A/71/PV.62 General Assembly

The General Assembly will consider the reports of the Sixth Committee on agenda items 74 to 86, 108, 121, 135 and 165 to 174. I request the Rapporteur of the Sixth Committee, Mr. Isaías Arturo Medina Mejías of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, to introduce the reports of the Committee in one intervention. Mr. Medina Mejías (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela), Rapporteur of the Sixth Committee: I have the honour to present the reports of the Sixth Committee on its work during the seventy-first session of the General Assembly. The Assembly allocated to the Committee 25 substantive and three procedural agenda items. Except for the item relating to the election of officers, all those agenda items fall under three of the headings corresponding to the priorities of the Organization, namely, “Promotion of justice and international law”, “Drug control, crime prevention and combating international terrorism in all its forms and manifestations” and “Organizational, administrative and other matters”. I will introduce the reports of the Sixth Committee on the various items in the order in which they fall under those three headings. I shall begin with the first heading, “Promotion of justice and international law”, under which the Sixth Committee considered 13 agenda items and adopted 18 draft resolutions recommended to the General Assembly for adoption. I first invite the Assembly to consider agenda item 74, “Responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts”. The report on this agenda item is contained in document A/71/505, and the draft resolution recommended to the General Assembly for adoption is reproduced in paragraph 9 thereof. Under the terms of the draft resolution, the General Assembly would, inter alia, request the Secretary- General to prepare a technical report listing in a tabular format the references to the articles contained in the compilation of decisions of international courts, tribunals and other bodies prepared by the Secretary- General, as well as in submissions presented by Member States since 2001, and to submit such material during its seventy-first session. The Assembly would also request the Secretary- General to update once again the compilation of decisions of international courts, tribunals and other bodies referring to the articles, invite Governments to submit information on their practice in that regard and submit such material well in advance of its seventy- fourth session. The General Assembly would further encourage all Member States to continue the substantive dialogue on an informal basis during the period prior to its seventy-fourth session. Finally, the Assembly would decide to include the item in the provisional agenda of its seventy-fourth session and further examine, with a view to taking a decision, within the framework of a Working Group of the Sixth Committee, the question of a convention on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts or other appropriate action on the basis of the articles. The report on agenda item 75, “Criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission”, is contained in document A/71/506, and the draft resolution recommended to the General Assembly for adoption is reproduced in paragraph 7 thereof. The draft resolution affirms and further elaborates on the various measures adopted in previous resolutions aimed at ensuring the criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission and sets out a variety of mechanisms intended to increase and enhance the information enabling Member States to address the topic. The report on agenda item 76, “Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its forty-ninth session”, is contained in document A/71/507. The Sixth Committee recommended four draft resolutions for adoption by the General Assembly, which are reproduced in paragraph 14 of the report. Under the terms of draft resolution I, the General Assembly would, inter alia, take note with interest of the decisions taken by the Commission with regard to its future work and the progress made by the Commission in its work in several areas. Draft resolutions II, III and IV pertain to texts that were finalized and adopted by the Commission during its forty-ninth session. Draft resolution II relates to the model law on secure transactions and recommends, inter alia, that all States give favourable consideration to the model law when revising or adopting legislation relevant to secure transactions. Draft resolution III concerns the 2016 note on organizing arbitral proceedings and recommends, inter alia, the use of the 2016 note, including by parties to arbitration, arbitral tribunals and arbitral institutions, as well as for academic and training purposes with respect to international commercial dispute settlement. Finally, draft resolution IV pertains to the technical note on online dispute resolution and recommends, inter alia, that all States and other stakeholders use the technical note in designing and implementing online dispute-resolution systems for cross-border commercial transactions. The report on agenda item 77, “United Nations Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination and Wider Appreciation of International Law”, is to be found in document A/71/508. The draft resolution is reproduced in paragraph 7 thereof. Under the terms of the draft resolution, the General Assembly would, inter alia, note with satisfaction that resources have been provided under the programme budget for the organization of regional courses in international law on an annual basis and for the further development of the audiovisual library of international law. The Assembly would also authorize the Secretary-General to carry out the activities specified in his report on this item. The report on agenda item 78, “Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its sixty- eighth session”, is contained in document A/71/509. The two draft resolutions recommended to the General Assembly for adoption are reproduced in paragraph 11 of the report. Under draft resolution I, the General Assembly would, inter alia, express its appreciation to the Commission for the work accomplished at its sixty- eighth session and recommend that it continue its work on the topics in its current programme. Furthermore, the General Assembly would decide that the next session of the Commission shall be held at the United Nations Office at Geneva from 1 May to 2 June and from 3 July to 4 August 2017. To commemorate the International Law Commission’s seventieth anniversary, part of the session in 2018 will be held in New York at United Nations Headquarters. Under draft resolution II, the General Assembly would, inter alia, take note of the draft articles on protection of persons in the event of disasters, invite Governments to submit comments concerning the recommendations by the Commission to elaborate a convention on the basis of those articles and decide to include in the provisional agenda of its seventy-third session an item entitled “Protection of persons in the event of disasters”. The report on agenda item 79, “Diplomatic protection”, is contained in document A/71/510. The draft resolution recommended to the General Assembly for adoption is reproduced in paragraph 9 of the report. Under the terms of the draft resolution, the Assembly would commend once again the articles on diplomatic protection to the attention of Governments and request a report from the Secretary-General on comments from Governments. In addition, the Assembly would decide to include in the provisional agenda of its seventy- fourth session an item entitled “Diplomatic protection” and, within the framework of a working group of the Sixth Committee, continue to examine the question of a convention on diplomatic protection or any other appropriate action on the basis of the aforementioned articles and to also identify any difference of opinion on the articles. The report on agenda item 80, “Consideration of prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities and allocation of loss in the case of such harm”, is contained in document A/71/511. Paragraph 7 of the report contains the draft resolution recommended for adoption by the General Assembly. By its terms, the Assembly would once again commend the work of the International Law Commission with regard to the various outcomes in relation to the item, request reports from the Secretary-General on comments from Governments and on relevant case law, and include the item in the provisional agenda of the seventy-fourth session of the General Assembly. The report on agenda item 81, “Status of the Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and relating to the protection of victims of armed conflicts”, is contained in document A/71/512. The draft resolution recommended to the General Assembly for adoption is reproduced in paragraph 7 of the report. Under the terms of the draft resolution, the Assembly would, inter alia, reaffirm the necessity of making the implementation of international humanitarian law more effective and support its further strengthening and development. In addition, the Assembly would note with appreciation the 10 resolutions adopted at the thirty-second international Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent, which took place in 2015. The report on agenda item 82, “Consideration of effective measures to enhance the protection, security and safety of diplomatic and consular missions and representatives”, is contained in document A/71/513. The draft resolution recommended to the General Assembly for adoption is reproduced in paragraph 7 of the report. Under the terms of the draft resolution, the Assembly would, inter alia, strongly condemn acts of violence against diplomatic and consular missions and representatives as well as against missions and representatives to international, intergovernmental organizations and officials of such organizations and urge States to strictly observe, implement and enforce, including during a period of armed conflict, all the applicable principles and rules of international law. The report on agenda item 83, “Report of the Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on the Strengthening of the Role of the Organization”, is contained in document A/71/514. The two draft resolutions recommended to the General Assembly for adoption are reproduced in paragraph 11 thereof. Under the terms of draft resolution I, the Assembly would, inter alia, endorse the decisions and recommendations adopted by the Special Committee at its 2016 session, as annexed to the draft resolution, and call upon the Special Committee to consider them in an appropriate, substantive manner and framework. It would also welcome the establishment of a new website for the repertoire of practice of the United Nations organs. Under the terms of draft resolution II, the Assembly would, inter alia, solemnly commend the International Court of Justice for the important role it has played as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations over the past 70 years in adjudicating disputes among States and recognize the value of its work. The report on agenda item 84, “The rule of law at the national and international levels”, is contained in document A/71/515. Under the terms of the draft resolution reproduced in paragraph 7 of the report, the Assembly would, inter alia, invite Member States to focus their comments in the upcoming Sixth Committee debates during its seventy-second session on the subtopic “Ways and means to further disseminate international law to strengthen the rule of law”. The report on agenda item 85, “The scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction”, is contained in document A/71/516. Under the draft resolution, which is reproduced in paragraph 9 of the report, the Assembly would decide that the Sixth Committee shall continue its consideration of the matter next year, including the context of a working group of the Committee that would undertake a thorough discussion of the item. The report on agenda item 86, “The law of transboundary aquifers”, is contained in document A/71/517, and the draft resolution is reproduced in its paragraph 7. Under the terms of the draft resolution, the Assembly would, inter alia, once again commend the draft articles annexed to its resolution 68/118 to the attention of Governments as guidance for bilateral or regional agreements and arrangements for the proper management of transboundary aquifers. I shall now turn to the second heading, “Drug control, crime prevention and combating international terrorism in all its forms and manifestations”, under which the Sixth Committee considered agenda item 108, “Measures to eliminate international terrorism”. The relevant report is contained in document A/71/518, and the draft resolution is reproduced in paragraph 9 thereof. By its terms, the Assembly would, inter alia, decide to recommend that the Sixth Committee, at the seventy-second session, establish a working group with a view to finalizing the process on the draft comprehensive convention on international terrorism as well as discussions on the item included in its agenda by Assembly resolution 54/110, concerning the question of convening a high-level conference under the auspices of the United Nations, while also encouraging all Member States to redouble their efforts during the intersessional period towards resolving any outstanding issues. Under the third and final heading, “Organizational, administrative and other matters”, the Sixth Committee considered 11 substantive and two procedural items. Agenda item 145, “Administration of justice at the United Nations”, was allocated to the Fifth and Sixth Committees. The views of the Sixth Committee on that item were transmitted to the Fifth Committee through a letter from the President of the General Assembly dated 26 October 2016, in the annex to document A/C.5/71/10. The report on agenda item 165, “Report of the Committee on Relations with the Host Country”, is contained in document A/71/522. Under the draft resolution recommended to the General Assembly for adoption, which is reproduced in paragraph 8 of the report, the Assembly would, inter alia, request the Committee to continue its work in conformity with Assembly resolution 2819 (XXVI). Furthermore, the Sixth Committee considered nine requests for observer status in the General Assembly. It recommended that the Assembly grant observer status in the General Assembly to the Conference of Ministers of Justice of the Ibero-American Countries, agenda item 170; the International Youth Organization for Ibero-America, agenda item 171; the Pacific Islands Development Forum, agenda item 172; the International Chamber of Commerce, agenda item 173; and the Central American Bank for Economic Integration, agenda item 174. The reports concerning those requests are found in documents A/71/527, A/71/528, A/71/529, A/71/530 and A/71/521, respectively. The relevant draft resolutions and draft decisions are reproduced in paragraph 7 of documents A/71/527, A/71/528, A/71/529 and A/71/521 and in paragraph 9 of document A/71/530. The Sixth Committee also recommended that the Assembly defer to the seventy-second session a decision on the requests for observer status in the General Assembly for the Cooperation Council of Turkic- speaking States in the General Assembly, agenda item 166; the Eurasian Economic Union, agenda item 167; and the Community of Democracies, agenda item 168. The reports on those requests are reproduced in documents A/71/523, A/71/524 and A/71/525, respectively. The relevant draft decisions are reproduced in paragraph 8 of those reports. The sponsors of draft resolution A/C.6/71/L.4 on agenda item 169, “Observer status for the International Conference on Asian Political Parties in the General Assembly”, decided not to pursue the request for observer status in the General Assembly for the International Conference on Asian Political Parties at the current session, while reserving the right to present it at a future session. The Sixth Committee concluded its consideration of that item without taking action. The report on that agenda item is contained in document A/71/526. Concerning the two procedural items, namely, agenda item 121, “Revitalization of the work of the General Assembly”, and agenda item 135, “Programme planning”, the report under agenda item 121, containing the provisional programme of work of the Sixth Committee at the seventy-second session, is to be found in document A/71/519. The draft decision by which the Assembly would take note of the provisional programme of work is reproduced in paragraph 6 of the report. The report on agenda item 135 is contained in document A/71/520, and no further action by the Assembly is recommended. The draft resolutions and draft decisions relating to the agenda items under all three headings were adopted by the Sixth Committee without a vote, and it is my hope that the General Assembly will be in a position to do the same. Finally, I wish to inform the Assembly that there is no report in respect to agenda item 5, entitled “Election of the officers of the Main Committees”. Consistent with previous practice, the election of the officers of the Sixth Committee for the seventy-second session will be taken up at a later stage in the course of the current session. That concludes my introduction of the reports of the Sixth Committee. I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to the Chair of the Sixth Committee, Ambassador Danny Danon of Israel, for his dedicated work and for the commendable leadership that he provided to the Committee, as well as to the other members of the Bureau — Mr. Bilal Ahmad of Pakistan, Mr. Kaswamu Katota of Zambia and Mr. Zoltán Turbék of Hungary — for their valuable cooperation. I also wish to thank all representatives and colleagues, particularly coordinators and facilitators of the draft resolutions and working groups, for their valuable contributions to the success of this session. Finally, I would like to express my gratitude and appreciation to the secretariat of the Sixth Committee and the Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs, Mr. Miguel de Serpa Soares, for their efficient and valuable support, and, especially Mr. Huw Llewellyn, Mr. Arnold Pronto and their team at the Codification Division of the Office of Legal Affairs for their dedicated work devoted to the Sixth Committee and professional advice provided throughout the session.

If there is no proposal under rule 66 of the rules of procedure, I shall take it that the General Assembly decides not to discuss the reports of the Sixth Committee that are before the Assembly today.

Statements will therefore be limited to explanations of vote or position. The positions of delegations regarding the recommendations of the Sixth Committee have been made clear in the Committee and are reflected in the relevant official records. May I remind members that, under paragraph 7 of decision 34/401, the General Assembly agreed that “When the same draft resolution is considered in a Main Committee and in plenary meeting, a delegation should, as far as possible, explain its vote only once, that is, either in the Committee or in plenary meeting, unless that delegation’s vote in plenary meeting is different from its vote in the Committee.” May I also remind delegations that explanations of vote or position are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats. Before we begin to take action on the recommendations contained in the reports of the Sixth Committee, I should like to advise representatives that we are going to proceed to take decisions in the same manner as was done in the Committee, unless the Secretariat is notified otherwise in advance. I therefore hope that we may proceed to adopt without a vote those recommendations that were adopted without a vote in the Committee. Members are reminded that additional sponsors are no longer accepted now that draft resolutions and decisions have been adopted by the Committee. Any clarification about sponsorship should be addressed to the Secretary of the Committee.

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 9 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 74?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 75?

The Assembly has before it four draft resolutions recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 14 of its report. We will now take a decision on draft resolutions I to IV. Draft resolution I is entitled “Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its forty-ninth session”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft resolution II is entitled “Model Law on Secured Transactions of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

Draft resolution III is entitled “2016 Notes on Organizing Arbitral Proceedings of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft resolution IV is entitled “Technical Notes on Online Dispute Resolution on the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 76?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 77?

The Assembly has before it two draft resolutions recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 11 of its report. We will now take a decision on draft resolutions I and II. Draft resolution I is entitled “Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its sixty- eighth session”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft resolution II is entitled “Protection of persons in the event of disasters”. The Sixth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 78?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 9 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Sixth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 79?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Sixth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 80?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 8 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Sixth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same? 71/144).

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 81?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Sixth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same? 71/145).

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 82?

The Assembly has before it two draft resolutions recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 11 of its report. We will now take a decision on draft resolutions I and II. We turn first to draft resolution I, entitled “Report of the Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on the Strengthening of the Role of the Organization”. The Sixth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

Draft resolution II is entitled “Commemoration of the seventieth anniversary of the International Court of Justice”. The Sixth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 83?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Sixth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 84?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 9 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Sixth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 85?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Sixth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

I shall now call on those representatives who wish to speak in explanation of position on the resolution just adopted.

The delegation of the Republic of Paraguay has followed very closely the negotiations on resolution 71/150, entitled “The law of transboundary aquifers”, submitted by the delegation of Japan under agenda item 86 of the current session. Paraguay holds 5 per cent of the Guarani Aquifer, one of the world’s largest freshwater reserves. We accord great importance to the consideration of this agenda item by the Organization and believe that the draft article submitted by the International Law Commission represents progress in that regard. As such, in 2010, we signed an agreement with the other countries on whose territory the Guarani Aquifer is located. Nevertheless, the delegation of Paraguay wishes to state that while we joined the consensus on the adoption of the resolution, we note that the legislative branch of our country did not approve the 2010 agreement. It did not enter into force, therefore, since our State did not ratify it.

Turkey believes that the work on transboundary aquifers should focus on general principles, respecting the sovereign rights of each State to promote the sustainable utilization of water resources of an aquifer in its territory and not causing any significant harm to other riparian States. The provisions of the draft articles should have been elaborated in such a way that the multiplicity of interests of the riparian countries could be taken into account in a balanced and objective manner. Each transboundary aquifer system has its own specific characteristics and peculiarities and reflects its own regional, economic, social, cultural and historic aspects. Therefore, one-size-fits-all approaches for transboundary aquifers are not appropriate. In that regard, the draft articles might serve only as voluntary guidance for the practice of States and should remain a non-binding document. As to the reference to the model provisions on transboundary ground waters, Turkey would like to dissociate itself from it, as it makes reference to an instrument to which Turkey is not party — the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes. That reference should therefore not be interpreted as a change in Turkey’s legal position with regard to that instrument.

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 86?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 9 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Sixth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 108?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 8 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Sixth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 165?

The Assembly has before it a draft decision recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 8 of its report. We will now take action on the draft decision. The Sixth Committee adopted the draft decision without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 166?

The Assembly has before it a draft decision recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 8 of its report. We will now take action on the draft decision. The Sixth Committee adopted the draft decision without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 167?

The Assembly has before it a draft decision recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 8 of its report. We will now take action on the draft decision. The Sixth Committee adopted the draft decision without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 168?

May I take it that the Assembly wishes to take note of the report of the Sixth Committee?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 169?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Sixth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 170?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Sixth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 171?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Sixth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 172?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 9 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Sixth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

I now give the floor to the representative of Argentina.

The delegation of Argentina wishes to point out that, while we joined the consensus on resolution 71/156, on the granting of observer status for the International Chamber of Commerce in the General Assembly, in view of the special role the Chamber plays as well as its historical specificities, Argentina would reiterate its support for the criteria set forth in General Assembly decision 49/426. Pursuant to those criteria, the granting of observer status to the International Chamber of Commerce would therefore be done on an exceptional basis and should not be seen as a precedent for the future in the context of granting such status to an organization that is not intergovernmental in nature.

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 173?

The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Sixth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 174?

The Assembly has before it a draft decision recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. We will now take action on the draft decision entitled “Provisional programme of work of the Sixth Committee for the seventy-second session”. The Sixth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 121?

May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to take note of the report of the Sixth Committee?

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 135. On behalf of the General Assembly, I would like to thank Mr. Danny Danon of Israel, Chair of the Sixth Committee, the members of the Bureau and representatives for a job well done. The General Assembly has thus concluded its consideration of all the reports of the Sixth Committee before it for this meeting.

At the outset, my delegation welcomes all efforts made in preparation of the annual report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (see A/71/322), which includes a review of the Agency’s activities and achievements in the three key areas: nuclear technology, nuclear safety and security, and verification. Iraq is well aware that nuclear security is first and foremost a national responsibility to be borne by States through their national institutions and legislation. Accordingly, my Government has adopted several positive measures in this regard. In fact, in November 2016, our Parliament enacted a new law on the atomic energy authority, which will enter into force once our President signs it and it is published in the Official Gazette of Iraq. National institutions in Iraq are currently working on drafting new instructions for the Oversight Department, which regulates all nuclear- and radioactive-related issues, together with the IAEA. The relevant authorities have also analysed the situation in areas recovered by the Iraqi security forces to make sure that there are no risks, particularly radioactive risks, in zones that were previously controlled by terrorist organizations. Iraq continues to be in dire need of international aid to revitalize those areas. As for the implementation of international conventions, Iraq ratified the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism. We have taken the necessary steps to implement both conventions through the establishment of special committees created for that purpose. In order to support our integrated nuclear security plan, we have worked to include all activities that would improve the capacity of Iraqi institutions to safeguard nuclear materials and facilities, information security and nuclear criminal investigations. In the same vein, my Government has adopted fundamental principles for a national policy on radioactive-waste management, establishing a national committee in order to draft the necessary policy for adopting a strategy for the management and disposal of radioactive materials. We hope we can implement such a strategy in the first semester of 2017, after it has been reviewed by the IAEA. The technical cooperation programme for the promotion and transfer of nuclear technology to ensure sustainable socioeconomic progress remains a key task for the Agency. This programme is the joint responsibility of the IAEA and its member States. Our collective efforts will have a decisive impact on the programme’s success and will be based on the needs of member States. Materials will be needed to ensure that the cooperation-fund resources are predictable and sufficient to cover the expenses for the Agency’s other activities included in its rules of procedure. The progress made in mitigating the risk of nuclear weapons and promoting the effectiveness of the safeguards regime will remain insufficient unless we make tangible progress, whether in nuclear disarmament, through the implementation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), or in urging States to adhere to the Treaty and achieve its noble objectives. In this regard, the Middle East remains a challenge. International and regional efforts have been unable to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone because Israel continues to reject all attempts to do so, despite the fact that, since 1974, the General Assembly has adopted many resolutions that call for the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone and despite the decisions of NPT review conferences to that effect. We also believe that establishing a nuclear- weapon-free zone is one of the best ways of achieving the most noble goal — nuclear security. As we consider our region, the Middle East, and the challenges it has been currently facing, it is clear that reaching an agreement for the establishment of a zone free of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction is one of the most important steps for achieving nuclear security and ensuring the stability and security of the region in general. The most crucial step continues to be subjecting Israeli nuclear facilities to the Agency’s comprehensive safeguards regime. We stress that nuclear disarmament and the legal commitments undertaken to this end, when they are in line with international commitments on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, can serve only to promote the effectiveness of other nuclear-safety measures. The failure of the 2015 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in reaching consensus on an outcome document is a setback in international efforts to rid the region of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. My Government therefore stresses the relevance of the decision of the 1995 NPT Review and Extension Conference, on the basis of which the Treaty was indefinitely extended and will remain in force until it is fully implemented. We reaffirm our deep belief in the need to fully implement and comply with all international instruments on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, as well as all relevant Security Council resolutions — the latest of which, resolution 2321 (2016), condemns North Korea for conducting nuclear tests and continuously disregarding relevant international resolutions. North Korea’s conduct only thwarts efforts to maintain international and regional peace and security. Once again, we stress that developing peaceful programmes is an unalienable right for all countries. It is part of their right to development, especially for developing countries, without any impediment or monopoly by any group of States and without imposing any mandatory conditions that undermine the interests of those countries.

Belarus believes that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) continues to adequately carry out its important role in guaranteeing the non-proliferation regime and assisting Member States in the implementation of their integral right to develop peaceful nuclear energy. We note the importance of further improving the IAEA safeguards regime to increase effectiveness, but also of ensuring Member States’ confidence in the objectivity of the current system. This year’s IAEA report (see A/71/322) reflects the fact that in 2015 Belarus continued the construction of both nuclear power units of its first nuclear power plant. Over the course of a year, Agency experts conducted several missions to prepare recommendations for a regulatory framework. We underscore our unstinting commitment to the international rules and standards concerning nuclear energyand the prime importance of ensuring nuclear security and transparency in the implementation of this project which is crucial for our country. Belarus intends to actively draw upon the tools that the Agency provides to countries that, for the first time, begin to implement nuclear-energy programmes. That includes relevant consultations with the Agency and the use of Agency assessment missions. We stress the critical importance of the technical cooperation mechanisms with the Agency, as well as the need to continue and broaden relevant IAEA programmes here. The participation of the Agency and other international organizations in multilateral efforts to reclaim and sustainably develop territory impacted by the Chernobyl disaster continues to be relevant. Last week, resolution 71/125, entitled “Persistent legacy of the Chernobyl disaster” — initiated and drafted by Belarus — was adopted by consensus in the General Assembly. The resolution calls for the continued attention of the international community to the issues following Chernobyl and for the coordination of international efforts to address the long-term consequences of the Chernobyl disaster. We would like to see the IAEA participate actively in joint efforts to attain the Sustainable Development Goals in the territory affected by the Chernobyl disaster. Belarus has co-sponsored and supports draft resolution A/71/L.35, which endorses the report of the IAEA.

At the outset, I would like to thank International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano for his comprehensive report on the Agency’s activities (see A/71/322). We warmly welcome the adoption of the Agency’s report and commend the outstanding work of the IAEA in supporting the needs of Member States by expanding its work from nuclear verification and the safety and security of nuclear materials to focusing on nuclear applications and technical cooperation for a better and safer world. As a member of the Agency, we are proud to work closely with the IAEA to strengthen our own policies in the fields of nuclear energy, non-proliferation, safety and security in our country, the region and globally. Kazakhstan has had strong technical cooperation with the IAEA in the areas of nuclear education, medicine and agriculture; research reactor safety; and radioisotope and radiation applications for collective global human security. As one of the world’s largest producers and suppliers of uranium, Kazakhstan has vastly expanded its fuel fabrication capability for peaceful uses of nuclear energy, within the framework of IAEA safeguards. My country is also working on the Kurchatov nuclear technologies park, under IAEA surveillance. In August 2015, Kazakhstan and the Agency signed an agreement on the establishment of the IAEA Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) Bank. After the commissioning of a new facility for the LEU Bank, which is expected to be ready in the second half of 2017, the Bank will be launched. The establishment of the LEU Bank will be an important step towards the safe and peaceful use of the atom and the strengthening of the non-proliferation regime. Kazakhstan’s contribution to the IAEA Nuclear Security Fund and the Peaceful Uses Initiative have exceeded €1 million. My country’s extensive nuclear-disarmament division supports its nuclear security and non-proliferation policies on many different fronts. This year, we are celebrating the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Semipalatinsk nuclear-test site closure and, on 29 August, we held an international conference in Astana on building a nuclear-weapon-free world. Last year, during the seventieth session of the General Assembly and at the subsequent Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, D.C., in March, President Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan made a momentous proposal to get rid of nuclear weapons by 2045 — the centenary of the United Nations. My country has always supported the process of international negotiations on the Iranian nuclear programme and made a practical contribution to it. In 2013, Kazakhstan hosted two rounds of talks between the P5+1 group and Iran in Almaty concerning Iran’s nuclear programme, which contributed to the negotiations between P5+1 and Iran. Last year, the European Union, acting as coordinator of the Joint Commission of the P5+1 and Iran, appealed to Kazakhstan to assist in the implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). In coordination with P5+1, Iran, the IAEA and the relevant structures of the Security Council, Kazakhstan supplied Iran with natural uranium on commercial terms as compensation for the removal of low-enriched uranium from that country, as specified in the JCPOA. Kazakhstan strongly believes that strict implementation of the agreements achieved between the P5+1 and Iran will further strengthen the nuclear non-proliferation regime and ensure the implementation of the legal and absolute rights of every State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) to develop peaceful nuclear activities, provided they fully observe the provisions of the Treaty, the safeguards agreement with the IAEA and its additional protocol. We call on all the parties involved to adhere to their commitments and to the plan. We are concerned about the escalation of the nuclear military programme of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and call on it to fulfil its obligations, in full accordance with the relevant Security Council resolutions, and to return to the negotiation process to resolve the situation through the Six-Party Talks. The strengthening of the nuclear non-proliferation regime and nuclear security will be among the main thrusts of Kazakhstan’s work as a non-permanent member of the Security Council for the 2017-2018 period. Kazakhstan will always be fully committed to supporting the IAEA in all of its initiatives as an unfailing and longstanding partner.

First of all, let me thank Director General Yukiya Amano for his comprehensive presentation of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) 2015 report (see A/71/322). The Argentine Republic has been committed to the work of the IAEA since its inception and, in that spirit, we have co-sponsored draft resolution A/71/L.35, on the report. The Argentine nuclear sector already has more than 66 years of experience, as well as robust development in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, backed by solid and consistent State policies that give vital importance to the implementation of the international safeguards system. The effectiveness of the IAEA nuclear activity verification system is crucial to preventing nuclear proliferation. However, such verification measures must not affect the inalienable right of States to develop nuclear technology for exclusively peaceful ends, as set forth in article IV of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). My country has consistently reaffirmed, at the IAEA and other relevant forums, the importance of not limiting or reinterpreting that right. The Republic of Argentina also stresses that the safeguards regime and its guarantees must be developed in an environment of cooperation and dialogue. In that sense, we would like to highlight the four-party agreement that Argentina has with its sister country — the Federative Republic of Brazil, the Brazilian-Argentine Agency for Accounting and Control of Nuclear Materials and the IAEA, which has defined and regulated cooperation activities for the application of nuclear safeguards since 1991. Regarding the Agency, we are pleased to announce that on 18 July, along with Brazil, we celebrated its twenty-fifth anniversary. The creation of the Agency has been a milestone not only in our relationship with Brazil, accompanied by the credible assurance of the exclusively peaceful uses of nuclear development in both countries, but also for the region, as it helped consolidate the idea of a Latin America free of nuclear weapons. Argentina wishes to express its appreciation and support for the work carried out by the IAEA in the field of nuclear security. In that regard, our country has repeatedly affirmed the central role of the Agency in coordinating and strengthening the architecture of nuclear security, and urges it to play a more active role in that area. We echo the sentiment of our Foreign Minister at the Vienna conference on nuclear security last week, when she stated that the expansion of international efforts in the field of nuclear security is equally essential. We would therefore like to emphasize the importance of supporting the work of the IAEA — not only politically but also financially — as nuclear safety is a clear case where countries must back their words with actions. The IAEA’s role in nuclear security must be strengthened and reach the maturity and development that it has already demonstrated in nuclear safety, another of its fundamental pillars. Argentina actively participates in that arena and aims to become a focal point for conducting training activities in the region. In that regard, our country has offered to host several of the training, education and human resource skill development activities sponsored by the IAEA in the field of exclusively peaceful uses of nuclear energy. We will continue to work with the Agency’s technical cooperation programme, to which we offer our experience and training and capacity- building facilities, which have already benefited engineers and professionals from our region and other parts of the world.

Cuba would like to thank the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mr. Yukiya Amano, for his presentation of the Agency’s 2015 report (see A/71/322). We support the important work of the IAEA for global peace and development, and we welcome the Agency’s sixtieth anniversary. We appreciate that the Agency has been able to strike the right balance in its work on the key pillars, focusing on nuclear energy and its applications — nuclear safety and security, nuclear verification and technical cooperation. Since the presentation of the previous report (see A/70/219), we have witnessed two major global agreements: the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. The IAEA and its technical cooperation programme has an important role in achieving the goals of both. The IAEA’s technical cooperation programme must be a priority, as it is one of the Agency’s main pillars and the main instrument to promote the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Cuba attaches great importance to technical cooperation with the IAEA and recognizes that the application of nuclear technologies contributes significantly to key areas for the economy and society, such as human health, particularly the cancer-control programme; food security; and agriculture and the protection of the environment, especially water-resource management. The IAEA Director General’s November visit to Cuba was made in the context of celebrating the sixtieth anniversary of the United Nations agency that is the global centre of cooperation in the area of the application of nuclear energy, science and technology, and it also reflected the excellent relations between the IAEA and Cuba. The effective management of nuclear security precludes exclusion and selectivity. The international standards on nuclear security must be adopted at the level of the IAEA, following transparent and inclusive multilateral negotiations, with the participation of all States. The IAEA’s leading role in seeking consensual approaches, in that regard, must not be minimized or ignored. Cuba welcomes the successful international conference on nuclear security that took place just a few days ago. We also stress each State’s responsibility to ensure nuclear security and to create national measures to strengthen it. We welcome the recent entry into force of the amendment to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, which will better protect nuclear facilities and materials, thus enabling cooperation among States party to the Convention in their efforts to prevent and combat crimes regarding radioactive and nuclear materials in a reaffirmation of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. In that context, we reiterate our rejection of measures aimed at prohibiting or limiting the legitimate right of States to develop and use nuclear energy, technology and related knowledge for peaceful uses. We denounce and call for the immediate lifting of all limitations and restrictions regarding the exportation of materials, equipment and technology related to nuclear activities for peaceful ends to developing nations. We welcome the implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in the Islamic Republic of Iran. That is a clear example that dialogue and negotiations are the appropriate means for resolving differences and reaching agreements that satisfy all parties involved. We reaffirm our support for the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East. In that regard, we deeply regret that the conference that was planned for that purpose has yet to take place. The possibility of a terrorist attack using nuclear materials cannot be eliminated through a selective approach limited to horizontal proliferation and ignoring vertical proliferation and disarmament. The only way to avoid the use or the threat of the use nuclear weapons is to prohibit and completely eliminate them. We believe that it is an important step to convene an international conference in 2017 so as to negotiate an instrument prohibiting nuclear weapons and aimed at their complete elimination. Finally, let me conclude by congratulating the body on its 70 years of work and extremely important contribution to such important issues as climate change, combating desertification and drought, ensuring food security and treating diseases. We are convinced that this time of celebration will strengthen commitments and contribute to implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/71/L.35, entitled “Report of the International Atomic Energy Agency”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that since the submission of the draft resolution and in addition to those delegations listed on the draft document, the following countries have become sponsors of A/70/L.35: Angola, Belarus, Brunei Darussalam, Chile, Costa Rica, France, Georgia, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, the Republic of Moldova, San Marino, Sweden and Switzerland.

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to adopt draft resolution A/71/L.35?

The representative of Lithuania has asked to speak in explanation of vote on the resolution just adopted. I remind her that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

I wish to make an explanation of vote on behalf of my country with regard to resolution 71/158. Lithuania co-sponsored the resolution, which reaffirms the indispensable role of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) with regard to non-proliferation and the use of atomic energy for peaceful purposes, as well as nuclear verification safety and security. My country aligns itself with the statement made on behalf of the European Union yesterday (see A/71/ PV.61). Nuclear energy is a viable solution, given the challenges facing the international community that arise from climate change and the need to ensure energy security. Yet nuclear energy has a future only if it is developed in the most responsible way and in conformity with the spirit and letter of the international safety standards and requirements. Lithuania appreciates the role of the IAEA in setting high nuclear-safety standards through the constant improvement of regulations, assistance in implementation and efforts to foster the concept of a safety culture. The implementation of stress tests and the IAEA’s safety standards, the adherence to the Nuclear Safety Convention and cooperation with specialized IAEA missions, including review missions of the Centre for Environment and Development for the whole nuclear cycle, should be integral parts of each and every nuclear-power programme. Bearing in mind the broader context of transboundary implications and in reaction to the statement delivered by the representative of Belarus, we are concerned about the fact that nuclear-energy sites are being built on my country’s borders without the proper implementation of international conventions, nuclear-safety standards and genuine dialogue with neighbours. The lack of transparency and essential information, especially with regard to site selection, seismic evaluation and emergency preparedness plans, is deeply alarming. Confidence-building and ensuring maximum safety are crucial for nuclear-energy development. The implementation of the IAEA safety standards, adherence to the Nuclear Safety Convention and cooperation with specialized IAEA missions for the whole nuclear fuel cycle, including site safety, should become inseparable from any nuclear-power programme. In acknowledgement of that desired outcome, therefore, and in the interest of ensuring the maximum safety level in nuclear power plants, we call on all countries implementing nuclear-energy projects to use the instruments provided by the IAEA and international conventions dating from the very beginning of the project in full compliance with the rules and requirements of the IAEA, the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context and other international and regional bodies in order to ensure a safe environment and the safe use of nuclear energy.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote. Several delegations have asked to speak in exercise of the right of reply. May I remind members that statements in the 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.

Yesterday in his statement (see A/71/PV.61), my colleague the representative of the Republic of Korea made unprecedented allegations about my country that we have not read in any report and that have not appeared in any document. We ask our colleague to provide us with further information concerning those allegations and to indicate if they have been corroborated through bilateral channels. We would have preferred it if, rather than accusing us, our colleague from South Korea had dispelled and disavowed information referring to the existence of nuclear weapons in my country, which would constitute a flagrant violation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

I would just like to underscore in my statement the untiring commitment of Belarus to the international norms and standards concerning nuclear energy, as well as the priority nature for us of ensuring nuclear safety and security and transparency in carrying out the construction of our first nuclear power plant. We stand ready for dialogue with all international partners, including our neighbours. For my country, which suffered the greatest impact of the Chernobyl, nuclear security is of primary importance. As I noted earlier in my statement, Belarus uses the tools provided by the International Atomic Energy Agency to countries that are embarking on nuclear programmes for the first time. We have hosted the assessment missions of the Agency on numerous occasions.

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 88?