A/75/PV.73 General Assembly

As indicated in my letter dated 2 June, at this meeting the Assembly will proceed to the election of 18 members of the Economic and Social Council to replace those whose term of office expires on 31 December 2021 and, at the same time, a by- election to elect four members of the Council to fill the four seats of the members that will relinquish their seats before the end of their terms, in accordance with rule 140 of the rules of procedure. The 18 outgoing members are: Angola, Armenia, Brazil, Canada, Egypt, Ethiopia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Jamaica, Kenya, Luxembourg, Mali, the Netherlands, Pakistan, Paraguay, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and the United States of America. Pursuant to rule 146 of the rules of procedure, those countries are eligible for immediate re-election. In accordance with paragraph 4 of resolution 2847 (XXVI) of 20 December 1971 and taking into account the number of States that will remain members of the Council after 1 January 2022, the 18 members should be elected as follows: five from among the African States, four from among the Asia-Pacific States, two from among the Eastern European States, three from among the Latin American and Caribbean States and four from among the Western European and other States. The ballot papers, marked “A”, “B”, “C”, “D” and “E”, reflect that pattern. In connection with the by-election of four members of the Council, I would like to draw the attention of members to note verbale A/75/894 dated 18 May from the Permanent Mission of Portugal to the United Nations, in which the Mission, in its capacity as Chair of the Group of Western European and other States for the month of May, announced that Australia would relinquish its seat on 31 December 2021 for the remainder of the term, in favour of New Zealand; Finland would relinquish its seat on 31 December 2021 for the remainder of the term, in favour of Denmark; Germany would relinquish its seat on 31 December 2021 for the remainder of the term, in favour of Israel; and Switzerland would relinquish its seat on 31 December 2021 for the remainder of the term, in favour of Greece. As a result, four vacancies will occur and new members must be elected to fill the unexpired terms of Australia, Finland and Switzerland, commencing on 1 January 2022 and expiring on 31 December 2022, and the unexpired term of Germany, commencing on 1 January 2022 and expiring on 31 December 2023. In accordance with paragraph 4 of resolution 2847 (XXVI) of 20 December 1971 and taking into account that the vacancies will occur from among the Western European and other States, the new members should be elected from that region. I should like to inform the Assembly that those candidates  — not exceeding the number of seats to be filled — that receive the greatest number of votes and a two-thirds majority of those present and voting will be declared elected. If the number of candidates obtaining a two- third majority is less than the number of members to be elected, there shall be additional ballots to fill the remaining places, the voting being restricted to the candidates obtaining the greatest number of votes in the previous ballot, up to a number not more than twice the number of places remaining to be filled. Also, consistent with past practice in the case of a tie vote and when it becomes necessary to determine the candidates to be elected or the ones to proceed to the next round of restricted balloting, there will be a special restricted ballot limited to those candidates that have obtained an equal number of votes. As of 1 January 2022, the following States will be represented on the Economic and Social Council: Argentina, Austria, Bangladesh, Benin, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Botswana, Bulgaria, China, Colombia, the Congo, France, Gabon, Guatemala, Indonesia, Japan, Latvia, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Mexico, Montenegro, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, Solomon Islands, Thailand, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and Zimbabwe. I would ask the Assembly to note that, as mentioned previously, Australia, Finland, Germany and Switzerland will relinquish their seats at the end of 2021. The names of these States should therefore not appear on the ballot papers. Regarding candidatures, I have been informed of the following. For the five vacant seats from among the African States, five endorsed candidates have been communicated, namely Côte d’Ivoire, Eswatini, Mauritius, Tunisia and the United Republic of Tanzania. For the four vacant seats from among the Asia-Pacific States, four endorsed candidates have been communicated, namely Afghanistan, India, Kazakhstan and Oman. For the two vacant seats from among the Eastern European States, two candidates have been communicated, namely Croatia and the Czech Republic. For the three vacant seats from among the Latin American and Caribbean States, three candidates have been communicated, namely Belize, Chile and Peru. For the four vacant seats from among the Western European and other States, four endorsed candidates have been communicated, namely Belgium, Canada, Italy and the United States of America. In accordance with rule 92 of the rules of procedure, we shall now proceed to the election by secret ballot. I should like to remind representatives that pursuant to rule 88 of the rules of procedure, after the President has announced the beginning of voting no representative shall interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual conduct of the voting. Any announcements, including those concerning the withdrawal of candidatures, should therefore be made prior to the commencement of the voting process, that is to say before the announcement of the beginning of the voting process. As indicated in my letter dated 2 June, all representatives were advised to pick up their ballot papers from the East Documents Counter, located towards the back of the General Assembly Hall, before being seated. I request representatives to use only these ballot papers. Representatives are requested to remain in their seats until they are called to cast their ballots in the ballot boxes located at the base of the podium. While the 1+1 format outlined in my letter dated 21 May will apply to this meeting, only one representative per delegation should walk from the national seat to cast the ballot. I would like to remind members that they are voting on the election of 18 members of the Economic and Social Council and the by-election of four members from the Western European and other States. In accordance with resolution 71/323 of 8 September 2017, the names of the States that have been communicated to the Secretariat have been printed on the ballot papers for each of the regional groups. Additional blank lines corresponding to the number of vacant seats to be filled for each of the regional groups have been provided on the ballot papers for inscribing other States if desirable. I request representatives to use only those ballot papers that have been distributed and to put an “X” in the boxes next to the names of the States from the relevant region for which they wish to vote, and/or to write other eligible names on the blank lines. If the box next to the name of a State is checked, the name of that State does not have to be repeated on the blank line. The total number of checked boxes and/or handwritten names should not exceed the number of vacant seats to be filled as indicated on the ballot paper. A ballot paper will be declared invalid if it contains more names of States from the relevant region than the number of seats allocated to it. Accordingly, for the ballot papers marked “A” for African States, the total number of checked boxes and/ or handwritten names should not exceed five; for the ballot papers marked “B” for Asia-Pacific States, the total number of checked boxes and/or handwritten names should not exceed four; for the ballot papers marked “C” for Eastern European States, the total number of checked boxes and/or handwritten names should not exceed two; for the ballot papers marked “D” for Latin American and Caribbean States, the total number of checked boxes and/or handwritten names should not exceed three; and for the ballot papers marked “E” for Western European and other States, the total number of checked boxes and/or handwritten names should not exceed four. Equally, for the ballot papers marked “By-election” for Western European and other States, the total number of checked boxes and/or handwritten names should not exceed four. A ballot paper will be declared invalid if none of the names of the States on that ballot for which votes were cast belongs to the relevant region. If a ballot paper of a region contains one of the following, the ballot remains valid but the vote for those States will not be counted: States that do not belong to the region concerned or States that continue to be members of the Council. If a ballot paper contains any notation other than votes in favour of specific candidates, those notations will be disregarded. If a mistake is made in filling out the ballot paper, delegations should request a new ballot paper from the Secretariat at the East Documents Counter. Representatives of the following States have agreed to serve as tellers: Guatemala, Japan, Norway, the Republic of Moldova and South Africa. Two ballot boxes have been placed at the front of the General Assembly Hall where tellers will be able to observe them and the casting of ballots  — one ballot box for the election of the 18 members of the Council and one for the by-election of four members of the Council. For the casting of ballots, the Secretary will call the name of each delegation following the General Assembly protocol seating arrangement, starting from the delegation of Iceland, and will ask representatives concerned to proceed to cast their ballots. Representatives are requested to practice physical distancing of no less than two metres and to proceed to cast their ballot only when the previous representative has completed casting their ballot. That will continue until the last representative has cast their ballot. After casting their ballots, representatives will leave the General Assembly Hall through the exit on the west side and return to their seats through the doors located on the east side. Signs marked “re-entry” have been placed to guide representatives back to the General Assembly Hall. Once all ballots have been cast, the voting will be declared closed and the meeting will continue with the consideration of other items, as announced in the Journal of the United Nations. The tellers, accompanied by Secretariat staff, will proceed to the Trusteeship Council Chamber for the counting of the ballots. Upon receipt of the results certified by the tellers, the results will be announced. The proceedings of the plenary meeting, including the announcement of the results, will be webcast. May I take it that the General Assembly agrees to these procedures?

We shall now begin the voting process. I request representatives to use only those ballot papers that have been provided to them.

As I announced earlier, while the votes are being counted, the General Assembly will continue with the plenary meeting to take up agenda items 7 and 111. The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of sub-item (b) of agenda item 118.

I should like to draw the attention of representatives to the second report of the General Committee (A/75/250/Add. 1). The General Committee recommends to the General Assembly that an additional item entitled “Appointment of the Secretary-General of the United Nations” be included in the agenda of the current session under heading I (Organizational, administrative and other matters). May I take it that the General Assembly decides to include this item in the agenda of the current session under heading I (Organizational, administrative and other matters)?

The General Committee also recommends that the item be considered directly in plenary meeting. May I take it that the General Assembly decides to consider the item directly in plenary meeting?

I should like to inform members that the item entitled “Appointment of the Secretary- General of the United Nations” becomes item 184 of the agenda of the current session.

I now give the floor to the representative of China to introduce draft amendment A/75/L.94.

I have the honour to introduce the amendment contained in document A/75/L.94, jointly proposed by Belarus, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Russian Federation, the Syrian Arab Republic, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and my own country, China. We thank the Permanent Representatives of Georgia and the Philippines for their efforts as co-facilitators of draft resolution A/75/L.93, entitled, “Modalities, format and organization of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the appraisal of the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons”. We strongly support and actively participate in global efforts in combating trafficking in persons, especially women and children, and look forward to the upcoming high-level meeting to renew our commitment to addressing that serious challenge to humankind. We strongly support a comprehensive approach and partnership among Member States, the United Nations system and all relevant stakeholders in implementing the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons. We welcome and appreciate the important contributions made by civil society, including non-governmental organizations (NGOs), in engaging constructively with Member States and the United Nations system to combat trafficking in persons, provide assistance to victims and survivors and raise awareness. We are glad to see that currently almost 6,000 NGOs enjoy active consultative status with the Economic and Social Council. We are also pleased to see that in past years the General Assembly has agreed to the consensus approach of allowing the participation, on a non-objection basis, of NGOs that do not have consultative status with the Council, while respecting the rules of procedure of the General Assembly and the intergovernmental nature of its work. That practice has worked successfully for many years. However, we regret that since February, the decades-long consensus has been broken. The established rules of procedure and methods of work of the United Nations were challenged. An unnecessary division was provoked, and the unity and solidarity of Member States were undermined. We also need to point out that, when consensus cannot be achieved among Member States, it is the long-standing practice of United Nations negotiations to revert to the previously agreed language as the best way out. We therefore regret that, despite hours of consultations and various efforts, the concerns of several delegations were not properly addressed. The controversial text, which was non-consensual and put to the vote in the General Assembly, remains before the Assembly for action, although the silent procedure was broken by a number of delegations. Since that is the case, Belarus, China, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Russian Federation, the Syrian Arab Republic and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela have accordingly proposed draft amendment A/75/L.94, which contains verbatim the language of resolution 71/287. entitled “Modalities, format and organization of the high-level meeting on the appraisal of the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons”, which was adopted by consensus without reservation. We believe that consensual language is in the best interest of all Member States. In that regard, we call on all Member States to vote in favour of the draft amendment. By voting in favour of it, they will be supporting the most important principle of consensus. They will be supporting unity, not division. They will be supporting NGO participation based on long-established and effective practice, in line with the rules of procedure of the General Assembly. Please vote in favour of the draft amendment. We count on the support of Member States.

Before we proceed to take a decision on draft resolution A/75/L.93 and draft amendment A/75/L.94 thereto, delegations wishing to make a statement in explanation of vote before the vote on the draft resolution and/or the draft amendment are invited to do so now in one intervention. May I remind delegations that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union and its 27 member States. The European Union would like to thank the President of the General Assembly and the co-facilitators, Georgia and the Philippines, for their efforts and transparent consultations carried out on draft resolution A/75/L.93 on the modalities, format and organization of the high- level meeting of the General Assembly on the appraisal of the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons. Agreeing on the modalities for the high-level meeting today is an important milestone for the issue of trafficking in persons and we therefore welcome the draft resolution. Let me turn to the importance of civil society participation. The European Union welcomes the zero draft, which allows the participation of a diverse range of civil society experts in such a transversal issue as trafficking in persons. Such contributions will greatly enrich our discussions. The European Union attaches great importance to the participation of civil society organizations at the United Nations. It is a high priority. As we strongly supported the language of resolution 75/260 on the organization of the 2021 high-level meeting on HIV/AIDS and resolution 75/282 on countering the use of information and communications technologies for criminal purposes, we welcome that paragraph 9 of the zero draft contains that agreed language. We regret that paragraph 9 of draft resolution A/75/L.93 is being put to the vote. We cannot support an amendment that deviates from the language of the zero draft. On the contrary, we support paragraph 9, which not only provides more transparency with regard to the participation of civil society organizations but also ensures that the power of decision on the participation of civil society organizations remains with the Assembly. The final decision on the list of civil society organizations must not be that of a single Member State. Civil society makes an indispensable contribution to our work on countless issues, including the promotion and protection of human rights. Let us not forget that in a world that is increasingly hostile to non-governmental organizations (NGOs), it is all the more incumbent upon the United Nations and its Member States to facilitate access for and participation of NGOs at the United Nations. Trafficking in persons is a multidimensional and complex issue. We need to hear all those voices so that they can share their broad experiences at the high- level event. For those reasons, the European Union cannot support draft amendment A/75/L.94 concerning paragraph 9 of draft resolution A/75/L.93 and will vote against it. We also call on other members to do the same.

The United States wishes to thank Georgia and the Philippines for draft resolution A/75/L.93 on the modalities, format and organization of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the appraisal of the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons. We place importance on the Global Plan of Action and look forward to the high- level meeting to be held in November. Primarily, I want to say today that we support the co-facilitators’ text, as it has been submitted to the General Assembly, including paragraph 9, which ensures the inclusive participation of civil society, accountability and transparency, by bringing it to the whole General Assembly for a decision. We call on members to vote against draft amendment A/75/L.94. Those modalities were adopted in recent resolutions, as already mentioned by other delegations, including the consensual modalities text in resolution 75/282 on countering the use of information and communications technologies for criminal purposes, which was adopted by the General Assembly just a few days ago in this very Hall. Moreover, those very same modalities were used successfully in the preparations for the 2021 high- level meeting on HIV/AIDS, for which the General Assembly — again in this very Hall — adopted the list of non-governmental organizations by consensus about a week ago. We regret that some members wish to weaken the draft resolution’s references to transparency and accountability for NGO participation in the meeting. It is critical that we enable the meaningful participation of civil society and ensure that its views are heard in order to inform this important discussion. Once again, we urge all delegations to vote against this draft amendment, which would walk back recent precedent. Finally, I just wanted to mention that the procedures that are set out in operative paragraph 9 of the text are a long-standing practice and precedent of this body for high-level events and conferences. We are disappointed that some Member States continue to distort this fact and elide it in our conversations about civil society. I would like to correct that in the record today.

I wanted to start by, like others, thanking the co-facilitators, Georgia and the Philippines, for the modalities draft resolution (A/75/L.93) that we have before us today. It is the result of a lot of hard work on their part and on the part of colleagues around the room. But I am not going to focus my words today on the issue of trafficking; the United Kingdom’s position on that is well known. I wanted to instead turn, as others have, to the amendment being proposed to operative paragraph 9 by Russia, Syria, Iran and China, as contained in document A/75/L.94. Colleagues around the room today will be forgiven for perhaps feeling a slight sense of déja vu as we come to this subject, because this is the third time in just over three months that we as the General Assembly are being asked to opine on this matter. It is the same question; it is the third time of asking. We are very pleased on this occasion that it is the people proposing the draft amendment who are having to propose to make a change to the text, as the co-facilitators have included the language in operative paragraph 9 because it is the agreed language of the General Assembly. It is the language that the Assembly adopted in the votes taken on 23 February, for the HIV modalities resolution (see A/75/PV.55), and again on 26 May concerning the Ad Hoc Committee to Elaborate a Comprehensive International Convention on Countering the Use of Information and Communications Technologies for Criminal Purposes (see A/75/PV.71). The reason that the General Assembly, I believe, adopted the language that we have before us in the text is because it does what we want it to do. It means that civil society can actively participate in the meeting on trafficking, and, critically, it means that any one State that wishes to prevent civil society from participating does not have a veto. That is the crux of the matter. The draft amendment that is being put to the Assembly today is an attempt to give Member States a veto over civil-society participation. The language in the text as it stands allows the General Assembly as a whole to make decisions on civil-society participation, and that is why we should vote against this draft amendment. It is also worth noting that human trafficking is an issue that benefits enormously from the wisdom, perspective and experience of the civil-society actors out there who deal with the matter of trafficking on a day-to-day basis. It is absolutely right that as the General Assembly considers the matter, it should be able to hear from all those experienced individuals and groups. Now, as my United States colleague has just said, it is being put to the Assembly by the delegation proposing this draft amendment that in some way, the way in which we are approaching this is a departure from consensus. That is simply not true. This is a return to the consensus that was established on texts as far back as 2001, 2006 and 2011. I urge all members to vote against the draft amendment and in doing so vote for civil-society participation, vote against the ability to veto civil- society participation, and vote for a meeting on trafficking that is rich in knowledge and experience.

I make this statement on behalf of Canada, New Zealand and my own country, Australia. At the outset, we, too, would like to express our thanks to Georgia and the Philippines for their leadership on draft resolution A/75/L.93 and the open and constructive way in which they have facilitated negotiations. We regret the submission of draft amendment A/75/L.94, which seeks to take power away from the General Assembly. Decisions about meetings of the General Assembly should be made by the Assembly, not by individual Member States. That is one of the fundamental principles that guides our work. It is why we have spent the last few months negotiating on this modalities draft resolution. But that principle is at stake in today’s vote. Under the draft resolution submitted by the facilitators, if a Member State were to object to the participation of a civil-society organization in the high-level meeting, the General Assembly would have the ability to make the final decision on that organization’s participation. That puts decision-making power in all of our hands, not just those of one Member State. If adopted, the draft amendment would give an individual Member State the ability to unilaterally and anonymously block a civil-society organization from participation in the meeting without even having to disclose why. In recent months, there has been a surge of support in this body for a more transparent and collective approach to civil- society participation. This draft amendment seeks to take us backwards. At a time when the coronavirus disease pandemic has contributed to the shrinking of civic space, taking steps to ensure civil-society inclusion is more important than ever. Ensuring participation in the high-level meetings of the Assembly is one such step. We urge all delegations to vote against the draft amendment.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote before the voting. I now give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that since the submission of draft amendment A/75/L.94 and in addition to the delegations listed in the document, the following countries have also become co-sponsors: Algeria, the Comoros and Egypt.

Before we proceed to take a decision on draft resolution A/75/L.93, in accordance with rule 90 of the rules of procedure, the Assembly shall first take a decision on draft amendment A/75/L.94. We turn first to draft amendment A/75/L.94. A recorded vote has been requested.

Since draft amendment A/75/L.94 was not adopted, we shall proceed to take a decision on draft resolution A/75/L.93. I give the floor to the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic on a point of order.

My delegation would like to thank the permanent delegations of Georgia and the Philippines for their efforts as facilitators of draft resolution A/75/L.93, “Modalities, format and organization of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the appraisal of the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons”. My country continues to engage in international efforts to combat human trafficking, particularly given the proliferation of transnational crime and its negative impact on development, peace, stability and security, as well as the increasing nexus in some cases between such crimes and terrorism. We look forward to the convening of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the appraisal of the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons in order to renew our commitment to address that grave challenge for all humankind. My delegation therefore participated positively, transparently and in good faith in the negotiations on draft resolution A/75/L.93. At every step, we emphasized the need for the draft resolution to be adopted by consensus, given our commitment to the established working procedures of the General Assembly, particularly with regard to the participation of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in its meetings. From the beginning, we have been keen to proceed on the basis of consensus. Regrettably, the negotiations were diverted from their desired course through the insertion by some of controversial language that was not voted on with regard to the non-objection rule in particular, which has been used successfully in previous years. We regret that the concerns of my country and a sizeable number of other delegations were not taken into consideration. Our concerns should not be seen as an objection to the participation of NGOs in General Assembly meetings. However, we are of the view that the participation of NGOs that do not enjoy consultative status with the Economic and Social Council must be in line with the applicable rules of procedure of the United Nations, given the intergovernmental nature of those organizations. What is taking place today  — the insertion into the text of language that has not been agreed upon  — constitutes a grave violation of the rules of procedure and creates gross precedents that will undermine the multilateral work and the spirit of pluralism that we must preserve among Member States. My delegation therefore requests a recorded vote on operative paragraph 9 of draft resolution A/75/L.93. We also call on all delegations that share our concerns and worries regarding attempts to undermine the non-objection rule in particular, and the working procedures of the General Assembly in general, to vote against it.

I apologize for taking the floor. I would like to make clear our understanding that as amendment A/75/L.94, concerning paragraph 9 of draft resolution A/75/L.93, has been rejected, we are now being asked to vote on paragraph 9 of draft resolution A/75/L.93. The United Kingdom intends to vote in favour of paragraph 9 as contained in the original text of draft resolution A/75/L.93.

I would like to only clarify that we will vote against paragraph 9 of draft resolution A/75/L.93.

I do not want to prolong the process, but according to the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, since the vote has begun, if there is no procedural point of order the floor should not be used for explanations of vote before the voting.

A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution A/75/L.93. A separate, recorded vote has been requested on paragraph 9 of the draft resolution. I shall first put to the vote paragraph 9.

The Assembly will now take action on draft resolution A/75/L.93, entitled “Modalities, format and organization of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the appraisal of the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons”. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/75/L.93?

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

Allow me to thank the Permanent Representatives of Georgia and the Philippines for coordinating the negotiations on the modalities for holding a high-level meeting on trafficking in persons. The Russian Federation attaches great importance to international efforts to eliminate trafficking. Our support for the consensus-based adoption of resolution 75/283 is a result of our dedication to the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons and our intention to work together with all interested parties to successfully implement the Global Plan of Action. Achieving substantial results toward eliminating the crime of trafficking in persons is possible only if there is political will and if there are united efforts of States and constructive and mutually respectful dialogue. Regrettably, the process of negotiations and the attitude of our partners showed a complete lack of willingness to reach agreement, even on procedural documents. What is telling is that our colleagues have not attempted to achieve consensus on such an important issue. The leadership has acted out of political motivations and not with the intention to help with human trafficking. It is already clear now how negotiations will take place on the final document, now that we know the difficulties that we will have to encounter. The practice of including items in a draft resolution does not lead to a consensus-based outcome. This practice could put an end to the usefulness of any document. If a political declaration reflects only the interests of a well- known group of States, it will come with a cost, which is the case with the resolution adopted today. I would also like to underscore the following. I disagree with the appraisal of those delegations that believe that our draft amendment is distorting something. What was adopted today is not agreed- upon language. It is flagrantly non-consensus-based wording. Our delegation is convinced that the contribution of civil society organizations is crucial for the functioning of the United Nations. However, this should be ensured in accordance with the rules of procedure and with established methods and practice. Any attempts to politicize this issue or blur the lines of intergovernmental work in the Organization is unacceptable in that regard. The Russian Federation therefore disassociates itself from the consensus on paragraph 9 of resolution 75/283 just adopted.

China pays great attention to combating human trafficking, and we expect the high-level meeting of the General Assembly to be held successfully. However, regrettably, the General Assembly adopted resolution 75/283 on the modalities of the high-level meeting without a consensus. Once again, the rules of procedure and practices developed by the General Assembly over the years as well as the non-objection-basis approach are being challenged, and consensus and unity among Member States have thereby once again been undermined. In view of the foregoing, China cannot but disassociate itself from the consensus on paragraph 9 of the resolution. China appeals to the general membership to continue to conduct broad-based and in-depth discussions in pursuit of the maximum possible consensus and unity. China is ready and willing to engage in open and constructive consultations with the various parties in an effort to ensure that non-governmental organizations can actively participate in work of the United Nations and play their due role on the basis of maintaining the General Assembly’s rules of procedure and practices.

The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela wishes to express its gratitude to the Permanent Representatives of the Philippines and Georgia and their teams for their efforts throughout the process of negotiating resolution 75/283 on an issue of primary importance for the world, namely, the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons. Aware of the complexities of the issue and the various positions on it and recognizing the constructive spirit that animated negotiating parties at all times, we also reiterate Venezuela’s support for community-based and civil society organizations, the academic and private sectors among others that contribute to the United Nations system in multiple areas and whose efforts, based on pluralism and gender equity, have made positive contributions to the work of the Organization. Together with other countries, Venezuela co-sponsored draft amendment A/75/L.94 with the intention of establishing that the reaction to the modalities of participation of non-governmental organizations has not been sufficiently debated and that the current formulation of resolution 75/283 does not constitute a consensus among the Member States, that consensus having been broken following decades of being preserved in the Organization. It is striking how for some States there are issues that require an almost infinite amount of discussion and debate when consensus has not been reached, but there are others for which there is no need for this debate to take place despite the expressed differences and a lack of consensus that has recently been made plain in the context of other United Nations processes that have also been addressed in this same Hall. That shows a double standard and selectivity in the approach to certain issues. Substantive results require that these issues be dealt with without polarization, realistically and in a spirit of transparency so that, in future United Nations processes, a consensus formula on the participation of non-governmental organizations is adopted that favours both the United Nations system and these organizations themselves. For all of the foregoing reasons, Venezuela would prefer that the previously agreed formulation be maintained as It is language that had been agreed by all States for decades, or until a new consensus formula is reached. Accordingly, it voted in favour of the draft amendment A/75/L.94 and disassociates itself from paragraph 9 of resolution 75/283.

While appreciating the efforts by the Permanent Representatives of Georgia and the Philippines and emphasizing the importance of civil society’s constructive engagement with Member States and the United Nations system, my delegation would like to explain its position on paragraph 9 of resolution 75/283 just adopted. My delegation is of the view that the current wording of operative paragraph 9 does not adequately address the concerns raised by many delegations during the informal discussions. In addition, the wording does not have consensual terms, and it is not a well-established practice based on previous resolutions on modalities. The delegation of the Islamic Republic of Iran therefore disassociates itself from operative paragraph 9 of draft resolution A/75/L.93. My delegation would like to request that this explanation of vote be included in the relevant report.

The Republic of Belarus supports the consensus-based adoption of resolution 75/283, entitled “Modalities, format and organization of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the appraisal of the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons”. Human trafficking is one of the most dangerous global challenges today. Belarus attaches great importance to the prevention and suppression of this criminal act in all its forms and manifestations. That is true in the context of international cooperation and at the national level. We believe that the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons, adopted in 2010, is an effective tool that allows for the regulation of approaches to preventing human trafficking, protecting and rehabilitating its victims, and prosecuting those who have committed such crimes. As coordinator of the Group of Friends United against Human Trafficking, Belarus will continue to make every effort to enhance the coordination of efforts against human trafficking. We view the forthcoming high-level meeting on the appraisal of the plan of action as a key element in galvanizing actions against human trafficking throughout the world. It will serve as an important venue for exchanging state-of-the-art knowledge, opinions and experience. Apart from substantive matters, we view this resolution as an important element in laying out the specific procedures and modalities for the upcoming meeting. In that regard, we are concerned about the manner in which negotiations were carried out and about the inclusion in the final draft of language that was known to be controversial. We are also concerned about the retreat from the consensus that was reached. In that regard, Belarus signed on as a co-sponsor of the amendment to operative paragraph 9, based on the consensus-based text, and voted in its favour. The Republic of Belarus has consistently supported the achievement of consensus on all issues on the international agenda. That is precisely the approach that underpins the multilateral system. In that regard, the Republic of Belarus is compelled to disassociate itself from operative paragraph 9, as it is not consensus-based.

We once again thank the Permanent Representatives of Georgia and the Philippines for facilitating the adoption of resolution 75/283. My country’s delegation regrets that our concerns as well as those of a sizable number of other delegations were not taken into account. We had hoped that the negotiation process would take another turn in line with the spirit of unanimity we aspire to when adopting any draft resolution here in the General Assembly or in any other United Nations body. Needless to say, the long-standing practice for negotiations in the United Nations is, in the absence of consensus among Member States, to revert to the previously agreed language as the best solution. That is challenged today, and therefore the solidarity that is required in our work is undermined. The co-facilitators maintained the language of operative paragraph 9 despite the objections made by a number of delegations, including that of my country. The objective of the draft amendment was to maintain consensus and avert resort to avenues that we do not need. Therefore, my delegation disassociates itself from the consensus on operative paragraph 9 of draft amendment A/75/L.93, particularly concerning the non-objection basis. We hope to avoid that in future whether in the General Assembly or any other United Nations body.

My delegation would like to thank the Permanent Missions of the Philippines and Georgia for their valuable efforts as the co-facilitators of draft resolution A/75/L.93, entitled “Modalities, format and organization of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the appraisal of the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons”. Allow me to highlight the fact that Algeria has been strongly and constructively engaged throughout the negotiation process, based on our firm commitment to the implementation of the United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons. Indeed, Algeria supports the efforts of the international community to address the phenomenon of trafficking in persons and at the national level has continued to implement its 2019-2021 national anti-trafficking action plan. It will be endowed, by the end of 2021, with a specific and exhaustive law intended to fight human trafficking and protect all victims. This is to say how important and crucial this high-level meeting is to my delegation. That is why Algeria joined the consensus in adopting resolution 75/283, despite our strong concerns regarding operative paragraph 9. In that regard, I would like to indicate that my delegation is concerned by the non-consensual language adopted in operative paragraph 9 of the resolution, which alters the non-objection-basis clause on the participation of non-governmental organizations in General Assembly meetings. That alteration, in our view, will only cause our proceedings to further deviate from the established and consensual General Assembly rules of procedure. Any modification of the agreed procedure for the participation of non-governmental organizations should be discussed and duly agreed within the appropriate framework, consistent with resolution 1993/31 of the Economic and Social Council, on the relationship between the United Nations and non-governmental organizations. Let me also indicate that despite our firm belief in the positive contribution of civil society to our work, we are appalled to note that this matter is an issue of changing existing procedures without consensus on the part of the entire membership. We therefore believe that it is wiser to avoid any misuse of the non-objection-basis clause, which would only undermine the intergovernmental nature of our work as well as the sovereign right of States Members of the United Nations to pronounce themselves on this issue. My delegation therefore disassociates itself from operative paragraph 9 and does not consider that paragraph part of the agreed language of any future processes.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote after the voting. I would like to express my sincere appreciation to His Excellency Kaha Imnadze, Permanent Representative of Georgia to the United Nations, and His Excellency Enrique Austria Manalo, Permanent Representative of the Philippines to the United Nations, who ably and patiently conducted the discussions and complex negotiations in the informal consultations on draft resolution A/75/L.93. I am sure that the members of the Assembly join me in extending to them our sincere appreciation. The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 111. As ballots are still being counted for the election of the members of the Economic and Social Council, I shall suspend the meeting for one hour.

The result of the voting is as follows: By-election — Western European and other States (4 seats) Number of ballot papers: 187 Number of invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 187 Abstentions: 3 Number of members present and voting: 184 Required two-thirds majority: 123 Number of votes obtained: Greece 178 New Zealand 175 Denmark 173 Israel 1 53 Iceland 1 Liechtenstein 1 Malta 1 San Marino 1 Group A — African States (5 seats) Number of ballot papers: 187 Number of invalid ballots: 1 Number of valid ballots: 186 Abstentions: 0 Number of members present and voting: 186 Required two-thirds majority: 124 Number of votes obtained: Côte d’Ivoire 183 Tunisia 183 United Republic of Tanzania 182 Mauritius 181 Eswatini 177 Group B — Asia and Pacific States (4 seats) Number of ballot papers: 187 Number of invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 187 Abstentions: 1 Number of members present and voting: 186 Required two-thirds majority: 124 Number of votes obtained: Oman 182 Afghanistan 181 Kazakhstan 180 India 179 Group C — Eastern European States (2 seats) Number of ballot papers: 187 Number of invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 187 Abstentions: 2 Number of members present and voting: 185 Required two-thirds majority: 124 Number of votes obtained: Croatia 180 Czech Republic 176 Romania 1 Slovenia 1 Hungary 1 Group D — Latin American and Caribbean States (3 seats) Number of ballot papers: 187 Number of invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 187 Abstentions: 4 Number of members present and voting: 183 Required two-thirds majority: 122 Number of votes obtained: Belize 179 Chile 178 Peru 175 Honduras 1 Group E  — Western European and other States (4 seats) Number of ballot papers: 187 Number of invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 187 Abstentions: 5 Number of members present and voting: 182 Required two-thirds majority: 122 Number of votes obtained: Italy 175 Canada 169 Belgium 167 United States of America 166 Luxembourg 1 Spain 1 Switzerland 1

I congratulate the States that have been elected members of the Economic and Social Council and I thank the tellers for their assistance. The General Assembly has thus concluded its consideration of sub-item (b) of agenda item 118.