← Votes

A/59/516/Add.1 GA

United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning

59
Session
84
Yes
34
No
37
Abstentions
Draft symbol A/59/516/Add.1
P5 Positions
Russia — United States ✓ United Kingdom ✗ China ✗ France ✗

Vote Recorded Vote — A/59/PV.82 March 8, 2005

— Abstain (37)
✗ No (34)
✓ Yes (84)
Speeches following this vote (20) may include explanations of vote
The Acting President
I shall now call on those representatives who wish to speak in explanation of vote on the resolution just adopted.
Mr. Gómez Robledo (Mexico)
We have come to the end of a long process aimed at reaching points of agreement on a very complex topic. In negotiating the draft Declaration that the Assembly has just adopted, we had to take into account the uncertainty to which new scientific advances give rise as well as ethical, cultural and religious considerations, all of which are legitimate in and of themselves. From the outset, my dele…
Mr. Zhang Yishan (China)
Like many other countries, China supports the Assembly’s efforts to negotiate an international convention against the reproductive cloning of human beings. However countries vary in their understanding of the moral, ethical and legal questions related to research on therapeutic cloning. The correct option is to let countries adopt at the national level moratoriums, prohibitions or strict regulati…
Mr. Gandhi (India)
My delegation deeply regrets that the Sixth Committee was unable to recommend to the General Assembly a text that was acceptable to all Member States on a matter of paramount importance such as an international convention against the reproductive cloning of human beings. We voted against the political Declaration on Human Cloning because some of its provisions could be interpreted as a call for …
Mr. Verbeke (Belgium)
Belgium regrets that agreement could not be reached on a declaration that would enjoy consensus the General Assembly. My delegation has always believed that the question of human cloning — which is clearly an ethical question — must be dealt with through a declaration of a universal nature in order for such a declaration to be of value. The results of this morning’s vote clearly confirm that the…
Mr. Simon (Hungary)
On behalf of the Hungarian delegation, I would like to explain the vote of the Republic of Hungary on the resolution just adopted. During the discussions in the Sixth Committee, Hungary devoted itself to forging consensus on the highly divisive matter of human cloning. While we regret that a text acceptable to all Member States proved to be unachievable, we recognize that the voting results and …
Mr. Ha (Republic of Korea)
The Republic of Korea voted against the United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning because it is not a product of consensus; neither does it reflect the views of Member States. We reaffirm that the Declaration is non-binding and that it will not affect our policy on therapeutic cloning in the future. Therapeutic cloning research and its application, when conducted under strict regulations, will…
Mr. Boonpracong (Thailand)
Thailand regrets that neither the General Assembly nor the Sixth Committee could adopt by consensus the draft resolution containing the United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning. The Declaration voted upon today is not binding. Moreover, the text of the Declaration is ambiguous in terms of calling upon Member States both to adopt all necessary measures to protect adequately human life in the a…
Mr. De Palacio España (Spain)
The Spanish delegation believes that the term “human life”, used in the resolution just adopted, is imprecise and could be subject to various interpretations. Spain has a clear preference for the expression “human beings”, which is usually employed in scientific and political debates on cloning and related subjects. It is also the term that appears in the title of agenda item 150 of the current …
Mr. Tajima (Japan)
Japan voted against the resolution that has just been adopted. The Declaration annexed to the resolution is difficult to interpret as permitting therapeutic cloning and does not respect the differing views of Member States on therapeutic cloning. We wish to make it clear once again that the adopted resolution will not affect Japan’s domestic policy on human cloning. Japan will go forward with th…
Mr. Leon (Brazil)
My delegation regrets the lack of consensus on the adoption of the political Declaration on which the Assembly has just voted. Instead of trying to bridge the different views on a complex issue, human cloning, the Declaration has only highlighted the deep divisions in the international community on the issue. My delegation also regrets that the Sixth Committee has deviated from its original manda…
Mr. Menon (Singapore)
Singapore cast its vote against this resolution because, in our view, it does not capture the diversity of the views that have been expressed on this important issue. Four years ago, the General Assembly adopted resolution 56/93, endorsing the noble initiative put forward by France and Germany to begin work on an international convention to ban the reproductive cloning of human beings. There was…
Mr. Siv (United States of America)
The United States welcomes the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning. During the consideration of the item by the Sixth Committee, we explained our position on the draft resolution. Consistent with the recommendation contained in paragraph 76 of annex V of the rules of the procedure of the General Assembly and its practice, we will not repeat that statement in the plenary. T…
Mr. Zyman (Poland)
I should like to explain the position of the Government of Poland with respect to the United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning. The Declaration calls upon all Member States to “prohibit all forms of human cloning inasmuch as they are incompatible with human dignity and the protection of human life” (resolution 59/280). That is a position which the whole international community should unequi…
Mr. Maqungo (South Africa)
We abstained in the voting on the Declaration and take this opportunity to explain our vote. We are grateful for the efforts made by the Chairman of the Sixth Committee to ensure that the different sides of the debate over human cloning should agree on a compromise language. We believe that the language arrived at in the Declaration that has just now been adopted is deliberately ambiguous so as …
Mr. Laurin (Canada)
Canada’s position on cloning is clear. All forms of human cloning, for whatever purpose and by whatever technique, are prohibited in Canada under the law relating to assisted reproduction. Although certain elements of the Declaration are in line with Canadian national law, such as the prohibition of reproductive cloning, the ambiguity of the Declaration’s language could give rise to certain legal…
Mr. Lovald (Norway)
The Norwegian Government opposes both reproductive cloning of human beings and cloning for therapeutic purposes. That position is reflected in our domestic legislation, which prohibits both forms of cloning. Throughout this process, Norway’s priority has been to contribute to the elaboration of an effective, legally binding instrument in the form of a convention on human cloning. We have, howeve…
Mr. Stagno Ugarte (Costa Rica)
This morning’s adoption of the United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning represents a historic step in the international community’s efforts to promote human rights and to guarantee respect for human dignity in all circumstances. Indeed, in calling upon States to prohibit all forms of human cloning, the new Declaration encourages the scientific community to advance decisively in the development…
Mrs. Collet (France)
France regrets the failure of attempts to reach consensus on this item. We are convinced that there is a clear consensus in favour of the prohibition of the reproductive cloning of human beings. The debate over the past three years, however, has highlighted key differences between States as regards therapeutic cloning and embryo research. Those differences justify, retrospectively, the spirit of …
Mr. Isong (Nigeria)
The Nigerian delegation has always been in favour of the Declaration; there is no alternative to it at this point in time. Nigeria’s position on this issue remains very clear: human life is sacrosanct. No reason or excuse can ever be strong enough for the violation of that principle. The United Nations was set up primarily to stop all acts that could violate the sanctity and dignity of human life…
▶ Cite this page

UN Project. “A/59/516/Add.1.” UN Project, https://un-project.org/votes/resolution/A-59-516-Add-1/. Accessed .