A/70/PV.116 General Assembly
The meeting was called to order at 10.20 a.m.
14. 2001-2010: Decade to Roll Back Malaria in Developing Countries, Particularly in Africa
Members will recall that the General Assembly considered, in a joint debate, agenda item 66 and its sub-items (a) and (b) and agenda item 14 at its 34th and 35th plenary meeting, on 16 October 2015.
I now give the floor to the representative of Chad to introduce draft resolution A/70/L.62.
As the representative of the country that holds the chairmanship of the African Leaders Malaria Alliance (ALMA), I am pleased to introduce, on behalf of the Group of African States, draft resolution A/70/L.62, entitled “Consolidating gains and accelerating efforts to control and eliminate malaria in developing countries, particularly in Africa, by 2030”.
The draft resolution has been revised for technical reasons, as compared to last year’s resolution 69/325, because of the alignment in commitments agreed upon in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (resolution 70/1). During the negotiations on the draft resolution, we considered the World Health Organization 2015 World Malaria Report, which shows a considerable decrease in malaria throughout the world over the past 15 years. Target 6 (c) of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), on malaria, has been
achieved, and we have seen a 75 per cent decline in 57 countries in the number of malaria cases at the national level by 2013. The decrease in deaths from malaria has made a major contribution to the progress on Target 4 of the MDGs, namely, in the reduction by two thirds of the mortality rate of children under 5 from 1990 to 2015.
Despite that remarkable progress, many challenges remain. Many African countries continue to make inadequate progress in achieving national and international goals. In 2014, the estimate was that 269 million people had no mosquito nets or lived in an unprotected place; 15 million pregnant women at risk of malaria had not received any preventive treatment; and between 68 and 80 million children had not been properly treated.
The African Leaders Malaria Alliance and the Asia-Pacific Leaders Malaria Alliance are fighting to eradicate malaria by 2030. Under the presidency of Mr. Idriss Deby Itno, President of the Republic of Chad, Chairman-in-Office of the African Union and Chairman of the African Leaders Malaria Alliance, the Heads of State and Governments of Africa, at the margins of the African Union Summit held in Kigali in July adopted a new road map to completely eliminate malaria in Africa by 2030. In the 2013 Abuja Declaration, Africa had already planned to eradicate malaria by 2030, and the Abudja Declaration is also a key pillar for the implementation of the African Union 2063 Agenda.
The World Technical Strategy for Malaria 2016- 2030, adopted by the World Health Assembly in May 2015, establishes ambitious, but nevertheless
achievable, objectives by 2030, namely, to reduce by at least 90 per cent cases of malaria and associated mortality cases. According to the WHO, when the intermediate objectives of 2020 and 2025 are realized, almost 3 billion people will be spared from malaria and 10 million lives will be saved, and when the 2030 targets are achieved $4 billion in additional economic benefits are expected.
The achievement of the intermediary goals is the target of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in terms of fighting malaria. It will involve new intensified interventions, which have been tried and tested — the strengthening of monitoring systems and ensuring continued investment in research and development — and will lead to the necessary innovations in terms of tools and methods. That will also contribute to fighting infectious diseases, such as the Zika virus.
An impact study of expenditures shows that an investment of $1 per capita to fight malaria in Africa leads to a per capita increase of the national gross domestic product of $6.75. The increase in national expenditures will therefore have to be supported by increased external funding, especially in countries where the heavy burden of malaria is accompanied from the outset by low levels of per capita incomes, which means the population lives in a very fragile situation or in a situation of crisis. Therefore, we have especially to strengthen health systems and meet the resistance to medication and insecticide by seeking in particular to provide countries suffering from malaria with infrastructure, health-care services, monitoring and laboratory services. A working mechanism for data collection so they can respond rapidly and effectively is also needed during malaria outbreaks. We encourage the sharing at the interregional level of knowledge, experience and lessons learned in the framework of fighting malaria and its eradication, particularly involving Africa, the Asia-Pacific and the Latin American regions.
In conclusion, I thank all Member States for their constructive participation in the negotiation process and for their active support, which signals their commitment to eradicate malaria by 2030.
The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/70/L.62, entitled “Consolidating gains and accelerating efforts to
control and eliminate malaria in developing countries, particularly in Africa, by 2030”.
I now give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.
I should like to announce that, since the submission of the draft resolution, in addition to those delegations listed in document A/70/L.62, the following countries have also become sponsors of the draft resolution: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Greece, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Lithuania, Monaco, Myanmar, Serbia, Sweden, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Turkey.
May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/70/L.62.
20. Sustainable development Oceans and the law of the sea (a) Oceans and the law of the sea
Vote:
70/303
Consensus
Draft resolution A/70/L.62 was adopted (resolution 70/300)
Vote:
70/300
Consensus
34. Preventing armed conflict (b) Strengthening the role of mediation in the peaceful settlement of disputes, conflict prevention and resolution
Vote:
70/304
Consensus
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 14?
It was so decided.
15. Integrated and coordinated implementation of and follow-up to the outcomes of the major United Nations conferences and summits in the economic, social and related fields
Vote:
70/301
Consensus
Members will recall that the Assembly considered agenda item 15, jointly with agenda items 116 and 123, at its 52nd plenary meeting, on 13 November 2015. Members will recall that the General Assembly considered agenda item 15 at its 75th and 82nd plenary meetings, on 14 and 23 December 2015, retroactively, and adopted resolution 70/110 under this item. Members will also recall that the Assembly considered the item at its 19th plenary meeting, on 1 April, and adopted resolution 70/259 under this item. Members will further recall that the Assembly considered the item at its 112th plenary meeting, on 25 July 2016, and adopted resolution 70/293.
I now give the floor to the representative of Germany to introduce draft resolution A/70/L.63.
First, let me first thank my colleague from Gabon, Ambassador Baudelaire Ndong Ella, the United Nations Group of Friends on Poaching and Illicit Wildlife Trafficking and all other supporters for their strong commitment to this significant issue and for the constructive work atmosphere in preparing this draft resolution.
The General Assembly adopted the first-ever resolution (resolution 69/314) on tackling illicit trafficking in wildlife on 30 July 2015 — you mentioned it, Mr. President. Since then, we have raised global awareness remarkably and put this topic back on the agenda. But despite that success, the statistics on poaching and illicit wildlife trafficking are reaching all- time highs. That is an entirely unacceptable situation.
The global illegal wildlife trade is valued at approximately $19 billion annually. That makes it the fourth-largest sector of the illegal trade, following narco-trafficking, human trafficking and product piracy. As we speak, four to five elephants are being poached in African countries. According to the first- ever report of the Secretary-General on tackling illicit trafficking in wildlife, published in June, 100 elephants are poached per day, adding up to a very sad 40,000 elephants annually out of a total remaining population of only 500,000. That means 8 per cent of the world’s elephant population is being killed by poaching every year. In addition, in 2015, a deplorable record high of 1,500 rhinos were poached. Those iconic species draw much attention, but many lesser-known species are also brutally exploited. Wildlife is in more danger than ever, despite all our efforts at the regional, national and international levels. Clearly, that is not acceptable. If poaching numbers continue to increase in that way, elephants, rhinos and many other species may face global extinction during our lifetime. The time for action is now, not tomorrow.
Equally disturbing are the negative political, economic, social and environmental effects of illicit traffic in wildlife. The scale and nature of wildlife crime must be seen as a pressing global problem that requires shared solutions at all levels. The World Wildlife Crime Report: Trafficking in protected species, issued by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime in May, identifies wildlife traffickers from more than 80 nations. That illustrates that wildlife crime is a truly global challenge. All regions of the world are implicated, either as a source, as a transit or as a destination of the illegal wildlife trade. No Government, country,
region or agency working alone will be able to succeed in suppressing it. The need for an enhanced collective effort within and among States, regions and agencies is obvious. That includes working across source, transit and destination States and tackling both demand and supply. The fight against wildlife crime is our common, shared responsibility.
In September 2015 we agreed on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (resolution 70/1). Target 15.7 calls on Member States to take
“urgent action to end poaching and trafficking of protected species of flora and fauna and address both demand and supply of illegal wildlife products”.
In addition, target 15.c calls for enhanced
“global support for efforts to combat poaching and trafficking of protected species”.
As a consequence of the resolution adopted in July 2015, many countries have undertaken further actions to combat illicit trafficking in wildlife by strengthening legislation. However, one third of Member States still responded in a United Nations survey that illicit trafficking in wildlife would not be treated as a serious crime under their national legislation. We must ensure the full implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora and the draft resolution before us. The report of the Secretary- General offers a range of further measures we all can apply to fight the illegal wildlife trade.
In conclusion, together we have been successful in raising much-needed attention to this topic. Now it is up to all of us to maintain the momentum to ensure a significant and immediate reduction of the alarming numbers I mentioned earlier. It is our responsibility to ensure the survival of many endangered species. We stand ready to continue the fight against illicit wildlife trafficking and, with all our support, we will ensure that this topic remains a priority on the international agenda. In this case, too, the words of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon must come true: 2015 was the year of commitment, 2016 must be the year of implementation.
I now give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.
The present statement
is made in accordance with rule 153 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly.
By paragraph 4 of draft resolution A/70/L.63, the General Assembly would request the Secretary- General, taking into account Economic and Social Council resolution 2013/40, to present, based on inputs from Member States and other relevant stakeholders, updated information to the Assembly at its seventy- first session on the global status of illicit trafficking in wildlife, including poaching and the illegal trade, and on the implementation of the present draft resolution and to present proposals for possible future action.
The implementation of the request in paragraph 4 of the draft resolution would require extrabudgetary resources in the amount of $71,000 for the preparation and translation into all six languages of one report. The activities related to the request in paragraph 4 of the draft resolution would be carried out provided that the extrabudgetary resources mentioned are made available. Accordingly, the adoption of draft resolution A/70/L.63 would not give rise to any financial implications under the programme budget.
The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution A/70/L.63, entitled “Tackling illicit trafficking in wildlife”.
I give the floor again to the representative of the Secretariat.
I should like to announce that, since the submission of the draft resolution, in addition to those delegations listed in document A/70/L.63, the following countries have also become sponsors of A/70/L.63: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Chad, Georgia, Liechtenstein, Madagascar, Malaysia, Malta, Monaco, the Republic of Moldova, Serbia and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
May I take it that the Assembly wishes to adopt draft resolution A/70/L.63?
Draft resolution A/70/L.63 was adopted (resolution 70/301).
Before giving the floor to the speaker in explanation of position, I remind delegations that explanations are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.
The United Kingdom is proud to sponsor this important resolution
on tackling illicit trafficking in wildlife. We would like to thank and congratulate Gabon and Germany once more for their continued dedication and hard work in bringing people and countries together on this pressing issue.
The first-ever General Assembly resolution on the illegal wildlife trade (resolution resolution 69/314), adopted last year, was a milestone. It demonstrated a powerful and growing consensus that the illegal wildlife trade was an issue worthy of global attention at the highest levels of Government. It is an issue that calls out for global cooperation across Governments, sectors, regions and continents. We know why it is important. Some of our most iconic species are being driven to the point of extinction. Organized criminal networks are making untold profits. Rangers are being killed. The impacts are wide-reaching — corruption, criminality, decreased chances for sustainable livelihoods — and could be permanent. Once these animals are gone, they are gone for good.
The United Kingdom therefore welcomes this resolution on illicit trafficking of wildlife and remains firmly committed to working with our international partners to end this abhorrent trade. It is vital that we build momentum. The Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, to be held later this month, will be a significant milestone and an opportunity to take international efforts further. Then, on 17 November, Viet Nam will host the third global high-level conference on the illegal wildlife trade in Hanoi, to follow the London and Kasane Conferences on the Illegal Wildlife Trade. That will be a crucial opportunity to uphold the high-level political momentum that this issue so urgently requires. The United Kingdom is pleased to support the conference.
Resolution 70/302, which we have just adopted, shows clearly that we are making progress in our recognition of the issue and in our resolve to act. It is an important and reassuring signal of global commitment that the battle has not been won, and it is vital that we redouble our efforts and act now to reverse the catastrophic loss of wildlife through the illegal trade.
The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 15.
15. Integrated and coordinated implementation of and follow-up to the outcomes of the major United Nations conferences and summits in the economic, social and related fields. Follow-up to the outcome of the Millennium Summit
Members will recall that, under agenda items 15 and 116, the Assembly held the United Nations Summit for the adoption of the post-2015 development agenda, at its 4th to 12th plenary meetings, from 25 to 27 September 2015, and adopted resolution 70/1 at its 4th plenary meeting, on 25 September 2015. Members will also recall that the Assembly considered in joint debate agenda items 15, 116 and 123, at its 52nd plenary meeting, on 13 November 2015.
Members will further recall that the Assembly considered agenda items 15 and 116, at its 81st plenary meeting, on 21 December 2015, and adopted decision 70/539; at its 93rd plenary meeting, on 27 April 2016, and adopted resolution 70/262; at its 108th plenary meeting, on 30 June 2016, and adopted resolution 70/290; and at its 114th plenary meeting, on 29 July 2016, and adopted resolution 70/299.
As members all know, the current crisis related to migration and refugees has caused the worst humanitarian crisis since the Second World War. The numbers are staggering, and the genuine loss and pain these people are suffering should be unbearable for all of us. As we speak today, millions of Syrian civilians continue to suffer, and basic humanitarian assistance is denied to millions more right across the world. It is frustrating to see that, despite the generosity of some, in a global economy worth more than $77 trillion, somehow we are not even able to fill a humanitarian funding gap of $10 to $15 billion. It is equally frustrating that we have not been able to end the conflicts and the disgraceful attacks on civilians that are at the root of much of today’s displacement.
In January, I joined the Secretary-General in Dubai for the launch of the report of the High-level Panel on Humanitarian Financing, and during the first six months of this year I visited refugees in Jordan, Ethiopia and Turkey. As members know, the Assembly, in close cooperation with the Secretary-General, has been working hard to address the crisis. In both plenary and informal General Assembly meetings, including
the humanitarian response in Africa and through the World Humanitarian Summit in Istanbul, on which I once again congratulate the Secretary-General and the Turkish host, we have sought to bring forward a better, more just, more equitable and more comprehensive response. The high-level meeting of the General Assembly to be held on 19 September will build on the achievements of those endeavours.
I wish to sincerely congratulate Her Excellency Mrs. Dina Kawar, former Permanent Representative of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, and His Excellency Mr. David Donoghue, Permanent Representative of Ireland, for ably and resolutely leading the negotiations on the modalities and the draft outcome of the high- level meeting. I also wish to thank civil society and others within this cause to reach higher. Of course, I wish to thank Member States for their commitment to bringing the negotiations to a successful conclusion.
Members today have the opportunity to transmit draft resolution A/70/L.61, which contains the draft outcome document, entitled “New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants”, for adoption by Heads of State and Government and other high-level representatives on 19 September. In doing so, let us recall that the United Nations was created 70 years ago with the fundamental purpose of promoting peace, protecting vulnerable populations and ensuring human rights. The draft New York Declaration reflects the collective commitment of the international community to pursue that objective.
We must ensure that the issue of large movements of refugees and migrants continues to be the subject of our focus and engagement. We must continue the strong cooperation by all concerned in finalizing the two compacts and preparing the international conference on migration, and we must not allow our commitment to some of the world’s most vulnerable people to weaken.
We shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/70/L.61.
I call on the representative of Ireland on a point of order.
I have a small point of order. But first, on behalf of the co-facilitators, may I also take this opportunity to thank Member States for their constructive engagement and excellent cooperation over the past several months as we negotiated the modalities and the draft declaration for the 19 September summit on large movements of refugees
and migrants. Ambassadors Donoghue and Kawar are also very grateful for the support they received during the negotiations from the broader United Nations system, as well as for the important contribution by civil society.
On the point of order, with reference to draft resolution A/70/L.61, when processing the document editorially, it was initially agreed that the reference to the name of the office-holder in paragraph 62 of the draft declaration and in paragraph 13 of appendix II would be omitted, in order to align with common practice. It is now proposed to revert to the text as agreed by consensus on 2 August by reinserting the name of the office holder, Peter Sutherland, in both cases. If agreed, I understand that the draft outcome document contained in draft resolution A/70/L.61, which will be transmitted to the high-level meeting on 19 September for adoption, as noted, will reflect those revisions. A number of Member States have made very clear their wish to see that change made.
The 19 September summit will be a critically important and timely event. For the first time ever, the 193 States Members of the United Nations will come together to comprehensively and collectively address the global challenge of large movements of refugees and migrants. The commitments that we have agreed together, along with the draft global compacts on refugees and migrants to be adopted within two years, have the potential to improve the lives of millions of people around the world who need protection and support to live in safety and dignity.
Finally, warm thanks are due to you, Mr. President, and your Office for your steadfast support, trust and advice during this process. Please accept our thanks and every good wish as your term of office draws to a close.
I understand that there is a request for an oral amendment to draft resolution A/70/L.61 to include the name of Peter Sutherland, Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Migration, in paragraph 62 of the draft declaration and in paragraph 13 of appendix II. That proposal — reinserting the name of the office-holder in both places — would revert to the draft text agreed upon by consensus on 2 August.
May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt resolution A/70/L.61, as orally revised?
Draft resolution A/70/L.61, as orally revised, was adopted (resolution 70/302).
I shall now give the floor to speakers who wish to make statements following the adoption of resolution 70/302.
I now give the floor to the observer of the European Union.
I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member States.
Let me warmly congratulate you, Sir, on the successful outcome of the negotiations on the draft political declaration and its two appendices (resolution 70/302, annex) for the 19 September high-level meeting of the General Assembly, including the oral revision, which was just been agreed to, at the request of Ireland and others. Let me in particular thank the co-facilitators and their teams for their efforts to bring about a successful conclusion in this important exercise.
We note with satisfaction that the negotiations and the summit itself reflect growing awareness of the truly global nature of refugee and migrant issues, as well as an understanding of the need for global consensus and cooperation. The high-level meeting will mark a unique and important moment in which the international community will come together to affirm the shared responsibility in responding to large flows of migrants and refugees. We are pleased to see the notion of responsibility-sharing and the importance of international cooperation in response to migration and refugee flows reflected in the draft outcome document. The establishment of a global compact for refugees and a global compact for safe, orderly and regular migration in the upcoming two years will be an important next step in moving this important agenda forward. We believe our strong participation will emphasize and confirm our steadfast political commitment and major contributions to the effective management of related issues in all their facets, in the name of human dignity and in line with our international humanitarian and human rights obligations.
While recognizing the efforts of the co-facilitators in finding common ground, the European Union and its member States regret that the consultations period did not allow more time to consider issues that would have benefited from further reflection. We would therefore like to clarify our understanding of certain points.
We would like to take this opportunity to express a clarification with respect to paragraph 33 as it currently stands. Although in some exceptional cases the detention of children might be required for the purpose of determining migration status, we reiterate that the detention of children should be used only as a measure of last resort, in the least restricted setting, for the shortest possible period of time, and with full respect for the human rights of the child taken into account, as a primary consideration, in the best interests of the child.
We are fully committed to promoting, protecting and respecting the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all migrants, particularly children, regardless of their status, and to upholding mainstream labour standards for regular migrant workers as we do for any worker in our own countries. It is our understanding that paying attention to the application of minimum labour standards for migrant workers regardless of status does not carry any responsibilities to provide residence permits to irregular migrants. With regard to the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, the European Union and its member States believe that the legal frameworks in place within the European Union provide equivalent or greater protection for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of migrant workers as compared with the Convention.
In paragraphs 42 and 58 and the reference to all States’ obligations to readmit their own nationals, we believe that this obligation is essential for a well- functioning global migration management system. Any interpretation of these two points must be in line with the wording of paragraph 35 of resolution 68/141, adopted by the General Assembly on 18 December 2013, which emphasizes the obligation of all States to accept the return of their nationals and calls upon all States to facilitate the return of any person who has been determined not to be in need of international protection. We welcome the wording on enhanced cooperation with respect to return and readmission and reiterate that a well-functioning system of cooperation in this field is indeed conducive for expanding and creating new legal avenues for migration, which is mutually beneficial and can in turn promote people-to-people contact.
We recognize the International Organization for Migration (IOM) as the global lead organization on migration. The integration of the IOM into the United Nations system and the development of the
global compact on migration are two processes that will strengthen cooperation on migration issues at the global level. We are committed to actively engaging in those processes.
We welcome a change in title, which makes it more intelligible, including to the wider public. While we understand that introducing a title is a prerogative of the President of the General Assembly, we would welcome broader consultations on such issues in future.
Lastly, we would like to reaffirm our commitment to ensuring the effective implementation of the draft political declaration and to reaffirm our engagement in the upcoming negotiations on a draft global compact for migration to be concluded by 2018. We look forward to the high-level meeting on addressing large movements of refugees and migrants on 19 September.
Before giving the floor to speakers in explanation of position, may I remind delegations that explanations of position are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.
Today, the world of migration and protection-of-refugees issues is changing rapidly, as those issues are becoming increasingly acute. Despite the efforts undertaken by the international community and States themselves, the gravity of migration issues is not diminishing, which burdens us with the task of further strengthening international cooperation so as to develop new joint comprehensive approaches to finding the optimal economic, social and political solutions to such issues. In that regard, we fully support the initiative of holding, on 19 September, a high-level plenary meeting of the General Assembly to address large movements of refugees and migrants. We also support most of the provisions set out in the draft outcome document (resolution 70/302, annex) that we are transmitting to the seventy-first session of the General Assembly today.
We are grateful to the co-facilitators of the negotiation process for their efforts in achieving compromise. In our understanding, agreement on the draft outcome document without disseminating the final version for approval through the so-called silence procedure does not harm the established United Nations practice of using that procedure in similar cases. We will insist on adherence to it henceforth.
It is understood that any formulation of the draft outcome document, as well as actions aimed at its implementation, cannot run counter to the fundamental humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, objectivity and independence, nor can it violate the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States or be implemented without the agreement of the countries involved. In our view, the current difficult migration situation, first and foremost in European countries, is the fallout of irresponsible interference into the internal affairs of sovereign States in the Middle East and North Africa, their destabilization and the forceful removal of undesirable Governments. That has led to a collapse in nationhood, humanitarian catastrophes, civil wars and the rise of terrorism. All that has made life in those regions untenable due both to the threat that posed to human lives and to the disregard for human rights and fundamental freedoms, which has led to massive outflows of refugees and migrants from that region. We believe that States actively participating in such interference must be held primarily responsible for providing aid to the victims, refugees and forced migrants.
It is our understanding that none of the provisions in the draft outcome document, including those relating to so-called shared responsibility, create additional international, legal and financial obligations. That is equally true of the provisions dealing with issues relating to relocating refugees.
Of course, what I have said here does not mean that we are distancing ourselves from solving issues of refugees and migrants. We continue to contribute significantly to international cooperation for development realized within United Nations specialized bodies. We also support the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in the fulfilment of the functions entrusted to him.
I would like, first of all, to express our appreciation to the co-facilitators, Ambassadors Dina Kawar and David Donoghue, and thank them for their efforts and leadership throughout the drafting process. The draft outcome document (resolution 70/302, annex), together with its appendices, which will be adopted at the highest level next week by the General Assembly, is indeed the result of a complex process and many compromises along the way. While we acknowledge the consensus reached on the draft document, now entitled the “New York Declaration for
Refugees and Migrants”, my delegation would like to make the following remarks.
Lebanon believes equitable international burden- and responsibility-sharing to be indispensable when responding to mass displacements of refugees, particularly in the attempt to meet refugees’ needs in terms of shelter, food and essential services, such as access to water supplies, sanitation, electricity, education and basic health care. That can best be achieved through the provision of direct humanitarian and development assistance to host countries, including through United Nations entities operating at the country level.
Lebanon reaffirms that the priority goal should remain the return of refugees to their countries. In that regard, Lebanon reaffirms its respect for the principles of non-refoulement in accordance with international refugee law, and will continue to provide international protection to all those who qualify for refugee status on its territory until the return to their countries becomes possible. Furthermore, Lebanon believes that, in exercise of their right to return, refugees decide to go back to their homeland even before political solutions are achieved, they should be allowed to do so without any impediment. That is how Lebanon understands the contents of paragraph 76 of the draft outcome document.
Lebanon is a small country with limited resources and territorial space. It has one of the highest population densities in the world and has been, for over 150 years, a country of emigration, not immigration. Lebanon is therefore not in a position to accept the integration, naturalization or any other form of permanent resettlement of refugees on its territory. With more than 1.2 million registered Syrian refugees — and for more than seven decades over 400,000 Palestinian refugees — Lebanon is today the country with the world’s highest ratio of refugees and displaced persons, both per capita and per square kilometre. As a result, Lebanon faces humanitarian challenges that go way beyond its capacities and which could threaten its very existence.
It is our hope that the high-level debate next week will raise awareness of the challenges faced by countries hosting large movements of refugees, like Lebanon, and the necessity to recommit at a global level to the principles of equitable burden- and responsibility- sharing, particularly with developing countries. We look forward to a successful and fruitful meeting.
Mexico welcomes the adoption of the draft outcome document (resolution 70/302, annex), entitled New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants. The draft document represents a watershed in the way in which we respond to the multidimensional reality of migration. We recognize and commend the difficult work of the co-facilitators, Ambassadors Donoghue and Kawar. Building consensus among Member States regarding migrants’ human rights continues to be a strategic priority of my Government. However, Mexico regrets that some aspects of the draft declaration are not sufficiently strong, which leads us to this explanation of position.
The Mexican Government believes that the draft New York declaration identifies important commitments at each stage of migration. We must continue to work towards its implementation in order to create a virtuous cycle of migration.
While Mexico welcomes the commitments regarding border controls based on full respect for human rights and the rights of refugees, it is our view that the most recent resolutions of the General Assembly and of the Human Rights Council on this issue must continue to inform future discussions in the light of the draft declaration.
Mexico is a country of origin, transit and destination and return of migrants, which include unaccompanied boys, girls and adolescents. We reaffirm the findings of the Committee on the Rights of the Child as set forth in paragraph 86 and recommendation 79 of its General Comment No. 6 (CRC/GC/2005/6), particularly the need to identify a durable solution that addresses all unaccompanied children’s protection needs and consider their best interests in any determination of immigration status. Following a rights-based approach, the search for a durable solution commences with analysing the possibility of family reunification. The punitive detention of minors due to their parents’ immigration status is a violation of children’s rights. Member States will have to explore and promote alternatives to such detention, working hand in hand with civil society to ensure that minors have access to education, health care and psychosocial support. We hope to see greater commitment in that regard in the future.
We are convinced that the United Nations is the ideal forum for managing migration with a human face. The upcoming negotiations towards a global compact
for safe, orderly and regular migration represents a historic opportunity to show that the United Nations can meet those expectations. Mexico warmly welcomes the holding of an international conference for the adoption of such a text in 2018. Although it is not reflected in the draft outcome, we would like to repeat our offer to host a preparatory conference on the topic. We call upon all Member States, the Secretariat, the International Organization for Migration and civil society to work with resolve, transparency and ambition to reach a global compact.
At the outset, we would like to welcome the transmittal of the draft New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants (resolution 70/302, annex). Due to the complexity of the issue, there have been many differences of opinion among Member States. We particularly thank the co-facilitators, Ambassadors Donoghue and Kawar, as well as the Secretariat, for leading the difficult negotiations towards consensus. We sincerely hope that the adoption of the draft declaration at the highest level at the summit will be an important step towards resolving this global challenge. I would like to make a few points on the draft declaration.
First, Japan regrets that the draft declaration focuses only on the cross-border movements of people and could not shed light on internally displaced persons (IDPs). The international community, including the United Nations, should further address the plight of IDPs.
Secondly, we welcome the fact that the draft declaration stresses the importance of improving the self-reliance and resilience of host countries and communities through strengthening the humanitarian development nexus. Japan also shares the view that the international community should support host countries and communities through burden- and responsibility- sharing.
Lastly, I would like to add a few words on the financial implications of the draft declaration. Although we support the draft declaration, Japan would like to express its serious concern that, even as we speak, Member States are not yet informed about the details of its extra-budgetary implications. We understand that the additional resource requirements of the draft declaration are partly subject to future negotiations among Member States, such as the modality of the negotiations on a draft gobal compact for safe, orderly
and regular migration. However, there could have been an informal way to provide information related to probable financial implications, to the extent that the Secretariat was then aware. Since we adopted resolution 70/302 without knowing its additional budgetary requirements, we strongly expect that the additional costs for the Secretariat in implementing the draft outcome document will be reduced as much as possible and absorbed into the budget for the 2016- 2017 biennium. We expect that the issue will be further discussed in the Fifth Committee.
First, I would like to thank you, Mr. President, and acknowledge the effort invested by the co-facilitators and Member States in producing the draft outcome document of the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants (resolution 70/302, annex). Israel is deeply sensitive to the unprecedented numbers of refugees and migrants that the world has witnessed in recent years and is aware of the impetus behind the important draft declaration we have agreed to transmit today.
The State of Israel has absorbed hundreds of thousands of refugees since its founding. The Jewish people, in its long history, are all too familiar with the trials and hardships of the refugee and migrant experience. Therefore, we feel genuine solidarity with the plight of today’s refugees and migrants, and intimately understand the destabilizing effects of and the personal toll taken by such massive levels of human mobility.
At the same time, Israel is a society that is a living testimony to the many blessings and the richness of diversity that migrant communities bring to the countries that absorb them. Israel recognizes the need for a coordinated and thoughtful response to that phenomenon at the international level. We also recognize the central role that the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in particular can play in helping to find durable solutions to refugee situations, as recognized in the draft outcome document and its appendices. As the draft document acknowledges, the response needs to show sensitivity and flexibility while taking account of
“different national realities, capacities and levels of development and respecting national policies and priorities.” (resolution 70/302, annex, para. 21)
Large movements of refugees and migrants demand an international response that is humane, effective
and respectful while, at the same time, respecting the right of States to manage and control their borders and ensure security, prosperity and stability within them. It is important to note — as stipulated in the draft document we have agreed to transmit today — that the draft outcome document and its appendices constitute a political declaration that does not establish or recognize any new legal rights or obligations.
The draft outcome document and its appendices also recognize that each refugee and migrant situation is different in nature and should be addressed with attention to its specific circumstances, with a view to adopting mechanisms and solutions that respond to, and take account of, the particular political context, the practical reality on the ground and the legitimate needs and interests of all those affected by the specific situation. That is why international legal and policy approaches to large-scale refugee and migrant situations must in practice advance a flexible and practical response that considers a variety of options, including integration, resettlement in third countries, repatriation to the country of nationality and a wide range of factors and variables.
Israel views the draft outcome document and its annex as a call to action to respond to the recent wave of refugee and migrant populations, in a manner that is sensitive, non-dogmatic and practical. We look forward to contributing to the advancement of the document’s goals in that spirit.
Cuba joins the consensus on resolution 70/302 in adopting the draft outcome document, whose annex contains the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants, although we believe that the Declaration should address the causes of the high number of refugees and migrants directly and more thoroughly. We believe that those who provoke or help to foment international armed conflicts should shoulder the burdens and responsibilities of dealing with refugees. Only genuine international cooperation will enable us to help both the countries taking in refugees and refugees’ countries of origin.
Where migrants are concerned, the Declaration should address the negative brain-drain effect that irregular and unregulated migration can have on developing countries, and which does not help such countries achieve their internationally agreed-on development goals. The Declaration should condemn
Member States’ use of selective and discriminatory policies that encourage unregulated migration and cause irregular flows that create problems for countries of transit and render migrants vulnerable to human- trafficking networks. In that regard, it should directly address the effects of the Cuban Adjustment Act of the United States, and in particular the implementation of the so-called wet-foot, dry-foot policy, which treats Cubans differently from anyone else in the world by admitting them immediately and automatically to the United States, regardless of the ways and means whereby they enter its territory and even if they are illegal. The policy encourages illegal emigration from Cuba to the United States and constitutes a violation of the letter and spirit of existing migration accords under which both countries have an obligation to ensure legal, safe and orderly migration.
Similarly, Cuba asserts that the Declaration should have asked for an end to the Cuban Medical Professional Parole Program in the United States, which encourages Cuban doctors and other health workers to abandon their missions in third countries and to emigrate to the United States. It is a reprehensible practice designed to damage Cuban cooperation programmes and deprive Cuba and many other countries in need of vital human resources.
I would first like to congratulate the co-facilitators and all of us on a successful conclusion to the negotiations on the draft outcome document of the high-level plenary meeting of the General Assembly on addressing large movements of refugees and migrants (resolution 70/302, annex). Nepal fully understands how important and urgent it is to deal effectively with the sensitive issues consequent on the situations that are at the root of large movements of refugees and migrants, and yet how difficult it is to find ways to do so. My delegation has followed the negotiations with great interest, since the issue is one that is central to Nepal as a host to one of the world’s most protracted refugee problems and a country about one tenth of whose population is made up of migrant workers from outside the country. In the light of this, we really appreciate the efforts made by all delegations to arrive at consensus on the draft document. Nonetheless, my delegation wishes to register the following concerns.
Developing countries that host large numbers of refugees should be considered in the light of their capacity to do so and to make the commitments included in the draft outcome document. The commitments that
are expected of such countries may not be feasible in practice. We also believe that nothing in the draft document should be construed as a binding alternative instrument for countries that are not party to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. Nor should it eliminate the autonomy and right to their own policies of individual States for decisions on such issues as their national capacity, economy, environmental consideration, geopolitical sensitivities and domestic imperatives demand.
The scale of resources required to address the problems that come with large movements of refugees and migrants is very high. If such resources are mobilized at the cost of providing development aid to least-developed countries (LDCs) and others in special situations, they may involuntarily risk increasing the numbers of migrants and refugees due to the direct effects on the economies and related political issues in these countries.
Refugees and migrants are not synonymous. They are distinct from one another and should be treated as such. We should always take into account the fact that not all migrants are refugees. Any provision that downplays that reality may make its implementation unrealistic, and no provisions should leave room for justification of any forceful eviction of citizens.
We agree that every possible effort should be made to ensure that all the basic rights of refugees and migrants are protected, but seeking such assurances from LDCs or vulnerable host countries whose own citizens are themselves far from possessing such rights is counter-productive and blames them for a lack of resources and capacity. We therefore believe that the specific national circumstances and conditions of countries such as Nepal should be taken into account and an enhanced level of international cooperation provided in order to bridge the resource gap.
When we draft outcome documents such as these, we should aim to reach a consensus that can stand the test of time, changing landscapes, shifting problems and likely scenarios that indicate that a country’s status may change over time. Regarding issues relating to status, residency and nationality, we should be aware that the same country may simultaneously be a place of origin, destination or transit for different groups of migrants. There is no guarantee that a place of origin will not be a destination too, or vice versa. Our texts should reflect that perspective as well. Where refugee
and migrant populations are manmade, they should be the responsibility of the country that has been the cause, not the country where they reside. We respect the right of refugees to return to their own countries. In case of political refugees, the problem cannot be fully addressed if the countries of origin take a back seat.
Nepal is not yet a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention and its optional Protocol. Despite that, on humanitarian grounds, we have hosted refugees and provided them with all the necessary support and favourable environments within our capacity to do so. Nepal has always respected the principle of non-refoulement, while making every effort to protect and promote refugees’ dignity and well-being. The international community should make every effort to avoid situations where those who reject refugees are silently encouraged while those who extend support to them on humanitarian grounds are burdened with additional commitments. Nor should those who wish to return to their countries in safety and dignity be forced to accept citizenship of their host countries or to resettle elsewhere.
We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote for this meeting.
We will now hear statements after the adoption of the resolution.
The United States is pleased to join consensus on resolution 70/302 before us, which decides to transmit the draft outcome document of the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants to the General Assembly at its seventy-first session for adoption at the high-level plenary meeting on addressing large movements of refugees and migrants, to be held on 19 September. In doing so, we reiterate the comments that we made at the adoption of the Declaration and its two annexes on 2 August. We will transmit a written explanation of the United States position on the text to the Secretary- General separately for inclusion in the official record under the relevant agenda item.
We also welcome the reinsertion of the name of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for International Migration and Development, Peter Sutherland, and note also that we have concerns about the number of substantive changes to the text.
On behalf of the Bangladesh delegation, I would like to congratulate
and thank you, Sir. I would also like to congratulate the co-facilitators, Ambassadors Dina Kawar and David Donoghue, for their leadership and also all Member States for their substantive engagement during the negotiations and the successful outcome. We express our sincere thanks to the co-facilitators for their attempts in upholding the consensus, which was achieved during the negotiations. We would also like to welcome the reinsertion of the name of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, a consensus reached during the negotiations.
Now we should look forward and work together for a successful high-level meeting on 19 September and the adoption of the New York Declaration, which will ultimately culminate in the adoption of the global compact for migrants and refugees through an inclusive intergovernmental process.
We have now heard the last speaker on this item.
I would like to express my sincere thanks to Ambassadors David Donoghue of Ireland and Dina Kawar of Jordan, the co-facillitators of the intergovernmental negotiations, who demonstrated great political acumen in their conduct of the complex discussion in the negotiations. I also thank all Member States for their valuable contributions to reaching an agreement on resolution 70/302.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 15 and agenda item 116?
It was so decided.
The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/70/L.64, entitled “Modalities for the United Nations Conference to Support the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development”.
I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.
The present statement is made in accordance with rule 153 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly.
In paragraphs 1 and 2 of draft resolution A/70/L.64, the General Assembly would decide that the high-level United Nations Conference to Support the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development, shall be convened at United Nations Headquarters from 5 to 9 June 2017, in view of the exceptional circumstances; and also decide that the Governments of Fiji and Sweden shall retain co-hosting responsibilities by assuming the costs of the conference and its preparatory process.
Pursuant to the request contained in paragraph 2, it is understood that the Governments of Fiji and Sweden would be responsible for co-hosting the high-level United Nations Conference to Support the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development, and would assume all the costs associated with the Conference and its preparatory Process.
Accordingly, the adoption of draft resolution A/70/L.64 would not give rise to any financial implications under the programme budget for the biennium of 2016-2017.
Mr. Zinsou (Benin), Vice-President, took the Chair.
The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/70/L.64, entitled “Modalities for the United Nations Conference to Support the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development”. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt the draft resolution?
Draft resolution A/70/L.64 was adopted (resolution 70/303).
Before giving the floor to delegations that wish to explain their position on the resolution just adopted, I remind Assembly members that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.
We take this
opportunity to express our unconditional solidarity with the people of our brother country Fiji, confronted by the natural disaster that recently impacted its shores. We trust that they will emerge stronger from their unfortunate circumstances.
Our delegation wishes to refer to resolution 70/303, which has just been adopted under agenda items 20 and 79 (a), entitled “Modalities for the United Nations Conference to Support the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development”. We wish to express our gratitude to the facilitators of the resolution — the representatives of the delegations of Fiji, Sweden and Mauritius. We also wish to express our thanks to the Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, the Office of Legal Affairs and the Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
For the sake of consensus, my country took part in the negotiation process in a constructive and dialogue-oriented spirit. It is nevertheless appropriate to recall that Venezuela is not party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Venezuela is also not a party to the Agreement on the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 related to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks. That is why the regulations set out in the aforesaid instruments, including those that could be characterized as customary international law — other than those that our country expressly recognizes through their incorporation into our national legislation — cannot be imposed upon us. For Venezuela, the Convention on the Law of the Sea should not constitute the sole legal framework to regulate activities related to the oceans and seas, or characterized as a universal instrument.
While the text includes positive and proactive aspects on the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (resolution 70/1), we nevertheless note the presence of elements that, in their times, led my country to express reservations on the outcome document of the 2012 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (resolution 66/288, annex), as well as issues relating to marine biodiversity outside national jurisdictions. For the same reasons, my country has also expressed reservations on Sustainable Development Goal 14 (c), included in the
document, “Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”.
We are of the view that we must consider the future updating of the terms of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, since new situations that have been addressed prematurely and in some cases could have counterproductive results. We take this opportunity to stress that the evolution of this regime must address the most important seas and oceans issues of the day in a balanced, equitable, participatory and inclusive manner. In that context, we again offer our special thanks to the delegations of Fiji and Sweden on the work they have done in preparing for the Conference. They can count on the active participation and the full support of my country on this issue.
The Fiji delegation is delighted to see resolution 70/303 adopted by consensus, and we thank all Member States for demonstrating a positive spirit of engagement throughout the consultations. We especially thank the two co-facilitators, Ambassador Jagdish Koonjul, Permanent Representative of Mauritius, and Ambassador Magnus Lennartsson of Sweden for their excellent stewardship in bringing us all together through this resolution.
We also express our appreciation to President Lykketoft and his Office for the leadership and oversight theyprovided throughout this process. The adoption is a joyous moment not only for Fiji but for all communities around the world that care about the oceans’ health. We are convinced that this will be the game-changing conference for the ocean — one that will support the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14, thereby helping to reverse the current cycle of decline in which the oceans are caught. To ensure that the Conference delivers on the mandate given by this organ, the Fiji delegation, along with that of Sweden, is committed to working closely with Member States, relevant international organizations and partners in preparing for it in June 2017.
We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote.
I would like to express my gratitude to Ambassador Jagdish Koonjul of Mauritius and Ambassador Magnus Lennartsson of Sweden, co-facilitators of resolution 70/303, for conducting the complex negotiations on the resolution in the informal consultations to bring them to a successful conclusion. I am sure that the members
of the Assembly join me in extending to them our sincere appreciation.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 20 as a whole and agenda item 79 as a whole?
It was so decided.
I give the floor to the representative of Finland to introduce draft resolution A/70/L.65.
I have the honour to introduce draft resolution A/70/L.65, entitled “Strengthening the role of mediation in the peaceful settlement of disputes, conflict prevention and resolution”. The draft was initiated by the Group of Friends of Mediation. The Group of Friends, co-chaired by Finland and Turkey, consists of 43 States Members of the United Nations and 8 regional and subregional organizations, with a total of 51 members. Before the draft I am presenting today, the Group initiated three resolutions on mediation. The first, in 2011 (resolution 65/283), addressed the normative framework of mediation. The second, in 2012 (resolution 66/291), was procedural. Resolution 68/303 of 2014 had a specific focus on the role of regional and subregional organizations in mediation.
Mediation is one of the principal tools for the peaceful settlement of disputes envisaged under the Charter of the United Nations. It is among the main raisons d’être of the Organization. Mediation, as we know, is a voluntary endeavour whereby a third party assists two or more parties, upon their consent, in preventing, managing or resolving a conflict by helping them to achieve mutually acceptable agreements. The United Nations has been at the forefront of international mediation efforts.
The new draft resolution seeks to strengthen the role of mediation in line with the key findings and recommendations of the recent review processes in United Nations peace and security, which have concluded that mediation should be further used as
a conflict-prevention tool and as a means to sustain peace. Mediation needs to be used to its full potential as a tool for seeking political solutions to conflict. At the United Nations, mediation needs to have a central place in the Organization’s toolbox.
In line with the reviews and the 2014 resolution, today’s draft resolution recognizes the role that regional and subregional organizations play in mediation. The institutional and operational partnerships between the United Nations and regional and subregional organizations should continue and be further enhanced. In specific mediation contexts, the coherence and complementarity of the efforts of the various actors should be encouraged. Mediation efforts should also engage all the relevant actors and support national and local capacities, as appropriate. The draft resolution recognizes the role of civil society in mediation and calls for integrating gender perspectives into it.
In order to fully play its role, mediation needs capacities, funding, support functions and strategic thinking. Those aspects must be developed further to ensure a professional approach in every effort involving the United Nations, regional and subregional organizations and Member States.
Strengthening the role of mediation as a tool for conflict prevention should also be a priority for the incoming Secretary-General. The draft resolution includes a task directed specifically at the Secretary- General and requesting that he or she produce a report on mediation. It does not, however, focus on any specific conflict or mediation process.
We wish to thank all delegations for their active participation, constructive approach and flexibility in the negotiations, and for their untiring quest to find solutions. We would also like to thank the other delegations sponsoring today’s draft resolution.
In conclusion, I would also like to acknowledge the Secretariat and its Mediation Support Unit for their support and insights during the process.
The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/70/L.65, entitled “Strengthening the role of mediation in the peaceful settlement of disputes, conflict prevention and resolution”.
I now give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.
I should like to announce that, since the submission of the draft resolution, in addition to those delegations listed in document A/70/L.65, the following countries have also become sponsors of the draft resolution: Austria, Azerbaijan, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Chad, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Estonia, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iraq, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mexico, Montenegro, the Netherlands, Norway, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of Moldova, Romania, Samoa, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Ukraine, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay and the observer State of Palestine.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to adopt draft resolution A/70/L.65?
Draft resolution A/70/L.65 was adopted (resolution 70/304).
Before giving the floor to speakers in explanation of position on the resolution just adopted, I would like to remind delegations that explanations of are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by representatives from their seats.
The role of mediation is essential to the prevention and peaceful resolution of conflicts and is clearly recognized in the Charter of the United Nations, Article 33 of which explicitly calls on parties to a dispute to resort to mediation. Clearly, mediation can and should play a critical role at every stage of a conflict or dispute. That said, the resolution the Assembly has just adopted (resolution 70/304) should be based on a clearly articulated consensus supported by all States. Such consensus is central to ensuring the resolution’s credibility and integrity.
Armenia deplores the fact that the resolution has retained an uncompromising position on certain areas through the selective references to the principles of international law and the Charter of the United Nations that are reflected in two of its preambular paragraphs. In considering delegations’ arguments concerning the
application in the resolution of certain forms of agreed- on language, Armenia would like to point out that the Charter represents the ultimate agreed-on language. The purposes and principles of the Charter cannot be distorted, limited or made conditional. It is evident that credible and effective mediation aims to achieve the peaceful settlement of disputes and the prevention and resolution of conflicts in ways that are based on the Charter and on international law. Article 1 of the Charter emphasizes that the purpose of the Organization is to
“develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace”.
In the decades since the adoption of the Charter, our understanding of the substantive legal principle of self-determination has evolved into our recognition of it as a fundamental right. Today’s resolution aims to further strengthen the mediation dimension of the United Nations and regional organizations. As such, we believe that it should consolidate the purposes of the Charter and the principles of international law and ensure their balanced and inclusive reflection in the text. We cannot agree to the limitations it imposes on the self-determination of peoples, and we believe that the narrow reference in the seventh preambular paragraph should in no way prejudice the right of all peoples to self-determination, freedom and independence, as derived from the Charter of the United Nations, the two international covenants on human rights and the numerous relevant United Nations resolutions, among other instruments, especially given the resolution’s subject matter.
We firmly believe that a delegation has a legitimate right to request that a resolution duly reflect the language of the Charter of the United Nations and that such a request should be heard, respected and addressed. I regret that resolution 70/304 lacks that minimum degree of agreement, and Armenia therefore dissociates itself from the consensus.
I would like to underscore the special importance of the topic of resolution 70/304 for my country and to thank the representatives of Finland and Turkey for the efforts to facilitate its adoption.
As a country that continues to suffer from Russian aggression, we clearly understand the importance
of mediation activities at all stages of the conflict cycle, from prevention to resolution. Ukraine is fully committed to the idea that the United Nations has to play a more active role in response to ongoing conflicts all over the world. Ukrainian society looks upon the United Nations as a universal international organization tasked with preventing military conflicts between States and ensuring compliance with the principles of international law. The relevance of this statement has increased significantly over the past two years with regard to the ongoing Russian aggression against Ukraine.
According to the Secretary-General’s report on the United Nations and conflict prevention of 25 September 2015,
“while Member States bear the primary responsibility for conflict prevention, the United Nations, with its universal membership, impartiality and the legitimacy derived from the principles of the Charter, has an important and unique role to play.” (S/2015/730, para. 2)
Once again, we would like to express our gratitude for the support expressed by Member States with respect to the resolution on the territorial integrity of Ukraine. At the same time, we are of the view that there is room for actions by the Secretariat, within its competence in the area of mediation and good offices, instead of shying away from playing its part. Such an action does not contribute to resolving the conflict. The Russian Federation continues to concentrate its weaponry, armaments and military forces on the temporary occupied territories of Crimea and Dombass, as well as along the Ukrainian-Russian border. Nevertheless, Ukraine remains committed to a peaceful resolution of this conflict. We proceed from the fact that Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations envisages an obligation to settle any international dispute peacefully. However, striving to achieve that does not mean that a breach of the principles of the United Nations should be accepted. That would be a false lesson to be drawn from history and be detrimental for both regional and global security. In that context, Ukraine would like to highlight the necessity of strengthening the cooperation of the United Nations with regional and subregional organizations devoted to the process of mediation and conflict resolution.
In conclusion, I wish to recall that resolution 70/304, on the territorial integrity of Ukraine, was also adopted
under this agenda item. That resolution underlines the prescience of the Charter principles, including the obligations of States to refrain in their international relations from the threat of the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State and to settle international disputes by peaceful means, thereby emphasizing the acute relevance of mediation activities given the current state of world affairs.
The Republic of Argentina joined the consensus on resolution 70/304, entitled “Strengthening the role of mediation in the peaceful settlement of disputes, conflict prevention and resolution”. In doing so, Argentina reaffirms its strong commitment to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations as well as its belief that multilateralism is the key principle for international peace and security. While all methods for the peaceful settlement of disputes are equally valid to settle international conflicts, we particularly stress our conviction that only through such methods can we ensure fair and lasting solutions. That of course means mediation, which, as stipulated in the guidelines of the United Nations for effective mediation, has its own logic and may or may not coexist with other methods for the peaceful settlement of disputes, such as facilitation, good offices and dialogue efforts. In that regard, we stress the special role that the Charter bestows on the Secretary-General in terms of good offices and mediation.
Argentina stresses that the guideliness for effective mediation refer to the necessary consent of the parties to be involved in a specific process for the peaceful settlement of disputes. Nevertheless, it is clear that what can never be subjected to the consent of the parties is the greater obligation that weighs upon all Member States to settle disputes by peaceful means. For that reason, it would not be appropriate to condition the consent of the parties to a dispute to the mandate given by the international community to the Secretary- General.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (b) of agenda item 34?
It was so decided.
7. Organization of work, adoption of the agenda and allocation of items: reports of the General Committee
Members will recall that, at its 95th plenary meeting, on 13 May 2016, the General Assembly concluded its consideration of sub-item (c) of agenda item 113. In order for the Assembly to consider sub-item (c) of agenda item 113, it will be necessary to reopen its consideration.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to reopen its consideration of sub-item (c) of agenda item 113 and to proceed immediately to its consideration?
It was so decided.
113. Elections to fill vacancies in subsidiary organs and other elections (c) Election of the Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme Note by the Secretary-General (A/70/859/Add.1)
Members will recall that, at its 95th plenary meeting, on 13 May 2016, the General Assembly elected Mr. Erik Solheim as Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme for a term of four years, beginning on 15 June 2016 and ending 14 June 2020. In his note, the Secretary-General informs the General Assembly that Mr. Solheim assumed his duties on 27 June 2016. Accordingly, his term of office will be from 27 June 2016 to 26 June 2020.
May I take it that the General Assembly takes note that Mr. Solheim’s term of office will be from 27 June 2016 to 26 June 2020?
It was so decided.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (c) of agenda item 113 and of agenda item 113 as a whole?
It was so decided.
34. Prevention of armed conflict (a) Prevention of armed conflict
Member States will recall that, at its 2nd meeting, on 18 September 2015, the Assembly decided to include this sub-item in the agenda of the seventieth session. It is my understanding that it would be desirable to include this sub-item in the draft agenda of the seventy-first session of the General Assembly.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to include sub-item (a) of agenda item 34 in the draft agenda of its seventy-first session?
It was so decided.
May I take it that it is also the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (a) of agenda item 34 and of agenda item 34 as a whole?
It was so decided.
36. Zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic
Member States will recall that, in resolution 55/285, the General decided to consider agenda item 36 biennially at its fifty-sixth session. Members will also recall that the Assembly, in its decision 60/509, decided to maintain biennial consideration of the item at its seventy-first session. Members will furthermore recall that the General Assembly, in its resolution 69/322, requested the Secretary-General to submit a report to the Assembly at its seventieth session and decided to include the item in the provisional agenda of the seventieth session. It is my understanding that to maintain the biennial consideration of the item, pursuant to decision 60/509, it would be desirable to include this item in the draft agenda of the seventy-first session of the General Assembly.
May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to include agenda item 36 in the draft agenda of its seventy-first session?
It was so decided.
May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 36?
It was so decided.
40. The situation in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan
Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2015, the Assembly decided to include agenda item 40 in the agenda of the seventieth session. In connection with this item, I have received a letter dated 3 August 2016 from the representative of Azerbaijan in which he requests that the consideration of this agenda item be deferred to the Assembly’s seventy-first session.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to defer its consideration of this item and to include it in the draft agenda of its seventy-first session?
It was so decided.
May I also take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 40?
It was so decided.
41. Question of the Comorian island of Mayotte
Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2015, the Assembly decided to include this item in its agenda, on the understanding that there would be no consideration of the item by the Assembly until further notice. In connection with this item, I have received a note verbale dated 13 April 2016 from the Permanent Mission of the Comoros to the United Nations requesting the inclusion of this item in the provisional agenda of the seventy- first session.
May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to include the item entitled “Question of the Comorian island of Mayotte” in the draft agenda of the seventy- first session?
It was so decided.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 41?
It was so decided.
43. The situation in Central America: progress in fashioning a region of peace, freedom, democracy and development
Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2015, the Assembly decided to include item 43 in the agenda of the seventieth session in accordance with the decision 60/508, of 31 October 2005. In that decision, the General decided that this item shall remain on the agenda for consideration upon notification by Member States. Accordingly, this item has been included in the draft agenda of the seventy-first session.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 43?
It was so decided.
44. Question of Cyprus Armed aggression against the Democratic Republic of the Congo Question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) The situation of democracy and human rights in Haiti Armed Israeli aggression against the Iraqi nuclear installations and its grave consequences for the established international system concerning the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and international peace and security Consequences of the Iraqi occupation of and aggression against Kuwait
Members will recall that at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2015, the Assembly decided to include items 44 to 49 in the agenda of the seventieth session, in accordance with paragraph 4 (b) of the annex to its resolution 58/316, of 1 July 2004. In resolution 58/316, the General Assembly decided that these items shall remain on the agenda for consideration upon notification by Member States. Accordingly, these items have been included in the draft agenda of the seventy-first session.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda items 44 to 49?
It was so decided.
119. Implementation of the resolutions of the United Nations
Members will recall that at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2015, the Assembly decided to include this item in the agenda of the seventieth session. Members will also recall that the Assembly considered, in a joint debate, agenda items 119 and 120 at its 45th and 46th plenary meetings, on 3 and 4 November 2015. It is my understanding that it would be desirable to defer consideration of this item to the seventy-first session of the General Assembly.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to defer consideration of this agenda item 119 and to include it in the draft agenda of its seventy- first session?
It was so decided.
May I also take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 119?
It was so decided.
130. Global awareness of the tragedies of irregular migrants in the Mediterranean Basin, with specific emphasis on Syrian asylum seekers
Members will recall that at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2015, the Assembly decided to include this item in the agenda of the seventieth session. Members will also recall that the Assembly considered this item at its 59th, 60th and 61st plenary meetings, on 20 and 23 November 2015.
At the outset, I should like to record my country’s objection to re-including agenda item 130, “Global awareness of the tragedies of irregular migrants in the Mediterranean Basin, with specific emphasis on Syrian asylum seekers”, for the following reasons.
First of all, the phenomenon of migration and refugees is a global phenomenon that is affecting all
peoples of the world, rather than a specific geographical region or population. The agenda item in question seeks to focus on the phenomenon in the Mediterranean Basin alone and only on the Syrian population. Therefore, the inclusion of these specific places and people betrays political rather than humanitarian motives. I would also highlight that Syrians make up only 20 per cent of the migratory movements from the Mediterranean via Turkey. The remainder comprises other nationalities in Turkey with fake Syrian passports.
Secondly, the phenomenon will be eliminated only if all Member States assert that countries that support terrorism must stop doing so and must implement the relevant Security Council resolutions.
Thirdly, while we express our appreciation of the frank and honest efforts of a number of countries to host Syrians, we reject any attempt to abuse these Syrians through political and electoral manipulations or to contend that they cannot be hosted or that they are linked to terrorism. The international community must therefore shoulder its own responsibilities to confront the phenomenon of tens of thousands of foreign terrorists from 100 Member States migrating to join the terrorist groups that are active in Syria.
We can solve the problem of Syrian refugees and encourage them to return to their countries only if we first end the terrorism that rules over the Syrian people and affects all aspects of life in Syria. That can be accomplished by pressuring the Governments of the countries that fund terrorism to implement the relevant Security Council resolutions relating to confronting terrorism, especially resolutions 2170 (2014), 2178 (2014) and 2199 (2015).
Secondly, we must end the unilateral procedures and measures imposed on the Syrian people that are among the primary reasons behind the paralysis of their way of life, the destruction of their infrastructure, the closing of hundreds of factories and the increase in the unemployment rate. These unilateral measures are serving to limit the Syrians’ way of life, extending the tragedies that have befallen them thus far and causing them to flee their country and fall victim to human traffickers.
Thirdly, we must support international efforts to find a peaceful solution to the Syrian crisis based on a comprehensive dialogue among the Syrian people, without external interference.
Fourthly, we must stop buying oil and antiquities from Da’esh and other Turkish mediators.
Fifthly, stressing that the agenda item is to be deferred to the following session makes it clear that the political blackmail of the Syrian Government will continue.
In conclusion, and because the issues of migrants and refugees are being discussed at two levels of the General Assembly, including the high-level meeting that is charged with dealing with large movements of migrants and refugees, my delegation would like to stress that agenda item 130 should not be included in the agenda of the seventy-first session.
Since the issue of migrants and refugees is being regularly considered under various agenda items, bearing in mind the hefty number of items already on the General Assembly’s agenda, and in order to avoid duplication in the Assembly’s work, my delegation is also unable to support the inclusion of item 130 on the draft agenda of the seventy-first session.
In the light of the previous two delegations’ statements, I feel obliged to take the floor. While I regret having to take up more of our time, I should point out that in the next few days our leaders will come together to raise global awareness of the tragedies facing millions of displaced people. The summit of 19 September will represent an important milestone in our efforts to take stock of our work and advance our areas of action in addressing large movements of refugees and migrants. Turkey is determined to continue its cooperation, advocacy and humanitarian policies aimed at ensuring safe, orderly and regulated migration, as well as spreading the burden and sharing responsibility for refugees and their hosts.
As we said during the adoption of the agenda of the seventy-first session, this subject has never been Turkey’s agenda item per se. Since that adoption, it has been the General Assembly’s item, and today it is still in our collective interest to consider the issue at the seventy-first session until we see meaningful change in the lives of millions of the displaced. We are therefore confident that Member States will stand firm in their commitment to keeping item 130 on the agenda of the seventy-first session of the Assembly.
We would like to
briefly add our voice to the discussion. In the interests of saving time, we will not repeat the explanations just made by our colleagues from Syria and Iran, but while we are aware that the issue of refugees is a global problem, we do not support including the topic on the agenda of the General Assembly at its seventy- first session.
The United States wishes to express its support for the transfer of agenda item 130. Despite the fact that refugees and migrants are included elsewhere in the General Assembly’s scope of work, we believe there is still a place and a need for a specific focus on the issue, and wish to see it included on the agenda of the Assembly at its seventy-first session.
France supports keeping item 130, “Global awareness of the tragedies of irregular migrants in the Mediterranean basin, with specific emphasis on Syrian asylum seekers”, on the agenda of the General Assembly at its seventy-first session.
The introductory statement today by the President of the General Assembly reflected only a small part of the suffering and tragedy suffered by millions of refugees, especially refugees from Syria. My Turkish colleague has voiced the reasons that prompt us to support keeping the item on the Assembly’s agenda as a forum and a way of dealing with the suffering of those millions. Just as we support the reasons cited by the representative of Turkey, we also support keeping the item on the Assembly’s agenda.
I would like to reaffirm that the United Kingdom also supports keeping this item and transferring it to the agenda of the Assembly at its seventy-first session.
I too would like to express my delegation’s support for keeping item 130 on the agenda of the Assembly at its next session.
I would like to support the proposal of the representative of Turkey to keep this item on the agenda of the General Assembly at its seventy-first session.
I would like to add my voice to those proposing to retain this item on the
Assembly’s agenda, given the ongoing tragedy in the region and in Syria itself.
Having heard the statements just made, I understand that further consultation is required. I therefore propose that we defer discussion of this item to the morning of Tuesday, 13 September 2016. The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 130.
155. Financing of the United Nations Mission in East Timor
Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2015, the Assembly decided to include this item on the agenda of the seventieth session. It is my understanding that it would be desirable to defer consideration of the item to the seventy-first session. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to defer consideration of agenda item 155 and to include it on the draft agenda of the seventy-first session?
It was so decided.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 155?
It was so decided.
Programme of work
I should like to remind delegations that the following agenda items, which have been considered at previous meetings, remain open for consideration during the seventieth session of the General Assembly: items 9, 16, 18, 18 (d), 21, 30 to 32, 37, 38, 56, 57, 67, 73, 73 (a), 73 (b), 73 (c), 74, 91, 107, 109, 110, 112, 112 (b), 114, 114 (a), 114 (b), 114 (e), 114 (f), 114 (g), 115, 122, 123, 126 to 129, 131 to 154 and 156 to 166.
As members are aware, these items have been included in the provisional agenda of the seventy-first session of the General Assembly, with the exception of sub-item (d) of agenda item 18, entitled “Commodities”; agenda item 32, entitled “Support by the United Nations system of the efforts of Governments to promote and consolidate new or restored democracies”; agenda item 74, entitled “Assistance to survivors of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, particularly orphans, widows and
victims of sexual violence”; agenda item 91, entitled “Review of the implementation of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security”; agenda item 126, entitled “International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994”; agenda item 133, entitled “Programme budget for the biennium 2014-2015”; agenda item 150, entitled “Financing of the United Nations Mission in the Central African Republic and Chad”; agenda item 156, entitled “Financing of the United Nations Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste”; and agenda item 163, entitled “Financing of the United Nations Supervision Mission in the Syrian Arab Republic”.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to include agenda items 9, 16, 18, 21, 30, 31, 37, 38, 56, 57, 67, 73, 73 (a), 73 (b), 73 (c), 107, 109, 110, 112, 112 (b), 114, 114 (a), 114 (b), 114 (e), 114 (f), 114 (g), 115, 122, 123, 127 to 129, 131, 132, 134 to 149, 151 to 154, 157 to 162, 164, 165 and 166 in the draft agenda of the seventy-first session?
It was so decided.
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda items 9, 16, 18, 18 (d), 21, 30 to 32, 37, 38, 56, 57, 67, 73, 73 (a), 73 (b), 73 (c), 74, 91, 107, 109, 110, 112, 112 (b), 114, 114 (a), 114 (b), 114 (e), 114 (f), 114 (g), 115, 122, 123, 126 to 129, 131 to 154 and 156 to 166 at the present session?
It was so decided.
I should like to inform members that the following representatives have been elected Chairpersons of the First, Special Political and Decolonization (Fourth Committee), Second, Third and Sixth Committees of the General Assembly at its seventy-first session and are accordingly members of the General Committee for that session: for the First Committee, His Excellency Mr. Sabri Boukadoum of Algeria; for the Special Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth), His Excellency Mr. Vladimir Drobnjak of Croatia; for the Second Committee, His Excellency Mr. Dian Triansyah Djani of Indonesia; for the Third Committee, Her Excellency Ms. María Emma
Mejía Vélez of Colombia; and for the Sixth Committee, His Excellency Mr. Danny Danon of Israel.
I congratulate the Chairpersons of these Main Committees for the seventy-first session of the General Assembly on their election.
I should like to inform members that the Chairperson of the Fifth Committee will be elected at the first meeting of the Fifth Committee.
I shall now call on those representatives who wish to speak in exercise of the right of reply.
May I remind members that statements in exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and to five minutes for the second intervention and should be made by delegations from their seats.
Upon the adoption of resolution 70/304, the Ukrainian delegation unfortunately took the floor for his own destructive ends rather than to focus on the Minsk agreements. We condemn such an approach.
I take this opportunity to remind members that the next plenary meeting of the seventieth session will be held on Thursday 13 September, in the morning, to take up agenda item 120, entitled “Revitalization of the work of the General Assembly”, and agenda item 130, entitled “Global awareness of the tragedies of irregular migrants in the Mediterranean basin, with specific emphasis on Syrian asylum seekers”.
I would also like to remind members that the closing plenary meeting of the General Assembly at its seventieth session will be held at 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 13 September, in this Hall. Immediately thereafter, the General Assembly will declare open the seventy-first session and convene the 1st meeting of the seventy-first session.
In order to allow a smooth proceeding of two meetings — namely, the closing of the seventieth session and the opening of the seventy-first session — I would like to remind members that, as announced at the 115th plenary meeting and as indicated in the Journal of the United Nations, the General Assembly Hall will have the seating protocol of the seventy-first session as of 3 p.m. Therefore the delegation of the Plurinational State of Bolivia will occupy the first seat in the General Assembly Hall.
The meeting rose at 12.50 p.m.