UNGA THIRD COMMITTEE TAKES ACTION ON DEFAMATION OF

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 001139

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PHUM PGOV PREL KIRF AORC UNGA
SUBJECT: UNGA THIRD COMMITTEE TAKES ACTION ON DEFAMATION OF
RELIGIONS, ESA EXECUTIONS, AND MORE


1. On November 24, the UN General Assembly Third Committee
adopted two draft resolutions by consensus and adopted six
others by vote, including three resolutions on which the
United States was the sole opponent. The draft resolutions
adopted by consensus were A/C.3/63/L.58/Revision 1, entitled
"Assistance to refugees, returnees and displaced persons in
Africa" and A/C.3/63/L.73, entitled "Follow-up to the Fourth
World Conference on Women and full implementation of the
Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action and the outcome
of the twenty-third special session of the General Assembly."
The U.S. is a co-sponsor of A/C.3/63/L.58/Revision 1. The
United States delivered an Explanation of Position on
A/C.3/63/L.73, in which the United States dissociated from
consensus; the complete text of this and all other U.S.
statements can be found at www.usunnewyork.usmission.gov.


2. Draft resolution A/C.3/63/L.50/Revision 1, entitled "Use
of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and
impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to
self-determination," passed in a vote (called by the United
States) of 122 in favor, 51 against (U.S.),and five

abstentions. Draft resolution A/C.3/63/L.22/Revision 1,
entitled "Combating defamation of religions," passed in a
vote of 85 in favor, 50 against (U.S.),and 42 abstentions.
Draft resolution A/C.3/63/L.42/Revision 1, entitled "The
right to food," passed in a vote (called by the United
States) of 180 in favor, one against (U.S.),and no
abstentions. Draft resolution A/C.3/63/L.30/Revision 1,
entitled "The right to development," passed in a vote (called
by the United States) of 177 in favor, one against (U.S.),
and two abstentions. Draft resolution A/C.3/63/L.35/Revision
1, entitled "Extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions,"
passed in a vote of 121 in favor, none against, and 57
abstentions (U.S.). The proposed amendment in L.74, dealing
with States in which the death penalty has not been
abolished, was withdrawn by the sponsor, the Organization of
the Islamic Conference (OIC). The proposed amendment in L.75
was voted on in two parts. Parts A and B of paragraph one,
dealing with the death penalty, were rejected in a vote of 78
against (U.S.),60 in favor, and 29 abstentions. Part C,
dealing with sexual orientation, was rejected in a vote of 77
against (U.S.),59 in favor, and 25 abstentions. Draft
resolution A/C.3/63/L.16/Revision 1, entitled "Rights of the
child," passed in a vote (called by the United States) of 180
in favor, one against (U.S.),no abstentions. The U.S.
issued Explanations of Vote (EOVs) on A/C.3/63/L.22/Revision
1, A/C.3/63/L.42/Revision 1, A/C.3/L.30/Revision 1, and
A/C.3/63/L.16/Revision 1.


3. During the discussion on draft resolution
A/C.3/63/L.22/Revision 1, Uganda, on behalf of the OIC, said
that while Islam was currently the main target of defamation
of religions, the draft did not preclude that it could happen
to other religions in the future. The observer from the Holy
See said he feared that the draft's focus on the protection
of institutions, symbols, and ideas, rather than on
individual and group rights, would stifle dialogue and would
result in national laws penalizing religious minority groups.
The United States expressed concern that in seeking to
address defamation of religions, some States were taking
measures to restrict freedom of expression rather than
focusing on fostering dialogue. The United States also noted
concern that the text considered race and religion similarly,
suggesting that individuals did not have the right to choose
or change their religion, which countered provisions for such
in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. France, on
behalf of the European Union, noted the need to distinguish
between incitement to religious hatred and the right to
discuss or criticize religion, and said that international
prevention efforts should focus on incitement to religious
hatred.


4. During the discussion on draft resolution
A/C.3/63/L.35/Revision 1, Uganda noted the OIC's concern that
the situation of persons under foreign occupation was not
adequately addressed in the text. Uganda also expressed the
OIC's concern regarding the draft's reference to sexual
orientation, claiming that there was no legal provision for
such in international human rights instruments. Several
delegations defended the need to include a reference to
sexual orientation, with the Netherlands appealing to the
Committee to "call a spade a spade," noting that there was a
link between arbitrary killings and sexual orientation, and
emphasizing that the UN should not "shy away" from addressing
the issue. The United States and Israel expressed their
regret over the politicization of parts of the draft
resolution, particularly the OIC's attempt to insert
unhelpful language on foreign occupation.
Wolff