UN Human Rights Treaties

United Nations GENERAL ASSEMBLY THIRTY-FIFTH SESSION Official Records* THIRD COMMITTEE 50th meeting held on Friday, 7 November 1980 at 3:30 p.m. New York SUMMARY RECORD OF THE 50th MEETING Chairman: Mr. GARVALOV (Bulgaria) CONTENTS AGENDA ITEM 69: INTERNATIONAL YOUTH YEAR: PARTICIPATION, DEVELOPMENT, PEACE (continued) AGENDA.ITEM 8l: POLICIES AND PROGRAMMES RELATING TO TOOTH (continued) AGENDA ITEM 71: PROBLEMS OF THE ELDERLY AND THE AGED (continued) AGENDA ITEM 73: QUESTION OF A CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD (continued) AGENDA ITEM 79: INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF DISABLED PERSONS (continued) AGENDA ITEM 70: PRESERVATION AND FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF CULTURAL VALUES, INCLUDING THE PROTECTION, RESTITUTION AND RETURN OF CULTURAL AND ARTISTIC PROPERTY (continued) AGENDA ITEM 68: ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE (continued) AGENDA ITEM 72: HUMAN RIGHTS AND SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS (continued) AGENDA ITEM 76: INTERNATIONAL COVENANTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS (continued) (a) REPORT OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE b) FUTURE MEETINGS OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTED (c) STATUS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS, THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT OH CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS AND THE OPTIONAL PROTOCOL TO THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT 01* CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS Distr. GENERAL A/C.3/35/SR.50 24 November 1980 ENGLISH ORIGINAL: SPANISH 80-57393 A/C.3/35/SR.50 English Page 2 The meeting was called to order at 3.50 P.m. AGENDA ITEM 69: INTERNATIONAL YOUTH YEAR: PARTICIPATION, DEVELOPMENT, PEACE (continued) (A/35/361 and Add.1 and A/34/855; A/C.3/35/3: A/C.3/35/L.26) AGENDA ITEM 81: POLICIES AND PROGRAMMES RELATING TO YOUTH (continued) (A/35/503; A/C.3/35/3) AGENDA ITEM 71: PROBLEMS OF THE ELDERLY AND THE AGED (continued) (A/35/130 and Add.1 and Corr.1; A/0.3/35/8) AGENDA ITEM 73: QUESTION OF A CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD (continued) (A/C.3/35/L.14) AGENDA ITEM 79: INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF DISABLED PERSONS (continued) (A/35/274 and Add.1, A/35/291 and A/35/444 and Add.1: A/C.3/35/5) AGENDA ITEM 70: PRESERVATION AND FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF CULTURAL VALUES, INCLUDING THE PROTECTION, RESTITUTION AND RETURN OF CULTURAL AND ARTISTIC PROPERTY (Continued) (A/35/349 and A/35/419; A/C.3/35/L.22) AGENDA ITEM 60: ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE (continued) AGENDA ITEM 72: HUMAN RIGHTS AND SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS (continued) (A/35/202) AGENDA ITEM 76: INTERNATIONAL COVENANTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS (continued) (A/35/65, A/35/96, A/35/132, A/35/137 and Corr.1 [English only], A/35/173, A/35/185, A/35/288, A/35/434, A/35/457 and A/35/462) (a) REPORT OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE (A/35/40; A/C.3/35/4) (b) FUTURE MEETINGS OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE (A/35/417) (c) STATUS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL and CULTURAL RIGHTS, THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS AND THE OPTIONAL PROTOCOL TO THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS (A/35/3/Add.24; A/35/195) 1. Mr. VOICU (Romania) said that, as a sponsor of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.26, which was being Co-sponsored by more than 60 countries representing all the geographical regions, the Romanian delegation wished to draw the Committee's attention to various linguistic and technical aspects of the text requiring explanation and to suggest some changes. 2. In the second preamble paragraph of the English version of the draft resolution the word "humanity" should be replaced by "mankind". In the penultimate A/C.3/35/SL English Page 3 (Mr. Voicu, Remania) paragraph of the preamble there was a reference to Economic and Social Council resolution 1980/67, of 25 July 1980, on the question of international years and anniversaries. That paragraph should reflect the fact that the Council resolution had already been approved by consensus in the Second Committee by the adoption of the draft decision in document A/C.2/35/L.7. Accordingly, the paragraph would read: "Recalling also in this connation its decision A/C.2/35/L.7 and Economic and Social Council resolution 1980/67, of 25 July 1980 ..." 3. In paragraph 1 the words "organs ... of the United Nations system" should be inserted. The text would read "Invites again all States, all organs and specialized agencies of the United Nations system," the rest of the paragraph remaining unchanged. 4. As far as participation in the work of the Advisory Committee referred to in the draft resolution was concerned, the sponsors intended that traditional United Nations practice should be followed and that, accordingly, interested States which were not members of the Committee should be able to participate in the Advisory Committee's work as observers and specialized agencies and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council should also be represented in it. His delegation therefore wished to suggest to the other sponsors of the draft resolution and to the Third Committee in general that a paragraph should be inserted between paragraphs 4 and 5 of the present text reading: "Requests the Secretary-General to invite Scats which are not members of the Advisory Committee, the specialized agencies of the United Nations system and concerned intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations which have consultative status with the Economic and Social Council to participate as observers in the work of the Advisory Committee. 5. Implementation of paragraph 6 of the draft resolution obviously meant that the Advisory Committee was being asked to keep abreast of the activities of regional and international meetings dealing with or of interest to youth. In that connation, the Secretary-General should be asked to draw up a list of relevant meetings in time for the first session of the Advisory Committee, which would decide, in consultation with the interested organizations, which of the meetings it would attend. That interpretation should be reflected in the draft resolution. Accordingly, the words "Invites the Advisory Committee to be represented" in paragraph 6 should be replaced by "Invites the Advisory Committee to pay particular attention to regional and international meetings", the remainder of the paragraph being unchanged. 6. Since the Advisory Committee should consider in what way it would be represented in the various international activities, his delegation suggested to the the other sponsors and to the Committee in general that two additional paragraphs should be added immediately after paragraph 6, the first of which would read: "Call3 upon the Advisory Committee, in implementing paragraph 6, to seek information about the activities of the regional and international meetings dealing with youth or related to youth questions, The second new paragraph proposed would read: A/c.3/35/SR.50 English Page 4 (MR. Voicu, Romania) Requests the Secretary-General to provide a list of relevant meetings for the first session of the Advisory Committee and invites the Advisory Committee to consider the question of being represented at such meetings, in consultation with the interested bodies". 7. His delegation hoped that those changes would be acceptable to the other sponsors of the draft resolution and to the Third Committee as a whole and that draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.26 (International Youth Year: Participation, Development, Peace) in its revised version could be adopted by consensus. He trusted that the Secretariat would read out the list of additional sponsors of the draft resolution. 8. Miss RICHTER (Argentina) observed that the paragraphs would have to be renumbered as a consequence of the changes proposed and suggested that paragraphs 8 and 9 should spell out the criteria which would guide the Secretary-General and the Advisory Committee in the matter of attendance at relevant meetings; for the sake of clarity it would be advisable to add "relevant meetings of the United Nations" or some similar wording. If the sponsors accepted the two new paragraphs suggested by the Remaian delegation, she trusted that the Secretariat would prepare a statement of the related financial implications, which could be very considerable unless the type of meetings at which the Advisory Committee would be represented was specified. 9. Mr. VOICU (Romania) observed that the renumbering of the paragraphs of the draft resolution could be left to the Secretariat. It was too early to state with any precision what type of international meetings was contemplated in the draft resolution. That question should be considered initially by the Advisory Committee at its first session. Obviously, no decisions of any kind would be taken before the Advisory Committee had studied the matter. The Secretary-General of the United Nations could inform the Advisory Committee of the meetings scheduled for the forthcoming months and thus for the time being no financial implications would arise from that recommendation. 10. All relevant information in that regard appeared in document A/C.3/35/L.39, which contained a statement of the financial implications of implementing the existing paragraph 6 of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.26. Thus, in the opinion of the sponsors of the draft resolution, which had been the subject of arduous and lengthy negotiations, the change proposed by the delegation of Argentina was not applicable. 11. Ms. ROSER (Federal Republic of Germany) expressed her gratitude to the Romanian delegation for reflecting her delegation's concerns in paragraph 6 of the revised varsion of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.26, which she hoped would be adopted by consensus. She therefore withdrew the amendment in document A/C.3/35/L.38. 12. Mr. WALKATE (Netherlands) withdrew the amendment in document A/C. 3/35/L. 40. 13. Mr. GOODEN (Jamaica) said that his delegation would like to Join the sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.26 A/C.3/35/SR.50 English Page 5 14. Mrs. DOVNING (Secretary of the Committee) announced that the delegations of Bahamas, Barbados, Cape Verde, Congo, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Mauritius, Nigeria, Qatar, Sudan and Zambia had become sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.26. She drew attention to the statement of the administrative and financial implications of the draft resolution in document A/C.3/35/L.39. 15. Mr. VOICU (Romania), replying to a question put by the delegation of Argentina, said that the question of the participation of youth organizations in a given meeting would have to be considered at the first session of the Advisory Committee, in 3.981. The Advisory Committee v would submit a report to the General Assembly at its thirty-sixth session, and the Assembly would at that time take the necessary measures. 16. The CHAIRMAN said that, if he heard no objection, he would take it that the Committee wished to adopt draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.26, as revised, without a vote. 17. It was so decided. 18. Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.26, as revised, was adopted without a vote. 19. Mr. MORENO-SALCEDO (Philippines) said he wished to protest against the practice of submitting oral changes to draft resolutions at a late stage, a practice which deprived delegations of the opportunity of requesting instructions from their Governments. Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.32 20. Mrs. DOWNING (Secretary of the Committee) announced that the delegations of Austria, Barbados, Central African Republic, Colombia, Fiji, Federal Republic of Germany, Jamaica, Ireland, Lebanon, Philippines, Rwanda, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay, Venezuela and Zaire had Joined the sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.32. 21. The CHAIRMAN said that, if he heard no objection, he would take it that the Committee wished to adopt draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.32 without a vote. 22. It was so decided. 23. Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.32 was adopted without a vote. 24. Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.14 24. Mrs. DOWNING (Secretary of the Committee) announced that the delegations of Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Barbados, Bolivia, Burundi, Colombia, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guyana, Jamaica, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Uruguay, Venezuela and Zaire had Joined the sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.14 25. Mr. GIUSTETTI (France) said that his delegation was a sponsor of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.14 because it attached great importance to the signing of a convention on the rights of the child. The work on that subject should be A/C.3/35/SR.50 English Page 6 (Mr. Giustetti, France) carried out in collaboration with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and the United Nations Children's Fund. The Working Group of the Commission on Hunan Rights which was dealing with that subject should not intervene in the work of other bodies that were studying related questions. He hoped draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.14 would be adopted by consensus. 26. Ms. ROSER (Federal Republic of Germany) said that her delegation was a sponsor of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.14 because it believed that the convention on the rights of the child would promote one of the fundamental aspects of human rights. She agreed with the representative of France that the Working Group of the Commission on Human Rights should not intervene in the work of other bodies studying similar questions. 27. Mrs. DE RIVERA (Colombia) said that Colombia had been a strong supporter of measures and conventions aimed at enhancing the welfare of children and the family. The Government of Colombia attached great importance to efforts to ensure that children shared In the benefits brought about by the development process in her country. There was no limit to the efforts Colombia had made to protect children and the family. The Colombian Institute for Family Welfare had been substantially restructured and Act No. 7, of 1979, expanded care for mothers and children over 7 years of age. An all-out campaign had been conducted in the rural areang, reaching all the villages throughout the country. 28. Her delegation supported draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.14 because of her country's clear identification with programmes for children. She wished to reiterate the recommendations made in previous years to the effect that: a permanent agency of the United Nations should be created to monitor compliance with the rights of the child; States parties to the Convention should undertake to ratify the Declaration of the Rights of the Child, with such amendments or additions as might be made as a result of its analysis and revision; and States Members of the United Nations should, within their countries, promote solidarity with the children of developing countries. 29. The CHAIRMAN said that, if he heard no objection, he world take it that the Committee wished to adopt draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.14 without a vote. 30. It was so decided. Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.34 31. The CHAIRMAN said that the Secretariat was expected to submit a document on the administrative and financial implications of the recommendations of the Advisory Committee for the International Year of Disabled Persons (A/35/***/Add.3). He wondered whether members might wish to delay the examination of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.34 until such time as the Secretariat distributed the document. The Committee would study draft resolutions on other items in the meantime. A/C.3/35/SR.50 English Page 7 32. Mr. GAGLIARDI (Brazil) supported by Mr. ABDUL AZIZ (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), said it was incredible that document A/35/444/Add.3 should still not have been distributed; however, since the Committee had before it document A/C.3/35/L.41 on the financial implications of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.34, it should not delay its decision on the draft resolution. 33. Mrs. DOWNING (Secretary of the Committee) announced that the delegations of the following countries had Joined the sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.34: Afghanistan, Bangladesh. Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Canada, Costa Pica, Cuba, El Salvador, Federal Republic of Germany, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Ireland, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Sri Lanka, Syrian Arab Republic, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay.. Venezuela, Zaire and Zimbabwe. She also announced that the following changes had been made: in paragraph 8, the word "buildings'' had been added before the word 'documents' , and the final phrase of paragraph 9 bad been deleted. 34. Mr. MUCORLOR (Liberia) proposed that the draft resolution should be adopted by acclamation. 35. The CHAIRMAN said that, if he heard no objection, he. would take it that the Committee wished to adopt draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.34 without a vote. 36. It was so decided. Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.22 37. Mr. GLAIEL (Syrian Arab Republic) expressed his satisfaction at the efforts made by UNESCO with regard to the restitution of cultural property and said that the United Nations should try to ensure that Israel returned to the occupied territories their cultural property. Far from that being the case, there were daily reports of new violations perpetrated by Israel, the latest of which had been the decision to annex Jerusalem. 38. Mr. EDIS (United Kingdom) said he had difficulty understanding the relationship between the subject of the draft resolution and certain references in the preamble. For example, he did not Know what should be understood by the term "humanism" in the fourth preambular paragraph; he asked the representative of Poland for clarification in that regard. 39. Mr. SOKALSKI (Poland) said he had already explained the exact meaning of the draft resolution in bis introductory statement. Culture and cultural values were part of the concept of humanism, and that was how the term should be understood. 40. The CHAIRMAN said that, if he heard no objection, he would take it that the Committee wished to adopt draft resolution A/C3/35/L.22 without a vote. 41. It was so decided. A/C.3/35/SR.50 English Page 8 Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.33 42. Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.33 was adopted without a vote. 43. Mr. EUNCHAN (Luxembourg) 6aid that the nine States members of the European Economic Community had spoken in favour of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.33, although some of them wished to reaffirm the reservations they had already expressed at previous sessions of the General Assembly. 44. Mr. LINNER (Sweden) said that, if draft resolutions A/C.3/35/L.22 and L.33 had been put to the votes his delegation would have abstained. 45. Mrs. AKAMATSU (Japan) said that her Government would have abstained from voting on paragraph 6 had a vote been taken on that paragraph. 46. Ms. ATKINS (United States of America) said that the United States did not agree with paragraph 7 of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.33, as it could be interpreted as an invitation to Governments to involve themselves with the affairs of the mass information media. The United States supported the principle of returning cultural property under the terms of the UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property. It opposed any effort to require Governments to return such property that vent beyond the terms of the UNESCO Convention, which did not require restitution with respect to works of art that had entered a country before the date of entry into force of the Convention in that country. 47. Finally, the United States was somewhat disturbed at the reference to previous resolutions that appeared to be aimed at rolling back history- The experts from developed and developing countries who had been meeting since 1976 under the auspices of UNESCO had recognized that it would not be practical to go back in history to claim property rights. Any interpretation of the draft resolution that was incompatible with the UNESCO Convention was unacceptable to the United States. 48. Mr. MUCORLOR (Liberia) 6aid that, had there been a vote, he would have voted in favour of draft resolutions A/C.3/35/L.22 and L.33. Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.30 49. Mrs. DOMING (Secretary of the Committee) said that Austria, Bolivia, Costa Rica, E1 Salvador, Gambia, Federal Republic of Germany, Kenya and Nicaragua had Joined the sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.30. 50. Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.30 was adopted without a vote. Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.27 51. Mr. BADJI (Senegal) said that in the third preambular paragraph of the French version the words was detriment des libertes et des droits fondamentaux de l'homme" should be replaced by "au detriment des droits de l'homme et des libertes fondamentales. A/C.3/35/SR.50 English Page 9 52. Ms. WELLS (Australia) said that, at the thirty-third session of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, a resolution had been adopted which referred to the specific problem of interference with the privacy of individuals and the exercise of their freedoms that could result from scientific and technological developments. Although the Committee had certain reservations about referring to resolutions of the Sub-Commission, she proposed that an additional preambular paragraph be added to draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.27 which would read: "Welcoming the resolution of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, adopted at its thirty-third session, relating to a study on the relevant guidelines in the area of the protection of individuals against interference," 53. Mrs. WARZAZI (Morocco) agreed with the statement made by the representative of Senegal on the French text of the draft resolution and said that the same mistake had been made in the fourth preambular paragraph and in paragraph 1. 54. Mr. OGURTSOV (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic), speaking on behalf of the sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.27, said that they had decided, in a spirit of co-operation, to accept the amendment proposed by the Argentine delegation, and the version read out by the Committee Secretary. The sponsors had substantive objections to the amendment proposed by the Australian delegation, since the Sub-Commission's documents had not been issued, which meant that the report of the Sub-Commission on its last session was not available, and that none of the sponsors of the draft resolution under consideration had seen the documents or resolutions referred to by the Australian representative. Moreover, since the Sub-Commission was an organ of the Commission, its decisions should be considered and approved by the Commission, which might not agree with those decisions. 55. The precedents cited by the Australian delegation included, among others, General Assembly resolutions which referred to decisions of the Sub-Commission, but the sponsors of the draft resolution considered that the resolution on Chile, for example, was not altogether appropriate, for obvious reasons which invalidated any comparison with the draft resolution under consideration. The sponsors therefore urged the Australian delegation not to insist on its amendment, which, if it were maintained, would have to be considered in its practical aspects by every member of the Third Committee. 56. The amendment proposed by Australia would require consultations with Governments on the question of the Sub-Commission, and that would clearly take more time than the Committee could afford. The sponsors therefore appealed to the Australian delegation not to insist on an amendment which was acceptable neither to the sponsors of the draft resolution nor to the majority of the Committee. 57. Ms. WELLS (Australia) said that her delegation had submitted its amendment because it considered that the work of the Sub-Commission had a direct impact on the subsequent consideration of the Declaration referred to in draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.27. nevertheless, her delegation was prepared to withdraw its amendment if its concern was fully reflected in the summary records of the debate on the draft resolution. A/C.3/35/SR.50 English Page 10 58. The CHAIRMAN said that the summary records of the debate on the item would fully reflect the amendment submitted by the Australian delegation and its subsequent withdrawal. He suggested that the Committee should decide whether draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.27, as revised, might be adopted without a vote. 59. Mr.MUNCHEN (Luxembourg), speaking in explanation of vote before the vote, said that, with respect to the draft resolution under consideration, the nine member States of the European Economic Community wished to recall the position they had adopted on resolution 3384 (XXX), on which they had abstained since the sponsors had not been able to accept various amendments to the text which would have allowed a consensus to emerge. The Stales of the European Economic Community would take the same position on the draft resolution under consideration, and wished to express their reservations on the value of the request to the Commission on Human Rights, in paragraph 3> to "give special attention ' to the Declaration contained in General Assembly resolution 3384 (XXX). 60. Mr. EDIS (United Kingdom), supported by Mr. WALKATE (Netherlands), endorsed the comments made by the representative of Luxembourg in explaining the votes of the nine member States of the European Economic Community. 6l. Mr. GIUSTETTI (France) said that his delegation endorsed the statement made by the representative of Luxembourg on behalf of the European Economic Community, and wished only to observe that the revised version of paragraph 4 made his delegation's reservations all the greater. The reports of the specialized agencies provided a valuable source of information on compliance by States with the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. 62. Miss RICHTER (Argentina) said that her delegation had Joined the sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.27. 63. The CHAIRMAN invited the Committee to vote on draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.27 an revised. 64. Draft reso3ution A/C.3/35/L.27, as revised, was adopted by 107 votes to none, with 26 abstentions. 65. Ms. ATKINS (United States of America) said that her delegation had abstained in the vote on draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.27, since it had had reservations from the out3et or. the Declaration on the Use of Scientific and Technological Progress in the Interests of Peace and for the Benefit of Mankind. Her delegation did not accord particular importance to that Declaration, but had no objection to the specialized agencies' taking it into account. 66. Mrs., de BARISH (Costa Rica) said that she would have liked the Australian amendment to draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.27 to be accepted. The draft resolution contained useful recommendations. She had voted in favour since the amendment proposed by the Argentine delegation had been adopted. A/C.3/35/SR.50 English Page 11 Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.31 67. Mr. GAGLIARDI (Brazil) said that any step which strengthened the activities of the Commission on Human Rights should be welcomed. His delegation's vote in favour of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.31 should not be taken as prejudging any measure which the Commission on Human Rights or the Economic and Social Council might adopt with respect to the report of the Sub--Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. 6G. Mr. EDIS (United Kingdom) confirmed that draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.31 did not prejudge any measure which the Commission on Human Rights or the Economic and Social Council might adopt with respect to the report of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. 69. Mr. BYKOV (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) said it was obvious that draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.31 had nothing to do with the item under consideration by the Committee, since in its text there was no reference either to human rights and scientific and technological developments or to declarations which had been adopted previously on the subject. Furthermore, with respect to the fourth preambular paragraph, the report of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities not only did not appear among the documents submitted under item 72 but was not even available. How were delegations to adopt a decision on a document whose contents they were ignorant of? 70. Mr. EDIS (United Kingdom) thought, on the contrary, that draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.31 was relevant to the item under consideration, given the references it contained to General Assembly resolution 33/53 and resolution 10 A (XXXIII) of the Commission on Human Rights. Resolution 11 (XXXIII) of the Sub-Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities had been adopted in accordance with General Assembly resolution 33/53, and it was natural that the text referred to that resolution. The reference in the fourth preambular paragraph of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.31 to resolution 11 (XXXIII) was perfectly clears the date and objective of the resolution were indicated in that paragraph. Moreover, the Soviet Union was a member of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, so that it was difficult to understand its opposition to taking note of one of the Sub-Commission's resolutions. 71. Mr. ABDUL AZIZ (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) said that there were some errors in the Arabic text of the draft resolution. 72. Mr. DERESSA (Ethiopia) drew attention to a typographical error in the third line of the fourth preambular paragraph of the English text where 'if should read of 73. The fourth_ Preambular paragraph of document A/C.3/35/I.31 was put to the vote. A/C.3/35/SR.50 English Page 12 74. The fourth Preambular paragraph was edonted_by 56 votes to 8, with 61 abstentions. 75. At the request of the representative of the United Kingdom, a recorded vote was taken on draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.31. In favour: Australia, Austria, Bahamas. Barbados, Belgium., Bhutan. Bolivia, Botswana. Brazil, Burma, Canada, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Colombia. Costa Rica, Cyprus. Democratic Kampuchea, Denmark, Ecuador. El Salvador, Fiji. Finland; France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany. Federal Republic of. Gharta, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti. Honduras, Iceland, Ireland, Israel. Italy. Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Lesotho, Luxembourg, Mexico, Morocco, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway. Paraguay. Peru., Portugal, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden Thailand. Trinidad and Tobago, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela., Zaire. Against: None. Abstaining: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin, Bulgaria, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cane Verde, Chad, Congo, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Ethiopia, German Democratic Republic, Guinea. Guinea-Bissau, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar. Malawi, Malaysia Maldives, Mali, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Sao Tome and Principe. Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia, Zimbabwe. 76. Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.31 was adopted by 70 votes to none. _with 63 abstentions. 77. Mr. SALCEDO (Philippines) said that a similar draft resolution had been proposed in 1978 and that the Philippines had abstained in the vote his delegation had once again abstained in the vote for the same reasons. Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.28 78. Mr. VELLA (Malta) said that, following consultations between the sponsors. it had been decided to make a number of technical amendments in order to A/C.3/35/SR.50 English Page 13 (Mr. Vella, Malta) eliminate any problems which might arise between the Third Committee and the Fifth Committee and to give the latter Committee greater freedom of action. It had therefore been decided to delete paragraph 1- to renumber the subsequent paragraphs accordingly, and to eliminate the reference in the foot note to document A/35/130/Add.1. 79. Mrs. DEVAUD (France) expressed surprise at the change in the name of the World Assembly on the Elderly which, according to Paragraph 4 of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.28, would be called the World Assembly on Aging. Aging was a process that began at the moment of birth and a more appropriate name would be World Assembly on Old Age , on the model of the World Youth Assembly . 80.Mr. VELLA (Malta) said that, in principle, he agreed with the representative of France. It was, however, always a problem to "find the right words to express what one wanted to say. After consulting a number of experts the sponsors had decided on the name World Assembly on Aging'1 but there would always be some doubt as to whether it corresponded exactly to their thought. The wording employed had different implications in the various languages. The important point WAS to get on with the work called for in the draft resolution. 81. Mrs. DOWNING (Secretary of the Committee) explained the financial implications of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.28. With regard to paragraph 1, the Secretary General had submitted a report on the draft programme and arrangements for the World Assembly on the Elderly (A/35/130) and also on the administrative and financial implications of the proposals contained therein in an addendum to that report. In connexion with paragraph 2 and with the recommendations of the Economic and Social Council in its resolution 1980/26, the Secretary General wished to draw attention to the statement of programme budget implications of the arrangements for the Assembly contained in document E/1980/C.2/L.7. 82. She drew attention to the relevant sections of document E/1980/C.2/L.7. which contained details of the financial implications of the draft resolution. The cost of salaries and common staff costs for a post at the Assistant Secretary-General level and a G-7 post in Vienna would be 5139,000 for 1981 and $285,900 for 1982. The related common services cost would be $31.000 for 1981 and $39,900 for 1982. There would also be travel costs of $16,000 for 1931 and $12,000 for 1982. The total costs would be $377,800. 83. Mr. BYKOV (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) said that his country supported the proposal to hold a World Assembly on Aging. The original paragraph 1 would have caused difficulties for his delegation and he was therefore grateful to Malta for having de3eted it. Documents A/35/130 and Add.1 contained a number of provisions which were not really necessary and the issue should therefore be examined further. His delegation's position was that the draft resolution should have no financial implications for the United Nations budget and that the Secretary General should recalculate the minimum expenditures necessary and submit his proposals for consideration by the appropriate bodies, at a later stage. A/C.3/35/SR.50 English Page 14 84. Mr. EDIS (United Kingdom), supported by Miss ROSER (Federal Republic of Germany), said that his delegation agreed with the general aim of draft, resolution A/C.3/35/L.28, as it considered the issue to be extremely important his delegation nevertheless wished to express reservations regarding the financial implications of the draft resolution. 85. The CHAIRMAN suggested that the Committee should take up draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.29 and expressed the hope that it could be approved speedily. 06. Mrs. WARZAZI (Morocco) said that her delegation wished to Join the sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.29. 87. Mrs. DOWNING (Secretary of the Committee) said that Barbados, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Jamaica, Morocco, Nicaragua and Rwanda had become sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.29. 88. Mr. DYRLUND (Denmark) said that, in the English text of the draft resolution, the letter OF should be eliminated from the reference made in the first preambular paragraph to resolution 31/86. 89. Miss WELLS (Australia), speaking in explanation of vote, said that Australia was pleased to announce that it had ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights on 3 August 1980. In regard to draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.29. her delegation commended the Commission on Human Rights on the work it had accomplished in monitoring the implementation of that Covenant by States parties. It shared the view that the Human Rights Committee should be provided with adequate staff and resources. 90. She supported the proposal that the Human Rights Committee should consider ways of improving publicity for its work and that its reports should be transmitted to the Commission on Human Rights and its Sub-Commission. she urged the Human Rights Committee and the Economic and Social Council' to continue their co-operation with specialized agencies such as ILO and UNESCO. In view of its importance, draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.29 should be approved by consensus. 91. Mr. CAGLIARDI (Brazil) said that, at the thirty-fourth session of the General Assembly when resolution 34/45 had been adopted, his delegation had expressed reservations on the system for apportioning the Committee's expenses as it considered that the costs connected with the sessions of that body should be shared by those Member States which had signed the International Covenants. The same reservation applied to paragraph 13 of the draft resolution under consideration. Moreover, the expenses in connexion with meetings of the human rights committees of individual countries should be financed by the States which had signed the Covenants. 92. Draft resolution A/C.3/35/L.29 was adopted without a vote. The meeting rose at 7.10 p.m.