A/77/PV.56 General Assembly

Members will recall that, in accord­ ance with paragraphs 4 (a) to (e) of resolution 60/180, of 20 December 2005, the Organizational Committee shall comprise the following: seven members of the Security Council, including permanent members; seven mem­ bers of the Economic and Social Council, elected from regional groups; five top providers of assessed con­ tributions to United Nations budgets and of voluntary contributions to United Nations funds, programmes and agencies, including a standing peacebuilding fund; five top providers of military personnel and civilian police to United Nations missions; and seven additional members elected by the General Assembly, giving due consideration to representation from all regional groups in the overall composition of the Committee. By the same resolution, the General Assembly also decided that each of the five regional groups shall have no fewer than three seats in the overall composition of the Organizational Committee. Members will also recall that, at the 44th plenary meeting of its seventy-fifth session, the Assembly elected Brazil, Costa Rica, Egypt, Lebanon and South Africa as members of the Organizational Committee of the Peacebuilding Commission for a two-year term of office, beginning on 1 January 2021, and that at the 52nd meeting of its seventy-sixth session, the Assembly elected Bulgaria and the Dominican Republic as members of the Organizational Committee for a two- year term of office, beginning on 1 January 2022. Consequently, the General Assembly will need to fill the seats to be vacated by Brazil, Costa Rica, Egypt, Lebanon and South Africa, whose two-year terms of office expire on 31 December 2022. By a letter dated 16 December 2022 addressed to the President of the General Assembly (A/77/650), the President was informed by the facilitator of the group of troop-contributing countries that Bangladesh, Ethiopia, India, Nepal and Rwanda would serve on the Organizational Committee for the period beginning 1 January 2023 and ending on 31 December 2024. By a letter dated 19 December 2022 addressed to the President of the General Assembly (A/77/652), the President was informed by the facilitator of the group of the leading financial contributors that Canada, Germany, Japan, Norway and Sweden had been selected to serve on the Organizational Committee for the 2023– 2024 term. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to take note of the information contained in documents A/77/650 and A/77/652?

The Assembly will now proceed to the election of five members of the Organizational Committee of the Peacebuilding Commission. By its resolution 60/261, of 8 May 2006, the Assembly decided that the members of the Organizational Committee shall serve for renewable terms of two years, as applicable. Accordingly, Costa Rica, Egypt, Lebanon and South Africa are eligible for immediate re-election, while Brazil has already been elected by the Economic and Social Council in its decision 2022/206 D, of 21 July 2022. Regarding candidatures for the five vacant seats, I should like to inform members that from among the African States, three endorsed candidates have been communicated, namely, Egypt, Kenya and South Africa. From among the Asia-Pacific States, one endorsed candidate has been communicated, namely, Qatar. From among the Latin American and Caribbean States, one endorsed candidate has been communicated, namely, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. Members will recall that, by its resolution 60/261, the General Assembly decided that the rules of procedure and established practice of the Assembly for the election of members of its subsidiary bodies shall apply to its election of members of the Committee. For this election, rules 92 and 94 are applicable. Accordingly, the election shall be held by secret ballot. However, I should also like to recall paragraph 16 of decision 34/401, whereby the practice of dispensing with the secret ballot for elections to subsidiary organs when the number of candidates corresponds to the number of seats to be filled should become standard, unless a delegation specifically requests a vote on a given election. In the absence of such a request, may I take it that the Assembly decides to proceed to the election on that basis?

Since the number of candidates endorsed by the Group of African States, the Group of Asia-Pacific States and the Group of Latin American and Caribbean States is equal to the number of seats to be filled, may I take it that the General Assembly decides to elect Egypt, Kenya, Qatar, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and South Africa as members of the Organizational Committee of the Peacebuilding Commission for a two-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2022?

I congratulate Egypt, Kenya, Qatar, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and South Africa on their elections as members of the Organizational Committee of the Peacebuilding Commission. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (b) of agenda item 117?

I now invite the attention of the General Assembly to draft decision A/77/L.42, circulated under sub-item (a) of agenda item 18, entitled “Towards the achievement of sustainable development: implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, including through sustainable consumption and production, building on Agenda 21”. Members will recall that, at its 3rd plenary meeting, on 16 September 2022, the General Assembly decided to allocate sub-item (a) of agenda item 18 to the Second Committee. To enable the Assembly to take action expeditiously on the document, may I take it that the Assembly wishes to consider sub-item (a) of the agenda item 18 directly in plenary meeting and proceed immediately to its consideration? It was so decided (decision 77/505).

The Assembly will now take action on draft decision A/77/L.42, entitled “Accreditation and participation of an intergovernmental organization in the United Nations Conference on the Midterm Comprehensive Review of the Implementation of the Objectives of the International Decade for Action, ‘Water for Sustainable Development’, 2018–2028”. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to adopt the draft decision?

Before giving the floor to delegations in explanation of position, I would like to remind delegations that explanations are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats. I now give the floor to the representative of the Russian Federation.

We would like to note that we did not undermine the consensus. However, our delegation would like to dissociate itself from the consensus, given that the European Union and its structures  — unfortunately  — are politicizing environmental and climate cooperation.

We have heard the only speaker in explanation of position. The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 18.

I now give the floor to the representative of Costa Rica to introduce draft resolution A/77/L.40.

Today I have the honour to address the General Assembly, on behalf of France and Costa Rica, to introduce draft resolution A/77/L.40, entitled “2025 United Nations Conference to Support the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development”. The ocean faces a continued emergency, with an unprecedented number of escalating challenges. And yet Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14 is currently the most underfunded of all the SDGs. It is estimated that an additional $175 billion would be needed each year, until 2030, for its full implementation. In the meantime, sea levels are rising and coastal erosion is worsening, impacting the lives, livelihoods and culture of many island nations and coastal communities. As the largest carbon sink, absorbing over 90 per cent of the heat generated by greenhouse-gas emissions, the ocean is also becoming warmer and more acidic. Coral reefs and mangroves, which are key to supporting life on land and sea, face extensive damage, and marine pollution continues to spread. Fish stocks are overexploited, marine biodiversity is rapidly declining and coastal ecosystems could become irreversibly damaged. The current situation is beyond alarming. However, thanks to the successful first and second conferences to support the realization of SDG 14, ably hosted by Fiji and Sweden and Kenya and Portugal, respectively, the international community has rallied around ocean health and sustainability, with commitments and actions pledged for better stewardship of the ocean. We must now build on the extraordinary momentum achieved and move towards scaling up action and implementation. The Presidents of France and Costa Rica therefore announced in Lisbon their offer to host the third United Nations Ocean Conference, to be held in France in June 2025, preceded by a high-level themed event in Costa Rica in June 2024. We believe that the Conference can be a crucial opportunity to reconvene all stakeholders working to sustainably protect and manage the ocean. They include Heads of State and Government, scientists, non-governmental organizations, financial institutions and development banks, philanthropists, young ocean professionals and maritime entrepreneurs, small-scale fishers, representatives of the world’s coastal cities and regions and a wide range of civil society representatives. By mobilizing all actors, funding and innovative solutions, we will work to ensure more sustainable governance of the ocean. The Conference will also provide a platform to review progress on key processes that require the highest level of political will and engagement, namely, the instruments on plastic pollution and the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, the discussions around deep sea mining, the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development and the commitments from more than 100 States to protect at least 30 per cent of marine areas by 2030, to name but a few. On behalf of France and Costa Rica, we would like to sincerely thank all Member States for their very positive engagement during the consultative process of this enabling draft resolution, during which we received extensive expressions of support for the text and the process, which concluded in record time. The co-sponsorship of over 50 Members States sends a strong signal in favour of pursuing the momentum for action and commitment to fully achieve SDG 14 by 2030. Their overall support also means that our call for greater ambition to address the dire state of the ocean has been heard. The second part of the process will entail the modalities of the Conference, which we hope to begin early next year. We will continue open and transparent consultations with the United Nations membership in order to identify the priorities of Member States at the Conference in 2025. We also intend to engage with all partners in order to gather ideas, as well as wide-ranging and concrete solutions. The health of the ocean is a global responsibility that belongs to all of us. It requires continued, committed multilateral action from the United Nations. We must take advantage of this great momentum to save our ocean. And time is of the essence.

The Assembly will take action on draft resolution A/77/L.40, entitled “2025 United Nations Conference to Support the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that, since the submission of draft resolution A/77/L.40, and in addition to the delegations listed in the document, the following countries have become sponsors of the draft resolution: Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Bulgaria, Cabo Verde, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Djibouti, the Dominican Republic, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, Germany, Guinea, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kenya, Latvia, Luxembourg, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mexico, the Federated States of Micronesia, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the Niger, Norway, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, Romania, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Senegal, Singapore, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia and the United Republic of Tanzania.

May I take it that the Assembly wishes to adopt draft resolution A/77/L.40?

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda items 13 and 72.

I now give the floor to the repre­ sentative of Iraq to introduce draft resolution A/77/L.41.

On behalf of the delegation of the Republic of Iraq, I thank you, Mr. President, for your cooperation and for adding draft resolution A/77/L.41 to the General Assembly meeting scheduled for today. I also express my thanks and gratitude to all delegations that supported and co-authored the draft resolution. We have the pleasure and honour of introducing to the General Assembly draft resolution A/77/L.41, entitled “International Day for the Prevention of Violent Extremism as and when Conducive to Terrorism”. We worked with the delegations of the sisterly Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, the sisterly State of Qatar and the sisterly Sultanate of Oman, under agenda items 14 and 121 of the General Assembly. Iraq is one of the countries that has suffered the most from terrorist acts. Terrorist organizations have repeated their attempts to sow instability and insecurity in my country by targeting the facilities of the Iraqi State and killing and terrorizing civilians by perpetrating horrible and inhumane acts. The Government of the Republic of Iraq is committed to cooperating with the international community to fight and totally eradicate terrorism in all its forms and though various means, including judicial accountability, security follow-up, supporting the victims, preventing extreme violence that leads to terrorism and addressing the radical causes for the emergence and spread of extremist thought. To that end, the Government of the Republic of Iraq reiterates its commitment to fighting terrorism in all its forms and preventing all entities that sponsor violence, terrorism, claims about others’ religious disbelief and hate speech. We denounce all terrorist acts wherever they occur in the world and call for the need to unify and coordinate all subregional, regional and international efforts to fight terrorism and prevent violent extremism regardless of its origin or name. Iraq is working very carefully to develop its national strategies on fighting terrorism and preventing violent extremism in line with global developments and the United Nations counter-terrorism strategy. Our national strategy encompasses, inter alia, addressing and preventing extreme thought, fighting organized crime and eradicating sources of financing terrorism in addition to waging field war. In this regard, Iraq values the great efforts made by the United Nations, including the Office of Counter-Terrorism, the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate and all other United Nations entities that coordinate international efforts and promote national capacities. Furthermore, Iraq shares the concerns noted in the fifteenth report of the Secretary-General on the terrorist threat posed by Da’esh (S/2022/576), which still constitutes a threat that could get worse. Iraq also expresses its grave concern that circumstances conducive to the spread of extreme thought still exist, especially in camps where terrorists and their families are detained. It is for that reason that Iraq is introducing draft resolution A/77/L.41 for consideration by the General Assembly today. The main objectives of the draft resolution are to declare 12 February the International Day for the Prevention of Violent Extremism as and when Conducive to Terrorism, to raise awareness of the threats linked to violent extremism conducive to terrorism and to enhance international cooperation in that regard. The date of 12 February was chosen to commemorate on which the General Assembly adopted resolution 70/254, on the Secretary-General’s Plan of Action to Prevent Violent Extremism (A/70/674), the first United Nations document on the issue (see A/70/PV.84). Iraq launched the initiative in line with our top priorities, which are to fight terrorism and prevent violent extremism as part of our national strategies to counter both scourges. Iraq believes that preventing violent extremism conducive to terrorism is a necessary step towards a comprehensive response to the threat of terrorism in line with the seventh review of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy and pursuant to the commitments under international humanitarian law. Further, pursuant to resolution 75/291, on the seventh review of the United Nations Global Counter- Terrorism Strategy, which was adopted by consensus on 30 June 2021, the sponsors of draft resolution A/77/L.41 preserved the agreed language. The primary objective is to adopt a consensual resolution that sends a strong and unified international message and to address and prevent the root causes of terrorism. Accordingly, my delegation has facilitated transparent and open negotiations, having held two informal meetings, on 18 and 28 November 2022, to that end. Also, to ensure consensus, we have engaged in bilateral and multilateral negotiations with all delegations. My country believes that international efforts must be made collectively to bolster partnership and that States should bear collective responsibility, respect each other’s sovereignty and ensure national ownership of efforts aimed at fighting terrorism and preventing violent extremism. We underscore that draft resolution A/77/L.41 fully respects those principles and emphasizes national ownership of fighting terrorism and preventing violent extremism. The text of the draft resolution stresses the important role played by intergovernmental organizations, civil society, academics, religious leaders and the media in fighting terrorism and preventing violent extremism conducive to terrorism. We once again emphasize that terrorism and violent extremism cannot be linked to any religion, nationality, civilization or racial group. My country reiterates that it unequivocally condemns terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. It also reiterates its firm commitment to promoting international cooperation aimed at fighting terrorism and preventing violent extremism conducive to terrorism. We must not use other countries to settle scores and jeopardize their security and stability. We must also uphold the principles of the United Nations Charter, in particular respect for the sovereignty of other countries, good-neighbourly relations and cooperation among countries. My delegation reiterates the importance of agreeing on a unified definition of terrorism by Member States in order to pool international efforts towards addressing the dangerous scourge that threatens the security of the international community. We look forward to working with the United Nations Office of Counter-Terrorism to celebrate the International Day for the Prevention of Violent Extremism as and when Conducive to Terrorism, upon the adoption of A/77/L.41. In conclusion, Iraq reaffirms its full commitment to cooperating with the international community bilaterally and multilaterally for fulfilling the purposes of the draft resolution through the exchange of best experiences and national expertise with interested countries. We call on members to support draft resolution A/77/L.41 as a step forward in the joint international efforts to fight terrorism and prevent violent extremism conducive to terrorism.

We shall now proceed to consider the draft resolution contained in document A/77/L.41. Before giving the floor for explanations of vote before the voting, may I remind delegations that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

The Russian Federation requested a vote on draft resolution A/77/L.41, as no extensive discussions were held on it. There were just two rounds of consultations. The coordinators decided to push the draft resolution through without taking into consideration the concerns expressed, nor the comments and proposals made. This draft resolution will not be granted the status of a consensus document. Let me explain why. First, the international community has not agreed to a definition of violent extremism. The attempt to introduce this wording — “violent extremism” — has created conditions under which double standards may be deployed. In other words, terrorists are now to be divided into two categories, the bad ones and the not-so-bad ones. Violent extremists fall in the latter category — the not-so-bad ones. Under this classification, international counter-terrorism legislation does not reach violent extremists, who are, as a rule of thumb, radical elements that have garnered outside support. That is the first reason. Secondly, let us consider why the draft resolution on celebrating an International Day for the Prevention of Violent Extremism as and when Conducive to Terrorism selected the date of 12 February. On 12 February 2016, resolution 70/254, on the Secretary-General’s Plan of Action to Prevent Violent Extremism, was adopted by the General Assembly. The Secretary-General’s Plan of Action was one of the first attempts to institutionalize the idea of preventing violent extremism in a universal format, which actually waters down traditional international legal norms and objectives related to counter-terrorism. Let me remind the General Assembly that the reaction of the Member States to the plan of action put forward by the then-Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was ambiguous, to put it lightly. Many States noted that the Plan in fact ignored very important factors leading to the radicalization of political and civilian groups, for instance, arbitrary outside interference in the domestic affairs of sovereign States, tolerance for using terrorist groups for political purposes, and a dismantling of State institutions. Instead, the Plan listed as, among the reasons for radicalization, the repressive policies and systematic violations of human rights. It is rather ironic that the greatest uptick in racially and ethnically motivated violent extremism has been seen in Western societies. How did it get to this? Are Western societies in fact repressive regimes? Are they systematically violating human rights? That may be the case, but it may also be that Ban Ki-moon’s Plan of Action is the embodiment of a host of superficial assertions that have not been given proper consideration. We would also like to note that resolution 75/291, dated 30 June 2021, on the review of the Global Counter-Terrorism strategy does not actually endorse the Secretary-General’s Plan as the starting point for national plans. Rather, as part of the review of the Strategy’s implementation in 2021, the international community declared s that the implementation of any recommendations in the Plan of Action should depend on the sovereign decision of each and every State. Is this ambiguous document what we are being asked to celebrate now at the international level? We suggested that we swap out the object of the draft resolution and focus on the prevention of terrorism, as this would reflect the full scope of approaches and opinions in Member States. Furthermore, we have very clear binding instruments on the prevention of terrorism: Security Council resolutions, international conventions and the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. The prevention-of-violent-extremism agenda should be taken within the context of the prevention of terrorism. It is not quite clear why the root causes of terrorism are ignored, including by Iraq, a country which is regularly hit by terrorist attacks. Just a few days ago, the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant once again committed a terrorist act on Iraqi soil. Moreover, the Iraqi representative just mentioned terrorism when presenting draft resolution A/77/L.41, so why is it that the prevention of terrorism is absent from A/77/L.41? It would make sense to withdraw the draft resolution from today’s agenda and continue with a constructive discussion of the issue. In that way, we might come to a common understanding before the next review of the global counter-terrorism strategy, which is scheduled for 2023.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote before the voting. The Assembly will take action on draft resolution A/77/L.41 entitled “International Day for the Prevention of Violent Extremism as and when Conducive to Terrorism”. For the Assembly’s information, the draft resolution has closed for e-sponsorship. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that, since the submission of draft resolution A/77/L.41, and in addition to the delegations listed in the document, the following countries have become sponsors of the draft resolution: Afghanistan, Algeria, Canada, Denmark, Djibouti, France, Germany, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Luxembourg, Mauritania, Micronesia (Federated States of), Morocco, Mozambique, the Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Portugal, Spain, the Sudan, Sweden, Tonga, Tunisia the United Arab Emirates, the United Republic of Tanzania and the United States of America.

A recorded vote has been requested.

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

My delegation thanks the representative of Iraq for introducing resolution 77/243, entitled “International Day for the Prevention of Violent Extremism as and when Conducive to Terrorism”, which we supported. Our vote in favour of resolution 77/243 is based on Cuba’s historic position against terrorism, namely, that Cuba is absolutely and categorically against all terrorist acts, methods and practices, in all their forms and manifestations, by whomever, against whomever and wherever they are perpetrated, whatever their motivations, including those in which Governments are directly or indirectly involved. By voting in favour of the resolution, my delegation reaffirms that the prevention of violent extremism or terrorism should not be used as a pretext for violating the United Nations Charter or to promote covert agendas to subvert or change the constitutional orders of sovereign States. It is unacceptable that under the banner of a supposed fight against terrorism, certain States carry out acts of aggression directly or indirectly against sovereign peoples and commit flagrant violations of human rights and international humanitarian law. Terrorism cannot and should not be linked to any religion, nationality, civilization or ethnic group. It must be confronted holistically, through direct actions aimed also at prevention, so as to address its root causes. We condemn the unilateral acts of certain States that arrogate for themselves the right to certify conduct and draw up politically motivated lists, which are also contrary to international law. We reject the manipulation of an issue as sensitive as terrorism in an effort to turn it into an instrument that could be used against any country. We support the strengthening of United Nations efforts to combat terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. We therefore reiterate our support for the adoption of a general convention on international terrorism in order to overcome the existing legal loopholes in relation to the definition of terrorism, which is imperative to addressing the deficiencies and omissions in the current legal framework. Cuba knows very well what terrorism is. In defending its independence, sovereignty and dignity, my country has for decades suffered the consequences of terrorist acts, which have brought a toll of 3,478 dead and 2,099 disabled in Cuba. In many of these cases, the evidence shows the complicity, support and protection given by the Government of the United States to the perpetrators of these acts. We will never forget, nor will we fail to denounce, the fact that 45 years after the mid-flight explosion of a Cuban airliner that caused the death of 73 people at the hands of self-confessed terrorists based on United States territory, the authorities of that country have not let justice be done for the victims of this horrendous crime. Nor will we fail to denounce the terrorist attack against our embassy in Paris on 28 July 2021, which resulted from a brutal campaign to incite hatred and violence and support the commission of hostile acts that were unleashed with total impunity on social networks and digital platforms from the territory of the United States. Nor will we fail to denounce the terrorist attack on the Cuban embassy in Washington in 2020, when an individual used a semi-automatic rifle to discharge 32 rounds against our diplomatic headquarters without the Government of the United States saying a single word about it. Unfortunately, the events I have mentioned are but a few examples of the terrorist attacks that Cuba has had to face. For all the aforementioned reasons, my delegation voted in favour of resolution 77/243.

Egypt voted in favour of resolution 77/243 as part of its support for promoting international efforts to counter terrorism and causes of and conditions conducive thereto from a holistic point of view, as well as efforts to raise awareness of this dangerous phenomenon and how to address it. Nonetheless, we continue to have concerns about violent extremism. Those concerns were clearly expressed in the discussions on the various resolutions on countering terrorism, foremost of which occurred during the reviews of the United Nations global counter- terrorism strategy. In that context, we affirm that although we voted in favour of resolution 77/243 today, that should not in any way be considered a change of our views about the issue as a whole. Our concerns on the issue include the following. First, we are concerned about the ongoing absence of any internationally agreed definition of what is known as violent extremism. Such a definition should highlight the difference between extremism, on the one hand, and terrorism, on the other. Secondly, the Secretary-General’s Plan of Action to Prevent Violent Extremism issued in 2015 (A/70/674) was not the product of discussions among countries. Therefore, it does not reflect the supposed consensus among countries. Thirdly, we are concerned about the lack of a clear legal framework to govern violent extremism, whether at the international level, meaning international conventions, or at the national level in many countries. Fourthly, there is a general trend towards using the term “violent extremism” to describe acts of terrorism committed by non-Islamic criminal groups, which makes the term “terrorism” — contrary to the truth — pertinent only to the criminal acts committed by some Islamists. Fifthly, many uses of this concept undermine the main responsibility of countries to counter terrorism, causing an unnecessary misunderstanding with regard to the reasons leading to terrorism. That is why, like many other countries, Egypt supports adding the phrase “conditions conducive to terrorism” wherever violent extremism is mentioned so that we are able to accept the inclusion of that concept in United Nations documents.

The exercise of the right of reply has been requested. May I remind members that statements in the exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and to five minutes for the second intervention and should be made by delegations from their seats.

My delegation expresses its thanks and gratitude to all the delegations that voted for and sponsored resolution 77/243. The result of the voting confirms the interest of the international community in implementing joint projects for preventing terrorism and violent extremism conducive to terrorism. It is unfortunate that a delegation requested a recorded vote, despite all the efforts we made to reach a consensus on the draft resolution. We showed extreme flexibility, listened carefully to and took into account comments of Member States in order to amend the text. However, a number of initiatives that were launched by our delegation and others were rejected. The only other option on the table was to set aside the resolution, which we found unacceptable. Iraq is eager to cooperate with Member States on the basis of mutual respect for the sovereignty and national ownership of counter-terrorism operations as well as operations for preventing violent extremism conducive to terrorism in line with the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, international law and international humanitarian law. We are open to promote cooperation and partnership for addressing this danger which threatens all of us.

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda items 14 and 121.

As indicated in document A/77/643, the General Assembly is required during the current session to appoint a member of the Joint Inspection Unit to fill the vacancy that will arise from the resignation of Inspector Kamioka Keiko of Japan with effect from 31 December 2022. In accordance with the procedures described in Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Joint Inspection Unit, and with resolution 61/238, of 22 December 2006, the President of the General Assembly, having held the necessary consultations, requested Japan to propose a candidate to serve for a period of five years beginning on 1 January 2023. As indicated in document A/77/643, the candidate, in accordance with paragraph 7 of resolution 59/267, should have experience in at least one of the following fields: oversight, audit, inspection, investigation, evaluation, finance, project evaluation, programme evaluation, human resources management, management, public administration, monitoring and programme performance, as well as knowledge of the United Nations system and its role in international relations. As further indicated in document A/77/643, as a result of the consultations held in accordance with paragraph 2 of article 3 of the statute of the Joint Inspection Unit, including consultations with the President of the Economic and Social Council and with the Secretary- General, in his capacity as Chair of the United Nations System Chief Executives Board for Coordination, the President of the General Assembly has submitted to the Assembly the candidature of Hoshino Toshiya of Japan for appointment as a member of the Joint Inspection Unit for a five-year term of office beginning 1 January 2023 and expiring on 31 December 2027. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to appoint Mr. Hoshino Toshiya of Japan as a member of the Joint Inspection Unit for a five-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2023 and expiring on 31 December 2027? It was so decided (decision 77/417).

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (j) of agenda item 118?

Since no candidate obtained the required two-thirds majority in the previous ballot at the 98th plenary meeting of the seventy-sixth session, on 2 September 2022, there remains one seat to be filled from among the Eastern European States. We shall therefore proceed to a tenth restricted ballot. In accordance with rule 94 of the rules of procedure, this twentieth round of balloting shall be restricted to the two States from among the Eastern European States that were not elected but obtained the largest number of votes in the previous unrestricted ballot, that is, North Macedonia and the Russian Federation. Before we begin the voting process, I should like to remind members that pursuant to rule 88 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, no representative shall interrupt the voting except on a point of order on the actual conduct of the voting. We shall now begin the voting process. Ballot papers will be distributed. The voting has thus begun. Members are requested to put an “X” in the box next to the name of a State printed on the ballot paper. There should not be more than one checked box for the vacant seat to be filled. A ballot will be declared invalid if both boxes are checked. Any notations other than a vote in favour of an eligible Member State will be disregarded.

The result of the voting is as follows: Eastern European States (1 seat) Number of ballot papers: 181 Number of invalid ballots: 1 Number of valid ballots: 180 Abstentions: 1 Number of members present and voting: 179 Required two-thirds majority: 120 Number of votes obtained: Russian Federation 97 North Macedonia8 2

Since no candidate obtained the required two-thirds majority in the previous ballot, there still remains one seat to be filled from among the Eastern European States. We shall therefore proceed to an eleventh restricted ballot. In accordance with rule 94 of the rules of procedure, this twenty-first round of balloting shall be restricted to the two States from among the Eastern European States that were not elected but obtained the largest number of votes in the previous unrestricted ballot, namely, North Macedonia and the Russian Federation. Before we begin the voting process, I should like to remind members that pursuant to rule 88 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, no representative shall interrupt the voting except on a point of order on the actual conduct of the voting. We shall now begin the voting process. Ballot papers will be distributed. The voting has thus begun. Members are requested to put an “X” in the box next to the name printed on the ballot paper. There should not be more than one checked box for the vacant seat to be filled. A ballot will be declared invalid if both boxes are checked. Any notations other than a vote in favour of an eligible Member State will be disregarded.

The result of the voting is as follows: Eastern European States (1 seat) Number of ballot papers: 179 Number of invalid ballots: 1 Number of valid ballots: 178 Abstentions: 1 Number of members present and voting: 177 Required two-thirds majority: 118 Number of votes obtained: Russian Federation 96 North Macedonia 81

Since no candidate obtained the required two-thirds majority in the previous ballot, there remains one seat to be filled from among the Eastern European States. We shall therefore proceed to a twelfth restricted ballot. In accordance with rule 94 of the rules of procedure, this twenty-second round of balloting shall be restricted to the two States from among the Eastern European States that were not elected but obtained the largest number of votes in the previous unrestricted ballot, namely, North Macedonia and the Russian Federation. Before we begin the voting process, I should like to remind members that pursuant to rule 88 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, no representative shall interrupt the voting except on a point of order on the actual conduct of the voting. We shall now begin the voting process. Ballot papers will be distributed. The voting has thus begun. Members are requested to put an “X” in the box next to the name of a State printed on the ballot paper. There should be no more than one checked box for the vacant seat to be filled. A ballot will be declared invalid if both boxes are checked. Any notations other than a vote in favour of an eligible Member State will be disregarded.

The result of the voting is as follows: Eastern European States (1 seat) Number of ballot papers: 179 Number of invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 179 Abstentions: 1 Number of members present and voting: 178 Required two-thirds majority: 119 Number of votes obtained: Russian Federation 99 North Macedonia 79

Since no candidate obtained the required two-thirds majority in the previous ballot, there remains one seat to be filled from among the Eastern European States. In accordance with rule 94 of the rules of procedure, we should continue with the series of balloting. In view of the late hour, further balloting will take place on a later day to be announced. The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of sub-item (b) of agenda item 116. I shall now suspend this meeting until the reports of the Fifth Committee are available for consideration by the General Assembly.