Question of Palestine home
22 August 1980
22 August 1980
Report of the Committee
on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
A. States parties to Convention
IV. CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS, COMMENTS AND INFORMATION SUBMITTED
BY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 9 OF THE CONVENTION
B. Consideration of reports
States parties to the convention
1. On 22 August 1980, the closing date of the twenty-second session of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, there were 107 States parties to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in resolution 2106 A (XX) of 21 December 1965 and opened for signature and ratification in New York on 7 March 1966. The convention entered into force on 4 January 1969 in accordance with the provisions of its article 19.
2. By the closing date of the twenty-second session, only seven of the 107 States parties to the convention had made the declaration envisage in article 14, paragraph 1, of the Convention. A list of States parties, and an indication 1, of the Convention, is contained in annex I below.
3. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination held two regular sessions in 1980. The twenty-first session (456th to 477th meetings) was held from 24 March to 11 April 1980 at the United Nations Office at General; and the twenty-second session (478th to 499th meetings) was held from 4 to 22 August 1980 at United Nations Headquarters, New York.
330. Before staring the consideration of the initial report of Israel (CERD/C/61/Add.1), a preliminary procedural discussion took place in the Committee on the basis of the intervention of one of its members who, speaking on a point of order, requested a Committee ruling on whether those parts of the occupied Arab territories, namely the West Bank, Gaza, Sinai, Golan and East Jerusalem, were parts of territories comprising the State of Israel as implied by the report. The member added that the consideration of the Israeli report by the committee should not imply recognition of the illegal occupation of Arab lands and that it would be necessary for the representative of Israel to accept such consensus of the Committee.
331. During the discussion several members expressed the pinion that the committee should proceed with its task of considering the report, and should hear the representative of the reporting State, and that the committee’s views on the matter would become apparent during the ensuring debate. Some members, however, felt that Israel’s denial of the rights of the Palestinian people constituted a branch of the principles laid down in the convention and that the Committee should therefore reject the report, and state its reason for doing so in the form of a decision addressed to the General Assembly. One member suggested that the representative or Israel should indicate to the committee what geographical area the report purported to cover. Other members agreed that it was not for the committee to consider the question of Israel’s occupation of certain Arab lands and that the committee’s consideration of the report should be based on the understanding that the territory of the State of Israel was limited to its 1967 borders, as they were internationally recognized.
332. The Committee agreed by consensus that its consideration of the report of Israel should not be interpreted as implying the recognition of any title by Israel to the occupied territories.
333. The representative of Israel, who was invited by the Chairman on this basis to participate in the examination of his Government’s report in accordance with rule 64-A of the provisional rules of procedure of the Committee, stated that he regretted that some members of the committee had made highly political remarks and that he could not therefore introduce the report or participate further in the Committee’s proceedings.
334. After a brief suspension of the meeting, requested by a member in accordance with the provisional rules of procedure, the Chairman announced that the Committee had decided by consensus to postpone consideration of the initial report of Israel until its twenty-third session.