in the Preparatory Commission's continuous effort to implement its mandate. The work ~ the Preparatory Commission thus augurs well for the future of the Convention. Mmittedly, there are diffiCUlt issues at hllnd - difficult yes, but not iMpossible to deal with if in fact there is a genuine desire to solve them. As Chairman of the Commiss ion, 1 can assure all members of the Assembly that 1 shall spare no effort to make sure that by the end of our mandate all issues are addressed and, in the language of resolution 1, -all possible measures· are taken to ensure full, effective &nd universal implementation of the Convention on the Law of the Seao In the light of the expressed "UUngness of States to find solutions to our existing problems, I intend to do whatever it takes to help. I am fully confident that with the ..,derstanding Ilnd co-operation of all we shall find a w~y. I have no doubt that the success of our collective endeavour in this regard will, in the end, (Mr. Jesus, Oaairman, Preparatory Commission for the International Sea-Bed Author!ty and for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea) have to rely on a convergence of co-ordinated efforts. Therefore, in the search of solutions to our difficulties, any action or step the nature of which tends to contradict those co-ordinated efforts should be avoided. Let me seize this opportunity to thank all those who have extended their oo-operatlm to me as I carry out my functions. My country and, surely, the whole of Africa, on whose behalf I hold the post of Chairman of the Preparatory Commission, appreciate that co-operation very much. In connection with the item now under consideration, I should nCM like to introduce draft resolution A/44/L.42, on behalf of its original sponsors: Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, O111e, China, Denmark, Fiji, Finland, the German Democratic Republic, Iceland, Ireland, Jamaica, Liberia, Malaysia, Mexico, Myanmar, Nepal, New Zealand, Norway, Qnan, the Philippines, Portugal, Romania, Saint wcla, SalllOl'1, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Trinidad and Tobago, the United Repr1bUc of Tanzania, Uruguay and Vanuatu. The foUCMing countries have also become sponsors: the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Guinea-Bissau, Indonesia, Mauritania, Pakistan, Singapore, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, ~.d Zambia. In the preparation of this draft resolution, account has been taken of the text of past resolutions adopted by the Assembly en this item. I mall therefore sum up in order to save the Assembly's time. In the preamble to the draft resolution, the Assembly would recall all the resolutions adopted on this item since the thirty-seventh session of the General Assembly, and would recognize that the problelll8 of ocean space are closely interrelated and need to be considered as a whole. (Mr. Jesus, Chairman, Preparatory Commission for the International Sea-Bed Authority and for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea) The Assembly would also sta te - in the third preambular paragraph - that it is important to safeguard the unified character of the Convention and related resolutions md should apply them in a manner consistent with that character and with their object and purpose. Although maintaining the underlying idea in the equivalent paragraJ;il of last year's resoluticn, this paragraph has been redrafted to reflect a positive approach in the language. In the preamble. the Assembly would furtherllOre emphasize the need for States to ensure consistent application of the Convention as well as the need for harmonization of national legislation with the Convention, recall that the Convention provides the regime to be apPlied to the Area and its resources, welcome - in a n\ew paragraph - the express ions of willingness to explore all possibilities of addressing issues, as referred to in the statements made at the end of tho summer meeting of the Preparatory Commissim, in order to secure universal participation in the Convention, recognize the need f"r co-operation in the early and effective implementation of resolution IIJ note with satisfaction the registration of the four pioneer investors as well as the designation o~ reserved areas for the Authority, and note the increasing needs of cOl.lltries for information, advice and assistance in the implementation of the Convention. In another new paragraph of the preamble, the Assembly would express concern, owing to the lack of resources, are as yet unable to take effective measures for the full realization of the benefits of the catlprehensive legal regime established (Mr. Jesus, Chairman, Preparatory Commission for the International Sea-Bed Authority and for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea) in the Conventicx\J and also in a new paragraph, would reC09nize the need to el'lhance and sUPPlement the efforts of States and intern~tional organizations to enable developing countries to acquire technological capabilities. Still in the preamble, the Assembly would recognize that the Convention enCClllpasses all uses and resources of the sea, and - in a new paragraph - would take note of the Secretary~neral'8 initiative in convening inter-agency consultations on ocean affairs and the law of the sea. It would express deep concern at the current state of the marine envirolllment, and - again in a new paragraph - would point out the importance of the Convention for the protection of the marine environment. In another new paragraph of the preaftble, the Assentllly would note with concern the use of fishing methods and practices which can have an adverse impact on the conservation and management of marine living resources. I turn now to the operative part of the draft resolution. In paragraph 1 the Assenbly would recall thf~ historic significance of the ConventiQl. In paragraph 2 it would eXI~tess sat:lsfaction at the increasing and O'Ierwhelming support for the Convent1ono In paragraph 3 -_ a new paragraph - the Assenbly would invite all States to mak-e renewed efforts to facilitate universal participatiCl'l in the Convention. Under paragraph 4 the Assellbly would call upon all States to consider ratifying or accecUNj to the ConventiQ'l. thder paragnph 5 it would cmll upon all States to safeguard the, unified character of the Convention and related resolutions and to apply them 1n a JIlanne: consistent with that character and wi.th their object and <",r. Jesus, Qlairman, Preparatory Commission for the International Sea-Bed Authority .,d for the International Tribunal for ~Law of the Sea) purpose. Here again, as is the case with the third prealllbular paragraph, the text is couched in a positive w~y. In paragraph 6 the Assel'bly would call upon States to Observe the provisions of the Convention when enacting legislation, and in pagraph 7 it would note the progress being made in the work of the Preparatory Comission. Paragraph 8 has been redrafted. In it the Asselllbly would reiterate the conviction that the early, satisfactory and successful. oonclusion of the ongoing consultations on the implementation of the obligations of the pioneer investon would constitute an important contribution to the overall work of the Preparabory eo.ission. In an updated version, paragraph 9 would have the Assellbly express satisfaction at the Secretary-General's efforts to support the Comrention and at the effective execution of the major progralllfte on narine affairs. In paragraph 10 the Asselbly would express appreciation for the report of the Secretary-General, and in paragraph 11 would call upon the Secretary-General to continue to assist States in the implementation of the Convention. Paragraph 12 is new. In it the Assenbly would request the competent international organizations to intensify financial, techOlogical, organizational and lIlu18ger1al assistance to the developing countries. In paragraph 13 - also new - it would call Q'l the Secretary-General to present a report identi fying the needs of States and the measures currently taken in responding to those needs i and to suggest methods ..a mechanisms for maximizing opportuni ties for the realizaticn, for all States during the decade 19~O to 2000, of the benefits of the Conv~ntlon's regime. (Mr. Jesus, Chairman, Preparatory eo..ission for the International Sea-Bed Authority and for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea) In paragraph 14 the Assembly would approve the Preparatory Commission's decision concerning I. ts next meeting. In parll9raph 15 which is a new pare9raph, it would recognize that the i",plementation of applicable provis ions of the Canvention would enhance 'the protection of the matine environment. In paragraph 16 the Assembly would express its appreciation to the Secretary';'General for his feport on the marine en,jlironlllent and request him to make the report available to preparatory 1Il8etings for the proposed 1992 conference on environment and development. In paragraph 17 it would request the Secretary-General to prepare an updated report on the lIa1'1ne, environment as a contribution to that conference. In paragraph 19 it would request the Secretary-General to prepare a study on marine scientific research. Paragraphs 20 and 21 are the Wlual technical paragraphs. Pinally, the present draft resolution does not include what was the aeventh prealllbular paragraph of last year' 3 resolu tion, on the mderstancUng that the underlying idea is implicitly cont&lned in the third preant>ular paragraph and operative paragraph 5 of the current drt ft resolu Uono '1'0 conclude, 1 would like to state that this draft rellolution is the end result of cClIIprehensive consultations afit)ng interested delegations. It ia it balanced text. tbat takes into account the concerns of all States here represented. We went to great lengths to accomD)date eYerybody's interests, includi~ those of non-signatory States, 'to rall)' tbe support of all States to this draft resolution. I therefore commend it for consideration md apprCNal by all delegations. Mr. SOttO OLlVISR (Malta). Malta participated actively in the 14-year process leadini} to the adoption, in 1982, of the United Nations Convention on 'the Law of tbe Sea Por the last seven ye~r8 the Preparatory Commission has been carrying out inteMive negotiations on the Implearantation of that Conyention. Malta's continuing active and constructive partlcipatim In lIlI'ly areau of the Preparatory Co_lsslon's work is proof of our unewerviftCJ oo_Uaent to the successful COIIPletion of a praceea wbi~ wu launched en Malta's initiative as rar: back. 1968. Much ia being said of the manges _iah the world la witnessing. There is general recognttiCln t~t the ~i,~ive political cSevelopmei\ts in international relations should lead us to search for new avenues of co-operation conducive to a IIIOre relaxed environ_nt, 1ft which the benefits of the common heritage of mankind are exploited and preserved 'tor peaceful purposes. In this respect, the United ,Nations COnvention on the Law of the Sea presents a unique opportunity for all Nelllber States to work together in a mlllBOn endeavour. Since the adoption of the la" of the, sea Conventlon, in 1982, llUeh progress ". . , ' , • - I, " has been _de 1n negotiations en its implementation. The Preparatory Co~i~.lon has carri~ out illportalt work in this regard. We lIl.Bt naw make every effort to, invigorate negotiations within the ,Preparatory Collllllsslon in order ',to advance and conclude the deliberations in the time-frame established. The progress achieved on a numer of long-standing issu~ is ~_enc1ablee We note in particular the agreement reached on the proposal to establisb a training prograDllle for the Enterprise, which, as rightly noted, represented the first concrete preparatory meaBure taken by the signatories to the Corwentian "on behalf ot and for the benefit of the future Enterprise of ,the Au.thod ~y:.., we strongly beUeve that with the necessary political will the success achieved lin Special Commission 2 could be repeated on the implementation of the obligations of the register~ pioneer investors "'der resolution Ii end en the remainill'J crucial issues being considered 1n the other Special Commissionse Malt!\ ~1so welcom. with sattetactlcn the eneour~qing state...te Oft universal participation IIIIlde by all groups at the last lleeting of the Preparatory Commiss!Dn. (Mr. Dol" 01l,vier, Malta) Thie trend ••t be encouraged. We bave achieved a COlIlDlCft drewn of vdtlng a conet!tution for the cceanll. We have declared areas of the eea-bed the OOlllQOn herltaCje of aaMind. It aust be recognized that without the participation of all key actor. in the international community we shall not be able to reap the benefits of tM principles ellbodied in th~ Canventio,,_ So far I have touched on certain 'issues which are amply reflected in the report of the Secretary-General (A! 44/650) • I should like to express my delegation'. appreciatlorn of the comprehensive information provided on developments pertatnllWJ to the United Natione Convention on the Law of the Sea. we find the info~t~n given th~rein helpful in assessing the many a~~ivities being undertaken in various parts of the .«la and by the Office for Ocean Affairs md the Law of the Sea. Many of the sections referred to tn the report, particularly those m the pro~ctlon md preserva ti~ of the llarine envlrcnment ~ on global cllmate ald sea-level rise and on the Medlterranean, are of special interest to my country and ¥e are ploued that this very useful information has been provided. When a4dressing the General AeaeUbly this septellber Malta's Prime Minister referred to two suggestions _ae here in 1987. The first concerned the establishment of a global forum on ocean affairs and the second concerned the .yste_tic strengthening of regional institutions, lirlking initiatives at the national and the 91abal levels. In pursuance of this latter suggestion, my delegation wisbes to brlrJ,1 to the attention of the Assembly., important activttiy which has as its .in objective the promotion of regional co-o~ration in the pMceful uses of the Mediter:unean Sea, lIS manc5ated by General Assembly resolution "3/84, tbe putting into practice of articles 276 and 277 of the Convention an the Law of the S., Md encouragelll8nt of new forms of scientific-Industrial co-operation between c1avelope4 an4 cSeveloplng Q)untrles in the ne~lterl'anean region. (Mr. 801'9 Ou'vier, Malta) In this connection, I wish to refer specifically to paragraph 174 of the Secretary-General's report, which relates to the meeting of experts on the establishment of a Mediterranean regional technology centre. That meeting was held from 18 to 21 April 1989 by the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UN1DO) in Vienna. Ten experts from seven Mediterranean countries participated. In addition, the meet!n9 was attended by an observer from Spain, an expert from Bulgaria, three international experts, and representatives from the Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the Food ald Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) /Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), together with UNIDO. There was consensus on the need for the establishment of a regional centre, which would fill a gap that has to be filled, considering the fundamental importance of research and development as the basis for technological innovation, which is the prime notor of economic grCMth and sustainable development. The meeting agreed on the centre's objectives, functions, activities, structure and modalities, and proposed that it should be established as a project under the auspices of UNIDO, in co-operation with UNEP and other international and national organizations, end with close links to the Mediterranean Action Plan. Malta has already pledged its support for the creation of such a Mediterranean centre and has offered to provide host facilities. In our view, the proposal bO set up a Mediterranean regional centre for research 5'ld development in marine indU9trial technology falls directly under the mandate of part XIV of the United Nations Convention a'l the Law of the Sea and is fully consistent with efforts ~ the Mediterranean States to stren9th~n security (Mr. Borg Olivier, Malta) std co-operation in the Mediterranean region in accordance with General Assembly resolution 43/84. My delegation therefore urges the Office of Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, as well as UNlDO, to continue to co-operate with interested Med! terranean States so that this initiative may be developed further, with tangible results. I should like to touch briefly on another area which is the subject of the special reporc by the Secretary-General, namely, the protection and preservation of the marine environment. The report is well documented and highly informative. , , Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library (Mr. Borg Olivier, Malta) In fact g it serves to put into perspective not only the efforts made or betng made ~t also our responsibilities in protecting and preserving the marine environment. The areas identified in the report for possible further action offer a challenge which demands an international eo-operative effort through which all countries at different levels of development could contribute towards the protection and preservation of the marine environment. While the contribution of countries is essential, so also is that of international organizations. Their role is in many respects crucial. International organizations should develop links and should function efficiently and effectively to respond to the needs of developing countries which do not have either the technological know-how and equipment to prevent and combat marine pollution or the enforcement mechanisms to ensure adherence to existing legal instruments. In this respect it is important that the initiatives which have been taken for regional co-operation should be supported and given their ,due recognition by all concerned. The law of the sea Convention dedicates one whole part covering 46 articles to the protection and preservation of the merine environment. Among the 11 sections Which fall within thia chapter, section 2 deals with global and regional eo-operation. While global eo-operation is important the role of regional eo-operation in initiatives for protecting the marine environment cannot be underestimated. As far back aR 1976, with the encouragement afid support of UNEP g States of the Mediterranean signed the Barcelona Convention - the legal instrument which put into operation the Mediterranean Action Plan, Which had been formulated a year earlier. (Mr. Borg Olivier, Mal~) The Barcelona Convention brought together fo~ the first time Mediterraneen developed and developing countries on ~ co-operative project for the organization of a system which would permanently monitor the health of the Mediterranean Sea, identify the main environmental prOblems and their causes, generate practical proposals for solving these problems and harmonize national legislation with the spirit an4 goals of the Convention. With the eventual adoption of three protocols on the prevention of pollution from dumping - from ships and aircraft, from oil and other harmful substances in cases of emergency, and from land-based sources - and a fourth protocol concerning Mediterranean specially protected areas, the Barcelona COnvention vas given its dynamism. As a result, this regional initiative in the Mediterranean, which grew into UNEP's Regional Seas Programme Activity Centre in Athens and which co-ordinates the work of the specialized centres of the action plan located 1n Malta, SOphia Antipolis, Split and Tunis, Boon became a model for action plans 1n other regions. Ten similar regional initiatives have to date been launched in other parts of the glObe. At a recently held ~orkshop by the Mediterranean Marine Pollution Emergency Response Centre for the Mediterranean Sea, based in Malta', which dealt with combating accidental pollution of the Mediterranean Sea, participants nominated by 13 Medit~rranean coastal States and by the European Economic COmmunity (EEC) as well as by representatives of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and UNEP, agreed among other things to initiative activities necessary for the future establishment of a computerized marine pollution emergency decision support system which will be operated by the Centre for the benefit of Mediterranean coastal States. This agreement was endorsed by the Contracting Patties to the Barcelona Convention which met In Athens last September. (Mr. Borg Olivier, Malta) In support of these activities, ve have established in Malta a Europe-Mediterranean Centre Ofi Marine Contamination Hazards, which has already organized a number of international meetings and intensive courses in this field, including a European workshop on contamination hazards in the Mediterranean, an intensive trainin~ eourne on the application of toxicity tests in assessing mar.ine contamination ha~ards In the Mediterranean and an intensive training course on remote sensing for marine and coastal hazards monitoring and disaster assessment in the Mediterranean. The protection of the marine environment has, also been given special attention by the participating States of the Conference on Security and Co-oper~tlon in Europe (CSCE). In their Vienna concluding document, the participating States agreed to develop and intensify national efforts as well as bilateral and multilateral co-operation in order -to reduce significantly the pollution of seas and coastal areas~ t:ansboundary watercourses and international lakes from all sources of pollution-. Furthermore, the par~icipating States agreed to devote special attention to the development of appropriate alternat!ven to sea disposal in order to decrease, progressively ana substantially, the dumping of harmful wastes and the incineration of noxious liQUi~ wastes at sea, with a vie8 to the early termination of such methods. It ls appropriate here to highlight the fact that, 1n accordance with the mandate given in the CSCE Vienna document on QUestions relating to security and co-operation in the Mediterranean, effofts in the protection of the marine environment are to be intensified on a bilateral and multilateral basia with the non-participating Mediterranean States. This subject will form part of the diRcussions envisaged fo. a CSCE meeting on the Medi.terranean to be held in Palma de Mallorca in 1990. Mention should also be made in this context of the far-reaching Langkawi Declaration on Environment adopted last month by the Commonwealth Heads of Gove~..~ent which, among other matters, devotes attention to the Question of marine pollution, including the question of ocean dumping of toxic wastes. I have touched upon a number of activities undertaken in the global and regional context relevant to the enhancement of co-operation in the protection of the marine environment. My country has taken and continues to take an active role in these activities, and it is our. intention to continue to support those initiatives which are seriously intended to protect our seas and oceans from degradation. Already a ratifying State to the Barcelona Convention and three of its Protocols, Malta will in tha very near future deposit its instruments of accession to the London Convention on the Pr~vention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter. Furthermore, careful and active consideration is being given by Malta to becoming a party to the MARPOL 73/78 Convention and to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal. It is recognized that further deqradation of our marine environment could have serious and far-~eaching implications for all. The excellent report by the Secretary-General provides UB with an opportunity to follow up on the issues highlighted therein. Our marine environment should receive increased attention fram the United Nations and its 8paclal!zed agencies and programmes, and Member States 3hould be encouraged and, where appropriate, assisted to combat marine pollution and preserve the heGlth of our oceans. We have a common responsibility to pursue this goal more vigorously in order to preserve and protect the common heritage of mankind.* In conclusion, allow me to announce that my delelgation would like to join the sponsors of draft resolution A/44/L.42. Mr. URIARTE (Chile) (interpretation from Spanish): The gener~! subject of the law of the sea Is of special interest to my country. One needs only to look at a map to realize Why, Chile is, after all, as a novelist once said, an -oceanic land-. For that ~eason we have attributed great importance to the long process of developinq and codifying the definitions, uses and practices of international maritime law in which the United Nations is now involved. The greatest achievement of that undertaking was the adoption of the Convention on the Law of the Sea, which is now at a deci~ive stage of ratification. As we hail this achievement we should also remember that that was not the end of it. The reports presented to us by the Secretary-General year after year for the past six years are clear proof of this. These annual reports relate to the great work being done by the international community to translate into national legislation the various provisions of the many chapters of the Convention on the Law of the Sea and to deal with the new problems and uses of the oceans, thus demonstrating the dynamic approach taken by States with regard to these problems. * The President returned to the Chair. Prom the international point of view, an extraordinarily dynamic aspect of the Preparatory Commission's work is the progress made in respect of the international sea-bed r'gime and the organization of the international sea-bed authority. Today, the Commission is at the beginning of a process that could lead to universal acceptance of the Convention on the Law of the Sea. There are few items that more clearly reflect the role the United Nations should play as an Organization than the one now before us. The law of the sea, because it involves so many suhjects and because so many countries are directly concerned 1n it, has been and continues to be a fertile ground for the Quest fot lasting 1nternationalsgreements that could craete a generally accepted universal maritime system compleme.nting other., independent international legal instruments that are fully in force. The annual debate in the General Assembly is of great importance and has much merit, 8in~e it serves not only to inform Governments about fulfilment of the tasks they have given the Secretariat, but also to evaluate the conceptual and legal framework within which these tasks were assigned and are being carried out. The Organi.ation is unequalled as a forum for this kind of work. It is the only body where the technical expertise of the Secretariat can be combined, at the samr level, with the political expertise of Governments. May I now make a few comments on the report on the law of the sea that the Secretary-General has submitted to this ses810n of the General Assembly. As usual, the Secretariat has prepared a detailed and informative report on development~ concerning this item both within the context of the Convention on the Law of the Sea and outside it. We have an additional document (A/44/46l and Corr.l) before \S this year devoted exclusively to the problem of the protection and preservation of the marine enviratrnent. We think this is an interestiB3 contribution deserving of study and thought on the par.t of MeiWer States. Nevertheless, I must express mv delegation's surprise at seeing included in the report a reference to the Preparatory Meeting of the fifteenth Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting. The Consultative Parties have already agreed to submit to the Secretary-General the final reports on such meetings, in accozdance wi th our obligation to keep the Organization and its Member States informed of agreements reached within the Antarctic Treaty system. That should suffice. These random references in the report suggest that the Organization has the role of a guardian, as it were, in respect of the Antarctic Treaty system. My delegation feels that this is not acceptable, for the Treaty is in conformity with the purposes and principles of the Charter CI'ld is indeed the most extraordinary system of international co-operation existing in the world today. We have studied the chapter of the Secretary-General's report (A!44/650) dealing with State practice and national policy in ocean matters. We take note that some 74 countries have claimed exclusive economic zones and have incorporated in their national legislation the provisions on this subject contained in the law~f-the-sea Convention. It might be of interest for the Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea to consider including in its excellent pUblication programne a canpilation of national legislation on the exclusive economic zone. I am not referrinq to general laws on that ocean space. Such work has already been done in that field. I am referring specifically to canplementary legislation on uses allowed and rights conferred by the exclusive economic zone. Such a document (Mr. Uriarte, Chile) would help us determine how nuch uniformi ty there is in State practice in the interpretation and application of the specific provisions of the components of the exclusive economic zone. In the chapter on the management and exploit.ation of fishing resources, two matters are of concern to us. First, we are disturbed at the grOlling tonnage of fish caught during this decade. The figure is now 'approaching 100 mill ion tons annually. This endangers the resources that should be left for future generations. It could also have a serious effect not only on the species themselves but also at their function within the ocean chain. In this respect, Chile has adamantly opposed the use of drift-net fishing and is one of the sponsors of the relevant draft resolution submitted in the General Assenbly'a Second Committee at this session. Similarly, we are concerned o~er the problem of the species found in the exclusive econolflic zones end the adjacent high seas. In Chile's case, a fleet of pr~esslng vessels has for years been fishing these species indiscriminately within the 20o-mUe zone, without submittil1) to any plan for their protection or preservation. In the case of other countdes, t.he situa tion is even IIIOre serious. They have agreements vith fishermen fraft far-off aleas granting them access to the resources within the exclusive zone. Theae fishermen are increasing their catches within those countries' 20~ile zone. The Convention on the Law of the Sea deals with this matter rather timidly. It might be desirable to explore the possibility of reaching conservation agreements on these species in regard to areas be:yond the exclusive economic I:one. (Mr. Uriarte, Chile) We have carefully considered the part of the report that deals with the activities of the Office for OCean Affairs and the Law of the Sea. ~ our knowledge, it Is the only Office that has a unified approach to ocean and marine affairs. The report presented to us by the Secretary-General is very detailed in this sphere, it covers all the Office's functions, which are important and shou!d be highlighted. In this connection we should mention the work related to the Convention on the L&w of the Sea. This work is being carried out by means of replies to reouests for assistance and the preparation of studies by groups of experts on specific SUbjects. So far there have been twomeeUngs on thb matter - one on baselines, and the other on marine scientific research. We urge the Office to pursue the approach of using groups of experts. This not only contributes to the unifor-m applieation of the Convention but also p~omote8 the exchange of practical experience, eSp'lcially between experts from developing countries, and ia of great benefit to that group of countries. The services extended to the Preparatory Commission have been very important and have greatly facilitated its work. It is also important that the Office continue and even broaden its puhlications programme, in. regard to analytical studies, State practice and technical guidelines for the implementation of the Convention. All this documentation is very useful 1n the study of the marine policies of Member states. That Is true also of the Law of the Sea Bulletin, and of the data base 80 carefully prepared by the Office. (Mr. Uriarte, Chile) The G0ger~nt of Chile 1. gery inter.eted In degelopaenta regardinQ the ay.te. of aCQUielnq oceanic data. There Is • brief gene%al ~eference to this In the report. Since 1912 there hae been • gradual development in the foe.uletion of provisiona to govern such instruments. But this proce•• was interrupt~while we awaited the adoption of the law-of-the-see Convention. We shall be greatly interested in the r••ults obtained at the focthcoaing .eeting of the Inter-secretariat COMMittee on Scientific Program.es rel~ting to oceanographic (ICSPRO) In BO far a8 they concern the possibility of starting n&gotiatinns on the prepar5tion of an international instrument to govern this activity. One of the problems caused by drift buoys is that of jurisdiction. That ia why we urge participation by the Office in the ptepar~tion of the relevant technical reports based on lnfo"IIDUon from the specialized agencies. , My deleg..Ucn ls particularly grateful tc) the Office for its support end for orqanizing the forthcoftdng meeting nn sea-use planning and the fixing of coastal zones for the Latin ~aerican and Caribbean States, a meeting organized jointly by the Office and the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (BCLAC). The advice and substantive assistance given to States by the Office of the Special Rep~e8entatives of the Secretary-General for the Law of the Sea are IICl8t valuable lI'ld welcome. we particularly appreciate the filet that this assistance hae been given to developing countries in Asia and Africa as well as in the Latin American and Caribbean region. This meeting of experts, which will be held in Santiago between 28 Noverrber and 1 DecenOer of this year~ is an excellent example of the kind of regional co-operation that is stressed in the Convention. Such co-operation can, of course, lead to better understanding and wider acceptance and more effective implementation of the Convention. The work of the Office, in particular its programme of advice and assistance in the area of marine matters end the law of the sea, are of direct relevance to countries, especially developinq countries. The assistance given by the Office in the form of studies, quidelines with respect to the implementation of complex technical aspects of the Convention, and, above all, information on the activities and actions of other States directly benefits States E they endeavour to put the Convention into practice. It need hardly be said that the assistance needed by States will increase as the number of ratifications grows Md as the tine for entry into force apprCllcheso Therefore, Chile believes that the United Nations must continue and, indeed, expand its activities in the area of marine mattors and the law of the sea, especially in connection with developing countries. This need ls recognized in the draft resolution before the Assembly, of which ChUe is a sponsor. We hope that these activities will constitute an important part of the future medium-term plan. r cannot conclude this part of my statellll!nt without saylr'll) that it is et great honour for Chile that this year the Ametasinghe Fellowship has been awarded, as IlI!!ntioned in the report, to a most competent cl thp.n of nrv country, who performs certain functions in one of the units our Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This is for U8 a source of special pride and we are confident that Miss Maria Luisa Cacvallo will justify the honour accorded to her. We attribute great importance to the work being done by the Preparatory Commission for the International Sea-Bed Authority lIld for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, which carrted out valuable work at its seventh session, which took place in August of this year. There were two significant developments. First, agreement was reached, after arduous negotiations during vat ious sess ions of the Commiss 10n, on the programme for training staff for the Enterprise. As the report bdt'l9s out very clearly, many delegations, lncludil'¥.J the delegation of Chile, believe that thh agreement. is the first concrete measure for the benefit of the future international Enterprise adopted by the signatories to the Convention. This shows that it is possible to achieve a broad and satisfactory consensus within the Commission. It can serve as an example for Special Connisslon 3, where there ls still no sign of ~ solution to the problems connected with the mining code, the debate on which is proving similar to the debate on this matter at the Third United Nations Conference on the taw of the Sea. The second most important development, in QJr opinion, was the statement b)' the representatt.v~of zamb ia, in his capacl ty as Chairman of the Group of 77. He reiterated, inter alia, the willingness of the developing countries to engage in open dialogue in the Preparatol'Y commioo ion with signatory and non-signatory countries to explore the possibilities of obtaining univ~rsal acceptance of the Convention on the x.av of the Sea. '1'h1s is undeniable proof of the flexibility of the Group of 77, flexibility that has been clearly manifested on ot!\er .tters in the Preparatory Commission, in particular in connection with resolution 11. We feel that this offer deserves ser l.oua considera ticn. This flexibUi ty is proof of uncoi'lditional good faitb and denotes a positive attitude to useful negotiations, as the Chairaan said himself of the Group ~f 77. Consideration of the various substantive aspects of this dialogue, followed by negotiations, could lead to a process that in turn could lead to co-operation in these areas. We must move away froll the confrontations that all too often have characterized debates in the Preparatory Commission. There le .190 now an unequalled opportunity to arrive at agreement on general acceptance of the Conventicn Cln the taw of the Sea - which b at present not the case - and not only transfer the document into len lata but have a single regime, namelv, the com~n heritage of maMind, l'l'pilcab1e to the sea-bed beyond national jurisdiet{on, for the benefit of the international community as a Whole. Furthermore, this exercise is in con80nan~e with the positive development of the North-5outh dialogue, whose oceanic expression~ as it were~ h"'8 been the negotiations concernifY;J the sea-bed and the ocean floor, for the purpoae of eO""Qperation and the solution of pr:obleN, without diluting or impairing the particular characteristics of the negotiating parties. We believe this to be a very positive development that may help to cut the Gordian knot 1n the negotiations on the mining code in the Preparatory Corrmiss ion. It is clear that matters must procee~ by stages. The Secretary-Generllll's report shOllls clearly the tSynam1em that exists in connection wi.th oceanic matters S\d the law of t:\.... at thE' national, regional and world levels. This is a positive development, although of course there are probleJl8, ",4 the United Nations, the Secretariat, through the Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, and States Members, have a very important role to play. My country, an ocean land, as has been said, continues to be keenly interested in these matters and will continue to make its contribution as a developing country and an essentially maritime land. Mr. PI<1CBRING (United States of AIIerlea) I The United States views the 1982 United Natlons Convention en the Lelwof the Sea as a IIIjor accaapUah_nt in the development of the international law of the oceanG. 'the Convention MS lIMy posi tive aspects ..d toh.. Uni ted States ha actively sur;ported a~ promted observance of the vast majority of its provisions. Unfortunately, the f".onven tion a lBo contains previs ione en deep-su-bed .in1"9 that cre fundamentally unacceptable to the United Stattas. Our concerns were clearly stated in 1982, when we announced our decis ion not to sl9ft th. Convention. We have followed closely developments regarding sea-bed mining since 1982 and we are aware th".t there has been an evolu t1cn in the thi de ing of so. of the other Governments. We are encouraged by the recognition by many 'States that a ~e-evaluetion of the sea-bed reqime is necessary 11'14 we have noted'lith interest the recent statement of the Chairman of the Group G~ 77 expressing readiness for: a dialogue II'Id the Group's support for efficiency and cClBt,ffectiveness in the sea-bed regime. The draft resolution rel10Ves thinly veiled criticisE of the United States contained in earlier resolutions. It welCO:c!.M the "Uli~ness of States to explore all possibilities of addressing out8tand~ng issues and invitee States to renew efforts to facilitate universal participation in the Convention. We view thcese changes as positive developments. They sugqest thmt there is a growing awareness of the need to address the concerns of the UniteeS Stetes .,d other industrial States involved in deep-sea-bed mining. The United States shares the desire for a universally &cceptable convention. We are concerned that, not~ithstanding what appears to be a genuine desire ~r dialogue, many countries do not understand that from the Unitea States perspective the sea-bed regime remains seriously flawed. We do not believe that a dialogue ean succeed unless it is based on an tl'lderstll'lding of this point. We therefoZ'9 believe it would be premature new to consider negotla tions. We beli/l!ve that fll"ldamental reform is a task that exceeds the capabilities of the Prepa~atory Commission and for this reason we do not participate in the Commission. Nevertheless, we continue to be w1111ng to exchange views with any State in the interests of determin.ing whether circulIIStances exist for a dialogue that wUl lead to a universallY acceptable convention. Notwithsta~ding the improvement 1n the draft resolution, the United States continues to object to certain aspects of it. In particular we cannot join in the call for all State9 to consider early ratification of or accession to the Convention to allow entry into force of the sea-bed regine, when we have objections to that regime. In addi tion we continue to object to the funding of the Preparatory Commission from the general budget of the Unlted Nationso We believe it should be funded by those States participating in it. For these reasonsp regrettablyo we Must oppose the draft resolution. Having expressed our concerns regarding the sea-bed regime, I should like now to express my Government's support for the emphasis placed on efforts to encourage States to bring their national laws into conformity with international law, as reflected in the previs ions of the Convention concerniBl tradi tional uses of the oceans. My Government has been active in supporting and prolllOting compliance with these provisions and discoura~ing claims that are inconsistent with international law. In particular we welcome the actit)n byi'llany States to E'evise their laws and regulations to ensure conformity with international law and encourage others to do likewise. I should like to take this opportunity to point out that the United States does not view the call upon all States 'to safeguard the unity of the Convention as a lillitation an either the right or the duty of all States to act. in accordance with those portions of the Convention which reflect custollllry international law. My delegation would like to join in the enpress10ns of appreciation of the Secretary-General's initiative in convening inter-agency consultations on international and reg tonal developments in ocean affairs and the law of the sea and Supports the request for the Secretary-General to prepare a study on marine scientitic research. We share the concern expressed for the protection of the urine environment and support the draft resolution's em(:'basis en the central role of scientific research as a basis for envirmmental decision-making, as well as its recognition of the importance of enhancing the marine scientific capabilities of developing countries. We are also pleased that the draft resolution emphasizes the role of the specialized United Nations organizations and the importance of co~peration and co~rdination among them. Mr. OOERNER (German DeJll)Cratic Republic), I consider today's debate as, in a way, a follow-up of the discussion m the agenda item -Decade of international law- in the plenary meeting on 17 Novellber. The strengthening of the rule of law in international relations requires not only the elaboration of new legal instruments but also reconsideration of already existing conventions of a glObabl nature which a considerable number of States have not acceded to, for var ious reasons, and mtieh therefore have not yet bec:ome universally acceptable. The most important of those legal instruments is, in our opinion, the United Nations Convention m the Law of the Sea. There is no need for ne to dwell m the historic importance of that Convention as an important contribution to the maintenance of peace, jlStice a1d progress for all peoples of the world. Yet we are all aware of the fact that quite a few States have not found themselves in a positicn to beCOII8 parties to the Convention, since &Om of the provisions of part Xl - the deep-sea-bed minir.cj part of the C'4nvention - forllulatec!, • they were, a decade ago, are no longer on a peill vith the daanging "or14 econasic conditions and thus stmd in the V&y of eccnOllically somd ~ea-bed mining. A dialogue is therefore required on those five or si. provis~ns on which pa~ties are in disagreement, so th~t these obstacles to a universal participation in the Convention lMy be overcome. That diacu8sion should be conducted now, before the eutry into force of t!'le Convention, for it easier to find practical solutions now than it would be afterwards when its institutional and other arrangements became effective. Another important reason for pleading for early nec)otiations cm these problems is to be seen in what the Secret~ry-Generalh 1B8 rightly pointed out in 9aragraph 2 of his report on the law of the sea (A/44/650), namely, that in the light of the significant change in the international political cU.te, in which confrontation has gben tlay to co-operation in mny areas of conflict and competition, it should be possible for all States to make a renewed effort to ensure universal participation in tb~ Convention. ., Such new political climate w&s even perceptible duril'¥J the recent session of the Preparatory Commission for the International Sea-Bed Authority and for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. At the end of that session, all groups of States declared their preparedness to explore all possibilities of addressing those iesues preventing States from ratifying or acceding to the Convention. My delegation would like particularly to commend the Group of 71 for having taken the inltiatiw in the pursuit of the necessary dialogue Cl1\ the issue. My delegation wishes to call upon those States, which so far have not participated in the work of the Preparatory Commission, to play an active part in this dialogue so that agreements can be reached that make it possible also for them to become Parties to the Convention. The negotiations In the Preparatory Commission that led to the registration of the first group of pioneer investors have shown that States are able to find pragmatic and flexible solutions to difficult problems as regards the legal regime for deep sea-bed mining. It is now imperative for all States to display the requisite political willingness actively to contribute t~ards resolving the existing disagreement in respect of a few specific provisions of part XI of the Convention. These provis ions have not yet been the subject of debate within the framework of the Preparatory Commission. I should like to -:;3ke this opportunity to express our thanks to the Secretary-GGneral for the preparation of the report on the law of the sea (A/44/650) and the report. entitled ·Protection and preservation of the marine environment W (A/44/46l) ,) These report.s provide us wit.h a wealt.h of usefUl information. The material is up-to-date and the presentation is concise and authoritat.ive on developments relating t.o the law of the sea. '!'he reports also set out the activi ties of the Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea. With its various publications, the Office continues to provide valuable assistance to Member States. Let me mention here as an example the law of the sea bibliographies rAlich have continued to keep us up-to-date on recent publications in the field of the law of the sea and marine affairs. Also, the ~ of the Sea Bulletin is a most useful tool, and we look forward with anticipation to the presentation of future volullles. '!'he Office also continues to provide valuable assistance in servicing the Preparatory Commission. The Special Representative of the Secretary-General for the Law of the Sea, Mr. Satya Nandan, and his team have provided extremely useful reports, studies, draft texts and working papers of a very high standard. My delegation also wishes to express its appreciation to the Office for Ocean Affairs II'ld the Law of the Sea for the important contribution it makea to marine-related activities that take place regionally and globally, under the auspices of the United Nations agencies and bodies, and other conferences and meetings. We deem it necessary for the Office (X)ntinue to make its effective contribution to creating favourable conditions for universal participation in the Convention. We also think that the Office should prepare itself properly for the Convention's entry into force. We believe that with the Convention entering into force, the States Parties will doubtless need more support in the implementation of the Convention. The practice of a number of coastal States in protecting their national interests in relation to the management of adjacent maritime areas - I am referring to the ~~rritorlal seas and the exclusive economic zones - shows that it often goes beyond what is permit tee! by the Law of the Sea Comention. In b1. report, the Secretary-General po intec5 out that the balance reached 1n the eora-.tlOn between the rights and duties of States in the different uses of the sea must not be jeopardized even if new challenges &hould arise for States, such as the necessity of increased protection of the marine environment, the interdiction of the transbo\IBdary 1RCWellent of hazardous wastes or drug trafficking by sea vessels. There is indeed a danger of this balance being eroded by increasingly divergent Stab!! practice. It is therefore imperative to apply in a uniform and consistent manner the comprehensive legal regime set out in the Convention. '!'his ean only be achieved if generally acceptable, practical solutions to the few controversial issues pertaining to the sea-bed mining part of the Convention can be fOl.l'ld as early as possible so that all States will be enabled to become parties to the Convention. Universal participation in the Convention on the Law of the Sea md strict caapl lance by all States would be the most effective contribution towards strengthening the rule of law on the seas and oceans and, thus, towards attaining the goals proclaimed for the Decade of International Law. 'l'be present draft resolution, which is co-sponsored by the German Democratic Republic, focuses eft the concrete steps necessary for that purpose. I therefore wish to voice the hope that it will meet with the full approval of the General ASIJeably. Mr. ABDEUAH (Tunisia) (interpretation from French) I In speaking on agenda item 30, the Tunisiim delegation wishes to express the great importance it attaChes to the 1. of the sea and its developnent under the aegis of the United Nations md within the context of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Tunisia ratified the Convention as early as 1985, and accordingly introduced relevant pl'O'Iislons into its domestic law. In all areas covered by the Convention, my country, when end where necessary, made legislative changes to align oor CMr. Goerner, German De1lYJcratic Republic) domestic law wi th the text of the Convention. This shows our commmitment to that instrument an~ to its unity. We have been follow ing closely the work of the Preparatorv C4mmission and we believe that progress has been made in several areas within its purview, for example, the finalization of the document on training during the summer 1989 session, which we welcone with interest and believe to be a positive sign of the ability of the Preparatory Commission to discharge its mandate successfully. Other questions remain outstanding. We believe that the question concernilYJ the obligations of the pioneer investors is one of the most critical. It must be resolved in a satisfactory manner, in keeping with the provisions of the Convention, particularly resolution XI and the relevant documenta. Accordingly, each partner has to shoulder its responsibilities and do its part under the contract. (Mr. Abdellah, Tunisia) So_ have said that they see signs of some development in the work of the l'reparatory Col!lllission and in attitudes outside the Commission - certain new apprceches to problems, in other words, a wind of chanqe in regard to tbe law of the sea, an indication that there may be new initiatives that command universal support. The Group of 77, to which my country has the honour of belonging, at the last session of the Preparatory Commission once again demonstrated its willingness to negotiate with all groups on all questions giving rlso to problems, in order to reach solutions that are acceptable to all !I'ld that respect the positions of all members of the international community. Thus we expressed our willingness to discuss with My State or group of States questions that might obstruct the universality of the COnvention. These discusslons, these exchanges of view, will take place within the framework of the Convention and in compliance with its provisions. They wUl take place with the prospect of preparing a document whose unified nature can never be challenged for any reason. The draft resolution before us today is the outcome of intensive negotiations and a laboriously reached caapromlse, it cannot give enUre satisfaction to everyone. However, it takes up the signal that the Group of 77 intended to send to all interested parties in the statement made at the end of the summer session of the Preparatory CoIrnlsslon. The point of that signal was clearly to state once again our desire to make sure that the Convention would cOlIIMand as mch support as possible. That 1s a pl we have been seeking for so long. We are calmly awaiting a sign$l in response, which we hope w111 be, Uke the one sent by the Group of 77, respectful of the Convention and within the context of its relevant provisions. 1'01' those reasons we shall support the draft resolution• (Mr. Abdel15h, Tunisia) Hr. lWIAS INGHE (Sri Lanka) a Sri Lanka takes nuch pleasure 1n co-sponsoring draft resolution A/U/L. 42, on the law of the sea. As members know, when the Poreign Minister of Sri Lanka, the Honourable Ranjan Wijeratne, addressed the General Assembly on 2 October 1989, he informed the Assembly of an inl tiative that Sri Lanka would take at the current session with the objective of launching an endeavour at the global level for the early realization of the benefits of the legal regime for the oceans. The new ocean regime contained in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea offers riah promise for all countries, especially the developing countries, which are increasingly looking to the resources of the oceans in their efforts to eradicate malnutrition, alleviate poverty and raise the living standa~ds of the poorest of their poor. Unfortunately~ many ~velopinq countries have been as yet unable to reap the regime's full potential in ocean fesources development, because of insufficient awareness as well as the lack of national capabilities in the ocean sector. This vacuum mmt be filled, Md it must be fUled soon. The Sri Lankan initiative is directed at, first, identifYing the needs of States in regard to ocean resource development a'ld management, secondly f exam!n inq the measures currently taken ~ Stetes and by competent intern~tional organizations 1n response to these needs, .,d, thirdly, utilizing the resources of the United Nations and its specialized agencies in assisting all Statea to maximize opportunities for the early realization of the benefits of the new ocean reqime during the decade 1990. to 2000. My delegation is confident that the full support and co-operation that this inl ttative has received, from developed end developing countries alike, auqurs well for the strengthening of global efforts to galvanize the human, financial and technical resources neoessary for the early realization of the vast potential and enormous promise of the ocean's resources. It will give a signal to specialized agencies and international organizatLons concerned with marine affairs that, nearly eight years after the Convention was signed« it ls the to s tap up act!vi ties to help all States to derive the IIBxinum benefits from this global &chievement for all States of the world. It will provide a basis foe specialized agencies and other international olqanizations in this field to allocate adequate fUnds - additional funds if necessary - within the framework of their own autonollDus Constitutions, towards the urgent promotion of ocean resource management and development. It will forge bonds of mutual l.Ilderstlinding ma accomllDdation among developed .,d developing cO\l'ltries in the orderly developnent and management of ocean resources. It will reflect., particularly at this point in time, the warmth, trust ~d friendship - the wnew wiad W which has been referred to with much promise and enthusiasm durill9 the negotiations on this draft resOlution - which have emerged as partiCUlarly propitious features of current international relations, moving away from conflict. .,d confrontation to consultation, canpromise and consensus. My delegation hopes that one of the consequences of this new international environment will be the early coming into effect of the Uni ted Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea .,d its universal acceptance. For those reasons my delegation feels particularly hopeful that the draft resolution on the law of the sea now before the Assembly wUl help advance current international co~peration in the field of marine affairs and promote the active participation of all States, rich and poor, powerful and weak, in the orderly and mutually beneficial development and management of ocean resources. My delegation hIS this year, as In prevlolB years, recoived the report of the Secretary-General an the 1ar of the sea. Again we express our appreciation to the Special Representative for the excellent report. ,The report caal~rehenslve1Y co\(ers, in a succinct form, a vast ar~ay of de'lelopnlents in the ftel,d of the 1. of the sea. The r:eport is of special interest to ray delegation, Iftd .. consider the information to be extremely Im~rtant in keeping abreast of the activities of States ~ intergovernmental bodies In ocean affalrae (Mr. Ranasinghe, Sri Lanka) we also note with great satisfactim the work that has been effectively carried out by the Office in supporting, advising and assisting the efforts of Governl'llents and of regicnal and global cc~perative ventures in ocean affairs. In particular, my delegation wishes to express its thanks to the Office for the co~peration and assistance it has provided to the ini tiative taken originally by Sri Lanka, which has na. developed into the Indian Ocean Marine Affairs Conference on Economic, ScientifiC and Technical Co~peration in Marine Affair~ in the Indian Ocean in the context of the new ocean tOgime (I<JoIAC). The second IOMAC Cclnference is scheduled to take place in 1990 in Tcmzania. While IIUch preparatory work has already baen completed, more has yet to be done in preparation for the second Conference. The Office for Ocean Affairs has continued to lend advice lI'ld assistance to these co-operative efforts, for the benefit of a l~rge number of Asian and African countries of the Indian Ocean region. To devel0i?ing countries such as mine, the immediate prioritf.es are to secure the benefits that accrue to them in terms of the extended areas of natiCl1al jurisdiction and sovereignty under the adjacent ocean space. We thus recognize the work of the Office in areaB dealing with the traditional uses of the seas. We have greatly benefited from the series of publications presented by the Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, which analyse prOVisions of the Convention, ~acilitate its interpretation and implementation, and review the activities of States as developments relating to the Conve.ntion. I refer 1n this cantext to the series of law of the sea studies, comprising analytical studies and studies of State practice. I also refer to the Law of the Sea Bulletin that is periodically issued. The recent study on baselinas constitutes a useful guide to the implications of the very technical prOVisions of the Convention, and the Annu~l - Review of Ocean Affairs contains a wealth of information in documentary form. (Mr. !\tnas inghe t Sri Lanka) My delegation makes special reference to the need for the Office to plan for the future, and particularly for the decade 1990-2000, when the Convention is likely to enter into force, II\d when the needs of de,veloping cOWltries will be greater than they are today. We a180 look forward irt anticipation to the r,...,...ults t~ be achieved by the constructive apprcach taken in th;s draft resolution. We shall welcome the efforts of all Menber States, mether developed or developing, to bring abOut a universally acceptable Conventlm that ia applied globally. The United Nation~ has a significant role to pl.ay in achieving these ends. Hence I reiterate that my delegation, as a co-sponsor of the draft resdlution, will vote in favour. Hr. STBPANOV (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (interpretation from Russian) I This year we are discussing the item m the law of the sea at a time when promising changes are taking place in international relations, gaining ground aid becoming more truly tangible. As is noted in the report of the Secretary-General on this agenda items -There has been a significant change in the international political climate. Confrcntation has given way to co-operatim in many areas of conflicts and competition. The international oo_unity must direct its attention to those areas where this new spirit hlls not yet unifested itself.- (A/44/650, para. 2) The delegation of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic supports this appeal. It is tine for a prodlctive dialogue to make the United Nil tions Convention on the Law of the Sea a truly universal instrullent of international law. This idea was the leit1llOtiv of interventions made b~, the representatives of all groups of States at the final meeting of the summer session of tbe Preparatory Commission for the Internatimal Sea-Bed Author!ty and for the Interna tia'lal Tribll1al for the Law of the Sea. That idea Is also expressed in preamular paragraph 1 of the draft resolution on this item. The Convention on the ItaV' of the Sea contains enOfllOUB potential for the .!ntenance of thl! rule of law in the world's ocoans, for the develoPIMnt of international co-operation for the benefit of all peoples of the world and for security on a global scale. However, this potential can be fulfilled only if the Convention becOMS a universal treaty binding on all Sta tes, !md this can be attained en1y if tho efff'ctivenes8 of the Convention !s based on political agree_lilts reflecting IIOdern realities md the balance of interests of various groops of States. The changes that have occurred since the signing of the Convention in 1982 require that 801II!l of its provisions be adapted to the different ccnditiona of the day. Bence the need to work out a new legal I118Chaniea, which in the future would align economic IIld financial provisions of the C3mrentiora t:8ith the dev~1.opaent trends in the world econc.r and the commodities market. The present situaticm in which the Corwenticm cannot beCOIIe a universal instrument is fraught with a real dangerl that it 1I8y lend itself to iJlprecise interpretations and opplications. Different interpretations o~ its provi3ions could damage the development of co-operation among States in the exploit&tion of the resources md spaces of the world's oceans. Iccor.dingly, the Ukrainian is prepared to support any positive step to overcome tha current difficulties t~ards universality for the Corwention by aeana of a constructive dialogue between all intorested parties both within and outside the Preparatory Collnissicm. We ,,&loollle the efforts IIllde by th. Secretary-General in trying to find a solution to this problem. At the current session of the General Assembly, apart from the basic report of t.he Secretary-General on the law of the sea, for the first time a report has been submitted en the protection and preservation of the marine environmant (A/44/461). This document contains, in a systematized form, information en the present status ef the world's oceans. It also suggests concrete, real areas for further action to be taken by the international cnn:nunity. This document could be useful in the preparations for the Conference en Environment and Development planned for 1992. It should be noted that the Convention on the Law of the Sea contains the basis for a number of ne'''' concepts and principles that could facilitate a DIOre effective consideration of global ecological problems as a whole. " We have every reasCll to expect that a concrete contribution to developil¥j this legal potential of the Convention will be made by the Preparatory Commission. I have in mind the consideration next, year in Special Commission 3 of the draft articles on the prevention of pollution of the marine environment by mining for polymetallic nodules. This work has not yet started but it is expected to be of major importance. A code governing the exploration of deep-sea resources should contain clear legal norms that would provide reliable protection for the integrity of the marine environment and its living resources during the carrying out of these activities. M:i country views the Convention a\ the Law of the Sea Mt only as a charter of the seas but as a unique programne for international co-operation in regard to the marine environment at various levels - bilateral, regional and multilateral, and through international organizations o A number of the provisions of the Convention can be implemented only 'through inter-State co-operation in one form or another. In this respect we support the programme for inter-organizational and other forms of co-operation contained in the medium-term plan of the Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, headed b~' Under-Secretary-General Nandan. The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic can also make a contribution to the implementation of the programme of co-operation in regard to the seas. Our schools have the capacity to educate people about virtually all aspects of the science of the world's oceans and the development of their resources. Apart from this, Ukrainian academic establishments have experience in organizing and building marine research centres in coastal States. We are prepared to consider My requests to provide these kinds of services, both through the United N&tions &nd on a regional or bilateral basis, and also by concluding agreements for joint ventures. Today it cannot yet be said that the Preparatory Commission has achieved a compromise making possible implementation of the provisions of the resolution on the pioneer activities relating to polymetalUc nodules. We believe that the reason for this is not a lack of political will by the parties to the negotiations, but the complex welter of problems that require patience to sort out. The draft resolution on this item was agreed.durlng lengthy, complicated consultations. The delegation of the Ukrainian SSR wishes to take note of two imp:>rtant, positive factors. First, this draft is mch broader than previous resolutions. Along with the traditional provisions on exploitation of deep sea resources and the activities of the Preparatory Commission, it contains a larger number of provisions than before on protection and preservation of the marine environment and its 11ving resources and on machinery for co-operation in regard to the marine environment. Concrete provia lons have been included that provide guidance to the international community on how to solve practical problems conr..ected with the Convention's entry into force. Seccndly - and this is the most important point - the draft resolution contains a provision on the need to embark on IS dialogue to obtain universal participation in the Convention. Like other delegations, we express the hope that the message sent by this draft resolution will be heard and that dialogue between all interested parties will get under way. Mr. TU~K (Austria). The Austrian delegation is pleased to be able to make a modest contribution to the debate on the highly important question of the law of the sea. Let me first of all express nw profound gratitude to the Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea and in particular to the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for the Law of tho Sea, Under-Secretary-General Satya Nandan, for the preparation of the reports now before us in docu....ts A/44/65O and "44/461, relating respectively to the law of the sea and the protection aDd swe.ervaUon of tbe marine environment. These reports are caa.ndable for, en the Ofte band, their thoroughness and precision and, m the other, tbe auccdftCt ~esentatlans they CDntain. They constitute a highly valuable cOfttdbutim to tba cClntinuilJ;l discussicn of the questions concerned, in general, and to the present deliberations in the Assel\i)ly, in particular. Por Austria, as certainly foe othec land-lacked countries not extensively involved in uses of the lIeas, these CDlIPrehenshe Gocu.-nts, giving a detailed overview of all present lIladti. activities, are also 1ft important source of information. 'fhe oceans, covering approximately 70 per cent of the surface of the earth, ha.e always played a significant role in mankind's development, particularly as a Yast area of colll!lUnic:ation but also for satisfying tbe nutritional needs of coastal populations. Since the beginning of this century the necessity of exploiting the marine resources, whether living 01' non-living, has intensified in order to keep pace with the increasing needs of b steadily 9rOlling world populatione At the same time, the possible uses of marine spaces and resources for the benefit of mank ind have been greatly cu:tended by technological progress. These developments have resulted in &n increasing tendency on the part of coastal States to assert sovereign rights over resources in mad time zones far beyond their coasts. The growing awareness by States that all the mellbers of the international community, regardless of their stage of development or their geographical location, should be able to benefit from the exploitation of ocean resources led eventually to the preparation, \Ilder the auspices of the Uni ted Nations, of a cxnllprehensive international legal instrument. the 1982 United Nations Convention al the Law of the Sea. It took the internatialAl· comllUlity 15 years to establish this new international maritime order, an all-encompassing (Mr. Tuerk, Austria) regime designed to govern all madtine uses and to take into account the close interrelationship of all maritime phenomena as well as the interconnection of land and sea. However, during the long and difficult negotiations at the third United Natiens Conference al the Law of the Sea it turned out that it was impossible to satisfy entirely the often-conflicting desires of all the members of the international community. In particular, the land-locked and geographically disadvantaged States had to reduce their expectations about the benefits they might detive from the Conventia1, as they could not offer anything in exchange at the negotiating table except their agreement to a new legal regime for the oceans. Thus, it was pcssible for all, or nearly all, States to accept the solutions which the Conference finally worked out, regardless of whether those solutions were always the best. ones. '!'he canpensation for the latter situation was the enorllOus advantage constituted by the dispelling of possible doubts as to the legal norms to be applied to the oceans. A major contributiQ'l to the reJlW)val of legal instability in this area was thereby made•• * Mr. Abulhasan (Kuwait), Vice-President, took the Chair. (Mr. TUerk, Austria) The 1982 Unit.ed Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is based on two main concepts. The first is the submission of vast ocean areas to the national regimes of the coastal States, enabliJ'V;J these States to benefit from the resources therein in an undisputed manner. This extension of coastal States' rights is, however, balanced by duties regarding the exploitation of those resources. Cor~ltal States are thus obliged to maintain the optimum sustainable yield and to prevent overfishing. Furthermore, coastal and port States have assumed important responsibilities as to the protection of the marine environment and they are obliged to grant access to the international scientific com1Wnity in their respective maritime zones. Secondly, the Convention is based on the concept of internationalising that part of the sea-bed that is beyond national jurisdiction by declaring it and its resources the common heritage of mankind. Rights of exploration and exploitation of these resources are balanced by corresponding duties to carry out such activities in a manner beneficial to humankind as a whole~ Seven years have passed since the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, a monumental work of codification and progressive development of international law unique in our time. Durinq those years the Convention has already proved its enorllDus value. The fact that its rules have to a certain extent become customary international law is evidence of this. In particular, I wish to mention the very widespread acceptance by States of the Umi ting of the territorial sea to 12 nautical miles. As can also be seen from the report (A/44/650), the United Republic of Tanzania has reduced its territorial sea claim from 50 nautical miles to 12 nautical miles. This is an example which, in the view of the Austrian delegation, merits commendation and which it is hoped will be followed by other coastal States at present considering claims beyond that conventional limit. Furthermore, a wide range of legislative activi ty has been ini tiated and stimulated by the adoption of the Convention. In this context my delegation wishes to praise the Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea of the United Nations Secretariat for advising and assisting States, at their request, in connection with the implementation of the Convention and for compiling and regularly publishing all relevant national and international legislation. The consolidation, in 1987, of marine affairs activities at United Nations Headquarters in the Office for OCean Affairs and the Law of the Sea has certainly resulted in enhancing the efficiency of the United Nations in these areas. Austria has noted with concern that national legislation does not always conform to the Convention. This may upset the delicate balance which ha.~ been established by the provisions of the Convention and which formed the basis for its acceptance by land-locked end geographically disadvantaged States. It should be noted in partic~lar that the rights of land-locked and geographically disadvantaged States enshrined in the Convention are not always fully reflected in national legislative acts, such as their rights relating to marine scientific research. Furthermore, we consider it a matter for concern that States are often tempted to rely only on those parts of the Convention that suit their interests. In the view of the Austrian delegation, this practice l18y disturb the equilibrium between the conflicting interests of various States achieved by the Convention and, in the long run, endanger its effectiveness. Issues relating to the protection and preservation of the marine environment will be a11Dn;) the principal future challenges to the comprehensive legal system established by the Convention. The report on the protection and preservation of the marine environment (A/44/461 and Carr.l) reflects 1n a clear and comprehensive manner the actual legal and factual status of the protection of the marine envirmment and indicates the problems with which {-;e are faced. The international community increasingly recognizes the primordial importance of the oceans in maintaining the global ecological balance end in controlling and moderatine the world's climate. Increased attention mst therefore be paid to the legal framework the Convention provides for the marine environment il'1 trying to establish a balance between the rights and freedoms set forth therein, relating, inter alia, to exploration and exploitation of marltillW! resources, navigation and marine scientific research on the one hand and the protection of the marine environment on the other. In spite of the relevant legal regime enshrined in the Convention, in particular in articles 192 to 196, laying dom the obligation of States to protect and preserve the marine environment, we must acknowledge the existence of grave deficiencies with regard to the prevention of maritime pollution, in particular in coastal areas. Austria deplores the fact that coastal States have not yet taken efficient measures to eliminate land-generated sources of marine pollution, 8uch as sewage or industrial sediments, a8 well as fertiliser and sedim~nt deriving from agricultural Std development activi ties. In our view, the elaboration of legal rules to deal with these problems is a matter of urgency. This could be done on the basis of the Montreal Guidelines for the Protection of the Marine Environment against Pollution from Land-Based Sources. At the same time, further enhancement Md development of the mechanisms, provided for by the Convention in article 297, concerning the settlement of disputes in cases of coaatal States contravening international rules and standards concerning the protection and preservation of the marine environment is necessary. This would have to include the resolu tion of the ques tion, also ra ised by the International Law Commission, in connection with ·damages to the commons·, as to (Mr. Tuerk, Austria) who might engage in a dispute-settlement procedure against such a State on behalf of the international community. I also wish to underline the Austrian view th~t the rules of international law on liability regarding activi ties causing mart ti me pollution require further development, in particular as regards civil liability. Let me finally express the deep concern of my delegation regarding the state of conservation ef maritime living resources. Some States, while benefiting from the achievements of the Convention, do not seem to be sufficiently prepared also to incur the duties flowing from it. Thus, the use of new fishing techniques may threaten the survival of certain living resources - a situation which the Convention aims at preventing. Austria therefore hopes that States will refrain from activities, includir¥;J fishing methods, that might lead to over-e1Cploitation endangering the very existence of maritime living resources. The Austrian delegation whole-heartedly subscribes to the view expressed by Under-5ecretary-General Nandan that ·we cannot allow the world to go back to the instability and disorder that had developed in the law of the sea and had precipitated the convening of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea." The significant change in the international political climate, reflected in many of the debates at the current session of the General Assembly, should make it possible for all Statee to renew their efforts to achieve universal participation in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea - as also pointed out in the report of the Se,;cetary-General (AI 44/650) • Bearing this in mind, the Austrian delegation wishes to emphasize that it is our common task to search all the J1Y.)re actively for solutions to those problems which have so far impeded general acceptance of the Convention. In addressing (Hr. Tuerk, Austr ia) these questions we have to face the fact that commercial sea-bed mining now seems a diatant prospect - contrary to what we thought when negotiating the relevant provisions of the Convention. Our aim must be to ensure a feasible, universally acceptable system of deep-sea-bed mining that will truly put into practice the principle of the common heritage of mankind by providing benefits for all the members of the international community and, in particular, for the least developed and the Und-locked amo~ the developing countriea. The Preparatory Commiss ion for the International Sea-Bed Authority and for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea has already resolved several difficult issues and thereby laid a solid basis for further endeavours in this direction. My delegation wishes in this connection to thank the Chairman of the Commission, Ambassador Jose Jesus, for his outstanding contributions to the work of that body. His unrelenting and energetic efforts, including his efforts relating to draft resolution A/44/L.42, now before us, merit particular praise. I wish to assure him of the continued md wholehearted support of the Austrian delegation as he carries out his difficult task. In particular, we share his view that efforts should be made to conclude the work of the Preparatory Commission - hopefully - approximately two years from now. My delegation was gratified to note that at this year's summer session of the Preparatory Commission the Chairman of the Group of 77 and speakers from the other important interest groups expressed their support for universal participation in the Convention and reaffirmed their willingness to enter into renewed dialogue on the outstanding issues with any delegation, whether or not currently involved in the work of the Preparatory Commission, whether or not a signatory to the Convention. Let me express the sincere hope of the Austrian delegation that this new attitude will enable us to achieve generally acceptable solutions to these issues. The present draft resolution, of which Austria is a co-sponsor, contains an express reference to this willingness to explore all possibilities of addressing issues in order to ensure universal participation in the Convention. We J'l8y hope that the signal sent by this draft resolution to those at present outside the ongoing negotiation process will be understood as a clear, an unequivocal, indication of the desire to achieve a viable and universal deep sea-bed regime. A convention not adhered to also by the major industrialized countries would, in the view of my delegation, remain a mere torso and could not fulfil the aspirations which ori9inally generated its preparation - that is, to form a :het md equitable legal basis for the use of the seas by all the members of (Mr. Tuerk, Austria) the international community for the benefit of mankind. Thus, we shall have to consider ways and means of adapting. certain provisions of the Convention in a pragmatic and flexible manner, taking into account, in particular, the changed economic circumstances since these provisions were drafted. In our view, only such an approach might be able to achieve the goal of participation in the Convention by all States. Finally, I should l.ike to point out that quite a nunber of countries cb not seem to be ready to rati fy the Convention at the present stage, as the precise financial implications of membership are not yet clear to them. Austria was pleased to note the decision of t~iie Preparatory Commissioo that the initial secretariat of the Sea-Bed Authority would be lean and cost-effective. That decision, iu our view, constitutes a step in the right direction CI1d should contribute to allaying apprehensions in connection with the financing of the Convention's organs. It would seem to \S that the Preparatory Commission should in the future devote even greater attention to these issues. Let us all work together to achieve the noble goals of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea bv establishing an effective and universal legal order of the seas. The draft resolution now before us might provide a valuable stepping-stone in that direction. Mr. TEUHANN (Norway) a I have the honour to speak CX\ behalf of the five Nordic countries. Denmark, Iceland, Sweden, Finland and Norway. The Nordic countries followed with great interest and satisfaction the developments which took place within the Preparatory Commission for the International Sea-bed Authority and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. The statements made on 1 September 1989 during that sess ion attested to the eXPressed readiness for a constructive dialogue in order to ensure that th~ 1982 Convention on the Law of the See could one day becone universally acceptable. The (Mr. Tuerk, Austria) willingness to engage in dialogue has continued to be expressed in the General Assenbly during the current session. We have witnessed delegations making important efforts in order to open the door to a constructive discussion regarding the proble1'llS related to some provisions in the Convention. We hope that these efforts will facilitate full participation in the work of the Preparatory Commission. The Secretariat deserves much cr.edit for its untiring work to bring about that podtive developtnP.nt.. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is a major achievement, to which all the Nordic countries pay tribute. The Convention codifies existing customary rules and const!tute as well as an important developnent of the law of the sea. Though it has not entered into force, it has had en important impact on the development of customary law. The Convention as a whole represents aspirations to a fair CI'ld jmt order. It is of crucial importcmce that the Convention enter into force one day on a universal basis. The Nordic countries have during recent years been concerned at the fact that the Convention has stUl not been universally accepted owing to the fact that some of its provisions ate still considered to be problematic. The Nordic countries have been particularly concerned at the fact that until quite recently there was little or no discussion on how to address the still-outstanding issues, regarding a workable deep·sea mining regime. Therefore, we are particularly pleased to welcome this new opening reflected in draft resolution. A/44/L.42, which is before the Assembly today. We regret that the draft resolution, which reflects this new development, cannot be adopted by consensus. None the less, we urge all States, whether or: not they have participated so far in the Preparatory Commiss ion - 8rld indeed we urge the Preparatory Commission itself - to take advantage of this momentum in order to seek ways to ensure the universal acceptance of the Convention as a whole. (Mr. Tellmann, Norway) Mr. MOHIUDDIN (Bangladesh). Bangladesh is taking part in the deliberations on the item at hmd with keen intere"t. '!'hat ls because for my country, a developing coastal State with limited resources, both land-based and marine, this matter has become increasingly significant for the well-being of the people, for 'Irtlich we maintain the widest possible support. The Uni ted Nations Conventien a'l the Law of the Sea h as been approprlately hailed as not only the constitution for the oceans of the wOt'ld but also the blueprint for ocean development. The Convention is a momentous achievement by the international community in that by establishing a legal order for the seas and oceans it proJlDtes - and here I quote from the preamble to the Conventions "the equitable and efficient utilization of their resources, the conservation of their living resources, and the study, protection and preservation of the marine environment". In this context, my delegation is pleased to note that the Secretary-General, in his comprehensive report on the item, addresses in great earnest the developments not only with regard to the legal order of the oceans but also with regard to ocean development, marine resource· conservation and marine environment. In fact, in view of the importance ~angladesh places on oceal development ald management, my delegation is particularly appreciative of the leading section of the report (Xl integrated management of coast.al alt2 ocean resources ald new challenges and opportunities for the 1990s. Bangladesh is eager to seize upon the new opportunities that are amply evident in this sphere. The priod ties of my country, as in the case of other developing coastal States, are in the traditional non-sea-bed related parts of marine affairs. Por example, we believe that baselines need to be established, maritime zones - territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone, continental shelf - need to be demarcated precisely with co~rdinates, delimitations need to be worked out, national legislation and regulation need to be aligned with the Convention, new projects m..t be formulated for cOMtal and marine resource development, requisite scientific and technological capabilities are to be strengthened, required human Skills have to be developed, and financial resources must be mobilized. All these are to be carried out in an integrated management apprcach within the framework of an overall maritim: policy which, in turn, should be an integral part of national development policy. Bangladesh accords special emphasis to food and energy prodtction, induetrialization and natural disaster prevention and control. Thus, my ~vernment is expending utll108t efforts sectorally. My Government is also paying attentioo to the integrated management approach towards coastal and ocean development. Currently, in addition to the sectoral programmes, Bangladesh is carrying out a (Mr. Mohiuddin, Bangladesh) project on coastal zone management with assistance from the United Nations cnd the United Nations Development Programme. We believe that international co-operation is the most effect means for ocean develop~nt. Bangladesh therefore urges such intensified co-operation so that the new opportunities in the 1990s can be realized and the new challenges met. In ~ delegation's view~ the international community has the potential for unique success in dealing with issues of marine affairs. The ConvenUon is a testimony to the success of the collective efforts of the Member States channelled through the United tlations. In our view, followiD;J the precedent of the Convention, the United Nations can be particularly effective in meeting the needs of the Member States. In this context, we take special note of the activities of the Office for Ocean Affairs cnd the Law of the Sea. A review o~ the second part of the Secretary-General's report demonstrates that he is already carrying out activities to assist developing coastal States. We see that a number of 11.s lan, African and Latin American States would be beneficiaries of that assistance, either at the natiooal level or within regional or subregional groups, with the relevant global, regional and subregional organizations, to strengthen and intensify such assistance activities addressing the opportunities of the 1990s. I should like also to extend my congratulations to the Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea cnd its dedicated and efficient staff, headed by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Satya Nandan, for their numerous cnd extremely helpful activi ties. We would like to request that Office to continue in its endeavours, specially taking into account the needs of developing coastal States. Bangladesh welcomes the efforts aimed at the realization of benefits from the non-sea-bed related parts of the Convention and urges the strengthening of such efforts at the international level. We are at the same time heartened by the new opportunities provided in the draft resolution to resolve sea-bed related matters of the Convention. Resolution of these latter matters would not only preserve the package constituting the Convention but also provide much-needed impetus for the fullest realization of benefits from the non-sea-bed related parts of the Convention. My delegation is ready and willing to contribute to any constructive dialogue and urges Member States to take advantage of the new opportuni ties that resolution would open up, so that sea-bed related matters coul~ be resolved satisfactorily, thereby ensuring universal acceptability of the whole package constituting the Convention. All efforts at all levels and in all forums leading to such resolution, while preserving the integrity of the Convention, arG wholeheartedly welcome t~ my delegation. Undivided attention could then be paid to the urgent needs of deve1opil'¥J coastal Statea for coastal and marine deVelopment and management. In conclusion, I should like to reiterate what my country's representative stated while signirwa the ConventiOil in Montego Bay in 1982: ~e have to acknowledge that not all our hopes have been realized in this Convention. Yet the Convention, with all its imperfections, offers a viable package deal which must be taken as a whole in the spirit of mutual co-operation ~d friendship". My delegation calls upon all Member States to keep in view this give-and-take approach. In a spirit of IIlJtual co-operation, we urge all to accept the Convention, the product of years of tireless toil. Mr. TREVES (Italy), The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea has been open for signature, ratification or accession for almost seven years. Although it is not in force, it exerts - to borrO\o1 the Secre.t8ry-General's words in his report: aa dominant influence on the maritime practices of States·. (A/44/650, para. 8) Whenever States meet with a problem concerning activl. ties at sea, they look to the Convention for guidance. They may, after consideration, come to the oonclusion that the particular provision that envisages their problem does not correspond to customary law J but it is a fact that the first text they oonsider is the Convention and that in most cases they find that its provisions give expression to rules that are apPlicable and appropriate. The experience of all Governments confirms this truth. Similar conclusions may be drawn from the relatively limited anDunt of documents of State practice published by the Secretariat or available from other sources. As the representative of France remarked on behalf of the States members of the European Community in speaking at the Preparatory Commission on 1 September this year, this positive influence on practice has resulted in the Convention already ·forming an essential element in the maintenance of legal order in the seas and oceans"• That notwithstanding, it seems obvious to us that the Convention's influence and its function of strengthening world order would be enhanced and guaranteed for the future if the Convention were to become a binding instrument. We consider importMt that the written rules, adequately guaranteed by compulsory mechanisms for the settlement of disputes, regulate relations between States as regards activi ties at sea. Such rules would be more efficient in restraining States from adopting legislation and practices divergent from the rules of the Convention CI'ld would channel the growth of the l~~ in the safe direction of generally agreed evolutionary interpretations of the Convention or of generally agreed revisions thereof. (Mr. Treves, Italy) Those post tive effects cannot., however, be obtained by the mere entry into force of the Convention. It is necessa~y that the Convention become a universally binding instrument I in other words, that it becone a treaty in force for the overwhelming majority of the international community, including the States most active in utilizing the seas. A convention in force for a group of States whose composition would not reflect adequately the wide variety of inte~ests, geographical situations, soc 181 and poli tica1 structures, or degrees of development that characterize the contemporary international community would not be sufficient to maintain world order in the oceans. Its function of constituting a framework and a guide for States in developing their activities at sea without inte~ferin9 with one another lIld solvi"1 their conflicts by peaceful means would be jeopardized. A convention in force to which important sectors of the international community could not become parties might involve certain risks for the orderly development of international relations. The world would become divided between States for which the convention was a binding instrument and States for which it would constitute, at least in part, mere guidance, subject. to verification of the correspondence with custoll'.ary law of the specific rules to be applied. The way would be opened for divergent practice and for an eVolution of the law that would not be the sane for every State. The Convention on the Law of the Sea might not, in that situation, be able to oontinue to fulfil the function it is fulfilling now, pending its entry into force. It is well known that the main reason for the rather dismal prospect. I have just evoked being a possibility is that a sizeable group of States - to which Italy belongs - have difficulties in becoming bound by the Convention because of certain (Mc. 'rreves, Italy) provisions contained in part XI, which conce~na sea-bEld mining. Other States hesitate to become bound by the Convention until they see serious prospects of its becoming acceptable to that group of States also. It is, however, our firm conviction that, seen in the ocnt.ext of the law of the sea as a whole, deep-sea-bed mining occupies a rather small place. Deep-sea-bed mining is just one marine activity among many. Moreover, the ideas enterta.ined during the negotiation of the Convention, according to which deep-sea-bed mining activity could be started soon and be profitable in commercial terms, have proved to be illusions. Deep~sea-bed mining is not for today, 011: tOJllOrrow. Consequently, the problem that precludes the universality of the Convention is relatively minor, at least in comparison with the rewards its solution would bring. We are firmly convinced that this problem can be solved and that the time is . ripe foe attempting to address it. We knCM we are not alone in this conviction. We were particularly pleased to hear, at the final meeting of the Preparatory CommissiCXl this summer, the representative of the Group of 77 proclaim the willingness of his Group to open dialogue with "any delegation, or group of delegations, be they currently involved in the work of the Preparatory Commission or not, whether signatories or non-signatories of the ConventionR • We did not hesitat.e to recognize an important signal in those words. In his statement at the same meeting of the Preparatory CommissiCXl the representative of Italy, Minister Ramiro Ruggiero, speaking on behalf of the Group of Six -Belgium, the Pederal Republic of Germany, Japm, the Netherlatds, the United KingdOltI and Italy - welcomed the statement of the representative of the Group of 77 and said, ·We are convinced that the Uni ted Hations law of the sea Convention constitutes a major achievement of the United Nationa and of the process of codification and progressive development of international law.. But the Jtates belonging to the Group of Six hold the view that part XI presents some serious problems which if left unresolved might jeopardize this achievement.. We have therefore worked tirelessly in this forum to find appropriate solutions to the above-mentioned difficulties so as to pave the way for a universally acceptable Convention.. We strongly believe that the achieving of this lofty objective might be greatly facilitated should all States agree to the launching of a dialogue, without pre-conditions and in the appropriate framework, ained at achieving better mderstanding of those problems and solutions to them..• At this plenary meeting of the General Asseftbly my delegation would like to confirm that it continues to hold that position and to indicate its satisfaction at seeing similar concepts incorporated in the draft resolution on the item on the law of the sea submitted to the Assembly for approval.. Although the seventh preambular paragraph and operative paragraph 3 could have been more explicit, they signal, in our opinion, the wish to foster the atmosphere favourable .to a dialogue aimed at ensuring the universality of the Convention - an atmosphere inaugurated by the statements made at the meeting of the Preparatory Commission on l September.. We for our part are ready to make our contribution.. It is of course difficult to say in what such a dialogue should consist.. We are perfectly aware that to certain delegations certain modalities are more acceptable than others, while to other delegations other lIDdali ties are more acceptable.. It seems to us th&t it would be premature to present now a blueprint for the structure of the dialogue. not all States on the various sides are ready for that .. What should be clear from the outset is the objective of the dialogue, namely, the creation of the conditions necessary for making the Convention a universally accepted instrument. Provided they help in the attainment of that objective, all means that diplomats and lawyers can imagine should be considered. All the help that can be mus tered, includin;J that of the Secretary-C'2Gneral, should be welcomed. The beginnings should be very cautious, much mist.rust has to be renoved, many ties have to be restored. Even though the willingness to engage in dialogue without pre-conditions is certainly a very positive element, it seems to-us that, at leMt in the initial stages, to go too quickly would be even Jll)re dangerous than to go too slowly. We must however start moving. TiDe is not unlimi ted and advantage should be taken of the favourable atmosphere now prevailing and reflected in the draft resolution. The important evencts and prospects I have just mentioned should now allow us to forget that the law of the sea is a vast area of international law in which many important developments take place every year. The S~cretary-General's valuable reports are an important reminder and an accurate reflection of this fact. This year we have before us two reports& the usual one on the law of the sea and a special one, requested by the General Assembly last year, on the protection and preservation of the marine environment. We wish to say at the outset that both reports meet the high standards to which pEevious reports have accustomed us. We welcome in partiCUlar the report on the marine environment. Its production is extremely timely and we are certain that when further updated and revised it will make 2n important contribution to the work of the 1992 United Nations conference on environment and development. It contains an extremely valuable analysis of the rules in the United Nations Convention Q'l the Law of the Sea concerning the marine environment, as well as of all other bodies of international law relevant to the subject. It emerges from that analysis that (Mr. Treves, Italy) "It ie already becoming apparent that the provisions of the Convention are prcwiding guidance on the fundamental rules relating to State obligations to protect .end preserve their own and the wider environment." (A/44/46l and Corr.l, para. 15) It emerges, too, that they also provide the framework for other specialized conventions, whether regiooal or universal in character. One observation in the report seelllS to us to be very important, namely, that "the Convention as a whole has struck m important balance between the protection of the marine environment and use of the ocean and its resources", Md that it is consequently important "that the issue relating to the protection and preservation of the marine environment should not be dealt with in isolation from other aspects of the law of the sea if the balance achieved is to be maintained." (ibid., para. 9) This observation must be kept in mind in commenting Cln two recent developments mentioned - although not from the point of view that we shall adopt - in the Secretary-General's reports. The first is the observation made in the Brmdt1and report (AI 421 427) on the future of the environment and reproduced in the report on the marine environment - namely 11 that -the most significant initial action that nations can take in the interests of the oceans' threatened life-support system- (A/44/461, para. 136) is to ratify the Convention a1 the Law of the sea. It is clear that, as the draft resolution we are goil'lg to adopt recognizes -the protection of the marine environment will be significantly enhanced by the implementation of the applicable provisions of the Cor~vention-. (A/44/L.42, para. 15) But is is also clear that what is needed is universal application of these provisions. Even though it emerges from the report that this is already happening, it fol1C7tfs from the foregoing observation that environmental protecUon is Cl good argument for trying to remove obstacles to the universality of the Convention. The second development on wich we wish to COIIIDent is that during the year that has elapsed since the General Assembly last discussed the law of the sea, difficulties emerged in two major international negotiations about striking the right balance between protection of the environmental or other interests of coastal States and protection of the interests of navigation. These were the negotiations that led to the adoption on 19 December 1988 of the United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotr~ic Substances, and to the adoption on 22 March 1989 of the Base1 Convention on the Control of TransbOundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal. In both negotiations certain States argued that partiCUlar powers should be recognized for the coastal States. As regards the negotiations on the drug Convention, it was argued that permission should be requested not only of the flag State but also of the coastal State in (M!. Trevas, Italy) order to take measures regarding a vessel suspected of being engaged 1n illicit traffic of drugs when it is exercising freedom of navigation in the exclusive economic zone. In the hazardous-wastes negotiations it was argued that the coastal State enjoys the right of giving pgrmission for transit in its territorial waters to ships carrying hazardous wastes. In both cases these positioM met with strong resistance I the right of innocent passage was invoked in the hazardous-wastes negotiations, and freedom of navigation in the economic zone was insisted upon in the drugs negotiations. In both cases the problem was solved with provisions that recall the relevant rules of international law, indirectly quoting the Convention on the Law of the Sea. Thes~ episodes confirm once more the problem-solving function of the Convention. They indicate also, however, that the balc!ll'lce struck in the Convention is under the pressure of new problems an~ concerns. This is another indication that the entrY into force of the Conven ticn vis-is-vis the widest snd most representative group of States is of the utmost importance for preserving such balance. This is confirmed by the fact that certain reservations which are highly questionable in the light of the Convention en the Law of the Sea, have been made to the other Conventions to which I have referred. The report on the law of the sea oontains interesting material that confirms, on the one hand, the dominlllt influence of the Convention on the practice of States and, on the other hand, that the delicate balance struck in the Convention between various interests is always at risk. Pattic~larly interesting indications of the influence of the Convention on practice can be found in the fact that Tanzania has reduced its territorial sea from SO to 12 miles, and in the joint communique issued by the United States and the Un ion of Soviet Boc iaUst Republics on 23 september 198~ eta ting that (Mr. Treves, Italy) "Governments are guided by the provis ions of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which, with respect to traditional uses of the seas, generally constitute international law cnd practice and balance fairly the interests of all States". TO those and other elements contained in the report one should add the Declaration adopted by France ald the United Kingdom on 2 November 1988 which recognizes as existing law the right of transit passage through the Straits of Dover in terms very close to those set forth in the Convention on the Law of the Sea. As regards the risks facing the balance of interests struck in the Convention, apart from the already-considered episodes concerning the Conventions on drugs and hazardous wastes, the report mentions in paragraph 57 the discussion now under way on including in a draft protocOl concerning specially protected areas and wild life in the Caribbean a rule Which would authorize States to take measures to regUlate passage, anchoring md stopping of vessels. Here again environmental interests exert pressure on the principles concerning navigation. The trend evidenced by the Soviet-United States agreement of 23 September 1989 on uniform interpretation of rules of international law governing innocent passage - that is, to resort to ag~eed interpretations or to unilateral interpretations of the Convention while the mechanisms for dispute settlement provided for in the Convention are not in place - as well ag the other elements of practice to which I have already referred, seem to confirm that a universally applicable convention would perform its task of guiding States ald preserving world order much better than a convention not in force or a oonvention in force for only a part of the international community. Before concluding, I should like to emphasize once a~ain ~ Government's deep appreciation for the many activities of the Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of (Hr. Treves, Italy) the Sea and for the dedication, competence and high poll tical skill of its leader, Mr. Satya Handan, and all the staff working with him. We particularly welcome ini tiatives aimed at facilitating the application of the Convention. The booklet on baselines is a primary example here, and a further important development took place a few montbs ago with the meeting of experts on marine scientific research. The pUblications of the Office, and in particular the yearly report, the Bulletin, the collections of State practice, and the newly born Annual Review of Ocean Affairs constitute invaluable instruments to increase the knowledge of States and scholars as well. They contribute greatly to the development of the law in a field where, together with the Convention, practice is decisive. The ~etin9 rose at 1.15 p.m. (Mr. Treves, Italy)