Thirty-second Session 

GENERAL ASSEMBLY 

PROVISIONAL VERBATIM RECORD OF THE ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTH MEETING

Held at Headquarters, New York 
on Friday, 16 December 1977, at 3 p.m. 

President: Mr. MOJSOV (Yugoslavia) 

-Report of the Economic and Social Council (12) (continued) 
(a) Report of the Third Committee; 
(b) Report of the Fifth Committee 

-World Conference to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination: report of the Third Committee (75) 

-Alternative approaches and ways and means within the United Nations system for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms: report of the Third Committee (76) 

-Question of the elderly and the aged: report of the Third Committee (78)

This record contains the original text of speeches delivered in English and interpretations of speeches is the other languages. The final text will be distributed as soon as possible. 

Corrections should be submitted to original speeches only. They should be sent in quadruplicate within three working days to the Chief of the Official Records Editing Section, Department of Conference Services, room A-3550, and incorporated in a copy of the record. 

AS THIS RECORD WAS DISTRIBUTED ON 19 DECEMBER 1977. THE TIME-LIMIT FOR CORRECTIONS WILL BE 22 DECEMBER 1977. 

The co-operation of delegations is strictly observing this time-limit would be greatly appreciated. 

-International Year for Disabled Persons (82): 
(a) Report of the Third Committee; 
(b) Report of the Fifth Committee 

-Human rights and scientific and technological developments: report of the Third Committee (83) 

-Policies and programmes relating to youth: report of the Third Committee (84)

-United Nations Decade for Women: Equality, Development and Peace: report of the Third Committee (65)

-Elimination of all forms of religious intolerance: report of the Third Committee (66) 

-Freedom of information: report of the Third Committee (68)

-United Nations conference for an international convention on adoption laws report of the Third Committee (69) 

-Proposed programme budget for the biennium 1978–1979 (Computerization of treaty information and registration and publication of treaties and international agreements pursuant to Article 102 of thee Charter of the United Nations): report of the Sixth Committee (100)

-Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its tenth session: report of the Sixth Committee (113) 

-United Nations Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination an Wider Appreciation of International Law: report of the Sixth Committee (114) 

-Elimination of all forms of religious intolerance: report of the Third Committee (66) 

-Freedom of information: report of the Third Committee (68) 

-United Nations conference for an international convention on adoption law: report of the Third Committee (69) 

-Proposed programme budget for the biennium 1978–1979 (Computerization of treaty information and registration and publication of treaties and international agreements pursuant to Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations): report of the Sixth Committee (100) 

-Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its tenth session: report of the Sixth Committee (113) 

-United Nations Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination and Wider Appreciation of International Law: report of the Sixth Committee (114) 

-Measures to prevent international terrorism which endangers or takes innocent human lives or jeopardizes fundamental freedoms, and study of the underlying causes of those forms of terrorism and acts of violence which lie in misery, frustration, grievance and despair and which cause some people to sacrifice human lives, including their own, i an attempt to effect radical changes (118): 
(a) Report of the Sixth Committee; 
(b) Report of the Fifth Committee 

-Drafting of an international convention against the taking of hostages (119): 
(a) Report of the Sixth Committee 
(b) Report of the Fifth Committee 

-Resolutions adopted by the United Nations Conference on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations: report of the Sixth Committee (120) 

-Consolidation and progressive evolution of the norms and principles of international economic development law: report of the Sixth Committee (121) 

-Draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind: report of the Sixth Committee (131) 

The meeting was called to order at 3.30 p.m. 

AGENDA ITEM 12 (continued), 75, 76, 78, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 88 and 89 

REPORT OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL: 
(a) REPORT OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE (A/32/458); 
(b) REPORT OF THE FIFTH COMMITTEE (A/32/479) 
WORLD CONFERENCE OT COMMIT RACISM AND RACIAL DISCRIMINATION: REPORT OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE (A/32/422) 
ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES AND WAYS AND MEANS WITHIN THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM FOR IMPROVING THE EFFECTIVE ENJOYMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS: REPORT OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE (A/32/423) 
QUESTION OF THE ELDERLY AND THE AGED: REPORT OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE (A/32/436) 
INTERNATIONAL YEAR FOR DISABLED PERSONS 
(a) REPORT OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE (A/32/437) 
(b) REPORT OF THE FIFTH COMMITTEE (A/32/478) 
HUMAN RIGHTS AND SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS: REPORT OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE (A/32/438) 
POLICIES AND PROGRAMMES RELATING TO YOUTH: REPORT OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE (A/32/439 and Corr.1) 
UNITED NATIONS DECADE FOR WOMEN: EQUALITY, DEVELOPMENT AND PEACE: REPORT OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE (A/32/440) 
ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE: REPORT OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE (A/32/441) 
FREDOM OF INFORMATION: REPORT OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE (A/32/442) 
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE FOR AN INTERNAITONAL CONVENTION ON ADOPTION LAW: REPORT OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE (A/32/443) 

Mr. Al-[Minai] (Oman), Rapporteur of the Third Committee, presented the reports of that Committee (A/32/458, A/32/422, A/32/423, A/32/436, A/32/437, A/32/438, A/32/439 and Corr.1, A/32/440, A/32/441, A/32/442 and A/32/443), and then spoke as follows: 
 
	Mr. AL-[MINAI] (Oman), Rapporteur of the Third Committee: The Third Committee discussed agenda item 12 relating to the report of the Economic and Social Council at 21 of its meetings, this being one of the most important items on the Committee's agenda. Three main categories of topics were discussed under this item: human rights, narcotic drugs and social progress and social development. In addition, the Committee discussed assistance to South African student refugees, on which it adopted a draft resolution which appears in the present report as draft resolution III, which was adopted by the Committee without a vote. 
	Concerning human rights, the Committee adopted five draft resolutions. Draft resolution II on the protection of human rights in Child commends the work done by the Ad Hoc Working Group and requests the extension of its mandate. Draft resolution IV deals with measures to improve the situation and ensure the human rights and dignity of all migrant workers. Draft resolution V deals with the protection of the human rights of certain categories of prisoners. Draft resolution VI deals with the protection of persons detained or imprisoned as a result of their struggle against apartheid, racism and racial discrimination, colonialism, aggression and foreign occupation, and for self-determination, independence and social progress for their people. 
	Here I should like to draw the attention of the General Assembly to draft resolution VI which appears at page 30 of document A/32/458. The last word of operative paragraphs 3 and 6 of this draft resolution should be " people" and not "peoples". 
	In draft resolution VII, which was adopted without a vote, the Committee recommends, inter alia, that the General Assembly, on the occasion of the observance in 1978 of the thirtieth anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, invite Governments, the specialized agencies, regional intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations to take appropriate steps to celebrate the thirtieth anniversary along the lines described in the annex to the draft resolution. It also recommends that the General Assembly decide to discuss at its next session an item entitled "Thirty years of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; international co-operation for promotion and observance of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights", and that the item be considered by the plenary Assembly. 
	Draft resolution XI, entitled "Regional arrangements for the promotion and protection of human rights", was adopted by the Committee without a vote. Draft resolution XII on missing persons in Cyprus is a consolidated text proposed by the Chairman of the Committee on the basis of two proposals submitted y the representatives of Cyprus and Turkey, among others. Also, in relation to the question of human rights, the Committee had before it under this item a draft resolution entitled "Protection of human rights in Uganda", which was introduced by the representative of Finland. After a series of consultations the sponsors suggested that here be no further discussion on that draft resolution at the meetings and said they had decided "not to press for a vote on it". The decision by the Committee to this effect is contained in paragraph 41 of document A/32/458. 
	With regard to narcotic drugs, the Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of the following draft resolutions: draft resolution VIII, which deals with international co-operation in treatment and rehabilitation; draft resolution IX on the United Nations Fund for Drug Abuse Control and its programmes related to economic and social development; draft resolution X, which deals with intensified and co-ordinated efforts to fight the illicit traffic in and illicit demand for narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. 
	Finally, the Committee adopted draft resolution I relating to social progress and development. In this draft resolution, entitled "Implementation of the Declaration on Social Progress and Development", the Committee recommends that the General Assembly include in the provisional agenda of its thirty-fourth session in 1979 a separate item entitled "Implementation of the Declaration on Social Progress and Development" in order to mark the tenth anniversary of the adoption by the General Assembly of the said Declaration. 
	In connexion with agenda item 75 on the World Conference to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination, the report on which appears in document A/32/422, the Committee adopted the draft resolution submitted to it by the Economic and Social Council and decided to recommend to the General Assembly that it convene the Conference in Geneva from 14 to 25 August 1978. In the annex to the draft resolution the Committee adopted the recommendation of the Economic and Social Council with regard to the non-governmental organizations united to participate in the World Conference. The Committee also adopted a draft decision to include in the provisional agenda of the World Conference an additional item to take into account the recommendation of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. The item called for the consideration at the Conference of the 
	"... fuller implementation and wider acceptance ... of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination ...". 
	(A/32/422, para. 11) 
	The attention of the Assembly is drawn to the fact that the financial implications of holding the World Conference to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination in Geneva in 1978 have been provided for in sections 4 and 23 and will be contained in the report of the Fifth Committee on the programme budget for the biennium 1978–1979. 
	The report of the Third Committee on agenda item 76 relating to alternative approaches and ways and means within the United Nations system for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms is contained in document A/32/423. The Committee is recommending for adoption by the General Assembly a draft resolution in which, inter alia, it would request the Commission on Human Rights to undertake as a matter of high priority at its thirty-fourth session an over-all analysis of the alternative approaches and ways and means within the United Nations system for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the light of the concepts defined in the draft resolution, and to include in the provisional agenda for its thirty-third session an item on this subject. In a procedural decision the Committee decided not to vote on a second draft resolution submitted to it on the same item. 
	Document A/32/436 contains the report of the Third Committee on item 78 dealing with the question of the elderly and the aged. The Third Committee adopted without a vote two draft resolutions for recommendation to the General Assembly. In draft resolution I the General Assembly would call on the various bodies of the United Nations system, specialized agencies and non-governmental organizations, as well as Governments, to co=-ordinate their efforts in the formulation of plans and programmes aiming at improving the social and economic situation of older people throughout the world. 
	The draft resolution also decides to include an item entitled "The elderly and the aged" in the provisional agenda of its thirty-fourth session. Draft resolution II is entitled "international Year and World Assembly on Aging". In this draft resolution the General Assembly would invite all States to make known their views to the Secretary-General concerning utility of proclaiming an international year on aging in order to call world-wide attention to the serious problems arising out of the growing properties of the world population and would decide to include in the provisional agenda of its thirty=third session an item under which the Secretary-General's report and pertinent observations by Members States would considered. 
	Document A/32/437 contains the report of the Third Committee on item 82 relating to the International Year for Disabled Persons. The Third Committee adopted without a vote a draft resolution entitled "International Year for Disabled Persons", by which it approved the proposals of the Secretary-General concerning plans for the celebration of the international year and, inter alia, appealed to Member States to make generous voluntary contributions for the international year. The Committee also recommended that the General Assembly decide to include in the provisional agenda for its thirty-fourth session as item entitled "international year for disabled persons". 
	The report on agenda item 84 entitled "Policies and programmes relating to youth" is contained in document A/32/439. The Third Committee adopted without a vote two draft resolutions on this item. Draft resolution I is entitled "Youth is the contemporary world". In it the General Assembly invites all States to make known their views concerning the proclamation of an international youth year and requests the Secretary-General to prepare a report containing such views and to propose means for the observance of such year. In this draft resolution the Assembly would also decide to include in the provisional agenda of its thirty-third session an item entitled "Policies and programmes relating to youth" and to grant it the highest priority, due consideration being given to the idea of proclaiming an international youth year at that session. 
	Draft resolution II, entitled "Cannels of communication with youth and youth organizations", requests, inter alia, the Secretary-General to undertake the necessary action for the implementation of guidelines for the improvement of the channels of communication between the United Nations and youth and youth organizations, as contained in the annex to the draft resolution. It also requests the Secretary-General to submit to the thirty-third session a report on comments and suggestions by Member States and the regional economic commissions relating to those guidelines. The Committee also adopted a draft decision taking note of the Secretary-General's report on the United Nations Volunteer Programme and asking the Secretary-General to transmit this report ot the sixty-fourth session of the Economic and Social Council. 
	Agenda item 85 deals with the United Nations Decade for Women. The report of the Committee is contained in document A/32/440. The Committee held a long general debate during 10 meetings. The Committee then established an open-ended Working Group to consider the text of the draft convention submitted by the Economic and Social Council. The Rapporteur of the Working Group, from Denmark, who was also the Vice-Chairman, informed the Committee that because of lack of time the Working Group had been unable to complete the drafting of the convention. The Committee then adopted a draft resolution in which it recommended that a working group to continue and complete the work should be established at the beginning of the thirty-third session. It also expressed the hope that the Draft Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women will be adopted at that session of the General Assembly. 
	The Committee adopted six more draft resolutions on item 85 as follows. Draft resolution II, dealing with the establishment of the International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women, requests the Secretary-General to prepare a draft document describing, inter alia, the responsibilities and programme for the Institute and to report to the Economic and Social Council at its sixty-fourth session on the progress achieved towards the establishment of the said Institute. Draft resolution III, entitled "Interagency programme for the United Nations Decade for Women", request the Secretary-General to transmit to Governments every two years the study of their interagency programmes for the Decade for Women and urges the 
	Draft resolution II, entitled "Channels of communication with youth and youth organizations", requests, inter alia, the Secretary-General to undertake the necessary action for the implementation of guidelines for the improvement of the channels of communication between the United Nations and youth and youth organizations, as contained in the annex to the draft resolution. It also requests the Secretary-General to submit to the thirty-third session a report on comments and suggestions by Member States and the regional economic commissions relating to those guidelines. The Committees also adopted a draft decision taking note of the Secretary-General's report on the United Nations Volunteer Programme and asking the Secretary-General to transmit this report to the sixty-fourth session of the Economic and Social Council. 
	Agenda item 85 deals with the United Nations Decade for Women. The report of the Committee is contained in document A/32/440. The Committee held a long general debate during 10 meetings. The Committee then established an open-ended Working Group to consider the text of the draft convention submitted by the Economic and Social Council. The Rapporteur of the Working Group, from Denmark, who was also the Vice-Chairman, informed the Committee that because of lack of time the Working Group had been unable to complete the drafting of the convention. The Committee then adopted a draft resolution in which it recommended that a working group to continue and complete the work should be established at the beginning of the thirty-third session. It also expressed the hope that the Draft Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women will be adopted at that session of the General Assembly. 
	The Committee adopted six more draft resolutions on item [ ]as follows. Draft resolution II, dealing with the establishment of the International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women, requests the Secretary-General to prepare a draft document describing, inter alia, the responsibilities and programme for the Institute and to report to the Economic and Social Council at its sixty-fourth session on the progress achieved towards the establishment of the said Institute. Draft resolution III, entitled "Interagency programme for the United Nations Decade for Women", requests the Secretary-General to transmit to Governments every two years the study of their interagency programmes for the Decade for Women and urges the participating agencies and organizations of the United Nations to identify and undertake, as quickly as possible, projects to be executed jointly. 
	Draft resolution IV, entitled "Pledging Conference for the United Nations Decade for Women", requests the Secretary-General to convene during the thirty-third session of the General Assembly a second pledging conference to finance the voluntary fund for the Decade and the International Research and Training Institute. In draft resolution V, dealing with the World Conference of the United Nations Decade for Women, the General Assembly accepts the offer of the Government of Iran to act as host to the proposed 1980 world conference and defines arrangements for the preparation of that conference. In draft resolution VI, on the Voluntary Fund for the United Nations Decade for Women, the General Assembly requests the Secretary-General to continue to report annually on the management of the Fund and to submit periodically to the General Assembly progress reports on the execution of the projects selected by the Consultative Committee to be financed by the Fund. Finally, in draft resolution VII on Women's participation in the strengthening of international peace and security and in the struggle against colonialism, racism, racial discrimination, aggression, occupation and all forms of foreign domination, the General Assembly calls upon all States to encourage broad participation of women in the effort to strengthen international peace, extend the process for international détente, curb the arms race and take measures for disarmament, and invites them to proclaim any day of the year as the day of the United Nations for Women's rights and international peace. 
	With regard to item 83, on "Human rights and scientific and technological developments"; item 86, on "Elimination of all forms of religious intolerance"; item 88, on "Freedom of information"; and item 89, on "United Nations conference for an international convention on adoption law", the Committee was unable because of lack of time, to consider in depth the substance of these items and adopted procedural decisions which may be found in the corresponding documents contained in the reports of the Third Committee on these items. 
	Since this will be the last time for me as Rapporteur of the Third Committee to address this Assembly, I should like to take this opportunity to express my sincere gratitude and thanks to Mr. Emmanuel [ ], the Secretary of the Committee, and to Mrs. Pilar Downing, both of whom I had the honour and fortune to work with 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 on Human Rights, the Conference Officers and the Document Officers. 
	Finally, I should like to wish all those members returning home a safe journey, and, to all of you, happy holidays and a happy new year. 

	The PRESIDENT: Before we proceed to the consideration of the reports of the Third Committee, I call on the representative of Iran who has asked to be allowed to make an explanatory statement. 

	Miss [ ] (Iran) (interpretation from French): When 5the Committee took a decision on the draft resolution, which is now draft resolution VI in document A/32/458, concerning the report of the Economic and Social Council, and had been submitted by the delegation of the Byelorussian SSR, my delegation made a suggestion to the Byelorussian SSR delegation that in its operative paragraph 1, instead of speaking of "social progress of peoples", it should say, as in paragraphs 3 and 6 of the French text "the social progress of their people" - in the singular. 
	As far as I can recall, the representative of the Byelorussian SSR twice indicated that he accepted the Iranian suggestion. It seems that the report does not incorporate it. Consequently, if the delegation of the Byelorussian SSR agrees, I propose – and this is the reason for my intervention – that our [ ], which I believe was accepted, should be duly reflected in the report and hence in the draft resolution. 
	
	Mr. MAKSTNOV (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) (interpretation from Russian): The representative of Iran was perfectly right in saying that during the discussion of this draft resolution in the Third Committee my delegation, as the sponsor of the draft resolution, did indeed accept those small changes and that the draft resolution should read: "social progress of their people". 

	The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of Mali who wishes to make a correction. 

	Mrs. MARICO (Mali) (interpretation from French): My delegation notes that in the French text of draft resolution XI contained in document A/32/458 there is an error in operative paragraph 1. In regard to operative paragraph 1 of draft resolution XI, we note that the Third Committee voted on a text the French version of which did not correspond to that introduced here by the Rapporteur. The wording in French accepted by the sponsors and adopted in the Third Committee should read as follows: "Appeals to States in areas where regional arrangements in the field of [bonus] rights do not yet exist". In the Third Committee we asked the Secretary to read this out twice in French, so that the Secretariat could take note of it. However, it has not been taken note of, as we see that the French text still reads: "Invites States in the areas ...". I am not making a frivolous correction. My delegation considers that such a decision, whereby the establishment of regional machinery for the promotion and protection of human rights is envisaged, falls within the competence of other bodies. The words "appeals to States" are much more acceptable to my delegation, for the reasons which my delegation explained in the Third Committee when explaining our vote. So once again I would request that a correction be made to the French text, before we vote on this draft resolution. 
	
	The PRESIDENT: The Secretariat will make the necessary corrections to the French text in accordance with the clarification just given by the representative of Mali, and the same will be done in regard to the correction requested by the representative of Iran. So there are no points of disagreement. These two corrections will be made in the final texts of the draft resolutions before us. 
	We shall now proceed to the consideration of the reports of the Third Committee. 
	Pursuant to rule 66 of the rules of procedure, it was decided not to discuss the reports of the Third Committee. 
	
	The PRESIDENT: The Assembly will consider first the report of the Third Committee on agenda item 12, entitled "Report of the Economic and Social Council", which is contained in document A/32/458. 
	I shall now call on those representatives who visit to explain their votes on any or all of the 12 draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in its report on agenda item 12. The representatives will also have an opportunity to explain their votes after all the votes on this report have been taken. 

	Mr. FUENTES [IRASTI] (Bolivia) (interpretation from Spanish): Although my delegation feels that our statement on the report of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile was quite clear, we should like, nevertheless, to make known our vies now concerning draft resolution II (formerly A/C.3/32/L.37), which was adopted by the Third Committee on 7 December and appears on today's agenda. 
	The Government of Bolivia attaches the greatest importance to the most zealous and universal observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and therefore in principle we would support any measure that would protect and defend those rights anywhere in the world, whoever the persons being deprived of them. However, at the time when the draft in document A/C.3/32/L.37 was voted on, we had to abstain because we had serious reservations, not only on our own behalf but also on behalf of other nations of the Latin American region, whose opinions were not at that time taken into account – something that was, in our view, an anomaly that would be very difficult to justify. 
	Although the evident intention of the sponsors of draft resolution A/C.3/32/L.37 would seem to be purely and simply the defense of human rights and a well-deserved [ ] of the Government accused of violating them, in the text of the [document] are to be found allegations, assertions and accusations which, since they have not been duly [ , are not valid as evidence and thus nullify the effectiveness and [veracity] of the document. One of the aspects of the document that detracts from its value is its discriminatory nature; it stigmatizes one Government and one country and in so doing passes a deliberate political judgment which touches on matters wholly and exclusively within the jurisdiction of that State. 
	In open contrast with that intention and with a flagrant lack of the objectivity that should be inherent in a subordinate body of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, this document omits mention of the progress achieved in Chile in the year that has elapsed since the previous report was submitted. It mentions whatever is abnormal and deserving of criticism but it does not mention the efforts being [made] to improve the situation. What is even more significant is that it entirely omits mention of the Chilean Government's constantly demonstrated willingness to co-operate with the Ad Hoc Working Group so long as that Group in no way infringes on its authority – or its sovereignty.  My delegation considers that all these factors infringe on the impartiality and the objectivity that should have been the feature of the work of the Ad Hoc Working Group. 
	If we agree to the investigation continuing on its present course, it is because we believe that the errors of the past will not be repeated, that they will be corrected because they have, to a certain extent, shaken our faith in its effectiveness. This is what caused a great may countries to advocate the creation of new machinery. Unfortunately, that view did not commend itself to the majority that make the decisions in the General Assembly. 
	Filled as we are with doubts regarding the existence of the conceptual error underlying the Ad Hoc Working Group and it being our duty to ensure a correct application of human rights, we have no choice but to abstain. We do so for two reasons: first, because we cannot vote in favour of a draft resolution whose political intent in so blatant and, especially, because we cannot vote against it however much we should like to do so since what is at stake is the prestige of a sister republic and a Government of Latin America pitilessly placed in the prisoner's dock. We feel, however, that we are supporting, perhaps hypothetically and ideally, rules of conduct protecting human rights. As we are being placed before a matter of conscience, we should like to recall what the Romans asked of Caesar's wife; not only that she be beyond reproach but that she be seen to be. The application of that historical requirement is apt in the case of human rights because governments, in their observance of those rights, must not only respect the legal order which includes them in their regular laws, but they must also be careful in the way they apply that legislation and ensure the honesty of those called upon to implement such legislation, that is, by taking good care to close all the loop-holes through which the purity of the law might be contaminated. 
	We therefore trust that the progress achieved towards normality in the observance of human rights in Chile will be strengthened daily and that very soon the exercise of all democratic freedoms in an atmosphere of order and progressive development which are the most positive elements that will lead to the establishment of lasting social peace, will be restored in that country. That is our hope. 

	Mr. DIEZ [URLUA] (Chile) (interpretation from Spanish): Before the vote on the draft resolution on "Protection of human rights in Chile", the Government of Chile wishes to explain its vote and to express its views. Not only does the Government of Chile reject the draft resolution adopted by the Third Committee, but it wishes to state for the record of this General Assembly its most determined protest at this iniquitous draft resolution and the way in which the Chilean case has been dealt with over the last three years in the United Nations. 
	We wish to state our rejection of it and our protest, first of all, because of the incredible singling out of a country that has occurred in the case of Chile. We are now reaching the end of this session of the United Nations General Assembly at a time when international public opinion quite rightly would have expected this to have been the year of human rights. And yet no other draft resolution has been discussed, no other draft resolution has been adopted, except for the one on Chile that we are going to vote upon now. This surely is not a tribute to the legal equality of States, a principle on which this Organization rests, nor is it a homage to the cause of human rights, nor is it proof of sincerity or consistency. 
	We also wish to protest the unheard of fact that, while problems of a country like mine are brought to the United Nations, the problems of the great Powers, the problems of the European States, are discussed elsewhere, behind closed doors, discreetly and cautiously, thus depriving this international Organization of a [competence], which is only invoked against smaller countries. 
	The regional organizations possess –and must possess – competence, and functions in the matter of human rights. But they must be recognized without any discrimination and must be applied equally in all regions. If priority intervention on the part of a regional organization in a matter of human rights in a country of that region is accepted, then by the same token we must accept the intervention of all the regional organizations in similar situations. 
	It is a known fact that the Organization of American States adopted an agreement on the situation of human rights in Chile. However, that has been entirely ignored and contradicted by the draft resolution now before the Assembly. 
	We also wish to protest because not only has the principle of the legal equality of States been gravely and repeatedly violated but because the report of the Ad Hoc Working Group, the debate held in the Third Committee and the draft resolution itself also violate the principles of self-determination and non-intervention in the domestic affairs of States. 
	The Ad Hoc Working Group violated those principles when it included in its report a number of suggestions, ideas and interventions in fields that are absolutely within the internal authority of Chile. The debate violates these principles beginning with the very representative who introduced the draft resolution when he referred to the economic system adopted by the Government of Chile. The draft resolution isolates those principles because, inter alia, it ratifies what has been done by the Subcommission on the Prevention and Protection of Minorities that has gone so far as to interfere and to require of the Government of Chile information regarding how its budget is drawn up, the amounts, the sources and the aims and objectives of its internal and external credits and its investment policies. 
	We reject that draft resolution since it does not take into account the real situation in Chile, the information supplied by the Government of Chile and then the co-operation given by my Government to the United Nations and the Ad Hoc Working Group. 
	We reject the draft resolution because we, who recognize and accept the fact that the final goal of the United Nations in this field is to co-operate with Member States, have not received from the General Assembly, from the Commission on Human Rights of from the Ad Hoc Working Group, any positive responses in our co-operation. Despite three years of full acceptance of international jurisdiction and despite three years of co-operation with the United Nations, we have no even achieved acceptance of minimum norms of competence and procedure which would allow us to continue to co-operate with dignity and safeguarding the principles and basic rights of our country. 
	In the Third Committee we described the situation in Chile; we replied to the charges leveled against us; and, finally, we expressed the reasons for our determined rejection of the draft resolution. Today, we repeat: Chile will vote against it or the following reasons. 
	First, because the treatment of the Chilean case is an obvious singling out of a country in open contradiction to the first preambular paragraph of the draft, which alludes to the universal observance of human rights as required by the letter and spirit of the Charter of the United Nations – although the word "universal", when it comes to this subject, has become a synonym for falsehood and hypocrisy;
	Secondly, because the draft ignores the real situation in Chile, as well as the gradual correction of its causes. The draft deliberately ignores the events of the past year and is based on purely political motives;
	Thirdly, because the draft resolution is contrary to the very spirit of the Charter, of the International Covenants on human rights and the resolution of the United Nations in general, which provide for international jurisdiction in this field – jurisdiction which we shall never tire of recognizing and accepting – with the basic aim of co-operative with States in which existing situations might appear to jeopardize those rights. The draft not only refuses to recognize the co-operation that the Government of my country has offered the United Nations, but would seem to impugn that co-operation and contend that e are hampering it. In fact, by its decisions and abusive language, it promotes and justifies domestic reaction in my country which makes it difficult for my Government to continue to act in the way it has done thus for in its dealings with the Working Group and the United Nations;
	Fourthly, because a number of its provisions, as we have said, constitute blatant intervention in the domestic affairs of Chile, which no self-respecting country would ever allow, since they go beyond the realm of international jurisdiction in matters of human rights and contravene the clear and binding language of Article 2, paragraph 7, of the United Nations Charter;
	Fifthly, because, furthermore, the context of the draft resolution as a whole violates article 55 of the Charter, which basically calls for international co-operation and for respect for the principles of the self-determination of peoples and of the legal equality of States in all fields covered by this Organization, and particularly in matters of human rights; 
	Sixthly, because the draft resolution totally ignores the rules of due process – namely, the minimal rules of procedural guarantees to which individuals as well as international communities are entitled. Thus it seriously affects the rights of a Member State – indeed, a Founding Member – of the United Nations – and permanently sets a highly dangerous precedent adversely affecting co-operation in the field of human rights which might in future be emulated by other Governments; 
	Seventhly, because the draft resolution completely overlooks the decision adopted by consensus in the General Assembly of the Organization of American States only a few months ago in Grenada, despite the fact that in the debate in the Third Committee it was invoked by the majority of the States of our region. Thus it shows complete contempt for the competence and judgements [sic] of a regional organization having a vigorous tradition of vigilance in matters of human rights – an organization possessing an Inter-American Commission on Human Rights that is serious and severe, that is concerned over [he] situation in our entire continent without discrimination or politicization. 
	Eighthly, because, generally, this draft as not, in our view, based on a desire to ensure respect for or improvement of the situation of human rights throughout the world of in Chile. On the contrary, as is common knowledge and clear to all, and as can be gathered from the very declarations of several countries that have supported it, it has basically political motives and was politically inspired, politically negotiated and politically drafted. Hence it does not comply with the principles to which we are all committed, and is the [dismal] result of international arrangements and compromises. 
	In concluding this explanation of vote, my delegation wishes it clearly understood that our rejection of and protest against this draft resolution do not necessarily imply an end to our co-operation with the United Nations in this very important and delicate field. 
	In future, our co-operation will depend on whether the Commission on Human Rights and its Working Group agree with us on the minimal procedural norms to ensure recognition of our present situation, based on law and justice Our co-operation will hinge also on whether an end is put to the discrimination and politicization applied to our case, and, in general, on whether United Nations action is consistent with the purpose and principles of the Charter; whether it remains within the limits of its international jurisdiction in human rights matters; and whether it respects the dignity and sovereignty of my country, co-operating with my Government instead of trying, condemning and penalizing an independent State. 
	The delegation of Chile, in addition to announcing its negative vote, wishes to appeal to all delegations truly concerned over the human rights situation in the world, and more specifically in my own country, to ponder the consequences of their votes on this draft resolution. This appeal is addressed particularly to the other developing countries which, for lack of political power, are also vulnerable, at some point in their history, irrespective of ideologies – a conspiracy like that which today has made Chile the victim. 

	The PRESIDENT: The Assembly will now take a decision on the 12 draft resolutions recommend by the Third Committee in paragraph 52 of its report (A/32/458) on page 19 of the English text. 
	We turn first to draft resolution I, entitled "Implementation of the Declaration on Social Progress and Development". The Third Committee adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?
	Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 32/117). 

	The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution II relates to the "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, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Colombia, Congo, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, German Democratic Republic; Germany, Federal Republic of; Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, India, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Mozambique, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Norway, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, 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, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia. 
	Against: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Lebanon, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Uruguay. 
	Abstaining: Bahamas, Bolivia, Central African Empire, Ecuador, Egypt, Fiji, Indonesia, Ivory Coast, Jordan, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Malaysia, Morocco, Nepal, Nigeria, Oman, Peru, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Syria, Surinam, Thailand, Zaire. 
	Draft resolution II was adopted by 96 votes to 14 with 25 abstentions (resolution 32/118). 

	The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution III is entitled: "Assistance to South African student refugees". The Third Committee adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution III was adopted (resolution 32/119). 
	
	The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution IV relates to "Measures to improve the situation and ensure the human rights and dignity of all migrant workers". The Third Committee adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution IV was adopted (resolution 32/120). 
	The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution V is entitled "Protection of the human rights of certain categories of prisoners". 
	The Third Committee adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution V was adopted (resolution 32/121). 

	The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution VI is entitled "Protection of persons detained or imprisoned as a result of their struggle against apartheid, racism and racial discrimination, colonialism, aggression and foreign occupation and for self-determination, independence as well as social progress for their peoples". 
	As was the case in the Third Committee, a separate vote has been requested on the word "and" between the words "foreign occupation" and the words "for self-determination" in the title and in operative paragraphs 3 and 6 of the draft resolution. 
	Since there is no objection to that request, I put to the vote the word "and". A recorded vote has been requested. 
	I call on the representative of Morocco on a point of order. According to the rules of procedures, a point of order may be introduced only with regard to the voting procedure. 

	Mrs. WARIALI (Morocco) (interpretation from French): Please excuse me, Mr. President, for having to interrupt you during the voting. But it I understood correctly the issue on which a separate vote has been requested should be expressed as follows so that the vote is clear: the issue is between those delegations which are in favour of retaining the word "and" in the sentence, and those against it. My delegation requested the vote, but I am not sure how to vote. So, Mr. President, I would request you to please instruct us exactly how we are to proceed in this vote. 
	
	The PRESIDENT: The explanation was very clear. I am putting to the vote the word "and". I shall ask for those who are in favour – that means in favour of retaining the word "and" and those who are against – that means against retaining the word "and". 

A recorded vote was taken. 
	In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Botswana, Bulgaria, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Central African Empire, Chad, Colombia, Congo, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Ethiopia, Gabon, German Democratic Republic, Greece, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mongolia, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Poland, Qatar, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Togo, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia. 
	Against: Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Fiji, France; Germany, Federal Republic of; Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Mauritania, Morocco, Netherlands, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Surinam, Thailand, Turkey, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Uruguay, Zaire. 
	Abstaining: Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Burma, Canada, Djibouti, Egypt, Finland, Ghana, Guatemala, Haiti, Iran, Ivory Coast, Japan, Lebanon, Malaysia, Malta, Mexico, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Oman, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Portugal, Romania, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, Sweden, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia. 
	The word "and" was retained by 66 votes to 36 votes with 33 abstentions. 

	The PRESIDENT: We shall now vote on draft resolution VI. A recorded vote has been [requested]. 
	A recorded vote was taken. 
	In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Central African Empire, Chad, Colombia, Congo, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Gabon, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Sao Tore and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, 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, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. 
	Against: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France; Germany, Federal Republic of; Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Untied States of America. 
	Abstaining: Argentina, Bahamas, Bolivia, Chile, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Fiji, Guatemala, Honduras, Ivory Coast, Japan, Lebanon, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Portugal, Spain, Surinam, Sweden, Uruguay. 
	Draft resolution VI was adopted by 97 votes to 18, with 22 abstentions (resolution 32/122). 

	The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution VII relates to the observance of the thirtieth anniversary of Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution is contained in document A/32/419. 
	The Third Committee adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution VII was adopted (resolution 32/123). 

	The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution VIII is entitled Narcotic drugs: international co-operation in treatment and rehabilitation". I put that draft resolution to the vote. A recorded vote has been requested. 
	A recorded vote was taken.
	In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Burundi, Canada, Central African Empire, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon; Germany, Federal Republic of; Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Surinam, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tunisia, United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. 
	Against: None. 
	Abstaining: Bulgaria, Burma, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Mongolia, Poland, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Viet Nam. 
	Draft resolution VIII was adopted by 125 votes to none, with 11 abstentions (resolution 32/124). 

	The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution IX concerns the United Nations Fund for rug Abuse Control and its programme related to economic and social development. 
	I put draft resolution IX to the vote. A recorded vote has been requested. 
	A recorded vote was taken.
	In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Burundi, Canada, Central African Empire, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon; Germany, Federal Republic of; Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Surinam, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. 
	Against: None. 
	Abstaining: Bulgaria, Burma, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Mongolia, Poland, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. 
	Draft resolution IX was adopted by 125 votes to none, with 11 abstentions (resolution 32/125). 

	The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution X is entitled "Intensified and co-ordinated efforts to fight the illicit traffic in and illicit demand for narcotic drugs and psychotropic substance". A recorded vote has been requested. 
	A recorded vote was taken. 

	In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Burundi, Canada, Central African Empire, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon; Germany, Federal Republic of; Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Surinam, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Untied States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. 
	Against: None. 
	Abstaining: Bulgaria, Burma, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Mongolia, Poland, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. 

	Draft resolution X was adopted by 125 votes to none, with 11 abstentions (resolution 32/126).

	The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution II is entitled "Regional Arrangements for the promotion and protection of human rights". The Third Committee adopted resolution XI without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution XI was adopted (resolution 32/127). 

	The PRESIDENT: Lastly, we come to draft resolution XII, entitled "Missing persons in Cyprus". The Third Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution XII was adopted (resolution 32/1128). 
 
	The PRESIDENT: I shall now call on representatives wishing to explain their votes. 

	U TIN LAT (Burma): The delegation of Burma abstained in the vote on draft resolution VIII, entitled "Narcotic drugs: international co-operation in treatment and rehabilitation" contained in the report of the Third Committee (A/32/458) under agenda item 12, Report of the Economic and Social Council. 
	We did so because the basic tenet of our Government's internal policy in regard to narcotics and drug abuse control is to rely on our own national efforts and to do so in conformity with the specific social, economic and cultural conditions in our country. Resort to any other approach is likely to create new facets incompatible with our sovereignty. 
	Burma has long recognized the inherent menace of the narcotics problem. Throughout the years since regaining independence in 1948, Burma has consistently give n and will continue to give high priority to combating the drag menaces a matter of national concern and has instituted various measures in that regard. [Open] inquiry committees were initially established in 1948 and 1951 to investigate the problems involved. The difficulties experienced in our efforts at that time were caused by the presence of [Kuomintang] troops in our opium-growing border areas. The prohibition of the sale of opium became effective throughout the country in October 1965. In 1961 a large-scale crop replacement operation covering 20,000 acres was started, and progress has been made towards converting that land to the cultivation of useful substitute crops. 
	The narcotics drugs law was passed in 1974. The national campaign to eradicate the drug menace at its source has resulted in the destruction of thousands of opium plantations in successive operations launched by our Government. However, we feel that any measures for the destruction of sources of supply will not be fully effective unless they are matched by equally vigorous measures taken by the outside world to restrict and eliminate the sources of demand and means of supply. 
	Burma considers it a national responsibility that no effort be spared in combating the narcotics menace, and is determined to strive for its complete eradication, fundamentally relying on our own efforts. 

	Mr. DAWADI (Nepal): My delegation voted in favour of draft resolution VI, entitled "Protection of persons detained or imprisoned as a result of their struggle against apartheid, racism and racial discrimination, colonialism, aggression and foreign occupation and for self-determination, independence as well as social progress for their people" (A/32/458). 
	My delegation has always opposed apartheid and all forms of racism or racial discrimination, colonialism and foreign occupation. However, in operative paragraph 4 of the resolution reference has been made to Israel and the racist minority régimes in southern Africa which may be misconstrued to mean that all the relevant situations referred to in the paragraph are equally applicable to both areas. 
	The reference to Israel is the direct consequence of its continued occupation of the Arab territories since 1967 and its refusal to respect the right to self-determination of the people in those territories. We urge upon Israel to withdraw from the Arab territories so as to avoid such references the future. However, my delegation would in no way interpret the situations in Israel and southern Africa as being similar in all respects. 

	Mr. MEZVINKSY (United States of America): The United States voted against draft resolution VI on the protection of detained or imprisoned persons. In our view the resolution has several serious defects and we shall confine our remarks to just a few of them. 
	First, we view the resolution as largely a political document. It patronizingly uses the question of political prisoners as a polemical vehicle. 
	Secondly, the resolution singles out only certain categories of prisoners for special attention. The silence with which it treats the questions of the rights of prisoners of conscience or of the call for the release of all political prisoners is deafening. That is inconsistent with the even-banded United Nations efforts to secure a general release of all those imprisoned for their beliefs. 
	Thirdly, we feel this resolution could be interpreted by some as calling for the blanket release of terrorists hijackers and others who use political slogans to excuse their criminal acts as defined by international law. The United States cannot support such an interpretation. 
	Fourthly, with regard to the first preambular paragraph and operative paragraph 5, the United States supports peaceful solutions of international problems and opposes any call that recognizes the legitimacy of armed struggle. 
	Fifthly, the language of this resolution is vague and imprecise. It is difficult to repress the suspicion that this is an effort on the part of certain Governments which themselves hold large numbers of political prisoners to subvert clear-cut, even-handed efforts by the United Nations to ensure human rights and fundamental freedoms of all political prisoners. 
	In contrast, we have supported the resolution on political prisoners, which was originally proposed by the Swedish delegation, as a small but positive step in the right direction. It is now very important to ensure that that second resolution, which calls upon the Commission on Human Rights to act and to report to the Economic and Social Council, not be allowed to become a large step backwards towards unequal treatment. 
	If we do not protect the United Nations human rights machinery from cynical misuse, we can expect that the whole United Nations human rights effort will be seriously undermined. 

	Mr. MERKEL (Federal Republic of Germany): On behalf of the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany, I should like to thank the delegation of Nigeria for the initiative it took on draft resolution XI. To promote and encourage respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion, is a task that ranks high among the obligations of the international community. The creation of regional machinery and regional commissions for the protection and observance of human rights will undoubtedly contribute to the attainment of these ends. We consider the resolution just adopted to be an important step towards achieving a universal guarantee of human rights and an encouragement for existing and future procedures within the United Nations to protect human rights. 
	We venture to express the hope that even closer co-operation in the field of human rights may eventually culminate in the establishment of institutions such as an international court of human rights – an idea that was put forward by the Foreign Minister of the Federal Republic of Germany. [Mr.] Mana Districh Genacher, during the general debate at the last session of the General Assembly had reiterated in the course of the present session of the General Assembly. Such a development would be truly consonant with the goals set out in Articles 1 and 55 of the Charter, to which we are all dedicated. 
	
	Mrs. NGUYEN [ ] (Viet Nam) (interpretation from French): The delegation of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam did not oppose the adoption by the General Assembly of draft resolution XI in document A/32/458. Nevertheless we should like to make the following comment. 
	My delegation considers that, since the promotion of and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the achievement of the full dignity and worth of the human person are the ultimate purposes and fundamental principles of the United Nations, inscribed in its Charter and in all its statutes and accepted by all Member States, it is perfectly clear that the entire system of the many relevant bodies of the United Nations, which have been borne clearly defined responsibilities in various fields since the system was established, is called upon to exert every effort at both the international and the regional level to ensure promotion of and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. 
	Experience of more than 30 years of United Nations activities has shown that, given the complexity, intricacy and scope of human rights problems, co-operation within the international community is encouraging and promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms cannot be really effective or constructive unless it is based, on the one hand, on full understanding of the variety of problems that exist in different societies and on full respect for the economic, social and cultural state of each nation, and, on the other hand, on the concept that all human rights, political and civil as well as economic, social and cultural, must be considered globally, fundamentally and in all their aspects. This tremendous undertaking, as noble as it is difficult, cannot be entrusted to one person or group of persons, however competent or impartial. 
	As our delegation made clear in the Third Committee during the debate on agenda item 76 on the question of appointing a high commissioner for human rights, it would be quite illusory, even dangerous, not to say ill-intentioned, whether at the international or regional level, to try to establish any kind of body which would centralize all the work concerning human rights. As we see it, the existing regional commissions set up in this connexion were established in specific historical conditions and in a past to which we shall never return. 
	 I should like to conclude by saying that at the present time any institutional approach or arrangement in the field of human rights envisaging the establishment of regional bodies would be illusory, even dangerous, and is not at all desirable. 

	Mr. GASS (United Kingdom): Although the United Kingdom was able to vote in favour of draft resolution X in document A/32/458, the substance of which my delegation considers to be a valuable contribution to efforts to combat drug abuse, the United Kingdom does not interpret operative paragraph 6 of the resolution as prejudicing over non-ratification of the 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances. 

	Mr. O"DONOVAN (Ireland): The delegation of Ireland has voted for draft resolution X, just adopted, concerning intensified and co-ordinated efforts to fight the illicit traffic in and illicit demand for narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. My delegation approves of the aims and purposes of the resolution. It wishes to note, however, that there are some practical difficulties which have delayed the ratification by Ireland of the 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances. 

	Mr. ABRANOV (Israel): My delegation voted against draft resolution VI for the reasons set forth in the Committee. We reject out of hand the allegations contained in operative paragraph 4 as regards Israel. In contrast to the situation in other countries, including countries which sponsored this resolution, where thousands of prisoners are held in prison or in concentration camps because of their opinions, in Israel not a single person is imprisoned for his political views. Only persons guilty of murder or other acts of violence are imprisoned. 

	Mrs. SAELELER (German Democratic Republic): The delegation of the German Democratic Republic voted in favour of draft resolution II in the report of the Third Committee to the General Assembly (A/32/458) because the present [situation] in Chile continues to arouse world-wide concern. 
	Fascism, wherever it raises its head, endangers friendly relations among peoples and their peaceful co-operation. We support this resolution because it condemns again the systematic and massive violation of the fundamental rights and freedoms of the Chilean people by the fascist junta and because it calls for the restoration of human rights in Chile without delay. 
	The report of the Ad Hoc Working Group and the deliberations thereon in the Third Committee have furnished fresh proof of the fact that the fascist dictatorship in Chile unabatedly continues with all its negative consequences, directed against the political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Chilean people. 
	Only recently the public at large learned about new acts of violence by the junta against the working class in Chile and its trade union movement. When the régime in Santiago arrested seven trade union leaders just at the time when the violation of human rights in Chile was dealt with in the United Nations, it proved itself the correctness of what is stated in operative paragraph 1 of draft resolution II. What is required, among other things, is to make use of the possibilities in paragraph 9. 

	Mr. MAKSIMOV (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) (interpretation from Russian): The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR expresses its satisfaction at the adoption of resolution VI by the General Assembly, entitled "Protection of persons detained or imprisoned as a result of their struggle against apartheid, racism and racial discrimination, colonialism, aggression and foreign occupation and for self-determination, independence as well as social progress for their people". We voted in favour of that resolution. 
	The Soviet people have always shown solidarity with those which participate in the noble struggle for social progress, in the name of the triumph of the ideals of peace, democracy and national independence. On 1 March 1976, the twenty-fifth Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union adopted a statement: "Freedom to the prisoners of imperialism and reaction". 
	We would now like to stress that we fully reject the slanderous allegations by the delegation of Israel. Of particular importance are the provisions of the resolution adopted by the Assembly expressing solidarity with those who are struggling for national independence and social progress. It also emphasizes that any attempts to suppress the struggle against colonial domination and racist régimes are incompatible with the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The resolution call upon Member States of the United Nations to provide support and assistance in all fields to the peoples fighting for their liberation from colonialism, foreign occupation and racism. 
	Something that is particularly topical is the demand in the resolution for the release of all individuals detained or imprisoned as a result of their struggle against racism, colonialism and foreign occupation, and for self-determination and social progress. 
	In connexion with the adoption without a vote of the resolution entitled "Protection of the human rights of certain categories of prisoners", the delegation of the Byelorussian SSR – would like to state the following. If this draft resolution had been put to a vote, we would have abstained for the reasons set forth by the delegation of the USSR in the Third Committee. The Byelorussian SSR, like the USSR and the Ukrainian SSR, are parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and we carry out the obligations that we entered into under that Covenant. 

	The PRESIDENT: We have concluded our consideration of the first item on our agenda for this afternoon. 
	The Assembly will now consider the report of the Third Committee on agenda item 75, entitled "World Conference to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination". The report is contained in document A/32/422. 
	I call on the representative of Israel, who wishes to explain his vote before the vote. 

	Mr. [ ] (Israel): My delegation has been and is on record as opposed to any form of racial discrimination. Likewise, Israel is in favour of the Decade for Action, for the struggle for the elimination of discrimination that is based on resolution 3057 (XXVIII). My delegation, however, will vote against the draft resolution in document A/32/422 because it cannot accept the implications arising out of the first and second preambular paragraphs and its operative paragraph 5. We wish to express the hope that in the future, when elements extraneous to the resolution and repugnant to its spirit are eliminated, Israel will participate in the activities of the Decade for Action. 
	Mr. President, with your permission, and in order to save the time of the Assembly, I wish to use this occasion to state that our negative vote on draft resolution IV, in document A/32/440, dealing with the United Nations Decade for Women, is motivated by the same reasons as guided our attitude to the draft resolution in document A/32/422. 

	The PRESIDENT: The General Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 10 of its report (A/32/422). The draft resolution is entitled "World Conference to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination". A recorded vote has been requested. 

A recorded vote was taken. 

	In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Empire, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, German Democratic Republic; Germany, Federal Republic of; Ghana, Greece, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal ,Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Surinam, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, 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, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia,. 
	Against: Israel. 
	Abstaining: Guatemala. 
The draft resolution was adopted by 131 votes to 1, with 1 abstention (resolution 32/129).

	The PRESIDENT: I invite representatives to turn now to the recommendation contained in paragraph 11 of the Third Committee's report (A/32/422). The Third Committee adopted that recommendation without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	The draft recommendation was adopted. 

	The PRESIDENT: I shall now call on those representatives wishing to explain their votes. 

	The PRESIDENT: I invite representatives to turn now to the recommendation contained in paragraph 11 of the Third Committee's report (A/32/422). The Third Committee adopted that recommendation without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	The draft recommendation was adopted. 

	The PRESIDENT: I shall now call on those representatives wishing to explain their votes. 

	Mr. LI_ Wen-chuan (China) (Interpretation from Chinese): ON agenda item 75, "World Conference to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination", the Chinese delegation voted in favour of the draft resolution contained in document A/32/422. With regard to operative paragraph 5 of that draft resolution, the Chinese delegation wishes to take this opportunity to state again that the invitation of observers to attend the World Conference to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination by the Secretary-General must be made in strict conformity with the provisions of resolution 2758 (XXVI) of 1971. The Chinese delegation requests that the foregoing position of ours be included in the records of the Assembly. 

	Mr. MIZVINSKY (United States of America): The United States viewed the Decade against Racism as it was originally conceived in 1973 as a milestone in the age-old struggle against racial prejudice and discrimination. In recent months, as many representatives are aware, the United States Government attempted to reach a formula whereby only matters in keeping with that original intent of the Decade would be raised during the 1978 World Conference on Racism. Unfortunately, despite our sincere efforts, we were unable to reach a consensus on such a formula, and consequently, the United States was not able to participate in the vote just taken on this item. 

	Mr. [ ] (Belgium) (interpretation from French): The mine Member States of the European Community, on whose behalf I have the honour to speak, voted in favour of the draft resolution on the World Conference to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination, contained in document A/32/422. The sponsors of that draft, all members of the African Group, had at the sixty-second session of the Economic and Social Council shown a great spirit of conciliation, which enabled that to develop a text able to command very broad agreement today. We should like to assure them that we appreciate this very much. 
	The Member States of the European Community have frequently stated that, if the Decade for Action to Combat Racism were to remain faithful to its objectives and to its original programme, elaborated and adopted jointly in the framework of resolution 3057 (XXVIII) of the General Assembly, they would be willing to reaffirm their support for the Decade itself and also for the 1978 Conference which is to be the highlight of the Decade. 
	In our opinion, the resolution that has just been adopted gives us reason to believe that the Conference will be able to be held within the context of the programme established by resolution 3057 (XXVIII) without the introduction of any elements extraneous to the resolution. 
	Our vote in favour of the resolution today is based on our belief in the maintenance of this very positive factor. If for any reason whatsoever our confidence is bound to be misplaced, we should with great regret be obliged to draw the inevitable consequences. 
	It will be recalled that the Federal Republic of Germany, France and the United Kingdom participated last March in the work of the Preparatory Committee for the Conference and were led to make certain remarks concerning the agenda of the Conference proposed by the Committee. I should like to say here that our nine delegations still fully stand by the comments made at the time of their three partners. 
	Lastly, with regard to the question of inviting non-governmental organizations to the Conference, our delegations fully agree with the opinion expressed on that subject in the Economic and Social Council on 2 December 1977 by the representative of Denmark. 

	Miss CAMPBELL (Canada): The Canadian delegation has voted in favour of the resolution just adopted under item 75, "World Conference to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination". We support this text as we did an earlier resolution under item 74, "Decade for Action to Combat Racism", because we wish to emphasize the resolve of the world community to eliminate a scourge which has for too long obstructed our common effort– to promote the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. At the same time, we wish to make clear the basis upon which the Canadian delegation has supported these texts. 
	At recent sessions of the General Assembly the Canadian delegation has opposed the inclusion of an alien and unacceptable element in the consideration of various resolutions on the Decade against Racism and the World Conference on Racism. In our view, these elements compromised the objectives of those resolutions and threatened their eventual success. This year we are conscious of the concerted efforts which have been made to restore the Decade and the Conference to their original purposes, as defined in resolution 3057 (XXVIII) of 2 November 1973. For this reason, we supported resolutions on these questions at the sixty-second session of the Economic and Social Council and, more recently, in the Third Committee of this session of the General Assembly. The basis of our support for the Decade and the World Conference is our interpretation of the term  "racism", as defined in article 1 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racism and Social Discrimination as "any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin". This definition will continue to be understood as the basis of Canada’s support of the Decade and will be one of the elements which will eventually determine the decision of the Canadian Government with respect to participation in the World Conference against Racism to be held in 1978. 
	We are especially pleased to note that the questions relating to the venue of the Conference and to participation by non-governmental organizations in the Conference have now been settled. As regards the latter issue, the Canadian delegation considers that it is of the utmost importance to ensure the most effective participation possible so that the most comprehensive range of views can be taken into consideration in the results of the Conference. The Canadian delegation, therefore, interprets the rule that has been adopted with respect to participation by non-governmental organizations in the World Conference as including the ability of non-governmental organizations to make oral presentations. 
	The Canadian delegation wishes to affirm at this time its strong support for all efforts to promote a climate of opinion in which the evils of racism and racial discrimination can be successfully combated. These are the aims of established Canadian policy, and this is the basis of our support for resolutions on the Decade for Action and the World Conference against Racism. 

	The PRESIDENT: We have concluded our consideration of agenda item 75. 
	The General Assembly will now consider the report of the Third Committee on agenda item 76, entitled "Alternative approaches and ways and means within the United Nations system for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms". The report is contained in document A/32/423. 
	I shall now call on those representatives wishing to explain their votes before the vote. 

	Mr. FUENTES IBAÑEZ (Bolivia) (interpretation from Spanish): My delegation deems it appropriate to make a few comments on the portion of the report of the Economic and Social Council concerning the need to encourage universal respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, which led to the preparation of draft resolution A/C.3/32/L.17 that was examined and adopted by the Third Committee. 
	While at the appropriate time we clarified some of the aspects that we felt might not have been positive, the amendments proposed, the majority of which were accepted with great understanding by the sponsors, smoothed down the rough edges and polished the document until it became acceptable to the majority of Member States, including my own. 
	I should now like to refer to another point contained in the draft resolution which is a matter of prime importance to Bolivia: that is the direct and determining incidence of the economic factor in the maintenance of social peace and the full enjoyment of human rights. Mine was one of the first countries to become aware of that reality because we experience it personally. 
	We are a developing country dependent on foreign markets, and thus we know how to scarcity of essential goods divides peoples [lamentably, impoverishes them further, and creates deep-rooted social unrest. 
	Fortunately, it is an actual fact that the third world is no longer an open reservoir from which all types of renewable and non-renewable resources, bought at arbitrary prices well below their real value can be drawn in order to benefit the industrialized nations that process the raw materials and, in turn, export manufactured goods of which the developing nations stand in great need. 
	The political systems of many of our countries were built on anachronistic foundations out of touch with our hopes and objectives; they produced only small gains and great frustrations because they were artificial. This situation was the result of the absence of a solid, and therefore stable, structure, and therefore our social peace was shaken whenever any outside event that we could not ourselves control, reduced our national income and inflicted harsh suffering on the weakest, most vulnerable and poorest sectors of our population. 
	As far as the economic history of Bolivia in this century is concerned, we have been like a pendulum that has swung between a relative prosperity, which generated social peace, and periods of uncertainty and dissatisfaction. The latter led to domestic upheavals brought about by the sudden drop in the prices paid for our exports, and the consequent need to resort to emergency measures such as the lowering or freezing of salaries that in turn resulted in a lack of incentives and unemployment which, to a large extent and as the document we have before us indicates, as a rule, generate situations of violence where very often individual liberties themselves are infringed. 
	Bolivia might have had an extraordinary economic boom when the Western countries' sources [ ] in Asia were cut off because of the Second World War. But at that time our co-operation was exacted in the war effort of one of the great Powers that was fighting in areas beyond the continent. The leaders of Bolivia at the time agreed to co-operate, assuredly in the conviction that we were by our sacrifice contributing to the re-establishment of world peace. 
	Great was our surprise and disappointment when the stocks accumulate by the great Power under which the General Services Administration operates became a kind of sword of Damocles permanently hanging over the expectations and hopes of the Bolivian people, as well as over peace and social order. The ex-Minister of Mines and Metallurgy, General Alfonso Villelpando, in a recent statement before the international Symposium on lead, held at the [ ] Pax, spoke of the General Services Administration as follows: 
	"It has become the mine with the greatest reserves in the world and the lowest possible extraction costs. It has repeatedly interfered in world market prices, producing all the damage that can be expected for nations like Bolivia where lead is the most important product in its economy." 
	The refusal of the General Services Administration in the 1950s to raise the price of lead from $1.05 to $1.20 a pound created a situation of serious imbalance which was followed by the upheavals of 9 April 1952. The result was a situation of violence but, at the same time, the profound social transformations whose consequences Bolivia; is still experiencing. However, as a well-known spokesman, the Minister of Mines and Metallurgy of Bolivia, has stated, the evil has not been redressed. It is still there and it will remain until those resources which were obtained almost gratia are dealt with by those who hold them in the same spirit of co-operation which made their accumulation possible, and until fair compensation is negotiated in that same spirit for those who provided the raw materials at such ludicrous prices. 
	My delegation believes that the redress of those injustices was the aim of the sponsors of the draft resolution formerly contained in document A/C.3/32/L.17, which we now have before us. We are encouraged to note among its supported in the Third Committee some of the industrialized countries that could do so much to alleviate the anomalies that I have referred to. 
	Indeed, the Teheran Proclamation recognized that the full achievement of civil and political rights without the achievement of economic, social and cultural rights is impossible. To that we must add that the freedom and rights inscribed in documents have no value if no one is vigilant to guarantee that those freedoms and rights are in effect equally and at all times. 
	For all those reasons, my delegation will vote in favour of the draft resolution. 

	Miss MAYA (Colombia) (interpretation from Spanish): The subject of international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural or humanitarian character and in promoting and encouraging respect of r human rights has for many years been a matter of deep concern to my Government. We have felt it indispensable to stress the importance of other human rights – that is, economic and social rights, and not only political rights – since they are the essential bases of any improvement is the dignity of the human person. These rights may seem obvious and even superfluous to affluent and sometimes even wasteful countries. I am referring to the right of a roof over one's head, the right to an education, the right o receive the proper remuneration for the work one does, the right to enjoy leisure time. The developing countries can achieve such rights only when they have solved their economic problems, many of which have been exported to them by the affluent nations. That is true of the present economic situation, in which there are many disturbing questions, such as the deterioration in the terms of trade of the developing countries, the restrictions on trade among nations, the imbalances in world income, the control over scientific and technological progress and its effect on the exploitation of the new resources of the planet, such as the wealth in the seas, or the [war] of outer space. 
	The Minister for Foreign Affairs of Colombia, Mr. Indalecio Lievano-Aguirre, expressed these ideas in the following way in his statement to the Assembly on 5 October, during the general debate: 
	"There are no insurmountable obstacles in international organizations when reaching important consensus in matters of political democracy, as in the case of the protection of human rights, the struggle against racial discrimination, or the equal representation of States. But obstacles systematically arise whenever the powerful vested interests of a small group of affluent societies are involved, as for them the concepts of equality and human rights are subjects that can be, and in fact are, excluded from the economic sphere, deemed by them apt for inequalities, predominance of power and maintenance of the privileges and advantages acquired under the old economic order." (A/32/[ ].21, p. 67) 
	Hence, my delegation treats that new trails to international co-operation will be blazed and that we shall be able to reduce the economic tensions between the rich nations and the developing countries so that those countries can enjoy social and economic human rights, as envisaged in the draft resolution which in the Third Committee had the symbol A/C.3/32/L.17. We shall of course vote in favour of the draft resolution in the General Assembly. 

	Mrs. de BARISH (Costa Rica) (interpretation from Spanish): In view of the importance that my delegation attaches to this item, we wish to place on record Costa Rica's position on the ideas at the basis of the vote which we shall cast on this question. 
	Since the promotion of human rights is universal in nature – as the United Nations Charter recognizes and stresses – its application to all spheres of human activity must also be viewed as universal. 
	The framework of the dignity of the [human] person is made up of a minimum number of human rights whose integrity must be maintained through respect for every one of them. I refer to the right to life, to freedom of thought, to moral convictions – religious or otherwise, to the expression of opinions the right to equality, to mental and physical well-being, to health, to survival, to education, to adequately remunerated work, the right to fraternal treatment by the other members of society. 
	In view of the challenge which the international community faces because of the need to achieve economic and social development, we must today place more emphasis on the economic and social human rights than on civil and political human rights. That emphasis can be explained if it does not serve as a pretext for the suppression of civil and political rights in the name of economic and social development that actually does not require the suppression of such rights. 
	My delegation does not share the view that in order to overcome the obstacles to development, civil and political rights must be ignored. My delegation does not believe that in the search for solutions to these grave problems certain rights must be suppressed in order to defend other rights. Rather, we believe that there must e progressive advancement towards the full enjoyment of all these rights. Costa Rica can make such a statement because of its own experience – the experience not only of the past, dating from the historic moment of its achievement of independence, but also o the present. Hence, logically speaking, we believe that international co-operation for development and international co-operation to promote respect for human rights are no longer purely domestic obligations but a major international duty. 
	It was on the basis of those considerations that the delegation of Costa Rica approached the proposals on this item which were before the Third Committee. Costa Rica considers that the draft resolution in paragraph 24 of document A/32/423 contains a series of concepts that are of undoubted interest and value. These concepts are summarized in the preamble and operative paragraphs of the draft resolution; we fully agree with none of them. However, in assessing the directions and purposes of this document we must note that there is a restrictive approach to the way in which the United Nations would in future [ ] in a consideration of the various alternative approaches and ways and means to improve the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms. 
	Despite the fact that we regard this document as too limited in its approach to make possible an examination of all the possibilities inherent in this item, we supported – and shall support today – the draft resolution in question because of the amendments that were accepted by the sponsors and because of the spirit of accommodation that marked the attitude of those sponsors in the Third Committee. 
	My delegation cannot but express its regret that the draft resolution in document A/C.3/32/L.25/Rev.1 – sponsored by the delegation of Costa Rica along with the delegations of Bolivia, Colombia, Denmark, El Salvador, Gambia, Honduras, Ireland, Italy, Lesotho, the Netherlands, Norway, Panama, Senegal, Spain, Suriname, Venezuela, Australia, Canada, Finland, Iceland, New Zealand, Sweden and the United Kingdom – which proposes the establishment of the post of Untied Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, failed once again, after 20 years of discussion pending a decision by the General Assembly, to be put to the vote. As a result of procedural obstacles, that legitimate right was denied to it. 
	This is one further link in the series of obstacles that has been placed in the path of that proposal over the years. My delegation continues to believe that this alternative is appropriate and would allow us to activate the work of the United Nations in the promotion of and search for positive solutions in the matter of respect for human rights. 
	WE venture to hope that in the future the General Assembly will finally agree to tackle the problem with apolitical will, and with an urgent desire to a[ ] ensure effective the application of human rights all over the world. 
	Regarding the decision contained in paragraph 23 of chapter III of document A/32/423, which states: 
	"The Committee decided not to vote on the draft resolution contained in document A/C.3/32/L.25/Rev.1 on the understanding that the said proposal and all documents related to it that have been before the Third Committee during the thirty-second session of the General Assembly, as well as the opinions advanced in the course of the debate on the said proposal, are to be transmitted to the Commission on Human Rights to be considered at its thirty-fourth session ..." 
My delegation would like note to be taken in the record that the proposal mentioned there relates to the establishment of a post of a United Nations high commissioner for human rights. 
	My delegation voted against that proposal, submitted originally by the delegation of Cuba in the Third Committee, and we shall do likewise in the Assembly. We wish to express our appreciation to those delegations which voted together with us at that time, and urge them to do likewise today. 
	We should like a recorded vote to be taken on this decision. 

	The PRESIDENT: The General Assembly will now take a decision on the recommendations of the Third Committee. 
	I invite representatives to turn first to the decision of the Third Committee referred to in paragraph 23 of its report, document A/32/423. 
	The representative of Costa Rica has just requested that a recorded vote should be taken. 
	I call on the representative of Cuba to speak on a point of order. 

	Mr. ALFONSO (Cuba) (interpretation from Spanish): My delegation would like some clarifications regarding the proposal just made by the delegation of Costa Rica. 
	If the Chad delegation correctly understood the procedure adopted at the beginning of our discussion of the 12 reports on the work of the Third Committee, the Assembly decided not to discuss the reports before us. Obviously, this included the report on agenda item 76 contained in document A/52/423. 
	If, therefore, my delegation correctly understands the procedure, the only thing the Assembly has before it today for decision is the recommendation to adopt the draft resolution contained in paragraph 24 of that document. The decision appearing in paragraph 23 of that document is not subject to any decision of the plenary, as my delegation understands the procedure. That decision was adopted, fearing on a specific proposal contained in document A/C.3/32/L.25/Rev.1 which was considered by the Committee. The Committee decided not to vote upon it. Thus ended the story of that document. 
	As my delegation sees it, the procedural situation confronting us today is very clear. I insist that what we have to do is vote on the sole draft resolution recommended by the Third Committee and contained in paragraph 24. But if my delegation understands the procedure properly, the General Assembly had no pronouncement to make either for or against paragraph 23 of a report that the plenary has decided not to discuss. 
	I should like some procedural clarifications regarding the situation in which we find ourselves, and I reserve my right to speak again if I feel it appropriate to do so. 

	The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of Costa Rica in order for her to explain her proposal. 

	Mrs. de BARISH (Costa Rica) (interpretation from Spanish): I would merely refer to one precedent that has just lately occurred here, where the Assembly first of all adopted draft resolution III on the "World Conference against Racism and Racial Discrimination". The President addressed himself to paragraph 11 of document A/32/422 and asked whether the General Assembly was ready to adopt the draft decision without a vote. 
	Availing myself of the same right, I think that a decision in paragraph 23 – on the same page as the draft resolution adopted by the Third Committee on this subject – does warrant being voted upon. My delegation has the right to ask for the same recorded vote as was asked for in the Committee. I do not think we are deleting anything; we are merely asking the Assembly to pronounce itself.  

	The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of Cuba to speak on a point of order. 

	Mr. ALFONSO (Cuba) (interpretation from Spanish): My delegation's surprise is growing. The representative of Costa Rica has just invoked as a precedent to the request she made the decision adopted in the plenary meeting a few moments ago – a decision recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 11 of document A/32/422/ A mere reading of that paragraph will clarify the situation in which we find ourselves at that moment. In the previous case we were dealing with a decision recommended for adoption to the Assembly by the Third Committee. An attempt is now being made to submit for decision by the Assembly a part of a report which the Assembly has decided not to discuss. The case cited by the representative of Costa Rica, namely, the decision contained in paragraph 11 of document A/32/422 on item 73, read as follows: 
	"The Third Committee also recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of the following draft decision ...". 
	That recommendation of the Third Committee quite rightly required a procedural decision on the part of the Assembly, and the President was correct when he noted that requirement. 
	In the case, however, of paragraph 23 of the report on item 76, nowhere does it state that after the plenary of the Assembly had decided not to discuss the report the Assembly should have to go back to vote on it, when there is no recommendation by the Third Committee that the plenary of the Assembly take a decision on it. 
	I must press my point, Mr. President, that my delegation still requires some clarification from you regarding the procedural situation in which we find ourselves. 

	The PRESIDENT: The situation is very clear: paragraph 23 of the report before us (A/32/423) is before the Assembly not for the purpose of having the Assembly take a decision by voting on it, but only for the purpose of having it take not of that paragraph. 
	The example cited by the representative of Costa Rica concerning paragraph 11 of the Committee's report contained in document A/32/422 is completely different, because in that paragraph the Third Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of a draft decision. That is why the representative of Costa Rica can modify her motion for a vote only on the whole report of the Third Committee on the item before us, and not on paragraph 23, of which the General Assembly should only take note. Therefore, I shall not ask the Assembly to vote on paragraph 23. My intention was to ask the Assembly only to take note of paragraph 23 of document A/32/423/ 
	I call on the representative of Costa Rica again on a point of order. 

	Mrs. de BARISH (Costa Rica) (interpretation from Spanish): I must apologize, Mr. President, for the undue delay I am causing, and I accept the explanations you have given. I was merely interested in having the record show the situation and of the reasons for which my delegation was interested in having the Assembly pronounce itself on what is to be done with our proposal, since in any case it is always the General Assembly that decides where to send proposals and confirms the decisions of recommendations of the Committees on each item. Therefore, I accept your explanations and rulings, Sir, and am satisfied with them. 

	The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of Morocco on a point of order. Since this particular matter has already been decided, under the rules of procedure her point of order should pertain to something other than this. 

	Mrs. WARZAZI (Morocco) (Interpretation from French): When paragraph 23 is put before us, it is not, of course – and Cuba is quite correct here – a question of voting on the draft resolution which was put before the Third Committee. On the contrary, my delegation considers it a question of voting on the decision taken to transmit all documents relating to this question to the Commission on Human Rights. On this point my delegation cast a negative vote, and any draft submitted to a vote in a Committee should also be put before the General Assembly. 
	I would point out that we have several decisions relating to this in other documents, and if we could not express ourselves on the question of whether or not these documents are to be transmitted to the Commission on Human Rights, then my delegation would not be able to vote on the decisions relating to document A/32/438, concerning the inclusion of an item on "Human rights and scientific and technological developments" next year. So it is quite clear that it is not a question of voting on a draft resolution: it is a question of voting on the decision to transmit the documents to the Commission on Human Rights. 
	My delegation will cast a negative vote if there is a vote, as indeed there must be. 

	The PRESIDENT: The representative of Costa Rica has already withdrawn her request for a vote on paragraph 23 of document A/32/423, and, as I have announced, it was not my intention to put that decision to a vote, but only to ask the General Assembly to decide to take note of that paragraph. 
	Now the representative of Morocco is asking, if I understand her correctly, for a vote on paragraph 23. 
	Because a request that the Assembly vote or not vote on a given paragraph is a procedural motion, I shall put to the vote first the motion of the representative of Morocco, following the withdrawal of the same notion by the representative of Costa Rica, for a vote on paragraph 23 of the report in document A/32/423. 

	Mr. [BAROODY] (Saudi Arabia): Mr. President. I think your decision was the right one. If you want to humour my good friend from Morocco, I think the procedural debate will lead us into reopening the whole substantive question. That is something which I [ ] neither the representative of Costa Rica nor the representative of Morocco wishes to be done. I think you very wisely mentioned that the report of the representative of Costa Rica does not apply, for the reasons you adduced. 
	Now, may I prevail on my colleague from Morocco not to have us get entangled in this procedural debate, which will lead us into a substantive debate – and in case we do reopen the question, a two-thirds majority will be required – but just to have what she said recorded, without any vote whatsoever. 
	She is right in wishing to state where she disagrees with the Committee, or a good part of the Committee; and since our colleague from Costa Rica acted in the manner of noblesse oblige. I hoe my colleague form Morocco will agree to be satisfied with merely having what she said recorded in order to register the disagreement she voiced in the Third Committee, as was her full right to do. But, for heaven's sake, do not reopen the question, because I will take the floor on the substance. And if I do, it will prompt other representatives, for and against, to take the floor. If you want to extend this session till after Christmas, well and good: I am not going on vacation. 
	So I warn the representatives, whether they are for or against, to be satisfied with the decision of the Third Committee, taking into account that the remarks of our colleagues from Morocco have been taken note of and so will be the decision ad infinitum or ad nauseam. It is in your hands. But the President was correct. I do not [carry] forever with anyone here in the United Nations and if the President were not correct I would tell him so, in spite of the fact that I find that this question has to be referred back to the Economic and Social Council. 

	The PRESIDENT: Several points of order have already been raised, and in answering the points of order, on the basis of rule 71, I have already made a ruling that the vote on paragraph 23 will not be taken, after listening to the arguments expressed by the representatives of Costa Rica and Cuba. After making this ruling, on the basis of rule 71, I should like to ask the representative of Morocco whether she insist on appealing against that ruling, or whether she would perhaps agree to take not e of the ruling. I take it that that appeal is withdrawn and therefore, the Assembly will not vote on paragraph 23 of its report. I take it that the General Assembly agrees to take note of paragraph 23 of the report. 
	It was so decided.

	The PRESIDENT: The General Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 24 of its report in document A/32/423. The draft resolution is entitled "Alternative approaches and ways and means within the United Nations system for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms". 
	I put the draft resolution to the vote. A recorded vote has been requested. 
	A recorded vote was taken.

	In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Empire, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Sao Tope and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab  Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda,  Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republic, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, [Yemen], Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. 
	Against: None. 

	Abstaining: Austria, Belgium, Chad, France, Germany, Federal Republic of Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Paraguay, Spain, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. 
	The draft resolution was adopted by 123 votes to none with 15 abstentions (resolution 32/130). 

	The PRESIDENT: I shall now call on representatives who wish to explain their vote after the vote. 

	Mr. [ ] (Belgium) (Interpretation from French): I should like to speak on behalf of the nine members of the European Community. In the Third Committee, four draft resolutions were put forward under item 76. One of them was adopted, and it has now been adopted by the General Assembly. 
	I should like to [ ] that in a joint statement on 5 December 1977. Two other draft resolutions were rejected in a roll-call vote. That is a perfectly democratic way to do things, and we would like to emphasize that. The fourth proposal, relating to the creation of the post of a High Commissioner for Human Rights, a proposal of great interest, was unfortunately not put to the vote which would have resulted in its adoption. 
	The delegation of the nine members of the European Community feel that the General Assembly's refusal to take a decision on the substance of a matter which has been before it for over 10 years is regrettable. 

	Mr. LACHANCE (Canada) (interpretation from French): The Canadian delegation voted in favour of the draft resolution entitled "Alternative approaches and ways and means within the United Nations system for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms". That resolution is intended to establish a set of priorities or concepts to guide future action in the human rights field within the United Nations system. The Canadian delegation agrees that the establishment of priorities in a valuable exercise. While there exist throughout the world flagrant and massive violations of human rights it is only reasonable that the United Nations should address itself principally to the most serious abuses. The exercise of establishing priorities is not, in our view, in any way inconsistent with the stated objective of Canadian policy, which is to ensure the full and complete enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons in every region of the world. 
	Despite Canada's positive vote on this draft resolution, however, there are certain difficulties in its balance and approach, which we wish at this time to clarify. First, we do not agree that the range of priorities as outlined in this resolution s as talented as is desirable. Although we concur with the priorities accorded to the rights enumerated in the first operative paragraph, we believe that more recognition should be accorded to gross and persistent violations of the worth and dignity of the human person, such as torture and systematic genocide. We also believe that more emphasis should be placed upon the fundamental human rights of individuals, so that the United Nations might act against limitations on freedom of though, of speech [ ] of religion, which are abuses of human rights all too pervasive in many areas of the world. The Canadian delegation will continue to work in the future towards establishing a range of priorities which, in our view, represents a more comprehensive view of the needs of both persons and peoples. 
	Certain parts of the resolution also lend themselves to the interpretation that there are prerequisites to the enjoyment of rights and freedoms. The Canadian delegation accepts that the full and complete enjoyment of rights is made more difficult in the absence of certain economic and social conditions. But we do not accept the premise that the attainment of such circumstances is a prerequisite for the promotion and protection of such rights. States should promote and defend human rights, irrespective of their social and economic conditions, and we believe that the international obligations in the field of human rights must be taken seriously if we are to render justice to all our fellow men. 
	The Canadian delegation also regrets that the resolution contains little concerning the establishment of effective machinery in the human rights field. In our view, the process of establishing priorities and setting standards must be accompanied by the creation of means whereby the international community can assist in the promotion and protection of human rights. The creation of the post of a High Commission for Human Rights, as discussed under this item in the Committee, might have greatly assisted in the process of promoting human rights as well as of re-examining the priorities of the international community. 
	That is why the Canadian delegation saw a link between the proposal to create the post of high commissioner and the approach to human rights set forth in draft resolution A/C.3/32/L.17/Rev.1. We hope that all delegations will be in a position shortly to re-examine the proposal to establish the post of high commissioner in the light of the debates that have taken place this year. Equally, we hope that the work of the Commission on Human Rights and the General Assembly at its next session will see the emergence of proposals to enhance the effectiveness of United Nations machinery for the benefit of all Member States. 
	The collective determination of the international community to combat the gross and constant repetition of the violations of human rights wherever they occur will be the true test of the concepts in draft resolution A/C.3/32/L.17/Rev.1. The United Nations has quite correctly dealt with the question of human rights in Chile. We believe that this Organization should pay equal if not greater attention to other States. There can be no justification for our failure to act on the situation in Uganda, where flagrant violations of human rights persist. The Canadian delegation regrets that we were not given the opportunity to deal with that matter at greater length. 
	We believe that the provisions of draft resolution A/C.3/32/L.27/Rev.1 apply in every case where there is flagrant abuse. To prove our faith and our commitment to the ideals of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights we shall have to translate the spirit of that text into specific and effective measures for the benefit of the entire international community. 

	The PRESIDENT: The Assembly has concluded its consideration of agenda item 76. The Assembly will now consider the report of the Third Committee on agenda item 76, entitled "Question of the elderly and the aged". The report is contained in document A/32/436. 
	We shall take a decision on the two draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 12 of its report. 
	Draft resolution I is entitled "Question of the elderly and the aged". The Third Committee adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 32/131). 

	The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution II is entitled "International Year and World Assembly on Aging". The Third Committee adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution II was adopted (resolution 32/132). 

	The PRESIDENT: We have concluded our consideration of agenda item 78. The Assembly will now consider the report of the Third Committee on agenda item 82, entitled "International Year for disabled persons". The report is contained in document A/32/437. 
	We shall take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 10 of its report, entitled "International Year for Disabled Persons". The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution is contained in document A/32/470. 
	The Third Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. M ay I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 32/133). 

	The PRESIDENT: We have concluded our consideration of agenda item 82. We shall now take up the report of the Third Committee on agenda item 83, entitled "Human rights and scientific and technological developments". The report is contained in document A/32/430. 
	The Assembly will take a decision on the recommendation contained in paragraph 9 of the report of the Third Committee. Under that recommendation the Assembly would decide to include this item in the provisional agenda of its thirty-third session and to consider it with appropriate priority. The Third Committee adopted that recommendation without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	The draft recommendation was adopted. 

	The PRESIDENT: We have concluded our consideration of agenda item 83. We now turn to the report of the Third Committee on agenda item 84, entitled "Policies and programmes relating to youth". The report is contained in document A/32/439. A corrigendum has just been issues and distributed (A/32/439/Corr.1). IN the English text the final words of paragraph 13 "under the item entitled 'policies and programmes relating to youth'," should be deleted. 
	The Assembly will now take a decision on the two draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 11 of its report. 
	Draft resolution I is entitled "Youth in the contemporary world". The Third Committee adopted draft resolution I without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 32/134). 

	The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution II relates to "Channels of communication with youth and youth organizations". The Third Committee adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution II was adopted (resolution 32/135). 

	The PRESIDENT: I now invite representatives to turn their attention to the recommendation contained in paragraph 12 of the report of the Third Committee (A/32/439). The recommendation deals with the United Nations Volunteers programme. 
	The Third Committee adopted that recommendation without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	The draft recommendation was adopted. 

	The PRESIDENT: We have concluded our consideration of agenda item 84. The General Assembly will now consider the report of the Third Committee on agenda item 85, entitled "United Nations Decade for Women: Equality, Development and Peace". The report is contained in document A/32/140. 
	We shall take a decision on the seven draft resolutions recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 26 of its report. 
	Draft resolution I is entitled "United Nations Decade for Women: Equality, Development and Peace". The Third committee adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 32/136). 

	The PRESIDENT: We turn now to draft resolution II relating to the "International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women". The Third Committee adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution II was adopted (resolution 32/137). 

	The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution III deals with the interagency programme for the United Nations Decade for Women. The Third Committee adopted draft resolution III without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution III was adopted (resolution 32/138). 

	The PRESIDENT: We now turn to draft resolution IV< entitled "Fledging conference for the United Nations Decade for Women". The Third Committee adopted draft resolution IV also without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution IV was adopted (resolution 32/139). 

	The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution V relates to the World Conference of the United Nations Decade for Women. The Third Committee adopted that draft resolution too without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution V was adopted (resolution 32/140). 

	The PRESIDENT: We now turn to draft resolution VI dealing with the [ ] for the United Nations Decade for Women. The Third Committee [ ] resolution VI without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	Draft resolution VI was adopted (resolution 32/141). 

	The PRESIDENT: Lastly, we come to draft resolution VII, entitled "Women's participation in the strengthening of international peace and security and in the struggle against colonialism, racism, racial discrimination, aggression, occupation and all forms of foreign domination". A recorded vote has been requested. 

A recorded vote was taken. 
	In favour: Algeria, Angola, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Chad, Colombia, Congo, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gabon, German Democratic Republic, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, India, Iraq, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nepal, Oman, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia. 
	Against: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France; Germany, Federal Republic of; Honduras, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Paraguay, Sweden, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. 
	Abstaining: Afghanistan, Argentina, Austria, Bahamas, Barbados, Bolivia, Brazil, Central African Empire, Chile, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Fiji, Finland, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Indonesia, Iran, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Mexico, Morocco, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Senegal, Spain, Surinam, Swaziland, Thailand, Turkey, Uruguay, Venezuela, Zaire. 
	Draft resolution VII was adopted by 71 votes to 19, with 46 abstentions (resolution 32/142). 

	The PRESIDENT: The Assembly has thus concluded it consideration of agenda item 85. 
	The Assembly will now consider the report of the Third Committee on agenda item 86, entitled "Elimination of all forms of religious intolerance". The report is contained in document A/32/441. 
	The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Third Committee in paragraph 8 of its report (A/32/441). The draft resolution is entitled "Elimination of all forms of religious intolerance". 
	The Third Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 32/143). 

	The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of Israel who wishes to explain his vote after the voting. 

	Mr. [ELIAV] (Israel): Although my delegation joined in the consensus on item 86 it did so with a good deal of uneasiness. The elimination of religious intolerance should be viewed as a subject of the utmost importance, yet years pass by and until today the United Nations has failed to take any concrete action on the elimination of all forms of intolerance and discrimination based on religion and belief. Therefore my delegation wishes to express its hope that this serious matter, which means so much to millions of people all over the world, will receive at the next session of the General Assembly the priority that it deserves. 
	My delegation likewise wishes to express the hope that item 88 on freedom of information, which also has been so often postponed, will be dealt with substantively at the next session of the General Assembly. 

	The PRESIDENT: We have thus concluded consideration of agenda item 86. We shall now take up the report of the Third Committee on agenda item 88, entitled "Freedom of information". The report is contained in document A/32/442. 
	The Assembly will now take a decision on the recommendation contained in paragraph 6 of the report of the Third Committee (A/32/442). Under that recommendation the Assembly would decide to include this item in the provisional agenda of its thirty-third session and to consider it with appropriate priority. 
	The Third Committee adopted that recommendation without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	The draft recommendation was adopted. 

	The PRESIDENT: We have thus concluded our consideration of agenda item 88. 
	We now turn to the report of the Third Committee on agenda item 89, entitled United Nations conference for an international convention on adoption laws. The report is contained in document A/32/443. 
	The Assembly will now take a decision on the recommendation in paragraph 6 of the report of the Third Committee (A/32/443).  Under that recommendation the Assembly would decide to include this item in the provisional agenda of its thirty-third session and to consider it with appropriate priority. 
	The Third Committee adopted that recommendation without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	The draft recommendation was adopted. 

	The PRESIDENT: We have thus concluded our consideration of agenda item 89 and of all the items allocated to the Third Committee. I should like, on behalf of the General Assembly, to express my gratitude to all the masters of the Third Committee for their dedicated work and active role in the consideration of all the items allocated to the Third Committee for the spirit of co-operation and accommodation shown in the final fulfilment of its task. I thank them on behalf of the General Assembly. 

AGENDA ITEMS 100, 113, 114, 118, 119, 120, 121 AND 131 

PROPOSED PROGRAMME BUDGET FOR THE BIENNIUM 1978–1979 (COMPUTERIZATION OF TREATY INFORMATION AND REGISTRATION AND PUBLICATION OF TREATIES AND INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 102 OF THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS): REPORT OF THE SIXTH COMMITTEE (A/32/432) 
REPORT OF THE UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW ON THE WORK OF ITS TENTH SESSION: REPORT OF THE SIXTH COMMITTEE (A/32/402) 
UNITED NATIONS PROGRAMME OF ASSISTANCE IN THE TEACHING, STUDY, DISSEMINATION AND WIDER APPRECIATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW: REPORT OF THE SIXTH COMMITTEE (A/32/412) MEASURES TO PREVENT INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM WHICH ENDANGERS OR TAKES INNNOCENT HUMAN LIVES OR JEOPARDIZES FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS, AND STUDY OF THE UNDERLYING CAUSES OF [ ] OF TERRORISM AND ACTS OF VIOLENCE WHICH LIE IN MISERY, FRUSTRATION, GREIVANCE AND DESPAIR AND WHICH CAUSE SOME PEOPLE TO SACRIFICE HUMAN LIVES, INCLUDING [ ], IN AN ATTEMPT TO EFFECT RADICAL CHANGE: 
(a) REPORT OF THE SIXTH COMMITTEE (A/32/452);
(b) REPORT OF THE FIFTH COMMITTEE (A/32/475)
DRAFTING OF AN INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION AGAINST THE TAKING OF HOSTAGES; 
(a) REPORT OF THE SIXTH COMMITTEE (A/32/467);
(b) REPORT OF THE FIFTH COMMITTEE (A/32/476)
RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON THE REPRESENTATION OF STATES IN THEIR RELATIONS WITH INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS: REPORT OF THE STATE COMMITTEE (A/32/468)
CONSOLIDATION AND PROGRESSIVE EVOLUTION OF THE [ ] AND PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LAW: REPORT OF THE SIXTH COMMITTEE (A/32/469) DRAFT CODE OF OFFENCES AGAINST THE PEACE AND SECURITY OF MANKIND: REPORT OF THE SIXTH COMMITTEE (A/32/470)
	Mr. Al-Khasawneh (Jordan), Rapporteur of the Sixth Committee, presented the reports of that Committee (A/32/432, A/32/402, A/32/412, A/32/453, A/32/467, A/32/468, A/32/469, A/32/470) and then spoke as follows:

	Mr. AL-KHASAWNEH (Jordan), Rapporteur of the Sixth Committee: I have the honour of introducing to the General Assembly the following reports of the Sixth Committee on agenda items: item 100 concerning the computerization of treaty information and registration and publication of treaties and international agreements; item 113 on the report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its tenth session; item 114 on the United Nations Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination and Wider Appreciation of International Law; item 118 on the report of the Ad Hoc Committee on International Terrorism; item 119 on the report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the drafting of an international convention against the taking of hostages; item 120 concerning resolutions adopted by the United Nations Conference on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations; item 121 on Consolidation and progressive evolution of the norms and principles of international economic development law; item 131 on the Draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind. 
	With reference to agenda item 100, the recommendation of the Sixth Committee is to be found in paragraph 6 of the report (A/32/432). This draft resolution, adopted by consensus, provides inter alia that the General Assembly would emphasize the importance of having every treaty and every international agreement registered and published as soon as possible. The Assembly would also request the Secretary-General to initiate forthwith such measures as would contribute toward the reduction of current [ ] both in the field of registration and in the field of publication of treaties and international agreements, approving to this effect certain proposals made in a vote of the Secretary-General; it would also request him to ascertain the best means of putting the Untied Nations treaty information to full use for the benefit of the international community. 
	Turning now to item 113 concerning the report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) on the work of its tenth session, the recommendation of the Sixth Committee adopted by consensus, is to be found in paragraph 44 of its report (A/32/402). According to this draft resolution the General Assembly would recommend that the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law should continue its work on the topic included in its programme of work; continue its work on training and assistance in the field of international trade law, taking into account the special interests of the developing countries; maintain close collaboration with the Untied Nations Conference on Trade and Development and continue to collaborate with international organizations active in the field of international trade law; continue to maintain liaison with the Commission on Transnational Corporations with regard to the consideration of legal problems that would be susceptible of action by UNCITRAL, giving special consideration to the interests of developing countries and to bear in mind the special problems of lead-locked countries. 
	It would also call upon UNCITRAL to continue to take account of the relevant provisions of the resolutions of the sixth and seventh special sessions of the General Assembly that laid down the foundations of the new international economic order; welcome the decision of UNICTRAL [sic] to review in the near future its long-term programme; express the view that both the draft Convention on the International Sale of Goods and the draft provisions on the Formation and Validity of Contracts for the International Sale of Goods should be considered by a Conference of Plenipotentiaries, deferring until its thirty-third session a decision as to the appropriate ties for convening such a Conference of Plenipotentiaries and adopt measures directed at making possible symposia on international trade law. By a draft decision concerning the United Nations Conference on the Carriage of Goods by Sea, the General Assembly would take not e of paragraph 58 of the report of UNCITRAL and request the Secretary-General to invite the organizations referred to in that paragraph. 
	With reference to item 114 regarding the programme of assistance in international law the recommendation of the Sixth Committee adopted by consensus is to be found in paragraph 7 of its report contained in document A/32/412. According to the terms of this draft resolution, the General Assembly, among other things, would authorize the Secretary-General to carry out in 1978 and 1979 the activities specified in his report, including the provision of a minimum of 15 fellowships in 1978 and 1979 at the request of Governments of developing countries, and assistance in the form of a travel grant for one participant from each developing country who will be invited to the regional courses to be organized in 1978 and 1979. It would express its appreciation to the Secretary-General, to UNISCO, [UMITAN] and Governments of Member States for their collaboration with the Programme; encourage the inclusion of courses on international law in programmes of legal studies and request the Secretary-General to continue to publicize the Programme and to invite voluntary contributions toward the financing of the Programme. 
	I turn now to item 118, on the report of the Ad Hoc Committee on International Terrorism. The recommendation of the Sixth Committee, adopted by 89 votes to 9, with 24 abstentions, is to be found in paragraph 8 of its report, contained in document A/32/453. According to the terms of this draft resolution, the General Assembly would express deep concern ever increasing acts of international terrorism; urge States to continue to seek just and peaceful solutions to the underlying causes which give rise to such acts of violence; reaffirm the inalienable right to self-determination and independence of all peoples under colonial and racist régimes. It would also invite the Ad Hoc Committee on International Terrorism to continue its work in accordance with the mandate entrusted to it under General Assembly resolution 3034 (XXVII), first by studying the underlying causes of terrorism and then by recommending practical measures to combat terrorism and invite the States which have not yet done so to submit their observations and concrete proposals as soon as possible to the Secretary-General so as to enable the Ad Hoc Committee to carry out its mandate more efficiently. 
	With regard to agenda item 119, on the taking of hostages, the recommendation of the Sixth Committee, adopted by consensus, is to be found in paragraph 7 of its report, contained in document A/32/467. According to the term of that draft resolution, the General Assembly would decide that the Ad Hoc Committee, as constituted, should continue, in accordance with paragraph 3 of resolution 31/103 of 15 December 1976, to draft at the earliest possible date on international convention against the taking of hostages and, in the fulfilment of its mandate, to consider suggestions and proposals from any State, bearing in mind the views expressed during the debate on this item at the thirty-second session of the General Assembly. It would also request the Ad Hoc Committee to submit its report and to make every effort to submit a draft convention against the taking of hostages to the General Assembly at its thirty-third session. 
	Finally, with respect to agenda item 120, on resolutions adopted by the United Nations Conference on the Representation of States, item 121, regarding norms and principles of international economic development law, and item 131, on the draft code of offences against the peace and security of mankind, the recommendations o the Sixth Committee are to be found, respectively, in paragraph 4 of document A/32/468, paragraph 5 of document A/32/469 and paragraph 4 of document A/32/470. Those items could not be considered by the Sixth Committee because of the lack of time, and, according to the terms of the recommendations, the General Assembly would include those items in the provisional agenda of its thirty-third session. 
	I should like to express my sincere hope that the assembly will be able to reach a consensus in as many instances as possible when considering the adoption of the recommendations of the Sixth Committee which I have just introduced. 
	Pursuant to rule 66 of the rules of procedure, it was decided not to discuss the reports of the Sixth Committee. 

	The PRESIDENT: The Assembly will first consider the report of the Sixth Committee on agenda item 100, which relates to "Computerization of treaty information and registration and publication foo treaties and international agreements pursuant to Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations". The report is contained in document A/32/432. 
	The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Sixth Committee adopted that draft resolution by consensus. May I take it that the Assembly adopts that draft resolution? 
	The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 32/144) 

	The PRESIDENT: We have concluded our consideration of the twelfth item on this afternoon's agenda. The Assembly will now consider the report of the Sixth Committee on agenda item 113, entitled "Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its tenth session". The report is contained in document A/32/402. 
	The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 44 of its report. The draft resolution is entitled "Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law". The Sixth Committee adopted that draft resolution by consensus. May I take it that the General Assembly adopts that draft resolution? 
	The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 12/145) 

	The PRESIDENT: I now invite representatives to turn to the draft decision recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 45 of its report (A/32/402). The draft decision is entitled "United Nations Conference on the Carriage of Goods by [ ]". May I take it that the Assembly adopts that draft decision? 
	The draft decision was adopted. 

	The PRESIDENT: We have concluded our consideration of agenda item 113. 
	We now turn to the report of the Sixth Committee on agenda item 114, entitled "United Nations Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination and Wider Appreciation of International Law". The report is contained in document A/32/412. 
	The General Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. The draft resolution is entitled "United Nations Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination and Wider Appreciation of International Law". The Sixth Committee adopted that draft resolution by consensus. May I take it that the Assembly adopts that draft resolution? 
	The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 32/146) 

	The PRESIDENT: We have concluded our consideration of agenda item 114. 
	The Assembly will now consider the report of the Sixth Committee on agenda item 118, entitled "Measures to prevent international terrorism which endangers or takes innocent human lives or jeopardizes fundamental freedoms, and study of the underlying causes of those forms of terrorism and acts of violence which lie in misery, frustration, grievance and despair and which cause some people to sacrifice human lives, including their own, in an attempt to effect radical changes". The report is contained in document A/32/453. 
	I shall now call on those representatives wishing to explain their votes before the vote. 

	Mr. FUENTES IBAÑEZ (Bolivia) (interpretation from Spanish): My delegation was not present in the Sixth Committee when item 118 concerning international terrorism was discussed. At the risk of delaying the work of the General Assembly, for which I apologize to you, Mr. President, and to all representatives here for speaking again, I am obliged to do so because this is a matter that my delegation has followed with the keenest interest ever since it was first proposed by the Secretary-General. 
	Draft resolution A/C.6/32/L.13 is not satisfactory in our view. We consider that once again the basic question of the prevention and repression of international terrorism has been sidestepped and priority given to a study of its causes. This makes the aim of the draft a purely theoretical exercise, drained of all power truly to combat terrorism, if only in one of its most cruel aspects, namely, the one relating to innocent victims. When the cyclical phenomenon of violence has disappeared, only then will we have the means of remedying it, that is to say, through appropriate measures for the eradication of something that will no longer exist, which of course will not restore to life the thousands of victims of this evil we do not have the courage to face or the will to solve. 
	The item as submitted subordinates the existence of the phenomenon to the study of its underlying causes. It overlooks the truly criminal fact which can be easily identified and diverts the international community from the true objective which, because fo the very nature of human beings, is varied, broad and difficult to determine. 
	When the Secretary-General, shortly after assuming his functions, proposed this item, he did so by interpreting precisely the clamour of the whole of the international community which, incidentally, has not been heeded. We were asked to consider this item that is typified by cruelty and by actions that are committed in darkness and with premeditation. None of this has been taken into account. Because of the subtle way in which terrorism is dealt with it becomes something that cannot be punished in the way that any crime deserves punishment. This is unreasonable, because we were not requested to prepare a socio-criminological treaty of purely intellectual scope. We were dealing with specific cases, horrible acts, events that were condemned by the international community as it condemns with equal vigour attempts to eliminate and eradicate through appropriate channels the criminal forms of racial discrimination and the heinous crime of apartheid. 
	The intention was to avoid recourse to terrorism as a weapon mercilessly used against innocent victims, to fight it anywhere and against anyone who commits those awful crimes in order to achieve specific ends or to give free rein to violent instincts. Because this is the view of my delegation on terrorism, it is unable to vote in favour of the draft resolution adopted by the Legal Committee in document A/C.6/32/L.13. There are a number of elements I disagree with, in particular the change in the order of priorities which, by their nature, should be granted to these questions. The priority afforded to the causes distorts the whole concept and makes it all rather ambiguous. If this paragraph could have been voted on separately, we would have voted against it. As for the rest of it, we shall abstain. 

	Mr. CURIA (Argentina) (interpretation from Spanish): The affirmative vote of the Argentine delegation on the draft resolution to be found in paragraph 8 of document A/32/453, [ ] to prevent international terrorism, is cast with the understanding that this text contains a condemnation of international terrorism which is at present striking the whole of mankind. 
	Our support is also an endorsement of the work of the Special Committee in the hope that as soon as possible it will be able to recommend effective measures to combat this scourge. To that end, it would appear to be necessary to differentiate clearly between violence [ ] by terrorism and the acts of national liberation movements. 

	Mr. MONTENEGRO MEDRANO (Nicaragua) (interpretation from Spanish): The delegation of Nicaragua, which condemns international terrorism as a heinous crime, repudiates the use of force in international relations and prohibits all interference in the internal affairs of States and any violation of human rights, was compelled to abstain from voting on the draft resolution in document A/32/ 453, which was adopted by the Sixth Committee. We did so because we feel that postponement of practical measures that should be taken to contest, eradicate and condemn international terrorism and which have been recommended by the Special Committee, will now delay and postpone indefinitely our treatment of so important a question for the international community. 
	We believe that the draft resolution, which gives priority to the study of the underlying causes of international terrorism, is another dilatory measures which allows this repugnant crime to continue to be perpetrated in the world. 
	It would appear that since 1972, when the General Assembly referred this important question to an ad hoc committee, despite rhetorical manoeuvres the impression was given that there was consensus to tackle this question dynamically. Today, five years after the establishment of the ad hoc Committee, the Fifth Committee has adopted a draft resolution that does not meet the aspirations of mankind and which, far from preventing the perpetration of that crime, will allow it to continue and to increase. 
	It is for those reasons that my delegation will abstain from the vote this evening. 

	The PRESIDENT: The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee to paragraph 8 of its report (A/32/453). The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution is contained in document A/32/475. The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution is contained in document A/32/475. The draft resolution has the same title as agenda item 118. A recorded vote has been requested. 
	A recorded vote was taken. 
	In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Central African Empire, Chad, Chile, China, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gabon, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, 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, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Peru, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Surinam, Swaziland, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. 
	Against: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Israel, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. 
	Abstaining: Austria, Bolivia, Colombia, Denmark, El Salvador, Fiji, Finland, France; Germany, Federal Republic of; Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Philippines, Portugal, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, Turkey, Uruguay. 
	The draft resolution was adopted by 91 votes to 9, with 28 abstentions (resolution 32/147).

	The PRESIDENT: I call upon the representative of Jordan, who wishes to explain his vote. 

	Mr. [ ] (Jordan): My delegation voted in favour of the draft resolution contained in document A/32/453, and in view of the fact that we did not participate in the general debate on agenda item 118 in the Sixth Committee I should like to explain our vote. 
	We think it necessary, if the international community is to succeed in eliminating international terrorism, to study its causes. To be sure, we do not expect such a study definitely to determine links between causes and effects but this, in our view, should not deter us from pursuing the attempt. Certain situations are conducive to violence, and certain measures against violence should not and could not be taken without reference to work situations. It is a healthy sign in a society afflicted with the scourge of violence to enter into a genuine process of soul-searching. There is no reason why international society should be an exception. 
	There is also the consideration that to look at the problem of international terrorism purely from the point of view of penal law would give attempts at international codification in this field an unbalanced character that would result in a lack of acceptability and would therefore ultimately prove ineffective. 

	The PRESIDENT: We have concluded our consideration of agenda item 118. The Assembly will now take up the report of the Sixth Committee on agenda item 119, entitled "Drafting of an international convention against the taking of hostages". The report is contained in document A/32/467.
	I call on the representative of the United Republic of Tanzania, who wishes to explain his position before a decision is taken on this item. 

	Mr. [KATIKA] (United Republic of Tanzania): We have all along maintained that the taking of hostages is an aspect of international terrorism. Therefore international terrorism and the taking of hostages should be taken as one subject, and they should not be treated in isolation. Unfortunately in the efforts to negotiate for a draft consensus on international terrorism certain delegations did not display the same spirit of compromise we displayed with regard to the draft resolution against the taking of hostages. We were therefore very tempted to call for a vote on the draft resolution on the taking of [ ] as a symbolic protest against this double treatment of one and the same subject. But out of respect for those of our friends who were prepared to negotiate genuinely on the draft resolution on international terrorism, we have refrained from doing so. But we want it to be on record that in future, when this item comes on along with one on international terrorism if the same attitude is displayed, we shall be compelled to call for a vote because we see no justification, [ ] or otherwise for treating these two related subjects in a different manner when we consider procedures. 

	The PRESIDENT: The General Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph [ ] of its report (A/32.467). The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution is contained in document A/32/476. The draft resolution is entitled "Drafting of an international convention against the taking of hostages". The Sixth committee adopted the draft resolution by consensus. May I consider that the Assembly adopts the draft resolution? 
	The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 32/148). 

	The PRESIDENT: I call on the representative of Togo, who wishes to make a statement of position. 

	Mr. [KPOTSPA] (Togo) (interpretation from French): My delegation wishes to tell the Assembly how happy it is that the right French people takes hostage and held by Polisario were freed. He should like to pay a tribute in the Secretariat and the Secretary-General for all they did to contribute to this release. 
	The role played in this regard by the Head of State of Togo, General [Grassingbé] Dyadóna, as is clear from the telegram sent to him on 14 December by the Secretary-General of Polisario, which was communicated to the press on the following day, shows quite clearly the commitment of the Togolese Government to co-operation on an international scale in order to solve this problem that confronts the world. 
	My delegation joined in the adoption by consensus of the draft resolution in the report of the Sixth Committee on agenda item 119. We should like to see real co-operation within our Organization in the Future work of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Drafting of an International Convention against the Taking of Hostages and the Ad Hoc Committee on International Terrorism. 

	Mr. PRESIDENT: We have concluded our consideration of agenda item 119. 
	We now turn to the report of the Sixth Committee on agenda item 120 entitled "Resolution adopted by the United Nations Conference on the Representation of States in their Relations with International Organizations". The report is contained in document A/32/468. 
	The Assembly will now take a decision on the recommendation contained in paragraph4 of the report of the Sixth Committee. 
	In accordance with that recommendation, the Assembly would do [ ] to include the item in the provisional agenda of its thirty-third session. 
	May I consider that the General Assembly adopts that recommendation? 
	The draft recommendation was adopted. 

	The PRESIDENT: We have concluded our consideration of agenda item 120. 
	The Assembly will now consider the report of the Sixth Committee on agenda item 121, entitled "Consolidation and progressive evolution of the norms and principles of international economic development law". The report is contained in document A/32/469. 
	The Assembly will now take a decision on the recommendation contained in paragraph 5 of the report of the Sixth Committee. 
	In accordance with that recommendation, the Assembly would decide to include the item in the provisional agenda of its thirty-third session. 
	The Sixth Committee adopted that recommendation without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? 
	The draft recommendation was adopted. 

	The PRESIDENT: We have concluded our consideration of agenda item 121. 
	Lastly, we turn to the report of the Sixth Committee on agenda item 121, entitled "Draft code of offences against the pence and security of mankind". The report is contained in document A/32/470. 	
	The Assembly will now take a decision on the recommendation contained in paragraph 4 of the report of the Sixth Committee. 
	In accordance with that recommendation, the Assembly would decide to include the item in the provisional agenda of its thirty-third session. 
	May I consider that the General Assembly adopts that recommendation? 
	The draft recommendation was adopted. 

	The PRESIDENT: With that, we have concluded our consideration of agenda item 131 and of all the reports of the Sixth Committee which were before the General Assembly this afternoon. 

The meeting rose at 7.05 p.m.