Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
08USUNNEWYORK1141
2008-12-05 14:56:00
UNCLASSIFIED
USUN New York
Cable title:
UNGA THIRD COMMITTEE TAKES ACTION ON PROGRAMME 19,
how-toVZCZCXYZ0008 PP RUEHWEB DE RUCNDT #1141 3401456 ZNR UUUUU ZZH P 051456Z DEC 08 FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 5480 INFO RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA PRIORITY 3460
UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 001141
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PHUM PGOV PREL AORC UNGA
SUBJECT: UNGA THIRD COMMITTEE TAKES ACTION ON PROGRAMME 19,
CONCLUDES WORK
UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 001141
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PHUM PGOV PREL AORC UNGA
SUBJECT: UNGA THIRD COMMITTEE TAKES ACTION ON PROGRAMME 19,
CONCLUDES WORK
1. On November 26, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) Third
Committee passed draft decision A/C.3/63/L.79, entitled
"Programme planning," in a vote of 167 in favor, two against
(U.S.),and two abstentions. The Committee Chair was the
initial sponsor of the draft, but withdrew it after the
Israeli delegation expressed its concerns regarding the
draft's provision calling upon the UN High Commissioner for
Human Rights to follow up to the Durban Declaration and
Programme of Action. The Mauritanian delegation, on behalf
of the African Group, resubmitted the draft, with 34 other
delegations adding their co-sponsorship. The United States
proposed an oral amendment replacing the reference in
paragraph 19.11(d) to the Durban Declaration and Programme of
Action with a broader reference to all relevant UN
conferences and summits. The Egyptian delegate engaged in a
procedural battle with the Committee Chair, resulting in a
motion by the delegate to appeal the Chair's decision to
follow Committee precedent and allow amendments submitted
with less than 24-hours advanced notice to be considered.
The Committee sided with the Chair in a vote of 74 in favor
(U.S.),57 against, and 24 abstentions. The Committee then
rejected the United States' proposed oral amendment in a vote
of 105 against, four in favor (U.S.),and 55 abstentions.
2. Following the adoption of A/C.3/63/L.79, delegates from
Australia and Canada delivered Explanations of Vote (EOVs)
explaining that although they strongly supported the work of
the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, they had abstained
on the draft because of their concerns regarding the Durban
Review Conference. The United States and Israel gave EOVs,
noting that they had voted against the draft because of
concerns with the Durban Review Conference, particularly the
Conference's persistence in unfairly singling out Israel.
The complete text of the U.S. EOV (and all other U.S.
statements) can be found at www.usunnewyork.usmission.gov.
Several other delegations noted their disappointment that the
Committee had been unable to achieve consensus on the draft
decision. The delegate from South Africa concluded that it
would have been "inconceivable" to have adopted a text
without a reference to the Durban Review Conference.
3. The Committee also adopted by consensus draft resolution
L.76, entitled "Tentative programme of work of the Third
Committee for the sixty-fourth session of the General
Assembly, submitted by the Chairman of the Committee," thus
concluding its work for the 63rd UNGA.
Wolff
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PHUM PGOV PREL AORC UNGA
SUBJECT: UNGA THIRD COMMITTEE TAKES ACTION ON PROGRAMME 19,
CONCLUDES WORK
1. On November 26, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) Third
Committee passed draft decision A/C.3/63/L.79, entitled
"Programme planning," in a vote of 167 in favor, two against
(U.S.),and two abstentions. The Committee Chair was the
initial sponsor of the draft, but withdrew it after the
Israeli delegation expressed its concerns regarding the
draft's provision calling upon the UN High Commissioner for
Human Rights to follow up to the Durban Declaration and
Programme of Action. The Mauritanian delegation, on behalf
of the African Group, resubmitted the draft, with 34 other
delegations adding their co-sponsorship. The United States
proposed an oral amendment replacing the reference in
paragraph 19.11(d) to the Durban Declaration and Programme of
Action with a broader reference to all relevant UN
conferences and summits. The Egyptian delegate engaged in a
procedural battle with the Committee Chair, resulting in a
motion by the delegate to appeal the Chair's decision to
follow Committee precedent and allow amendments submitted
with less than 24-hours advanced notice to be considered.
The Committee sided with the Chair in a vote of 74 in favor
(U.S.),57 against, and 24 abstentions. The Committee then
rejected the United States' proposed oral amendment in a vote
of 105 against, four in favor (U.S.),and 55 abstentions.
2. Following the adoption of A/C.3/63/L.79, delegates from
Australia and Canada delivered Explanations of Vote (EOVs)
explaining that although they strongly supported the work of
the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, they had abstained
on the draft because of their concerns regarding the Durban
Review Conference. The United States and Israel gave EOVs,
noting that they had voted against the draft because of
concerns with the Durban Review Conference, particularly the
Conference's persistence in unfairly singling out Israel.
The complete text of the U.S. EOV (and all other U.S.
statements) can be found at www.usunnewyork.usmission.gov.
Several other delegations noted their disappointment that the
Committee had been unable to achieve consensus on the draft
decision. The delegate from South Africa concluded that it
would have been "inconceivable" to have adopted a text
without a reference to the Durban Review Conference.
3. The Committee also adopted by consensus draft resolution
L.76, entitled "Tentative programme of work of the Third
Committee for the sixty-fourth session of the General
Assembly, submitted by the Chairman of the Committee," thus
concluding its work for the 63rd UNGA.
Wolff