A/77/PV.57 General Assembly

I would like, in keeping with established practice, to invite the attention of the General Assembly to document A/77/702, which contains a letter from the Secretary-General addressed to the President of the General Assembly, in which he informs the Assembly of Member States in arrears in the payment of their financial contributions to the United Nations within the terms of Article 19 of the Charter. I would like to remind delegations that, under Article 19 of the Charter, “A Member of the United Nations which is in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions to the Organization shall have no vote in the General Assembly if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of the contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. The General Assembly may, nevertheless, permit such a Member to vote if it is satisfied that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the Member.” N2301823 (E) *2301823* May I therefore take it that the General Assembly takes note of the information contained in those documents?

I now give the floor to the representative of Mongolia to introduce draft resolution A/77/L.44.

I have the honour to introduce draft resolution A/77/L.44, entitled “Education for democracy”. My delegation initiated this biennial resolution in 2012, based on our strong belief in the interdependent and mutually reinforcing link between education and democracy. We also believe that it has a transformative power that is essential for peace, sustainable development and human rights. We conducted several rounds of informal consultations on the draft resolution, which were organized in an open and transparent manner and during which the text was enriched with several proposals from Member States. The text has important language that calls on Member States to work with relevant stakeholders to take steps to close the digital divide and promote digital inclusion by addressing the challenges associated with access, affordability, digital literacy and digital skills. The updated text has been improved with paragraphs on the Transforming Education Summit, which was convened by the Secretary-General in New York in September 2022, and its pre-summit, which was hosted by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization in Paris in June 2022. If adopted, the draft resolution would be the second General Assembly resolution to include a reference to that significant summit. We believe that by including those paragraphs, the draft resolution will contribute to the country-level implementation of national commitments made during the Transforming Education Summit process. The draft resolution also requests the Secretary-General to submit a full report on education for democracy. I take this opportunity to extend our sincere gratitude to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization for its support and commitment to preparing a stand-alone report within its existing reporting obligations. On behalf of my delegation, I would like to express our sincere thanks to all delegations that engaged very constructively in the informal and bilateral consultations. I also wish to extend our gratitude to the Member States that co-sponsored our draft resolution. In conclusion, on behalf of all the sponsors, I would like to express our hope that, as in previous years, the draft resolution will receive the unanimous support of Member States and wide co-sponsorship.

The General Assembly will now take action on draft resolution A/77/L.44, entitled “Education for democracy”. 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.44 and in addition to those delegations listed therein, the following countries have become sponsors of the draft resolution: Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Burundi, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Djibouti, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, 2/8 N2301823 Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Myanmar, Nepal, the Netherlands, the Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of Moldova, Romania, Saint Lucia, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor- Leste, Türkiye, Uruguay and Zambia.

May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to adopt draft resolution A/77/L.44?

I now give the floor to the representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran, who has asked to speak in explanation of position on the resolution just adopted.

I take the floor to explain our position with regard to resolution 77/228, which was just adopted. At the outset, I would like to thank the Permanent Mission of Mongolia to the United Nations for facilitating that biennial resolution. My delegation joined the consensus on its adoption. We would like to refer to our previous position and observations regarding the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Islamic Republic of Iran considers the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and UNESCO’s Education 2030 Framework for Action, as well as the Incheon Declaration: Education 2030, adopted at the World Education Forum in 2015, as absolutely non-legally binding voluntary instruments that merely set out a number of non-obligatory recommendations. My delegation has announced that the Islamic Republic of Iran is not committed to those parts of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Education 2030 Framework for Action or the Incheon Declaration that in any way that contradict Iran’s national laws, regulation and policies, as well as Islamic principles and cultural and religious norms and values. Accordingly, the Islamic Republic of Iran has no legal obligation vis-à-vis the implementation of those instruments. Moreover, with regard to all domestic development and education issues, nationally developed instruments and programmes shall enjoy absolute priority and will be considered as the main reference for action. Considering the references in resolution 77/268 to the 2030 Agenda for the Sustainable Development and the Incheon Declaration: Education 2030, my delegation disassociates itself from the fifth and eleventh preambular paragraphs and from paragraph 4 of the resolution.

We have heard the only speaker in explanation of position on the resolution just adopted. The General Assembly has thus concluded its stage of its consideration of agenda item 13.

I now give the floor to the representative of the Russian Federation to introduce draft decision A/77/L.47.

My delegation has always supported the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) as a key United Nations structure for enabling the international community to coordinate solutions to environmental issues and for supporting the environmental pillar of sustainable development. On the issue of the election of the Head of the UNEP secretariat, our initial concern was that a constructive solution needed to be found through a transparent process and a comprehensive call for candidates, which is the standard for such processes. Unfortunately, that call on our part — and on the part of several other delegations  — was not heeded. We would like to express our disappointment about the lack of consensus in the procedure for the presentation of a candidate for the post of Executive Director of UNEP. The Secretary-General nominated Ms. Inger Andersen of Denmark for the consideration of the General Assembly, despite a number of written objections from Member States during the negotiation process among regional groups. Another important point is that some delegations seek to portray the current situation in a way that suggests that Russia is dissatisfied with the actions of UNEP and its leadership purely in the context of the Ukraine issue. Allow me to note that we began to express our concerns about UNEP’s work and its bias in favour of the largest donor countries long before the N2301823 3/8 special military operation. I therefore urge the General Assembly not to narrow the scope of the problem. Unlike some delegations, we are paying attention to the environmental protection situation in a number of different parts of the world in which the interests of developing countries continue to be undermined. It is important to consider the following reasons for our concerns. First, the leadership of UNEP has been monopolized by representatives of the Western countries: six of the seven UNEP Executive Directors over the past 30 years have come exclusively from that group of countries. And despite our appeals, the Secretary-General has not even offered to nominate candidates from other countries for the Assembly’s consideration. Secondly, we underscore that the international civil servant heading the main environmental protection structure in the United Nations must play the role of an impartial mediator who takes into account the interests of all countries, including those most severely affected by environmental degradation. Ms. Andersen, by contrast, has openly promoted European environmental priorities, allowing herself to politicize her work and sideline the interests of developing countries. Such favouritism towards donor countries is clear in the implementation of UNEP’s resolutions, its scientific activities and the preparation of its reports. For those reasons, I would like to reiterate the Russian Federation’s objection to Ms. Andersen’s candidacy and urge that it be taken into account during the formal consideration thereof. However, before we consider that issue, we ask the Assembly to consider draft decision A/77/L.47, which, if I may, I will now introduce. The first preambular paragraph recalls section II, paragraph 2, of resolution 2997 (XXVII), which decided that the secretariat of the United Nations Environment Programme should be headed by the Executive Director of the Programme, who should be elected by the Assembly upon nomination by the Secretary-General. Unfortunately, as I already noted, the nomination made this year by the Secretary-General runs counter to the principle of equitable geographical representation and the existing established practice of issuing a call for nominations. The second preambular paragraph recalls United Nations Environment Assembly resolution 5/13, entitled “Due regard to the principle of equitable geographical distribution, in accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 101 of the Charter of the United Nations”. Since 1992, the head of UNEP has been a position occupied by representatives of the West, who have not only advanced the priorities of developed countries on the environmental agenda but have also ensured that 60 per cent of the professional-level posts in UNEP are occupied by representatives of the Group of Western European and Other States. Allow me also to recall that the draft decision calls upon Member States to cooperate with UNEP in order to raise awareness about vacant posts among their citizens. The operative paragraph contains a request for the Secretary-General to afford Member States an opportunity to submit candidacies in order to ensure a transparent and fair selection process for this vacancy. We recall that in 2018, when the question of the election of the UNEP Executive Director was last on the agenda, the Secretary-General did not circumvent the procedure of consultations with Member States, giving them an opportunity to present their own candidates for this high-level and important position — just like in many other cases when electing senior United Nations officials. We have no doubt that there are a great many competent candidates in the countries of the global South who have the necessary experience and leadership qualities and who would be able to lead UNEP with dignity and provide value. Continuing to submit exclusively Western candidates when representatives of developing countries have no opportunity to participate in the competition is unfair. In that regard, I call on the membership to support draft decision A/77/L.47, which will allow all countries to have an opportunity to present their candidates for this position. I would note that Russia does not intend to put forward a candidate and is acting purely in the interests of developing countries. Since there is still sufficient time before June, when Ms. Andersen’s term comes to an end, we feel that it would be fairest to return to the question of elections after conducting a transparent competition for nominations and once again submitting candidates for the position of UNEP Executive Director to the General Assembly.

We shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/77/L.47. Before giving the floor to speakers in explanation of vote before the voting, I would like to remind 4/8 N2301823 delegations that explanations are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

I take the floor on behalf of Denmark to request a recorded vote on draft decision A/77/L.47, presented by the Russian Federation. If adopted, the proposal before us would reject the Secretary-General’s nomination of Ms. Inger Andersen for a second term as Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Let me be clear — Denmark strongly supports the principles of equitable geographical distribution of staff across the United Nations system, and it is of course no secret that Ms. Andersen and I share the same nationality. Denmark is requesting a vote on the Russian proposal for more important reasons than the fact that the Executive Director happens to be Danish. In our view, what is at stake is not just the continuity of the strong leadership of UNEP by Executive Director Andersen and Deputy Executive Director Mrema of Tanzania — a leadership that demonstrated their qualities just weeks ago in Montreal, when the landmark biodiversity agreement was adopted. What is at stake today is also the authority of the Secretary- General and the integrity of our established procedures for reappointments. After the Secretary-General’s consultations before the nomination, it was cleared that Ms. Andersen had broad support among Member States. And, in our view, no credible objections have been made to her obvious merits or achievements as Executive Director of UNEP. The reappointment of the Executive Director of UNEP has followed all the rules and procedures. In our view, there is simply no legitimate reason to question that. In conclusion, I encourage one and all to not support and to vote against draft decision A/77/L.47 today in order to show support for the Secretary-General, his nomination and the continued work of UNEP.

The European Union (EU) and its member States support the proposal of the Secretary-General to renew Ms. Inger Andersen’s mandate as Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). The Secretary- General engaged in transparent consultations with regional groups since October 2022 on this matter. Ms. Andersen’s work has been widely supported by the United Nations membership, and no alternative candidate has been proposed. In that context, we see the draft decision before us as (A/77/L.47) an attempt to disrupt the leadership of UNEP and undermine the authority of the Secretary- General. We call on all Member States to reject the draft decision in order to protect the integrity of UNEP and of the United Nations system, as well as the Secretary- General’s authority. Ms. Andersen stewarded the fifth United Nations Environment Assembly in 2022 towards some of its most ambitious outcomes, including our collective effort to agree on a global plastic agreement. Important processes are currently being launched through the fifth United Nations Environment Assembly, the twenty-seventh Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the 2022 United Nations Biodiversity Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. The integrity of UNEP should be protected, with an Executive Director who has demonstrated leadership and commitment over the past four years. The EU and its member States strongly support the principle of equitable geographical distribution of staff across the United Nations system. We supported the adoption of resolution 5/13 by the United Nations Environment Assembly in February 2022, on due regard to the principle of equitable geographical distribution in accordance with Article 101, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations. The resolution also welcomed the ongoing efforts made by the Executive Director to address that issue in the recruitment of staff. In that respect, we strongly welcome the nomination of Elizabeth Maruma Mrema of Tanzania to the position of UNEP’s Deputy Executive Director. Last month, as Executive Secretary of the secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, she helped secure the historic Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Finally, we wish to reiterate our strong support to the work of UNEP and its headquarters in Nairobi and our full confidence in the Secretary-General in the exercise of his prerogative.

The United States opposes the draft decision (A/77/L.47) introduced by the Russian Federation, which seeks to undermine the Secretary-General’s authority in his nomination of the incumbent Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Ms. Inger Andersen. The United States supports the long-standing practice N2301823 5/8 of appointing the Secretary-General’s selected nominee to the position of UNEP Executive Director. We also warmly welcome the recent nomination of Elizabeth Maruma Mrema of Tanzania to the position of UNEP’s Deputy Executive Director. For three months, the Secretary-General consulted with regional groups in an open and transparent manner regarding his intention to nominate Ms. Inger Andersen. During that time, no alternative candidate was proposed. Executive Director Andersen has effectively led UNEP since 2019 and guided the fifth United Nations Environment Assembly of 2022 towards key successes. We particularly commend Ms. Andersen’s own commitment to increasing geographic diversity at UNEP through various recruitment initiatives. In fact, during the past quarter, the largest number of UNEP staff selections were from the Group of Asia-Pacific States, at 29 per cent, followed by the Group of African States, at 25 per cent. We support the Secretary-General’s decision to nominate Ms. Andersen for a second term, and we believe that we should honour his choice. We reiterate our strong support for the work of UNEP and for its being headquartered in Nairobi. We express our full confidence in the Secretary-General’s choice to nominate Ms. Andersen for re-election. We call on all Member States to vote against the draft decision.

We appreciate the opportunity to participate in this discussion, although I have to confess that I think that it is highly unusual that we are put in this position by the Russian delegation today. Before we vote on draft decision A/77/L.47, I would like to express my deep regret that we are faced with such an unjustified attempt to prevent the renewal of Ms. Inger Andersen’s mandate as Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), as the Secretary-General asked us to do. We are proud to indicate our strong support for Ms. Andersen’s re-election, which, in normal times and in ordinary circumstances, would be completely uncontroversial and fully aligned with the past practice of allowing Executive Directors to serve two consecutive terms. Like other speakers, I would like to take this opportunity to thank her and to commend her for her excellent work thus far as Executive Director of UNEP. Since the start of her term in 2019, we all know that she has been a positive force in fulfilling UNEP’s important mandate in ensuring that the environment portfolio remains a top priority for the United Nations and its Member States. We saw that at first hand in the context of the fifteenth session of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, held Montreal in December 2022, with Ms. Andersen and Ms. Elizabeth Maruma Mrema of Tanzania directly helping to deliver the Kunming-Montreal Global Diversity Framework. Why are we here? Why have the Russians put forward this proposition? They say that it is in order to achieve regional diversity, of which everyone is in favour, and for which the selection process in every agency in every part of the Organization allows. The fact of the matter is that the Secretary-General has a mandate. He is required to nominate senior-level United Nations officials, and Canada’s view has always been that, even when he does not choose a Canadian, we should support him. The draft decision is not only obstructive to the re-election of someone who has demonstrated strong leadership as the Executive Director of UNEP; it also directly undermines the Secretary-General as the Head of this Organization. Canada has no intention of joining that effort on the spurious grounds that were put forward by the Russian delegation. As mentioned by my colleague from Sweden, the Secretary-General, as he always does  — we know that; that is what he does  — engaged in transparent consultations with all regional groups on the position since October. The consensus from that discussion was that Ms. Andersen’s work was widely supported. No other alternative candidate was suggested by any of the regional groups. The question therefore is: why are we now questioning her suitability to serve a second term? We all know why — politics. It is not about Inger Andersen. It is not about her qualification to serve a second term as the Head of UNEP and to be re-elected, as is normally the case, unless someone is not able to fulfil the obligations. It is about politics. We should at least be honest with ourselves and recognize that that is what we are dealing with. On the question of equitable geographic representation, we agree that it remains an important issue, which is why, for example, Canada joined many other delegations in adopting United Nations Environment Assembly resolution 5/13, on equitable geographical representation in the Organization, in February 2022. The issue of equitable representation 6/8 N2301823 exists in every single organ and every body of the United Nations. As a country, we will continue to wholeheartedly support all efforts to make all United Nations bodies diverse and inclusive and to ensure that senior management reflects the entire world that it is meant to serve. But we are not going to allow this issue to stop the process of nominating Inger Andersen as Executive Director. I am therefore urging all Member States not only to support Ms. Andersen’s re-election, but also to object, and vote against, attempts to undermine an effective United Nations. Such politicization of the United Nations Executive Director position exemplifies what is wrong with us at the moment — our collective inability to serve our citizens, and the fact that we would rather take every possible opportunity to throw a wrench into the works of the General Assembly, to cause mischief and to take away from our solemn obligations to ensure the efficient, effective and fair processes of representation of the United Nations. This is not about protecting the environment; it is about playing politics. That is why we will vote against the draft decision, and we hope that we will be given the opportunity to join the consensus on the re-election of Ms. Andersen in an effort to show the strong support of States Members of the United Nations for the UNEP mandate and for the mandate entrusted to the Programme’s Executive Director.

Belarus is convinced that, as a multilateral body that develops the global environmental agenda, the United Nations Environment Programme must be outside the political ambitions of a group of States and should take into account the interests of the entire developing world. We also believe it important to take into account the principles of fair geographical representation in the spirit of the Charter of the United Nations, and we support opening up the call for candidates for the position of Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme. We feel that that will be made possible through the adoption of draft decision A/77/L.47, which is under consideration. In that regard, we are inclined to support the draft decision, which, in our view, ensures the transparency of the selection process for that high-level position and the participation of candidates from other regions in it.

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft decision A/77/L.47, entitled “Election of the Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme”. I now give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that since the submission of the draft decision and in addition to the delegations listed in document A/77/L.47, the following countries have also become sponsors of the draft decision: Belarus, Nicaragua and the Syrian Arab Republic.

A recorded vote has been requested.

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

I simply wanted to say that Equatorial Guinea’s vote on draft decision A/77/L.47 was not recorded.

I would like to remind delegations that at the beginning of today’s meeting, we considered a letter of the Secretary-General to the President of the General Assembly containing a list of the countries that are in arrears in their payments to the budget of the United Nations and those that for the time being are not permitted to vote. Unfortunately, Equatorial Guinea is on that list. That is why its vote was not recorded. The General Assembly will now proceed to the election of the Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme. As stated in the note of the Secretary-General, the General Assembly, in section 2, paragraph 2 of resolution 2997 (XXVII), of 15 December 1972, adopted at the Assembly’s twenty-seventh session, decided that the secretariat of the United Nations Environmental Programme should be headed by the Executive Director of the Programme, who should be elected by the Assembly on the nomination of the Secretary-General for a term of four years. In decision 73/416 of 20 February 2019, the General Assembly, following the nomination of the Secretary-General, elected Inger Andersen of Denmark as Executive Director of the Programme for a four- year term of office beginning on 15 June 2019 and ending on 14 June 2023. In accordance with resolution 2997 (XXVII), the Secretary-General nominated Ms. Andersen for re-election as Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme for another term of four years, beginning on 15 June 2023 and ending on 14 June 2027. In that connection, I should inform members that objections have been raised to Ms. Andersen’s re-election, as we just heard in the debate a few minutes ago. In the light of those objections, pursuant to rule 92 of the rules of procedure the election shall be held by secret ballot. Before we begin the voting process, I should like to remind representatives 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. In addition, ballot papers will be given only to the representative seated directly behind the country’s nameplate. We shall now begin the voting process. Members are requested to remain seated until the ballots have been collected. Ballot papers will now be distributed. The voting has thus begun. In accordance with resolution 71/323, of 8 September 2017, the name of the candidate nominated by the Secretary-General pursuant to resolution 2997 (XXVII), of 15 December 1972, adopted at the twenty- seventh session, contained in document A/77/689, has been printed on the ballot papers. I request representatives to use only those ballot papers that have been distributed. Members wishing to vote for a nominated candidate are requested to put an “X” in the box next to the name printed on the ballot paper. A blank ballot paper will be considered an abstention. 8/8 N2301823 Finally, if a ballot paper contains any notation other than a vote in favour of an eligible candidate, those notations will be disregarded.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 167 Number of invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 167 Abstentions: 31 Number of members voting: 136 Required simple majority: 69 Number of votes obtained: Ms. Inger Andersen (Denmark) 136

As a result of the voting, Ms. Inger Andersen (Denmark) has obtained the required majority and is therefore elected as Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme for a term of four years, beginning on 15 June 2023 and ending on 14 June 2027. I take this opportunity to extend to her the congratulations of the Assembly on her re-election and to thank the tellers for their assistance. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (d) of agenda item 117?