A/46/PV.71 General Assembly

36.  (uw) LAW O? THR SEA (a) REPORTS OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL (A/46/722, A/46/724) (b) DRAI*r RRSOLUTION (W461L.44) no Pv (interpretation from Arabic)r In connection with draft resolution A1461L.44, I should like to draw the attention of members to a correction to be made in operative paragraph 5 of the English vereionr the last words of the paragraph, which read: “for the benefit for mankind a8 a whole", should reads "for the benefit of mankind a8 a whole". ~+_P~R~~HT_P.ANSEM_BP~~.E (Netherlands) r I have the honour of speaking on behalf of the European Community and its twelve member States. The Ruropean Conununity and its member States attribute great importance to the law of the sea and to the creation of conditions that would ensure that the numerous and ever-expanding uses of the aeaa will be regulated by a universally acceptable international instrument. In connection with this clearly established point of departure, I should like to reiterate the rtatement on the law of the sea that was annexed to the speech mado to the General Assembly by Mr. Hans van den Broek, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, on behalf of the European Community and the Twelve: “The Cormsunity and its member States remain convinced that the 1981 United Nation8 Convention on the Law of the Sea is of great importance for the upholding of the international legal order on the Bea8 and the oceana. It is hoped that the outstanding problems, related to a legal regime for deep-seabed mining, will be solved in order to make the Convention universally acceptable. In addition to the valuable work undertaken within the Preparatory Commission for the International Seabed Authority and for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the important informal consultations initiated by the Secretary-General of tne United Nations on these problems may lead to solving the remaining issues and thus contribute to the desired universal acceptability of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Twelve look forward to the continuation of these consultations so that the outstanding issues can be solved satisfactorily before the entry into force of the Convention.” Allow w to highlight in more specific terms some of the issues and develoPmenta to which general reference is made in that statement. The Preparatory Conmnission, under the skilful leadership of Ambarssdor Jose Luls Jesus of Cape Verde, to whom the Twelve wish to pay a tribute, remains the official principal forum for discussion of issues relstod to the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea. As its name implies, it is primarily responsible for preparation of the necessary infrastructure for an effective International Seabed Authority and an International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. The Twelve are therefore of the opinion that other initiatives, outside the framework of the Preparatory Conwnission, aimed at rolving certain problems, or at improving certain provisions in part XI of the Convention, should be regarded as complementary to the work of the Comirsioo and should be welcomed by it. I should like to share with the Assembly some thougnts about certain developments within the Preparatory Commission during its ninth session. The registration of two additional pioneer investors in the course of that session is proof of a continuing interest in future deep-seabed niniag. During the spring meeting in Kingston the People’s Republic of China wa6 registered, and during the summer meeting in New York Interoceanmetals Joint Organiration - a consortium consisting of Bulgaria, Cuba, Poland, the Soviet Union and the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic - was welcomed to the ranks of those demonstrating a keen interest in future deep-seabed-mining activities. The European Cormnunity and its member States are convinced that during the spring meeting of the Preparatory Commission’; tenth session agreement will M reached on the subsequent obligations of the respective pioneer investors. So far a8 the working methods of the Preparatory Commiaaion are concerned, the Twelve believe that, in particular with a view to streamlining and rationalising the work of the Cornmission, an important decision hat been taken. We welcome the consensus on shortening the future aesaiona of the Cotmnission - effective from the spring meeting of the tenth aeasion, which was held in Kingston.& An interesting and highly welcome development during the ninth Bession of the Preparatory Conmission was the outcome of the discussion that too? place in Special Conunission 2, dealing with the Enterprise. The Twel*.re welcome the goners1 agreement that the Enterprise should start its operation in the form of a joint venture. During the ninth serrion of the Preparatory Conmnisaion there was substantive discussion of the administrative arrangements, structure and financial implications of the International Seabed Authority. The discussion revolved around two possible administrati!-e structures - the relf-administering model and the United Nations-linked model. It should be recalled that the Twelve are convinced that the principles of efficiency and cost-effectiveness should govern any decision on the subject. The Authority should therefore reflect the current state of affairs -. the actual cormnencement of seabed mining is a matter for the distant future. Consequently, in the interim period the United Nations-linked model is - * Mr. Oudovenko (Ukraine). Vice-President, took the Chair. preferable. So long as actual seabed mining remains only a possibility for the distant future an independent ant1 self-administering authority will not be justifiable. The Twelve hope that the principles of efficiency and cost-effectiveness will continue to guide those taking part in the deliberations on this and other subjects during the forthcoming meetings of the Prepa;akOry C0mid8i011. The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is in a crucial phase. On one hand. constructive discussians to facilitate universal acceptability are in progress - the aim being the removal of the difficulties that prevent certain States from ratifying or acceding to the Convention. On the other hand, an increasing number of States have ratified the Convention - bringing closer the attainment of the 60 ratifications nscossary for its entry into force. Finally, the Preparatory Commission is also approaching the end of its work. As has been stated frequently, the European Cotmnunity and its member States remain convinced of t!le utmost importance of a universally acceptable regime to regulate the various uses of the seas. We are convinced that, in this respect, the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is the most appropriate instrument. However , if the desired universality is to be achieved the outstanding issues - issues that relate to the legal regime for deep-seabed mining - will have to be resolved. The Twelve consider it important that solutions be found before the Convention enters into force, and they urge all States to vork to this end. As wan stated by the repreaentative of Italy, when he spoke on behalf of the European Conwnunity and its member State8 during the forty-fifth session of the General As.sembly, the rC)aeons for the fact that the part of the Convention that relates to deep-seabed mining makes it difficult for a considerable number of States to become parties to the Convention “are not simply political in nature. ” The repreaentattve of Italy continued: “They do not depend only on different conception6 as regards co-operation in the exploitation of resource8 beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, It is now claar that they depend too on the fact that many circumstances have changed since the 1970s and the beginning of the 198Os, uh*n part XI of the Law of the Sea Convention was conceived, negotiated and adopted.” (A1451PV.64. D. 57) With a view to achieving universal acceptance of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Secretary-General of the United Nations initiated a series of consultations on outstanding problems relating to part XI of this Convention. The last round of these consultations under his leadership took place only yesterday. The European Community and its member Stat.es would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to this initiative taken by His Excellency Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar. His dedication to solving the problems related to the law of the sea and to achieving its unjversal acceptability is but one of the many things for which the member Ststes have to thank the present SecretFry-General. Considering the progress made and the positive atmosphere in which these disc*Jssiona took place, the European Community and its twelve member States would like to express their wish for the continuation of informal consultations with interested delegations aimed at finding solutions to the remaining problems related to a legal regime for deep seabed mining. We would consequently urge the Secretary-General-designate of tha United Nations to pursue and conclude the efforts of his predecessor. Six sessions of these informal consultations have now bee,r held, including the last round, which took place at the beginning of this week. The most important outstanding issues were first identified and a way of dealing with them was then discussed. There was a general convergence towards the approach of examining all the outstanding issues with a view to resolving them and deciding how to deal with those that might remain unsolved. This approach does not exclude the possibility of resolving all issues, nor does it exclude the possibility that there may be issues that are not capable of being resolved at this time and therefore may be postponed. The Twe?ve have noted with appreciation that the 3elegatjDns taking part in these informal consultations, whether from developing or industrialired countries, have undertaken the examination of the outstanding problems in a cooperative spirit, with a result-oriented approach based on an attitude of incroariag pragmatism. It is hoP?d that the discussions will continue in the present atmosphere, particularly now that the several outstanding problems relating to part XI of tha Convention have been identified and examined. Considerable progress has been made in tackling the remaining problems, not only in informal consultations but also within the Preparatory Comnission. For this reason the European Conunuaity and its member States hope that all these outstanding problems will be resolved before the Convention eaters into force, thus rendering possible the universal participation it darerver and, likewise, the necessary financial support to ensure its succass. I rhould like to highlight a few other events relating to the law of the 8ea. The Curopean Community and its member Statas took note with appreciation of the annual Report on the Law of the Sea (A/46/724) by the Secretary-General. Again, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for the Law of the Sea and Ocean Affairs, Mr. Satya Naadaa, and his enthusiastic and very competent staff hcrve delivered a report of high quality and broad scope. We also wish to express our appreciation for the many activities that have been undertaken by the Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea during the past year. During that period the activities of this office have ranged from the organization of the high-seas-fisheries meeting and the publication of the guide concerning marine scientific research to the editing and publication of a most valuable bibliography cn the law of the sea. The Twelv-e look forward to the continuation of the indispensable work oL‘ the Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, which is of benefit to all those interested in the .,ubject. In conclusion, the European Community and its member Statea sincerely hope that 1992 will be a successful year for all the activities embarked upon, whether they be the continuing informal consultations of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the work within the Preparatory Commission or any other item relating to the law of the sea. MC. m (Sweden18 This year Sweden is again a sponsor of the draft resolution (A.161L.441 on the Law of the Sea. First of all, I wish to express my delegation’s thanks for the impressive and exhaustive reports (A/46/722 and A/46/724, prepared by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for the Law of the Sea and Ocean Affairs, Mr. Satya Nandan. While reflecting the complexity of legal matters, the reporta also demonstrate the future potential of the oceans for the benefit of mankind. An important part of the reports deals with the issue of conservation of the environment . One of the primary objectives of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is the establishment of a legal regime designed to promoto the equitable and efficient utilisation of the resources of the seas and oceans, the conservation of their living resources and the protection of the marine environment. The Convention sets out princ:tples concerning the conservation of living resources on the high seas, aiminq at cnvironmentelly sustainable development. In this context, Sweden welcories the proposal for a global moratorium on all large-scale pelagic drift-.net fishing on the high seas as an example of the trend toward discouraqinq non-sustainable fishing practices. Tile United Nations Convention OD Law of the Sea, a ccnvention of codification and of the prog.-essive development of international law, is undoubtedly one of the most ambitious projects undertaken to date by the (i!lIL.D~~U~!Acg~ Nsthsrlands) United Nations. It is important to maintain the spirit of cooperation that inspired ua to convene the Third United Natioes Conference on Law of the Sea more than 15 years ago. In considering how to approach the tasks ahead we need to bear in mind the evolving context in which we are working. The Convention has not yet formally entered into force. However, the importance of universal acceptance and inpIementat.ion of the rules and principles set out in the Convention is being increasingly recognised in international and regional forums, particularly those dealing with the conservation and management of living marine resources and the protection of the world’s oceans and seas. This is a clear tribute to the great achievement which tire Conveation represents. At the ame time, however, the ongoing difficulties associated with one part of the Convention have prevented it from attaining its full potential. Accordingly, particularly now when only nine more ratifications are needed before the Convention enters into force, increased efforts must be made to find solutions to the remainlng difficulties that stand as a barrier to universal acceptance. The Preparatory Conmission, which occupies the pivotal role in preparing for the entry into force of the Convention, ha! paved the way for a solid basis for future endeavours. The agreement on the obligations of pioneer investors is one good example. My deelegation wishes to cocpliment His Excellency Ambassador Jose Luia Jesus for his important role in promc,ing the work of the Preparatory Conmission utilising all opportunities for formulating abiding and workable solutions to the problems it is charged with considering. ( LLintQaL. Sref&g 1 At the Kingston aelrsion this year the need wa8 noted for the Prepsratory Comlrrlon to rtreamline and rationnllte its work progranuns and to focus It.8 work on lrrsuer which appear capable of resolution. We must recognise when approaching this task that circumstances have changed since the Convention was opcLned for signature in 1982. In particular, deep seabed mining is now a more distant prospect than when ue started our work in the Preparatory Connirslon nine year8 ago. This in turn must influence the approach to be taken. It appears that we have arrived at a stage in our work where an arsessment should be made aa to what has been achieved and what remains to be resolved with a view to identifying those issues we might usefully explore now, as wnll as others that may not bo ripe for detailed elaboration. Over the last year consultations have been convened by the Secretary-General with the goal of facilitating progress on some contentious part XI issuer. I wish to convey my Government’s great appreciation to the Secretary-General for offering a forum for our common goal: to arrlvo at unlveraal acceptance of the Convention on the Law of the Sea. It lr indeed our hope that the dialogue on the implementation of the Convention will be continued with the participation of a wider group of Status. My delegation rates with satisfaction the fact that ona important country this year has changed its voting pattern with regard to the draft resolution. On the other hand, any solutions that may be proposed in the context of future talks will need to be considered by the Preparatory Comnlssion itself which, in accordance with resolutions I and II, is the body mandated to prepare the ground for the entry into force of the Convention. To conclude, the Swedish delegation welcomes the present draft resolution and considers tho suggested wording for paragraph 4 to be of particular significance as it links t-he issue of ratification of or accession to the Convention to the need to promote universal participation in t:le Convention and any measures that that might entail. ;Ilt. O’BRIEN (New Zealand): I should like to jclin New Zealand’s voice to the mcrny others which have already been heard and express New Zealand’s appreciation to the Secretary-General for his comprehensive report, which surveys developments with regard to the law of the sea. This report, along with the separate reports on the needs of States and on drift-net fishing, are, we think, testimony to the professionalism and dedication of the Secretary-General’s Special Representative for the Law of the Sea, Mr. Satya Nandan, and the skilled staff in the Office of Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea. The vast and diverse range of issues surveyed in the Secretary-General’s report demonstrate the comprehensive regime the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea embraces. In 1992 we will celebrate the tenth anniversary of the adoption of the Convention. This provides an opportunity to reflect on the remarkable contribution the Convention has made to the conduct of international maritime relations. While the Convention did not resolve a small number of issues contained in part XI in a manner satiscactory to some States, taken as a whole the Convention ranks as perhaps the most important achievement in the field of international law accomplished during the last decade. For New Zealand, as for many other delegations, the establishment of a legal regime governing all aspects of ocean use, which would command universal support from the international community, was our prime goal durinq the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. Since the adoption of the Convention we have supported a constructive approach to issues in part XX which, in the -riew of some States, had not been satisfactorily resolved. We are pleased to observe that prospects for further progress towards a universally acceptable Convention now seem better than they have been for several years. The informal consultations convened by the Secretary-General on part XI provisions have resulted in a constructive dialogue on issues which had hitherto appeared beyond resolution. With the cooperatioa, determination and commitment of all, New Zealand considers that the long-awaited goal of a universally accepted Convtntion on ths Low of ths Sea will be attained. It is important that we work together on all fronts to enhance possibilities for the early achievement of a universally acceptable convention. The dialogue initiated by the Secretary-General has been very constructive. But it is also of crucial importance that within the Preparatory Commission on the law of the sea complementary efforts be made to promote the goal of universality. We believe that ths Preparatory Comission, in bringing negotiations on the issue of pioneer investor obligations to a successful conclusion demonstrated last year, demonstrated its capacity to find solutions to difficult issues. We are hopeful that the constructive spirit that now pervades discussion On lau of the sea issues will have a positive impact on the work which remains to be carried out by the Preparatory Comisafon. In recent years, as the nations of the vorld have become more conscious of the need to protect the global environment and to ensure sustainable development of the world’s resources, greater recognition has been accorded to the need for full implementstion of the provisions of the Convention dealing with the preservation of the marine environment and the conservation and management of living marine resources. But mare recognition that the Convention’s provisions on such mattsra ore not being implemantad is, quite frankly, not enough. Indeed , the Socretsry-Canoral’s report highlights the fact that effectice action and practical measures must be taken by States to ensure the full implemcntstion of the relevant provisions of the Convention in these arow). Despite the substantial body of existing international law concerning the protection and conservation of the marine environment, it is apparent that the marine l nvirozunant and its resources are subject to serious and increasing degradation. Nor Zealand endorses the call made in the Secretary-General’s report for existing agreements and instruments concerning the preservation of the marine environment to be properly implemented by States. It is equally apparent from the report of the Secretary-General that world fisheries are now facing a crisis situation: over-fishing, stock depletion and the use of insufficiently selective fishing gear are among the principal causes. The Convention on the Law of the Sea requires States to take practical measures and to cooperate with other States for the conservation of the living marine resources of the hiyh seas. Clearly, the requirements of the Convention are not being met in this area. Strengthened international cooperation to address such matters is therefore of paramount importance. The objective must be to develop practical principles and measures consistent with and pursuant to the framework of cooperation set out in the Convention that will serve to ensure the rational utilizatioo and conservation ot livinq marine resources of the high seas. Like the reprerentative of Canada who l poke this mornlnq, I wont to quote from a key part of the Secretary-General’s report, where he rsyr# “The l laboratlon of the law of the mea regime for tho rational management and conservstion of high-sear living reaourcea Ir now firmly inrcribad on the international agenda.” (u-1 That i8 8 very important rtstement, and we all need tr, accept and acknowledge the point. Some progress has indeed already been made in addressing harmful fishing methods and practices. The international action against drift-net fishing taken by the Assembly beginning in 1989 with the adoption of resolution 441225 and the measures taken in the various regions of the world to prohibit this harmful practice are instructive sramples. Ir!e applaud in particular the recent action taken in the Second Cornnittee at this session of the General Assembly which has determined that global moratoria on large-scale pelagic drift-net fishing on the high seas will take effect from 31 December 1992. In our efforts to develop further principles and measures that will ensure effective conservation and management of high seas marine living resources, we need to proceed with a cosunitment equal to that which guided our efforts on drift-net fishing. In appropriate international forums, and particularly in the context of the Rio de Janeiro Earth Gusunit next year, New Zealand will be working with others, including the distant-water fishing nations and coastal States, to elaborate appropriate principles and measures that should govern high aeas fishing. New Zealand has been cooperating closely with other concerned coastal States, in particular Canada anti Chile, to elaborate the high seas fisheries provisions of the Convention in order to provide for their better implementation. We are pleased to have found wide support for these ideas from,\ States from all regions of the globe. We are convinced that the international community must take urgent action to ensure that the Convention’s provisions for the regulation of fisheries on the high seas are properly observed. With other countries we have introduced a proposal for the consideration of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Develrjpment (MF . . ..4.‘BKl~._lCLkw_ZaadaaD) which is drafted with this objective in view. We cormnend It to the attention of Member Staten, for we believe that it is essential that the Earth Sumnit in Rio do Janeiro ensure better protection of the marine living reSourceS of the high Seab. We welcome the greater recognition accorded to the nsed for effective cometvation and management of living marine zenourcea in the draft resolution before the General ASaembly today. We believe, aa do others who have already addrerred the item, that there are curtain points in it worthy of note; The Sixteenth preambular paragraph expresaes the concern our fishing methods and practices, including those aimed at evading regulations and controls, which can impact adversely on the connervstion and manegem nt of living marine feSoufceS. The SOVent66nth preambular paragraph recognises the need for conservation and management m6aSureS which give full effect to the provisions of the Convention. Paragraph 21 calls on States to strengthe.! their cooperation and to adopt the necessary m6a8ureSr including the prevention of fishing measures and practices which can have an adverse impazt on the conservation and management of marine living resources. States are further asked to comply with the regimes established by regional fisheries organixations and to adopt the necessary monitoring and enforcement measures. Our hope, and indeed our expec.tation, ia that the vote on the draft resolution will reflect a greater degree of consensus than previously. Such a result will strengthen progress towards the goal of universality. New Zealand hns joined the sponsors of the drnft resolution, which hiqhlighls the challenges that remain to be faced in the law of the sea context and recognises the achievements that the Convention as a whole represents. We also wish to expross our thanks for the joint efforts of Ambassador Jesus of Cape Verde and Under-Secretary-General Nandan for bringing the resolution to its present form. IlraJ. TREVG ( Italy) I The discussion on the item under consideriltion today is an important occasion in the yearly calendar of activities concerning the law of the sea. Although the time allotted is not long, it makes it possible to take stock of the events of the past 12 months and to assess the trends. It is the only universal forum that makes it possible to consider the subject as a whole, without undue emphasis on one or another of its aspscta. Nine years have elapsed since the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was opened to signature, on 10 December 1982. The political circumstances of the world and the specific circumstances of the law of the sea have undergone important changes since then. The East-West tensions are gone. Different outlooks prevail as regards economic development. Global environmental concerns are much more widely shared. As far as the seas are concerned, the importance of good order and legal certainty becomes more evident every day, in light of the disappearance of the balance and competition between the two main naval super-Powers and the emergence of a number of national ambitions in *Jarious corners of the world. This underlines the need for States to abide by a precise code of conduct on the seas. In our opinion, such a code of conduct is contained in the 1982 Convention. The rules of the Convention are such as to ensure adequate balance between the needn of the coastal States and those of othor States also interested in matters of the aea. Its environmental provision8 provide a framework for progress on the basis of which new rule8 adequate for taking new need8 into account can be elaborated. Only the ruler on deep seabed mining have been T artially flawed and are difficult to apply. The aaoumptions on the prospects of seabed mining that were prevalent in the 19708 and early 19608 are now universally regarded a4 over-optimistic and unrealistic. Deep seabed mininq is not for today, and it may not be fearible even for the next few decades. The elaborate structure described in tha Convention for the conduct and control of seabed mining appears to be an empty shell, the only effect of which is to discourage a group of important States - those that might one day actively engaye in deep seabed mining - from becoming parties to the Convention. In the world’8 present situation, it is, in our opinion, of the utmost importance to remove the obstacles that prevent participation in the Convention by the moat important Powers. A non-universal Convention on the Law of the Sea would contain the seed8 for possible loss of consensus even on the ba8ic tenets that have 80 far become part of international labf, such a8 the maximum width of the territorial sea and of the exclusive economic zone. Moreover, the subtle compromises contained in the Convention on delicate substantive issues might never materialize as law, and the ambitious conflict-solving procedures, albeit necessary for giving certainty to a very complex system of rule8, would never come into existence. The difficulties with regard to deep seabed mining appear to be of minor importance in comparison with what is at stake - peaceful coexistence on the aeas and oceans. They must be overcome. The iDitiatiV0 undortakon in July 1990, and continued on ri8 occsrionr up to yesterday evening by the Secretary-General for informal discussion of the outrtsnding irsuos on the deep meabed mining provisions of the Convention sooms to us the most promising svonue to overcome these obrtacles. We wish to join other rpmakorr - in particular the representatiw.~ of the #etherlands when he spoke OD behslt of the European Comnunity and its 12 member Stated - in praising Mr. Javior Pore8 do Cuellar for this timely initiative. With the cooperation of a group of interested States which engaged in discussions without preconditions and with an open mind, and with the invaluable support of Under-Secretary-General Nandan and his s:saff, these consultations have succeeded in identifying the issuen which need to be tackled and have also proceeded to a first examination of these issuea, an examination from which an impressive consonance of views has emerged on the kind of solutions that can be envisaged. It seems clear that the guiding principle accepted in the consultations is that of comparing the provisions of the Convention with the present prospects for deep seabed mining and with the changed outlook in international economic cooperation. Irrom this starting-point, an evolutionary, pragmatic set of solutions seems to be in the process of emerqinqr institutions should be created only when they are to perform effective functions and within the limits needed for performing these functions; the rules on decision-making must be reconsidered in order to streamline the system and to give adequate guarantees to those States which are ready to incur considerable risk in deep seabed mining. Some controversial problems cannot be solved in detail as long as commercial production from the seabed is not imminent, but basic principles can be agreed upon. This sixeable progress must not be lost. A lot of work is still needed, to give shape and detail to the broad consensus that is in the making. The end result should be such as to permit those States that have already ratified the Convention to adjust their obligations without important political sacrifice, and those which have not yet done so to become party to a Convention which is so adjusted as to have eliminated the existing difficulties. The need for widening the base of the present consultation uudoubtedly exists, but one must not lose sight of the fact that efficiency requires a forum that permits concentrated work. Once again wo wish to join our voice to that of others in urqing the Secretary-General-elect of the United Nations to continue this initiative uith the modalities he, in hia wisdom, will consider the most appropriate, in order to attain the objective of creating t.he conditions for the universal acceptability of the Convention. The Convention is one of the main achievements of the United Nations, and it is well worth the effort still necessary to make it a binding document that can help to maintain peace and order over two thirds of the world’s surface for many years to come. As every year. the Secretary-General’s report on the law of the sea is an extremely useful and valuable document. The first piece of information in the report concerns the present status of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: 51 States have ratified it or acceded to it. The movement towards the sixtieth ratification and entry into force has undoubtedly picked up speed during 1991. Yet almost no developed country and just a few of the major countries of the Third World are among the 51. Tnis illustrates once again the need to make every effort to ensure the conditions for a more balanced participation. It also shows, however , that the time available for these efforts is not unlimited. While even after the 60 ratifications mark has been reached, and perhaps also even after entry into force, possibilities for overcoming outstanding problems regarding deep seabed mining would remain open, it seems obvious that efforts in that direction would become more difficult. The reluctance already visible now in the States that have ratified the Convention to look again at the obligationa they have agreed to assume would become stronger. Conversely, the ( Mr_ L-.Tr~YmL.L+aLr ) temptation aomci.inea smergirq In dome of t.he States which have not- yet ratified to entrust to customnry law the protection of their interests might, rightly or wrongly, be strengthened. Secondly, it is very interesting to note the information ns to the inflr~ance of the Convention on international practice. This is visible proof of the vitality of the Convsntion and of the necessity of proserving it. The uame must be said for the rellancs -. which has clearly increased during the year just elapsed - on judicial and arbitral means for the settlement of international disputes concerning the Law of the Sea. It is worth noting that such reliance - even though principally focused, as in the past, on questions of the delimitation of maritime areas - ia starting to expand to other questions. Thirdly, from the brief but precise information given on the Preparatory Commission, it emergea that the Commission continues its valuable activities in the implementation of resolution II of the Third; United Nations Conference on the Low of the Sea. Two new pioneer investors have been registered and discussions are well under way for defining their obligations. In this context we should like to express some concern as regards the emerging trend to apply different obligations to different pioneer investors on the basis of differences in the applications they submitted: these differences, in our opinion, hardly justify such different treatment. Potential applicants, of which Italy is one, will resist any tendency that might ensue from this trend to reserve to them - when and if they apply for registered pioneer status - a treatment that is not similar on the basis of similar relevant conditions. As regards the preparation of rules and regulations of the future International Seabed Authority, the report confirms that on many subjects real p109ress is, at the present juncture, impossible because of lack of knowledge of the reality of seabed mining or because broader ccnsenaus on the necessary adjustments to the Convention hzO not yet been reached. It ale0 emerges. however , that realirtic approaches are prevailing on many issuea, and thir is welcome. The shortening of the sessions of the Preparatory Connission is also a promising signal. The activities of the Offica for Ocean Affaira and the Law of the Sea continue to be inteoae, and worthy of the usual praise. Under-Secretary-General Satya Nandan and his colleague8 hnve succeeded in making the Office the foremost centre of activity and information on the Law of the Sea and related affairs. The publications of the Offlce have become A necessary point of reference for all those who, in Government or ia scholarly research, try to have an updated knowledge and comprehension of the legal and political aspect8 of the 8ea8. In particular, Italy welcomes the important contribution the Office is making a8 the coordinating body for United Nation8 participation in the international exhibition that will be held in Genoa, Italy, in 1992, on the occasion of the 500th anniversary of Christopher Column us’8 voyage. The draft resolution we are going to adopt, although it retains the basic structure of those approved in previous years, presents important improvements. The realistic appraisal of the changed situation of the world and of its consequences on the Law of the Sea, as well a8 of the linkage between overcoming the difficulties concerning the seabed mining provisions cf the Convention and its universality, still hidden behind obscure and in part contradictory language in 1990, have in this year’s draft resolution become (Mr,!a,lY 1 orplicit. Thir ir a wlcome, important firnt step towards broadening the IICO~CI of agreement on the outlook adopted in the informal con#ultatioaa promoted by the Secretary-Conoral, and rithin the most important official forun of the United Watioas, nanely the General Aaaembly. ( f!tKLllmt!md~) bm (United Republic of Tanranla)r In our statement a year ago I almost to the clay, we emphasired thsL world peace and security could be significantly advanced and improved if the seas of the world were used to enhance cooperation between nations. That cooperation, sspecislly between the North and the South, I8 even more relevant and urgent now than in the past.. The endinq of the cold war has created a climate conducive to such cooperation. Just as the seaa join countries to become a single village, the seas in many ways offer a singular opportunity for international ecoaomi~ cooperation. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea could not have been more timely. We are pleased to note that the Convention is gaininq more univerrality. Now there are 51 ratifications and accessions. This means that the Convention is only nine ratifications or t iesrions away from its entry into force, which we have no doubt will happen soon. According to figures released recently, the 51 countries to which I have referred account for only 4.41 per cent of contributions to the regular budget of the United Nations. This is not a healthy starting point, especially because the North seems reluctant to join in makinq it enter into force and enabling it to become operational. We therefore cormrend the initiative of the Secretary-General to convene informal consultations aimed at achieving universal participation in the Convention. While these consultations may be useful, they have, in some instancecl, engendered some understandable fear on the part of developing countries that they miqht lead to an overhaul of part Xl and erode the basic noble concept which underlies that part - that is, the comnon-heritage-of-mankind principle. This Convention represents an international effort to establish a just and equitable international economic order. For this reason, the United Republic of Tanrania hopes that nothing will be done to the Convention that undermines that goal. We have taken note of the progress made in settling conflicts and disputes, particularly those relating to maritime boundaries. This inlicates the confidence of States in the role played by the International Court of Justice and the recognition of its competence in resolving conflicts and disputes relating to matters covered by the Convention. On the question of international peace and security, we hope that major maritime Powers, in view of ongoing political changea, will reduce their military presence in the seas. They should cooperate with those regions that have declared their areas zones of peace and security. States which transport and dump toxic and hazardous substances into the sea are damaging the ocean environment, to the detriment of mankind. This damage and damage to the seas by other means are matters which have been regulated by the Convention aDd many other legal instruments. Reyardiog conservation and management of the living marine resources, there have been recent developments which will contribute to the prevention of fishing methods and practices that can have an adverse impact on the conservation and management of marine living resources. A number of high seas areas were vulnerable to unregulated fishing and destructive fishing practices such as drift-netting. But, with cooperation, some States have indicated their intention to desist. from those fishin practices. Conservation and management of marine resources will be more effective if States will take adequate measures to oversee the fishing activities of their nationals and share data and information between themselves and with the relevant iatornational organirations. Again, the Law of the Sea Convention offers a good frameuork for cooperation on this eubject. Thir brings u8 to the question of the needs of States in developing and managing their resources. We highly cormnend the Secretary-General for his comprehensive report on the measures undertaken in response to the needs of Staten in the development and management of ocean resourcob. It is l ncouraqinq to note that a good number of States and organirations within the United Nations system and its specialirsd aqeucie8 and other international organisations responded to the report of the Secretary-General on thoae needa, by tranrmittinq their conunents. Apart from the information and suggestions received, the report contains an analyris of that information and those ruqqertions, providing for possible coureaa of action. This is very important and ureful to developil 3 countries. Tanrania wishes to extend its gratitude to those countries that have assisted it in its ocean development and management projects. In its capacity ar current Chairman of the Orqanitation for Indian Ocean Marine Affaira Cooperation (IOMAC), Tanzania wishes also to thank those that have indicated their intention to assist the organiration technically, financially or OtherWi80. IOMAC is a focal point for cooperation between Indian Ocean States. The Preparatory Cormnission for the International Seabed Authority and for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea will continue meetinq in order to discharge the mandate given to it. We hope it will accomplish its work au loon as possible to the satisfaction of all parties. We rlsh to pay a special tribute and express our gratitude to the Office for Ocean Affair8 and the Law of the Sea for its cormnendnble work and its dedication to carrying out the nctivitiea aasigned to it by the General Assembly. We particularly take note of the responsibilities cf thnt Office in meeting the needs of States and regional organisations by providing them with advice and assistance. The role that that Office has played in aaalsting the Secretariat of IOMAC is much appreciated. We call on Gove;wents and International organisations to extend more cooperation and assistance to the Office. T’ho objective of the Convention is to contribute to the maintenance of peace, justice and progress for all mankind. It is our earnest hope that the unified charact.t of the Convention will be maintained whilst its universality is achieved. In conclusion, I should like to assure the Assembly again of Tanzania’s full cooperation in the efforts to achieve these objectives. Hr. s (Sri Lanka): On behalf of the delegation of Sri Lanka I am happy to participate in the debate on agenda item 36, “Law of the sea”. The subject of the oceans was first raised in the General Assembly by the delegation of Malta in 1967. The then Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka, the late Shirley Amerasinghe, played a notable role in the wotk of the Seabed Conmnittee as its Chairman. It was that Committee’s uork that led to the adoption on 30 April 1982 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea by the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, of which also Shirley Arnerasinghe was also President. It was the result of one of the most prolorqed azd important negotiating processes in the codification and progressive development of international law. My delegntion wiahea to oxpress Its ainc*nre nppreciat ion to the Secretary General for hia pre(*ise ant1 very cclmprehennive report. (A/4h/724). Member States are indeed fortunate t-o be kept so well informed of world wide developmenta regarding the mnny rind varied aspects of ocean affairs. The Special Represent.ative of the Secretary General, Mr. Satyr Nnntlnn. and the United Nations Office for Ocenn Affairs and the Law of the Sea are to be congratulated for the useful functions they continue to perform so well. The Preparatory Commission for the International Sea.-bed Authority and for t-he International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea continues to labour unceasingly under the distinguished chairmanship of Ambassador Jose Jesus of Cape Verde. We wish to record our deep appreciation for this work. The United Nations Convent.ion on the Law of the Sea is t.he pre-eminent international legal instrrunent on all matters coltcerning the seas and oceans, which occupy more than 70 per cent of the surface of the globe. As of the end of November 1991, a total of 51 States have either ratified or acceded to the Convention, which will enter into force 12 months after the date of deposit of the sixtieth instrument of ratification or accession. It is hoped that this will occur in the not too distant future. We note that during 1991, the Secretary-General continued his informal consultations aimed at. achieving universal participation in the Convention. It is indeed heartening that problem areas for some States have been identified relating to the regime for deep-seabed mining and that considerable progress has been made towards achieving broad agreement on the issues involved. (Mr, Kplyw~e, Sri Lanka) There is today a world-wide nuBrene8s of the t.remendous pot.ential that the soan and ocean8 have to offer for human developmont. Through the of for ta of the United Nations, t.he world coeanunity ha8 sought to codify and progressively develop international laws to regu:.ate the uue of the ocenns and their resources in a rational and responsible manner. The sense of responsibility with which the nations of the world have sought to develop this “common heritage of mankind” has been heightened as we approach t.he United Nationr Conference on LAlvironment and Development. The mechanisms and institutions that have been developed through the efforts of the United Nations are of special importance to developing countries. The information and knowledge made available to those countries would assist in keeping them abreast of rspidly-changing developmenta in ocean affairs. These valuable United Nations activities should be continued even after the entry into force of the Convention. I wish to refer to one example which shows the very substantial concern that developing countries, especially the smaller ones, have for msttera relating to Ocean Affairs, namely the the Indian Ocean Marine Affairs Cooperation (IOMAC). Sri Lanka takes great satisfaction in its initiative to foster cooperation among the African and Asian States of the Indian Ocean region through IOMAC, whose chairmanship has now been assumed by the United Republic of Tanzania. The purpose of IOt4A“ is to encourage and facilitate action-oriented and pragmatic cooperation on economic, scientific and technical matters as well as in projects on marine affairs of the Iadian Ocean. Since 1985, IOMAC has progressed steadily. In 1990 the Arusha Agreement cn Indian Ocean Marine Affairs Cooperation was adopted. Since then the 7th meeting of the Standing Cormnlttas of 1OMAC has been held in Colombo, in July 1991. The Standing Committee dealt with the practical arrangement for cooperation, not only among the African and Aslsn States of the region, but also with other States active in the region, in particular the major msritime Powers. IOMAC has established a technical cooper&ion group, which involves the active participation of these extraregional States. The participation of the developed countries in IOMAC will greatly assist in the sharing of their technology, rcientific knowledge and experience with the countries of the Indian Ocean region and will help to maximise benofitr. We wish to thank the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for the T,aw of the Sea for him continued assistance in the IOMAC process, for the representation of his Office in its meetings and for the rubstantive support it has provided. fn 1989, Sri Lanka also took the initiative to propose a study by the Secretary-General on the needs of States in regard to the development and management of ocean resources. We welcomed the first report submitted last year and take pleasure this year in receiving the second report of the Secretary-General. The report draws upon the wide experience of Member States and brings into focus the activities of international organisations and 3gencies of the United Nations system and those outside. It syntheaizes the strategies and directions for facilitating the efforts of developing countries to harvest the potential of ocean resources. ( MK.*-Anl RAQULanba 1 Uo note the extremely useful publications of the Office of Ocean Affairs and tha Law of the Sea menttoned in part two of the teport of the Secretary-General on the law of ths sea. There is a wide range of excellent publicatlonrr specialfred bibliographies, analytical otudles evaluating important aspects of the Convention, series of studies on the practices of Stator and technical guidelines covering complex provisions of the Convention. Uo note in particular the study on the Regime for Marine Scientific Roroarch, which the IOMAC Standing Conunittee considered to be extremely ureful. IOMAC ham requested that this study be distributed to its participantr. In conclurion, it is with great pleasure that Sri Lanka has jointly rponrored the draft re8olution submitted to the General Assembly in document A1461L.44. &-_vl~AG. (Hexlco) (int~erpretatlon from Spanish) 1 My dologation wishes once again, on this occasion, to expresa its gratitude to the Secretary-General for his reports, vhlch are the basis for our dircumrion of thr, 1t.m before UB. They give nn account of the consolidation of ;aportant elemnts of the law of the sea which are increasingly being incorporated in the legislation of the various States Members of the United #ationr, and which highlight the benefits provided by the Convention. It is particularly important to emphasixe that, a(~ of today, 82 State8 have proclaimed exclusive econodic xonen, 16 States claim srclusivo firhinq xones within the 200.-mile limit, 133 States have chosen to adjust the extant of their territorial seas to the 12-mile limit established by international Iawl and there is a further strengthening of the quidalinom for the preservation of the marine environment and the conservation of mpecies, in the terms established by the Convention, while at the same time the notion of the consnon heritage of mankind retains its original validity. The systematic efforts made by the Office for Ocean Affair8 and the Law of the Sea, as described in part two of the report (A/46/724), to ensure a better understanding of the terms of the Convention, and the assistance that Office has provided towards the ratification of the Convention, merit our high esteem. We also recoqnixe the unquestioned contribution made by that Office towards increasing the number of ratifications of the Convention, which now stand at 51 States. We also value the efforts at promotion and dissemination that it has sponsored in various parts of the world. As regards Latin America, we are pleased to mention in particular the holding of seminars in Montevideo, Uruguay, in April of 1991, and in Santiago de Chile, in May of this year, at the headquarters of the Economic Conunlrrlon for Latin America. The purpose of the latter meeting wan to cvaluato thm extent to which the Convention on the Lsr of the Sea had been implemented, and to oxamine the porslbllltler oi achieving unlvorsallty. With thr pamain of time the validity of the central conceptr of the Convontlon har been confirmed, and it har become evident that there are certain realltlor which wo cannot lgnora today, realltlea gonerated by profound political and economic chanqer worldwide, which could not have been fully foremoon at the boginning of the last decado. My Government therefore approclated the tlmaly dialogue initiated by the Secretary-General for the purpoao of conrlderlng the dlfficultler that have kept certain States from adhoring to the Convontioo, and we have, from the beginning, taken par in the dlscurrlonr in a conrtructlva rpirlt. The Socrotary-General’8 initiative, aimed at 9slnln9 universal adherence to tho Convention through informal consultatlonr, is fully in keeping with the invitation nado by the General Assembly to Member States to make renewed effort8 to facilitate un( Trraal participation in the Convention on the tar of the Sea and to contribute to the successful conclusion of the work of the Preparatory Corwnlsrlon for the International Seabed Authority and for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. We share the point made in the introduction to the report that achievement of the wmber of ratifications necessary for the entry into force of the CODVeDtiOD, which is coming ever closer and for which we have been makiD active efforts, should not be regarded as an end in itself. Our ultimate objective should be to achieve the hlqhest degree of participation by States. (t!.r.A.-!f!il.Wa.i_r;n) Wo wish to refer to par,agraph 20 of the Secretary-Censrsl’e report (A/46/724!, which we wholeheartedly endorse. We refer t.o the need to widen the participation in the informal consultatione. We thank t.he Secretary-General for hi8 wise initiative and we trust that the consultations will continue, with the oame diligence a8 has characterised them 80 far, in the 8earch for concrete rerultr. We invite all State8 to participate, in the moat constructive way possible. in the quest for an effective and balanced convention which, while preserving the major gain8 already achieved, will be Adapted to the requirement8 of the present time. We are particularly grateful for the creative and indefatigable work done by Amba88ador Jose Luis Jesus of Cape Verde, in the delicate conduct of the work of the Preparatory Conunission. We also acknowledge the valuable contribution made to the international connunity by the Office of Ocean AC fair8, and in particular by the head of the Office, Mr. Satya Nandan, the Personal Representative of the Secretary-General for the Law of the Sea, with hi8 invaluable support both to the Preparatory Comnission and to other important activities. These include the promotion of the Convention on the Law of the Sea through the holding of symposia. such a8 those mentioned in the Secretary-General’8 report, the awardiug of fellowships, and the ongoing information work, a8 a result of which it ha8 been possible for him to publish collection8 which have bacome an accurate 8ource of reference material for specialists and which we should like to 800 made available to a broader public, including universities. Today’a revolutionary Change8 in the technological, economic and political fields worldwide have resulted in a shortening of distances and have consequently led to a climate propitious to international cooperation, a climste seldom experienced in the paat. The yromiae of development and well being which the nea haa always represented, is now closer to fulfilment. The international community hoa before it the challenge of taking advantage of the rich juridical and political patrimony repreaented by the law of the aea that has developed 60 far, and of raising it to levela of higher maturity, commensurate with the role which this resource is called upon to play for all humanity both now tnd in the future. Aa a State which has ratified the Convention and co-sponsored the resolution on the law of the sea, Mexico see8 a8 encouraging signs - which could bring us closer to that common objective .- the attitude which prevailed in the negotiation3 on the relevant draft resolution this year and also the attitude of delegationa which, although they had in the past voted against the resolution, wera willing thin year to change their negative vote. We wish to take this opportunity to reiterate Mexico’s connitment to continuing participation in the common efforts to improve t-he regime of the law of the sea. (Mr.. -YAllssm&d!!eisiu2 1 &aL &OR&S (Uruguay) ( int.erpretation from Spanish); First, my delegation wishes to thank the Secretary-General and his Special Representative for the excellent reports contained in documents A/46/722 and A/46/724, which, like previous reporta, set out the most significant recent developments pertaining to the Conventlo? and show the principal relevant trends. The profound changes made in the law of the sea over the last few decades have demonstrated that the idea that marine resources are inexhaustible and that oceans may be used and exploited in an unrestricted manner to provide the maximum benefit for States has been replaced by recognition of the need for sustainable, equitable and efficient exploitation aimed at conserving marine resourcea and at protecting and preserving the marine environment. That criterion of rationality was embodied in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Uruguay was a participant in that process and is now working on the final stages of the process of ratifying the Convention. My delegation shares the concern that other delegations have expressed cbout the need to achieve universal participation in the Convention, and hence we feel that the Secretbry-General’s initiative in arranging informal consultations with a view to achieving wider accession to the instrument is extremely positive. Paragraph 20 of the report (A/46/724) refers to the possibility of widening participation in the consultations. My deleqation feels that it would be more appropriate to open the meetings to all States Members oi the Organization. As ia rightly pointed out. in the Secretsry-General’s report, the Convention bps had a growing influence on various aopmcta of thr, law of thn sea. The Secretary-General amphaaices thoae aspect8 pertnining to the delimitation of maritime juriadictionsl zonea. Indeed, St.at.ea hnvo increasingly adapted their domestic legislation to the provialona of the Convention, made declaration8 to implement those provisions and endorsed the law of the sea both in time of peace and in the event of conflict. In the sphere of the peaceful settlement of disputes between States on maritime matters, the agreements that have been concluded and the jurisdictional decisions that have been adopted take account of the norms of the Convention. With regard to the prevention of naval incidents at sea and confidence-building in the maritime sphere, the Convention, whose principles and norm8 are in harmony with Conventions of the International Maritime Organiratioa, has likewise had a beneficial effect. My delegation believes that the protection and preservation of the marine environment and the conservation and orderly management of its living resourcea are closely linked to the strengthening of cooperation. These points are analysed in the report. In that connection, it would be desirable to promote the establishment of regional international organizations made up of States with ocean coastlines, or with interests related to the exploitation of the region’s natural resources, with a view to facilitating studies, exchanges of scientific information, controls, the transfer of technology, the application of technology on A cooperative or joint basis, research, prospecting and (Mrs, ?A~ren, Vswuoy) regulation of the exploitation of the resources through programmes in the context of cooperation provided for in the Convention. Some interesting reference8 to regional cooperation in respect of maritime affairs are to be found in paragraph 15 and the subsequent paragraphs of the Secretary-General’s report contained in document A/45/721. An example is the Organiration for Indian Ocean Marine Affairs Cooperation (IOMAC) which uas mentioned ear 1 ier. Similarly, the creation of regional centres of marine technology, which are also provided for in the Convention, affords co appropriate means for the exchange of know-how between States, as is pointed out in paragraph 70 of document A/46/722. My country is concerned about the use on the high seas of certain fishing practices and methods that damage the environment and threaten the biological resources in exclusive economic zones. The establishment of regional bodies would be a practical means of implementing the coxxnitment assumed by States “To achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character” (Charter of as United Nations. Article 1. pars. 31, which is one of the fundamental purposes of the United Nations. Lastly, my delegation wishes to reaffirm the importance it attaches to the work done by the Preparatory Conxxission in its dual role as the institution in charge of the implementation of the transitional regime before the entry into force of the Convention and as the institution in charge of the adoption of measures conducive to the establishment of the Authority. Mr. QRDZHONIKIDZE (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from Russian): The question of the law of the sea has been considered on numerous occasions at plenary meetings of the General Assembly. In our viaw, that reflect8 the extremely important role of the Convention on the Law of the Sea, which governs the international legal regime in respect of the world’s oceans and encompasses virtually all types of activity involvin,l the utiliration of ocean spaces and ocean resources. We should like to point out that even though nine years have elapsed since the signing of the Convention, it has, regrettably, not yet entered into force. In our view, if we were now to give up and cease our efforts to universalite the Convention, the international conunuaity might in a few years’ time encounter problems even more serious than those that existed at the beginning of the 19700, when the decision was taken to convene the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. In that connection, our delegation favours intensification of the efforts of al, groups of States to universalire the Convention and to overcome the obrtacles to the attainment of that end. We are in favour of widening serious international dialogue aimed at achieving universally acceptable solutions to problems involved in the exploitation of the mineral resources of the international Area of the sea-bed. We regard as ina&r.issible any arbitrary actions taken by States with regard to the open oeasj such actions lead to erosion of the Convention and to a weakening of the international legal order governing the world’s oceans. We are convinced that only if the Convention enter5 into force on a universal basis will it become an effective instrument to ensure legal order in respect of the world’s oceans. The need for universalisation of the Convention is now recognited by an absolute majority of States, a fact that is reflected in the draft resolution. It was precisely to overcome existing problems that the system of unofficial consultationa under the auspiceo of the Secretary GenerAI of ths United Nations was set up. We wish to commend most highly the Secretary-General’s efforts to eliminate the existing divergence3 of views concerning the use of resources in t.!le int.ernational Area of the sea-bed. However, we do not view those conaultntions as a substitute for the work of the Preparatory Cormnission for the International Sea-Bed Authority and for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, which, during the nine yeara of its activity, has done a great deal of useful work. We believe that use must be made of all ways and means, includinq the great prettiqe of the Secretary-General, for universalizinq the Convention. We wish to point out that there have been definit n achievements resulting from the consultations. Cenernl underatandinq has been eached on a large number of issuea. A constructive atmosphere. characterimed by a search for solutions. realism and a readiness on t.he part of various groups of States to tsks each other’s intereat. into account, has been established. All of this creates a basis for conducting more substantive negotiations aimed at specific solutions to existing problema. We believe that the result of six rounds of consultations under the auspices of the Secretary-General should be followed by the preparation of an evaluation report by the Secretary-General and propoaals by the Secretariat as to how to proceed in the future. We also feel that future consultations should be held under the leadership of the new Secretary-General of the United Nat.ions. Our delegation favours accelerating the negotiation process. Fifty-one States have already ratified the Convention. If by the end of 1992 the parties to the negotiations are able to reach mutually acceptable solutiona, then an optimistic scenario would allow us to count on the entry into force of the Convention on a universal basis by the end of 1993 or 1994. In conclusion, we should like to emphasise the importance of enhancing the role of the United Nations Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea in the monitoring of compliance with and uniform application of the provisions of the Convention by all countries. We wish to express our esteem for and gratitude to the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, Mr. Nandan, and his staff for all the work they have done on the question. The PRESIDENT. - We have heard the last speaker in the debate on agenda item 36. I should like to announce that additional sponsors of draft resolution A/46/L.44 are Cyprus, Ireland and the Federated States of Micronesia. The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Costa Rica, C&e d'Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti. Dominica. Egypt. El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Romania, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia. Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan. Suriname, Sweden, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia, Zimbabwe Against: Turkey Abstaininq: Ecuador, Germany, Israel, Peru, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Venezuela Dr ft r s. a esolution A/46/L.44 was adonted bv 140 to 1. with 7 ab stention (resolution 46/76).*