Summary record of the 60th meeting : 3rd Committee, held on Wednesday, 29 November 1989, New York, General Assembly, 44th session.
|UN Document Symbol||A/C.3/44/SR.60|
|Convention||International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families|
|Document Type||Summary Record|
|Subjects||Refugees, Displaced Persons, Resettlement, Repatriation, Migrant Workers, Migrant Workers' Families, Genocide, Summary Executions, Disappearance of Persons, Human Rights in Armed Conflicts, Mass Exoduses, Narcotic Drugs, Drug Abuse, Drug Traffic, Drug Control, UN Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance|
UNITED NATIONS General Assembly FOKTY-FOURTK SESSION Official Records THIRD COMMITTEE 60th meeting held on Wednesday, 29 November 1989 at 10 a.m. New York SUMMARY RECORD OF THE 60th MEETING Chairman; Mr. KABORE (Burkina Faso) CONTENTS AGENDA ITEM 12: REPORT OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL(continued) AGENDA ITEM 109; EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS, INCLUDING REPORTING OBLIGATIONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS (continued) AGENDA ITEM 111: INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN AGAINST TRAFFIC IN DRUGS (continued) This record is subject to correction. Corrections should be sent under the signature of a member of the delegation concerned within one week of the dale of publication to the Chief of the Official Records Editing Section. Room DC2-750. 2 United Nations Plaza, and incorporated in a copy of the record. Corrections will be issued after the end of the session, in a separate corrigendum for each Committee. Distr. GENERAL A/C.3/44/SR.60 7 December 1989 ENGLISH ORIGINAL: FRENCH 89-57498 2231S (E) Digitized by Dag Hammarskjold Library A/C.3/44/SR.60 English Page 2 The meeting was called to, order at 10.40 a, m. AGENDA ITEM 12: REPORT OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL (continued) (A/C.3/44/L.2, L.62, L.64-66, L.70, L.71, L.74, L.75, L.78-85, L.86/Rev.l, L.87, 88 and L.92) 1. The CHAIRMAN informed the Committee that, except for draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.74, the draft resolutions submitted under agenda item 12 had no programme-budget implications. Draft decision contained in document A/C.3/44/L.2 2 Mrs. WARZAZI (Morocco) said it would be recalled that at the forty-first session of the General Assembly, the Moroccan and other delegations had submitted a draft decision on the biennialization of certain agenda items assigned to the Third Committee. Many delegations had participated in the negotiations and in a working meeting on the draft, in the course of which two delegations had proposed that the debate on the question should be postponed until the forty-second session. Each year thereafter, the draft had been unjustifiably postponed until the following session. Her delegation deplored the fact that that was once again the case. In order to avoid the successive postponements, she proposed that the following sentence should be added to the draft decision: "The Third Committee decides to establish, at the forty-fifth session, a working group entrusted with the task of studying the draft decision contained in document A/C.3/44/L.2." 3. The CHAIRMAN said he agreed with the Moroccan proposal. 4 Mr. ZIADA (Iraq) said that his delegation could have supported the adoption of the draft decision in document A/C.3/44/L.2 as it stood, but was also prepared to accept the Moroccan proposal. 5. Mr. KRENKEL (Austria) said that his delegation was particularly interested in the reorganization of the work and the agenda of the Third Committee, and suggested, for example, that the different draft resolutions submitted under certain items might be merged. His delegation welcomed the proposal to establish an open-ended working group, but felt that, instead of limiting its study to the items listed in document A/C.3/44/L.2, it should consider the entire programme of work. His delegation therefore wished to ask the Moroccan delegation to add, at the end of its proposal, the words: "and the entire programme of work". 6. Mr. HENNESSY (Ireland) said he welcomed the Moroccan proposal. His delegation would have found it difficult to take a position on the draft decision at the current session, but was prepared to participate actively in the working group. It also felt that a more radical approach might be taken to the examination of the Committee's methods of work, and endorsed the Austrian proposal. 7 Mr. GALAL (Egypt) requested that the Moroccan proposal should be amended so as to specify that the working group would be open-ended. In addition, delegations Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library A/C.3/44/SR.60 English Page 3 (Mr. Galal, Egypt) should be asked to think carefully before adding items to the agenda which might be covered under items that were already on it. His delegation endorsed the Austrian proposal for integrating questions pertaining to the same subject, which was in keeping with the example set by the draft resolutions concerning youth and the aged. 8. Mr. OGURTSOV (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) fully endorsed the Moroccan proposal, as well as the amendments proposed by Austria and Egypt. The need to rationalize the work of the Third Committee was evident, particularly since it held many more meetings than the other Main Committees. 9. Mrs. TAVARES ALVAREZ (Dominican Republic) welcomed the Moroccan proposal and endorsed the comments made by Austria, Egypt and Ireland. Indeed, all the items on the agenda should be studied, and not only the five items mentioned out of a total of 28. It was also important to define criteria that would allow for an equitable rationalization of the programme of work. 10. Mr. VELLA (Malta) supported the position of Austria and the Dominican Republic. 11. Miss AIOUAZE (Algeria) said she recalled that, during the informal consultations, the Moroccan delegation had made a special effort to choose those questions which presented the fewest problems. Algeria could accept the Moroccan proposal as amended by Egypt; however, it could not accept the Austrian proposal, because it seemed both unrealistic and premature to give the working group a mandate concerning the entire agenda of the Third Committee. 12. Mr. MORA (Cuba) endorsed the Moroccan proposal. However, he felt that the first task of the working group should be to decide on the criteria it would follow, and that its decision should be taken by consensus. Social and humanitarian questions did not seem any less important than others, and therefore all items should be dealt with on an equal footing. 13. Mrs. WARZAZI (Morocco) said that she had no difficulty in accepting the Egyptian proposal, since it was obvious that the working group would be open to all. With regard to the Austrian proposal, she felt it would be better to leave the text as it currently stood in document A/C.3/44/L.2, because changing it would be tantamount to amending the draft decision itself, a task which would be up to the working group. The Moroccan proposal dealt only with the creation of the working group, and not the text of the draft decision. Her delegation felt, moreover, that the working group should be set up at the start of the Third Committee's work, and she asked all interested delegations to consider specific proposals by the beginning of the forty-fifth session. 14. The CHAIRMAN, supported by Mr. WALDROP (United States of America) and Mr. GALAL (Egypt), proposed that the Committee should adopt the Moroccan proposal, as amended by Egypt, on the understanding that the working group would be able to determine the framework for its deliberations. 15. Mrs. TAVARES ALVAREZ (Dominican Republic) restated her position and requested a vote on the proposal. Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library A/C.3/44/SR.60 English Page 4 lb. Mrs. WARZAZI (Morocco) said that if the Dominican delegation persisted in requesting a vote on the matter, thus ending the consensus, her delegation would vote against the Dominican proposal. 17. The CHAIRMAN proposed the following as a compromise texts "The Committee decides to establish an open-ended Working Group at its forty-fifth session in order to consider appropriate ways and means of rationalizing the Committee's programme of work". If there was no agreement on that proposal, action on the matter would be postponed to a later date. 18. It was so decided. 19. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.62 was adopted. 20. Mr. MISOMALI (Malawi) thanked the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, donor countries and intergovernmental organisations for their assistance to Malawi, which his Government would use to the full to alleviate the plight of the refugees. 21. Mr. WALDROP (United States of America), explaining his delegation's position on draft resolutions A/C.3/44/L.62, L.64, L.65, L.66, L.70, L.71 and L.78, said that it would have been better to consolidate the seven draft resolutions into a single text which the Committee would then have adopted without a vote. His delegation had advocated the adoption of such a procedure for several years, and it was not alone in hoping for such a simplification. Grouping those closely interrelated questions in a single text would make it possible to concentrate the international community's attention on the refugee problem in Africa. He urged the sponsors of the seven draft resolutions to bear his request in mind at the Forty-fifth session. 22. Mr. GOSHU (Ethiopia) said that the sponsors of the draft resolutions had in [Hot tried to consolidate the various proposals and submit a single text, but without success. 23. Mr. TAN KOANO (Niger) said that his delegation wished to join the sponsors of the draft resolution. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.64 24. The CHAIRMAN said that the draft resolution had been introduced by Zaire at the 58th meeting on behalf of the sponsors, which had now been joined by the Central African Republic, the Comoros, Costa Rica, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Guinea, India, Jamaica, the Niger, Nigeria, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago and Uruguay. 2 5 . Draft resolution A/C. 3/44/L. 64 was...adopted. Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library A/C.3/44/SR.60 English Page 5 26. Mr. DORANI (Djibouti) welcomed the adoption by consensus of draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.64 and thanked the sponsors. He recalled that it had always been Djibouti's practice to spare no effort to help asylum-seekers. His Government valued the collaboration of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in that connection. He noted that a recent influx of some 35,000 displaced persons had overwhelmed the reception structures. They were currently scattered throughout the capital, and that created practical obstacles and various difficulties in providing them with aid. The city of Djibouti had a number of needy inhabitants of its own, and it would be inappropriate for only displaced persons to receive assistance. He recalled that his country had never been a source of mass emigration, but had always been a land of asylum for foreign refugees. Accordingly, it was once again requesting help from the international community in that difficult situation. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.65 27. The CHAIRMAN announced that Turkey had joined the sponsors of the draft resolution, which had been introduced by Zaire on behalf of the sponsors at the 58th meeting. 28. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.65 was adopted. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.66 29. The CHAIRMAN said that the draft resolution had been introduced at the 58th meeting by Zaire on behalf of the sponsors, since joined by Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, the Gambia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Kuwait, Liberia, Malawi, Mali, Oman, Pakistan, Sierra Leone and Yugoslavia. He announced that the Niger, Nigeria, Singapore and Turkey had also joined the sponsors. He pointed out that in operative paragraph 4 of the draft resolution, the last phrase "as soon as conditions permit" should be replaced by the phrase "as soon as possible". 30. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L..66, as amended, was adopted. 31. Mr. OSMAN (Somalia) welcomed the fact that the draft resolution had been adopted by consensus. Somalia was making considerable efforts to resolve the refugee problem and it called on the international community to take steps to ensure the resumption of the food and aid programmes which had been suspended, since the refugee problem represented an unduly heavy burden on Somalia's economy. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.70 32. The CHAIRMAN announced that Nigeria had joined the sponsors of the draft resolution introduced by Zaire at the 58th meeting. 33. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.70 was adopted. 34. Mr. BOULANDI (Chad) said he was pleased to see that the draft resolution had been adopted unanimously. Chad had need of all its citizens to continue its Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library A/C.3/44/SR.60 English Page 6 (Mr. Boulandi, Chad) development and it was to be hoped that the countries in which there were still Chadian refugees would encourage them to return to their country of origin. The efforts made by Chad to resolve the problems of displaced persons and of voluntary repatriation deserved to be supported by the international community. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.71 35. The CHAIRMAN recalled that the draft had been introduced by Zaire at the 58th meeting, on behalf of the sponsors, which had been joined by China, India, Swaziland, Trinidad and Tobago, and Yemen. Czechoslovakia and Mongolia also wished to become sponsors. 36. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.71 was adopted. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.74 37. The CHAIRMAN recalled that the draft had been introduced at the 58th meeting by Mexico, on behalf of the sponsors, which had been joined by Turkey. The programme budget implications of the draft were set out in document A/C.3/44/L.92. 38. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.74 was adopted. 39. Mr. KONIG (Federal Republic of Germany) said that his delegation maintained its substantive reservations concerning the usefulness of a convention designed to protect the rights of migrant workers. Such protection was ensured by other international instruments, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenants on Human Rights, which protected the rights of all human beings, without distinction. 40. His delegation also had objections to many aspects of the Working Group's deliberations. At its previous session, the Group had adopted various proposals which his delegation found unacceptable. His Government would probably not be in a position to sign or ratify the proposed convention. 41. Mr. RAVEN (United Kingdom) said that he deplored the late publication of the programme budget implications (A/C.3/44/L.92) of the draft resolution. With regard to paragraph 12 of that document, he considered that exceptions to the provisions of General Assembly resolution 40/243 came within the competence of the Committee on Conferences, which in turn had to report to the Fifth Committee; it was for that Committee to determine the best time for the Working Group to meet. As to paragraph 9, it would be preferable for the ACABQ to decide whether the amount of $208,000 should come under section 23 of the regular budget or other sections. 42. Mr. GALAL (Egypt) observed, with regard to paragraph 12, that the Working group met at New York every year and that the General Assembly itself had on each occasion taken a decision on the holding of those exceptional meetings. Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library A/C.3/44/SR.60 English Page 7 Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.75 43. The CHAIRMAN recalled that the draft had been introduced by Morocco at the 58th meeting, on behalf of the sponsors, which had been joined by Togo. Ecuador, Yugoslavia, Guatemala, Jamaica, El Salvador, Dominican Republic and Gambia also wished to be sponsors. 44. Mrs. WARZA2I (Morocco) pointed out that the United States wished to be included in the list of sponsors. 45. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.75 was adopted. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.78 46. The CHAIRMAN recalled that the draft had been introduced at the 58th meeting by Zaire, on behalf of the sponsors, which had been joined by the Bahamas, Barbados and Brazil. Australia, Guinea-Bissau, Costa Rica, Panama, Pakistan, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ethiopia and Cameroon also wished to be sponsors. 47. Mrs. ARGUILLAS (Philippines) said that her delegation wished to be included in the list of sponsors and that, if it had been present during their adoption, it would have become a sponsor of draft resolutions A/C.3/44/L.62, 65, 66 and 71. 48. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.78 was adopted. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.79 49. The CHAIRMAN recalled that the draft resolution had been introduced at the 58th meeting by the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic and Poland. 50. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.79 was adopted. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.80 51. The CHAIRMAN recalled that the draft resolution had been introduced at the 58th meeting by Sweden, on behalf of the sponsors, which had been joined by the United Kingdom. Colombia should be omitted from the list of sponsors. 52. Mr. DUHS (Sweden) announced that Samoa had joined the sponsors of the draft resolution, which should also include Sweden. 53. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.80 was adopted-Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.81 54. The CHAIRMAN recalled that the draft resolution had been introduced at the 58th meeting by France, on behalf of the sponsors, which had been joined by Uruguay. It had been orally revised during its introduction; paragraph 4, which read "Further welcomes the progress made in the preparation of the draft Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library A/C.3/44/SR.60 English Page 8 (The Chairman) declaration on enforced or involuntary disappearances" became the penultimate preambular paragraph, which would now have the following wordings "Welcoming the progress made in the preparation of the draft declaration on enforced or involuntary disappearances". 55. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.81 was adopted. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.82 56. The CHAIRMAN recalled that the draft resolution had been introduced at the 58th meeting by Italy, on behalf of the sponsors, which had been joined by Samoa. 57. Mr. COTTAFAVI (Italy) suggested the following amendment to the text: in the fourth line of the first preambular paragraph, the phrase "Additional Protocols I and II thereto, of.1977" should be replaced by "their Additional Protocols of 1977"; in the first three lines of paragraph 6, the words "treat all fighters as combatants within the meaning of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Additional Protocols I and II thereto, of 1977" should be replaced by "respect the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 1977". 58. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.82, as orally revised by Italy, was adopted. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.83 59. The CHAIRMAN recalled that the draft resolution had been introduced at the 58th meeting by Austria, on behalf of the sponsors, which had been joined by the United Kingdom and Cyprus. 60. Mr. KRENKEL (Austria) announced that Colombia and Samoa had also joined the list of sponsors. 61. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.83 was adopted. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.85 62. The CHAIRMAN recalled that the draft resolution had been introduced at the 58th meeting on behalf of the sponsors, which had been joined by Thailand. 63. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.85 was adopted. AGENDA ITEM 109: EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS, INCLUDING REPORTING OBLIGATIONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS (continued) (A/C.3/44/L.73) Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.73 64. The CHAIRMAN recalled that the draft resolution had been introduced at the 58th meeting by Canada, on behalf of the sponsors, which had been joined by Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library A/C.3/44/SR.60 English Page 9 The Chairman) Belgium, Costa Rica, Finland and Iceland. During the introduction, paragraph 11 had been amended by inserting, after the phrase "requests the Secretary-General" the words "within existing resources". 65. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.73, as amended, was adopted. 66. Mr. ITO (Japan) said that his delegation had joined in the consensus, but could not disguise certain misgivings. First of all, in the case of paragraph 4, it did not see how the Secretary-General could communicate before the end of 1989 the draft detailed reporting manual to those treaty bodies which were of an ad hoc nature and were therefore not permanent. With regard to paragraph 5, the identification and implementation of ways of further streamlining and improving reporting procedures as well as enhancing co-ordination and information flow were primarily the responsibility of the treaty bodies themselves, and not necessarily of the States parties to those treaties. In addition, it would have been better to begin paragraph 7 with the words "Taking note" rather than the word Acknowledges". In paragraphs 5 and 8, it would have been preferable to follow the words "States parties" by the words "to the international instruments on human rights", in the interests of precision. It seemed that paragraph 9 could be interpreted as excluding the possibility of using the regular budget of the United Nations to alleviate the financial difficulties of the treaty bodies. If that was the meaning implicit in the paragraph, his delegation would have some difficulty in supporting it. 67. The CHAIRMAN said that the Committee had concluded its consideration of agenda item 109. AGENDA ITEM III: INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN AGAINST TRAFFIC IN DRUGS (continued) (A/C.3/44/L.32/Rev.l, A/C.3/44/L.89, A/C.3/44/L.33, L.35, L.36/Rev.2 and A/C.3/44/L.93, A/C.3/44/L.91, A/C.3/44/L.41/Rev.2, A/C.3/44/L.90, A/C.3/44/L.34) Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.33 68. The CHAIRMAN noted that the draft resolution had been introduced at the 4 3rd meeting by Venezuela, on behalf of the sponsors, which had been joined by Cyprus, Denmark, Guatemala, Ireland, Netherlands, Suriname and Sweden, and more recently by Japan. The draft resolution had no programme budget implications. 69. Miss VERLEZZA (Venezuela) said that the following fourth and fifth preambular paragraphs should be added after the third preambular paragraph: "Noting with satisfaction the broad support given to the Convention, and in particular the signatures and ratifications, "Urges the Commission on Narcotic Drugs to consider what measures might be recommended to Governments with a view to the implementation of the Convention". Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library A/C.3/44/SR.60 English Page 10 (Miss Verleaza.Venezuela) 70. Her delegation hoped that those changes would make it possible to adopt the draft resolution without a vote. 71. Mrs. SHERMAN-PETER (Bahamas) thanked the Venezuelan delegation and the sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.33 for accommodating some of the views of the Bahamas in the draft resolution. Her country considered it important that the wide spread support for the United Nations Convention against the Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, hailed by the international community as a most significant development in the field of international drug control, should be a matter of record. Further, the title of the draft resolution rightly concerned the implementation of the Convention. Her country was therefore of the view that the Commission on Narcotic Drugs should be encouraged to begin considering those measures that might be recommended to Governments to implement the Convention when it came into force, as was now stated in the new fifth preambular paragraph, inserted by the representative of Venezuela. Her country would have wished to see that paragraph go further and invite the Commission on Narcotic Drugs to review, in particular, those measures which might be recommended for the tracing of profits through the international banking system and for ensuring that banks in each country were not used to launder drug profits. That aspect of the drug problem had been underscored by numerous States. Her country agreed, however, that that was just one aspect of that very important Convention, although a most important one. Her delegation did not therefore insist on the inclusion of that aspect at the present time and was pleased to become a co-sponsor of the resolution. 72. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.33, as orally revised, was adopted. Draft decision A/C.3/44/L.34 73. The CHAIRMAN stated that that draft decision would have no programme budget implications. 74. Draft decision A/C.3/44/L.34 was adopted. 75. Mr. MALAGA (Peru) said that he had notified the Secretariat of a technical problem regarding the draft decision. The terms "Lucca international" had been translated in English by "International action" rather than by "International struggle", which did not reflect the intent of the sponsors. He wondered whether the Secretariat had solved the problem. 76. Mr. ACAKPO-SATCHIVI (Secretary of the Committee) said that the relevant translation service would be asked to choose a correct translation before the report was submitted to the General Assembly. 77. Mr. GALAL (Egypt) requested the Peruvian delegation not to insist on changing the English text. On the one hand, the word "struggle" was usually associated with imperialism. On the other hand, the Egyptian delegation had joined the consensus on the basis of the Arabic and English texts which it had at its disposal and where Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library A/C.3/44/SR.60 English Page 11 (Mr. Galal, Egypt) the word "struggle" had not been used. If the English text were to be changed, the Egyptian delegation would be forced to request a vote on the draft decision in the plenary session of the General Assembly. 78. Mrs. ARUNGU-OLENDE (Kenya), supported by Miss ZINDOGA (Zimbabwe), said that, when the English text of the draft decision had first been submitted, the English-speaking countries of Africa had objected to the use of the word "struggle", which, in their view, was used in connection with apartheid. The members of the Committee had accepted the English version of the draft decision, where the word "action" was used. 79. Mrs. WARZAZI (Morocco), supported by Mr. WHITAKER-SALLES (Brazil) and Miss AIOUAZE (Algeria), said that, since the original text of the draft decision, which the Committee had already adopted, had been submitted in Spanish, the translations in the other languages should conform to the original text. The Secretariat should be reminded of the need for scrupulously exact translations of draft proposals in order to avoid any future problems. 80. Mr. ZIADA (Iraq) said he could accept without difficulty the word "struggle", but supported the position of Egypt inasmuch as the change requested by Peru had come after the vote. If it had been r*****ed before the vote, as it should have been, certain delegations might not have led the consensus. In any case, certain delegations had voted on the basis of the English and Arabic texts. 81. Mr. TANASIE (Romania) stressed the fact that draft decision A/C.3/44/L.34 had been adopted by the Third Committee. If Egypt wished to reconsider the draft decision, the provisions of rule 81 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly would have to be applied. 82. The CHAIRMAN thought it would not be wise to reconsider the decision which the Committee had taken. It would be preferable to hold consultations to find the right term, and the final decision would be made in the plenary session of the General Assembly. Draft resolution A/C.3/44/L.35 83. The CHAIRMAN said that the Third Committee would take a decision on the draft resolution at the afternoon meeting. The meeting rose at 12.50 p.m. Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library