A/63/PV.74 General Assembly

The General Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Credentials Committee in paragraph 12 of its report (A/63/633). The Credentials Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of sub-item (b) of agenda item 3. I would like to inform Member States that the Assembly will suspend the 74th plenary meeting and will resume after the completion of the work of the Fifth Committee.

May I further take it that the Assembly agrees to proceed immediately to the consideration of agenda item 48? I see no objection. We shall now proceed accordingly. In connection with this item, the General Assembly has before it a draft resolution issued as document A/63/L.57. The report of the Fifth Committee on the programme budget implications of the draft resolution is contained in document A/63/657. The General Assembly will now take action on draft resolution A/63/L.57, entitled “Doha Declaration on Financing for Development: outcome document of the Follow-up International Conference on Financing for Development to Review the Implementation of the Monterrey Consensus”. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/63/L.57?

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude this stage of its consideration of agenda item 48? Reports of the First, Third and Fifth Committees The President (spoke in Spanish): The General Assembly will now take up the remaining reports of the First Committee on agenda item 89 and of the Third Committee on sub-item (a) of agenda item 60, sub-items (a) and (b) of agenda item 62, and sub-items (b) and (c) of agenda item 64. Following that, the General Assembly will take up the reports of the Fifth Committee on agenda items 116, 119, 127, 121 to 123, 125, 126, 129 to 131, 130 together with 131, 139, 148, 118 and 117. If there are no proposals under rule 66 of the rules of procedure, I shall take it that the General Assembly decides not to discuss the reports of the First, Third and Fifth Committees that are before it today.

Statements will therefore be limited to explanations of vote. Positions of delegations regarding the recommendations of these Committees have been clearly expressed in the Committees and are reflected in the relevant official records. I would like to remind Members that, under paragraph 7 of decision 34/401, the General Assembly agreed that “When the same draft resolution is considered in a Main Committee and in plenary meeting, a delegation should, as far as possible, explain its vote only once, i.e., either in the Committee or in plenary meeting, unless that delegation’s vote in plenary meeting is different from its vote in the Committee”. I would remind delegations that, also in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations at their seats. Before we begin to take action on the recommendations contained in the reports of the First, Third and Fifth Committees, I should like to inform representatives that we are going to proceed to take decisions in the same manner as was done in the Committees, unless the Secretariat has been notified otherwise in advance. That means that, where separate or recorded votes were taken, we will do the same. I should also hope that we may proceed to adopt without a vote those recommendations that were adopted without a vote in the respective Committees.

I shall now put to the vote operative paragraph 4 of draft resolution XXV. A recorded vote has been requested.

I shall now put to the vote operative paragraph 5 of draft resolution XXV. A recorded vote has been requested.

I shall now put to the vote draft resolution XXV as a whole. A recorded vote has been requested.

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 89. The Assembly has also thus concluded its consideration of all the reports of the First Committee.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (a) of agenda item 60 and agenda item 60 as a whole?

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 62?

I call on the representative of the United States of America, who wishes to speak in explanation of position on the resolution just adopted.

The United States disassociates itself from the consensus on resolution 63/244 for the reasons that we explained in the Third Committee.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (b) of agenda item 64? (c) Human rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs and representatives Report of the Third Committee (A/63/430/Add.3 and Corr.1) Report of the Fifth Committee (A/63/651) The President (spoke in Spanish): The Assembly will now take action on draft resolution II, recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 29 of its report. The report of the Fifth Committee on the programme budget implications of draft resolution II is contained in document A/63/651. We shall now take a decision on draft resolution II, entitled “Situation of human rights in Myanmar”. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burundi, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Eritrea, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Uruguay Against: Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brunei Darussalam, China, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Egypt, India, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Oman, Russian Federation, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Uzbekistan, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Zimbabwe Abstaining: Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahrain, Barbados, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Colombia, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea- Bissau, Indonesia, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Yemen, Zambia

I now give the floor to the representative of Myanmar, who will speak in explanation of vote.

The exploitation of human rights for political purposes is not acceptable to Myanmar. Our domestic political process has made significant strides with the adoption of a new Constitution by the people of Myanmar through a nationwide referendum. We have been on track to make a smooth transition to democracy and we are determined to proceed with our seven-step political process. We are actively making preparations for multiparty elections, the fifth step of the seven-step road map, which will be held in 2010. The resolution that has just been adopted is particularly objectionable since it delves into areas which, under the Charter, are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of my country. Myanmar cannot allow or accept the blatant interference in our home- grown political process. Therefore, we voted against this highly politicized country-specific resolution. We dissociate ourselves from the resolution and will not be bound by it. In conformity with our foreign policy, we will continue to cooperate with the United Nations and the good offices role of the Secretary-General.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (c) of agenda item 64 and of agenda item 64 as a whole? It was so decided.

The General Assembly has thus concluded its consideration of all the reports of the Third Committee. Report of the Fifth Committee The President (spoke in Spanish): The General Assembly will now consider the reports of the Fifth Committee on agenda items 116, 119, 127, 121 to 123, 125, 126, 129 to 131, 130 together with 131, 139, 148, 118 and 117. I request the Rapporteur of the Fifth Committee, Mr. Patrick Chuasoto of the Philippines, to introduce in one intervention the reports of the Fifth Committee.

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 116.

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 119.

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 127.

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 121.

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 122.

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 123.

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 125.

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 126.

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 129.

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 130.

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 131.

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda items 130 and 131.

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 139.

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 148.

We will now consider the five draft resolutions and two draft decisions contained in documents A/63/648/Add.1 to Add.4. We shall first consider the draft resolution contained in document A/63/648/Add.1. The General Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 8 of its report. For the time being, the text of the draft resolution is contained in document A/C.5/63/L.20. The draft resolution is entitled “Development-related activities”. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We turn next to the draft resolution contained in paragraph 6 of document A/63/648/Add.2. For the time being, the text of the draft resolution is contained in document A/C.5/63/L.21. The draft resolution is entitled “Strengthening of the Department of Political Affairs”. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We turn next to the draft resolution contained in paragraph 6 of document A/63/648/Add.3. For the time being, the text of the draft resolution is contained in document A/C.5/63/L.18. The draft resolution is entitled “Information and communications technology, enterprise resource planning, and security, disaster recovery and business continuity”. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We turn next to draft resolutions I and II and to draft decisions I and II, which are contained in paragraphs 44 and 45, respectively, of document A/63/648/Add.4. For the time being, the text of draft resolution I is contained in document A/C.5/63/L.23. (spoke in English) I give the floor to the representative of France to introduce an amendment to draft resolution I.

On behalf of the European Union, France would like to request a recorded vote on the deletion of paragraph 3 bis of section XI of draft resolution I, which is contained, for the time being, in document A/C.5/63/L.23. The European Union will vote in favour of the deletion of that paragraph.

The representative of France has introduced an oral amendment to paragraph 3 bis of section XI of draft resolution I, by which that paragraph would be deleted. I should like to remind Member States that, in accordance with rule 83 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, decisions on budgetary issues shall be made by a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting. In accordance with rule 90 of the rules of procedure, the Assembly will first take a decision on the amendment proposed by the representative of France. I give the floor to the representative of Lebanon, who wishes to speak in explanation of vote before the voting.

For both procedural and substantive reasons, Lebanon opposes the proposal just made by the representative of France. Procedurally, this paragraph was discussed in the Fifth Committee and that received the support of the Committee. In terms of substance, the paragraph that we proposed is basically in line with the concerns that the delegation of Lebanon raised during the introduction of the reports of the Secretary-General in a formal meeting of the Fifth Committee. The proposed paragraph is also in line with similar concerns and questions that my delegation raised in informal consultations on the draft resolution. The paragraph also responds to the intention expressed by the Secretariat to provide a revised report during the first resumed session of the Assembly. In that regard, we are grateful for the intention expressed by the Secretariat to do so. For all those reasons and other substantive reasons we talked about in the Fifth Committee and in informal consultations, we are against the deletion of the paragraph. We kindly call upon all Member States to vote against the deletion by pressing the red button.

A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Albania, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America Against: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahrain, Barbados, Belarus, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Oman, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia Abstaining: Cameroon, Nigeria, Panama The oral amendment was rejected by 88 votes to 50, with 3 abstentions.

Since the oral amendment introduced by the representative of France has not been adopted, we shall now proceed to consider draft resolution I as a whole. May I take it that the General Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution I?

I call on those representatives wishing to speak in explanation of vote.

The United States regrets that it was forced to vote on this separate paragraph in the draft resolution on estimates in respect of special political missions. Unfortunately, such language only serves to politicize the proceedings and distracts all of us from the important work at hand. My delegation hopes that all delegations will refrain from inserting politically oriented language in draft resolutions concerning administrative and budgetary matters. The work of the Fifth Committee should be focused on financial and management issues, not on issues discussed in other United Nations bodies.

Since the adoption of the 2006-2007 budget on special political missions, my delegation has consistently sought to have a transparent dialogue with the Secretary-General and concerned delegations in order to comply with the relevant legislative mandates related to the budgets of the special representatives of the Secretary-General. To that end, we have been in extensive contact with the Secretary-General and interested delegations to explain our comments. Our observations have been widely understood and supported because they have been realistic, based on concrete facts and related to the political and legal falsehoods that have arisen in the logical framework of the budget of the Special Envoy of the Secretary- General for the implementation of Security Council resolution 1559 (2004). In this respect, we still hold serious doubts and concerns with regard to the gaps between the process for drawing up the budgets of special political missions and the method for rules-based budgeting. During prior sessions, our delegation has expressed its unease regarding the increasing tendency that we have noticed within the Secretariat, whereby the majority of expected accomplishments and indicators of achievement related to special political missions have exceeded or contradicted the legislative mandates on the basis of which those missions were created. This has occurred despite the sensitive nature of the special political missions and activities, which requires the Secretary-General to ensure that proposed budgets are completely in line with the provisions of General Assembly resolution 55/231 in order to avoid one- sided political confusion that would remove these efforts from their neutral context. The way in which these indicators of achievement and expected accomplishments are developed does not reflect the sought-after objectives because paragraph 9 of resolution 55/231, on results- based budgeting, indicates that the Secretary-General must use the expected accomplishments and the indicators of achievement to measure achievements in the implementation of United Nations programmes and not those of individual Member States. Moreover, the presentation of the accomplishments and indicators, in several cases, has not been in line with the rules and regulations governing programme planning. We would like to emphasize once again that the logical framework of the budget of the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for the implementation of Security Council resolution 1559 (2004) is full of political and technical falsehoods. From a technical point of view, the narrative of the budgetary programme of the Special Envoy suffers from the fact that it is not in line with the rules governing results-based budgeting or with the mandate given by the Security Council to the Secretariat. We also note that the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General has exceeded his mandate, thus flouting the guiding principles set out in the Charter of the United Nations. This he did in spite of the fact that my country has repeatedly asked for Charter-based analysis of the indicators of achievement referred to in the budget of the Special Envoy on establishing diplomatic relations among sovereign States. This is a question that has nothing to do with the mandate set out in resolution 1559 (2004) and therefore constitutes interference in the internal affairs of States. It is not in line with resolution 1680 (2006), which stipulates that the establishment of diplomatic relations between two States is a question of a purely bilateral nature. It constitutes a clear violation of paragraph 9 of resolution 55/231, as it measures the actions of States when it is in fact designed to measure the performance of the Secretary-General and not those of Member States. The fact that the Secretariat insists on addressing this issue is a reflection of its determination to violate the oath of office as well as the Charter of the United Nations, paragraph 7 of Article 2 of which states that “Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state.” Moreover, as we have indicated to the Secretariat several times, by violating the rules and regulations of the Organization and eschewing the appropriate approach, those who prepare the budget for the implementation of Security Council resolution 1559 (2004), as well as the expected accomplishments and performance indicators, are neither objective nor neutral, because resolution 1559 (2004) explicitly calls for the withdrawal of foreign troops from Lebanon. In addition, despite the fact that Israel continues to occupy part of Lebanon’s territory, the Secretariat has failed to include the goal of Israeli withdrawal from either the northern part of the village of Al-Ghajar or from Lebanese territory north of the Blue Line, including the village of Kfar Shouba. All this information is included in United Nations reports, which leads me to question further the Secretariat’s discharging of its mandate in this regard. Why is it so passive even as it focuses on bilateral issues that are not within the purview of the United Nations and attempts to deflect attention from the real problems in the region? Those problems have to do with Israel’s practices and the fact that it continues to occupy Arab territories. My delegation is surprised that those who drafted the budget for the implementation of resolution 1559 (2004) should ignore the fact that their job includes monitoring and recording aerial, naval and ground violations of Lebanon’s sovereignty. They have rejected a performance indicator in that regard by stating that the resolution does not call for one. Meanwhile, the mandate of the Special Envoy has been broadened to include the implementation of other Security Council resolutions that have nothing to do with resolution 1559 (2004), despite the fact that other mechanisms already exist to implement those other resolutions. All of that is intended to serve a certain political agenda, of which we are all aware. In resolution 61/252, the General Assembly emphasized coherence between legislative mandates and the structures of special political missions. However, the Secretariat has continued to ignore the resolution and to interpret resolution 1559 (2004) in a manner that distorts the mandate. It has done so by developing performance indicators that interfere in bilateral relations between countries. The Secretary-General has not met the requirements of resolution 1559 (2004), because paragraph 2 of the resolution has not been implemented. That paragraph explicitly calls for the withdrawal of the remaining foreign forces from Lebanon, specifically Israeli forces. The Secretariat has therefore worked around the mandate of resolution 1559 (2004) and has not reflected the ongoing reality that we are all aware of, including the Secretary- General himself, namely, the presence of Israeli forces on Lebanese territory. The Secretariat also ignores daily violations by Israel, which are documented in reports of the Secretary-General, as well as violations of Lebanon’s sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity.

I would kindly like to remind the representative of Syria that the General Assembly has agreed not to discuss the reports in plenary meeting. In addition, the 10 minutes permitted have already elapsed.

Just two more minutes, please, Mr. President. (spoke in Arabic) My country’s delegation therefore asks the Secretary-General to consider the following. First, we have asked that performance indicators pertaining to the establishment of diplomatic links and the demarcation of borders between States be scrapped, for they have nothing to do with the mandate of the Special Envoy and violate the letter and spirit of Security Council resolution 1559 (2004). Secondly, we have asked him to stress the second preambular paragraph of resolution 1559 (2004), in which the Security Council reiterated “its strong support for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized borders”. Performance indicators must therefore be included to reflect Israel’s aerial, ground and naval violations of Lebanon’s sovereignty. Thirdly, we asked the Secretary-General to highlight paragraph 2 of resolution 1559 (2004), in which the Council calls upon all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon. Consequently, there should be a performance indicator on the withdrawal of foreign forces, including from the village of Al-Ghajar and from the area north of the Blue Line, so as to reflect the situation on the ground and bolster the credibility of the Secretary-General vis-à-vis the resolutions that have been adopted on the subject of special political missions. Finally, my delegation requests the Secretary- General to include those comments in his report to the Fifth Committee to be considered during the resumed session. We shall closely follow all developments in that regard.

I should like to remind members that we are taking too much time.

The delegation of Lebanon would like to thank all Member States that voted in favour of retaining the paragraph. We are very grateful to them. The delegation of Lebanon would also like once again to express its appreciation for the intention expressed by the Secretariat to provide a revised report during the first resumed session. In fact, as I have explained, the purpose of our paragraph was just to respond to the intention expressed by the Secretariat, for which we are very thankful. The delegation of Lebanon also believes that positive developments have taken place since the adoption of the previous resolution of the General Assembly on the special political estimates. The resumption of the political dialogue in Lebanon and the recent developments in relations between Lebanon and Syria, specifically progress achieved in the establishment of diplomatic relations and the decision to set up permanent diplomatic missions, are issues that relate to the mandate of the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for the implementation of Security Council resolution 1559 (2004), which is mentioned clearly in that resolution, in resolution 1680 (2006) and related statements by the President of the Council. Those positive developments only prove and attest to the position that we have taken as a delegation over the past three years, as well as to the commitment of all Lebanese to enhancing and strengthening their relations with Syria. It is a commitment that all the Lebanese expressed again in 2006 in their dialogue when they called for the establishment of diplomatic relations between Lebanon and Syria and the resolution of all pending issues between the two countries, including the delineation of their common border. In addition to those developments, Lebanon has a long-standing position that violations of Lebanese sovereignty by Israel and its continued occupation of Lebanese land as we speak today fall within the mandate of the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for the implementation of Security Council resolution 1559 (2004).

Draft resolution II is entitled “Proposed programme budget for the biennium 2008-2009”. For the time being, the text of draft resolution II is contained in document A/C.5/63/L.24. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft decision I is entitled “United Nations Fund for International Cooperation”. For the time being, the text of draft decision I is contained in document A/C.5/63/L.24. The Fifth Committee adopted draft decision I without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft decision II is entitled “Rental of office space in the Secretariat by the Group of 77 and China”. For the time being, the text of draft decision II is contained in document A/C.5/63/L.24. The Fifth Committee adopted draft decision II without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We shall now take a decision on the draft resolution, entitled “Reports of the Office of Internal Oversight Services on its activities”. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda items 128 and 117.

The draft decision is entitled “Questions deferred for future consideration”. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft decision without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise? The President returned to the Chair.

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 117. On behalf of the General Assembly, I would like to thank Mr. Gábor Bródi, Permanent Representative of Hungary to the United Nations and Chairperson of the Fifth Committee, the members of the Bureau and representatives for their good work.

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 71. The General Assembly has thus concluded its consideration of all the reports of the Fifth Committee before it. Programme of work The President (spoke in Spanish): With regard to the programme of work of the General Assembly, apart from organizational matters and items that may have to be considered by operation of the rules of procedure of the Assembly and bearing in mind that consideration and action have already been taken by the Assembly on a majority of items thus far, I should like to inform members that the following items on the agenda remain open for consideration during the sixty-third session of the General Assembly: 9, 12 to 16, 18, 21 to 26, 31, 40, 41, 44, 45, 48, 49 (d), 57, 59, 71, 79, 89, 99, 100, 103 (c), 104 (a) and (c), 105 (d) and (g) to (1), 106, 107, 110 to 113, 114 (a), (h), (p), (q) and (u), 115, 116 (a) to (q), 117 to 149, 152 and 154. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to take note of those items on the agenda that remain open for consideration during the sixty-third session of the Assembly? It was so decided. Statement by the President of the General Assembly The President (spoke in Spanish): I am very pleased to close this year’s work with a very brief report on the work completed at the sixty-third session of the General Assembly to date. This is the final plenary meeting of the main part of the sixty-third session of the General Assembly and, for me, it has been an honour to preside over this busy, dynamic and constructive period of work. At the beginning of the current session, we defined the priorities for this session, which we have been implementing over these past three months. Indeed, the session started as usual in the second half of September with the general debate which, this year, was attended by more heads of State and Government than in recent years. The General Assembly also held a meeting on the special needs of Africa, which gave African countries the opportunity to draw attention to what they really need and not to what others think they need. The Assembly also convened a high-level meeting devoted to the Millennium Development Goals and to the midterm review of the Almaty Programme of Action. In view of the fact that the food and energy crises have been compounded by the ongoing serious financial crisis, the General Assembly organized an interactive round-table discussion on the topic, in which various renowned experts shared their views with member States. On the theme of the culture of peace, the General Assembly held a high-level meeting on interreligous dialogue that was attended by, among others, a number of heads of State and Government. That event highlighted the importance of global values to foster genuine solidarity among peoples that transcends differences in religious beliefs and ethical and philosophical traditions. The Follow-up International Conference on Financing for Development to Review the Implementation of the Monterrey Consensus was held in Doha. The Declaration that came out of that Conference entrusts the governance of international finance to the most representative group, the Group of 192 — that is to say, the General Assembly. That decision is crucial and it is now the duty of this plenary body to endorse and implement it, in particular in view of the current international economic and financial disaster in the wake of the breakdown of the Bretton Woods system. Furthermore, at that international Conference, I announced the establishment of the Commission of Experts of the President of the United Nations General Assembly on Reforms of the International Monetary and Financial System, to be composed of 18 members and tasked with reviewing the workings of the global financial system, including important bodies such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, and suggesting steps to be taken by Member States to secure a more just and sustainable global economic order. The General Assembly celebrated the sixtieth anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We marked the occasion by awarding prizes to prominent human rights advocates and defenders from various parts of the world. Two interactive panels were organized featuring prominent persons in the field of human rights. A declaration was adopted recognizing the progressive nature of human rights, as exemplified by the Optional Protocol to the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, strengthening the enjoyment of collective human rights. With respect to other matters, I should like to recall that, at its sixty-second session, the General Assembly failed to reach consensus on the election of members to the Peacebuilding Commission and therefore extended until 31 December 2008 the term of office of the members of the Assembly with seats on the Organizational Committee of the Commission — Burundi, Chile, Egypt, El Salvador and Fiji. At this sixty-third session, consensus has emerged among the five regional groups regarding the election of members to the Organizational Committee of the Peacebuilding Commission by the General Assembly. At the same time, Haiti and Croatia, the respective Presidents of the Economic and Social Council and the Security Council, have been authorized to conduct consultations on this matter with representatives of troop- contributing countries. It was also agreed that the term of office of the members of the General Assembly on the Commission’s Organizational Committee would begin in January 2009. With regard to Security Council reforms, we moved ahead on the basis of decision 62/557, which, as I said, I intend to implement in letter and spirit. That means giving the Open-ended Working Group the time and freedom it needs, until February 2009, to pave the way towards the intergovernmental negotiations. I am grateful to Mr. Zahir Tanin, Permanent Representative of Afghanistan and one of the Vice-Presidents of the General Assembly, for the considerable support he has been providing me by conducting the delicate relevant consultations on my behalf. I ask all members for their cooperation and assistance in that important task. I look forward with great interest to receiving the results of the consultations. In addition to the work of the General Assembly itself, we have also organized various side events relating to anniversaries and commemorations, to which the Organization has given its firm support. With a view to coordinating efforts, I have met, among many others, with the presidents of the Economic and Social Council and Security Council, the chairpersons of the Main Committees, the coordinators of the different regional groups and with politicians from Member States. The Secretary-General and I decidedly agree on all that needs to be done to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. We have agreed to a comprehensive preparatory process, and I also invite members to set out strategic development priorities to make it possible to achieve and, with genuine desire, even to exceed the Goals. I take this opportunity to thank the Secretary- General and his staff for the support and cooperation they have extended to me. I would also like to thank conference management officials, whose work behind the scenes ensures that the General Assembly operates smoothly. My special thanks go to the facilitators and co-chairpersons, whose dedication and goodwill have made possible the positive results on the issues they took up. Let us use the holidays to re-energize ourselves and return in 2009 with renewed vigour. Our efforts should not flag just because this intensive period has come to an end. To the contrary, we have a busy schedule ahead and there are many important issues that call for dedication and diligence from all of us. I wish everyone very happy holidays. Finally, I wish to convey my warmest greetings and gratitude to our interpreter colleagues. (spoke in English) Merry Christmas to all, and a happy new year.