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.4/55/SR.24
10 November 2000

English
Original: Spanish

General Assembly
Fifty-fifth session
Fourth Committee

Summary record of the 24th meeting
Held at Headquarters, New York, on Friday, 10 November 2000, at 3 p.m.

Chairman: Ms. Grcic-Polic (Vice-Chairman) ..................................... (Croatia)



Contents

Agenda item 84: United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (continued)

Agenda item 85: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories (continued)

In the absence of Mr. Kiwanuka (Uganda), Ms. Grcic-Polic (Croatia), Vice-Chairman, took the Chair.


The meeting was called to order at 3.10 p.m.



Agenda item 84: United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (continued) (A/C.4/55/L.10-L.16)


Draft resolutions A/C.4/55/L.10, entitled “Assistance to Palestine Refugees”; A/C.4/55/L.11, entitled “Working Group on the Financing of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East”; A/C.4/55/L.12, entitled “Persons Displaced as a result of the June 1967 and subsequent hostilities”; A/C.4/55/L.13, entitled “Offers by Member States of grants and scholarships for higher education, including vocational training, for Palestine Refugees”; A/C.4/55/L.14, entitled “Operation of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East”; A/C.4/55/L.15, entitled “Palestine Refugees’ properties and their revenues”; and A/C.4/55/L.16, entitled “University of Jerusalem ‘Al-Quds’ for Palestine Refugees”

1. The Chairperson invited the Committee to take action on the draft resolutions submitted under agenda item 84 entitled “United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East”, namely, the draft resolutions contained in documents A/C.4/55/L.10 to L.16.

2. Mr. Minot (France), speaking on behalf of the European Union, introduced draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.10 entitled “Assistance to Palestine Refugees”. The European Union considered that the activities carried out by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) not only provided vital services to refugees, but also promoted the peace process in the Middle East. The draft resolution welcomed the increased cooperation between the Agency and international and regional organizations, which was essential to improving the living conditions of the refugees; noted with concern the critical financial situation of the Agency and urged States to provide political and financial support to the Agency in order to enable it to carry out its mission effectively. The draft resolution also commended the efforts of the Commissioner General to move towards budgetary transparency and internal efficiency and welcomed the new unified budget structure for the biennium 2001-2002. The European Union, the main donor of UNRWA, hoped that the draft resolution would, as in previous years, garner overwhelming support.

3. The Agency, which had been established to provide temporary assistance, had now been in existence for 50 years. The European Union hoped that a global, just and lasting peace would soon be established in the region, thereby permitting the transfer of the Agency’s functions to the Palestinian Authority.

4. Ms. Van Daalen (Netherlands) introduced draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.11 entitled “Working Group on the Financing of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East”, on behalf of its sponsors, the European Union and Norway and Turkey. The reports and statements before the Committee made it clear that the Agency’s precarious financial situation might require it to cut back on services. The draft resolution was similar to the one adopted the previous year, although updated, and paragraph 4 welcomed the new, unified budget structure for the biennium 2000-2001, which could contribute to improved budgetary transparency of the Agency. It was to be hoped that the draft would be adopted, as in previous years, without a vote.

5. Mr. Pohan (Indonesia) introduced the following proposals: draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.12 on persons displaced as a result of the June 1967 and subsequent hostilities; draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.13 on offers by Member States of grants and scholarships for higher education, including vocational training, for Palestinian refugees; draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.14 on the operation of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East; draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.15 on Palestine refugees’ properties and their revenues; and draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.16 on the University of Jerusalem “Al-Quds” for Palestine refugees.

6. The draft resolutions represented the Committee’s annual reaffirmation of the rights of Palestine refugees and displaced persons and its recognition of the work of UNRWA under difficult circumstances and enormous financial constraints. The draft resolutions were essentially like those of the previous year with the appropriate updating. With reference to draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.12, he drew particular attention to paragraphs 1, 2 and 3. With regard to draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.13, which recognized the importance of education and training, he singled out paragraphs 1 and 2. Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.14 had a new preambular paragraph expressing grave concern about the increased suffering of the Palestine refugees. With reference to draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.15 he underscored paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 6. Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.16 drew attention to the need to strengthen the educational system in the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem, and specifically the need to establish the University of Jerusalem “Al-Quds”.

7. The Chairman announced that Oman had become a sponsor of draft resolutions A/C.4/55/L.12 to L.16 under agenda item 84.

Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.10, entitled “Assistance to Palestine refugees”

8. A recorded vote was taken on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.10.

In favour:

Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against:

Israel.

Abstaining:

United States of America.


9. Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.10 was adopted by 123 votes to 1, with 1 abstention.

Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.11, entitled “Working Group on the Financing of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East”

10. Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.11 was adopted without a vote.

Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.12, entitled “Persons displaced as a result of the June 1967 and subsequent hostilities”

11. A recorded vote was taken on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.12.

In favour:

Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against:

Israel, United States of America.

Abstaining:

None.

12. Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.12 was adopted by 122 votes to 2.

Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.13, entitled “Offers by Member States of grants and scholarships for higher education, including vocational training, for Palestine refugees”

13. A recorded vote was taken on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.13.

In favour:

Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against:

None.

Abstaining:

Israel.

14. Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.12 was adopted by 123 votes to none, with 1 abstention.

Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.14, entitled “Operation of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East”

15. A recorded vote was taken on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.14.

In favour:

Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against:

Israel, United States of America.

Abstaining:

None.

16. Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.14 was adopted by 122 votes to 2.

Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.15, entitled “Palestine refugees’ properties and their revenues”

17. A recorded vote was taken on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.15.

In favour:

Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against:

Israel, United States of America.

Abstaining:

None.

18. Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.15 was adopted by 122 votes to 2.

Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.16, entitled “University of Jerusalem ‘Al-Quds’ for Palestine refugees”

19. A recorded vote was taken on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.16.

In favour:

Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against:

Israel, United States of America.

Abstaining:

None.

20. Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.16 was adopted by 122 votes to 2.


Agenda item 85: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories (continued) (A/C.4/55/L.17 to L.21)

Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.17, entitled Work of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories”

Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.18, entitled Applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, to the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and the other occupied Arab territories”

Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.19, entitled Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan”

Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.20 entitled Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem”

Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.21, entitled The occupied Syrian Golan

21. Mr. Dausa Céspedes (Cuba) introduced draft resolutions A/C.4/55/L.17 to L.21 on behalf of the sponsors after pointing out the key aspects of each draft resolution, he noted that the situation in the occupied territories had worsened significantly following the Israeli aggression against the people and holy sites of Palestine. The United Nations must therefore remain firm and send a clear message to the Israeli authorities. He hoped the five draft resolutions would enjoy the widest possible support.

22. The Chairman announced that Oman had become a sponsor of draft resolutions A/C.4/55/L.17 to L.20 and Pakistan and the Syrian Arab Republic had become sponsors of draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.21.

Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.17, entitled “Work of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories”

23. A recorded vote was taken on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.17.

In favour:

Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Chile, China, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia.

Against:

Israel, United States of America.

Abstaining:

Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Benin, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Yugoslavia.

24. Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.17 was adopted by 68 votes to 2, with 53 abstentions.

Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.18, entitled “Applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, to the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and the other occupied Arab territories”

25. A recorded vote was taken on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.18.

In favour:

Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against:

Israel, United States of America.

Abstaining:

None.

26. Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.18 was adopted by 124 votes to 2.

Adoption of measures on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.19, entitled “Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan”

27. A recorded vote was taken on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.19.

In favour:

Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against:

Israel, United States of America.

Abstaining:

None.

28. Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.19 was adopted by 124 votes to 2.

Adoption of measures on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.20, entitled “Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem”

29. A recorded vote was taken on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.20.

In favour:

Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against:

Israel, United States of America.

Abstaining:

None.

30. Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.20 was adopted by 123 votes to 2.

Adoption of measures on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.21, entitled “The occupied Syrian Golan”

31. A recorded vote was taken on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.21.

In favour:

Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against:

Israel.

Abstaining:

United States of America.

32. Draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.21 was adopted by 123 votes to 1, with 1 abstention.

33. Ms. Price (Canada) said that her delegation had abstained during the voting on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.17 because the text referred only to violence committed by one of the parties to the conflict; her Government deplored all acts of violence and the deaths and losses on both sides.

34. Her delegation’s position with regard to draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.20 was the same as that for draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.17. She pointed out that her delegation had voted in favour of the draft resolution based on the understanding that the thirteenth preambular paragraph, which referred to “the positive impact of a temporary international or foreign presence”, referred only to an international presence in Hebron.

35. Mr. Smith (Australia) said that his delegation had abstained during the voting on draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.17 because, given the current context, it was certainly not appropriate to unfairly single out one of the parties for criticism and blame. Both parties were responsible for putting an end to the current violence and restoring the mutual confidence that would be necessary for negotiations to resume. He looked forward to the prompt renewal of a process of peaceful negotiations based on Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), the Oslo Accords and the principle of territory for peace.

36. His delegation had voted in favour of draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.19 because it condemned all illegal acts of violence, including those committed by Israeli settlers. However, that general principle, accepted by both parties, was not reflected in an even-handed manner in paragraph 5.

37. His delegation had voted in favour of draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.20 because, as a whole, it was a clear and important reflection of the international community’s views on that issue. Nevertheless, if a vote had been taken on each paragraph, his delegation would have abstained with regard to paragraph 2, not out of lack of sympathy for the situation of the Palestinian people, but because it believed that in the current context recriminations against only one of the parties served no useful purpose. Neither the excessive use of force nor violence were acceptable; both parties were responsible for putting an end to the current violence and restoring an atmosphere of mutual trust as a basis for renewed negotiations. In addition, his delegation did not believe that the thirteenth preambular paragraph in any way prejudiced decisions which might be taken by the Security Council or the parties themselves with regard to a protection force.

38. Mr. Minot (France) said that although the European Union welcomed the opportunity to support the draft resolutions submitted under agenda item 85, it had concerns with regard to draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.17 and had abstained during that vote because it wished to avoid repeated and pointless criticism of Israel at a time when the international community should be making every effort to put an end to the violence and ensure a return to the peace process.

39. With regard to agenda item 85 as a whole, the European Union was concerned by the policies of the Government of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory and had made its position very clear with regard to the use of excessive force, obstacles to the circulation of goods and persons and the fact that settlement activities were continuing. The European Union felt that the mandate and mission of the Special Committee did not adequately reflect the current situation, and that the issues being considered by the Committee should be dealt with in another forum. He reiterated the European Union’s support for a just, lasting and comprehensive resolution of the Middle East question based on compliance with Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), the Madrid Conference and the Oslo Accords.

40. In spite of the tragedy of recent weeks, the European Union welcomed both parties’ continued commitment to remaining on the path of peace, since the only possible solution to the current crisis was implementation of the Sharm el-Sheikh Memorandum and of the agreement between the two Nobel Peace Prize winners, Mr. Peres and Mr. Arafat, together with the work of the fact-finding commission established on 7 November. The European Union stood ready to help implement those agreements and to support the anticipated renewal of the peace process.

41. Mr. Wembe (Syrian Arab Republic), making a general statement, said he would have preferred that the countries which had voted against draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.21 on the occupied Syrian Golan or had abstained, had supported the draft, the true purpose of which was to vote to eliminate injustice and oppression, since peace and security could not be achieved so long as the occupation continued.

42. Ms. Abdelmady Naser (Observer for Palestine) said that the majority support given to the draft resolutions under agenda item 84 clearly showed the international community’s support for the work undertaken by UNRWA on behalf of Palestinian refugees and their rights. She hoped that political support would be translated into financial support at the Organization’s next pledging conference.

43. With regard to the draft resolutions under agenda item 85, she said that recent events and the tragic deterioration of the situation in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, were a sad reminder of the continuing violations of the human rights of the Palestinian people and of the need for the Special Committee to continue its work.

44. She welcomed the support shown for draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.18 on the applicability of the Geneva Convention. She expressed disappointment, however, that draft resolution A/C.4/55/L.17 had not received overwhelming support, especially in the light of the worsening situation in the occupied Palestinian territory, which continued to deteriorate as a result of the excessive use of force by Israel, the occupying Power, against Palestinian civilians.

The meeting rose at 4.20 p.m.



Follow UNISPAL RSS Twitter