← Votes

79/6 GA

Report of the International Criminal Court : resolution / adopted by the General Assembly

79
Session
113
Yes
10
No
30
Abstentions
Draft symbol A/79/L.8
Adopted symbol 79/6
Category POLITICAL AND LEGAL QUESTIONS
Sponsors (4)
P5 Positions
Russia ✗ United States ✓ United Kingdom ✓ China ~ France ✓
UN Document 79/6 ↗

Vote Recorded Vote — A/79/PV.29 Oct. 29, 2024

— Abstain (30)
✗ No (10)
Absent (40)
✓ Yes (113)
Speeches following this vote (8) may include explanations of vote
The Acting President
Before giving the floor for explanations of votes 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.
Mr. Evseenko (Belarus)
In recent years, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has become a hostage of the blatant patronage of Western States, which have been openly influencing its rulings in order to exert pressure on Governments that are inconvenient to the West and are capable of pursuing independent foreign policies. Lithuania’s recent actions demonstrate the abuse of ICC procedures for the purpose of exerting p…
Mrs. Rangasamy (India)
The new addition at the end of paragraph 11 of the resolution invites States that are not Parties to consider further facilitating cooperation with the Court. With the increased politicization and arbitrariness of the Court, we feel that non-States Parties are expected to put in place proper procedures by means of a resolution. Hence, my delegation formally abstained in the voting on resolution …
The Acting President
We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote after the voting. The exercise of the right of reply has been requested. May I remind Members that statements in exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and five minutes for the second intervention and should be made by delegations from their seats.
Mr. Paulauskas (Lithuania)
This is with regard to the statement of the representative of the Republic of Belarus. Of course, Lithuania voted in favour of resolution 79/6, and I would like to state the following in that regard. While the Republic of Belarus is not a State Party to the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Court may exercise its jurisdiction if at least part of the conduct takes place in the territory of…
Mr. Evseenko (Belarus)
Belarus is compelled to respond to the latest anti-Belarusian action by the outgoing Government of Lithuania. It is absolutely clear that these accusations regarding the approach to the International Criminal Court are absurd and fabricated. There is no need for comment, but what is important is that this step, along with the spate of hasty and unfriendly actions already undertaken, further dist…
Mr. Paulauskas (Lithuania)
I will again state that Lithuania has referred the matter to the International Criminal Court, as the crimes against humanity being committed against civilians in Belarus constitute a grave matter of international concern, requiring a response from the international community at large. Many thousands of victims of the Belarusian regime are present in neighbouring countries, including Lithuania, …
The Acting President
We have heard the last statement in exercise of the right of reply. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 74?
▶ Cite this page

UN Project. “79/6.” UN Project, https://un-project.org/votes/resolution/79-6/. Accessed .