Question of Palestine home || Permalink || About UNISPAL || Search

English (pdf) ||Arabic||Chinese||Français||Русский||Español||



Follow UNISPAL Twitter RSS

UNITED
NATIONS
A

        General Assembly
Distr.
GENERAL
A/C.3/65/SR.48
19 January 2011

Original: English

Sixty-fifth session
Official Records

Third Committee

Summary record of the 48th meeting
Held at Headquarters, New York, on Thursday, 18 November 2010, at 3 p.m.

Chairman: Mr. Tommo Monthe .......................................................... (Cameroon)


Contents

/...

Agenda item 63: Report of the Human Rights Council (continued)

/...


Agenda item 63: Report of the Human Rights Council (continued)

/...

Draft resolution A/C.3/65/L.57: Report of the Human Rights Council

46. Mr. Diallo (Mali), introducing the draft resolution on behalf of the Group of African States, said that the report contained important recommendations with respect to key human rights issues. The Group hoped for the adoption of the resolution by consensus and encouraged all member States to become sponsors.

47. The Chair announced that India had become a sponsor of the draft resolution.

48. Ms. Bouhamidi (Morocco), speaking on behalf of States members of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), noted the valuable work of the Human Rights Council and underlined the resolutions pertaining to human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory and the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. It invited all member States to support the draft resolution.

49. Mr. Apakan (Turkey) said that the Report of the Human Rights Council and its addendum contained many important resolutions and decisions, including resolution 15/1 on the follow-up to the report of the independent international fact-finding mission on the incident of the humanitarian flotilla. While no separate resolution had been initiated in the General Assembly on the issue, his delegation would revisit its position pending forthcoming developments and in consultation with other interested parties. He invited all member States to support the resolution.

50. Ms. Furman (Israel), speaking in explanation of vote before the voting, said that the Council’s report and resolutions demonstrated its bias and fixation with Israel, reaffirmed its failure to adhere to its own founding principles and called its integrity and credibility into question. She noted that half of the country-specific resolutions not dealing with technical assistance were targeted at Israel. Her delegation regretted having to call for a vote on the resolution and urged other delegations with a genuine interest in promoting a responsible human rights agenda around the world to voice their concern as well.

/...

52. Ms. Halabi (Syrian Arab Republic), speaking in explanation of vote before the voting, said that Israel refused to comply with any United Nations resolutions and continued to impede the work of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict. Moreover, Israeli perpetrators of crimes against humanity continued to boast that they were immune from prosecution. The United Nations must take all necessary measures to investigate Israeli human rights violations that had been documented in the report of the Fact Finding Mission and must prosecute those responsible. Victims of human rights violations deserved justice. Syria would thus vote in favour of the draft resolution.

/...


55. Draft resolution A/C.3/65/L.57 was adopted by 119 votes to 2, with 55 abstentions.

/...

59. Mr. Sammis (United States of America) ...

/...

60. Acknowledgement of the report, however, should not be taken as support for the Council’s unbalanced and one-sided approach to the situation in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. The Council should treat all countries in an unbiased and objective manner. The United States did not support resolutions that singled out the Government of Israel and not the violations of international law intentionally committed by Hamas.

61. Allegations of violations of international law that took place during the Gaza conflict warranted effective domestic follow-up, and Israel had the mechanisms to investigate, including a robust judiciary and the capability for independent review of military operations. The continuing bias against Israel was further evident in the hastily adopted resolution establishing a fact finding mission with a flawed mandate to investigate the Gaza incident. His delegation commended the panel established by the Secretary-General to review the results of the internal investigations in Israel and Turkey and the spirit of cooperation it represented, and continued to regard that panel as the primary method for the international community to review that incident.

62. The work of his delegation on the Council would continue to be guided by his Government’s commitment to the universality of human rights, dialogue, principled engagement and fidelity to the truth.

/...

The meeting rose at 6 p.m.


Follow UNISPAL RSS Twitter