31 May 2012
| |||
| Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York |
Secretary-General, in Message to Pacific Regional Seminar on Decolonization
Set to Examine ‘Current Realities and Prospects’, Urges Genuine Discussion
(Received from a UN Information Officer.)
QUITO, ECUADOR, 30 May —
In a message to the Pacific Regional Seminar on the Implementation of
the Third International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism,
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon encouraged participants to
promote genuine communication at all levels, formal and informal, in
which interlocutors are genuinely listened to and heard, on a
case-by-case-basis.
The three-day seminar,
held under the theme of “Current Realities and Prospects,” convened in
Quito, Ecuador, provides an opportunity to representatives of the
Non-Self-Governing Territories to share their concerns with the United
Nations Special Committee on the Implementation of the Declaration on
the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. Civil
society, non-governmental organizations and experts also typically take
the floor to convey their views on the way forward for the
decolonization process.
Ambassador Diego
Morejón-Pazmiño, Chair of the United Nations Special Committee on
Decolonization (Special Committee), extended his sincere thanks to the
Government and people of Ecuador for hosting the seminar.
The central and primary
task of the Special Committee was to reduce the list of Non-Self
Governing Territories to zero to avoid the spectre of “colonialism in
perpetuity”, he said in his opening remarks. He encouraged everyone “to
engage in a fruitful and constructive dialogue in the following days,
bearing in mind the responsibility we have to contribute to finding the
solutions required in addressing the current realities and prospects
proper to the decolonization process”.
The Third Decade should
not be a “lost decade”, he said. Efforts needed to concentrate on
tangible results, with a proactive and focused approach, as repeated
many times on different occasions and venues.
Statements
Foreign Minister Ricardo
Patiño, Ecuador, opened the Pacific Regional Seminar and welcomed the
participants, stating that “it seems impossible that until today we are
still discussing colonized and excluded peoples”. Conditions must be
created so that the countries administering non-autonomous Territories
accepted that their administrative role was provisional.
At
the same time, he said, “decolonization policies” would not suffice if
those were implemented by the administering Powers, who continued to
exert control in the Territories through alliances with the local
influential sectors. Today’s influence was exerted through political
and economic means. For that reason, the relationship between the
administering Powers and the Special Committee must change.
He said that today’s
seminar must have a critical view. It was no longer possible to
continue discussing “administering Powers,” “Member States”, and
“international community” as if each one had different interests. The
international community’s ultimate interest was to decolonize the 16
non-autonomous Territories of the world.
The
United Nations General Assembly had requested the Special Committee to
elaborate jointly with the administering Powers and the non-autonomous
Territories a programme of work to examine the problems of
decolonization on a case-by-case basis, said the Foreign Minister. In
the case of “Malvinas”, he said: “We have always defended Argentina’s
claim over Malvinas. Today we reiterate our commitment”.
[A dispute exists between
the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom concerning
sovereignty over the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) (see document ST/CS/ SER.A/42).]
In the case of Puerto
Rico, the people’s voices, which would be heard in the referendum slated
for next November, would be important. Even though Guantanamo was not
included in the list of Territories, it was worse than a colony, he
said, calling it “a military base and a United States prison for
terrorists”. The Foreign Minister concluded by stating that the words
of the non-autonomous Territories were more “revealing and powerful”
than the words of the administering Powers.
Mr.
Morejón-Pazmiño, Special Committee Chair, pointed out the importance of
concrete proposals pertaining to the Plan of Action for the Third
International Decade and a renewed and focused dialogue with the
administering Powers. With regard to the current cross-cutting issues
faced by the Territories, Ambassador Morejón-Pazmiño noted that the
approaching United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development
underlined the continuing concern over the impact of climate change on
the Non-Self-Governing Territories under the purview of the Special
Committee. Small island States and Non-Self-Governing Territories were
impacted by negative socio-economic and environmental factors.
Undoubtedly, all the Territories were on the front line of the battle
to mitigate the impact of climate change, a reality that added more
importance to the work of the Special Committee in light of the upcoming
Rio+20 Conference, which would coincide with the thirtieth anniversary
of the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,
he said.
The Ambassador highlighted
the responsibility of the United Nations system for the peoples of
Non-Self-Governing Territories. He concluded by appealing for renewed
impetus, while noting that it was time to give a tangible form to the
pragmatic and realistic approaches that might be found through frank
discussions and formal and informal dialogue at the 2012 seminar.
Current Realities and Prospects in the Pacific Region
TOETASI FUE TUITELELEPAGA,
Representative of the Governor of American Samoa, said that in the past
the Special Committee had been asked to remove American Samoa from
the list of colonized Territories. He further stated that “while we do
not advocate a change in our position of removal from the list of
colonized States, American Samoa must continue to progress politically
and economically, while respecting the concerns of the United States and
the United Nations”.
He stressed that one of
the most challenging issues the Territory had to deal with in the
relationship with the United Sates was the lack of understanding for
American Samoa’s unique circumstances and characteristics. He also
stated that “a more structured approach to determine the will of the
people would be better implemented and carried out over the future if
there were a detailed work plan on how best to gauge the people’s will
on political status”.
LISA
NATIVIDAD, Representative of the Governor of Guam, said that in 2010,
Governor Eddie Calvo had convened a committee to address Guam’s
political status. In 2011, the Governor had convened a public forum on
the self-determination of the Chamorro people of Guam to asses the state
of the issue and to ignite public comment and thought. The Guam
Commission on Decolonization was centred on setting a plebiscite date
for the Chamorro self-determination vote and identifying the resources
to fund a crucial education campaign to inform the community of the
political status issue, but Guam still had not received any financial
support for that effort, she said. Ms. Natividad indicated that the
price tag for such a campaign engaging all forms of mainstream media was
estimated at approximately $1 million. To date, funds from the
Department of Interior had not been made available. Owing to current
fiscal problems, Guam was not in the position to commit its financial
resources to carrying out the necessary public education campaign.
The limitations of Guam’s
colonial status had resulted in a cumulative state where the Chamorro
people were so restricted that “our survival as a people in our native
land is threatened”, said Ms. Natividad, adding that, “these are the
current realities of Guam”.
EDWARD P. WOLFERS, an
expert on the Pacific region, where almost one third (five) of the 16
remaining Territories under the Special Committee’s purview were
located, presented a discussion paper on the context, issues and
possible options for the Third International Decade. He stated that
decolonization, as understood and promoted by the United Nations,
extended beyond the right to self-determination and the transfer of
power to embrace other aspects of human and social development,
including economic and cultural aspects. He discussed some possible
options for the Third International Decade, acknowledging the need to
clarify, refine and possibly re-define the options available as outcomes
of decolonization. It was important, he noted, that the Special
Committee consider the issue and decide whether to recommend that the
General Assembly formulate a fresh and integrated resolution on the
matter.
ED ALVAREZ, expert on
Guam, presented an update on the public education efforts of the Guam
Commission on Decolonization, recalling that the challenge was to keep
the momentum going while simultaneously developing a public education
programme. “We are at the stage where the funding for the educational
programme is our priority,” he said, adding that “we all know it is very
expensive and we feel comfortable stating that our programme will cost
about $1 million”. He requested the Special Committee’s assistance in
helping Guam attain the funds or technical assistance necessary to
educate the people of Guam.
The
Territory had also begun aggressive efforts to populate the
decolonization registry as required by public law. “We have doubled the
number of Chamorro registered and have further enhanced our ability to
more expediently register those who are left. There are now 79
certified registrars as compared to only 10 years ago,” he added.
He added that Guam was
part of the United States. By virtue of that, the United States was
part of Guam. He said the American Government had, for the most part,
treated Chamorros and Guamanians with respect and dignity.
SARIM JACQUES BOENGKIN,
New Caledonia, said the situation of New Caledonia could be seen as a
great challenge for the international community. New Caledonia “has a
rendezvous with elections that could lead to independence” for the
Territory. According to him, three areas of rights offered the
principles and practices that would allow the international community to
succeed in one of its most laudable goals, the eradication of
colonialism.
He went on to say that the
Nouméa Accord provided for the Congress of New Caledonia to conduct as
many as three referendums on whether the Territory should assume the
final sovereign powers and become fully independent. That accord
committed France to conduct the referendum. He put forward the question
of whether the administering Power could in fact conduct the referendum
and whether it would be acceptable to the international community for
the administering Power to organize and conduct the self-determination
referendum for New Caledonia.
Mr. Boengkin informed the
seminar about the communication he recently had sent to the newly
appointed Minister for Overseas Territories and Departments to ask what
education programmes were in place for the concerned population of New
Caledonia, in order to prepare them to exercise their right to
self-determination.
Current Realities and Prospects in the Caribbean Region
JOSEPHINE GUMBS–CONNOR,
Anguilla, said that Anguilla was the last remaining Territory of the
United Kingdom to engage in its constitutional advancement process. The
people of Anguilla would surely be considering a comprehensive
overhaul of the principles in the current Constitution, in particular, a
serious reduction in the powers of the Governor.
“The people of Anguilla
see ourselves on a direct collision course with the administering Power
since, in the view of our People, they have seen the worst manifestation
of true colonialism sanctioned by the British Government through their
current Representative against the current elected Government. Again,
although there is no official poll, there is the appearance that our
people are leaning increasingly towards independence,” she declared.
Anguilla had witnessed the
greatest form of retrogression and had been thrown deeper in the arms
of colonialism, against the spirit of the resolution 1514 (XV). She
regretted that the “administering Power is not mobilizing us to embrace
the concept of independence through more positive mechanisms”. Two
primary factors had spurred Anguilla’s consideration of independence:
the actions of the Governor towards the elected representatives of the
current administration and the indication from the Administering Power
that there could be no change to the fundamental structure of the
relationship.
She further referred to
“examples of the actions of the Representative of the administering
Power, which we feel are contrary to the interests of us as a people,
and contrary to the very statements of the standards which the
administering Power says they embrace”.
Mrs.
Gumbs-Connor added that “the people of Anguilla are concerned that they
are being denied the full range of options open to us as part of the
decolonization process”.
KIM WILSON, speaking on
behalf of the Government of Bermuda, pointed out Bermuda’s unique
circumstances and recalled that, in 1997, Bermuda, by default, had
become the oldest and the numerically largest of the 14 remaining
non-independent Territories of the former British Empire. Regarding
good governance and preparation of the Bermudian people for the
eventuality of independence, the Territory’s Government has done much in
that regard, based on lessons learnt from Bermuda’s 1995 referendum.
Referring to a 2005 report of the Bermuda Independence Commission, the
speaker outlined the critical insight provided by the aforementioned
report into what informed public sentiment about independence.
The
recently tabled Referendum Act 2012 outlined more generally
comprehensive measures for conducting referendums in Bermuda, he said.
In the meantime, he added, Bermuda’s Government had turned its
attention to the most immediately pressing needs of the people. He also
recalled the British Overseas Territories Act 2002, changing the
Territory’s designation. In that regard, he stressed that “a move
towards independence would confront the people of Bermuda with the
issue of relinquishing or retaining their newly acquired British
citizenship”.
He stated that Bermuda’s
circumstances as related to the issue of independence were unique as
were the Special Committee’s challenges in that regard. Bermuda had
been afforded the benefit of a time-tested constitution providing a
semi-autonomous internal Government. He further expressed that “while
the dream of independence persists, if temporarily deferred, the
Government’s present cue from the people is that such a pursuit is not a
current top priority”. Concluding, he said ”we look forward to one day
ultimately sitting at the table with the other nations of the world as a
confident, economically prosperous, politically stable, still beautiful
and independent Bermuda”.
DELORES CHRISTOPHER,
British Virgin Islands, stated that the British Virgin Islands “is an
internally self-governing Territory administered with the United
Kingdom”. She recalled that the Constitutional Commissioners 2005
report had concluded that independence was not desired by the people of
the Territory. She also mentioned the future publication of a new white
paper, which would outline the parameters of a “BVI-UK” relationship
for the foreseeable future.
In
concluding, she said the position of the Virgin Islands at present was
to maintain its current relationship with the United Kingdom, built
on mutual respect and a mature partnership. She said that was “but an
interim position as the Territory continues to grow and generations of
Virgin Islanders attain higher levels of education”.
REUBEN T. MEADE,
Montserrat, referring to the 2010 Constitution, said it was “not a
perfect document, but we must use its provisions to consolidate the
gains provided therein. We must continue to determine a way forward
over time. We must, however, not lose sight of the focus on development
rather than on our relationship with the United Kingdom”.
He expressed that there
was no public interest whatsoever in separation from the United Kingdom.
The continued relationship was made by free choice. The provision for
separation from the United Kingdom no longer required a fight; it was a
simple matter of the electorate, making that choice in a plebiscite.
No local politician or political group or party in recent times had
been bold enough to put that request for independence before the
electorate, he added.
Montserrat was a fully
internally self-governing Territory, Mr. Reuben said, adding that “we
pass our own laws, we make our own decisions, we make our own monetary
policies as part of the OECS [Organization of Eastern Caribbean States]
Monetary Union. We have full citizenship rights in the United Kingdom
with all of its attendant benefits”.
He also stated that “we no longer see ourselves as being a colonized people on the basis of the seven elements of the 947th
United Nations Plenary of 14 December 1960. It is therefore my
recommendation that this United Nations Decolonisation Committee remove
Montserrat from their list of non-self governing countries within their
Decolonization discussions.” He concluded by saying, “I am also
certain that the United Kingdom supports our stance.”
Discussion
Wilma Reveron-Collazo,
expert from Puerto Rico, discussed three main issues, including the
removal of Territories from the list, the nature of resolution 1514 (XV)
and the conducting of referendums in the Territories.
Territories removed from
the Special Committee’s list were left in a “juridical limbo,” she
said. Puerto Rico had been removed from the list of Territories in
1953, following a United Nations resolution in which the United States
committed to address future claims by the Territory. However, today,
Puerto Rico’s main challenge was the lack of a mechanism within the
United Nations General Assembly to demand the implementation of the
United States commitments.
With
regard to a proposal by Joseph Joe Bossano ( Gibraltar) on integrating
all the resolutions on decolonization, she noted that resolution 1514
(XV) represented the “imperative and obligatory right” of all Member
States on the issue of self-determination.
On the issue of
referendums, Ms. Reveron-Collazo stressed the importance of conducting
education programmes prior to holding electoral consultations on
self-determination. She called on the United Nations for the provision
of technical assistance and advice on those processes. In the case of
Puerto Rico, which would be holding a referendum in November, there had
not been a proper preparation or implementation of education
programmes.
Joseph Joe Bossano,
Gibraltar, suggested that the Committee monitor processes of
constitutional reforms, including reports by the administering Powers on
how ready the Territory would be to govern itself. There was a need
for an analysis on a case-by-case basis. Independence was by definition
a one-way ticket. At the same time, 16 Territories were entitled to
associate freely.
