Bangladesh: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, it is with much sadness
that my delegation has noticed a rising level of tension in our present
deliberations. It is with great concern that we observed a =8A state of
acrimony. This is unwarranted. We would therefore urge calm. We have
said before and we reiterate now that name calling or to be perceived to
have engaged in such does not advance the cause of human rights. On the
contrary it becomes a serious impediment. By resorting to it we do
unspeakable violence to our purpose. There is so much to discuss and
achieve. We have debated how to mainstream women in our political, social
and economic lives. We have deliberated on the rights of the child. We
have exchanged views about microcredit as an instrument of social change.
We have argued about the pros and cons of death penalty. We have made
forward movement towards the attainment of common values in many areas.
These are major achievement. Surely in all debates there were thrust and
parries as there were in ours. But these should be contained with an
acceptable limits. A relentless pursuit for tit for tat does not generate
healthy relationship. As Mahatma Gandhi once said an eye for an eye leads
only to blindness. Mr. Chairman, its easier to exaggerate the faults of
others. This is human nature. But to do so excessively is damaging.Parts of the houses we all live in are made of glass. To throw stones at others would only be it to invite the same back at ourselves. It is difficult to see how it can produce harmony and neighbourliness. It is our conviction that hectoring does not necessarily convince. Ponderfication does not necessarily pursued. More often than not the result is the just the opposite. None of us is an angle also none of us is Lucifer. We all fall somewhere in between. In my own country we are proud that our polity is seen to be democratic, pluralistic, vibrant and tolerant. Yet on our own volition we will say that we are not perfect. We will want others to help us to remove our imperfection as we will help them remove theirs. We believe this is why we are all here. We should be
breaking down the walls that separate us not building them anew. We should
be bridging the gaps that divide us not widen them further. The east and
the west, north and the south have all contributed to human kinds progress.
Plato and Aristotle, Confucius and =8A.have all had their share in this
process. The Human Rights Commission should testify to the fact that our
society has come of age. This is a forum where states and non-states,
governments and NGOs interact so freely. I know of no other body in which
this is done. The Human Rights Commission can be pressed into our service
far more effectively than has been done to date. The resolution contained
in L. 91 is perhaps not the way to do it. We would urge dialogue and
consultations. Only that, Mr. Chairman can bring about any desired change.
My delegation would prefer that no action be taken on the draft resolution
before us. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman: Thank you very much Ambassador for your statement and the next
speaker on the list is the distinguished representative of Pakistan.
Pakistan: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the Pakistan delegation
has seen the draft resolution in document L. 91 with a sense of regret and
consternation. We sincerely hope therefore that this Commission will as it
has done in the past six years reject this draft resolution. Mr. Chairman,
the purposes which we are concern in this Commission and which are outlined
in Article 55 of the UN Charter are primarily to promote the objectives of
stability and friendly relations among states. This draft resolution, Mr.
Chairman, it should be evident from the debate which we have had this
afternoon. This draft resolution is likely to promote confrontation and
conflict among major powers, major countries and will promote instability
rather than the harmonisation of relations among states. Pakistan enjoys
good relations both with those who have sponsored this resolution and
especially with the PRC. We do not wish to see confrontation between these
countries and we believe that this confrontation is unnecessary and
provocative. Rule 65, paragraph 2, Mr. Chairman, was inserted in the rules
of procedure precisely to ensure that actions are not taken by any body of
the ECOSOC which are contrary to the objectives that we are supposed to
promote, the objective set out primarily in Article 55 of the Charter.
Since this draft resolution will indeed promote confrontation, it is
against the objective set out in Article 55, it is precisely for such
situations that rule 65,2 has been provided and therefore is the most
appropriate rule under which action should be taken by this Commission to
take no decision on this draft resolution. Mr. Chairman, it has been said
by some here this evening that China has sought to dictate to others what
should be done in this Commission. I believe, Mr. Chairman that the shoe
is on the other foot. China did not ask anybody to present this draft
resolution. Those who are seeking to dictate to this Commission are those
which wish to present this resolution, time after time after time, knowing
full well what the results will be and knowing that it will exacerbate
international relations among major powers. Mr. Chairman, this draft
resolution is selective. It is selective because there are other
situations of even more serious and persistent violations of human rights
which this Commission chooses to ignore, which the co-sponsors of this
draft resolution choose to ignore year after year. My own delegation has
brought such situations to the attention of most of the co-sponsors and we
have been told that please do not address, do not raise this question, such
questions should not be raised because the country concern will reject them
and will spurn co-operation with the human rights bodies. In this case,
Mr. Chairman, the exact opposite argument is used in order to target China
and it is targeting. Let us make no mistake about it. We have read the
press, we know the background, we know the origins of this resolution and
we know that this is selective and political targeting of major country of
the Asia, a major country of the Third World, a country which is emerging
as a great power and therefore has become the target of certain other
powers. We understand this and we should not seek to confuse the issue in
this Commission. Mr. Chairman, the situation of human rights in China is
improving. There is no doubt about that. Please ask anybody who has
visited China and we in Pakistan visit China very often and we have seen
the great transformation which has taken place in that country and the
changes that have taken place in the lives of its people and it is clear to
us that the human rights situation in China has improved. The way to
further advance this is through co-operation and not through the resolution
that has been submitted. Mr. Chairman, my distinguished colleague from the
Netherlands has said, he has expressed the hope that this may be the last
time that China moves a no action motion. I sincerely hope so because I
hope that this is the last time that the sponsors of this doomed resolution
will move that in this Commission.
Chairman: Thank you very much Ambassador for your statement and it was the
last statement we had. We had both the kinds of combination of general
comments and explanations of vote before the votes so we shall now proceed
to the voting and we had a formal request for the vote in roll call so we
will start roll call voting on the no action motion.
Secretary: Voting will start with Bangladesh.
YES:
Algeria, Angola, Bangladesh, Belarus, Benin, Bhutan, Cape Verde, China,
Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gabon, Guinea, India, Indonesia,
Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Mozambique, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Uganda,
Ukraine, Zaire, Zimbabwe.
NO:
Austria, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador,
France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Nicaragua, South
Africa, United Kingdom, United States of America.
ABSTENTION:
Argentina, Brazil, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Mexico, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Uruguay.
Chairman: So I should like to announce the results of the roll call vote on the no action motion and this non action was adopted by 27 votes in favour,
there are 17 votes against with 9 abstention. So it is so decided.=09
Transcribed from official UN Recording
By Ngawang C. Drakmargyapon
Tibet Bureau for UN Affairs
Geneva, SWITZERALND
