A/72/PV.73 General Assembly

Tuesday, Dec. 19, 2017 — Session 72, Meeting 73 — New York — UN Document ↗

The meeting was called to order at 10.05 a.m.
Vote: A/RES/72/153 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
✗ No (2)
✓ Yes (123)
Vote: A/RES/72/178 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
— Abstain (2)
✗ No (1)
✓ Yes (183)
Vote: A/RES/72/173 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
✓ Yes (187)
Vote: A/RES/72/170 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
✓ Yes (136)
Vote: A/RES/72/174 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
✓ Yes (134)
Vote: A/RES/72/160 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
— Abstain (4)
✓ Yes (176)
Vote: A/RES/72/156 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
✓ Yes (133)
Vote: A/RES/72/166 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
— Abstain (1)
✓ Yes (188)
Vote: A/RES/72/168 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
✓ Yes (134)
Vote: A/RES/72/158 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
✓ Yes (128)
Vote: A/RES/72/157 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
✓ Yes (133)
Vote: A/RES/72/141 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
✓ Yes (184)
Vote: A/RES/72/189 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
✓ Yes (81)
Vote: A/RES/72/185 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
— Abstain (3)
✓ Yes (129)
Vote: A/RES/72/164 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
✓ Yes (175)
Vote: A/RES/72/167 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
✓ Yes (140)
Vote: A/RES/72/172 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
— Abstain (5)
✓ Yes (129)
Vote: A/RES/72/191 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
✓ Yes (109)
Vote: A/RES/72/190 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
— Abstain (76)
Vote: A/RES/72/162 Recorded Vote
Show country votes
✓ Yes (187)

Reports of the Third Committee

The President #83141
The General Assembly will consider the reports of the Third Committee on agenda items 27, 28, 64, 67 to 72, 107, 108, 121 and 137. I request the Rapporteur of the Third Committee, Mr. Edgar Andrés Molina Linares of Guatemala, to introduce the reportts of the Committee in one intervention.

27.  Social development (a) Implementation of the outcome of the World Summit for Social Development and of the twenty-fourth special session of the General Assembly (b) Social development, including questions relating to the world social situation and to youth, ageing, disabled persons and the family Report of the Third Committee (A/72/431)

Vote: 31/37 Consensus

28.  Advancement of women (a) Advancement of women (b) Implementation of the outcome of the Fourth World Conference on Women and of the twenty- third special session of the General Assembly Report of the Third Committee (A/72/432)

Vote: 31/37 Consensus

64.  Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, questions relating to refugees, returnees and displaced persons and humanitarian questions Report of the Third Committee (A/72/433)

Vote: 31/37 Consensus

68.  Promotion and protection of the rights of children (a) Promotion and protection of the rights of children (b) Follow-up to the outcome of the special session on children Report of the Third Committee (A/72/435)

Vote: 31/37 Consensus

107.  Crime prevention and criminal justice Report of the Third Committee (A/72/440)

Vote: 31/37 Consensus

108.  International drug control Report of the Third Committee (A/72/441)

Vote: 31/37 Consensus
The President #83142
I thank the Rapporteur of the Third Committee. The positions of delegations regarding the recommendations of the Committee have been made clear in the Committee and are reflected in the relevant official records. Therefore, if there is no proposal under rule 66 of the rules of procedure, I shall take it that the General Assembly decides not to discuss the reports of the Third Committee that are before the Assembly today.

70.  Elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance (a) Elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance (b) Comprehensive implementation of and follow- up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action Report of the Third Committee (A/72/437)

Vote: 31/37 Recorded Vote
✓ 133   ✗ 2   49 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (133)

71.  Right of peoples to self-determination Report of the Third Committee (A/72/438)

Vote: 31/37 Recorded Vote
✓ 128   ✗ 51   6 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (128)
It was so decided.
The President #83143
Statements will therefore be limited to explanations of vote or position. I would like to remind members that, in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, a delegation should, as far as possible, explain its vote only once, that is, either in the Committee or in plenary meeting, unless that delegation’s vote in plenary meeting is different from its vote in the Committee. I would also like to remind members that explanations are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats. Before we begin to take action on the recommendations contained in the reports of the Third Committee, I should like to advise representatives that we are going to proceed to take decisions in the same manner as was done in the Committee, unless the Secretariat is notified otherwise in advance. This means that, where separate or recorded votes were taken, we will do the same. I would also hope that we may proceed to adopt without a vote those recommendations that were adopted without a vote in the Third Committee. The results of the votes will be uploaded and available on the PaperSmart portal. Before proceeding further, I would like to draw the attention of members to a note by the Secretariat, in English only, entitled “List of proposals contained in the reports of the Third Committee”, which has been circulated as document A/C.3/72/INF/1. The note has been distributed desk-to-desk in the General Assembly Hall as a reference guide for action on draft resolutions and decisions recommended by the Third Committee in its reports. In that connection, members will find in column 4 of the note the symbols of the draft resolutions and decisions of the Third Committee, with the corresponding symbols of the reports for action in the plenary in column 2 of the same note. For reports containing multiple recommendations, the draft resolution or decision number is contained in column 3 of the note. Furthermore, members are reminded that additional sponsors are no longer accepted now that draft resolutions and decisions have been adopted in the Committee. Any clarification about sponsorship in the Committee reports should be addressed to the Secretary of the Committee. Furthermore, members are reminded that any corrections to the voting intention of delegations after the voting has concluded on a proposal should be made directly to the Secretariat after the meeting. I would seek members’ cooperation in avoiding any interruptions to our proceedings in that regard.
Vote: 32/413 Consensus
Vote: 32/413 Consensus
Vote: 32/413 Consensus
The President #83144
The Assembly has before it seven draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 39 of its report, as well as one draft decision recommended in paragraph 40 of the same report. We shall now take decisions on draft resolutions I to VII and on the draft decision, one by one. After all the decisions have been taken, representatives will have an opportunity to explain their vote or position on any or all of the draft resolutions and on the draft decision. We turn first to draft resolution I, entitled “Persons with albinism”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Vote: 32/413 Recorded Vote
✓ 184   ✗ 2   0 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (184)
Vote: 32/413 Consensus
Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 72/140).
Vote: 31/100 Consensus
Vote: 32/413 Recorded Vote
✓ 133   ✗ 10   43 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (133)
The President #83145
Draft resolution II is entitled “Implementation of the outcome of the World Summit for Social Development and of the twenty-fourth special session of the General Assembly”. A recorded vote has been requested.
Vote: 31/100 Consensus

72.  Promotion and protection of human rights Report of the Third Committee (A/72/439)

Vote: 31/37 Consensus
Vote: 31/100 Consensus
A recorded vote was taken.
Vote: 31/100 Consensus
Draft resolution II was adopted by 184 votes to 2 (resolution 72/141).
Vote: 31/100 Recorded Vote
✓ 176   ✗ 7   4 abs.
Show country votes
— Abstain (4)
✓ Yes (176)
The President #83146
Draft resolution III is entitled “Promoting social integration through social inclusion”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Vote: 32/95 Consensus
Draft resolution III was adopted (resolution 72/142).
Vote: 32/95 Consensus
The President #83147
Draft resolution IV is entitled “Cooperatives in social development”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution IV was adopted (resolution 72/143).
Vote: 31/169 Consensus
The President #83148
Draft resolution V is entitled “Follow-up to the Second World Assembly on Ageing”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Vote: 31/169 Consensus
Draft resolution V was adopted (resolution 72/144).
The President #83149
Draft resolution VI is entitled “Follow-up to the twentieth anniversary of the International Year of the Family and beyond”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution VI was adopted (resolution 72/145).
Vote: 32/97 Consensus
The President #83150
Draft resolution VII is entitled “Policies and programmes involving youth”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution VII was adopted (resolution 72/146).
The President #83151
We will now take action on the draft decision, entitled “Document considered by the General Assembly in connection with the question of social development”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Vote: 32/98 Consensus
The draft decision was adopted (decision 72/530).
The President #83152
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 27 and its sub-items (a) and (b)?
It was so decided.
The President #83153
The Assembly has before it three draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 20 of its report, as well as one draft decision recommended in paragraph 21 of the same report. We shall now take decisions on draft resolutions I to III and on the draft decision, one by one. We turn first to draft resolution I, entitled “Follow- up to the Fourth World Conference on Women and full implementation of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action and the outcome of the twenty- third special session of the General Assembly”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution I was adopted (decision 72/147).
The President #83154
Draft resolution II is entitled “Improvement of the situation of women and girls in rural areas”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution II was adopted (resolution 72/148).
The President #83155
Draft resolution III is entitled “Violence against women migrant workers”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution III was adopted (resolution 72/149).
The President #83156
We will now take action on the draft decision, entitled “Documents considered by the General Assembly in connection with the item “Advancement of women”. The Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Vote: 32/413 Consensus
The draft decision was adopted (decision 72/531).
The President #83157
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 28 and its sub-items (a) and (b)?
It was so decided.
The President #83158
The Assembly has before it three draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 17 of its report. We shall now take a decision on draft resolutions I to III, one by one. Draft resolution I is entitled “Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Vote: 31/100 Consensus
Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 72/150).
The President #83159
Draft resolution II is entitled “Enlargement of the Executive Committee of the Programme of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 72/151).
The President #83160
Draft resolution III is entitled “Assistance to refugees, returnees and displaced persons in Africa”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Vote: 32/95 Recorded Vote
✓ 140   ✗ 10   38 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (140)
Draft resolution III was adopted (resolution 72/152).
The President #83161
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 64?
It was so decided.

67.  Report of the Human Rights Council Report of the Third Committee (A/72/434)

The President #83162
The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 10 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. A recorded vote has been requested.
Vote: 31/169 Recorded Vote
✓ 134   ✗ 53   0 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (134)
A recorded vote was taken.
The draft resolution was adopted by 123 votes to 2, with 58 abstentions (resolution 72/153).
The President #83163
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 67?
Vote: 32/97 Consensus
It was so decided.
The President #83164
The Assembly has before it two draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 44 of its report. In connection with draft resolution II, the General Assembly has before it a draft amendment circulated in document A/72/L.36. Before proceeding further, I should like to inform members that action on draft resolution II, entitled “Rights of the child”, is postponed to a later date to allow time for the review of its programme budget implications by the Fifth Committee. The Assembly will take action on draft resolution II as soon as the report of the Fifth Committee on its programme budget implications is available. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution I, entitled “The girl child”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?.
Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 72/154).
The President #83165
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (b) of agenda item 68?
Vote: 32/98 Recorded Vote
✓ 136   ✗ 53   0 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (136)
It was so decided.
The President #83166
The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 68 and its sub-item (a).

69.  Rights of indigenous peoples (a) Rights of indigenous peoples (b) Follow-up to the outcome document of the high-level plenary meeting of the General Assembly known as the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples Report of the Third Committee (A/72/436)

The President #83167
The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 10 of its report, as well as a draft decision recommended by the Committee in paragraph 13 of the same report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Vote: 32/99 Consensus
The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 72/155).
The President #83168
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 69 and its sub-items (a) and (b)?
It was so decided.
The President #83169
The Assembly has before it three draft resolutions recommended by the Committee in paragraph 26 of its report, as well as a draft decision recommended by the Committee in paragraph 27 of the same report. We will now take a decision on draft resolutions I to III and on the draft decision, one by one. We turn first to draft resolution I, entitled “Combating glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance”. A recorded vote has been requested.
Vote: 32/100 Recorded Vote
✓ 129   ✗ 54   5 abs.
Show country votes
— Abstain (5)
✓ Yes (129)
A recorded vote was taken.
Draft resolution I was adopted by 133 votes to 2, with 49 abstentions (resolution 72/156).
The President #83170
We now turn to draft resolution II, entitled “A global call for concrete action for the total elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and the comprehensive implementation of and follow-up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Vote: 32/101 Recorded Vote
✓ 187   ✗ 2   0 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (187)
Draft resolution II was adopted by 133 votes to 10, with 43 abstentions (resolution 72/157).
The President #83171
We now turn to paragraph 27 of the report to take action on the draft decision entitled “Documents considered by the General Assembly in connection with the elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance”. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to adopt the draft decision, as recommended by the Third Committee?
The draft decision was adopted (decision 72/532).
The President #83172
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-items (a) and (b) of agenda item 70?
Vote: 35/94 Recorded Vote
✓ 134   ✗ 52   0 abs.
Show country votes
— Abstain (1)
✓ Yes (134)
It was so decided.
The President #83173
The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 70.
The President #83174
The Assembly has before it three draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 27 of its report. We will now take a decision on draft resolutions I to III, one by one. We first turn to draft resolution I, entitled “Use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self- determination”. A recorded vote has been requested. [Subsequently, the delegation of Andorra informed the Secretariat that it had intended to vote against.]
Vote: 33/173 Consensus
A recorded vote was taken.
Draft resolution I was adopted by 128 votes to 51, with 6 abstentions (resolution 72/158).
The President #83175
Draft resolution II is entitled “Universal realization of the right of peoples to self- determination”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Vote: 39/192 Consensus
Draft resolution II was adopted (resolution 72/159).
The President #83176
We now turn to draft resolution III, entitled “The right of the Palestinian people to self- determination”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Vote: 351/97 Consensus
Draft resolution III was adopted by 176 votes to 7, with 4 abstentions (resolution 72/160).
The President #83177
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 71?
It was so decided.
The President #83178
I would like to inform members that we will take action on sub-items (a) to (d) of agenda item 72 immediately after taking action on the main agenda item.. The Assembly has now before it a draft resolution recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 9 of its report, as well as a draft decision recommended by the Committee in paragraph 10 of the same report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution and on the draft decision, one by one. We turn first to the draft resolution, entitled “International Day of Sign Languages”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Vote: 40/143 Recorded Vote
✓ 183   ✗ 1   2 abs.
Show country votes
— Abstain (2)
✗ No (1)
✓ Yes (183)
The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 72/161).
The President #83179
We will now take action on the draft decision, entitled “Documents considered by the General Assembly in connection with the question of the promotion and protection of human rights”. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to adopt the draft decision, as recommended by the Third Committee?
The draft decision was adopted (decision 72/533).
Vote: 40/144 Consensus
The President #83180
The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 72. (a) Implementation of human rights instruments Report of the Third Committee (A/72/439/Add.1)
The President #83181
The Assembly has before it two draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 29 of its report. We shall now take a decision on draft resolutions I and II, one by one. We turn first to draft resolution I, entitled “Implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Optional Protocol thereto: situation of women and girls with disabilities”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Vote: 37//6/ Consensus
Draft resolution I was adopted by 187 votes to none (resolution 72/162).
The President #83182
We turn next to draft resolution II entitled “Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”. In connection with draft resolution II, the General Assembly has before it two draft amendments circulated in documents A/72/L.34 and A/72/L.35. I now give the floor to the representative of the Sudan on a point of order.
Mr. Mohamed SDN Sudan #83183
First of all, I would like to once again reiterate our full support and commitment to fighting torture. However, as in the Third Committee, the inclusion of language in the seventh preambular paragraph and in operative paragraph 4 of draft resolution II now forces us to request a recorded vote on those paragraphs, which mention the jurisdiction and authority of the International Criminal Court (ICC). As we have said before, since 1945 the United Nations has succeeded largely in keeping its promise, enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, to maintain international peace and security. Challenges and failures have of course been experienced along the way and, unfortunately, continue to take place now and then. Nevertheless, we have to acknowledge the blessings of the relative peace that prevails and the present interactions and interrelations among world cultures and civilizations. The fact that some are forcing and imposing on others — who include no less than 60 per cent of the world’s population — the authority of the International Criminal Court is damaging to world peace and likely to create a serious conflict between peace and justice, thereby jeopardizing both. In the Sudan, since 2003 and throughout the long period during which we addressed the conflict in Darfur, the International Criminal Court has been nothing but an impediment to peace. It took the United Nations six years or more to acknowledge the Darfur Peace Agreement, concluded in 2011, especially with regard to the peace dividends it produced. That was simply because of the interference of the ICC, which has always been malignant since its Statute entered into force in 2002. At best, it is a threat to stability and peace in my country, as well as other parts of the world, not to mention its disputed history since its inception. It has been dogged by successive scandals. It is not an organ of the United Nations, in spite of the distortive attempts by some parties to suggest otherwise in meetings of the Main Committees of the General Assembly. We continue to maintain that power politics will never allow the ICC to exercise its jurisdiction independently, justly and equally. That conviction was further vindicated on 13 December when the Assembly of the States Parties to the Rome Statute of the ICC decided to include the crime of aggression in the list of crimes that fall under the jurisdiction of the ICC. As many of those present may recall, the opt-in principle proposed in the initial draft statute of the ICC by the International Law Commission to include all crimes in the Statute was rejected, and was to be accepted and allowed only with respect to the crime of aggression. That means that a State party to the Rome Statute can declare its non-acceptance of the jurisdiction of the ICC over that crime when nationals of that State party are implicated or the crime is committed on its territory. In addition, the exercise of the jurisdiction of the ICC with respect to the crime of aggression is conditional on the prior determination of the commission of that act of aggression. The Security Council has the power to prevent the ICC from exercising jurisdiction over the crime of aggression by invoking its power under article 16 of the Rome Statute. The inclusion of the crime of aggression in the Rome Statute and the activation of the ICC’s jurisdiction over that crime through a resolution of the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute is meaningless. It is worthless, hypocritical and wrong. Given the determination by the Nuremburg Tribunal in 1946 that aggression is the supreme international crime, the political and discriminatory nature of the ICC has now become quite clear. Finally, once again, the inclusion of language in draft resolution II that promotes the authority and jurisdiction of the ICC does not in any way serve the unanimously agreed principle of the elimination of torture. On the contrary, it creates discord and disagreement. My delegation has a serious reservation about the inclusion of the reference to the jurisdiction of the ICC and to making use of the draft resolution to call on, propagate and exert unacceptable pressure on Member States to include such references and such language. In particular, we draw attention to the seventh preambular paragraph and operative paragraph 4 of this draft resolution on torture. We call for a recorded vote on both paragraphs, and we call on Member States to vote against the inclusion of such references and language.
Vote: 55/108 Consensus
The President #83184
I now give the floor to the representative of Estonia on a point of order.
Ms. Tasuja EST Estonia #83185
Is this the right time to present an explanation of vote on the amendments before the voting?
The President #83186
Let us first clarify the procedural proposal presented by the delegation of the Sudan. I would like to ask the representative of the Sudan to explain once again procedurally whether he is proposing to replace the original texts of the seventh preambular paragraph and operative paragraph 4 with his proposals, or if he is requesting a separate vote on the texts, as contained in draft resolution II.
Mr. Mohamed SDN Sudan #83187
We do not want to go through the same process that we went through in the Third Committee, where, during the informal consultations, we proposed language that could accommodate all positions. Failing that, we revert to the position of voting separately on the draft paragraphs that I mentioned, namely, the seventh preambular paragraph and operative paragraph 4. We therefore made our statement, calling for a recorded vote on those two paragraphs and taking the floor before the voting.
The President #83188
I take it that the delegation of the Sudan withdraws its two proposals for amendments to draft resolution II as contained in the documents A/72/L.34 and A/72/L.35 and requests separate votes on the seventh preambular paragraph and on operative paragraph 4. I will now ask the delegation of Estonia if its request for the explanation of vote is still relevant. I understand that it is not. A recorded vote has been requested on the seventh preambular paragraph of draft resolution II.
A recorded vote was taken.
The seventh preambular paragraph was retained by 110 votes to 17, with 31 abstentions.
The President #83189
We shall now take a recorded vote on operative paragraph 4 of draft resolution II.
A recorded vote was taken.
Operative paragraph 4 was retained by 109 votes to 19, with 31 abstentions.
The President #83190
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to adopt draft resolution II, as a whole, as recommended by the Third Committee?
Draft resolution II, as a whole, was adopted (resolution 72/163).
The President #83191
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (a) of agenda item 72? (b) Human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms Report of the Third Committee (A/72/439/Add.2) Draft amendment (A/72/L.37)
It was so decided.
Mr. Sauer (Finland), Vice-President, took the Chair.
The Acting President #83192
The Assembly has before it 26 draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 189 of its report. In connection with draft resolution XIX, the General Assembly has before it a draft amendment circulated in document A/72/L.37. Before proceeding further, I should like to inform members that action on draft resolutions XXI and XXII is postponed to a later date to allow time for the review on the programme budget implications by the Fifth Committee. The Assembly will take action on draft resolutions XXI and XXII as soon as the report of the Fifth Committee on the programme budget implications is available. We will now take decisions on draft resolutions I to XXVI, one by one. After all the decisions have been taken, representatives will have an opportunity to explain their votes or positions. Draft resolution I is entitled “Strengthening the role of the United Nations in enhancing periodic and genuine elections and the promotion of democratization”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Draft resolution I was adopted by 175 votes to none, with 13 abstentions (resolution 72/164).
The Acting President #83193
Draft resolution II is entitled “International Day of Remembrance and Tribute to the Victims of Terrorism”. The Third Committee adopted draft resolution II without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution II was adopted (resolution 72/165).
Vote: 40/233 Consensus
The Acting President #83194
Draft resolution III is entitled “United Nations Human Rights Training and Documentation Centre for South-West Asia and the Arab Region”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Draft resolution III was adopted by 188 votes to none, with 1 abstention (resolution 72/166).
The Acting President #83195
Draft resolution IV is entitled “The right to development”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Vote: 40/234 Consensus
Draft resolution IV was adopted by 140 votes to 10, with 38 abstentions (resolution 72/167).
The Acting President #83196
Draft resolution V is entitled “Human rights and unilateral coercive measures”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Vote: 56/169 Consensus
Draft resolution V was adopted by 134 votes to 53 (resolution 72/168).
The Acting President #83197
Draft resolution VI is entitled “Enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution VI was adopted (resolution 72/169).
The President #83198
Draft resolution VII is entitled “Human rights and cultural diversity”. A recorded vote has been requested.
Vote: 57/583 Recorded Vote
✓ 129   ✗ 53   3 abs.
Show country votes
✓ Yes (129)
A recorded vote was taken.
Draft resolution VII was adopted by 136 votes to 53 (resolution 72/170).
The Acting President #83199
Draft resolution VIII is entitled “Strengthening United Nations action in the field of human rights through the promotion of international cooperation and the importance of non-selectivity, impartiality and objectivity”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Vote: 56/170 Consensus
Draft resolution VIII was adopted (resolution 72/171).
The Acting President #83200
Draft resolution IX is entitled “Promotion of a democratic and equitable international order”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Vote: 47/147 Consensus
Draft resolution IX was adopted by 129 votes to 54, with 5 abstentions (resolution 72/172).
The Acting President #83201
Draft resolution X is entitled “The right to food”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Draft resolution X was adopted by 187 votes to 2 (resolution 72/173).
The Acting President #83202
Draft resolution XI is entitled “Promotion of equitable geographical distribution in the membership of the human rights treaty bodies”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Draft resolution XI was adopted by 134 votes to 52 (resolution 72/174).
The Acting President #83203
Draft resolution XII is entitled “The safety of journalists and the issue of impunity”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution XII was adopted (resolution 72/175).
The Acting President #83204
Draft resolution XIII is entitled “Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping, stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons, based on religion or belief”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution XIII was adopted (resolution 72/176).
The Acting President #83205
Draft resolution XIV is entitled “Freedom of religion or belief”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution XIV was adopted (resolution 72/177).
The Acting President #83206
Draft resolution XV is entitled “The human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Draft resolution XV was adopted by 183 votes to 1, with 2 abstentions (resolution 72/178).
The Acting President #83207
Draft resolution XVI is entitled “Protection of migrants”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution XVI was adopted (resolution 72/179).
The Acting President #83208
Draft resolution XVII is entitled “Protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution XVII was adopted (resolution 72/180).
The Acting President #83209
Draft resolution XVIII is entitled “National institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution XVIII was adopted (resolution 72/181).
The Acting President #83210
We now turn to draft resolution XIX, entitled “Protection of and assistance to internally displaced persons”. In connection with draft resolution XIX, the General Assembly has before it a draft amendment circulated in document A/72/L.37. In accordance with rule 90 of the rules of procedure, the Assembly shall first take a decision on the proposed draft amendment. I now give the floor to the representative of the Sudan on a point of order.
Mr. Mohamed SDN Sudan #83211
As in the case of other paragraphs mentioning the International Criminal Court (ICC), my delegation has serious reservations about the inclusion of any reference to the jurisdiction of the ICC and about using draft resolution XIX to include language calling for, propagating or exerting unacceptable pressure on States Members of the United Nations. That jeopardizes the ongoing peacebuilding efforts in my country aimed at safeguarding internally displaced persons and ensuring their protection and access to humanitarian assistance. We reiterate that in the Sudan, since 2003 and throughout the long period during which we addressed the conflict in Darfur, the International Criminal Court has been only an impediment to peace by creating imaginary conflict and sowing discord between peace and justice. The Darfur Peace Agreement was concluded in 2011. It took the United Nations more than six years to acknowledge the peace dividend that the Agreement brought about. That was simply because of the interference of the ICC, which has been ill- intentioned since its Statute entered into force, in 2002. At best, the ICC is a threat to stability and peace in my country, in Africa and other parts of the world, not to mention the fact of its disreputable history since its inception. It has been dogged by scandal after scandal, as we have all seen. The ICC is not an organ of the United Nations, in spite of the fervent attempts by some parties to portray it as otherwise in meetings of the Main Committees of the General Assembly. My delegation therefore distances itself from those positions and would like to refer the Assembly to the twenty-sixth preambular paragraph of this draft resolution on protection and assistance to internally displaced persons. We call for a recorded vote on amending it by deletion, and we call on Member States to vote against the inclusion of such a reference.
The Acting President #83212
May I ask the representative of the Sudan whether his delegation’s request concerns the amendment of the twenty-sixth preambular paragraph?
Mr. Mohamed SDN Sudan #83213
That is correct. According to the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, it is amendment by deletion and therefore a vote on the deletion of this particular paragraph.
The Acting President #83214
I have a further request for clarification. Would this mean withdrawing the replacement of the paragraph from document A/72/L.37?
Mr. Mohamed SDN Sudan #83215
Going back to the recent history of this draft resolution, we have been through negotiations with sponsors and interested States regarding the inclusion of language that would be acceptable to all of us or at least that could be generally accepted. We failed, however. The repeated proposals we made to amend it in order to arrive at language that would fall midway failed. Accordingly, we went through voting in the Third Committee on the original language, which we did not accept. The draft resolution before us includes the paragraph that we did not accept and failed to amend. We are therefore now calling for its total deletion.
The Acting President #83216
I call on the representative of Norway, who wishes to speak on a point of order.
Mr. Torbergsen NOR Norway #83217
It was my understanding — though implicitly, since the representative of the Sudan did not directly answer your question, Mr. President — that the intention is to withdraw the amendment presented and instead proceed to a vote to delete the twenty-sixth preambular paragraph.
The Acting President #83218
That is the correct assumption. I now give the floor to the representative of Mexico on a point of order.
Mr. Ríos Sánchez MEX Mexico [Spanish] #83219
We need to have absolute clarity regarding the procedure that we are going to follow. We should like to ask whether the draft amendment to document A/72/L.37 has been withdrawn, or whether we will be voting on that amendment. We also heard the proposal of an oral amendment by deletion of the twenty-sixth preambular paragraph, and we would also like to understand whether we are going to vote on that oral amendment as well.
The Acting President #83220
I call on the representative of the Secretariat.
Mr. Nakano Department for General Assembly and Conference Management #83221
Through your exchange with the representative of the Sudan, Mr. President, it has been clarified that the draft amendment contained in document A/72/L.37, which involved replacement language for the twenty-sixth preambular paragraph, has been withdrawn. Instead, the delegation of the Sudan has proposed an oral amendment whereby the same preambular paragraph would be deleted. The Assembly has before it the oral amendment proposed by the Sudan to delete the twenty-sixth preambular paragraph. At this point there is no request for a vote on that oral amendment. I hope that will answer the question of the representative of Mexico.
The Acting President #83222
I call on the representative of Estonia on a point of order.
Ms. Tasuja EST Estonia #83223
We ask for a recorded vote on the proposal by the Sudan.
The Acting President #83224
A recorded vote has been requested on the oral amendment to delete the twenty- sixth preambular paragraph of draft resolution XIX.
A recorded vote was taken.
The oral amendment was rejected by 111 votes to 22, with 32 abstentions.
The Acting President #83225
I give the floor to the representative of the Sudan on a point of order.
Mr. Mohamed SDN Sudan #83226
I apologize for taking the floor for the third or fourth time this morning. I would like to emphasize that our delegation did its best to agree on language that would accommodate all interests, although such language would not be optimal for us. We did our best, approached the sponsors to that end, and worked with them very closely and cooperatively with the best of intentions. Nevertheless, we failed. The twenty-sixth preambular paragraph of draft resolution XIX was adopted by the Third Committee and put to the vote before the General Assembly. We therefore saw that having exhausted all possibilities and options, we would have to revert to the original position of our Government, which is shared by many others, namely, that we should not have to make any reference to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in any language, as we were not able to do that during the preliminary negotiations. I would like to underline that point and express once again our willingness, which we have conveyed by voting in favour of various resolutions, and, as every representative here could see, we have found it somewhat difficult to join the consensus. Nevertheless, we have overcome such difficulties and voted for omnibus and other relevant resolutions that incorporated language referring to the ICC.
The Acting President #83227
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to adopt draft resolution XIX?
Draft resolution XIX was adopted (resolution 72/182).
The President #83228
Draft resolution XX is entitled “International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution XX was adopted (resolution 72/183).
The Acting President #83229
Before proceeding further, I should like to inform members that action on draft resolution XXI, entitled “Effects of terrorism on the enjoyment of human rights”, and draft resolution XXII, entitled “Twentieth anniversary and promotion of the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms”, is postponed to a later date to allow time for the review of their programme budget implications by the Fifth Committee. The Assembly will take action on the draft resolutions as soon as the report of the Fifth Committee on their programme budget implications is available. Draft resolution XXIII is entitled “Effective promotion of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution XXIII was adopted (resolution 72/184).
The Acting President #83230
Draft resolution XXIV is entitled “Globalization and its impact on the full enjoyment of all human rights”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Draft resolution XXIV was adopted by 129 votes to 53, with 3 abstentions (resolution 72/185).
The Acting President #83231
Draft resolution XXV is entitled “The role of the Ombudsman, mediator and other national human rights institutions in the promotion and protection of human rights”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution XXV was adopted (resolution 72/186).
The Acting President #83232
Draft resolution XXVI is entitled “Subregional Centre for Human Rights and Democracy in Central Africa”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution XXVI was adopted (resolution 72/187).
The Acting President #83233
The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of sub-item (b) of agenda item 72. (c) Human rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs and representatives Report of the Third Committee (A/72/439/Add.3)
The Acting President #83234
The Assembly has before it five draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 33 of its report. Before proceeding further, I should like to inform members that action on draft resolution V, entitled “The situation of human rights in Myanmar”, is postponed to a later date to allow time for a review of its programme budget implications by the Fifth Committee. The Assembly will take action on draft resolution V as soon as the report of the Fifth Committee on its programme budget implications is available. The Assembly will now consider draft resolutions I to IV, recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 33 of its report. I now call on those delegations wishing to speak in explanation of vote or position before the voting.
Mr. Ja Song Nam PRK Democratic People's Republic of Korea #83235
The delegation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea categorically rejects draft resolution I, on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, submitted by the European Union and Japan. The draft resolution is a product of the political and military confrontation, plot and conspiracy organized by the United States of America and other hostile forces against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. It is also an extreme manifestation of politicization, selectivity and double standards on human rights. It is manipulated by them through lies, fabrications, plots and fraudulent means. Its heinous political purpose is to overthrow our State and social system. The United States and its vassal forces have become more desperate in their human rights racket against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, resorting to unprecedented military threats, blackmail, sanctions and pressure against us. In particular, the manoeuvres of the United States to sanction the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea have reached an extremely vicious and barbarous phase in its attempt to eliminate our State and people’s sovereignty, dignity and right to survival and development. These barbarous sanctions of the United States are a despicable violation of human rights and a crime of genocide that violate the humanitarian law and instruments of international human rights. Despite the persistent sanctions and pressure imposed by the United States and other hostile forces, my Government is concentrating all its efforts on improving our people’s livelihood and providing them with a better future. We hope for sincere dialogue and cooperation in the genuine promotion and protection of international human rights, but we will respond strongly in order to end the confrontation and pressure aimed at stifling our system. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea once again categorically rejects the draft resolution as an unlawful and flawed document unworthy of consideration. In that regard, we do not feel any need to call for a vote. Even if it is railroaded through, the draft resolution can never be considered a consensus text. We call on representatives to oppose the adoption of the draft resolution by making clear statements dissociating themselves from consensus, proceeding from the guiding principles of non-politicization, non-selectivity, objectivity and impartiality enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and in the final documents of the Non-Aligned Movement. Finally, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea strongly rejects politicized, country-specific resolutions against the Russian Federation, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Syrian Arab Republic, proceeding from its principled position on the discussion of human rights issues.
Mr. Hassani Nejad Pirkouhi IRN Islamic Republic of Iran #83236
I am delivering this statement in regard to draft resolution II, submitted by Canada. Who can argue with the fact that the gravest atrocities in our recent history have been committed by the closest allies of Canada and other main sponsors of this draft resolution? Who can argue with the fact that the cause of human rights is being abused by countries that have made every attempt — from coups and war to subversive operations — against a nation that has chosen to say no to their hegemonic attitudes? This is another unfortunate occasion when the General Assembly is being dragged into taking a deeply biased and politicized decision that further erodes the credibility of the United Nations. Human rights are once again being abused to put pressure on our people. Few would accept this biased move by Canada as a sign of respect or concern for human rights. This political charade, orchestrated year after year by Canada, only further undermines the cause of human rights itself. Indeed, the biggest threat to human rights arises from hypocrisy, politicization and double standards. I am referring to the hypocrisy of Governments that, under the pretext of promoting human rights, mercilessly criticize their political foes while at the same time condoning the gravest atrocities of their closest allies and, even worse, giving them their unconditional support. In fact, those Governments are not confronting their political foes. Rather, they are ruthlessly attacking the cause of human rights itself. Canada should have realized by this time that such a pointless and futile exercise is a disservice to human rights, a harmful measure against the United Nations human rights mechanism, and a token of disrespect for the wisdom of the people who closely monitor Canada’s selective stances on human rights situations. In fact, observing Canada’s voting record in the United Nations is highly enlightening in terms of understanding that country’s stand on human rights. Ottawa, along with a very few others, has consistently and unconditionally supported Israel despite all the grave human rights violations committed by that regime. That level of hypocrisy and double standards is mind-boggling. It is insulting that against the background of such entrenched hypocrisy, Canada expects others to view this draft resolution as a sincere and benevolent exercise in support of human rights. In the same vein, when the main sponsors of the draft resolution use undue pressure in order to collect votes, each year conducting a vigorous campaign of pressure and intimidation, this should be viewed as another clear assault on the cause of human rights. Securing votes by threatening cuts in financial or development funds does not contribute to the promotion of human rights; rather, it further exposes the dishonesty of those self-proclaimed champions of human rights. In its very long history, Iran has never practiced slavery, colonized other nations or uprooted indigenous communities. It has never advocated for racism or racial supremacy. It is therefore absurd that a few well-known countries that have all these dark practices, and even worse, in their very short history, have the audacity to abuse the noble cause of human rights to the detriment of Iran and Iranians, simply to advance their short- sighted political interests. The commitment of Iran to the promotion and protection of human rights is genuine and deeply rooted in the country’s culture and history. Iran derives its legitimacy and security from the voice and vote of its people. We do not outsource our legitimacy and security. That is an intrinsic characteristic of our political system. Accordingly, the Government views the protection of and respect for all human rights of its citizens as indispensable to ensuring its national security, prosperity and longevity. The attachment of Iranians to democracy and human rights is incontestable. We have proved that human rights are a priority for us, part and parcel of our national security priorities. As with any other country, deficiencies may exist, and we are determined to address them. However, it is not for those who traditionally, historically and practically have supported colonialism, slavery, racism and apartheid to lecture Iranians on human rights. Sadly, certain powers respect democracy and people’s choices only insofar as those choices are in line with their own interests. People who dare to choose otherwise deserve to be punished by military coup, aggression, sanctions, occupation or demonization via abuse of the United Nations human rights machinery. In the case of their allies and clients, however, democracy and respect for human rights are optional. As far as the content and intentions of this draft resolution are concerned, we clearly see that the same cynical pattern against Iran and the Iranians is in play. The situation of human rights in Iran is by no means a special one that warrants a special mandate or resolution. We regret that a few unscrupulous Governments continue to challenge the integrity and credibility of the United Nations, an exercise that only underscores how selective, irrelevant and subjective United Nations decisions can sometimes be. Rejecting and voting against this absurd draft resolution, which has time and again shown its futility, would be considered an appropriate step towards enhancing the credibility of human rights discourse.
Mr. Yao Shaojun CHN China [Chinese] #83237
China has consistently maintained that constructive dialogue and cooperation should be carried out on a basis of equality and mutual respect when addressing differences in the field of human rights. We reject the politicization of human rights issues and the practice of exerting pressure on other countries. We oppose country-specific resolutions on human rights. In that regard, the Chinese delegation will not join the consensus on draft resolution I, on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and will vote against other country-specific human rights resolutions.
Mr. Qassem Agha SYR Syrian Arab Republic [Arabic] #83238
Draft resolution IV, on the so-called situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic, was submitted to the General Assembly by the United States of America, United Kingdom, France, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. That is an expressive variety of States. If some Member States put the promotion and the protection of human rights in the hands of these States, they have to know that they are placing their trust in those who cannot be trusted to protect an important human right. Those who spread chaos in the world, invade sovereign States, steal the wealth of peoples, kill millions of human beings, manipulate facts and lack any respect for the Charter and the principles of international human rights should not be trusted. They should not be allowed to abuse the notion of the promotion and the protection of human rights, because the continued politicization of that noble goal will undermine the international consensus mechanisms that we established together in 2006 in order to advance that cause in our national agendas. My country will therefore vote against all the country-specific draft resolutions that target certain States. We should note that the sponsors of the draft resolution are allied Governments that have conspired against, encircled and intimidated one another. However, they are allied in sponsoring the international terrorism that claims to follow Islam, abuses the image of Arabs and Muslims, and causes unprecedented bloodshed. They vie with one another in the race to spread devastation in Syria, Iraq, Libya and many of other States. The draft resolution before us today on the so- called situation of human rights in Syria represents the hysteria and political impotence displayed by the Saudi regime in the face of the victories of the Syrian army and its allies in defeating the Saudi-Qatari Wahhabi and takfiri terrorism afflicting the entire world, especially my country, Syria. That was stressed by Mohammed bin Jassim, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the former Qatari regime, in a recent interview on the official Qatari television network. The draft resolution seeks to gloss over the Saudi crimes, aggression and siege against Yemen that have resulted in its destruction and in the killing of thousands of children, along with 3 million others condemned to famine and cholera. It represents a vast human massacre that has been met with silence and international complicity. Regrettably, the reasons for that are well known and shameful. Saudi Arabia foments a sectarian discourse against Iran and supports terrorist groups in Syria, Iraq and other parts of the world. Worse than that, it whitewashes its despicable plots against the Arabism of Al-Quds Al-Sharif to please Israel, which is an ally of the Saud family. That is what Golda Meir was talking about when she stood on the shore of the Gulf of Aqaba and said, “I can smell my ancestors in Khyber”. Saudi Arabia is a primitive regime that celebrated the opening of its first cinema only one week ago. We cannot say if this is ironic or pathetic. It is not even a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It has neither a parliament nor a constitution, and neither its women or its men enjoy freedoms. How then can it submit a draft resolution on Syria, where a woman occupies the post of Vice-President? For the delegation of Saudi Arabia to submit this draft resolution against my country on behalf of its sponsors and users is an irony in itself. The Saudi regime should be the last to speak on human rights in this international Organization, given its record of human and legal backwardness with respect to its nationals and expatriates. Beginning in 1745, Abdulaziz Al-Saud and Muhammad Abdul Wahhab, the country’s spiritual father and partner in governance, spread corruption and conspiracy and shed blood in Al-Hijaz, claiming the lives of 17,000 persons in their first massacre. Between 1903 and 1904, Abdulaziz Al-Saud killed nearly 33,000 persons from the Mutayr and Shammar tribes, and 3,500 persons from Kuwaiti tribes, with the aim of capturing Asir. In 1925, the Al-Saud army killed 3,000 people from Jordanian tribes in order to capture Al-Hijaz, thenceforth calling the territory Saudi Arabia. This is the fertile ground that sponsors hatred and denounces love and tolerance. Al-Saud established an absurd kingdom and spread Wahhabi ideas by the sword. They taught schoolchildren that those who do not pray are non-believers, that those who smoke are punks, that those who listen to songs will be tortured in hell, that Christians are sinful, that Shiites are more deceitful than the Jews, that secular people are atheists who deserve to be crucified, and that invasion and the taking of women as slaves are halal practices. They established slave markets for women, and children had different prices and could also be sold. They established the practice of chopping off hands and feet, just as Da’esh has done. That is the common ground among Da’esh, Al-Nusra, Al-Saud and Israel, which promotes an apartheid regime, denies tolerance and harnesses religion as a weapon of mass destruction. The Saudi regime prohibits the establishment of houses of worship for non-Muslims who reside and work in Saudi Arabia. It forbids the burial of non-Muslims in the land of Saudi Arabia. It issues shameful religious opinions that are not appropriate for Arabs or Muslims. Turkey joined Saudi Arabia and Qatar not only in sponsoring this draft resolution, but in sponsoring terrorism, allowing tens of thousands of foreign terrorist fighters from Central Asia to enter western countries, and allowing Arabs to cross its borders into Syria with chemical weapons brought with them from Libya, under the Turkish authorities’ sponsorship. All of that information is before the Organization. I conclude by calling on Member States to vote against all spurious country-specific draft resolutions.
Mr. Zagaynov RUS Russian Federation [Russian] #83239
Our delegation normally votes against so- called country-specific resolutions on human rights, which are designed to exert political pressure on a given State. The exploitation of human rights issues in order to settle scores, wage information wars or advance political agendas leads only to situations in which such resolutions are often based on unreliable information and have nothing to do with the real situation in a given country. That only discredits the human rights structure of the United Nations, which is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of States. Such resolutions have never led to an improvement of the human rights situation anywhere. The international community should have refrained long ago from the counterproductive practice of proposing such resolutions. It should instead should pursue equitable dialogue on a whole range of human rights issues. We outlined our position on such draft resolutions during the current session of the Third Committee. It has not changed. We will vote against the draft resolutions on the situations of human rights in Iran, Myanmar and Syria, and will not participate in the consensus on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Draft resolution III, on the situation of human rights in Crimea and Sevastopol, is a clear example of abuse of the theme of human rights. It is quite obvious that the Ukrainian delegation and its protectors are not in the least concerned about the human rights of the Russian region. Rather, in spite of the clearly declared desires of the people, they are trying to dispute the status of Crimea under the cover of human rights rhetoric, as revealed by their surreal attempts to present the situation as an armed conflict. The delegations that vote in support of this draft resolution should understand that they are encouraging extreme fantasies and thereby creating grounds for provocation on the part of Kyiv. They are sharing responsibility for them. There appears to be an attempt here to divert attention from the many systematic violations of human rights at home, in particular arbitrary detentions, discrimination, political persecution and the repression of freedom of speech. Intolerance and violence are on the rise and against this background, impunity prevails for the crimes that are committed. It should be noted that this has been reaffirmed even by the human rights monitoring mission in Ukraine, which recently issued its twentieth report. If the sponsors of the draft resolution are so concerned about human rights, why does the draft resolution not even hint at such problems? That is extremely hypocritical. It is quite obvious that the efforts to maintain trade links, as well as the water and energy blockade of Crimea by Ukraine, are attempts to sow division and discrimination. We can only regard Ukraine’s attempts to ensure education in Crimea as cynical and farcical. On the peninsula, schools and classes continue to function in the Crimean Tatar and Ukrainian languages, whereas in Ukraine in September a scandalous law was adopted that deprived hundreds of thousands of children of the possibility of being educated in their native language. Examples of double standards and outright discrimination, which are rife in the draft resolution, can be found further on as well. We underscore the fact that support for the draft resolution will send a false signal to Kyiv which, with the fanfare of its anti-Russian propaganda, can continue its discriminatory attempts in violation of human rights. We call on delegations to assess this draft resolution objectively, in spite of the pressure of the sponsors, and to vote against it.
Mr. Kyslytsya UKR Ukraine #83240
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all those delegations that supported draft resolution III, on the situation of human rights in the Republic of Crimea and the City of Sevastopol, Ukraine, in the Third Committee. The current draft resolution is the follow-up to resolution 71/205, adopted last year. Forty-two countries initiated this new document in the Third Committee because, since the adoption of resolution 71/205, the situation in the temporarily occupied Ukrainian territory, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol has not changed for the better, and in fact has worsened considerably. The Russian Federation continues to blatantly violate its obligations as an occupying Power, and there is no sign that it will comply with the requirements of resolution 71/205. The thematic report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, entitled “Situation of human rights in Ukraine”, released in December, in compliance with resolution 71/205, once again reiterated that the human rights situation in Crimea has significantly deteriorated under the Russian occupation. The report states that “[T]he Russian Federation continued to apply its laws, in violation of international humanitarian law applicable to an occupying Power. Practices by the authorities which resulted in serious human rights violations and which disproportionately affected Crimean Tatars persisted this reporting period. Further, the exercise of freedoms of opinion and expression, religion or belief and peaceful assembly also continued to be curtailed through verdicts criminalizing criticism and dissent.” The international community must act to counter such actions for the sake of millions of people now living with no chance to defend their rights or be heard. According to the Charter of the United Nations, the international community’s absolute priority is to ensure fundamental human rights and freedoms. Despite the temporary occupation by the Russian Federation and forced imposition of its legal framework, the residents of Crimea remain Ukrainian citizens. The Government of Ukraine is committed to providing all possible means to protect the fundamental freedoms and human rights of the citizens of Ukraine in the temporarily occupied territory of Crimea. Less than a fortnight ago, a year-long campaign to honour the seventieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was launched. Today we call on all States Members of the United Nations to ensure that our commitments are in line with the standards of the Declaration, unite around our common values and protect the residents of Crimea from the tyranny of the invaders. In conclusion, I call on all delegations to vote in favour of the draft resolution.
The Acting President #83241
We shall now take a decision on draft resolutions I to IV, one by one. We first turn to draft resolution I, entitled “Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”. The Third Committee adopted it without the vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 72/188).
The Acting President #83242
Draft resolution II is entitled “Situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Draft resolution II was adopted by 81 votes to 30, with 70 abstentions (resolution 72/189).
The Acting President #83243
Draft resolution III is entitled “Situation of human rights in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol (Ukraine)”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Draft resolution III was adopted by 70 votes to 26, with 76 abstentions (resolution 72/190).
The Acting President #83244
Draft resolution IV is entitled “Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic”. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
Draft resolution IV was adopted by 109 votes to 17, with 58 abstentions (resolution 72/191).
The Acting President #83245
I now give the floor to those delegations that wish to speak in explanation of vote or position on the resolutions just adopted.
Mr. Cepero Aguilar CUB Cuba [Spanish] #83246
The Cuban delegation does not join the consensus on resolution 72/188, entitled “Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”, consistent with our position against the imposition of selective and politically motivated resolutions and mandates. We believe that genuine international cooperation alone, underpinned by the principles of objectivity, impartiality and non-selectivity, is the best way to ensure the effective promotion and protection of all human rights. In this case and in all others, we request that an opportunity be granted for the Universal Periodic Review to hold a debate free of politicization and confrontation and that fosters cooperation with the country concerned. The resolution continues to promote sanctions and the dangerous and counterproductive involvement of the Security Council on issues that are not within its remit. Cuba therefore cannot join the consensus on a resolution that calls for punishment and sanctions by the Security Council in situations that pose no threat to international peace and security. We cannot be complicit in attempts to deny the people of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea their right to peace, self-determination and development. We would like to underscore that our opposition to this selective and politicized mandate is in no way a value judgment on other outstanding issues mentioned in the twentieth preambular paragraph, which require a fair and honourable solution that meets with the agreement of all interested parties.
Mr. Hassani Nejad Pirkouhi IRN Islamic Republic of Iran #83247
My delegation would like to make the following statement in explanation of position on resolution 72/188 and of vote on resolution 72/191. We dissociate ourselves from resolution 72/188, entitled “Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”, in line with our principled position on the practice of the selective adoption of country-specific resolutions, which is damaging to human rights discourse at the United Nations. With regard to resolution 72/191, entitled “Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic”, apart from the fact that its content and intention make it objectionable in its entirety, we would like to put the following on record. The content of paragraph 28 of the resolution, which falsely lumps together, labels and condemns those in the fight against terrorism in Syria, is simply an act of revenge against the forces on the ground that have been proved to be most effective against terrorism and violent extremism. There is a major question mark in the minds of people outside the Organization. How can the United Nations condemn terrorists and at the same time denounce the people who fight them, spilling their blood and sweat — the brave people who have proved to be the most effective in combating terror and terrorism? It is our view that paragraph 28 rewards violent extremists and terrorists, as well as their supporters. The two Iranian forces mentioned in paragraph 28 are part of the regular armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran, deployed in Syria on an exclusively advisory basis, at the formal invitation of the Government of that country, to combat terrorists in Syria.
Mr. Poveda Brito VEN Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela [Spanish] #83248
Given its principled position and without prejudice to the content of the resolution, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela dissociates itself from the consensus reached on resolution 72/188, entitled “Situation of human rights on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”. Venezuela would like to affirm its principled position with regard to the adoption of resolutions, special procedures or any other mechanisms pertaining to the situation of human rights in specific countries, in order to demonstrate that, with regard to that issue, it rejects selectivity for politically motivated purposes, which violates the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. Cooperation and dialogue are key principles and the best way to ensure the effective promotion and protection of human rights. In that regard, we support the ongoing calls of the Non-Aligned Movement with regard to this issue. The continuing practice of selectivity in adopting country-specific resolutions pertaining to the situation of human rights violates the principles of universality, objectivity and non-selectivity, which should be upheld when addressing human rights issues. Venezuela encourages the international community to build on the gains made since the establishment of the Human Rights Council, and to support the Universal Periodic Review as a means to foster cooperation in the area of human rights. We call for the elimination of the practice of selectivity in adopting country-specific resolutions, in particular with regard to human rights, because it undermines the mandate of the Human Rights Council.
Mr. Mohamed SDN Sudan [Arabic] #83249
We abstained in the voting on resolution 72/191, entitled “Situation of human rights in Syria”, for the same reasons we gave during the seventy-first session. Moreover, it is our view that the reference to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the resolution is a step backwards, and we therefore dissociate ourselves from it. We will certainly attempt to address that element to ensure that it is not included in future texts. The resolution was put to the vote but it was not adopted by consensus. It is our view that there should be no mention of the ICC in a resolution that does not specifically address the Court, for reasons that we explained when proposals were made in the Third Committee and other Committees of the General Assembly.
Mr. Habib IDN Indonesia #83250
I am taking the floor to give a brief explanation of the position of Indonesia on the text of resolution 72/191, entitled “Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic”. Indonesia underlines its concerns about the prolonged and deteriorating humanitarian and human rights situation caused by the ongoing conflict in Syria, in particular its impact on the civilian population, including women and children. As reported by the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic, civilians continue to make up an overwhelming majority of casualties in the Syrian conflict, while children and internally displaced persons remain among the most vulnerable to violence. The conflict demands that we urge all parties to immediately cease all acts of violence and hostilities, including through a strong commitment to the ceasefire agreement. The utmost respect for international human rights law and international humanitarian law, as well as unhindered and safe humanitarian access for those in need, including refugees, are critical and urgently needed. We are of the view that all parties to the conflict must comply with their respective obligations under international human rights law and international humanitarian law, including by refraining from disproportionate and indiscriminate attacks. We demand that the Syrian authorities uphold their commitment to protecting the civilian population and ensuring full respect for all human rights and fundamental freedoms. Furthermore, Indonesia notes with grave concern the 8 August report of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons-United Nations Joint Investigative Mechanism. We therefore call on all parties to refrain from using chemical weapons and demand that those responsible for the use of chemical weapons be held accountable. We sincerely hope that the international community and all parties concerned will concentrate their efforts on putting an immediate end to all forms of violence, regardless of its origin. Indonesia has been consistent in reiterating that, in promoting and protecting the fundamental human rights of the Syrian people, it is also crucial to respect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic. Finally, my delegation urges the international community to continue to work to create conditions that foster negotiations, with a view to reaching a political solution to the Syrian conflict. We stress that the only sustainable solution to the current conflict in the Syrian Arab Republic is through an inclusive, Syrian-led and -owned political process. For those reasons, Indonesia abstained in the voting on draft resolution IV.
Mr. Qassem Agha SYR Syrian Arab Republic [Arabic] #83251
My country’s delegation would like to once again underscore the principled position of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, which refuses to use selectivity to address human rights issues as a means to interfere in the internal affairs of countries under legal and political pretexts. Those practices contravene the Charter of the United Nations, which places the principle of sovereignty and equality first for all nations. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has cooperated with many United Nations mechanisms on many occasions. That represents a positive step that has enabled greater cooperation in areas that will foster human rights. It is a signatory to a number of conventions — the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women — and underwent its second Universal Periodic Review in 2014. In addition, the Government accepted 81 of the recommendations made at the end of the first Universal Periodic Review. My delegation therefore dissociates itself from the consensus on resolution 72/188, on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Moreover, my delegation rejects draft resolution 72/189, entitled “Situation of human rights in the Republic of Iran”, as it seeks to tarnish the reputation of the Iranian Government in international forums so as to overshadow the democratic accomplishments of Iran, which is already suffering from unilateral coercive sanctions imposed by States Members of the Organization that are known to everybody. The resolution is yet another violation of the mandate of the General Assembly, as it undermines the credibility of the political and legal points of reference in international relations, especially the international consensus on human rights issues, which belong exclusively to the purview of the Human Rights Council. My country’s delegation also rejects resolution 72/190, on the so-called situation of human rights in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, because it is politicized and far removed from reality. We also reiterate our position whereby we reject attacks on certain States under political and selective pretexts. Unfortunately, the General Assembly is once again wasting its time by discussing propaganda instead of conducting an objective debate promoting human rights. The Russian Crimea is another target of a group of countries that have granted themselves the right to decide what is best for the residents of a particular country. But the resolution does not reflect the reality of the current situation in the Russian Crimea, nor does it reflect the views and interests of its inhabitants. It is nothing but a blatant attempt to interfere in the internal affairs of the Russian Federation, with the aim of undermining regional integrity and political independence.
The Acting President #83252
The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of sub-item (c) of agenda item 72. (d) Comprehensive implementation of and follow- up to the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action Report of the Third Committee (A/72/439/Add.4)
The Acting President #83253
May I take it that the Assembly wishes to take note of the report of the Third Committee? It was so decided (decision 72/534).
The Acting President #83254
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (d) of agenda item 72?
It was so decided.
The Acting President #83255
The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 72.
The Acting President #83256
The Assembly has before it five draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 20 of its report and a draft decision recommended by the Committee in paragraph 21 of the same report. We shall now take a decision on draft resolutions I to V and on the draft decision, one by one. Draft resolution I is entitled “Follow-up to the Thirteenth United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice and preparations for the Fourteenth United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 72/192).
The Acting President #83257
Draft resolution II is entitled “Promoting the practical application of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules)”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution II was adopted (resolution 72/193).
The Acting President #83258
Draft resolution III is entitled “Technical assistance for implementing the international conventions and protocols related to counter-terrorism”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution III was adopted (resolution 72/194).
The Acting President #83259
Draft resolution IV is entitled “Improving the coordination of efforts against trafficking in persons”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution IV was adopted (resolution 72/195).
The Acting President #83260
Draft resolution V is entitled “Strengthening the United Nations crime prevention and criminal justice programme, in particular its technical cooperation capacity”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution V was adopted without a vote (resolution 72/196).
The Acting President #83261
We shall now turn to paragraph 21 of the report to take action on the draft decision entitled “Document considered by the General Assembly in connection with the question of crime prevention and criminal justice”. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to adopt the draft decision, as recommended by the Third Committee?
The draft decision was adopted (decision 72/535).
The Acting President #83262
The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 107.
The Acting President #83263
The Assembly has before it two draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 10 of its report. We shall now take a decision on draft resolutions I and II, one by one. Draft resolution I is entitled “Promoting the implementation of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Alternative Development and related commitments on alternative development and regional, interregional and international cooperation on development-oriented, balanced drug control policy addressing socioeconomic issues”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution I was adopted without a vote (resolution 72/197).
The Acting President #83264
Draft resolution II is entitled “International cooperation to address and counter the world drug problem”. The Third Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution II was adopted without a vote (resolution 72/198).
The Acting President #83265
May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 108?
It was so decided.

121.  Revitalization of the work of the General Assembly Report of the Third Committee (A/72/480)

The Acting President #83266
The Assembly has before it a draft decision recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph five of its report. We shall now take action on the draft decision, entitled “Programme of work of the Third Committee for the seventy-third session of the General Assembly”. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to adopt the draft decision as recommended by the Third Committee?
The draft decision was adopted (decision 72/536).
The Acting President #83267
The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 121.

137.  Programme planning Report of the Third Committee (A/72/485)

The Acting President #83268
May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to take note of the report of the Third Committee?
It was so decided.
The Acting President #83269
The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 137. Several delegations have asked to speak in exercise of the right of reply. I would like to remind members that statements in the exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention, and five minutes for the second, and should be made by delegations from their seats.
Mr. Alkadi SAU Saudi Arabia [Arabic] #83270
I thank you, Sir, for giving my delegation this opportunity to respond to the statement by the Syrian representative. My delegation will not use the style used by the representative of the Syrian delegation in talking about my country. Rather, I will provide some facts that the Syrian representative may be unaware of or perhaps ignored. The vote by the vast majority of Member States in favour of resolution 72/191, on the situation of human rights in Syria, is a good indication of the international community’s support for the position of Saudi Arabia and the international community, which has repudiated the Syrian regime’s slaughter of its people for almost six years now. The victories that the representative of the Syrian regime is boasting about are merely victories over the corpses of the Syrian people, including children, women and the elderly. In that time, the Syrian regime has killed more than 500,000 Syrians and displaced more than 11 million others around the world. Saudi Arabia is hosting more than 2 million Syrian citizens with humane and humanitarian treatment. We treat them as equals of Saudi citizens. The Syrian representative also talked about my country’s position on Al-Quds and the Palestinian question. That is off topic. Nevertheless, the position of Saudi Arabia in that regard is firm and not subject to discussion. I want to clarify to everybody and to the representative of the Syrian delegation that our country has never sold its territories, as the Syrian regime did in the occupied Golan. In conclusion, with regard to the Syrian regime’s supposed truths about Saudi Arabia’s history, which are false, I call on the representative of Syria to review the history books before talking about things he knows nothing about.
Mr. Uğurluoğlu TUR Türkiye #83271
I felt compelled to take the floor in response to the baseless allegations of the representative of the Syrian regime about my country, which we categorically reject. Unfortunately, we have once again been witness to an attempt to divert members’ attention from the enormous destruction and human suffering caused by the Syrian regime. I would like to underline that Turkey will continue to stand by the Syrian people.
Mr. Qassem Agha SYR Syrian Arab Republic [Arabic] #83272
We have no one in mind when we talk about truths. Since the representative of the Saudi regime says that we should go back and review our history books, I shall do that without prolonging my speech. In 1745, the first massacre that took place in Al-Hijaz claimed the lives of more than 17,000 people, who were killed by Abdulaziz Al-Saud and Muhammad Abdul Wahhab. After that, 33,000 Arabs from the Shammar and Matayr tribes in Al-Hijaz were killed. The Saudi representative is familiar with those two tribes. In 1914 and during the First World War, Abdulaziz Al-Saud conspired against Muslims when he helped to bring down the Islamic caliphate with his allies, Great Britain and France, and killed 200,000 people. In 1918, more than 1,000 people were killed during the siege of Al-Hijaz, which today is called Saudi Arabia. In 1920, more than 3,000 people from neighbouring Kuwaiti tribes were killed by the Al-Saud army. After that, more than 3,500 people were killed by the Al-Saud army in order to seize the Asir region. In 1925, Al-Saud’s army killed 3,000 Jordanian tribesmen, and 1,500 more in 1930 when it turned against its allies. Approximately 18,000 people from Yemen were killed between 1930 and 1935. What is happening now in Yemen dates back to those years. Nearly 1 million people have perished in Yemen to date. I repeat that over a five-year period, from 1930 to 1935, 18,000 people were killed. From 1930 to 1941, a plot led by Saudi Arabia with the British Mandate, against the revolutionary movement of Iraq, resulted in the deaths of more than 8,000 Iraqis. In 1940, in the battle of El Alamein, 18,000 Egyptians were killed because Al-Saud supported Great Britain by offering oil. Germany asked Italy at that time to carry out strikes on the oil wells that were providing free oil to Great Britain. As for the Golan, we did not sell it, as the representative of Saudi Arabia claimed; we defended it. Let me explain that. In accordance with an agreement signed by Abdulaziz Al-Saud and the British Government, and an agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia regarding Palestine, more than 2 million Palestinians were killed between 1917 and 1948, and 12 million others were displaced all over the world. We are all well acquainted with the number of displaced refugee Palestinians. In 1960, there was another plot between Saudi Arabia and Great Britain with the participation of some Arabs in the Gulf region against Abd Al-Karim Qasim, the President of Iraq, who was killed, along with 30,000 Iraqis. In 1967, Israel waged an illegitimate war against Syria and Egypt, in coordination with Saudi Arabia, after committing the Jaffa massacre. That war resulted in 25,000 people dead and more than 50,000 wounded. It was met with total silence from Saudi Arabia, which did not intervene until after the Khartoum summit. In 1973, following the victory of Egypt and Syria against Israel with the support of King Faisal, the honourable Saudi king who cut off Saudi Arabian oil to America and the West, they killed King Faisal. That is the Saudi regime. That is the Saudi Arabia that has sold Palestine, destroyed Yemen, sent terrorists to Syria, Yemen and Libya and done whatever it wants because it does not represent the Saudi people. In 1988, Saudi Arabia created the Al-Qaida organization, which was sent to Afghanistan and resulted in the deaths of 3 million Afghans. In 1992, Saudi forces attacked Qatar’s borders and killed more than 100 people. From 2004 to 2017, Saudi Arabia sponsored terrorist groups in Iraq and Syria, and supported Israeli aggression against Lebanon with the help of the United States, under the pretext that Hizbullah was supported by Iran. In 2008, Israel waged a war against the Gaza Strip amid Saudi silence, under the pretext that Hamas was supported by Iran. In 2009, Israel launched an attack on Yemen and named it Operation Scorched Earth. In 2011, the Saudi army entered Bahrain to put down a peaceful civil movement. In the same year, Saudi security forces attacked Alkatif, killing thousands of people. In 2012, Israel waged a war against Gaza with Saudi support. From 2012 to this very moment, the Wahhabi organizations of Saudi Arabia have been sowing hatred and death throughout Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Egypt. That is history. That is the history of Saudi Arabia, which can be found on Internet sites.
The Acting President on behalf of General Assembly #83273
On behalf of the General Assembly, I would like to thank His Excellency Mr. Einar Gunnarsson, Permanent Representative of Iceland and Chair of the Third Committee — whose country has donated this gavel to the United Nations — as well as the members of the Bureau of the Third Committee and representatives for a job well done. The General Assembly has thus concluded its consideration of all the reports of the Third Committee for this meeting.
The meeting rose at 1.10 p.m.