UN Human Rights Treaties

United Nations
General Assembly
Thirty-Fifth Session
Official Records
96th Plenary Meeting
Monday, 15 December 1980
at 3:20 p.m.

New York

CONTENTS
Page
Agenda item 24:
Question of Palestine: report of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian
People (concluded)           1687
Agenda item 12:
Report of the Economic and Social Council (continued)
Reports of the Third Committee    
Agenda item 65: Crime prevention and control:
(a)    Capital punishment: report of the Sixth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and
the Treatment of Offenders;    1693
(b)    Sixth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders;
(c)    Implementation of the conclusions of the Fifth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders: report of the Secretary-General
Report of the Third Committee    
Agenda item 77:
Alternative approaches and ways and means within the United Nations system for improving the effective
enjoyment of human rights and fundamental free doms reports of the Secretary-General
Report of the Third Committee    
Agenda item 82: Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment:
(a)    Questionnaire on the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture     1694.
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment: report of the Secretary-General
(b)    Unilateral declarations by Member States against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment: report of the Secretary-General;
(c) Draft Code of Medical Ethics: report of the Secretary-General;
(d) Draft body of principles for the protection of all persons under any form of detention or imprisonment: report of the Secretary-General
Report of the Third Committee    
Agenda item 30:
Question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council (continued)         1706
President: Mr. Rudiger von WECHMAR (Federal Republic of Germany).
AGENDA ITEM 24
Question of Palestine: report of the Committee on the exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (concluded)
1.    The PRESIDENT: This afternoon the Assembly will continue its consideration of agenda item 24 on
 
the question of Palestine. As members will recall, this morning the Assembly voted on all the draft resolutions on this item, but owing to lack of time we did not hear the exaplanations of vote after the vote. we shall therefore hear them now. I call on those representatives who wish to explain their vote.
2.    Mr. SINGHA (Thailand): I should like to explain my delegation's vote on draft resolution A/35/L.38/ Rev.l.
3.    Thailand regards the question of Palestine as central to any settlement of the Middle East question and fully supports the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, as recognized by the relevant United Nations resolutions. Therefore we were able to vote in favour of draft resolution A/35/L.38/Rev.l. However, my delegation is not entirely happy with some parts of that text and its vote should be seen in the following light.
4.    With regard to operative paragraph 1, even though my delegation appreciates the fact that Security Council resolution 242 (1967) does not deal in a comprehensive manner with the question of Palestine, we believe that it offers the best possible framework for a peaceful solution of the Middle East conflict. While the legitimate and inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, including the right to self-determination and to statehood are recognized, the legitimate right of the State of Israel to exist within secure and recognized boundaries must also be recognized. Such a basis is deemed by my delegation to be essential for any just and lasting solution of the conflict in the Middle East.
5.    Mr. JANKU (Albania): The Albanian delegation did not participate in the vote on the draft resolutions contained in documents A/35/L.38/Rev.l and A/35/L.40 and Add.1 and voted in favour of draft resolutions A/35/L.39 and Add.1, A/35/L.41 and Add.1 and A/35/L.42/Rev.l and Add.1.
6.    The position of the People's Socialist Republic of Albania concerning the question of Palestine and the just and only solution, as well as the means of achieving that solution, is well known and remains unchanged its statement during the debate in the General **** [78th meeting, paras. 107-118] the Albanian egation reconfirmed, once again, that stand ana considerations of its Government. The People's Socialist Republic of Albania has supported and supports the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to establish all its national rights on its homeland, to return to its own territories occupied by Israel through aggression, to preserve its identity and rebuild its national sovereignty. The Albanian people and its Government have supported and will always strongly support the heroic resistance of the Palestinian people in its just and determined struggle against the Zionist aggressors and imperialist plots for the full
    A/35/PV.96
 
1688    General AssemblyóThirty-fifth SessionóPlenary Meetings
 
implementation of its national rights. As we have pointed out on other occasions, we are convinced that the just solution of the question of Palestine will be achieved through the struggle waged by the Palestinian and other Arab peoples themselves against the Zionist imperialist aggression and the interference of the super-Powers and other imperialist Powers.
7.    In accordance with the well-known stand of the People's Socialist Republic of Albania on the question of Palestine and the Middle East problem, the Albanian delegation voted in favour of the three draft resolutions mentioned. Our delegation also supports the majority of the considerations and provisions contained in draft resolutions A/35/L.38/Rev.l and A/35/L.40 and Add.1, but, as we have reservations on them, we did not participate in the vote.
8.    This attitude of the Albanian delegation is based on arguments we also have explained in the past. On this occasion we should like to state briefly the following considerations. Security Council resolution 242 (1967) in our view was and remains a plot and a blow against the interests of the Palestinian and other Arab peoples. It is used to favour and justify the aggressive policy of the Israeli Zionists and the interference of the super-Powers in the Middle East.
9.    From the very beginning the Albanian delegation has expressed its reservations concerning some parts of the report of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People [A35135-]. It would like also to place on record its reservations concerning other United Nations documents and the character and activities of some United Nations bodies associated with the question of Palestine referred to in the resolutions just adopted. These are some of the motives which led the Albanian delegation not to participate in the vote on A/35/L.38/Rev.l and A/35/ L.40 and Add.1.

10.    Mr. KATAPODIS (Greece): The attachment of Greece to the principles inherent in the question of Palestine and its full support for the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination are well known. They have been reiterated on many occasions and are confirmed by a consistent voting pattern in the General Assembly, as was evidenced, inter alia, at the seventh emergency special session last July.
11.    Of the five draft resolutions submitted to the Assembly this year, my delegation voted in favour of A/35/L.40 and Add.1, A/35/L.41 and Add.1 and A/35/L.42/Rev.l and Add.1 and abstained on A/35/ L.38/Rev.l and A/35/L.39 and Add.1. I should like to explain briefly why. In the case of A/35/L.38/Rev.l, we are in general agreement with its contents and especially with the reaffirmation of the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people, including the right to independent statehood. But we do not think it advisable to undermine in any way the validity of Security Council resolution 242 (1967). That resolution constitutes a balanced whole; it calls for the evacuation of all occupied Arab territories and recognizes the right of all States in the area to live in peace within secure borders. To tamper with it while no satisfactory alternative has been agreed upon would be to deprive the parties of a sound basis for an equitable settlement and would provide some of them
 
with an excuse to go back on their commitment to implement the resolution.
12.    As regards draft resolution A/35/L.39 and Add.1 we consider, as we have often had the opportunity to state, that although any solution to the problem of the Middle East must be comprehensive and arrived at with the participation of all the parties, including the Palestine Liberation Organization [PLO], no intermediate step should be rejected out of hand, unless and until it is proved beyond doubt that such an arrangement would stand in the way of an over-all settlement in accordance with the principles of the Charter and the relevant United Nations resolutions.
13.    Mr. MUNTASSER (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) (interpretation from Arabic): The vote of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in favour of the five draft resolutions dealing with the question of Palestine by no means signifies any change in the position of my country with respect to some of the resolutions referred to in the five texts which we adopted this morning.
14.    Mr. PETREE (United States of America): The United States voted against draft resolutions A/35/ L.38/Rev.l, A/35/L.39 and Add.l, A/35/L.40 and Add.l and A/35/L.41 and Add. 1. The United States supports the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, but the draft resolutions before us do not contribute to bringing the achievement of those rights closer to practical reality. We believe that the question of Palestine is at the core of the complex of Arab-Israeli disputes. In that connexion, we object to this forum being used for counter-productive polemics, such as we heard earlier in the debate on this item from the Permanent Representative of Jordan. Such interventions, we are confident, do not represent the views of this body.
15.    I shall not attempt to make a list of the many deficiencies in draft resolution A/35/L.38/Rev.l. It is completely one-sided. It contains no reference to those provisions of Security Council resolution 242 (1967) which affirm the right of every State in the area to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries, free from threats or acts of foree. In fact, the resolution criticizes the only existing framework of negotiations for a comprehensive peace in which legitimate Palestinian rights can be recognized, but it suggests no realistic alternative to the framework of negotiations adopted at Camp David.
16.    Draft resolutions A/35/L.40 and Add.1 and A/35/L.41 and Add.1 refer to the report of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian people and the Special Unit on Palestinian Rights. My Government opposes those bodies and their activities, including the observances which are associated with the so-called International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. We believe that such activities harm the good name and moral authority of the United Nations.
17.    Finally, my delegation abstained in the vote on draft resolution A/35/L.42/Rev.l are Add.1, in consistency with our previous positions ***evertheless, the opposition of my Government to such unilateral action as that recently taken by the Knesset is well known. We do not recognize the Knesset's action as having changed or altered the status of Jerusalem. We believe that the status of the city can only be
 
96th meetingó15 December 1980    1689
 
resolved in the context of negotiations for a comprehensive, just and lasting Middle East peace.
18.    Mr. JASUDASEN (Singapore): The delegation of Singapore voted in favour of draft resolution A/35/L.38/Rev.l on the question of Palestine. However, it wishes to place on record its position on certain elements of that draft resolution.
19.    First, Singapore, wishes to reiterate its belief that Security Council resolution 242 (1967) still provides the best basis for a negotiated settlement of the conflict. Secondly, our support for the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people is given on the clear understanding that the State of Israel has the right to exist as a sovereign and independent State within secure and recognized boundaries. Thirdly, the references in the text to a withdrawal of Israeli forces from all the occupied Palestinian and other Arab territories, including Jerusalem, are understood to refer only to those Arab territories occupied by Israel after the June 1967 war.
20.    Mr. REMEDI (Uruguay) (interpretation from Spanish): My delegation has stated its position clearly on the item before us at previous sessions of the General Assembly, the last time being at the seventh emergency special session. Despite that fact and in order to reaffirm our traditional policy on the subject, we wish to explain a number of aspects relating to the position taken by our delegation with respect to draft resolution A/35/L.38/Rev.l which the Assembly has just adopted and in favour of which we voted, as well as with respect to draft resolution A/35/L.39 and Add.1, on which we abstained in the vote.
21.    First, as stated by the Foreign Minister of my country, Mr. Adolfo Folle Martinez [13th meeting, paras. 58 and 59], we have not hesitated in confirming our support to the Jewish people, while we have maintained a consistent position with respect to the legitiamte rights of the Palestinians. That is why Uruguay has consistently and unambiguously maintained that any initiative aimed at a viable, just and lasting solution to the question should be based essentially on the following considerations: first, the fact that Israel is an irreversible reality and that as such it has an undeniable right to existence within secure and internationally recognized boundaries; secondly, the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, to a national homeland and to independent statehood without foreign interference; and thirdly, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force.
22.    In addition, while we do not fail to recognize that the agreements concluded so far have not been implemented as expected and in no way represent peace for the region, my country, consistent with its traditional policy of support of the principle of the peaceful settlement of international disputes, can in no way disregard such efforts. On the contrary, we hope that the parties that are to implement them will be guided by the main principle in international relations, namely, good faith.
23.    We applaud those delegations which, like Malta, undertook tireless efforts in order to improve the text of draft resolution A/35/L.38. Despite that, we have serious reservations about operative paragraph 1 and, if that paragraph had been put to a separate vote, our
 
delegation would have abstained. We would have taken the same position on operative paragraph 4 if it had been voted on separately.
24.    Mr. PELAEZ (Peru) (interpretation from Spanish): The delegation of Peru wishes to record its reservations concerning the present contents of operative paragraph 1 of draft resolution A/35/L.38/ Rev.1 which makes reference to Security Council resolution 242 (1967).
25.    We consider that the original wording of the paragraph called into question that resolution of the Security Council, or at least weakened the principles and measures advocated for the settlement of the Middle East problem, in which the Palestine question plays a fundamental role. Despite the new wording of that paragraph, in our view it does not entirely correct the weakening of resolution 242 (1967).
26.    For that reason my delegation would have abstained if that paragraph had been put to the vote separately. We believe that Security Council resolution 242 (1967) is and will continue to be the appropriate framework for a just solution of the Middle East question and that that resolution should be implemented together with other relevant resolutions, in particular General Assembly resolution 3236 (XXIX).
27.    We believe that the establishment of a lasting, total and just peace in that conflict area presupposes the withdrawal of all armed forces from the occupied Arab territories, including Jerusalem, the cessation of all conflicts and respect for the rights of all States in the region, including their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries. We consider that implicit respect for the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, independence and national sovereignty falls within that context.
28.    We voted in favour of draft resolution A/35/ L.38/Rev.l as a means of reaffirming the support always given by Peru to the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, as recognized by the General Assembly.
29.    My delegation also abstained in the vote on draft resolution A/35/L.39 and Add.1 because it prejudges the sovereign right of States to conclude treaties and to orient their actions towards the quest for the peaceful settlement of conflicts that jeopardize international peace and security.
30.    We consider that with respect to the longstanding question of the Middle East the positive side of any negotiations should be taken into consideration, bearing in mind the long period of political immobility which has characterized and aggravated the crisis in that region. We consider that any attempt or initiative that may contribute to bringing about lasting peace through dialogue or negotiations among the parties to the conflict should receive support.
31.    Mr. CHAN (Australia): In approaching the question of Palestine the Australian Government has in mind four fundamental considerations. These are: that Israel's legitimate security concerns should be recognized and respected; that the legitimate political rights of the Palestinians should be recognized and respected; that an over-all settlement of the Middle East question should be based on the principles enunciated in Security Council resolution 242 (1967),
 
1690    General AssemblyóThirty-fifth SessionóPlenary Meetings
 
which calls on Israel to withdraw from territories occupied in 1967 and affirms the right of all the States in the area, including, of course, Israel, to exist within secure and recognized boundaries; and, finally, that the wording and objectives of resolutions relating to the question of Palestine should be conducive to the cre-ation of the atmosphere of compromise and trust which is necessary if a peaceful settlement of the Middle East crisis is to be achieved.
32.    My delegation voted against four of the draft resolutions considered today because they are, in our view, incompatible with the fundamental considerations to which I have referred; in particular, they do not take account of Israel's security interests and were expressed in provocative terms which are unhelpful to the search for an over-all peaceful settlement.
33.    On the other hand, my delegation voted in favour of draft resolution A/35/L.42/Rev.l and Add.l on Jerusalem because in our view the basic law on Jerusalem creates a further obstacle to the search for a peaceful settlement. My Government is opposed to any measures designed to change the status and character of East Jerusalem or, for that matter, of any other part of the occupied territories.
34.    We again stress the need for all parties to refrain from statements and actions which do not help to build up the atmosphere of trust and compromise which, as we have stressed, is essential if a solution is to be found to the difficult issues before us.
35.    Mr. DUPUY (Canada): The Assembly has discussed and debated the question of Palestine for over 30 years. We have done so because the persistence of this problem has brought human tragedy to the peoples of the area and because it is a major source of world tension. Our debates, however, have not led to a resolution of the problem. We in the international community have not been able to create a positive environment which would permit a just solution of the Arab-Israeli dispute. We have very often permitted rhetoric and emotion to dominate our deliberations.
36.    If there is to be a just and lasting peace, it must be based on the recognition of the legitimate rights and concerns of both sides; the right of all States to live within secure and recognized boundaries must be openly and clearly accepted. Israel has the right to live in peace within the boundaries that are accepted by its neighbours. Equally, it is essential that we respect the legitimate rights of the Palestinians. Unless their identity as a people is realized, unless the Palestinians play their full part in negotiations to determine their future and unless their right to a homeland is recognized, there will not be peace. What form such a homeland should take, however, including its geographical extent, its status and its relationship to its neighbours, must, we believe, be determined in negotiations between the parties directly involved in the dispute. Progress towards a settlement requires that meaningful compromise by both sides be seen as attainable. To that end, the Palestinians must be given reason to believe that their minimum just requirements can be met, or they will not join in negotiations.
37.    Canada therefore opposes the establishment of Israeli settlements in occupied territories and other unilateral Israeli measures which attempt to alter the
 
situation in those territories and thereby prejudge the results of negotiation. Such measures hinder progress towards a settlement. For that reason Canada has voted in favour of draft resolution A/35/L.42/Rev.l and Add.l concerning Jerusalem. In a press release of 1 August, the Canadian Government made its position on Jerusalem clear:
"Canada does not recognize the validity of Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem. We believe that the issue of Jerusalem, one of the most sensitive in the Arab-Israeli dispute, must be settled by negotiation in the context of an over-all peace settlement. It cannot be decided by unilateral actions. Canada will maintain its present policy and practices regarding East Jerusalem, including the avoidance of official contacts with the Israeli authorities there."
38.    Unfortunately, the other draft resolutions before us today, particularly that in A/35/L.38/Rev.l, the omnibus resolution, similarly prejudge negotiations. They, too, hinder progress towards a settlement. They do little to promote understanding and essential dialogue between the parties, when to facilitate that should be the goal of the Assembly.
39.    Therefore, despite our very real concern over many Israeli practices and despite our support for legitimate Palestinian rights, Canada could not support those texts. In many respects, the effect of those resolutions would be to impose a settlement that has not been agreed upon by the parties concerned. They therefore run directly counter to the framework which has been so carefully and exhaustively built up since 1967 by Security Council resolutions 2.42 (1967) and 338 (1973) and by ongoing negotiations.
40.    In the light of what I have just said, the Canadian delegation voted against draft resolutions A/35/L.38/ Rev.l and A/35/L.39 and Add.l. We also voted against draft resolution A/35/L.41 and Add.l, dealing with the Secretariat Special Unit on Palestinian Rights, because we are not in agreement with the work programme which the resolution instructs the Unit to undertake.
41.    We abstained in the vote on draft resolution A/35/L.40 and Add. 1, concerning the work of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, because, while we have not supported the findings of the Committee, we accept that the Committee itself is an established part of the United Nations system. We hope that in future, however, it will work to promote a settlement taking into consideration the legitimate rights and concerns of both sides. Only on that basis can it make a contribution to the search for a just, lasting and comprehensive Middle East peace.
42.    Mr. OSWALD (Sweden): In pursuance of Swedish policy, my delegation abstained in the vote on draft resolution A/35/L.38/Rev.l.
43.    With reference to operative paragraph 1 of that text, I wish to express the firm opinion of the Swedish Government that Security Council resolution 242 (1967), although admittedly incomplete, and resolution 338 (1973) continue to be the only viable foundation for a peaceful settlement of the Palestinian question and the conflict in the Middle East. We
 
96th meetingó15 December 1980    1691
 
regret that that is not reflected in draft resolution
A/35/L.38/Rev.l.
44.    Our opposition to the Israeli settlements policy in the occupied territories and to unilateral Israeli measures regarding the status of Jerusalem has been clearly stated on several occasions. We wish, never-theless, to dissociate ourselves from the wording of operative paragraph 12 of the same resolution.
45.    Mr. MATHIAS (Portugal): We consider the reaffirmation of General Assembly resolution 181 (II) in the first preambular paragraph of draft resolution A/35/L.38/Rev.l as a most positive contribution to the achievement of an agreed settlement of the question of Palestine.
46.    Nevertheless, we regret that we could not cast a positive vote on that draft resolution, as we have reservations regarding parts of some of its operative paragraphs.
47.    I should like also to put on record that our vote in favour of draft resolution A/35/L.40 and Add.1 does not alter our position regarding the resolutions recalled in its first preambular paragraph.
48.    Mr. KOLBY (Norway): The Norwegian Government is of the opinion that a just and lasting peace in the Middle East can be brought about only if a solution is found to the Palestinian problem. The legitimate national rights of the Palestinian people, including their right to self-determination, must be recognized and implemented. A solution to the Palestinian problem can, however, be achieved only as part of a negotiated settlement which also recognizes the right of Israel to exist within secure and recognized boundaries.
49.    The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination should find expression through involvement in the negotiations of representatives of the Palestinian people. The question of Palestinian participation in such negotiations raises, of course, the question of the role of the PLO. In the view of my Government, no other Palestinian organization or group can claim to be more representative. It is difficult to foresee real progress towards a negotiated settlement unless the PLO shares in one way or another responsibility for the negotiations.
50.    A negotiated settlement requires mutual concessions. The resolutions just adopted, however, prejudge a number of difficult issues which, in our view, should be solved through negotiations involving all parties concerned. In our view, the resolutions do not reflect in an adequate and balanced manner the main prin-ciples which must constitute the basis for a comprehensive settlement in the Middle East. It remains the firm conviction of the Norwegian Government that a peaceful solution must be based on Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973).
51.    Mr. DIEZ (Chile) (interpretation from Spanish): My delegation supported draft resolutions A/35/L.40 and Add.l and A/35/L.42/Rev.l and Add.l, which have just been adopted by the General Assembly.
52.    With regard to draft resolution A/35/L.39 and Add.l, the delegation of Chile wishes to reiterate its disagreement with the statement being made by the General Assembly on agreements and treaties which, freely and in all sovereignty, may be subscribed to
 
by two or more States. As we said last year when referring to resolution 34/65 B,1 pre-empting the right for political considerations will only lead to the progressive weakening of a body such as the General Assembly and in no way contribute to any effort to reach a just settlement of the question of Palestine and the Middle East crisis.
53.    Our reservation in connexion with such a statement, which is not in keeping with the attributes proper to the General Assembly, also compelled us to abstain in the vote on draft resolution A/35/L.38/Rev. 1, because its first preambular paragraph reaffirms resolution 34/65 B. We wish to make it quite clear that our position as stated does not cover all the provisions of draft resolution A/35/L.38/'Rev.l, most of which we have supported and shall continue to support.
54.    Mr. CHARLES (Haiti) (interpretation from French): Haiti's position on the Middle East conflict was clearly expressed during the seventh emergency special session of the General Assembly2 last July on the question of Palestine.
55.    We continue to believe that a just and lasting settlement of this question can be found only if it is discussed directly by the parties involved. No peace process can be initiated if the parties to the conflict refuse to recognize each other's right to exist. Israel is waging a desperate struggling in an attempt to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries, and the struggle being waged by the Palestinian people is connected with its unquestionable right to independence and self-determination. It is in that context that my delegation unreservedly supported draft resolutions A/35/L.40 and Add. 1, A/35/L.41 and Add. 1 and A/35/L.42/Rev.l and Add.l.
56.    On the other hand, in view of the fact that a negotiated solution of the question can be found only by implementing Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), my delegation has very clear reservations with regard to operative paragraph 1 of draft resolution A/35/L.38/Rev.l. Hence it abstained in the vote on that draft resolution.
57.    We took the same position in the vote on draft resolution A/35/L.39 and Add.l. We consider that the General Assembly, while unable in certain cases to play its part as an international arbiter, should not for that reason be silent about, let alone condemn, the efforts being made by some of its members to take an objective view of the problems before it. In this respect operative paragraph 2 of draft resolution A/35/L.39 and Add.l does not meet our point of view on partial agreements and separate treaties, which, to our mind, appreciable efforts and definite landmarks on the path towards a settlement of the conflict. They should not be rejected.
58.    Mrs. FRAENKEL (Costa Rica) (interpretation from Spanish): My delegation abstained in the vote on draft resolution A/35/L.38/Rev.l because the wording of operative paragraphs 1 and 8 gives rise to serious reservations, especially that of operative paragraph 1.

1    See Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-fourth Session, Plenary Meetings, 83rd meeting, paras. 180-183.
2    Ibid, Seventh Emergency Special Session, Plenary Meetings, 11th meeting.
 
1692    General AssemblyóThirty-fifth SessionóPlenary Meetings
 
59.    My delegation's reservations on operative paragraph 1 are due to the fact that it questions the validity of Security Council resolution 242 (1967), which reflects undeniable principles of international law and was adopted unanimously. That resolution was adopted as the basis for a solution to the question of Palestineóa point that has been made on repeated occasions by my delegation, which has also given its support to Security Council resolution 338 (1973) as a supplement to resolution 242 (1967). We nevertheless support the right of the Palestinian people to its own homeland and to the full exercise of its inalienable rights, including that of self-determination.
60.    My delegation likewise supported General Assembly resolution 181 (II), of 29 November 1947, on the establishment of Israeli and Palestinian States. We appreciate the efforts of the delegation of Malta to improve the wording of operative paragraph 1 of draft resolution A/35/L.38; nevertheless, we maintain our reservation, because the problem is not removed by a change in wording.
61.    As for operative paragraph 8, my delegation cannot accept the word "unconditional" in the context in which it is used. We believe that the specific conditions for withdrawal must be negotiated by the parties directly concerned. May we point out that in the last phrase in that paragraph "the fundamental principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force" is invoked and that is precisely one of the principles of international law enshrined in Security Council resolution 242 (1967).
62.    My delegation also abstained in the voting on draft resolution A/35/L.39 and Add.l, because, as we have stated on repeated occasions, we believe that any peace agreement between two sovereign States is desirable and valid, however limited it may be, to the extent that it affects the parties involved in the agreement, although we recognize that it does not apply to any other peoples than those which are under the jurisdiction of the States parties to the agreement. For that reason, we cannot censure or oppose measures of this sort, which are aimed at establishing peace between two sovereign States.
63.    If the wording of the paragraphs in question had not attacked those principles, my delegation would have voted in favour of the draft resolutions because we believe them to contain other principles which my delegation supports.
64.    Mr. LEPRETTE (France) (interpretation from French): My delegation voted against the provisions of operative paragraph 13 of draft resolution A/35/ L.38/Rev.l. In effect, in requesting the Security Council to consider the situation and the possibility of taking effective steps under Chapter VII of the Charter, the General Assembly is attempting to guide the work of the Council, thereby encroaching on the powers expressly vested in that principal organ of the United Nations. Furthermore, eventual recourse to the provisions of Chapter VII, as mentioned in operative paragraph 13 of that text, would, in the view of my delegation, be in contradiction with our desire to facilitate a negotiated settlement in the Middle East.
65.    My delegation abstained in the voting on draft resolution A/35/L.38/Rev.l as a whole, not only for the aforementioned reasons but also for reasons similar
 
to those which prompted our abstention on resolution 3236 (XXIX) and subsequent resolutions on the subject.
66.    Mr. BELTRAMINO (Argentina) (interpretation from Spanish): The Argentine delegation voted in favour of draft resolution A/35/L.38/Rev.l because, by and large, it was in conformity with the principles and concepts set forth in resolution 34/65 A which was adopted by the General Assembly at its thirty-fourth session, and which Argentina voted in favour of on that occasion.
67.    It is also worth mentioning that the resolution we have just adopted is consonant with the principles laid down in resolution ES-7/2, adopted by the General Assembly at its seventh emergency special session, on 29 July 1980.
68.    My delegation wishes to reiterate its position to the effect that Security Council resolution 242 (1967) is still a valuable and essential political element which retains its relevance and should not be disregarded, even though historical developments have made it necessary to supplement some of its aspects.
69.    Let me add that my country's position on both the situation in the Middle East and the Palestine question was clearly set forth in the statements of my delegation at the seventh emergency special session of the General Assembly3 this year, as well as in the statement of the Argentine Minister for Foreign Affairs in the general debate at the current session of the General Assembly [9th meeting, paras. 65-68].
70.    Mr. ADJOYI (Togo) (interpretation from French): I wish to clarify the position taken by my delegation in the voting on draft resolutions A/35/ L.38/Rev.l to A/35/L.42/Rev.l and Add.l. The delegation of Togo voted in favour of them on the one hand to indicate our country's solidarity with the Palestinian cause and on the other hand to emphasize our interest in seeking a solution to the Palestinian problem. However, the delegation of Togo regrets that the sponsors of those draft resolutions did not see fit to reproduce in them the appropriate provisions of the relevant res****    s adopted by the Security Council.
71.    With reference to the operative part of draft resolution A/35/L.39 and Add.lóparticularly operative paragraph 2 thereof, which expresses the General Assembly's strong opposition to all partial agreements and separate treatiesómy delegation would like to stress that Togo is in favour of all appropriate means of restoring peace to that part of the world, provided that they do not violate the rights of the Palestinian people.
72.    All necessary steps and measures to restore that peace should be pursued so that the Palestinian people may recover its inalienable rights, particularly the right to self-determination, independence and national sovereignty.
73.    Mr. ORTIZ SANZ (Bolivia) (interpretation from Spanish): The delegation of Bolivia, reiterating its support for the cause of the Palestinian people, which seeks the restitution of its inalienable rights, voted in favour  of draft  resolution   A/35/L.40  and   Add.l,
3 Ib., 9th and 10th meetings.
 
96th meetingó15 December 1980    1693
 
A/35/L.41 and Add.l and A/35/L.42/Rev.l and Add.l. However, my delegation abstained from voting on draft resolutions A/35/L.38/Rev.l and A/35/L.39 and Add.l because of the negative tenor of those documents concerning Security Council resolution 242 (1967), the reference to measures relating to Chapter VII of the Charter and the explicit objection to treaties and agreements freely concluded between sovereign States.
74.    Mr. MIZUTANI (Japan): Japan abstained in the separate vote on operative paragraph 13 of draft resolution A/35/L.38/Rev.l. This was due to the fact that we did not receive any instructions on this specific point.
75.    Mr. GUERREIRO (Brazil): The delegation of Brazil voted in favour of draft resolution A/35/L.38/ Rev.l on the question of Palestine. Brazil's positive vote, however, should not be interpreted as an endorsement of all the provisions of all the resolutions mentioned in the preambular portion of the resolution adopted.
76.    Furthermore, the delegation of Brazil abstained in the vote on draft resolution A/35/L.39 and Add. 1 in view of the legal and constitutional implications of the language contained in resolution 34/65 B, which is reaffirmed in that draft resolution and on which we abstained in the voting last year. This stand, however, does not detract from Brazil's position of principle, namely, that the Palestinian people should be assured their inalienable right of return, their right to self-determination and independence in Palestine in accordance with the Charter and the relevant United Nations resolutions, that the PLO should participate in any peace negotiations and that all States in the region are entitled to exist within secure and recognized boundaries.
77.    The PRESIDENT: I now call upon the representative of Jordan, who wishes to speak in exercise of his right of reply.
78.    Mr. NUSEIBEH: (Jordan): I have been told that in my absence the Ambassador of the United States has expressed his objections to what I said this morning in explaining my vote. If only out of sheer curiosity, and in order to sleep comfortably, I feel an irresistible urge to know what my colleague the Ambassador of the United States objected to. I really and honestly do not know.
79.    If there had been any calumnies, although there were none this morning at least, they were between myself and the Ambassador of Israel. Should the ambassador of a super-Power assume the role of an attorney on behalf of a country that has caused untold and unparalleled suffering to three to four million victimized Palestinian people? If this is the role of the Ambassador of the United States is there not an Israeli delegation here that can fend for itself And if that is the case, why does the United States so blatantly unravel its organic association with the usurper and aggressor?
80.    My only guess isóand I am merely guessingóthat I uttered some indisputable truth, and truth can sometimes be bitter. That truth was that over the past three to four years, a major Power has given over $11 billion in direct official aid, in addition to the
 
tax exempt donations that flow into Israelóby devious means, I might add. Even though I had not mentioned the United States by name, the Ambassador has betrayed my tact and compelled me to state that the great country I had in mind, quoting from President Carter himself, was indeed the United States, although this morning I refrained from so much as mentioning the name of that country.
81.    If, on the other hand, the Ambassador was irritated by my critique of the Camp David process with regard to Palestinian rights, I have stated a mere few of the devastating effects of those accords on the fate of the Palestinian people. I did not delve into the full dimension of what those accords mean to three to four million Palestinians. The Palestinian people will never acquiesceóat least not willinglyóin being treated as stateless persons even in their own country, living in reservations like Red Indians. I need hardly explain to a very distinguished ambassador, and a friend, the difference between sovereign independence and self-rule, which in effect reduces the totality of the Palestinian national cause to a municipal affair. As far as the Palestinian people are concerned, the Camp David accords clearly and openly mean permanent occupation. Which country in this hall would accept permanent occupation by a foreign Power? I should like to ask that question. They mean that the judicial system would be subservient to the Israeli occupiers; they mean that legislation would be in the hands of the Israeli occupiers; they mean that even the land and the water that the people drink will be and are under the control of the Israeli occupiers. Even education will be subject to censorship.
82.    I do not want to go into the Camp David accords, for they have been analysed at length by many scholars, but I do deeply regret the intervention of the Ambassador of the United States, who is my respected friend and who has entered unnecessarily into what transpired this morning.
AGENDA ITEM 12 Report of the Economic and Social Council (continued)*
REPORTS OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE
(A/35/714, A/35/741)
AGENDA ITEM 65
Crime prevention and control:
(a)    Capital punishment: report of the Sixth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders;
(b)    Sixth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders;
(c)    Implementation of the conclusions of the Fifth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders: report of the Secretary-General
REPORT OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE (A/35/742)
* Resumed from the 84th meeting.
 
1694    General AssemblyóThirty-fifth SessionóPlenary Meetings
 
AGENDA ITEM 77
Alternative approaches and ways and means within the United Nations system for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms: reports of the Secretary-General
REPORT OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE (A/35/721)
AGENDA ITEM 82
Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment:
(a)    Questionnaire on the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment: report of the Secretary-General;
(b)    Unilateral declarations by Member States against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment: report of the Secretary-General;
(c)    Draft Code of Medical Ethics: report of the Secretary-General;
(d) Draft body of principles for the protection of all persons under any form of detention or imprisonment: report of the Secretary-General
REPORT OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE (A/35/743)
83.    Miss OBAFEMI (Nigeria), Rapporteur of the Third Committee: I have the honour this afternoon to present five reports of the Third Committee on agenda items 12, 65, 77 and 82.
84.    The Third Committee discussed certain chapters of the report of the Economic and Social Council pertaining to specific cases of providing assistance to refugees. The report on those chapters [A/351714] gives a summary of the Third Committee's proceedings during the nine meetings at which the chapters were discussed. In paragraph 34 of that report, the Third Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of five draft resolutions: draft resolution I, entitled "Assistance to refugees in Somalia"; draft resolution II, entitled "Situation of refugees in the Sudan", resolution III, entitled "Humanitarian assistance to the refugees of Djibouti"; draft resolution IV, entitled "Assistance to displaced persons in Ethiopia"; and draft resolution V, "Assistance to student refugees in southern Africa". The five draft resolutions were adopted in the Third Committee without a vote.
85.    As regards agenda item 77," the Third Committee adopted three draft resolutions, which are contained in paragraph 28 of the report on this item [A/351721]. Draft resolution I, adopted by a recorded vote, and draft resolutions II and III, adopted without a vote, are recommended for adoption by the Assembly.
86.    The Third Committee discussed the remaining chapters under agenda item 12 at 21 of its meetings, these constituting one of the most important items on the Committee's agenda. Under this item the Committee focused its discussion mainly on human rights topics. In addition, it discussed narcotic drugs and exchange of information on banned hazardous chemicals and unsafe pharmaceutical products. The
 
Committee recommends that the Assembly adopt 16 draft resolutions, which are contained in paragraph 92 of its report on these chapters [A/35/741].
87.    The Committee adopted draft resolution XII entitled "International co-operation in drug abuse control" without a vote. It adopted draft resolution II entitled "Exchange of information on banned hazardous chemicals and unsafe pharmaceutical products", by a recorded vote.
88.    The Committee established an open-ended working group on the drafting of an international convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and their families. In that regard, the Committee adopted without a vote draft resolution XV, in which it is recommended that the working group hold an intersessional meeting of two weeks' duration in New York in May 1981 and that it meet again during the thirty-sixth session of the General Assembly in order to continue its work on the elaboration of an international convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and their families. The Committee also established an open-ended working group to consider the questions of the human rights of individuals who are not citizens of the country in which they live and of the draft body of principles for the protection of all persons under any form of detention or imprisonment.
89.    With regard to the question of the human rights of non-citizens, the Committee adopted without a vote draft resolution XVI, by which it is decided to establish, at the thirty-sixth session of the General Assembly, an open-ended working group for the purpose of concluding the elaboration of the draft declaration on the human rights of individuals who are not citizens of the country in which they live.
90.    Concerning human rights, the Comminee adopted 12 draft resolutions. Draft resolution I, entitled "Human rights in Bolivia", was adopted by a recorded vote. Draft resolution III, entitled "Refugee and displaced children", was adopted without a vote. Draft resolution IV, entitled "Protection of human rights in Chile", was adopted by a recorded vote. Draft resolution V, entitled "Protection of human rights of certain categories of prisoners", was adopted without a vote. Draft resolution VI, entitled "Voluntary Fund of the United Nations for victims of gross and flagrant violations of human rights", was adopted by a recorded vote. Draft resolution VII, entitled "The right to education", was adopted without a vote. Draft resolution VIII, entitled "Measures to be taken against nazi, fascist and neo-fascist activities and all other forms of totalitarian ideologies and practices based on racial intolerance, hatred and terror", was adopted by a recorded vote. Draft resolution IX, entitled "Situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms in El Salvador", was adopted by a recorded vote. Draft resolution X entitled "Question of involuntary or enforced disappearances", was adopted without a vote. Draft resolution XI, entitled "Question of the redesignation of the Division of Human Rights as a Centre for Human Rights", was adopted without a vote.
91.    At this juncture, I should like to draw the Assembly's ****** to a correction relating to draft resolution XI. ********  paragraphs I and 2 are to be
 
96th meetingó15 December 1980    1695
 
deleted, and are to be replaced by the following words:
"Requests the Secretary-General to keep this question under consideration with the view to redesignating the Division of Human Rights as a Centre for Human Rights when he deems it appropriate, taking into account the views expressed by Member States at the thirty-fifth session of the General Assembly".
92.    Draft resolution XIII, entitled "Mass exoduses", was adopted without a vote. Draft resolution XIV, entitled "Regional, national and local arrangements for the promotion and protection of human rights", was adopted without a vote.
93.    The Committee also had before it a draft resolution entitled "Good offices of the Secretary-General in cases of human rights violations". The Committee held a debate on that subject and then decided not to take action on the draft resolution.
94.    The report on agenda item 65 [A/351742] gives a summary of the proceedings at the seven meetings at which the Committee considered the item jointly with item 82.
95.    The Committee entertained a debate on a draft resolution entitled "Capital punishment" and decided not to take any action on the draft resolution while awaiting the conclusions of the Sixth Committee on the subject.
96.    Four draft resolutions relating to item 65 were adopted by the Committee. Draft resolutions I, II, and III were adopted without a vote. Draft resolution IV was adopted by acclamation. The texts of the four draft resolutions are to be found in paragraph 30 of the report. The Committee also adopted without a vote the draft decision in paragraph 31. The draft resolutions and the draft decision are recommended for adoption by the Assembly.
97.    The report on agenda item 82 [A/35/743] reflects the proceedings during the seven meetings at which the item was discussed jointly with item 65.
98.    The Committee established an open-ended working group to consider the question of the human rights of individuals who are not citizens of the country in which they live, and of the draft body of principles for the protection of all persons under any form of detention or imprisonment.
99.    The Committee adopted draft resolution I in which the Assembly would decide to establish at the thirty-sixth session a working group with the intention of concluding the consideration of the draft body of principles for the protection of all persons under any form of detention or imprisonment, with a view to its adoption by the General Assembly.

100.    The Committee adopted two other draft resolutions on item 82. In paragraph 24 of the report are to be found the three draft resolutions which the Third Committee adopted without a vote and which it recommends for adoption by the General Assembly.
101.    Since this will be the last time that I shall address the Assembly as Rapporteur of the Third Committee, I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to express my sincere gratitude and thanks to the group of African States for my nomina-
 
tion and to the members of the Third Committee for my election.
102.    I should also like to express my thanks and appreciation to all the officials of the Committee, in
particular to Mrs. Pilar Santanden-Downing, secretary of the Committee, Mr. Guennadi Lebakine and
Mr. Hamid Gaham, with whom I had the privilege and good fortune to work closely, and with whose
help and dedication we were able to produce the reports now before the Assembly. My thanks also go to the members of the Division of Human Rights, the
conference officers and the documents officers.
Pursuant to rule 66 of the rules of procedure, it was decided not to discuss the reports of the Third Committee.
103.    The PRESIDENT: Statements will be limited to explanations of vote.
104.    The positions of delegations regarding the various recommendations of the Third Committee have, as members know, been made clear in the Committee and are reflected in the relevant official records.
105.    May I once again remind members that, by decision 34/401, the General Assembly agreed that when the same draft resolution is considered in a Main Committee and in plenary meeting, a delegation should, as far as possible, explain its vote only once, that is, either in the Committee or in plenary meeting, unless that delegation's vote is different in the plenary meeting from its vote in the Committee.
106.    May I also remind members that, in accordance with the same decision, explanations of vote should not exceed 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.
107.    I now invite members to turn their attention to the report of the Third Committee on agenda item 65, entitled "Crime prevention and control".
108.    The Assembly will now take a decision on the four draft resolutions and the draft decision recommended by the Third Commitiee in paragraphs 30 and 31 of its report [A/351742].
109.    Draft resolution I is entitled "Code of conduct for law enforcement officials". The Third Committee adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 35/170).
110.    The PRESIDENT: Now we turn to draft resolution II, entitled "report of the Sixth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders". The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution is contained in document A/35/768.
111.    The Committee adopted draft resolution II without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to follow its example?
Draft resolution II was adopted (resolution 35/171).
112.    The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution III is entitled "Arbitrary or Summary executions". The Third Committee it without a vote. May I consider
 
1696    General AssemblyóThirty-fifth SessionóPlenary Meetings
 
that the General Assembly wishes, as in the previous cases, to do the same?
Draft resolution III was adopted (resolution 35/172).
113.    The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution IV is entitled "Expression of appreciation to the Govern
ment and people of Venezuela on the occasion of the Sixth United Nations Congress on the Prevention
of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders". May I take it that the General Assembly also adopts draft
resolution IV?
Draft resolution IV was adopted (resolution 35/173).
114.    The PRESIDENT: We now come to the draft decision entitled "Capital punishment" recommended
by the Third Committee in paragraph 31 of its report. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to
adopt it also?
The draft decision was adopted (decision 35/437).
115.    The PRESIDENT: The General Assembly will now consider the report of the Third Committee on agenda item 77 [A/35/721] and take a decision on the three draft resolutions entitled "Alternative approaches and ways and means within the United Nations system for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms", recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 28 of its report.
116.    We come to draft resolution I. The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution is contained in document A/35/744. A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, india, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: United States of America.
 
Abstaining: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Fiji, Finland, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Guatemala, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Malawi, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Draft resolution I was adopted by 120 votes to I, with 26 abstentions (resolution 35/174).
117.    The PRESIDENT: The Third Committee adopted draft resolution II without a vote. May
I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution II was adopted (resolution 35/175).
118.    The PRESIDENT: Now we turn to draft resolution III. Here again, the Third Committee adopted
draft resolution III without a vote. I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same.
Draft resolution III was adopted (resolution 35/176).
119.    The PRESIDENT: We have two requests for explanations of vote after the vote on that item. I call first on the representative of Turkey.
120.    Mr. KIRCA (Turkey) (interpretation from French): The Turkish delegation has just voted in favour of draft resolution I. This vote is the consequence of the support which Turkey gives to the ideal of the new international economic order. Nevertheless, the Turkish delegation believes that the text of this resolution is not sufficiently well-balanced.
121.    The Turkish delegation would particularly have liked the fifth preambular paragraph and operative paragraph 3 to have brought out more clearly the basis of the classic theory of human rights according to which these inalienable rights are inherent to human nature and exist and can be enjoyed independently of any other factor.
122.    While we subscribe to the view that the exercise of fundamental human rights can be greatly facilitated by economic well-being and social justice, the Turkish delegation believes that these factors are neither the determining cause of or the sine qua non for the existence of these rights.
123.    Economic and social rights, the importance of which should naturally be fully recognized, far from eclipsing the intrinsic value of fundamental human rights, which, in particular, ensure the preservation of individual liberties and guarantee the participation of citizens in the political decision-making process, are complementary to the exercise of these latter rights. In the opinion of the Turkish delegation, that key idea has not been properly expressed in the wording of the text.
124.    Mr. RIGIN (Indonesia): The Indonesian delegation has joined the consensus on draft resolution III. However, had this draft resolution been put to the vote, my delegation would have abstained.
125.    The PRESIDENT: We now turn to the report of the Third Committee on agenda item 82 [A/35/743].
126.    The Assembly will take a decision on the three draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 24 of its report, all three of which were adopted without a vote.
 
96th meetingó15 December 1980    1697
 
127.    First, we shall consider draft resolution I, entitled "Draft body of principles for the protection
of all persons under any form of detention or imprisonment". The report of the Fifth Committee on the
administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution is contained in document A/35/717. May
I consider that the General Assembly wishes to adopt draft resolution I?
Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 35/177).
128.    The PRESIDENT: Next we turn to draft resolution II, entitled: "Torture and other cruel, inhuman
or degrading treatment or punishment". This text was adopted without a vote. May I take it that the General
Assembly wishes to follow that example?
Draft resolution II was adopted (resolution 35/178).
129.    The PRESIDENT: We now come to draft resolution III, entitled: "draft Code of Medical Ethics".
May I consider once again that the General Assembly wishes to follow the example of the Third Committee
in adopting this draft resolution without a vote?
Draft resolution III was adopted (resolution 35/179).
130.    The PRESIDENT: I propose that we now consider the report contained in document A/35/714 which deals with chapters of the report of the Economic and Social Council pertaining to the questions of assistance to refugees. In this connexion I shall invite representatives to speak in explanation of vote before the vote on the five draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee, taken together.
131.    Representatives will also be given an opportunity to explain their vote after all the votes on item 12 have been taken. This is the procedure which we shall also follow for the  report  in  document
A/35/741.
132.    The Assembly will now take a decision on the five draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 34 of its report [A/35/714].
133.    The Committee adopted draft resolution I, entitled "Assistance to refugees in Somalia" without objection. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution 1 was adopted (resolution 35/180).
134.    The PRESIDENT: We now turn to draft resolution II, entitled "Situation of refugees in the Sudan".
The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution is
contained in document A/35/769. The Third Committee adopted draft resolution II without objection. May
I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution II was adopted (resolution 35/181).
135.    The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution III is entitled "Humanitarian assistance to the refugees of Djibouti".
The Committee adopted that draft resolution without objection. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to
do likewise?
Draft resolution III was adopted (resolution 35/182).
136.    The PRESIDENT: We now turn to draft resolution IV, entitled "Assistance to displaced persons in
Ethiopia". The Committee also adopted that draft
 
resolution without objection. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution IV was adopted (resolution 35/183).
137.    The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution V is entitled "Assistance to student refugees in southern Africa".
The Committee also adopted that draft resolution without objection. May I take it that the Assembly
wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution V was adopted (resolution 35/184).
138.    The PRESIDENT: I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their vote after the vote.
139.    Mr. DERESSA (Ethiopia): In explaining my delegation's vote on draft resolution I which the Assembly has just adopted I should like to state the following for the record.
140.    Ethiopia has no reservations whatsoever on humanitarian assistance to the people of any country, least of all to those of the Somali Democratic Republic, a people with whom, despite everything else, Ethiopians share a common African heritage, tradition, history and ties of kinship. It was in this spirit of brotherhood and humanitarian concern for the people of Somalia that my delegation refrained from opposing the consensus that emerged in the Third Committee on the question of humanitarian assistance to the people of Somalia. This gesture of goodwill on our part should not, however, be mistaken for an endorsement of the underlying implications and political motives behind the resolution which the Assembly has just adopted.
141.    We have on several occasions put before the relevant organs of the United Nations our views about the so-called refugees in Somalia and therefore I shall not take the time of this Assembly by repeating facts that are well documented.
142.    Despite my Government's repeated calls on the United Nations to verify the number, the status and the national origin of the so-called refugees, appropriate and comprehensive registration procedures have yet to be instituted to monitor and verify the figures given for the number of refugees as well as the status claimed for them. My delegation therefore is left with no alternative but to state for the record once again its most serious reservations on the number and nationality of the people on whose behalf aid is sought in the resolution referred to.
143.    In view of this Ethiopian delegation has no choice but to disassociate itself from the resolution entitled "Assistance to refugees in Somalia".
144.    Mr. ADAN (Somalia): We are in favour of assistance and relief aid being rendered to people in need throughout the world, be they refugees or categorized by any other name. It was in that spirit that in the Third Committee we did not raise any objection to draft resolution IV, entitled "Assistance to displaced persons in Ethiopia". Our silence did not mean that we acquiesced to the presence in Ethiopia of so-called displaced persons. No statistics have so far been provided by the United Nations authorities concerned and therefore we cannot accept the figures given for these so-called displaced persons or even their existence in that country.
 
1698    General AssemblyóThirty-fifth SessionóPlenary Meetings
 
145.    My Government therefore disassociates itself from this so-called resolution entitled "Assistance to displaced persons in Ethiopia". If we did not speak on this in "the Third Committee, it was out of deference to African solidarity and to the desire not to block aid to any genuine and certified persons who may be in need, be they in Ethiopia or elsewhere in the world.
146.    Mr. ABDALLA (Sudan) (interpretation from Arabic): The General Assembly has unanimously adopted draft resolution II concerning the situation of refugees in the Sudan. I am happy, on behalf of my delegation, to express our gratitude and appreciation to Member States for adopting that humanitarian draft resolution unanimously. I am also happy to express my thanks and appreciation to the delegations which sponsored that draft resolution in the Third Committee. We would ask the representatives of those delegations to convey our thanks to their respective Governments.
147.    We should like to reaffirm our gratitude to Member States, as well as to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the relevant governmental and non-governmental organizations, for the assistance given to refugees in the Sudan. In view of the deterioration of the situation of refugees and their growing numbers in the Sudan we appeal to all those bodies to increase their assistance and to reinforce the efforts made by the Sudan by providing the necessary services for the refugees.
148.    My delegation requests the Secretary-General to take as a matter of urgency the steps necessary to implement this resolution, in particular by sending missions to undertake studies with a view to strengthening adequately the capacity of the Government of the Sudan to enable it to apply the resolution and assist all the refugees who are now in the Sudan. We hope that outstanding personalities will be members of those missions and we request that specialized agencies also be represented at a high level.
149.    The PRESIDENT: We now turn to the report of the Third Committee in document A/35/741, in paragraph 92 of which the Committee recommends the adoption of 16 draft resolutions, on which the General Assembly will now take a decision. I call on those Members who wish to explain their vote before the vote.
150.    Mr. ORTIZ SANZ (Bolivia) (interpretation from Spanish): When the Third Committee considered agenda item 12 at its 62nd meeting, my delegation supplied the following information. Last July, to prevent the occupation of the country by international extremism posing as electoral groups, the armed forces of Bolivia took over the reins of government. That change, supported by the overwhelming majority of the people, was made without bloodshed and without difficulty. On seeing its designs thwarted, and using human rights as a pretext, international extremism, through the proverbial willing dupes, unleashed a campaign of slander against Bolivia. Those in imperialist circles who seek to impose on Latin America a pseudo-democratic servitude in the Monroe manner joined the campaign of slander against Bolivia through their second-class ambassadors and, at the same time, imposed an unprecedented political and economic blockade against Bolivia in a manner expressly con-
 
demned by General Assembly resolution 31/91. That twofold campaign of slander, although based on falsehoods, as was demonstrated by our delegation with incontrovertible examples, seriously damaged Bolivia's international image. In order to defend the reputation of Bolivia and in a spontaneous manifestation of respect for this world Organization, the President of the Republic of Bolivia invited the Commission on Human Rights to visit Bolivia and ascertain on the spot the falsehood of such accusations.
151.    Our delegation stated at that point that any debate on the subject prior to the Commission's visit and the resulting report would prejudge the issue and that we would therefore not participate in any debate. We further stated that should the issue be thus prejudged our Government would be free to review its position concerning the invitation extended to the Commission on Human Rights.
152.    At the 79th meeting of the Third Committee we added that as from 21 November last not a single political prisoner remained in Bolivia; that the last 36 detainees had been placed at the disposal of the Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration and that they were leaving Bolivia with full guarantees and with the assistance of that international agency.
153.    I should like to add today that on 22 November a Committee of Amnesty Internationalómade up of a British representative and a representative from the Federal Republic of Germany and presided over by Admiral Sanguinetti, who is retired from the French Navyóarrived in Bolivia, where it freely investigated every aspect of the situation concerning human rights over a period of three weeks.
154.    In spite of this open, objective and praiseworthy position of Bolivia, the Netherlandsóa bourgeois trading nation whose record as a colonial Power was not very distinguished in the field of human rightsó submitted to the Third Committee a document which, after having been considered without the participation of Bolivia, now comes to this plenary meeting with 8 votes cast against it and 50 abstentions. That document does not worry us, but it does call for some comment on our part.
155.    A few days ago, on 10 December, you, Mr. President, spoke to us in this very hall of the many millions of human beings who are denied their fundamental human rights, of the tens of thousands of complaints that are formulated annually in that respect. It is strange that, in spite of those disquieting and overwhelming antecedents, the General Assembly of all the peoples of the earth should only find guilty and cast anathema on three small nations of Latin America, one of which is Bolivia.
156.    This is encouraging. The situation concerning human rights throughout the world must be very good if the General Assembly has time to sit in judgement on the small Republic of Bolivia, where not a single prisoner remains, to which the Commission on Human Rights has been invited and to which the International Committee of the Red Cross, a delegation from Amnesty International, the representatives of the Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration and all the correspondents of the world's press who
 
96th meetingó15 December 1980    1699
 
wished to go have been freely admitted, even if only to tell lies and slander my country later.
157.    We see, and I hope this is true, that there are no longer any psychiatric clinics for dissidents, nor summary executions by fundamentalists, nor rafts sinking under the weight of millions of refugees in the China Sea, nor areas of Africa where entire populations die because of the lack of that fundamental human right called a crust of bread, nor millions of illegal immigrants bought and sold as slaves on the black market of cheap labour in the most prosperous Power on earth.
158.    We believe that in all this there is a double standard: that the powerful nations which inherited the gifts and duties of the great Graeco-Roman tradition, as well as the other powerful nations which advocate human emancipation through socialism, accuse and condemn small countries of violations of human rights to sooth their guilty consciences while, at the same time, they remain silent about the great genocide perpetrated by hunger, about massacres committed by men in uniform and about the multi-million-dollar arms trade. Let each live with his conscience and his vote.
159.    One final reflection with regard to the effects of this vote. Soon, when slander has faded and the truth is known, the people and Government of Bolivia will emerge with an unsullied reputation. The blot that can never be washed away is that of the adoption by the General Assembly of the United Nations of a wrongful, unjust resolution even before having listened to the party concernedóand I repeat, before having listened to the party concerned.
160.    The PRESIDENT: The Assembly will now proceed to take decisions on the draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 92 of its report [A/351741].
161.    I shall first put to the vote draft resolution I, entitled "Human rights in Bolivia". A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Australia, Austria, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Congo, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Kenya, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Spain, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Upper Volta, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yugoslavia. Zambia, Zimbabwe.
 
Against: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Comoros, Guatemala, Paraguay, Philippines, Uruguay.
Abstaining: Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Botswana, Burma, Burundi, Colombia, Costa Rica, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Gabon, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Israel, Ivory Coast, Japan, Jordan, Lesotho, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Papua New Guinea, Qatar, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, Yemen, Zaire.
Draft resolution I was adopted by 83 votes to 9, with 47 abstentions (resolution 35/185).
162.    The PRESIDENT: We now turn to draft resolution II, entitled "Exchange of information on banned hazardous chemicals and unsafe pharmaceutical products". The administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution are contained in the report of the Fifth Committee [A/35/769],
163.    A separate recorded vote has been requested on operative paragraph 2 of this draft resolution.
A recorded vote was taken.
In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada,4 Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: None.
Abstaining: Australia, Belgium, Burma, Denmark, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America.
4 The delegation of Canada subsequently informed the Secretariat that it wishes to have its vote recorded as an abstention.
 
1700    General AssemblyóThirty-fifth SessionóPlenary Meetings
 
Operative paragraph 2 of draft resolution II was adopted by 121 votes to none, with 20 abstentions.
164.    The PRESIDENT: We shall now proceed to a recorded vote on draft resolution II as a whole. I call on the representative of Belgium, to speak on a point of order.
165.    Mr. VERKERCKE (Belgium) [interpretation from French]: After consultations with the delegations concerned, my delegation has reached the conclusion that perhaps it will not be necessary to take a recorded vote here in the General Assembly on draft resolution II.
166.    The PRESIDENT: Members of the Assembly have heard the proposal by the representative of Belgium to move to the adoption of draft resolution II without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to act in accordance with that proposal?
Draft resolution II as a whole was adopted (resolution 35/186).
167.    The PRESIDENT: We shall now turn to draft resolution III, entitled "Refugee and displaced chil
dren", which was adopted by the Third Committee without a vote. May I take it that the General As
sembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution III was adopted (resolution 35/187).
168.    The PRESIDENT: The Assembly will now vote on draft resolution IV, entitled "Protection of human
rights in Chile". A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Bulgaria, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Congo, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Finland, France Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, India, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Spain, Sri, Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Upper Volta, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Guatemala, Lebanon, Paraguay, Uruguay.
Abstaining: Bahamas, Burma, Colombia, Comoros, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Gabon, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Israel, Ivory Coast, Japan, Jordan, Lesotho, Malawi, Malaysia, Morocco, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru,
 
Philippines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Somalia, Suriname, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Zaire.
Draft resolution IV was adopted by 95 votes to 8, with 39 abstentions (resolution 35/188).5
169.    The PRESIDENT: The Assembly will now proceed to draft resolution V, entitled "Protection of
human rights of certain categories of prisoners", which was adopted by the Third Committee without a vote.
May I consider that the Assembly also wishes to adopt that draft resolution without a vote?
Draft resolution V was adopted (resolution 35/189).
170.    The PRESIDENT: The Assembly will now vote on draft resolution VI, entitled "Voluntary Fund of
the United Nations for victims of gross and flagrant violations of human rights". A recorded vote has been
requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
In favour: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Botswana, Canada, Central African Republic, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Luxembourg, Mauritius, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Portugal, Rwanda, Samoa, Spain, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Upper Volta, Venezuela, Zambia.
Against: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Congo, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Ethiopia, German Democratic Republic, Grenada, Hungary, India, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Niger, Pakistan, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Syrian Arab Republic, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Republic of Cameroon, Uruguay, Viet Nam, Yugoslavia, Zimbabwe.
Abstaining: Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Burma, Burundi, Cape Verde, Comoros, Egypt, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Liberia, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mexico, Morocco, Nepal, Nigeria, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Thailand, Tunisia, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Yemen, Zaire.
Draft resolution VI was adopted by 57 votes to 39, with 46 abstentions (resolution 35/190).
171.    The PRESIDENT: The Third Committee
adopted draft resolution VII, entitled "The right to
5 The delegation of Ghana subsequently informed the Secretariat it wished to have its vote recorded as having been in favour of the draft resolution.
 
96th meetingó15 December 1980    1701
 
education", without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution VII was adopted (resolution 35/191).
172.    The PRESIDENT: I invite members to turn their attention to draft resolution VIII, entitled "Measures to be taken against Nazi, Fascist and neo-Fascist activities and all other forms of totalitarian ideologies and practices based on racial intolerance, hatred and terror".
173.    I call on the representative of the Netherlands on a point of order.
174.    Mr. WALKATE (Netherlands): I should like to draw the attention of our colleagues to operative paragraph 2, which should read as follows:
"Urges all States to give due consideration to implementing the provisions laid down in General Assembly resolution 2839 (XXVI) in accordance with the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and especially to taking the necessary measures against activities...".
175.    I should also like to draw attention to the French version of the title and the ninth and tenth preambular paragraphs, which contain the words "Pintolerance raciale, la haine et la terreur".
176.    The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of Morocco on a point of order.
177.    Mrs. WARZAZI (Morocco) [interpretation from French[: Since I am working in French, I would like to support what has just been said by the representative of the Netherlands and my delegation will vote accordingly, in the case of the title and the paragraphs referred to, on the wording "Pintolerance raciale, la haine et la terreur".
178.    The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic on a point of order.
179.    Mr. OZADOVSKY (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) [interpretation from Russian]: As far as my delegation recalls, the matter raised by the representative of the Netherlands in the statement he just made did not in fact arise in the Third Committee.
180.    It does not appear to be a question of grammar. What is being proposed would affect the content of operative paragraph 2, which "urges all States to give due consideration to implementing the provisions laid down in" the previous General Assembly resolution on this item and "to take the necessary measures against activities of groups and organizations"óthose referred to in this draft resolution.
181.    That is why, in our view, the draft resolution should be adopted at this meeting of the General Assembly in the form it was adopted in the Third Committee.
182.    The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of Morocco on a point of order.
183.    Mrs. WARZAZI (Morocco) [interpretation from French]: I continue to insist on the wording of the title of the draft resolution and also in the ninth and tenth preambular paragraphs.
184.    In the Third Committee we voted on an oral amendment which had been introduced by the repre-
 
sentative of Madagascar. That amendment was noted frequently, and it referred to "Pin tolerance raciale, la haine et la terreur".
185.    I therefore maintain what I said previously. I was not referring to operative paragraph 2 but to the Malagasy amendment, which was accepted by the sponsors and in favour of which I voted in the Third Committee.
186.    The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of the United States on a point of order.
187.    Ms. ATKINS (United States of America): With regard to operative paragraph 2, we should like to support the statement by the representative of the Netherlands. We had made that change in the Third Committee, as the summary records will show.
188.    So I should like to emphasize that the statement of the representative of the Netherlands is correct, since the United States delegation had made that change in the Third Committee.
189.    The PRESIDENT: I wonder whether the Assembly is ready to vote on this draft resolution.
190.    Mr. O'DONOVAN (Ireland): I can only agree that the translators are under great pressure at the present time because of the number of draft resolutions coming to the Assembly, which need to be translated and prepared for us. I agree also with the representative of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic that we should, of course, adopt the text as it was adopted by the Third Committee. It seems to my delegation that the wording read out by the representative of the Netherlands is the one adopted by that Committee, and I feel confident that if the tapes of the discussions in the Committee are checked, this will be seen to be the case.
191.    It seems important to my delegation that we should adopt the text as adopted by the Third Committee and that we should be quite clear as to what we are doing. It might perhaps be desirable to defer action on this draft resolution by the Assembly to a later date and to proceed with other work in order to allow the tapes of the Third Committee to be checked.
192.    The PRESIDENT: I thank the representative of Ireland for his suggestion, which I would have made if he had not, unless the Assembly can agree here and now on the warding of the text we are voting on. I think that in view of the lack of clarity that seems to remain it might indeed be useful to defer the vote on draft resolution VIII until tomorrow, for instance, when the records have been checked.
193.    Mr. GONZALEZ de LEON (Mexico) [interpretation from Spanish]: My delegation feels that the wording read out brings this draft resolution into line with the text which was adopted by the Third Committee.
194.    The PRESIDENT: I think all representatives will agree with me that apparently the recollections of what transpired in the Committee when this particular draft resolution was adopted differ, and I would not wish to recommend to the Assembly that it adopt or even vote on something (hat is not entirely clear.
195.    My recommendation, therefore, would be that we proceed, as the representative of Ireland has suggested, to draft resolution IX and ask those who were
 
1702    General AssemblyóThirty-fifth SessionóPlenary Meetings
 
either sponsors or in any other way involved in the adoption of draft resolution VIII by the Third Committee, with the help of the Committee Chairman, the Rapporteur, the secretariat of the Committee and if need be the tapes, to go back and try to find out what should be presented to the General Assembly to vote upon. The vote on draft resolution VIII could very well be taken tomorrow. If I hear no objection to that procedure, we shall now go on to draft resolution IX.
It was so decided.
196.    The PRESIDENT: The Assembly will now vote on draft resolution IX, entitled "Situation of human
rights and fundamental freedoms in El Salvador". A recorded vote has been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Australia, Austria, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, Cape Verde, Congo, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Finland, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, India, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Jamaica, Kenya, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Mozambique, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Poland, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Viet Nam, Yugoslavia, Zambia.
Against: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Morocco, Paraguay, Philippines, Uruguay.
Abstaining: Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Botswana, Burma, Burundi, Central African Republic, Comoros, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, France, Gabon, Ghana,5 Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Jordan, Lesotho, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Nepal, Niger, Oman, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Portugal, Qatar, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United States of America, Venezuela, Zaire.
Draft resolution IX was adopted by 70 votes to 12, with 55 abstentions (resolution 35/192).
197.    The PRESIDENT: The Third Committee adopted without a vote draft resolution X, entitled
"Question of involuntary or enforced disappearances". May I take it that the Assembly wishes to
do the same?
Draft resolution X was adopted (resolution 35/193).
198.    The PRESIDENT: The Third Committee also adopted draft resolution XI without a vote. It is
entitled "Question of the redesignation of the Division
 
of Human Rights as a Centre for Human Rights". May I consider that the Assembly also wishes to adopt draft resolution XI without a vote?
Draft resolution XI was adopted (resolution 35/194).
199.    The PRESIDENT: Similarly, draft resolution XII, "International co-operation in drug abuse control", was adopted without a vote in the Third Committee. May I take it that the Assembly wishes
to follow the example of its Third Committee?
Draft resolution XII was adopted (resolution 35/195).
200.    The PRESIDENT: We come now to draft resolution XIII, entitled "Mass exoduses", which was
also adopted in the Third Committee without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to follow the
example of the Third Committee?
Draft resolution XIII was adopted (resolution 35/196).
201.    The PRESIDENT: Now we come to draft resolution XIV, entitled "Regional, national and local
arrangements for the promotion and protection of human rights". The administrative and financial
implications of this draft resolution are contained in the report of the Fifth Committee [A/351769]. The Third
Committee adopted draft resolution XIV without a vote. May I assume that the Assembly wishes to follow
that example?
Draft resolution XIV was adopted (resolution 35/197).
202.    The PRESIDENT: We turn now to draft resolution XV, entitled "Measures to improve the situation
and ensure the human rights and dignity of all migrant workers". The administrative and financial implica
tions of this draft resolution are contained in the report of the Fifth Committee [ibid.] A recorded vote has
been requested.
A recorded vote was taken.
In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Mada-gascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand,   Togo,   Trinidad   and   Tobago,   Tunisia,
 
96th meetingó15 December 1980    1703
 
Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia.
Against: None.
Abstaining: Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America.
Draft resolution XV was adopted by 131 votes to none, with II abstentions (resolution 35/198).6
203.    The PRESIDENT: Finally, I put before the Assembly draft resolution XVI entitled "Question of
the international legal protection of the human rights of individuals who are not citizens of the country in
which they live". The administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution are contained in of
the report of the Fifth Committee [ibid.]. The Third Committee adopted draft resolution XVI without a
vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
Draft resolution XVI was adopted (resolution 35/199).
204.    The PRESIDENT: I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their votes.
205.    Mr. DIEZ (Chile) (interpretation from Spanish): The resolution just adopted by the General Assembly in connexion with the situation of human rights in Chile is unjust, selective and discriminatory. In addition, it openly violates the principle of nonintervention in the internal affairs of a State enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations.
206.    Although the resolution has not succeeded in casting doubts on the integrity of the electoral process itself and the honesty of its results, it meddles in the plebiscite whereby the people of Chile freely and over-whelmingly adopted their new constitution, thus intervening quite obviously in the internal affairs of a State. No question is more inherent to the sovereignty of a State than the determination of its own institutional system.
207.    The Government of Chile not only rejects that resolution, it likewise rejects the judgements voiced by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of a European continental monarchy who, from this rostrum, referred to some of the provisions of the new Chilean constitution as if a sovereign State had to rely on the opinions, advice, methods and practices of European monarchies to establish the guidelines of its constitutional re-publican regime. That is certainly not the case of Chile, the three constitutions whose history have faithfully obeyed the requirements, customs and democratic virtues of its people.
208.    By Sacrifice and effort, Chile is emerging from the anarchy into which it was plunged by a government obedient to Soviet hegemonism and is endeavoring to build up its institutions in conformity with
6 The delegation of Colombia subsequently informed the Secretariat that it wiahed to have its vote recorded as having been in favour of the draft resolution.
 
its own values and traditions. We shall continue unflinchingly along that course, and the Government will continue to exercise its authority subject to the law. We are well aware that our obligation consists in finding a just balance between freedom and the legitimate exercise of authority. To that end we Chileans have given ourselves, freely and in all sovereignty, a constitutional regime that is ours alone and does not nor ever will bow to the pressures of other interests.
209.    The resolution just adopted also violates the principle of co-operation established as a basic norm of our Organization. The selective and discriminatory treatment that the majority in this General Assembly has attempted to apply to my countryótreatment we can qualify as ludicrous when we see what is taking place in other countries of the world, particularly in several that have voted in favour of this resolutionó has had the paradoxical effect that the only State that has given full co-operation to the United Nations, even permitting the entry into its territory of an ad hoc working group, should today be prevented from giving that collaboration. Such has been the sad result provoked by the continued violation by the United Nations of the generally accepted basic principles of international law.
210.    My delegation wishes to place on record in the General Assembly that some of the countries that most enthusiastically supported the resolution against Chile and the maintenance of selective and discriminatory procedures are the same countries that encourage terrorist criminal activities through radio broadcasts and publications.
211.    We wish emphatically to state that Chile will apply the strict letter of justice and the law against those practising terrorism. No Government worthy of the name can disregard the harmful consequences of weakness in that area, which can lead to uncontrollable and bloody situations such as those we daily deplore in other latitudes.
212.    We also reject the resolution in question because it would permit the maintenance of the ad hoc entity, the so-called Special Rapporteur, which my country does not accept because it runs counter to the existing United Nations norms on the subject. We are not prepared to assume responsibility for setting a precedent with such useless and nefarious consequences.
213.    The delegation of Chile is pleased to note that in the debate this year serious countries announced their readiness to put an end to these discriminatory and special procedures, and we hope that such statements will influence the Commission on Human Rights. We find another encouraging symptom of the newly-emerging will to correct erroneous procedures, and to treat countries with justice, in the initiative of a group of States to put an end to the singling out of Chile in a United Nations trust fund. The result of the vote on that initiative, given the representative nature of the countries that supported it, is a further demonstration of that will to put an end to the unjust procedures to which my country has been subjected.
214.    May I therefore be permitted to express the satisfaction  of the  Chilean  delegation,  which  has
 
1704    General AssemblyóThirty-fifth SessionóPlenary Meetings
 
consistently maintained in international bodies a position identical to the one we have just stated, at the understanding it is finding in countries whose views are generally appreciated and respected by Chilean public opinion.
215.    In conclusion, we should like once again to reiterate our clear and unchanging legal position, which consists in not recognizing any ad hoc or special procedures. We shall not co-operate with them, nor shall we co-operate with the general procedures as long as ad casum and special procedures continue to exist. This leads us to state that Chile will not participate in the next session of the Commission on Human Rights and thus will not send an observer delegation. Similarly, we are prevented from cooperating with the Human Rights Committee established under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, of which the so-called Special Rapporteur for Chile is a member, a fact that, as far as we are concerned, flaws the composition of that Committee.
216.    When the majority in the General Assembly and that in the Commission on Human Rights once again apply the existing general procedures without any exceptions or discrimination, Chile will lend its co-operation as it did in the past.
217.    The permanent intention of promoting and respecting human rights must have as its essential characteristics seriousness, depoliticization and a true concern for mankind; it cannot be a means or protext for carrying out campaigns of ideological aggression.
218.    Ms. ATKINS (United States of America): My delegation would like to make reference to draft resolution IX. I would state briefly that, since the United States delegation cast its vote in the Third Committee on the draft resolution dealing with human rights in El Salvador, the brutal murder of four American citizens in El Salvador has reinforced my Government's profound concern about the level of violence and death in that country.
219.    A special presidential mission was dispatched to El Salvador last week to express that concern and to consult with Salvadorian officials regarding investigation of the murders. The governing junta expressed its profound regrets with respect to the crime and established an official four-man ad hoc investigating commission. That commission has begun its task of conducting a thorough and professional investigation. Pending the outcome of that investigation, and in order to express the deep concern of the people of the United States over these murders, my Government abstained in the vote on this draft resolution.
220.    The United States could not support it for two reasons. First, we do not believe such a resolution to be appropriate at a time when the Government of El Salvador has just been reconstituted in ways that should re-establish civilian control and enhance the prospects for reform and peace. It is the policy of my Government to support that reform. We believe that other Governments should do so as well. Secondly, as my Government argued at the 80th meeting of the Third Committee, this is an unbalanced resolution. The United States has vigorously denounced all terrorism in El Salvador, including the assassinations listed in the resolution. We believe that the resolution
 
should have denounced equally violence from all sources, and we believe that it should have condemned the supply of arms to any group engaged in terrorism.
221.    The United States will continue to do all in its power to bring peace to El Salvador and its people. We share the deep concern that the violence in that country should be ended, but we do not believe, for the reasons I have stated here, that this resolution will move us closer to that goal.
222.    Mr. WALKATE (Netherlands): I should like to explain our vote on draft resolution XV. The Nether-lands is a major host country for migrant workers, mainly from countries around the Mediterranean. The Netherlands legal system, therefore, provides detailed rules dealing with the status of migrant workers, which rules are partly based on bilateral and multilateral treaties and partly of national origin. Moreover, migrant workers and their families benefit from the general protection which international treaties like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [resolution 2200 A (XXI), annex] and the Netherlands Constitution and national law offer in the field of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
223.    The Netherlands Government would hesitate to upset this carefully balanced legal framework unless it were convinced of the necessity to add new rules to the existing ones. In the opinion of my Government, the General Assembly is not the most appropriate body to set up a universal convention containing such new rules. In view of its experience and the work it has done over the past years, the ILO would be a more appropriate organization to deal with this complex matter, Moreover, its tripartite composition ensures that all interests, including those of the people most concerned, the migrant labourers, will be properly represented and that all the expertise required will be there when it is needed.
224.    For all those reasons, my delegation abstained from voting on draft resolution XV.
225.    During the debate on agenda item 12 in the Third Committee, my delegation indicated, at the 67th meeting, what a convention, if it were to be drafted by the Assembly, should look like in order to be, in principle, universally acceptable. I should like in conclusion to stress the necessity of its universal acceptability, since no purpose would be served by a convention which would not be ratified by the host countries. In such a case, our efforts would have been in vain.
226.    The PRESIDENT: I have been informed that while the Assembly has been dealing with other draft resolutions consultations have taken place with regard to draft resolution VIII, which was nudear before. It is my understanding that the parties concerned have agreed that in operative paragraph 2 the words "to taking" should read "to take".
227.    If that is correct and there is no objection, the General Assembly will now vote on draft resolution VIII.
228.    Mr. EDIS (United Kingdom): What I have to say relates to the question of the vote, rather than the question of the wording of the draft resolution.
229.    My delegation has held consultations on draft resolution VIII, and we understand that the delegation
 
96th meetingó15 December 1980    1705
 
which called for a vote in the Committee does not wish to do so in plenary meeting, in which case it may not be necessary to have a vote on this draft resolution now.
230.    The PRESIDENT: I take it that you wanted to specify that there is no need to take a recorded vote now; is it that there is no need to take a vote at all?
231.    Mrs. THANH (Viet Nam) (interpretation from French): My delegation is a sponsor of draft resolution VIII and insists that the General Assembly take a decision now on this draft resolution, since agreement has been reached among the parties concerned. As draft resolution VIII won almost unanimous support in the Committee my delegation considers it quite illogical and indeed unreasonable to defer action on this draft resolution until a subsequent date.
232.    The PRESIDENT: Before I call again on the representative of the United Kingdom, I gather there seems to be a slight misunderstanding creeping into our exchange of views here. I think the request not to have a vote now does not mean that we should not adopt the draft resolution. We have adopted a number of draft resolutions this afternoon without a vote. But I shall call on the representative of the United Kingdom, since he made the request.
233.    Mr. EDIS (United Kingdom): That is exactly what we are suggestingóthat we adopt the draft resolution without a vote.
234.    Mr. OZADOVSKY (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) [interpretation from Russian]: My delegation supports the request made by the representative of Viet Nam and asks that a recorded vote be held now.
235.    The PRESIDENT: There has been a request for a recorded vote on draft resolution VIII.
A recorded vote was taken.
In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Nepal, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,   United   Arab   Emirates,   United   Republic   of
 
Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia.
Against: None.
Abstaining: Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Belgium,7 Canada, Denmark, Dominican Republic,7 Germany, Federal Republic of, Iceland, Japan, Malawi, Mali,7 New Zealand, Norway, Samoa, Trinidad and Tobago, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America.
Draft resolution VIII was adopted by 124 votes to none, with 18 abstentions (resolution 35/200).
236.    The PRESIDENT: I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their vote after the vote.
237.    Mr. KOMISSAROV (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) [interpretation from Russian]: The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR attaches very great significance to the adoption of draft resolution VIII, entitled "Measures to be taken against nazi, Fascist and neo-Fascist activities and all other forms of totalitarian ideologies and practices based on racial intolerance, hatred and terror".
238.    The Byelorussian SSR has always consistently advocated the full elimination of nazism and fascism in all its forms and manifestations as being incompatible with the Charter of the United Nations and a threat to international peace and security. We should like to recall that in the Byelorussian SSR alone, in the Second World War after the invasion of the Hitlerite aggressors, one citizen in tour fell victim to the inhuman practices of fascism and nazism. Be-cause of this we cannot remain impartial, much less inactive in the face of the rebirth or activisation of nazism, fascism and neo-fascism ideologies and activities, which has intensified recently in a number of countries.
239.    Inspired by the hateful theory of racial superiority and racial discrimination, organizations of Fascist and neo-Fascist tendencies, especially in view of the militarist psychosis which has seized certain countries at this time, are displaying their activity more openly and on an ever-increasing scale. They are of special concern now because these organizations, we have been told, are establishing close links with militarist circles and are also expanding their links and co-ordination of activities on an international scale.
240.    The targets of the crimes of the Fascist and neo-Fascist organizations are as a rule those who fight against racism and racial discrimination, migrant workers, and so forth. As the discussion of this subject in the Third Committee has shown, the majority of countries from the various regions of the world are seriously aware of the danger of the rebirth and spread of neo-Nazi, neo-Fascist and Fascist ideologies and practices to the cause of peace and international security and to peaceful existence among peoples. Because of this there was an appeal, sup-
7 The delegations of Belgium, the Dominican Republic and Mali subsequently informed the Secretariat that they wished to have their votes recorded as having been in favour of the draft resolution.
 
1706    General AssemblyóThirty-fifth SessionóPlenary Meetings
 
ported in this draft resolution, for all States to take the necessary measures with regard to activities and organizations which propagate nazism, fascism, neo-fascism and other ideologies based on racial intolerance, hatred and terror.
241.    Against this background, what was said by some delegations in the Third Committee sounded rather discordant. They made demagogic attempts to cast doubts on the timeliness and the significance of this draft resolution and also strove to eliminate the anti-Fascist content of this draft resolution.
242.    Is not this position explained by the fact that it is precisely in their countries, according to world press reports, that there has been in recent times ever-increasing activity by Fascist and pro-Fascist organizations?
243.    The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR considers the adoption of draft resolution VIII as something which is in the interests of all peoples and countries sincerely interested in eliminating once and for all the danger of the rebirth of nazism and fascism and in liquidating their strongholds, including the criminal apartheid regime in southern Africa.
244.    The adoption of this draft resolution and its unswerving implementation will be a weighty contribution to the implementation of the Programme for the Decade for Action to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination [resolution 3057 (XXVIII)] and of the decisions of the World Conference to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination which took place in August 1978 and other relevant United Nations decisions.
245.    In conclusion, the delegation of the Byelorussian SSR would like to express its firm conviction that all the measures and activities at the national and international levels called for in this draft resolution will be carried out and that further necessary steps will be taken to eliminate the real threat of the rebirth of nazism and fascism in all their forms and manifestations.
246.    Mr. BALETA (Albania) [interpretation from French]: The Albanian delegation voted in favour of draft resolution VIII.
247.    By its affirmative vote, my delegation wished to underscore its wish to condemn the phenomenon of the ideology and the practice of fascism, nazism and neo-fascism. But our vote in favour in no way means that our delegation is satisfied with that draft resolution. Its submission and the amendments made to it later in the Third Committee are not, in our view, inspired by a concern to analyse the full breadth and scope of the phenomenon of the resurgence of fascist activities and to make clear the principal reasons for it.
248.    The text does not deal with the deep-rooted political, economic and social causes of fascism and nazism at this stage. It is true that the danger of fascism and Nazism is becoming greater, more evident and more disturbing. The fascist forces have gained impetus and are organizing in several countries. Fascist regimes are in power in certain places. Fascist methods and practices are becoming daily more apparent and increasingly accentuated in the domestic policy and the international conduct of the super-Powers and imperialist Powers, and of other reactionary regimes.
 
Fascist activity undertaken by imperialism and social-imperialism constitutes a very great danger in international relations today. Many peoples and countries have already fallen victim to Fascist-type aggressions launched by the imperialist super-Powers and other reactionary regimes. The super-Powers and other imperialist Powers are also in the process of militarizing the domestic life of their own countries and making war preparations. The aggressive, expansionist and hegemonistic policies of the imperialist super-Powers nourish and encourage fascist activities in the world.
249.    The resolution just adopted does not deal with those aspects and does not unveil the true dimensions of fascism, especially in the field of international relations. Thus, in our view, it has great weaknesses and gaps.
250.    To conclude, I should like to say that my delegation does not think that the measures called for in this resolution are sufficient or that they are going to produce concrete results to combat the danger of Nazism and fascism.
AGENDA ITEM 30
Question of equitable representation of and increase in the membership of the Security Council (continued)*
251.    The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution A/35/L.34/ Rev.l has been further revised and is to be found in document A/35/L.34/Rev.2.
252.    Mr. MISHRA (India): As you have just very kindly indicated, Mr. President, there is a further revision of the draft resolution with regard to the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council.
253.    The revisions, which are rather substantive, concern operative paragraph 1 (c). (d) and (e), and also operative paragraph 3 (f).
254.    The changes to operative paragraph 1 (c), (d) and (e), are designed to indicate that the majority required in the Security Council should be 14 instead of 13. During the debate here in the General Assembly on 4 December and during informal conversations it was repeatedly stressed to the sponsors that by keeping the majority required in the Security Council at 13 they were trying to have an automatic majority for a particular group of countries. We took this argument seriously, and, dispite the fact that the present requirement in the Security Council is, as all of us know, 9 out of 15 members, and therefore less than two thirds, the sponsors decided to take action to correct any misapprehension that might continue to exist. We have therefore now made the required majority 14, which is exactly two thirds of the Security Council as we should like to see it expandedóthat is, 14 out of 21. This relates to amendments to Article 27, paragraphs 2 and 3, and Article 109, paragraph 1, of the Charter.
255.    With other revision in operative paragraph 3 (f), the distribution has been further changed in order to take into account the very legitimate aspirations of the African States. It was pointed out to us that the African States would not be adequately represented if
* Resumed from the 82nd meeting.
 
96th meetingó15 December 1980    1707
 
the number of seats reserved for them were to remain at five. The sponsors have therefore decided to bring the group of African States into the system of rotation which is envisaged in paragraph 3 (f). Paragraph 3 (f) would then read
"One non-permanent seat shall alternate between Latin American States on the one hand and African States, West European and other States and East European States on the other in the following sequence: Latin American States, African States, Latin American States, West European and other States, Latin American States, East European States and so on."
The sponsors are of course conscious that this change may prove somewhat difficult for another group of States, but nevertheless, taking into account both of the substantive changes, we hope that it will be possible now for various delegations to support this draft resolution.
256. In view of the rather substantive changes which have been made and which are contained in A/35/ L.34/Rev.2, the sponsors felt that it might be advisable to postpone the voting on this draft resolution until 15 January. This proposed postponement is designed to give time to various delegations to consult their
 
Governments on these changes in order to obtain appropriate instructions. I therefore request that the voting on this draft resolution be postponed to 15 January 1981.
257.    Mr. ABDALLA (Sudan): I should like to say on behalf of the group of African States, that the Group, while supporting the principle embodied in document A/35/L.34/Rev.2 concerning the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council, wishes to support the proposal just made by the representative of India on behalf of the sponsors to postpone taking a decision on document A/35/L.34/Rev.2 until January 1981.
258.    The PRESIDENT: The Assembly has heard the proposal submitted by the representative of India and supported by the spokesman of the African group. May I take it that the General Assembly agrees to adopt the proposal to defer consideration of agenda item 30 until the resumed thirty-fifth session of the General Assembly in January 1981, most probably on 15 January?
It was so decided.
The meeting rose at 6.30 p.m.