S/PV.6881 Security Council

The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. At this meeting, the Council will hear briefings by the outgoing Chairs of the subsidiary bodies of the Security Council in order of the year of adoption of the related resolutions: Mr. Hardeep Singh Puri, Chair of the Committee pursuant to resolutions 751 (1992) and 1907 (2009) concerning Somalia and Eritrea; Mr. Peter Wittig, Chair of the Committee pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011) concerning Al-Qaida and associated individuals and entities, Chair of the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1988 (2011), and Chair of the Working Group on Children and Arms Conflict; Mr. Néstor Osorio, Chair of the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1591 (2005) concerning the Sudan, and Chair of the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1737 (2006); Mr. José Filipe Moraes Cabral, Chair of the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1718 (2006), Chair of the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1970 (2011) concerning Libya, and Chair of the Informal Working Group on Documentation and Other Procedural Questions; and Mr. Baso Sangqu, Chair of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Conflict Prevention and Resolution in Africa. I now give the floor to Mr. Puri.

The Committee pursuant to resolutions 751 (1992) and 1907 (2009) concerning Somalia and Eritrea is the oldest Sanctions Committee among the Council’s subsidiary bodies and has completed two decades of existence. The Committee is unique in that it is mandated to cover two countries in the Horn of Africa, namely, Somalia and Eritrea. Resolution 751 (1992), imposed an arms embargo on Somalia and established a Sanctions Committee to oversee its implementation. The mandate of the Committee has since been expanded to include new provisions for arms embargoes, assets freezes and travel bans through resolution 1844 (2008). In 2010, the Committee was mandated by resolution 1916 (2010) to oversee the provisions connected with the delivery of humanitarian assistance to Somalia. Resolution 2036 (2012) also imposed a ban on exports of charcoal and mandated the Committee to monitor its implementation. With respect to Eritrea, the Committee is mandated to oversee the implementation of targeted measures imposed by resolution 1907 (2009). The mandate was expanded to include new provisions under resolution 2023 (2011). Given that background, the work of the Committee is complex in terms of mandate and political sensitivity. During my two years as Chairman, the Sanctions Committee pursued its mandate with the full cooperation of Council member. The Committee, however, continues to face significant challenges in overseeing the sanctions regimes concerning both Somalia and Eritrea. These include issues related to technical violations of the arms embargo, objections by humanitarian partners to the reporting requirement, questions about the working of the Monitoring Group, and in some cases non-cooperation by Member States with the Monitoring Group. In view of these issues, I made a sincere effort to promote transparency and equity in Committee’s decision-making. I convened regular meetings with the Special Representative for Somalia, the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, and representatives of the World Food Programme and UNICEF. I also encouraged Somalia, Eritrea and interested States members of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development to participate in Committee meetings, to interact with the members and to express their views over the monitoring of the sanctions regime. My effort was always towards building consensus with utmost transparency. Both in 2011 and this year, the Sanctions Committee invited Somalia and Eritrea to interact with the Committee immediately after the submission of the final reports of the Monitoring Group. Also, I encouraged free and frank discussions in the Committee over the reports and recommendations of the Monitoring Group. I held several meetings with the Member States, including the Permanent Representatives of Somalia and Eritrea. In these meetings, I emphasized the implementation of the sanctions regimes and cooperation with the Sanctions Committee. During the past two years, the Committee met 18 times in informal consultations. It approved 25 requests for exemptions to the arms embargo, pursuant to paragraph 3 of resolution 1356 (2001), and 26 requests for exemptions to the arms embargo pursuant to paragraph 11 (b) of resolution 1772 (2007). It approved two travel ban exemptions to the same person in 2012. I must also state here that the work of the Committee has increased exponentially in comparison to that of the two years prior to my chairmanship. During the course of the past two years, there has been remarkable progress in the process of stabilization of political, security and humanitarian situations in Somalia. This has created a historic opportunity that must be seized for the full restoration of peace, security and stability in Somalia. In addition, the overall political and security situation in the Horn of Africa continues to improve, with increasing cooperation and reconciliation among Member States. In this context, the next Chairman of the Sanctions Committee on Somalia and Eritrea will need to continue the Committee’s engagement with not only Somalia and Eritrea but also other States in the region. In the short term, the Committee will also have to take a view on the issue of the large quantity of charcoal found in Kismayo and surrounding areas. I am convening a meeting of the Sanctions Committee shortly to discuss the issue with the Monitoring Group. It is my considered view that sanctions should be a measure of last resort by the Security Council and must fully comply with the provisions of the United Nations Charter. Sanctions regimes of the Security Council must be not an end in themselves, but instruments for the promotion and maintenance of peace and security in the region. In their implementation, the sanctions regimes must ensure that they have the intended impact and do not exacerbate the suffering of the population. As such, it is necessary to keep these regimes under constant review and adjust the measures to suit the objective and also keep pace with the changing situation on the ground in the countries concerned. In view of the developments in Somalia during the past year, I think that time has come for this Council to review the sanctions regimes in the Horn of Africa. This should be done taking into consideration the views expressed by the States of the regiona, as well as the African Union. In conclusion, on my personal behalf and also on behalf my delegation, I would like express our sincere appreciation to all colleagues in the Security Council for reposing their faith in my chairmanship of the Somalia-Eritrea Sanctions Committee for past two years. I would also like to thank all members of the Committee, their experts and the Secretariat for their valuable support, especially the Secretary of the Committee and his team.

I thank Mr. Puri for his briefing. I now give the floor to Mr. Wittig.

Over the past two years, Germany has had the honour to chair the Committee pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011) concerning Al-Qaida and associated individuals and entities, the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1988 (2011), and the Working Group on Children and Armed Conflict. Advancing the work of these bodies has been one of Germany’s priorities during its membership of the Council. Both the fight against terrorism and the protection of human rights are essential elements of our foreign policy. I therefore appreciate the opportunity to share some personal observations on this with the Security Council. With regard to the Al-Qaida and Taliban sanctions regime, I would like to point out three of the challenges we have had to tackle. First, we had to make the regime more responsive to the changing nature of the terrorist threat. Secondly, we have had to make sure that the sanctions regime continues to serve its political purpose. Thirdly, we have had to ensure continued universal respect for the sanctions regime. Those challenges could be met only with a determined and united effort of Council members. Our task was to forge a consensus in the Committee as a basis for the needed reforms. These efforts culminated in June 2011 when the Council adopted resolutions 1988 (2011) and 1989 (2011), establishing new landmarks within the United Nations sanctions policy. Resolution 1988 (2011) separated the Taliban sanctions regime from the former Al-Qaida and Taliban sanctions regime. This step rendered the instrument of sanctions more nimble and more responsive, which is of significant importance to the political process in Afghanistan. It is an encouraging development that Afghanistan is seeking an even stronger role in the Committee’s work and has presented proposals for delisting reconciled individuals. Resolution 1989 (2011) substantially strengthened the role of the Ombudsperson for the Al-Qaida sanctions regime. This introduced a much-needed element of due process that is crucial to ensure universal respect of the sanctions regime. It is time to consolidate the progress made and to build further on it. Germany, together with our partners in the group of like-minded States on targeted sanctions, has made concrete suggestions to improve due process in the sanctions regimes. In particular, we are of the view that the Council should consider widening the mandate of the Ombudsperson to other sanctions regimes. We are convinced that all Council members must have an interest in the universal respect of the Council’s political instruments, especially the sanctions regimes. We are therefore looking forward to the discussion of our suggestions in the Council. I now turn to the Working Group on Children and Armed Conflict. Allow me to start with a couple of words on the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, because it is on our minds in terms of topical developments. Just last month, more children were killed due to the fighting in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo than in the whole year before. In 2012, the number of children killed or maimed by parties to the conflict almost tripled as compared to the previous four years. Some estimate that up to 200,000 children suffer in this conflict. The Mouvement du 23 mars (M23) is estimated to have forcibly recruited at least 300 children as child soldiers. Other armed groups increased recruitment of children as well. There are gruesome testimonies from children confirming that M23 commanders have killed child soldiers within their ranks who tried to escape. The situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo is a grim reminder that civilians — especially women and children — continue to bear the brunt of war and conflict. Their suffering continues to oblige the international community. The Security Council commands unique powers — and has unique responsibilities — to advance the protection of children in conflicts. Germany is convinced that the Council must make use of those powers for the sake of the children affected and for the sake of international peace and security. In that spirit, my delegation has focused on three tasks within the Working Group. First, we have worked hard to significantly reduce the time gap between the reports of the Secretary-General on a given situation and the Working Group’s respective conclusions and recommendations. We appreciate the cooperation of Council members in this time-consuming and labour-intensive endeavour. Secondly, we have set out to strengthen the existing protection mechanism. We are pleased that the Security Council adopted resolution 1998 (2011) under Germany’s presidency in July 2011. The resolution added a new trigger to guarantee that armed groups that attack schools and hospitals, and persons related to them, are listed by the Secretary-General in his annual report. We also pleased with the Council’s adoption of resolution 2068 (2012) in September, again during our presidency, focusing on how to put more pressure on persistent perpetrators and achieve better accountability. Furthermore, the Secretary-General now has an open-ended mandate to present annual reports to the Council. Let me stress that his reports and the listings therein are very valuable and effective tools for protecting children. They are part and parcel of the international legal architecture for protecting children in war. Thirdly, we have ensured that the protection of children enjoys high priority in all peacekeeping mandates and sanctions committees. Most of the relevant sanctions regimes now contain provisions to hold those who violate children’s rights in armed conflict accountable. The Security Council can be proud of the innovative and successful mechanisms for protecting children in armed conflict. However, we call on members to remain vigilant and to prevent those mechanisms from being weakened. In fact, members should strive for further improvement. We firmly believe that the Council should follow up swiftly on resolution 2068 (2012) and discuss what can be done to further advance the protection of children and in particular to hold persistent perpetrators accountable. From our point of view, there are some practical steps that the Working Group could already be taking. It should make better use of its tool kit by issuing press statements on situations of concern that occur outside the reporting cycle. So far, there has been some resistance to using that tool. I recommend discussing the issue again, since the Working Group must be able to react immediately to massive violations and abuses of children’s rights in armed conflict. The informal so-called horizontal note by which UNICEF informs the Working Group about current situations on the ground is an ideal source of information in that regard. The Working Group should continue to hear briefings by the Special Representative of the Secretary- General, such as those we have heard on Côte d’Ivoire, Syria, Libya, Mali and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Such briefings are not only a valuable source of information, but also send strong signals of Council members’ commitment. The Working Group should also explore options for increasing the number of country visits. We successfully conducted a highly useful visit to Afghanistan in 2011 that was also part of the preparation for resolution 1988 (2011). We are certain that such visits can substantially complement the work of United Nations staff on the ground. In closing, let me take this opportunity to express my appreciation for the tremendous work being done by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General and her Office, as well as by our peacekeeping missions and UNICEF. I commend them for their commitment. They are the true cornerstones of the United Nations mechanism for protecting children in armed conflict.

I thank Mr. Wittig for his briefing. I now give the floor to Mr. Moraes Cabral.

I thank the Security Council for the opportunity to share my views and assessments on the work carried out by the three subsidiary bodies that I have had the honour to chair in the course of my country’s membership of the Council, and for bearing with me. Regarding the sanctions regimes in general, I join previous speakers in pointing out that sanctions are obviously not an end in themselves and are there to support a political objective. They should not exacerbate people’s suffering and should be regularly reviewed. We also support the extension of the Ombudsperson’s mandate to all the sanctions regimes. I will start by addressing the work of the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1718 (2006) during the past two years. As Chair, I have always worked on the basis of continuing and inclusive engagement with all members in an effort to build consensus on fulfilling the Committee’s mandate. To strive for consensus is not always an easy task; however, reaching such a level of agreement is actually the only way to make solid progress in a sanctions committee context. That is why we have focused very much on compromise and settling potential differences when addressing the challenges that have come our way. Secondly, although it has had its complexities and difficulties, the 1718 Committee has shown that in general it has had the capacity to effectively address the situations faced during our tenure. Early this year, as mandated by the Council, the Committee agreed on new designations and updated the lists of individuals, entities and items related to the nuclear and missile programmes of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The annual work plan was also updated, giving the Committee a comprehensive and clear approach based on compliance, investigation, outreach, dialogue, assistance and cooperation. It is against that background that I want to commend the excellent work and valuable assistance that the 1718 Committee consistently got from the Panel of Experts. Also very significantly, I think that the Committee has developed a certain sense of convergence that has allowed us to agree on some important principles: first, the general understanding that implementation assistance notices represent an important and valuable tool in providing guidance to Member States on a number of technical and practical issues; secondly, the importance of regularly reviewing the concrete parameters of the sanctions regime; and thirdly, the importance of taking advantage of existing synergies, informally and in a very pragmatic way, between various committees and panels of experts. Lastly, sustained effort within the Committee to improve the implementation of sanctions is always a work in progress, and I very much hope that the next Committee Chair will continue to benefit from the cooperation and constructive support I have received during these past two years in helping to implement the important mandate conferred by the Council. Turning to the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1970 (2011) concerning Libya, which I have chaired since its establishment in February, the first observation I would like to make is that its sanctions regime seems likely to have been the most rapidly evolving such United Nations regime of recent years. It has certainly been characterized by the need to adjust itself with efficacy to rapid changes in the political context in Libya, and in consequence to respond to a very significant workload, related to a diverse set of areas prompted by the evolving situation on the ground. Just as an illustration, I would like to point out that within a period of 21 months the Committee received 362 official communications and issued 568 letters or notes and a significant number of addenda, totalling more than 1,500 official communications. Within the same period, the Council adopted six resolutions on the matter, resulting in various modifications and adaptations of the sanctions regime that the Committee has had to address. My second observation is that while the core objective of the sanctions was initially to prevent further attacks on the civilian population in Libya and ensure that the former regime leaders had no access to funds outside Libya, the measures were later modified to address the changing situation on the ground, in support of the Libyan-led transition and rebuilding process, as well as regional security. In that transition process the Committee had an important role to play by constantly adjusting to the new challenges and responding to the needs, in line with the mandate entrusted to it by the Council. On the asset freeze in particular, the Committee played a specific role in responding promptly to those needs and devising ways to help funds become quickly and readily available to the Libyan people. I would like to make two observations, if I may, prompted by our experience, that may serve as useful guidance for the future. First, resolutions establishing sanctions regimes cannot disregard their humanitarian impact and should thus consider the early inclusion of humanitarian exemptions to help populations affected by the freezing of national assets and funds. Secondly, those resolutions should clearly determine whether or not subsidiaries of listed entities are subject to the sanctions. I believe that those early clarifications would be very useful for a more efficient implementation of an assets freeze, while at the same time helping to prevent unintended impact on populations and third States more affected. As of today, the assets freeze applies only to two remaining listed entities: the Libyan Investment Authority and the Libyan Africa Investment Portfolio. It is my understanding that as soon as the Libyan authorities deem it appropriate, the Council or the Committee will consider the delisting to ensure that the correspondent assets are made available to and for the benefit of the people of Libya. In relation to the arms embargo and the proliferation of Libyan arms and related materiel in the region, we must recognize that they continue to raise serious challenges for the Committee. The continued cooperation of States with the Committee, with the invaluable assistance of its Panel of Experts, is fundamental to overcome those challenges. In that regard, it is crucial to continue and strengthen the good practice that has been followed of putting together the efforts and contributions from different United Nations bodies — the Panel of Experts, the United Nations Support Mission in Libya, the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate, the International Civil Aviation Organization and the Office for Disarmament Affairs — in order to consistently assess and address the challenges posed by the proliferation of arms and military materiel from Libya to the region. Finally, the complexity of this sanctions regime and the rapid change of its normative framework required an important effort of assistance to United Nations delegations. We tried our best to provide information and possible guidance to our colleagues in many delegations who approached us with questions concerning the implementation of the regime. We view that as part of transparency, for which we advocate strongly. But we also view that as very useful to the overall efficacy of the sanctions regimes. Naturally, I wish also to highlight the role of the secretariat of the Subsidiary Organs Branch, and to express my gratitude for its invaluable assistance, as well as that of Panel of Experts: they have been truly indispensable. Last but not least, I want to thank all members of the Committee for their constructive commitment and spirit of cooperation and creativity, which were fundamental in helping the Committee address the number and complexity of submissions. Without it, it would have been impossible to carry out such a complex and important task. Let me turn now to the Informal Working Group on Documentation and Other Procedural Questions, which I have had the honour and pleasure to Chair since January. To chair a working group, more than helping build consensus, is to try to develop an agenda by seeking to lead the efforts of its members towards achieving major goals shared in general within the working group. The case of the Working Group on working methods is a special one, where Council members can share their views on ways to improve the Council working methods and have the opportunity to make a difference in the way the Council works in the future. It is never easy to get away from routine, which is always more comfortable than change; so it is a difficult task to generate interest in new measures, to discuss their usefulness and practicability, and to adopt them. Ultimately, more difficult is to persuade all of the need to change. I must say that the experience I have had was very positive. I counted on the active contribution of all members in the many discussions we held during the last year, at a pace of one, sometimes two, meetings per month. To improve the working methods, we must start by improving the way the Council does its internal work. A significant part of the Council’s work is done in consultations. While there has been an effort by the Council to meet more often in public, consultations are indeed useful to help the Council prepare its decisions. However, questions of transparency and inclusiveness remain important within the Council for Council members. We worked on that during the first part of the year. Following consultations organized by the Council in March, during the United Kingdom presidency, a discussion was held on further measures to improve interactivity, better planning of work and better use of conference resources. Those same aspects were further developed in the Working Group and later condensed in a note by the President in June (S/2012/402). The underlying idea is to stress the informal aspects of consultations, better organization of resources to allow more space for subsidiary bodies to meet, more use of video conferences to avoid the costly presence of briefers, and better planning of work by readjusting mandates and reporting cycles with a view to even up the workload throughout the year, leaving more time for the Council to prepare decisions and for prevention activities. Another aspect relevant to the internal work is the practice related to the work of penholders and the process of appointing Chairs of subsidiary bodies. The Working Group is now concluding the consideration of this question, through a draft note that deals with issues of enhanced participation, inclusiveness and exchange of information among Council members. These are crucial elements to enhance the Council’s efficiency and, ultimately, help promote the necessary consensus building within the Council. I hope, indeed I trust, that with the support and flexibility of all members in the Working Group, to conclude the work very soon. On the external aspects of Security Council work, the Working Group is considering further measures to improve transparency and interaction with the wider membership. A draft note is being discussed now on ways to improve open debates: by enhancing the interactivity, by ensuring a better follow up of open debates and by improving their efficacy. We are also considering measures to improve the annual report: by reinforcing aspects related to the interaction with non-Council members and providing more substantive information in the report and in its presentation to the General Assembly. Monthly assessments by Council presidencies can be particularly useful instruments to elucidate on the work done. Also very useful in that regard are informal briefings to the general membership by Council Presidents once they finish their presidencies, which could be done as a matter of practice, adding to the briefing that is already done at the start of each presidency. These are all aspects that have been discussed in the Working Group this year and are being considered through a draft note we expect to be adopted in the coming days. I am conscious that this is a work in progress. The Council has done much recently on this matter, as a result of efforts by Council members and especially of the previous Chairs of this Working Group, whom I salute, which resulted on the adoption of presidential note 507 (S/2010/507). But we all know that there is always room for improvement, and note 507 is the point of departure not an end in itself. I am confident that the next Chair who will carry on from here will bring renewed energy and ideas to further the work. I am sure that he or she will have the full support and encouragement that I surely benefited from. Finally, I wish to express my gratitude to the members of the Security Council for their support and active contributions to the work of the Committees and Working Group I had the honour to chair. I also thank the experts and the Secretariat for their cooperation and diligence, as well as the interpreters for their valuable assistance and constant patience.

I thank Mr. Moraes Cabral for his briefing. I now give the floor to Mr. Osorio.

I would like at the outset to thank you, Sir, for having convened this meeting, which provides a good opportunity for the Chairs of the subsidiary bodies of the Council to take stock of their work over the past two years. In my case, this means the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1591 (2005), concerning the Sudan, and the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1737 (2006), concerning the Islamic Republic of Iran, whose work I have had the privilege to steer as Chair since 1 January 2011. First of all, with regard to the 1591 Committee, after two years of work, I can affirm that the implementation of measures by the Council is a useful instrument for advancing a political solution for the situation in Darfur, but there is still a long way to go to meet its full potential. As Chair of the Committee, I sought to foment consensus on the interpretation of the measures, to offer all support possible to the Group of Experts in supporting that work, and to establish open dialogue with the various actors involved. During the period in question, the Committee held 12 informal consultations; maintained close communication with the United Nations-African Union Joint Special Representative for Darfur; responded to requests for information from Member States with regard to the scope of sanctions; and adopted an agreement with INTERPOL on INTERPOL-United Nations Security Council Special Notices, which entered into force on 20 November. That agreement will strengthen the application of measures by Member States. The principle difficulty we have faced in the past two years was guaranteeing the access of the Panel of Experts to the Sudan. A failure to issue visas and permits to enter Darfur in a timely manner was a recurrent problem, which both the Committee and the Security Council worked to resolve. Although there were improvements over the last year, unacceptable obstacles have recently begun to reappear. The Permanent Representative of the Sudan was attentive to our requests and conveyed the concerns and requests that I presented on behalf of the Committee to the authorities of his country. I believe that it would be advisable to further the direct dialogue between the Committee and the Sudanese authorities in order to improve the mutual perception of the impact that the sanctions regime could have on the peace process in Darfur and to exchange opinions on the remaining concerns with regard to the measures imposed by the Security Council. The visit that the Committee intends to make to Khartoum and Darfur, to which the Sudanese Government has assented, will be an excellent opportunity to expand the communication channels, improve the understanding of the sanctions and move towards their full implementation. Despite the difficult environment in which it must work, the Group of Experts has been noteworthy as a reliable source of information for the Committee in monitoring the implementation of sanctions. In order for it to do its job, there must be harmonious work, cooperation and singleness of purpose among its members, as well as high levels of quality with regard to the information it supplies. To that end, I appeal to Member States, in compliance with their responsibilities, to cooperate with the Group of Experts, to provide it with timely, accurate and truthful information, and to answer its requests and facilitate its visits. I must highlight the cooperation of the African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID) with the work of the Group. I believe that it must be permanently maintained at every level. The effective implementation of Security Council resolutions requires the commitment and full cooperation of all Member States. The reports on the implementation of sanctions are vital for the work of the Committee and its Group of Experts. To date, only 29 national reports have been received. I therefore invite Members of the Organization to provide available information on the implementation of the relevant Council resolutions. With regard to new listings, I believe that progress must be made in considering proposals involving the individuals and entities falling under the criteria established in Security Council resolutions, particularly with regard to those who impede the peace process and those involved in attacks on UNAMID staff. Lastly, I would urge a greater degree of discussion with the private sector in order to improve the understanding of sanctions by the businesses at work in the Sudan. Allow me, Mr. President, to refer now to the activities carried out by the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1737 (2006) under my leadership. With the adoption of resolution 1929 (2010), on 9 June 2010, a decisive step was taken towards the full implementation of measures to ensure that Iran’s nuclear programme is destined exclusively for peaceful ends. The resolution established the Group of Experts so that, under the guidance of the Committee, but acting independently, it would assist it in complying with its mandate. During my two years as Chair, the practice of holding regular meetings was established, which provided the possibility of exchanges of view with the active participation of the Group of Experts. Those meetings were intended to effectively achieve the proper implementation of the relevant Security Council resolutions. The Committee met eight times. In order to optimize its work, in July 2011 the Committee thoroughly revised the guidelines for carrying out its work. This process was aimed at redefining its working methods to make them more effective and establishing clearer and more accurate procedures. Thanks to the judicious review of its guidelines, the Committee has improved its level of dialogue with Member States, inter alia, by means of the timely receipt of notices on reports of sanctions violations and matters related to requests for exemptions. In fulfilling my duties, I submitted eight quarterly reports in public meetings giving an account of the developments in the implementation of the relevant Security Council resolutions pertaining to the Islamic Republic of Iran. In July, under the Colombian presidency of the Security Council and with the support of the Group of Experts and the Secretariat, a public meeting was held on the work of the Committee and its Group of Experts. That provided an good opportunity to interact with non-Security Council members and to learn first hand of their opinions on the sanctions committees, the work the committees do and their effectiveness with regard to compliance with the respective mandates. I believe that this practice should be kept up, as it contributes to the outreach and transparency that Member States want in the Security Council and its subsidiary bodies. During the 2011-2012 biennium, the Committee, with the valuable support of the Secretariat, modernized and updated its web page to make it more user friendly. Allow me, Sir, to refer now to the close cooperation that has prevailed between the Committee and its Group of Experts over the past two years. There is no doubt that we have benefitted enormously from the experience of the Group with regard to the implementation of sanctions. If the Committee is to do its work properly, it is vital that this exchange be maintained and strengthened. The working methods adopted by the Group have made it possible to ensure the Group’s independence in investigating reported incidents, to provide information on its findings and to make recommendations aimed at making Member States aware of their obligations with regard to the implementation of Security Council resolutions. I must say that, both for my country and for me personally, it was a great pleasure and honour to have presided over those two Committees that, albeit different, made it possible for us to understand that, without the full and firm support of Member States, those subsidiary bodies would be unable effectively to carry out their work. We believe that it is imperative to intensify dialogue and cooperation with all Member States in order to bolster their ability to effectively implement the measures adopted by the Council. In conclusion, I would like to thank the members of the Committees for their cooperation, active participation, valuable contributions and enriching discussions. I also wish to extend thanks to the Group of Experts for the work they have done in contributing to compliance with the mandates of the two Committees. Lastly, I would like to sincerely thank the Secretariat team for its excellent work and exceptional support to me in carrying out my work.

I thank Mr. Osorio for his briefing. I now give the floor to Mr. Sangqu.

South Africa has had the honour and privilege to serve as the Chair of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Conflict Prevention and Resolution in Africa for the past two years. The Group was created pursuant to statement S/PRST/2002/2 by the President of the Security Council, in which the Council recognized the need for adequate measures to prevent and resolve conflicts in Africa. Consequently, the Working Group has over the past two years considered thematic issues that directly concern the work of the Council in identifying proposals, which may be useful to the Council’s work in Africa. As such, my statement will focus on the work that has been done since we assumed the role of Chair of the Working Group in 2011. On 31 March 2011, the Working Group held a meeting that examined ways of enhancing the Group’s effectiveness. The meeting looked at how the Working Group could improve its monitoring of the implementation of the recommendations contained in the presidential statement and how fast the Council could actualize and concretize their recommendations, as well the frequency of their reporting to the Security Council. Several recommendations on the working methods of the Working Group emanated from this meeting, the most notable being that the Council could task the Working Group with tracking and monitoring the implementation of the Council’s resolutions and other outcomes concerning peacebuilding, conflict prevention and resolution mediation in Africa and with submitting recommendations to the Council. On 3 May 2011, the Working Group held an interactive dialogue between the members of the Working Group and the permanent representatives of the African Union (AU) Peace and Security Council members based in New York. That discussion focused on cooperation between the two Councils and was in preparation for the annual discussions between the Councils, which were held in Addis Ababa later in May. The Working Group also held a seminar on early warning tools and indicators to assess the risk of election-related violence in Africa. The meeting reviewed the early warning tools available for identifying and preventing election-based and election-related violence and how those tools could be used by the international community before, during and after elections. On 28 September 2011, the Working Group held another seminar that focused on the root causes of conflict on Africa and looked at new and emerging challenges to peace and security. The meeting, inter alia, discussed the Secretary-General’s report on the causes of conflict and the promotion of durable peace and sustainable development in Africa (see S/2011/476) as well as the World Bank report on conflict, security and development in 2011. The Working Group also held a seminar on recent lessons learned in African conflict prevention and resolution, coordinating responses and supporting local capacities. The meeting discussed how the thrust of preventive work could shift from reactive external interventions, with a limited and superficial impact, to internally driven initiatives on developing local and national prevention capacities. On preventative diplomacy, the discussions focused on success stories, particularly the important role played by the United Nations, the AU and other regional organizations. On 8 June, the Working Group held a meeting on enhancing African Union-United Nations cooperation. The seminar discussed practical ways in which the commitments made by the Security Council in resolution 2033 (2012) could be implemented and how the AU and the United Nations could further cooperate in the prevention of conflict in Africa. The Working Group also held a meeting on the promotion of and respect for the rule of law and justice in the prevention and resolution of conflicts in Africa. That meeting discussed the relationship between the rule of law and conflict prevention, particularly in the context of the Security Council. Furthermore, the discussions allowed for an exchange of views on the application of the rule of law. Practical insights were made on the challenges regarding implementation of the rule of law in Africa and how it applies to the efforts of the international community to resolve conflict, with a focus on Security Council efforts. Unfortunately, due to Hurricane Sandy, we cancelled the meeting entitled “The promotion of the African Union Charter on democracy, elections and governance”, which was scheduled to take place on 30 October. Likewise, we were unable to hold the meeting on reflecting on conflicts in Africa, which aimed to look at understanding the causes and drivers towards promoting and providing sustainable solutions to African conflicts. During South Africa’s tenure as Chair of the Working Group, we have placed significant emphasis on making the meetings open to non-members of the Security Council and civil society organizations, especially those active on the ground. We have encouraged open and frank discussions in order to cultivate ideas that would positively contribute to enhancing the work of the Security Council, especially since its agenda is particularly focused on African issues. We would like to recommend that the Working Group continues to have more open meetings of that nature. During our tenure, we utilized diverse expertise from the academia, the Secretariat and other practitioners. That has greatly enriched discussions by providing different expertise and experiences. We therefore encourage the continuation of that practice. Furthermore, we would propose that topics are continually revisited in order to examine in depth the challenges that continue to persist in Africa and to try and find mitigating mechanisms through continuous dialogue. In addition, it will be recalled that, in resolution 2033 (2012), the Council decided to follow up on the communiqués of the annual consultative meetings of the two Councils, including through its Ad hoc Working Group on Conflict Prevention and Resolution in Africa. The Working Group should continue with that important mandate, entrusted to it by the Security Council. Moving forward, the various meetings identified very useful recommendations that could enhance the work of the Security Council. Furthermore, we would like to propose that the Council holds an interactive discussion based on the recommendations to consider those that could be incorporated into the work of the Security Council. I would like to express my personal gratitude and that of the South African delegation to the members of the Working Group for their collaboration and the support extended to me in discharging of the Group’s mandate. My appreciation also goes to the Organization and all individuals who greatly enriched the discussions of the Working Group. Finally, I would like to thank the Secretariat for assisting us in fulfilling our mandate, in particular James Sutterlin, Marylyn Alfred and, previously, Oseloka Obaze, for their dedicated support to my delegation. I wish my successor all the best in continuing with their work done by the Working Group.

I thank Mr. Sangqu for his briefing. On behalf of the Security Council, I take this opportunity to express appreciation to the outgoing Chairs of India, Germany, Portugal and South Africa for their briefings. The Council appreciates their presentations and the manner in which they have carried out their work. There are no further speakers inscribed on my list. The Security Council has thus concluded the present stage of its consideration of the item on its agenda.