A/71/PV.96 General Assembly

I now give the floor to the representative of Ecuador to introduce draft resolution A/71/L.70/Rev.1.

On behalf of the Group of 77 and China, I have the honour to introduce to the General Assembly the draft resolution entitled “New Partnership for Africa’s Development: progress in implementation and international support”, as contained in document A/71/L.70/Rev.1. The draft resolution highlights the progress made by African countries, with the support of development partners, in the implementation of various programmes and projects of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development. It also underscores the need to address the special development needs of Africa and to meet all pledges to support its development, with a view to promoting the effective and integrated implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the African Union’s 2063 Agenda and its first 10-year implementation plan. In particular, the draft resolution stresses the importance of continuing to promote the key elements that facilitate inclusive growth and the eradication of poverty, including agricultural development and food security; the development of infrastructure and regional integration; commerce and investment; official development assistance; the development of human capital and women’s empowerment; industrialization and structural economic transformation; and environmental sustainability. The draft resolution expresses concern about Africa’s scant level of participation in international trade and the growing debt burden of some African countries. It also stresses that due emphasis must be given to supporting Africa’s development priorities, in keeping with the 2030 Agenda. The draft resolution also highlights the key role that some of the primary results of the Addis Ababa Action Agenda can play in promoting the growth and development of Africa, including by bolstering international fiscal cooperation and combating illicit financial flows. In addition, the draft resolution recognizes the role of the African Union and that of regional economic communities in promoting the regional integration agenda, and it welcomes the progress made in ensuring the free movement of people, goods and services in Africa as an important step towards greater regional integration and the establishment of a continental free trade area. The draft resolution recognizes Africa’s vulnerability to the adverse effects of climate change and calls for the international community, including developed countries, to continue providing financial and non-financial support to enable Africa to address its adaptation needs, in line with the commitments made in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, including the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. By recognizing the importance of the growing partnership between the United Nations and the African Union, the draft resolution also welcomes the adoption of resolution 71/254, on the Framework for a Renewed United Nations/African Union Partnership on Africa’s Integration and Development Agenda 2017-2027 — also known as PAIDA — as the successor programme to the 2006 United-Nations Ten-Year Capacity-Building Programme for the African Union. The draft resolution also welcomes the efforts of the United Nations and the African Union to align the clusters of the Regional Coordination Mechanism for Africa with Africa’s development priorities. Finally, I should like to take this opportunity to express my thanks to the representatives of Algeria and Egypt for their commendable roles as coordinators on behalf of the Group of 77 and China. I would also like to thank the representatives of South Africa for their roles in facilitating the consultations on the draft resolution towards a successful conclusion and for doing their utmost to reach consensus on the document. I should also like to express my thanks to all delegations for their constructive commitment and participation, as well as the Office of the Special Adviser on Africa for its support throughout the entire consultation process.

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/71/L.70/Rev.1, entitled “New Partnership for Africa’s Development: progress in implementation and international support”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that, since the submission of the document, there have been no additional co-sponsors of draft resolution A/71/L.70/Rev.1.

May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/71/L.70/Rev.1? Before giving the floor to delegations in explanation of position, may I remind delegations that explanations are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of the Group of African States. The African Group would like to express its appreciation to all delegations for their support for resolution 71/320, which is of the utmost importance. For the past 15 years, the General Assembly has deliberated under this agenda item on draft resolutions that reflect the efforts of both African countries and organizations in implementing the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), but equally on the response of the international community in support thereof. Over those years, the Assembly has always reached consensus on the outcome of those deliberations through the successive resolutions it has adopted. We welcome the adoption by consensus today. The NEPAD resolution is of the utmost importance to Africa, as are the efforts undertaken to achieve the continent’s sustainable development. The resolution highlights challenges that the continent continues to contend with, such as addressing the fight against poverty, enhancing productive capacities and sharing job creation and supporting the needed expansion of health services, education and food security, among others. The resolution also stresses the importance of the international community in supporting the continent’s prosperity. It underlines the need to address Africa’s special development needs and fulfil all commitments to support Africa’s development, so as to promote an effective and integrated implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the African Agenda 2063 and its first 10-year implementation plan. An important aspect of the engagement by the international community is ensuring that the efforts of African countries in pursuing their development strategies are supported through sufficient means of implementation. Among its elements are debt relief, improved market access, support for the private sector and entrepreneurship, the fulfilment of commitments and official development assistance and increased flows of foreign direct investment and transfer of technology. In particular, the NEPAD resolution expresses concern in relation to Africa’s low share in international trade and the growing debt burden of some African countries. In the current global economic system, improved market access is very important for Africa, and for developing countries in general. Our view is that the interests of developing countries lie more in making sure that market access is improved. On one hand, improved access to markets will always depend upon the ability of those who seek that access, while also leaving the system intact. On the other hand, improved market access — what the resolution currently calls for — means changing the system, and therefore denotes a completely different meaning. Those elements are acknowledged and enjoy consensus within the international community as part of the enterprise of financing for development. In conclusion, the African Group wishes to express its appreciation once again to all delegations for joining and maintaining the consensus. The African Group will continue to work with all its partners to achieve our development aspirations.

We take this opportunity to make important points of clarification on resolution 71/320, on the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), and to underscore that this non-binding document does not create rights or obligations under international law. The United States applauds the efforts of the African Union to execute NEPAD. We support the overall mission of NEPAD to address the critical challenges of poverty, development and Africa’s marginalization internationally. In particular, NEPAD is an excellent example of an African solution to African problems, with support from like-minded international partners. The United States is proud to support the efforts of NEPAD and aims to remain engaged, so as to enhance and expand the successes of NEPAD. However, the United States remains deeply concerned about the trade references within the resolution. As a result, we must disassociate ourselves from paragraph 48. We cannot join the consensus on the reference to improved market access, because the United Nations is not a proper forum for such a discussion. We must also disassociate ourselves from paragraph 54. We cannot agree to language through which the United Nations opines on some Members’ trade policies towards other Members. In addition, we are confused by the reference to multilateral institutions. While certain multilateral institutions encompass trade issues within their mandates, multilateral institutions that are not customs unions do not have trade policies towards specific countries. We reject any interpretation of paragraph 54 that would suggest that the United Nations give direction to multilateral institutions with respect to member countries’ trade policies. While we applaud commitments to improve food security and nutrition, the United States disassociates itself from paragraphs 26 and 40 and notes such language does not have standing in future negotiations. We are troubled that its proponents are not willing to acknowledge that measures aimed at developing the industrial and agricultural sectors must be consistent with relevant international rules and obligations. The United States recognizes that every country wants to put in place measures to promote economic development and improve competitiveness. However, in the case of World Trade Organization (WTO) members, those measures must be consistent with WTO rules and obligations. That consistency is important if such measures are to facilitate progress towards sustainable development. The United States must also disassociate itself from the consensus on language related to climate change and the Paris Agreement. The United States recognizes that climate change is a complex global challenge, and we affirm our strong commitment to an approach that lowers emissions while supporting economic growth and improving energy security needs. We note that President Trump announced his intention to withdraw from the Paris Agreement but indicated openness to considering re-engaging in the Agreement on terms more favourable to the American people. The United States again raises its concern with references to technology transfer in paragraphs 48, 51 and 65 that do not indicate that such transfers must be on a voluntary basis and on terms mutually agreed by both parties. The United States continues to oppose language that we believe undermines intellectual property rights. The United States is disappointed to see ongoing references to the financial crisis of 2008 within the document. We note that the impacts of the financial crisis are no longer of any real relevance in the region, and continued references to it detract from focus on today’s challenges. Paragraph 15 captures the current challenges stemming from the fragility of and slowdown in global growth, including debt sustainability. We believe that sound economic policies and strong public financial management, along with structural reforms, are needed to enhance the quality of public investment and help to enable the private sector to flourish. These are key requirements for debt sustainability. The United States will remain a strong partner to African countries as they put in place the measures necessary to achieve sustained, inclusive growth. Regarding paragraph 55, the United States strongly believes that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Paris Club offer effective mechanisms for debt-crisis prevention and external debt problems and have the necessary mandate and expertise. Prudent debt management requires appropriate economic management by Governments, and the IMF offers tools to assist with that management. We also note our objection to the inclusion of the word “comprehensive”, which is not mitigated by the insertion of “as appropriate” after “debt cancellation”. As we have noted previously, the United States continues to hold that the term “illicit financial flows” in paragraph 68 has no agreed-upon international definition. In the absence of any common understanding of what constitutes such flows, we must instead focus our attention on preventing and combating illegal activities that produce or contribute to illicit financial flows, such as bribery, tax evasion, money-laundering and other corrupt practices. The United States is a strong proponent of taking concrete action to combat these illegal activities, and we have been active participants in relevant multilateral processes such as the United Nations Convention against Corruption, which is the only global legal instrument that provides a clear set of State party obligations to address these issues. However, we reiterate that discussions on such topics are best left to technical expert bodies such as the Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption and its working groups. With these clarifications, we will accept the adoption of the resolution for NEPAD.

We align ourselves with the statement made by the African Group on resolution 71/320, on the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD). Africa has since 2002 been committed to a bold and ambitious development path, recognizing that while it may not be able to change its past, it can and must shape its future and construct a new economic and development paradigm. In this light, Africa embarked on a multi-tiered process of economic renaissance. The elaboration of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development reflects a commitment to bringing the continent into a new age of peace, security, stability, economic growth and sustainable development. With this commitment, Africa received a promissory note of commitment and support globally, including from all development partners. This support is also manifested by the United Nations in this important annual resolution, which seeks to address the continent’s development and growth challenges and commits to initiatives to realize these agreed objectives, with the collaboration and partnership of the international community. Over the past two years, the international community has committed to a number of unprecedented and bold agreements, all of which embody the notion of partnership, with the overarching priority of poverty eradication. The resolution outlines the actions taken by African countries and organizations in pursuit of the achievement of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, as well as Africa’s Agenda 2063, together with a response by the international community. This entails the creation of an enabling environment through the availability of means of implementation, with continued support for measures to address the challenges of poverty eradication, hunger and malnutrition, job creation and sustainable development, including, as appropriate, debt relief, improved market access, fulfilment of official development assistance commitments, increased flows of foreign direct investment, technology transfer, capacity-building and support for the private sector and entrepreneurship on mutually agreed terms. The African continent has always enjoyed and appreciated the unequivocal support of the international community expressed in the adoption of this annual resolution by consensus since 2002. I take this opportunity to thank all delegations for their support and constant engagement during the informal consultations and for joining the consensus on the resolution just adopted. My delegation further expresses appreciation to the coordinators for their commitment and to the Office of the Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on Africa for its assistance.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of position. I shall now give the floor to those delegations that wish to make statements following the adoption of the resolution. 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. We are glad that consensus could be found on the text in front of us today (resolution 71/320). The text is certainly not perfect, but we have decided to support it in recognition of the efforts of the South African facilitators to bridge divergent positions. This was a difficult task, and we commend them for all their work. While we joined the consensus on the resolution, we have a number of substantive reservations on the text, some of which we would like to put on record today. First, last year’s explicit call for strengthening intra-African trade in what is now paragraph 33, as well as the provision on resisting protectionist tendencies in paragraph 53, have both disappeared from the final draft. We regret that and would like to underline that this does not represent any change of position on our side. Regional integration and international trade remain key engines of sustainable development. Secondly, no evidence has been provided to substantiate the provisions contained in paragraph 28, despite our repeated requests. We hereby formally ask that the next report of the Secretary-General back such assertions with concrete evidence. Thirdly, we believe that it is time to update language on the world financial and economic crisis to reflect today’s realities. We hope that this year’s session of the Second Committee can help us achieve that. Fourthly, the new paragraph 45, although quoting the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, is taken out of context. Its operational implications here are unclear, and we underline that this does not constitute a precedent for future resolutions. Without entering into details, I will add that this resolution has been used by some as a vehicle to fight for language that is not directly relevant to the issue under discussion. We will continue to resist such attempts. More generally, we have concerns as to the way this exercise is currently framed. In many ways, this is symptomatic of what we see as the ills of the General Assembly sustainable development cluster. In this respect, I should like to make four quick points. The first point is that the first informal consultation on this text took place on 30 May. That is two full months before the final text was put on the silence procedure. This process, we think, was unnecessarily time-consuming. Secondly, the resolution is far too long. Although it was brought down from 99 paragraphs in the zero draft to 92 paragraphs now, we do not feel that past pledges to look constructively at streamlining the document have been fully fulfilled. We fundamentally disagree with the logic that longer is by definition better. The structure of the text, three largely repetitive sections, contributes to this duplication. Thirdly, the resolution still largely duplicates the Commission on Social Development’s resolution on the New Partnership for Africa’s Development. We had received assurances last year that efforts would be made to articulate the two exercises in a more complementary manner, yet not much has happened. Reducing overlap by streamlining or merging the resolutions will strengthen readability and impact. Fourthly, as a result of our collective inability to fix those structural flaws, the overall narrative of the resolution has become somewhat unclear. Last but not least, we would question the need for adopting this resolution annually. Again, we contest the logic according to which higher frequency means higher importance. In that regard, more is not always better. I would like to request that this statement be included in the record of this meeting.

We have heard the last speaker on this item. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (a) of agenda item 62 and of agenda item 62 as a whole?

We shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/71/L.82. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

The following statement is made in accordance with rule 153 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly. Under the terms of paragraphs 5, 6, 7 and 8, the General Assembly would request the following. The Secretary-General would be requested to report to the General Assembly, by the end of its seventy- fourth session, on achievements, analysis and concrete recommendations on the possible further measures necessary to enable the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of relevant United Nations bodies on issues affecting them, building on the report of the Secretary-General on ways and means of promoting participation at the United Nations of indigenous peoples’ representatives on issues affecting them, the report of the Secretary- General on progress made in the implementation of the outcome document of the high-level plenary meeting of the General Assembly known as the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples, and the compilation of views transmitted by the President of the General Assembly, as well as on the informal discussions convened during the seventy-first session, as reflected in the relevant correspondence of the President of the General Assembly. The Assembly would also request the Secretary- General, with the support of Member States, to seek input from indigenous peoples from all regions of the world in preparing the report to be submitted at its seventy-fourth session, and in that regard would encourage the Secretary-General to hold regional consultations, including through the regional commissions, as appropriate, with the support of Member States and relevant agencies and entities of the United Nations system, before the nineteenth session of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, and would also request the Secretary-General to incorporate those inputs in the report. The Assembly would also decide to continue its consideration of possible further measures necessary to enhance the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in relevant United Nations meetings on issues affecting them at its seventy-fifth session, taking into account the achievements in that regard of other bodies and organizations throughout the United Nations system, to be preceded by consultations with indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions from all regions of the world as an input to the intergovernmental process. The Assembly would also request the President of the General Assembly, as part of the preparatory process for the consideration of such measures during its seventy-fifth session, to organize and preside over informal interactive hearings and to prepare a summary of each hearing, during its seventy-second, seventy- third and seventy-fourth sessions, on the margins of the sessions of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, with indigenous peoples, ensuring, to the extent possible, balanced regional representation. It is envisaged that the requests set out in the draft resolution would entail additional resource requirements as follows. Under section 2, General Assembly and Conference Management and Economic and Social Council Affairs, pursuant to paragraphs 5, 6 and 7, the Secretary- General would prepare a new report by the end of the seventy-fourth session, for consideration during the seventy-fifth session, on achievements, analysis and concrete recommendations on the possible further measures necessary to enable the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of relevant United Nations bodies on issues affecting them, while seeking input from indigenous peoples from all regions of the world in preparation for the report. Furthermore, pursuant to paragraph 8, the President of the General Assembly would organize and preside over informal interactive hearings on the sidelines of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and prepare a summary of each hearing, during the seventy-second, the seventy-third and the seventy-fourth sessions of the General Assembly, as part of the preparatory process for the consideration of the report of the Secretary- General during the seventy-fifth session. In order to implement the requests in the draft resolution, the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management would incur costs related to translation amounting to $55,600 during the biennium 2020-2021 as follows. Costs related to the translation of the new Secretary-General’s report, with a limit of 8,500 words, as requested in paragraphs 5 and 6, from English into all of the official languages, would amount to $27,800. Costs related to the translation of the compilation of inputs, with a limit of 8,500 words, as requested in paragraph 6, from English into all of the official languages would amount to $27,800. Any activities and related resource requirements during 2018-2019 related to section 2 would be undertaken within the amount proposed under the regular budget for the period 2018-2019. Under section 9, Economic and Social Affairs, pursuant to paragraphs 5 and 6, the Secretary-General would prepare a new report on achievements, analysis and concrete recommendations on the possible further measures necessary to enable the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of relevant United Nations bodies on issues affecting them, while seeking input from indigenous peoples from all regions of the world in the preparation of the report. The Department of Economic and Social Affairs would prepare, distribute, collate and analyse a survey of inputs from indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions from all regions of the world that would serve as input for the preparation of the draft report, before the nineteenth session of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, in 2020. Those inputs would be incorporated into the new report by the end of the seventy-fourth session of the General Assembly in 2020 and the Secretary-General’s report. In order to implement the requests in the draft resolution, including the proposal pursuant to paragraph 7, the following resource requirements, which will be funded by voluntary contributions, in the amount of $93,300, would be required during the period 2019- 2020: general temporary assistance at the P-3 level for 12 months amounting to $93,300 to implement the programme of work in support of the draft resolution, which is presently not being undertaken in the Secretariat. Temporary assistance is needed to prepare and distribute the survey, compile and analyse the survey responses and prepare the compilation for the nineteenth session of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, which, based on the current pattern of meetings, will convene in the first half of 2020. The drafting of the new Secretary-General’s report on achievements, analysis and concrete recommendations requires temporary staff to review, analyse and consolidate responses from various reports, compilations, informal discussions and inputs in order to prepare the draft recommendations on enabling the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of relevant United Nations bodies on issues affecting them. The temporary staff would consult with the necessary Secretariat departments and offices, including the Office of Legal Affairs and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, in the preparation of the Secretary-General’s report. The temporary staff would also coordinate with other Secretariat departments and contractors in connection with the editing, translation and preparation of the report. As this resource requirement, amounting to $93,300, would be funded by voluntary contributions, the adoption of draft resolution A/71/L.82 would not give rise to programme budget implications under section 9 of the proposed programme budget for the biennium 2018-2019 or the biennium 2020-2021. The additional resource requirements in the amount of $55,600 under section 2, General Assembly and Economic and Social Council Affairs and Conference Management, relating to the regular budget would be included in the proposed programme budget for the biennium 2020-2021. Accordingly, the adoption of draft resolution A/71/L.82 would not give rise to programme budget implications under the proposed programme budget for the biennium 2018-2019. Copies of the statement that I have just read out have been distributed desk-to-desk in the Hall and will also be made available on the PaperSmart Services portal.

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/71/L.82, entitled “Enhancing the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of relevant United Nations bodies on issues affecting them”. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt it?

Before giving the floor to speakers in explanation of position, may I remind delegations that explanations are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

I make this statement on behalf of Canada, Australia and New Zealand. In line with the outcome document of the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples (WCIP) and with the aims of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, we strongly believe that indigenous peoples have the right to participate and to be heard in decisions that affect them at the United Nations. Our countries have actively participated in the consultations and negotiations on this important issue, and we can congratulate the four advisers appointed by the President of the General Assembly — the Permanent Representatives of Ghana and Finland, and the two indigenous advisers, Mr. James Anaya and Ms. Claire Charters — for achieving this outcome. We thank them for their guidance and able leadership throughout the process. As our countries have stated previously, the commitment to enhance the participation of indigenous peoples in the United Nations is not a new concept. In 2014, at the WCIP, participants, including States, committed to consider ways to enable the participation of indigenous peoples in relevant meetings of the United Nations on issues affecting them. Thereafter, Member States were given a clear mandate by resolution 70/232 to adopt a draft resolution on indigenous participation by the end of the current session of the General Assembly. We are here today to formally satisfy that mandate, but, in doing so, our countries express disappointment that, after approximately two years of consultations, we have not been able to establish a new category for indigenous participation in the United Nations. It is extremely important, therefore, that resolution 71/321 ensures that the door remain open to enhancing the participation of indigenous peoples in the United Nations. Our countries remain firmly committed to that goal. We continue to urge all bodies and organizations throughout the United Nations system to work to enable the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in relevant meetings on issues affecting them. We look forward to the Secretary-General’s report on the achievements, analyses and concrete recommendations on further measures necessary to enable the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in the United Nations to be delivered by the end of the seventy-fourth session of the General Assembly. It is vital that we safeguard the progress already made by Member States, indigenous peoples and the advisers of the President of the General Assembly during the past two years. In that vein, we are pleased that the report will build on the consultations heard during the seventy-first session of the General Assembly and the Secretary-General’s previous report (A/70/84) on progress made in the implementation of the outcome document of the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples. It is also important to recognize the invaluable contributions of indigenous peoples throughout this consultation process. We thank the numerous individuals and representatives of institutions who travelled from often far and remote locations to share their views here at the United Nations. Their contributions were influential. They enriched and informed our discussions. We are pleased to note that the resolution that we adopted today will continue to enable the participation of indigenous peoples going forward, including through a series of interactive hearings to be held on the sidelines of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues from next year until the seventy- fourth session of the General Assembly. The mandated regional consultations will also be an essential element for our deliberations going forward, while ensuring that a broad range of views from indigenous peoples are carefully considered. We welcome the expansion of the mandate of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Peoples to assist representatives of indigenous peoples’ organizations and institutions to participate in the hearings to be organized by the President of the General Assembly. As our discussions move forward over the next few years, it will remain critical to our countries to ensure that the United Nations gives consideration to broader participation by indigenous peoples, including in the General Assembly. We remain committed to ensuring that indigenous peoples, wherever they live, are able to influence global decision-making at the United Nations, and we look forward to the day when indigenous peoples are able to engage across the United Nations, while speaking with independent voices even when they differ from those of Member States and presenting the views of peoples who have not been heard.

I take the floor on behalf of the Group of Like-minded Megadiverse Countries — including Bangladesh, Cameroon, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Morocco, Myanmar, Nigeria, the Philippines, the Russian Federation, Thailand, Viet Nam and my own country, China — to join the consensus on resolution 71/321, entitled “Enhancing the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of relevant United Nations bodies on issues affecting them”. The adoption of this resolution serves to underscore the decision to continue discussions on the significant, yet very complex, question of enhancing the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of the relevant United Nations bodies on issues affecting them. The diverse groups of indigenous peoples reflect the global diversity of the world’s populations. Therefore, although there has been an appreciable convergence of several aspects over the course of the three-year-long consultation process on the issue under consideration since the adoption of the outcome document of the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples (WCIP) in 2014, it is not surprising that significant divergence exists on several issues with regard to the whole spectrum of questions related to the issue. The broad-based and transparent consultation process, under the able guidance of the President of the General Assembly and the appointed advisers, was instrumental in facilitating a remarkable degree of understanding among Member States and indigenous peoples on a wide range of issues related to the complex views involved. On the one hand, the Member States have learned a lot about indigenous peoples and the issues affecting them. On the other hand, indigenous peoples have also been able to learn about the various sensitivities of Member States with regard to their positions and concerns. There is unanimous agreement that there is no internationally agreed-on definition of indigenous peoples, and that such peoples’ situations vary from region to region and from country to country. Not all countries have indigenous peoples, and ethnic and national minorities should be distinguished from indigenous peoples. The resolution recognizes that the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of the relevant United Nations bodies on issues affecting them should respect the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, as well as the sovereignty and territorial integrity or political unity of Member States. It should also maintain the intergovernmental nature of the United Nations. There are existing mechanisms that envisage and facilitate the participation of indigenous peoples in the work of the United Nations, such as the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Peoples and the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples. In that context, we understand that paragraph 4 of resolution 71/321 is applicable only to the arrangements that currently exist, and in accordance with the established rules and procedures of all bodies and entities within the United Nations, and should be read in conjunction with the decision enshrined in paragraph 7 of the resolution, which states that consideration of measures necessary to enhance the participation on indigenous peoples in relevant United Nations meetings on issues affecting them will continue at the seventy-fifth session. The resolution should not be misunderstood to be launching new mechanisms. Disagreement persists on several issues related to the process and the objectives, but the significant progress that has been made since the process began, resulting in the resolution just adopted today, is a landmark and a notable achievement. In that regard, we would like to once again convey our sincere appreciation to the advisers, who helped to establish a really fruitful and open atmosphere in the process and guided us with their valuable and unique expertise. We hope that our future discussions will maintain that spirit. We need to preserve the results that have been achieved and build on them in the next rounds of intergovernmental discussions led by Member States.

At the outset, on behalf of the four co-advisers, I would like to express our profound thanks to Member States and the representatives of indigenous peoples for their collective effort and the hard work that went into the negotiation of resolution 71/321. The advisers — Ambassador Kai Sauer, Permanent Representative of Finland, Ms. Claire Charters, Mr. James Anaya and myself — would like to take this opportunity to thank you, Mr. President, for the confidence that has been placed in us in entrusting us with this important task. We are grateful to you and your team for the support and encouragement that we have been given throughout the consultation and negotiation process. There can be no denying the fact that indigenous communities, by their very nature, face unique social, cultural and economic challenges. It is therefore imperative that we continue to conduct a dialogue on appropriate means for enabling their effective participation in the work of the Organization. In our view, the complex issues and challenges identified in the course of our consultations and negotiations, as well as the particular concerns expressed by Member States, can be resolved through continued dialogue. The willingness of the negotiating parties to reach out and understand the positions of the other side was evident, but fell short of reaching consensus on key issues. We are hopeful, however, that the spirit of compromise and good faith that led to the adoption of today’s resolution will be reflected in its implementation, as we move forward on enabling the participation of indigenous peoples in this body on issues that affect them. It is our hope that the gains that have been made through the resolution will be used to work for the positive development of all indigenous peoples across the globe and to help allay any misconceptions that might have hindered this issue’s speedy progress in the United Nations. Our Organization is committed to leaving no one behind in the quest for sustainable development. If we are to truly live by that principle, the time has indeed come for us to allow the voices of our indigenous peoples, wherever they exist, to be heard and to have a meaningful impact on our collective efforts as a global organization. I should not conclude without thanking my colleagues and co-advisers for their excellent cooperation and teamwork. I would also like to thank the secretariat of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and to all the staff of the Secretariat who have supported our work since we launched this process in March 2016. I must confess that this has been a great and rewarding learning experience for me and my co-advisers on indigenous issues, and I hope it has been the same for the several delegations that actively participated in the journey.

The Plurinational State of Bolivia would like to express its satisfaction at the General Assembly’s adoption by consensus today of resolution 71/321 and hopes that it will contribute to increasing indigenous peoples’ participation beyond the modalities already envisaged in the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Peoples and the Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Council on the rights of indigenous peoples. The resolution reaffirms our solemn commitment as Member States to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations in a spirit of cooperation with the world’s indigenous peoples. It also reflects our respect for the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples on conducting good-faith consultations and cooperating with indigenous peoples before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures affecting them, as well as establishing ways to ensure their participation in matters that concern them. The resolution also embodies the fulfilment of the commitments made at the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples to ensuring the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of the relevant United Nations bodies on matters that concern them. Bolivia’s history has been marked by years of exclusion of its indigenous peoples. Despite the fact that more than 60 per cent of the country’s population is indigenous, Bolivia, founded in 1825, did not have a President of indigenous origin until the election of Mr. Evo Morales Ayma’s Government in 2006. Since then, and with the adoption of our new 2009 Political Constitution, Bolivia identifies itself as a plurinational State, based on cultural plurality and respect for the rights of indigenous peoples. It recognizes, among other rights, their rights to freely exist; to their cultural identity, religious beliefs, practices and customs and their own view of the world; to self-determination, institutions that are part of the overall structure of the State, and their traditional knowledge; to have their languages, rituals, symbols and clothing valued, respected and promoted; and to be consulted, through the appropriate procedures, and to participate in State entities and institutions. In addition, and in that process of claiming the rights of indigenous peoples, Bolivia is the only country that has ratified, by law, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Through recognition and respect for the pre-colonial existence of native indigenous peoples and rural workers and ancestral control of their territories, Bolivia will continue to dismantle old colonial practices and will continue its efforts to respect and promote the rights of all indigenous peoples, at the national and international levels. In that regard, the Plurinational State of Bolivia hopes that resolution 71/321 will allow structural changes that guarantee the right to participation of the world’s indigenous peoples and, in particular, the empowerment and participation of indigenous young people and indigenous women in order to strengthen their leadership. We also hope that specific and appropriate participation mechanisms will be developed for those within the same population group who are most vulnerable, such as indigenous people with disabilities, indigenous women, indigenous children and elderly indigenous people.

The Government of Mexico welcomes the efforts undertaken to facilitate the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of relevant United Nations bodies on issues affecting them, in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 33 of the outcome document of the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples. We thank the Permanent Representative of Finland and the Permanent Representative of Ghana for their work at the forefront of this important negotiation process. We also commend the commitment and hard work of the two advisers on the indigenous process. Likewise, the delegation of Mexico also thanks all delegations for their constructive participation in the process. The delegation of Mexico takes the floor to explain the position that the Government of Mexico holds on an issue that it considers a priority, given that Mexico is pluricultural nation that was originally sustained by its indigenous peoples. In line with that position over time, Mexico has continued to actively promote the rights of indigenous peoples and to strengthen the issue’s normative and institutional framework, both within the United Nations and in other multilateral forums. In collaboration with various States and always in close cooperation with indigenous peoples’ representatives, Mexico has promoted historic processes that have resulted in tangible progress with regard to respect for, and the protection of, the individual and collective rights of indigenous people. It is now time to give tangible expression to the rights set forth in the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the commitments outlined in the Conference’s outcome document, including the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of the Organization’s bodies. Mexico firmly believes that the participation of indigenous peoples enriches the work of the United Nations. As with other specific groups, the principle of “nothing about us without us” is equally applicable to issues that affect indigenous peoples. Mexico joined the consensus on resolution 71/321 because we recognize that the text includes important elements, such as the request for a report by the Secretary-General, with concrete recommendations, interactive hearings and regional consultations with indigenous peoples, and the extension of the mandate of the Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Peoples. We believe that the negotiation process served to highlight the vast complexity of the issue of indigenous peoples within the Organization. We would like to underscore the space given to indigenous peoples throughout the entire process, as well as their active and ongoing positive participation, while, at the same time, regretting that, at times, Latin America was underrepresented. Two years after the beginning of the process that resulted in the resolution we just adopted, Mexico acknowledges that its outcome satisfies very few and falls far short of expectations. Mexico deeply regrets that the States Members of the United Nations have not reached an agreement on the approval of a new category that would allow indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions to participate in this session, and joined the consensus with lessons learned and a few conclusions. First, nothing in the text of the resolution we just adopted undermines the commitments made in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples or in the outcome document of the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples. Secondly, existing participation forums should be strengthened and, we hope, expanded in future. Thirdly, in order for indigenous peoples and Member States to join forces and work together, it is essential to assess both the region’s unique features and the intergovernmental nature of the Organization. We sincerely hope that the lessons learned from this process will inform the future work of the Assembly at its seventy-fifth session, when a new phase of this process begins. Please note, Mr. President, Mexico’s resolute support of your efforts to facilitate the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of the relevant United Nations bodies on issues affecting them.

In 2014, after the United Nations had been in existence for more than half a century, the first World Conference on Indigenous Peoples was held here. Ecuador supported the proposal to hold the conference from the start and took active part in organizing the event. It was a historic and special occasion that fostered the promotion and protection of the rights of indigenous peoples throughout the world. It is one of the commitments made at the Conference that has brought us here today. Our task is to consider ways to enhance the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of relevant United Nations bodies on issues affecting them. We acknowledge the work of the advisers to the President of the General Assembly in organizing consultations that sought to successfully meet the aspirations of indigenous peoples. My country, which is well aware that this is an outstanding issue for the international community and underscores the importance of achieving greater and more effective participation of indigenous peoples in the United Nations system, supported the process and contributed positively to it. We endorse the establishment of a new mechanism or committee that would select indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions to participate in meetings of the United Nations, and maintain geographic balance. We reiterate that indigenous peoples are not recognized as non-governmental organizations. It is therefore necessary to create a new category for indigenous peoples’ representatives or institutions. We underscore that any steps taken to enhance the participation of indigenous peoples must guarantee balanced geographic representation that ensures the presence and participation of, inter alia, the indigenous peoples of the region of Latin America and the Caribbean. The voice of indigenous peoples — their life experiences and knowledge — must be heard and recorded. It is therefore necessary to have the right participation procedures to enable them to do so, without undermining the intergovernmental nature of the Organization. Our Government is determined to recognize and celebrate diversity and to respect the rights of indigenous peoples and nationalities to preserver their own ways of life. Respect for collective rights is fundamental, as is respect for their social organization and legal systems. We must protect and promote their knowledge, the exercise of their rituals, their respectful relationship with nature, their production practices and fair trade. While Ecuador supports resolution 71/321, we regret that we were unable to reach agreement on enhancing the participation of indigenous peoples representatives’ and institutions in the meetings of relevant United Nations bodies on issues affecting them. Although we will revisit this topic at the General Assembly during its seventy-fifth session, it will be impossible for the aspirations of indigenous people to become a reality unless we overcome the economic, social, political and cultural gaps that have affected those people and nationalities since colonial times. Budgetary considerations and regional consultations will be essential for success the next time we consider this topic. Governments are obligated to act efficiently in adopting appropriate measures in order to honour the commitments undertaken in the outcome document of the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples. It is crucial to maintain a broad intercultural dialogue in order to jointly create solutions and alternatives — as a central tenet for cooperation and solidarity among indigenous States and peoples all over the world. Finally, the President of Ecuador, Mr. Lenín Moreno Garcés, sums up his commitment to dialogue with the following phrase “Nothing for you all without you all”. Attaining that objective nationally and internationally will be possible only with the participation of leaders and representatives of indigenous peoples and nationalities.

Viet Nam welcomes the adoption of resolution 71/321, entitled “Enhancing the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of relevant United Nations bodies on issues affecting them”, which creates momentum for the process of enhancing the participation of indigenous people’s representatives and institution on issues affecting them in the United Nations. We would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation to the President of the General Assembly and to the advisers for their great efforts to facilitate the process. On the way forward, we would like to emphasize the following. First, Viet Nam attaches great importance to international intergovernmental consultations as the best way to reach consensus and promote cooperation. During consultations among Member States over the past two years, we witnessed divergent views due to a diversity in backgrounds among countries and regions. We also saw the indispensable role of consultations in bringing countries closer to find common ground. The intergovernmental nature of that process must therefore be consistently upheld to develop greater understanding and consensus among all Member States. Secondly, while reaffirming the leading role of Member States in this process, Viet Nam sees the merit in engaging the indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions. In that regard, we take note of this engagement under various forms, as mentioned in paragraphs 5, 6 and 8 — with the understanding that those engagement activities will provide objective information for future considerations. Lastly, Viet Nam remains committed to actively participating in this process and looks forward to working with other Member States in a cooperative and constructive manner.

My delegation aligns itself with the statement made by the representative of the delegation of China on behalf of the Group of Like-minded States earlier today. India is a strong supporter of the promotion and protection of the rights of indigenous peoples. We supported the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in 2007. India is also supportive of the process of enhancing the participation of indigenous peoples and institutions in relevant meetings of United Nations on issues affecting them, as per resolution 70/232. We appreciate the efforts made by the advisers, the Member States and the indigenous peoples to implement that resolution. At the same time, during the consultation process, it was once again clear that there is no internationally agreed definition or criteria of identification of indigenous peoples. We would recall that the concept of indigenous peoples relates to specific situations of people who have suffered from historical injustices as a result of their colonization and the dispossession of their lands, territories and resources. That complex concept cannot be expanded arbitrarily to also include societies where diverse ethnic groups have lived together for thousands of years in order to create artificial divides. Because of that lack of clarity about the definition of indigenous peoples, today there are three different situations among Member States with regard to the concept of indigenous peoples — one group of countries that identifies certain sections of their populations as indigenous and as distinct from the other sections of non-indigenous peoples residing in the State; a second group that identifies their entire population as indigenous; and a third group that rejects the proposition that they have any indigenous population groups in their country. It is our understanding that the current process applies only to those countries that recognize indigenous peoples as distinct from the other non-indigenous people residing in the country. My delegation will continue to remain actively engaged in future consultations and intergovernmental negotiations on this issue in future in order to reach a decision by consensus.

Bangladesh thanks the advisers for their dedicated work and for helping us arrive at a pragmatic outcome, as reflected in resolution 71/321. Bangladesh aligns itself with the statement made by the representative of the People’s Republic of China on behalf of the Group of Like-minded delegations. However, we wish to add three points in our national capacity. First, Bangladesh did not join the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. We underline that the language contained in paragraphs 2 and 3 would not have any implication on our position vis-à-vis that document, which we do not consider to have universal application or relevance. Secondly, Bangladesh will continue to remain engaged with the issue of possible further measures to enhance the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in relevant United Nations meetings on issues affecting them at the General Assembly at its seventy-fifth session. We would, however, underscore the critical importance of maintaining the intergovernmental nature of the consultations, particularly on any outcome of the process. The process can indeed benefit from input from the indigenous people’s representatives and institutions based in countries where they are recognized as such. The regional consultations envisaged in paragraph 6 would need to remain mindful of the diverse positions and policies on this issue across countries and regions. Thirdly, the rigorous informal consultations in the past two years made it evident that, in the absence of any internationally agreed definition of indigenous peoples, there needs to be a creative solution to address the question of enhanced participation of indigenous people’s representatives and institutions in United Nations meetings. If we were to circumvent the need for a definition, then the issue would have to be addressed in a differentiated manner, corresponding to the diverse historic and political contexts across regions and countries on the subject. Any attempt to adopt a uniform approach would perhaps further risk widening divergence among Member States and compromise our collective efforts to create opportunities for enhancing participation in United Nations meetings involving indigenous peoples from countries where they are so recognized and deserve to contribute to discussions on issues affecting them.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of position. I would like to add my own sincere thanks to Ambassador Kai Sauer of Finland and Ambassador Martha Pobee of Ghana, as well as Ms. Claire Charters and Mr. James Anaya, the advisers to the informal consultations, for having so skilfully led the complex negotiations on this important matter. I also thank Member States for their valuable contributions to reaching an agreement on resolution 71/321. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 65 as a whole?

I now invite the attention of the General Assembly to draft resolution A/71/L.80, circulated under agenda item 106, “Crime prevention and criminal justice”. In order for the Assembly to take action on the draft resolution, it will be necessary to reopen consideration of agenda item 106. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to reopen consideration of agenda item 106 and proceed immediately to its consideration?

I now give the floor to the representative of Spain to introduce draft resolution A/71/L.80.

It is a pleasure to introduce draft resolution A/71/L.80 to the General Assembly today on behalf of its two principal sponsors, Guatemala and my own country, Spain. We wished to introduce this innovative draft resolution to help prevent and combat two forms of criminal activity that have so far been largely overlooked by the Assembly: trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal and trafficking in human organs. With this new initiative, we have sought to address three aspects of those crimes that we believe should be analysed: the human rights, health care and criminal aspects. We believe that, as a result of such an approach, we can develop much more effective national policies and partnerships at the international and regional levels to combat these crimes. We need a multidisciplinary approach, and we are introducing this draft resolution in the General Assembly today precisely to promote cooperation among the various agencies and bodies involved. The prevention and prosecution of the two types of crime we are facing require the cooperation and adequate training of authorities and health-care specialists, as well as State security forces and bodies, because the guiding principles of transplantation established by the World Health Organization are violated in both types of crime. That is why in the draft resolution we request the World Health Organization to develop international guidelines on the health, criminal and human rights aspects relating to those crimes, in collaboration with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Furthermore, we believe that a well-regulated national system for organ transplants is key to preventing and prosecuting those offences. Such crimes occur chiefly for two reasons — first, because of a growing structural imbalance between demand for and availability of organs available for transplant, and secondly, because of economic and social problems that render individuals involved in this kind of trafficking more vulnerable. Data provided by the Global Observatory on Donation and Transplantation reveal that in 2015, there were 126,670 organ transplants reported globally. Of that number, 84,000 were kidney transplants. It is estimated that such activity barely covers 10 per cent of global needs for transplants. The World Health Organization calculates that between 5 to 10 per cent of transplants around the world — and this is highly significant — are carried out using trafficked organs. That could be the tip of the iceberg of a problem that, due to a lack of research and information, may be much more widespread. Our countries consider that well-regulated national systems of transplants, regulated by the principles of transparency, equal access and altruism, could significantly reduce those cases of organ trafficking. We believe in a system based on the guiding principles of the World Health Organization on the transplant of human cells, tissues and organs. On behalf of Guatemala and Spain, I thank all countries that have sponsored this important draft resolution and have expressed their support for the initiative. I commend in particular the work of the experts of the various missions who conducted the negotiations of the draft resolution. Without their dedication, effort and commitment, it would have simply been impossible to present the ambitious resolution today.

We shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/71/L.80. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

The following statement is made in accordance with rule 153 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly and will be distributed desk-to-desk in the Hall and made available on the portal. Under the terms of paragraphs 10, 11 and 12, the General Assembly would request the World Health Organization, in collaboration with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), among other relevant bodies, to develop international guidelines on the health, criminal and human rights aspects relating to trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal and trafficking in human organs. The General Assembly would request the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime to engage in a dialogue with members of the Inter-Agency Coordination Group against Trafficking in Persons and other relevant intergovernmental international organizations, in particular the World Health Organization, in close consultation with Member States, so as to enable the Office to improve data collection and analysis on instances of trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal and relevant prosecutions, and to promote research among diverse fields, such as the medical and health management fields, as well as on the part of the anti-trafficking community, while bearing in mind that data on trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal are being gathered for the Global Report on Trafficking in Persons, in accordance with the provisions set out in General Assembly resolution 70/179, of 17 December 2015. The General Assembly would also request the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, in collaboration with other entities of the United Nations system, including the World Health Organization (WHO), to continue providing capacity-building and technical assistance to States, upon request, to assist them in strengthening national capacities to effectively prevent and combat trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal and trafficking in human organs. With regard to the request contained in operative paragraph 10, it is estimated that extrabudgetary resources in the amount of $405,400, inclusive of programme support costs, would be required to engage with the World Health Organization and the OHCHR in at least two meetings aimed at jointly developing international guidelines, with each of the three organizations focusing on its mandate, with UNODC responsible for developing international guidelines focusing on the criminal justice responses to combat trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal and trafficking in human organs; and develop and validate international guidelines aimed at identifying gaps in legislation and its application aimed at strengthening Member States’ knowledge of and capacity to combat the trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal and trafficking in human organs. The resource requirement includes the following cost elements: one professional post at the P-4 level for three working months to provide expertise and oversee the development of guidelines on the criminal aspects of trafficking in human organs based on the analysis of information provided by Member States and to engage in a dialogue with relevant international organizations ($56,300); one professional post at the P-3 level for six working months to organize the expert group meetings, provide substantial input to the drafting of the guidelines, guide the international consultant and oversee the conduct of the assessment missions and the drafting of the outcome reports ($90,500); one General Service (Other level) post for four working months to support the organization of the two expert group meetings and the assessment missions to the three countries ($39,300); local staff for three working months to support assessment missions ($13,800); consultancy service to support the research work, the substantial preparation of the two expert group meetings, the drafting of the issue paper, and the legislative assessment of six countries, including the three assessment missions ($44,700); travel costs to facilitate UNODC’s participation in meetings with WHO and OHCHR in Geneva for two trips by two staff members ($7,900); the conducting of two expert group meetings for two days in Vienna with 14 participants from various regions ($76,800); printing of the guidelines in 60 pages, including situational analysis ($18,100); and assessment costs for conducting a review of the relevant legislation in six countries from Africa, Asia and Latin America, including three country visits to selected countries from these regions ($58,000). With regard to the request contained in operative paragraph 11, it is estimated that extrabudgetary resources in the amount of $307,400, inclusive of programme support costs, would be required to assess status of knowledge and data availability in the field of trafficking in persons for organ removal, including the identification of relevant stakeholders in this field of work; engage with other United Nations entities, including through but not limited to the Inter-Agency Coordination Group against Trafficking in Persons and WHO, in conducting an expert group meeting for the selection of relevant indicators of trafficking in persons for organ removal for data collection, a meeting that will also identify possible research activities in the medical and health fields to improve knowledge on trafficking in persons for organ removal; carry out international data collection on the basis of the indicators selected at the meeting; report to and evaluate with the relevant stakeholders the information and data collected, and gather feedback for further improvements on data collection and analysis; and include the results in the different editions of the UNODC Global Report on Trafficking in Persons. No supplementing activities and costs are needed for the dissemination of this analysis. The resource requirement includes the following cost elements: one General Service (Other level) post for 12 working months to support data collection, storage and analysis as well as the organization of expert group meetings ($117,900); consultancy services to assess the status of knowledge, identify relevant stakeholders, evaluate and report the data and information collected, and communicate systematically with other United Nations entities ($106,700); travel costs to support consultations with United Nations entities: two trips to Geneva and one trip to New York by one staff member ($14,100); two expert group meetings for two days in Vienna with 10 participants from various regions ($46,100); information technology support in the development of informatics tools for the collection and storage of data on trafficking in persons for organ removal ($22,600). With regard to the request contained in operative paragraph 12, it is estimated that extrabudgetary resources in the amount of $572,100, inclusive of programme support costs, would be required to provide capacity-building and technical assistance to Member States. The objective would be to assist at least three Member States — one country from Africa, one country from Asia and one country from Latin America — in strengthening national capacities to effectively prevent and combat trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal and trafficking in human organs; and undertake a situational analysis of trafficking in persons for organ removal and organ trafficking in at least three Member States to ensure evidence-based policy and tailored capacity-building. Using as a basis UNODC’s 2015 Assessment Toolkit: Trafficking in Persons for Organ Removal, the assessment would include in-depth field work and interviews to analyse and draft recommendations on the following areas: legislative and policy framework; criminal justice sector response, including interviews with law enforcement, prosecutors and the judiciary; assistance and protection measures, including the immediate assistance needs of victims; screening procedures for organ donation, including measures to assess consent; assessment of medical and health-care professionals and staff to ascertain factors that increase the risk of trafficking in persons for organ removal and organ trafficking, and identify areas for future collaboration and cooperation; interviews with embassy and consulate staff to identify areas for cooperation, prevention and identification; and interviews with civil society. The resource requirement includes the following cost elements: one professional post at the P-4 level for one working month to guide the technical assistance and capacity-building efforts to prevent and combat trafficking in organs in three selected States ($18,800); one professional post at the P-3 level for six working months to lead the country assessments and the technical assistance provided to the three countries and to oversee the development of specialized investigative tools ($90,500); one General Service (Other level) post for two working months to support the organization of the assessment missions and technical assistance activities as well as the recruitment of consultants ($19,700); and local staff support for nine working months shared among the various countries ($41,400). In addition, it would include national and international consultancy services to conduct assessments on trafficking in persons for organ removal, including detailed legislative and policy analysis, fieldwork and research among key stakeholders in the three countries, to develop the specialized investigative tools and to support the delivery of technical assistance activities to the countries — $129,800; costs on assessment on trafficking in persons for organ removal, including detailed legislative and policy analysis, fieldwork and research among key stakeholders — $65,300; the development of specialized investigative tools, i.e., video crime scene investigation interactive tool and accompanying basic module, adapted to the national legislative and policy context — $18,500; three specialized capacity-building workshops per country, subject to analysis and recommendations from the assessments, targeting law enforcement, prosecutors, judiciary, health officials, medical and transplant professionals, as well as civil society — $188,100. The activities related to the requests contained in operative paragraphs 10, 11 and 12 would be carried out in 2018 provided that the extrabudgetary resources mentioned above are made available. The related additional resource requirements are summarized as follows: other staff costs for additional requirements in 2018 — $419,800; consultants — $322,900; experts — $275,300; staff travel — $70,800; contractual services — $42,200; general operating expenses — $6,000; subtotal net — $1,137,000; programme support costs of 13 per cent — $147,900; which amounts to a total of $1,284,900. Hence, the adoption of draft resolution A/71/L.80 would not entail any additional appropriation under the programme budget for the biennium 2016-2017 and the proposed programme budget for the biennium 2018-2019.

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/71/L.80, entitled “Strengthening and promoting effective measures and international cooperation on organ donation and transplantation to prevent and combat trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal and trafficking in human organs”. For the Assembly’s information, the draft resolution has closed for e-sponsorship. I now 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 in the document, the following countries have also become sponsors of A/71/L.80: Armenia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Bulgaria, Cabo Verde, Croatia, Cyprus, Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Latvia, Lithuania, Malaysia, Malta, Panama, Peru, the Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Sao Tome and Principe, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the United Kingdom and Uruguay.

May I take it that the General Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/71/L.80?

Before giving the floor for explanations of position, may I remind delegations that explanations are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

We would like to begin by thanking Spain, in particular Victoria Ortega and María José Castillo, for guiding the negotiations of Member States in order to bring attention to two important, yet overlooked, global issues, those of trafficking in human organs and trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal. The number of individuals in need of life-saving organ transplants far exceeds the number of viable and available organs around the world. This window of need has created a black market for the purchase of organs and poses health risks to both the individuals who sell their organs out of desperation or are coerced into organ removal, as well as those receiving these organs. The motive to purchase an organ is an understandable one. The United States has joined the consensus but regrets that resolution 71/322 moved away from a health-oriented, regulatory focus in favour of a crime-focused approach to the issue. Many of the measures set forth in this resolution have the potential, however, to advance States’ efforts and international cooperation on organ donation and transplantation and contribute to preventing and combating both trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal and trafficking in human organs. While these two crimes — trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal and trafficking in human organs, — both prey on the poor and the desperate, the black market of human organs is supplied both by people who sell their organs under desperate situations and those who are forced, defrauded or otherwise coerced into having their organs removed. The United States would like to underscore the importance of maintaining the distinctions between the two crimes. The crime of organ trafficking, clearly established in the vast majority of Member States’ laws, makes it illegal to both sell and to buy organs. While recognizing this as a criminal activity, States may recognize that individuals who sell their organs are desperate and may have been driven to make ill-advised decisions for a variety of reasons. Nonetheless, their decisions to sell their organs contribute to a black market industry built on their and others’ suffering, and pose risks to their health, putting them in harm’s way and at risk of being exploited by human traffickers. Regardless of individual circumstances, people trafficking in organs, even their own, are in fact engaged in a crime, and as such States do not have an international law obligation to protect them. The United States has therefore emphasized that the distinction be made between individuals who sell their organs, and who are contributing to a crime, and individuals who are defrauded or coerced into having their organs removed, who are victims of a crime. The United States remains concerned that this critical distinction is not maintained throughout the resolution. Also, while the resolution refers to “individuals who sell their organs”, it also refers to this same group as organ “donors” or “victims” even when an individual receives a monetary benefit. This incongruity obfuscates the focus of the resolution, which is to promote effective measures and cooperation relating to organ donation and prevent and combat the illegal selling and buying of organs, as well as the more egregious removal of organs by force, fraud or coercion. Furthermore, although the United States makes substantial efforts to meet the interests of victims in all federal prosecutions, including the protection of their dignity and physical security, the United States Constitution, under its due process and sixth amendment confrontation clauses, precludes any legislation that purports to grant anonymity to victims. Those fundamental provisions accord defendants a right to the evidence against them, including the ability to confront their accusers. No federal, state or international legislation can contravene these individual rights. Accordingly, the United States is not able to fulfil the request to protect anonymity as detailed in paragraph 9 (b). Nevertheless, United States prosecutors can and routinely make every reasonable effort to protect the dignity and security of victims. In conclusion, the United States remains committed to working with other countries to pool resources and broaden coordination to end both trafficking in human organs and trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal. However, the United States maintains its position that anyone who sells any of their organs is in fact neither an organ donor or a victim. As long as these distinctions continue to be ignored, as this resolution ignores them, the international community will inadvertently continue to support the black-market industry of organ trafficking and continue to jeopardize the health of those who sell their organs, those who are victims of human trafficking for the purpose of organ removal, and those organ recipients who rely on the black market for their health needs.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of position. I give the floor to the Permanent Observer of the Observer State of the Holy See to the United Nations. Archbishop Auza (Holy See): I would just like to express my delegation’s sincere gratitude to the Permanent Missions to the United Nations of Spain and Guatemala, as well as to the entire membership for the successful negotiation and adoption of resolution 71/322. My delegation hopes that this resolution will lead Member States to consider consolidating further effective and invaluable national, regional and international initiatives and instruments to provide medical and ethical guidelines for the donation and transplantation of organs, as well as combatting trafficking in them. Organ donation and transplantation are a testament to human progress and goodwill and the amazing progress of medical science. We must ensure that the practice remain safe, transparent and voluntary. In that regard, my delegation welcomes all commitments to address the many economic and social inequalities that lead people to provide or sell their organs involuntarily. The Holy See condemns in the strongest possible terms the criminal networks that prey upon the vulnerable and profit from their exploitation, in particular in trafficking in persons and in the involuntary removal and trafficking of organs.

We have heard the last speaker on this item. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 106?

The General Assembly meets today to adopt the latest draft resolution (A/71/1007, para. 64) on the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly. This year’s draft resolution follows the General Assembly’s long-standing annual practice of working to continuously enhance its role, authority, effectiveness and efficiency, and to improve the ability of the United Nations to fulfil its mandate under the Charter of the United Nations. To that end, I thank all delegations for their hard work, dedication and constructive engagement throughout the consultation process. This year’s draft resolution includes a number of key developments to make a more effective General Assembly. It includes provisions relating to the alignment of the General Assembly’s agenda with the Sustainable Development Goals and will facilitate ongoing consideration of ways to address gaps and duplication in the General Assembly’s agenda as it relates to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. It includes changes to the way in which the Journal of the United Nations will be published, thereby reflecting the Organization’s commitment to multilingualism. I am pleased to see that it includes provisions on the need to enhance decorum during the high-level segment of the general debate and that it provides a foundation for further improvements to be made in that area. I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to Ambassador Vladimir Drobnjak of Croatia and Ambassador Lana Zaki Nusseibeh of the United Arab Emirates for their outstanding leadership of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Revitalization of the Work of the General Assembly, and for steering that process through to a successful outcome. The process of revitalizing the work of the General Assembly is not an easy one, but is a necessary task. It is one that requires diligence, determination and an unwavering commitment to ensuring that the General Assembly can best fulfil its role of guiding the critical work of the United Nations. I wish all delegations the very best for their work during the seventy-second session of the General Assembly in pursuit of our goal to revitalize the Assembly so that it continues to be in the best possible shape to carry out the great global responsibilities that have been given it. We shall now proceed to consider the draft resolution. In this connection, since the report of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Revitalization of the Work of the General Assembly (A/71/1007) was circulated only this morning, it will be necessary to waive the relevant provision of rule 78 of the rules of procedure, which states that: “[a]s a general rule, no proposal shall be discussed or put to the vote at any meeting of the General Assembly unless copies of it have been circulated to all delegations not later than the day preceding the meeting”. Unless I hear any objections, I shall take it that Assembly agrees with my proposal of waiving rule 78.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution, entitled “Revitalization of the work of the General Assembly”, which is contained in paragraph 64 of the report of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Revitalization of the Work of the General Assembly (A/71/1007). May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt the draft resolution?

Before giving the floor for explanations of position, may I remind delegations that explanations are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group (ACT), a cross-regional group composed of 25 small and mid-sized countries seeking to improve the working methods of the Security Council: Austria, Chile, Costa Rica, Denmark, Finland, Gabon, Ghana, Hungary, Ireland, Jordan, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, the Maldives, New Zealand, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Portugal, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, Uruguay and my own country, Estonia. We welcome the Assembly’s adoption today of resolution 71/323 and would like to thank the Permanent Representatives of Croatia and the United Arab Emirates, the co-Chairs of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Revitalization of the Work of the General Assembly, for their excellent work, creativity and dedication. The ACT group would like to make a few comments on the cluster dealing with the selection and appointment of the next Secretary-General and other executive heads, as addressed in the resolution. After the Ad Hoc Working Group’s consensus agreement on resolutions 69/321 and 70/305, which dramatically improved the level of transparency in the process of selecting the Secretary-General, the natural next step would be solidifying those achievements without delay. In that regard, the ACT group regrets that for the resolution just adopted the Working Group was not able to reach a consensus on wording for the lessons-learned process of the most recent and genuinely historic selection of the Secretary-General. ACT and other groups have recently concluded their assessments of the selection process so that they can be used to contribute to future versions of the process. In the view of the ACT group, there are two broader issues that still remain to be thoroughly discussed in the sessions leading up to the next selection. The first concerns communication between the Security Council and the General Assembly and the second, the selection and appointment of senior officials.

I would first like commend and thank Ambassadors Drobnjak, of Croatia, and Nusseibeh, of the United Arab Emirates, for their leadership and the commitment with which they guided the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Revitalization of the Work of the General Assembly. Their guidance was unquestionably essential to achieving resolution 71/323, which both strengthens various concepts in the resolutions adopted in 2015 and 2016 and incorporates innovative elements. My delegation welcomes the fact that the language in today’s resolution keeps to the parameters of transparency, accountability, best practices and inclusiveness that were so fundamental to resolutions 69/321 and 70/305, of 2015 and 2016, respectively. I would like to briefly cite some of those achievements. In my delegation’s view, in the area of transparency, one of the lessons learned in the process of selecting the Secretary-General was the importance of holding informal hearings before the Assembly met, and then presenting documents that included the visions of candidates and the guiding principles that would govern their work in office. The success and usefulness of that process has now led to the inclusion of a similar procedure for the selection of the candidates for the presidency of the General Assembly at its seventy- third session. It has also led to the creation of a tool to enable the States Members of the United Nations to publish information about the various parallel events held at Headquarters throughout the year, and has institutionalized the continuous broadcasting of the general debate as well as the thematic meetings of the Ad Hoc Working Group. Furthermore, with regard to the goal of improving the current system of elections and candidature campaigns, we studied the possibility of establishing a code of conduct that could be adopted with the goal of enhancing the Assembly’s standards and its norms of transparency and equity. Improvements can also be made in the area of accountability in the interaction between Permanent Missions and the Secretariat through periodic interactive dialogues and the establishment of focal points in the Department of Management. With regard to best practices, I should emphasize the importance of instituting regular meetings between the outgoing and incoming Presidents of the General Assembly and the Chairs of the six Main Committees. Unfortunately, where inclusivity is concerned, there should have been a little more effort to have women represented as Committee Chairs. The importance of all of those elements has increased in the wake of the current efforts of the Secretary-General and Member States’ commitment to promoting and ensuring gender equality throughout the United Nations system. In conclusion, I would like to mention how important it will be to have consultations with all Member States on strategic approaches to dealing with potential duplication and gaps among the items on the General Assembly’s agenda with regard to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which will undoubtedly help us to implement the activities and mandates of our Organization more effectively.

In his statement, the representative of Colombia mentioned the Chairs of the Committees and the fact that the outgoing President of the General Assembly should perhaps have had more to do with that. I would like to go on record before the Assembly as saying how disappointed I am that there are no women Committee Chairs at the seventy-second session. In front of everyone here I am on record as saying that. But it has nothing to do with the outgoing President of the General Assembly; it is the Member States that make those decisions. I have said — and I hope it will be one of my legacies — that we are relying on the regional groups to address this issue. If we want to have gender parity in our representation, particularly for the important Chairs of the six Main Committees, it is up to the regional groups to nominate women to put forward. The Assembly generally simply accepts whomever the regional groups propose. So it is the Member States that should address the matter through their regional groups. It is not for either outgoing or incoming Presidents of the Assembly to do something about. I put that back to the States very firmly.

On behalf of my colleague Ambassador Lana Nusseibeh and myself, I would like to express our satisfaction with the successful outcome of our efforts under the auspices of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Revitalization of the Work of the General Assembly. With today’s adoption of resolution 71/323 we have a good resolution before us and every confidence that it will further improve and enrich the work of the General Assembly. Our sincere appreciation goes to Member States for all the constructive cooperation and creative assistance they have given us during the seventy-first session. It has been a privilege to chair the Ad Hoc Working Group, and I do not exaggerate when I say that today’s resolution is a success for us all. Once again, consensus has carried the day, demonstrating how much can be achieved when we work together in a spirit of creative compromise and with clear common goals before us. Two years ago, resolution 69/321 focused primarily on the area of the selection and appointment of the Secretary-General, bringing multiple improvements to the process. Last year, resolution 70/305 emphasized strengthening the Office of the President of the General Assembly and increasing its accountability. We should recall that a code of ethics for the President of the General Assembly is now included, as annex XI, in the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, and that as a result of resolution 70/305, His Excellency Mr. Peter Thomson became the first President of the Assembly in the history of the United Nations to take an oath of office. During the seventy-first session, our work in the Ad Hoc Working Group was aimed mainly at improving working methods. Among our achievements this year I would particularly like to underline the efforts to improve the interactive dialogue between Permanent Missions and the Secretariat; the decision to publish the first part of the Journal of the United Nations in all six official languages of the United Nations throughout the year, starting on 1 January 2018; and improvements in election procedures and balloting. In addition, special attention should be given to paragraph 30 of the new resolution, which is designed to align the agenda of the General Assembly with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. We would like to sincerely thank the Secretariat and, in particular Ms. Ruth de Miranda and Mr. Georg Zeiner, for their continuous and highly professional support extended throughout the year. Last but definitely not least, we sincerely thank the President of the General Assembly at its seventy-first session, Mr. Peter Thomson, and his team for all the confidence entrusted in the co-Chairs and all assistance provided. It was indeed an honour to chair this ground-breaking process and, once again, we thank the Assembly.

I am sure that all Member States agree with what I said earlier about thanking both the Permanent Representative of Croatia and the Permanent Representative of the United Arab Emirates for their great leadership and very important work. We have heard the last speaker in explanation of position. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 121?

I now give the floor to the Permanent Representative of Brazil, who will introduce draft resolution A/71/L.84.

On behalf of the States members of the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries (CPLP) — Angola, Cabo Verde, Guinea- Bissau, Equatorial Guinea, Mozambique, Portugal, Sao Tome and Príncipe, Timor-Leste and my own country, Brazil — it is my honour to introduce, under agenda item 126 (t), draft resolution A/71/L.84, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries”. The Community encompasses 276 million people in nine countries and four continents, bound by a common language and strong cultural ties. Portuguese is the fifth most spoken language in the world. The Community’s goals are to strengthen diplomatic and political dialogue, enhance cooperation in all areas and promote the Portuguese language. The CPLP is committed to reinforcing cooperation among its member States and with other States and regional and multilateral organizations, such as the United Nations and its agencies, funds and programmes. At the eleventh Summit of Heads of State and Government of the CPLP, held in Brasilia on 31 October and 1 November 2016, on the theme “The Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”, leaders recognized the need to further promote political dialogue, the exchange of experiences and cooperation to support, within the Community, the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. At the conference, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia and Uruguay were admitted as associate observers. The Community was fortunate to have the then Secretary-General-designate, António Guterres, present at its eleventh Summit. He was the first citizen of a Portuguese-speaking country to occupy such a distinguished position. As stated during the debate on strengthening cooperation between the United Nations and regional and subregional organizations, the CPLP is committed to the same general principles underlying the functioning of the United Nations. The draft resolution aims to deepen the CPLP’s partnership with the United Nations in the pursuit of common objectives, particularly in the sectors of human rights, health, education, science, culture, food and agriculture, public administration and science and technology. The draft resolution recalls the importance of civil society and the private sector in the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals within the Community and notes with appreciation the first Global Economic Forum of Portuguese-speaking Countries, held in Timor-Leste in February 2016. It also stresses the importance of partnerships to improve coordination and cooperation in peacebuilding and sustaining peace. The draft resolution also takes note, with appreciation, of the CPLP’s commitment to the promotion of human rights, as well as to gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls. The draft resolution stresses the need for Guinea- Bissau to continue to take concrete steps towards peace, security and stability, welcomes the adoption of the six- point road map brokered by the Economic Community of West African States, and endorses the Conakry Agreement as the primary framework for a peaceful resolution of the political crisis. It notes the active engagement of the Secretary-General and his Special Representative for Guinea-Bissau and recognizes the role played by the Peacebuilding Commission and the United Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office in Guinea-Bissau. The draft resolution also welcomes the support of the international community for Guinea- Bissau’s efforts in strengthening its democratic institutions and moving towards sociopolitical stability, reconciliation and economic development. In conclusion, on behalf of the CPLP member States, allow me to express our deep appreciation to the countries that contributed to enriching the text and those that sponsored the draft resolution. We are very pleased with such a high level of sponsorship and support this year, and therefore kindly request that the draft resolution be adopted without a vote.

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/71/L.84, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries”. I now 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 also become sponsors of A/71/L.84: Algeria, Armenia, Bangladesh, Belarus, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Botswana, Burundi, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Denmark, Djibouti, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Germany, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Liechtenstein, Malaysia, Mexico, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Namibia, Nauru, the Niger, Norway, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Qatar, the Republic of Moldova, the Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Singapore, South Africa, the Sudan, Sweden, Thailand, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United States of America, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Viet Nam and Zimbabwe.

May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/71/L.84?

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (t) of agenda item 126?

I now invite the attention of the General Assembly to draft decision A/71/L.85, circulated under sub-item (x) of agenda item 126, “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Organization for Democracy and Economic Development - GUAM”. In order for the Assembly to take action on the draft decision, it will be necessary to reopen consideration of the sub-item. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to reopen consideration of sub-item (x) of agenda item 126?

The Assembly will now take action on draft decision A/71/L.85, entitled “Succession by the Organization for Democracy and Economic Development – GUAM in the General Assembly”. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft decision A/71/L.85?

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (x) of agenda item 126?

Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 16 September 2016, the Assembly decided to include this item in the agenda of the seventy- first session. It is my understanding that it would be desirable to include agenda item 31 in the draft agenda of the seventy-second session of the General Assembly. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to include agenda item 31 in the draft agenda of its seventy-second session?

May I also take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 31?

Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 16 September 2016, the Assembly decided to include agenda item 33 in the agenda of the seventy-first session. It is my understanding that it would be desirable to defer consideration of this item to the seventy-second session of the General Assembly. May I therefore take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to defer consideration of this item and to include it in the provisional agenda of its seventy- second session?

May I also take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 33?

Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 16 September 2016, the Assembly decided to include this item in the agenda of the seventy-first session. In connection with this item, I have received a letter dated 15 August 2017 from the representative of Azerbaijan, requesting that consideration of this item be deferred to the seventy- second session of the Assembly. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to defer consideration of this item and to include it in the draft agenda of its seventy-second session?

May I also take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 37?

Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 16 September 2016, the Assembly decided to include this item in its agenda on the understanding that there would be no consideration of this item by the Assembly until further notice. In connection with the item, I have received a note verbale dated 11 April 2017 from the Permanent Mission of the Comoros to the United Nations requesting the inclusion of this item in the provisional agenda of the seventy- second 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- second session?

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 38?

Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 16 September 2016, the Assembly decided to include item 40 in the agenda of the seventy- first session, in accordance with decision 60/508, of 31 October 2005. In decision 60/508, the General Assembly decided that this item shall remain on the agenda for consideration upon notification by a Member State. Accordingly, this item has been included in the draft agenda of the seventy-second session. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 40?

Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 16 September 2016, the Assembly decided to include items 41 to 46 in the agenda of the seventy-first 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 a Member States. Accordingly, these items have been included in the draft agenda of the seventy-second session. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda items 41 to 46?

Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 16 September 2016, the Assembly decided to include this sub-item in the agenda of the seventy-first session. It is my understanding that it would be desirable to defer consideration of this sub-item to the seventy-second session of the General Assembly. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to defer consideration of sub-item (i) of agenda item 115 and to include it in the draft agenda of its seventy-second session?

May I also take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (i) of agenda item 115?

Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 16 September 2016, the Assembly decided to include this item in the agenda of the seventy- first session. It is my understanding that it would be desirable to include this item in the draft agenda of the seventy-second session of the General Assembly. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to include agenda item 120 in the draft agenda of its seventy-second session?

May I also take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 120?

Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 16 September 2016, the Assembly decided to include this item in the agenda of the seventy- first session. It is my understanding that it would be desirable to include this item in the draft agenda of the seventy-second 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 123 in the draft agenda of the seventy-second session?

May I also take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (a) agenda item 123?

Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 16 September 2016, the Assembly decided to include this item in the agenda of the seventy-first session. In connection with this sub-item, I have received a note verbale dated 5 September 2017 from the Permanent Mission of Algeria to the United Nations requesting, on behalf of the Group of African States, the deferral of this sub-item to the seventy- second session. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to include sub-item (a) of agenda item 126 in the draft agenda of the seventy-second session?

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (a) of agenda item 126?

Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 16 September 2016, the Assembly decided to include this item in the agenda of the seventy-first session. It is my understanding that it would be desirable to defer consideration of this item to the seventy-second session of the General Assembly. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to defer consideration of agenda item 155 and to include it in the draft agenda of its seventy-second session?

May I also take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 155?

Members will recall that, at its 2nd plenary meeting, on 16 September 2016, the Assembly decided to include this item in the agenda of the seventy- first session. In connection with this item, I have received a letter dated 5 September 2017 from the representative of Guyana to request that consideration of this item be deferred to the seventy-third session of the Assembly. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to defer consideration of this item and to include it in the provisional agenda of its seventy-third session?

May I also take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 15?