GA/SHC/3966
Sixty-fourth General Assembly
Third Committee
41st & 42nd Meetings (AM & PM)
Refugee High Commissioner, Globalization, Disabilities Convention, Palestinian Self-Determination, Protecting Migrants Among Other Issues Addressed
The General Assembly would express deep concern at the negative stereotyping of religions and manifestations of intolerance and discrimination in matters of religion or belief by one of 16 texts the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) approved today -- six of them by recorded vote.
The Committee also passed 10 other drafts by consensus, on questions related to refugees, returnees and displaced persons, the right of peoples to self-determination and the promotion and protection of human rights. It deferred action on three drafts tabled by the Cuban delegation and two others related to crime prevention and criminal justice, as well as international drug control.
By further terms of the draft on combating defamation of religions -- which was approved by a recorded vote of 81 in favour to 55 against, with 43 abstentions -- the Assembly would strongly deplore all acts of psychological and physical violence and assaults against persons on the basis of religion or belief, and deplore incitement to such acts. (See Annex VII for further details of the vote.)
The Assembly would also note with deep concern "the intensification of the overall campaign of the defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred", including the ethnic and religious profiling of Muslim minorities in the aftermath of the tragic events of 11 September 2001. It would further recognize that, in the context of the fight against terrorism, defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred had become aggravating factors that contributed to the denial of fundamental rights and freedoms of members of target groups, as well as their economic and social exclusion.
By other provisions, the text would have the Assembly emphasize that freedom of expression carried with it special duties and responsibilities, and might therefore be subject to limitations as provided by law, and which were necessary for respect of the rights or reputations of others, protection of national security or of public order, public health or morals.
In explaining their opposition to the resolution, several delegations cited its focus on one religion and suggested a broader perspective would achieve wider support. Others emphasized that the defamation of religion had to be addressed in such a way that was not detrimental to other rights, including, several stressed, the right to freedom of expression.
Underscoring the "increasingly splintered view" among States on the current text, the United States representative suggested an alternate vision to combat the defamation of religion was needed. Among other things, the United States would not agree that prohibiting speech was the way to promote tolerance. Such prohibitions were sometimes used for discrimination, he cautioned, and Governments might abuse individual rights in the name of this resolution and the United Nations.
The delegations of Albania and India further expressed concern that the text attempted to link the issue with racism, which specifically requests the Secretary-General to address the correlation between defamation of religions and the intersection between religion and race in his report on the resolution's implementation during the Assembly's sixty-fifth session.
By the terms of a draft resolution on the International Covenants on Human Rights, which was introduced by Finland, the Assembly would strongly appeal to all States that had not yet done so to become parties to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and to consider acceding to their Optional Protocols.
The draft text was passed, as orally revised and amended, by a recorded vote of 111 in favour to none against, with 66 abstentions, following separate recorded votes on two oral amendments proposed by the representative of Zambia, on behalf of the African Group. (See Annex IV).
Those two oral amendments proposed, respectively, to delete from operative paragraph 9 references to General Comment No. 33, on the obligations of States parties under the Optional Protocol, and to delete from operative paragraph 10 references both to General Comment No. 19 on the right to social security and General Comment No. 20 on non-discrimination in economic, social and cultural rights.
In calling for these amendments, the representative of Zambia said General Comment No. 33 lacked clarity and risked contradicting the Vienna convention on law of treaties. General Comment No. 20 on non-discrimination lacked solid ground in international law. Moreover, mentioning it in the current resolution was unprecedented, since it was not even included in the report of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Along those lines, the African Group had no issues with General Comment No. 19, but believed referencing the Committee's report, which included that General Comment, was sufficient.
Echoing several of the draft's co-sponsors,>>>
Posts
