11 December 2011

U.N. General Assembly Adopts 2011 Resolutions on Decolonization


9 December 2011
General Assembly
GA/11191

Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York
Sixty-sixth General Assembly
Plenary
81st Meeting (AM)


GENERAL ASSEMBLY, ON RECOMMENDATION OF FOURTH COMMITTEE, ADOPTS 26 TEXTS,


INCLUDING 9 ON ARAB‑ISRAELI CONFLICT, 11 ON DECOLONIZATION


Consensus Eludes Assembly on Texts Concerning Middle East, Five

            On Decolonization, including on Implementation of Decolonization Declaration

Acting on the recommendation of its Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization), the General Assembly this morning adopted 24 resolutions and two decisions, nine among them concerning the Arab‑Israeli conflict, with others focused on decolonization, outer space, atomic radiation, information and public outreach, and peacekeeping.  Recorded votes were required for more than half.

As in past years, the updated but traditional resolutions on the Middle East forwarded to the world body by the Fourth Committee required recorded votes.  Of the five texts contained in the Report of the Work of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian Peoples and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories, three contained provisions that focused on Israeli settlement activities.

In one such text, the Assembly, bearing in mind the “extremely detrimental” impact of Israeli settlement policies, decisions and activities on efforts to resume and advance the peace process, reiterated its demand for the immediate and complete cessation of all Israeli settlement activities in all of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan.

By further terms of that resolution, the Assembly called upon Israel to comply strictly with its obligations under international law, with respect to the alteration of the character, status and demographic composition of the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

It was adopted by a recorded vote of 162 in favour to 7 against (Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 4 abstentions (Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Panama, Vanuatu).  (For details of the voting, see Annex VII.)

With 72 delegations abstaining from the vote on the traditional text on the work of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices, the resolution only garnered the support of little more than half those voting, with 86 in favour to 9 against (Australia, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau, Panama, Nauru, United States), with 75 abstentions.  (Annex V)

Drawing broader support were three more texts on Israeli practices:  on the applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war, practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Territory, including East Jerusalem; and the occupied Syrian Golan.

Also adopted were four texts on the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), specifically concerning:  UNRWA’s operations (Annex III); persons displaced as a result of the June 1967 and subsequent hostilities (Annex II); assistance to Palestine refugees (Annex I); and entitlement of the Palestine refugees to their property and to the income derived therefrom (Annex IV).

In the text on UNRWA’s operations, the Assembly, deploring the endangerment of the safety of the Agency’s staff and the damage and destruction caused to the facilities and properties of the Agency, urged the Government of Israel to expeditiously reimburse the Agency for all transit charges incurred and other financial losses sustained as a result of delays and restrictions on movement and access.

By further terms of that draft, the Assembly urged the Government of Israel to cease obstructing the movement and access of the staff, vehicles and supplies of the Agency and to cease the levying of taxes, extra fees and charges, which affect the Agency’s operations detrimentally.  It also urged all Member States to carefully consider the Agency’s proposal for support by the Secretary‑General of the institutional strengthening of the Agency through the provision of financial resources from the regular budget of the United Nations.

That resolution was adopted by a recorded vote of 165 in favour to 7 against (Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 2 abstentions (Cameroon, Vanuatu).  (Annex III)

Taking up 11 decolonization texts, the Assembly adopted five by recorded votes, including one related to the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, another on the specialized agencies and international institutions associated with the United Nations, a third on dissemination of information on decolonization, a fourth on information from Non‑Self‑Governing Territories, and a fifth on economic and other activities.

Again reaching consensus on a draft resolution on the question of Western Sahara, the Assembly called upon the parties to cooperate with the Secretary‑General and his personal envoy as well as with the International Committee of the Red Cross, and further called upon them to abide by their obligations under international humanitarian law.

Also acting without a vote, the Assembly adopted a resolution related to Tokelau, noting New Zealand’s exemplary cooperation and ongoing recognition of the complete right of the people of Tokelau to undertake the act of self‑determination when they considered it to be appropriate. 

The Assembly also passed by consensus a draft decision on the question of Gibraltar, by which it urged both Governments, while listening to the interests and aspirations of Gibraltar, to reach, in the spirit of the statement of 27 November 1984, a definitive solution to the question of Gibraltar.

Also acting without a vote, the Assembly adopted a resolution on international cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer space, by which it urged States that have not yet become parties to the international treaties governing the uses of outer space to give consideration to ratifying or acceding to those treaties in accordance with their domestic laws, as well as incorporating them in their national legislation.

Further to that text, the Assembly urged all States, in particular those with major space capabilities, to contribute actively to the goal of preventing an arms race in outer space as an essential condition for the promotion of international cooperation in the exploration and use of outer space for peaceful purposes.

By further provisions of that draft, the Assembly welcomed the continuous progress made by the International Committee on Global Navigation Satellite Systems towards achieving compatibility and interoperability among global and regional space‑based positioning, navigation and timing systems and in the promotion of the use of global navigation satellite systems and their integration into national infrastructure, particularly in developing countries.

Also by consensus, the Assembly adopted two draft resolutionsrelating to information.  By the terms of one text, it urged all countries, organizations of the United Nations system as a whole and all others concerned to disseminate information and communicate their views and their cultural and ethical values through endogenous cultural production, as well as to ensure the diversity of sources and their free access to information, towards “a new world information and communication order, seen as an evolving and continuous process”.

In further actionthe Assembly adopted a text on the effects of atomic radiation, by which it requested the Scientific Committee to continue its work, including its important activities to increase knowledge of the levels, effects and risks of ionizing radiation from all sources.  It encouraged Member States to make voluntary contributions to the general trust fund established to support the work of the Scientific Committee, and decided to increase the membership of the Committee from 21 to 27 States, inviting Belarus, Finland, Pakistan, Republic of Korea, Spain and Ukraine to become full members.  Each of those Governments would then be requested by the Scientific Committee to designate one scientist, with alternates and consultants, to be its representative.

The Assembly also adopted the Committee’s programme of work for the sixty‑seventh session, without a vote, and took note of the Fourth Committee’s report on a comprehensive review of the whole question of peacekeeping operations in all their aspects.

The Rapporteur of the Fourth Committee, Hasan Abdulhasan ( Kuwait ), introduced that body’s reports.

The representatives of Iran and Israel spoke in explanation of position on the Fourth Committee texts.

The General Assembly will reconvene today at 3 p.m. to consider the reports of the Sixth Committee (Legal).

Background

The General Assembly met this morning to take up the reports of its Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization), which contain 24 draft resolutions and two draft decisions.

Topics covered in the Fourth Committee include effects of atomic radiation (item 50); international cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer space (item 51); United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) (item 52); report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories (item 53); comprehensive review of the whole question of peacekeeping operations in all their aspects (item 54); questions relating to information (item 55); Assistance in mine action (item 49); decolonization issues (items 56‑60); revitalization of the work of the General Assembly (item 121); and programme planning (item 135).

Decolonization issues before the Assembly included information from Non-Self-Governing Territories transmitted under Article 73 e of the United Nations Charter (item 56); economic and other activities which affect the interest of the peoples of the Non‑Self‑Governing Territories (item 57); implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples by the specialized agencies and the international institutions associated with the United Nations (item 58); offers by Member States of study and training facilities for inhabitants of Non‑Self‑Governing Territories (item 59); and implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (item 60).

Committee Reports

The Assembly also had before it a report on assistance in mine action (document A/66/423) containing a draft resolution, by which the Assembly would urge all States to provide assistance to countries affected by mines and explosive remnants of war and to support national programmes in that regard.  It would also urge States to provide reliable, predictable and timely contributions for mine‑action activities, as well as necessary information and technical, financial and material assistance to locate, remove, destroy and otherwise render ineffective minefields, mines, booby traps, other devices and explosive remnants of war.

That text would also have the Assembly urge all mine‑affected States to identify all areas under their jurisdiction or control containing mines and other explosive remnants of war.  The Assembly would stress the importance of cooperation and coordination in mine action, and emphasizes the primary responsibility of national authorities in that regard.

The Committee approved that draft resolution without a vote on 28 October.  (See Press Release GA/SPD/494)

Also before the Assembly was a report on the effects of atomic radiation (document A/66/424) containing a draft resolution of the same name, by which it would request the Scientific Committee to continue its work, including its important activities to increase knowledge of the levels, effects and risks of ionizing radiation from all sources.

By other provisions, the Assembly would encourage Member States to make voluntary contributions to the general trust fund established to support the work of the Scientific Committee, and decide to increase the membership of the Committee from 21 to 27 States.

The Committee approved that text on 10 November without a vote.  (Press Release GA/SPD/499)

Also before the Assembly was a report on international cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer space (document A/66/425).  By the resolution contained therein, the Assembly would urge States that have not yet become parties to the international treaties governing the uses of outer space to give consideration to ratifying or acceding to those treaties in accordance with their domestic laws, as well as incorporating them in their national legislation.

Also by that text, the Assembly would urges all States, in particular those with major space capabilities, to contribute actively to the goal of preventing an arms race in outer space as an essential condition for the promotion of international cooperation in the exploration and use of outer space for peaceful purposes.

By further provisions of that draft, the Assembly would welcome the continuous progress made by the International Committee on Global Navigation Satellite Systems towards achieving compatibility and interoperability among global and regional space‑based positioning, navigation and timing systems and in the promotion of the use of global navigation satellite systems and their integration into national infrastructure, particularly in developing countries.

The Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote on 18 October.  (Press Release GA/SPD/486)

The report on United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) (document A/66/426) contains four draft resolutions, all of which were approved by a recorded vote on 10 November.  (Press Release GA/SPD/499)

Draft I, on assistance to Palestine refugees, would have the Assembly call upon all donors to continue to make the most generous efforts possible to meet the anticipated needs of UNRWA, including with regard to increased expenditures arising from the serious socio‑economic and humanitarian situation and instability in the region, particularly in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, and those mentioned in recent emergency appeals.

The draft was approved by a recorded vote of 160 in favour to 1 against ( Israel), with 9 abstentions ( Canada, Ecuador, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States, Vanuatu, Haiti).

By the terms of draft II, on persons displaced as a result of the June 1967 and subsequent hostilities, the Assembly would stress the necessity for an accelerated return of displaced persons, and call for compliance with the mechanism agreed upon by the parties in article XII of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self‑Government Arrangements of 13 September 1993 on the return of displaced persons.  It would also strongly appeal to all Governments, organizations and individuals to contribute generously to the Agency and to the other intergovernmental and non‑governmental organizations concerned.

The text was approved by a recorded vote of 162 in favour to 7 against (Israel, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 4 abstentions (Cameroon, Haiti, Panama, Vanuatu).

By draft III, on operations of UNRWA, the Assembly would urge the Government of Israel to expeditiously reimburse the Agency for all transit charges incurred and other financial losses sustained as a result of delays and restrictions on movement and access, and to cease obstructing the movement and access of the staff, vehicles and supplies of the Agency and to cease the levying of taxes, extra fees and charges, which affect the Agency’s operations detrimentally.

By further provisions, it would reiterate its call on Israel to fully lift the restrictions impeding the import of necessary construction materials and supplies for the reconstruction and repair of thousands of damaged or destroyed refugee shelters.

The text was approved by a recorded vote of 163 in favour to 7 against (Israel, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 2 abstentions (Cameroon, Vanuatu).

Draft IV, on Palestine refugees’ properties and their revenues, would have the Assembly urge the Palestinian and Israeli sides to deal with that important issue within the framework of the final status negotiations of the Middle East peace process.

The text was approved by a recorded vote of 163 in favour to 7 against (Israel, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 3 abstentions (Cameroon, Haiti, Vanuatu).

The Committee’s report on the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories (documentA/66/427) contains five draft resolutions, all of which were approved by recorded vote on 10 November.  (Press Release GA/SPD/499)

By draft I, entitled Work of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories, the Assembly would demand that Israel, the occupying Power, cooperate, in accordance with its obligations as a Member State of the United Nations, with the Special Committee.

The text was approved by a recorded vote of 89 in favour to 9 against (Australia, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Panama, United States), with 72 abstentions.

By the terms of draft II, on the Applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the other occupied Arab territories, the Assembly would demand that Israel accept the de jure applicability of the Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, and that it comply scrupulously with the provisions of the Convention.

The text was approved by a recorded vote of 162 in favour to 7 against (Israel, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 3 abstentions (Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Vanuatu).

By draft III, on Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan, the Assembly would reiterate its demand for the immediate and complete cessation of all Israeli settlement activities in all of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan.

The text was approved by a recorded vote of 160 in favour to 7 against (Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 5 abstentions (Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Haiti, Panama, Vanuatu).

Draft IV, on Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, would have the Assembly demand that Israel cease all practices and actions that violate the human rights of the Palestinian people, including the killing and injury of civilians, the arbitrary detention and imprisonment of civilians and the destruction and confiscation of civilian property.

The draft text was approved by a recorded vote of 158 in favour to 9 against (Australia, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Panama, United States), with 4 abstentions (Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Haiti, Vanuatu).

According to draft V, on the occupied Syrian Golan, the Assembly would call upon Israel to comply with the relevant resolutions on the occupied Syrian Golan, in particular, Security Council resolution 497 (1981), in which the Council, inter alia, decided that the Israeli decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the occupied Syrian Golan was null and void and without international legal effect.

That text was approved by a recorded vote of 159 in favour to 1 against ( Israel), with 11 abstentions.

Next, the Assembly had before it the Fourth Committee’s report on the Comprehensive review of the whole question of peacekeeping operations in all their aspects (document A/66/428), on which no proposal was submitted.

The report on questions relating to information (document A/66/429) contains two draft resolutions, which were approved, without a vote, on 20 October.  (Press Release GA/SPD/488)

By the terms of draft A, information in the service of humanity, the Assembly would urge all countries, organizations of the United Nations system as a whole and all others concerned to disseminate information and communicate their views and their cultural and ethical values through endogenous cultural production, as well as to ensure the diversity of sources and their free access to information, towards “a new world information and communication order, seen as an evolving and continuous process”.

The report also contains draft resolution B, on United Nations public information policies and activities, by which the Committee would have the Assembly request the Secretary‑General, in respect of the those policies and activities, to continue to implement fully the recommendations contained in relevant resolutions.  It would further have the Assembly request the Department of Public Information to maintain its commitment to a culture of evaluation and to continue to evaluate its products and activities with the objective of enhancing their effectiveness, and to undertake endeavours related to bridging the digital divide, supporting United Nations Information Centres, providing strategic communications services, and other measures, including in regards to United Nations peacekeeping.

The Fourth Committee’s report on information from Non‑Self‑Governing Territories transmitted under Article 73 e of the United Nations Charter (document A/66/430) contains a resolution of the same name, by which the Assembly would request the administrating Powers concerned to transmit, or continue to transmit, regularly to the Secretary‑General information relating to economic, social and educational conditions in the Territories, for which they are responsible.

By further provisions, the Assembly would also request the fullest possible information on political and constitutional developments in the Territories concerned, within a maximum period of six months following the expiration of the administrative year in those Territories.

The Committee approved that text by a recorded vote of 131 in favour to none against, with 5 abstentions ( France, Israel, United Kingdom, United States, United Republic of Tanzania) on 11 October.  (Press Release GA/SPD/483)

The Fourth Committee’s report on economic and other activities which affect the interests of the peoples of the Non‑Self‑Governing Territories (document A/66/431) contains a draft resolution of the same name, by which the Assembly would reaffirm the right of peoples of Non‑Self‑Governing Territories to self‑determination in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations and with General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV), containing the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, as well as their right to enjoy and dispose of their natural resources in their best interest.

The Committee approved the text by a recorded vote of 144 in favour to 2 against ( Israel, United States), with 2 abstentions ( France, United Kingdom) on 11 October.  (Press ReleaseGA/SPD/483)

Also before the Assembly was the Committee’s report on the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples by the specialized agencies and the international institutions associated with the United Nations (document A/66/432), which contains a resolution of the same name, by which the Assembly would recommend that all States intensify their efforts in the specialized agencies and other organizations of the United Nations system in which they were members to ensure the full and effective implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, contained in General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV), and other relevant United Nations resolutions.

The Committee approved that draft text by a recorded vote of 101 in favour to none against, with 51 abstentions on 11 October.  (Press Release GA/SPD/483)

The report on offers by Member States of study and training facilities for inhabitants of Non‑Self‑Governing Territories (document A/66/433) contains one draft resolution, by which the Assembly would urge the administering Powers to take effective measures to ensure the widespread and continuous dissemination in the Territories under their administration of information relating to offers of study and training facilities made by States.

The draft was approved without a vote on 10 October. (Press Release GA/SPD/482)

The report on implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (document A/66/434) contains six draft resolutions and one draft decision.

By the terms of draft resolution I, on the question of Western Sahara, the Assembly would call upon the parties to cooperate with the Secretary‑General and his personal envoy as well as with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and further call upon them to abide by their obligations under international humanitarian law.

The Committee approved that resolution without a vote on 10 October.  (Press Release GA/SPD/482)

By draft II, on the question of New Caledonia, the Assembly would urge all the parties involved to maintain, in the framework of the Nouméa Accord, their dialogue in a spirit of harmony and in this context welcomed the unanimous agreement, reached in Paris on 8 December 2008, on the transfer of powers to New Caledonia in 2009 and the conduct of provincial elections in May 2009.

The Committee approved that text without a vote on 10 October (Press Release GA/SPD/482).

By the terms of draft III, on the question of Tokelau, the Assembly would note New Zealand’s exemplary cooperation and ongoing recognition of the complete right of the people of Tokelau to undertake the act of self‑determination when they consider it to be appropriate.

Acting without a vote, the Committee approved the text on 10 October (Press Release GA/SPD/482).

Draft IV, which concerns the questions of American Samoa, Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Guam, Montserrat, Pitcairn, Saint Helena, Turks and Caicos Islands, and the United States Virgin Islands, would have the Assembly call upon the administering Powers to participate in and cooperate fully with the work of the Special Committee, and would request the Territories and the administering Powers to take all measures necessary to protect and conserve the environment of the Territories.

By further provisions, the Assembly, would stress the importance of implementing the plan of action for the Second and Third International Decades for the Eradication of Colonialism, as well as the importance of the various constitutional exercises in the respective Territories administered by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America, and led by the territorial Governments, designed to address internal constitutional structures within the present territorial arrangements.  It would decide to follow closely the developments concerning the future political status of those Territories.

Also by that text, the Assembly would reiterate its request that the Human Rights Committee collaborate with the Special Committee with the aim of exchanging information, including political and constitutional developments, in many of the Non‑Self‑Governing Territories that are within the purview of the Special Committee.

The Committee approved that text as a whole without a vote on 10 October.  (Press Release GA/SPD/482)

According to draft V, on dissemination of information on decolonization, the Assembly would request the Department of Public Information to continue its efforts to update web‑based information on the assistance programmes available to the Non‑Self‑Governing Territories, and also request the Department of Political Affairs and the Department of Public Information to implement the recommendations of the Special Committee and to continue their efforts to take measures through all the media available.

The Committee approved the text by a recorded vote of 147 in favour to 3 against ( Israel, United Kingdom, United States) with 1 abstention ( France), on 11 October.  (Press ReleaseGA/SPD/483)

By the terms of draft VI, on the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, the Assembly would request the Special Committee to continue to seek suitable means for the immediate and full implementation of the Declaration and to carry out the actions approved by the General Assembly regarding the Second and Third International Decades for the Eradication of Colonialism in all Territories that have not yet exercised their right to self‑determination, including independence.

The Committee approved the text by a recorded vote of 101 in favour to none against, with 51 abstentions, on 11 October.  (Press Release GA/SPD/483)

By the draft decision on the question of Gibraltar, the Assembly would urge both Governments, while listening to the interests and aspirations of Gibraltar, to reach, in the spirit of the statement of 27 November 1984, a definitive solution to the question of Gibraltar.

The Committee approved the text without a vote on 10 October.  (Press Release GA/SPD/482)

Also before the Assembly was the Fourth Committee’s report on the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly (document A/66/435) containing a draft decision.

Action on Fourth Committee Texts

Hasan Abdulhasan ( Kuwait), Rapporteur, introduced the reports for the Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization).

The Assembly first took up the report on the assistance in mine action (document A/66/423), and adopted the draft resolution contained therein without a vote.

Next, the Assembly took up the report on the effects of atomic radiation (document A/66/424), and adopted the draft resolution contained therein, also without a vote.

Turning to the report on international cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer space (document A/66/425), the Assembly adopted the draft text contained therein, also without a vote.

The Assembly next turned to the report on United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) (document A/66/426).

It adopted draft resolution I, on assistance to Palestine refugees, by a recorded vote of 160 in favour to 1 against ( Israel), with 8 abstentions ( Cameroon, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Vanuatu, Palau, Nauru, United States).  (For details of the vote, please see Annex I.)

Next, it adopted draft resolution II, on persons displaced as a result of the June 1967 and subsequent hostilities, by a recorded vote of 163 in favour to 7 against (Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 3 abstentions (Vanuatu, Cameroon, Panama).  (Annex II) 

After that, the Assembly adopted draft resolution IIIonUNRWA’s operations, by a recorded vote of 165 in favour to 7 against (Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, , Nauru, Palau, United States), with 2 abstentions (Cameroon, Vanuatu).  (Annex III)

The Assembly then adopted draft resolution IV, on Palestine refugees’ properties and their revenues, by recorded vote of 165 in favour to 7 against (Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 2 abstentions (Cameroon, Vanuatu).  (Annex IV)

Continuing, the Assembly turned its attention to the report on the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs o the Occupied Territories (document A/66/427), adopting draft resolution I, on the work of the Special Committee, by a recorded vote of 86 in favour to 9 against (Australia, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau, Panama, Nauru, United States), with 75 abstentions.  (Annex V)

It then adopted draft resolution II, on the applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the other occupied Arab territories, by a recorded vote of 164 in favour to 7 against (Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 2 abstentions (Cameroon, Vanuatu).  (Annex VI)

Turning next to draft III, on Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan, the Assembly adopted that text by a recorded vote of 162 in favour to 7 against (Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 4 abstentions (Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Panama, Vanuatu).  (Annex VII)

Draft IV, on Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, was adopted by a recorded vote of 159 in favour to 9 against (Australia, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Canada, Panama, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 4 abstentions (Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, El Salvador, Vanuatu).  (Annex VIII)

Draft V, on the occupied Syrian Golan, was also adopted, by a recorded vote of 162 in favour to 1 against ( Israel), with 11 abstentions.  (Annex IX)

Speaking in explanation of vote, the representative of Iran said his delegation had voted in favour of all draft resolutions under agenda item 53, including resolutions Drafts I through V from report A/66/427 concerning Israeli practices, in order to join other members of the General Assembly in showing solidarity with the Palestinian people.  He emphasized that Iran would maintain its long‑standing position on the resolutions relating to the Palestinian issue.

Explaining his delegation’s position “more clearly” concerning the resolutions and certain paragraphs contained therein, he said that to the knowledge of all, Iran had been unwavering in its support for the Palestinian people and their endeavours to attain their national goals and aspirations, including the full exercise of their right to self‑determination, and had genuinely supported the legal and democratic government of Palestine.  Iran continued to emphasize the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, who had been suffering from the occupation and suppressions for decades.

He said Iran believed that the settlement of the Palestinian crisis would be achievable only if the inalienable rights of the people of occupied Palestine were fully recognized.  Due to the lack of attention to the root causes of the crisis, it had remained unsolved for more than six decades.  Those causes included the continued occupation of the Palestinian and other occupied territories by the Zionist regime, as well as the persistent violations of the rights of the Palestinian people, including the right to self‑determination, especially the legitimate and inalienable right of return of the Palestinian refugees.

Durable peace in Palestine would be possible through justice, an end to discrimination, an end to occupation of all Palestinians territories, the return of all Palestinian refugees to their homeland and the establishment of a democratic Palestinian State with East Jerusalem as its capital, he added.

Also speaking in explanation of position after the vote, the representative of Israel said that, year after year, the Assembly “rubber stamped” the resolutions on Israeli practices, which distorted the truth and undermined the credibility of that body.  She thanked the Member States that had stood up against those “destructive resolutions”, and hoped that more would do so in the future.

The Assembly then took note of the report on the Comprehensive review of the whole question of peacekeeping operations in all their aspects (documentA/66/428).

Taking up the report on questions relating to information (document A/66/429), it adopted its draft resolution I, on Information in the service of humanity, and draft resolution II, on United Nations public information policies and activities, without a vote.

Turning to the report on Information from Non‑Self‑Governing Territories transmitted under Article 73 e of the United Nations Charter (document A/66/430), the Assembly adopted the resolution by the same name contained therein by a recorded vote of 170 in favour to none against, with 4 abstentions (France, Israel, United Kingdom, United States).  (Annex X)

The Assembly, taking up the report on economic and other activities which affect the interests of the peoples of the Non‑Self‑Governing Territories (document A/66/431), adopted a draft resolution by the same name, by a recorded vote of 170 in favour to 2 against (Israel, United States), with 2 abstentions (France, United Kingdom).  (Annex XI)

The Assembly then took up the report on the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples by the specialized agencies and the international institutions associated with the United Nations (document A/66/432), adopting the draft resolution by the same name by a recorded vote of 115 in favour to none against, with 56 abstentions.  (Annex XII)

The Assembly then turned to the report on offers by Member States of study and training facilities for inhabitants of Non‑Self‑Governing Territories (document A/66/433), adopting the draft resolution contained therein, without a vote.

Next, the Assembly took up the report on implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (document A/66/434), which contained six draft resolutions and one draft decision.

Acting without a vote, the Assembly adopted draft resolution I, on the question of Western Sahara, draft resolution II, on the question of New Caledonia, draft resolution III, on the question of Tokelau, and a two‑part draft resolution IV, on the questions of American Samoa, Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Guam, Montserrat, Pitcairn, Saint Helena, Turks and Caicos Islands, and the United States Virgin Islands.

The Assembly adopted draft resolution V, on the dissemination of information on decolonization, by a recorded vote of 166 in favour to 3 against ( Israel, United Kingdom, United States), with 2 abstentions ( Belgium, France).  (Annex XIII)

The Assembly then adopted draft resolution VI, on implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, by a recorded vote of 168 in favour to 3 against (Israel, United Kingdom, United States), with 1 abstention (France).  (Annex XIV)

Acting without a vote, the Assembly adopted the draft decision on the question of Gibraltar.

Turning next to the report on the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly (document A/66/435), it adopted the draft decision contained therein, also without a vote.

Finally, the Assembly adopted the report on programme planning (document A/66/436) also without a vote, thus concluding its consideration of the reports of the Fourth Committee.
_____________________________________________________________________________

Votes on Decolonization Resolutions (emphasis added)

Vote on Information from Non-Self-Governing Territories

The draft resolution on information from Non-Self-Governing Territories transmitted under Article 73 e of the United Nations Charter (document A/66/430) was adopted by a recorded vote of 170 in favour to none against, with 4 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  None.

AbstainFrance, Israel, United Kingdom, United States.

Absent:  Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Kiribati, Myanmar, Nauru, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, South Sudan, Suriname, United Republic of Tanzania.

*****


Vote on Economic and Other Activities Affecting Non-Self-Governing Territories

The draft resolution on economic and other activities which affect the interests of the peoples of the Non-Self-Governing Territories (document A/66/431) was adopted by a recorded vote of 170 in favour to 2 against, with 2 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  Israel, United States.

Abstain:  France, United Kingdom.

Absent:  Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Kiribati, Myanmar, Nauru, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, South Sudan, Suriname, United Republic of Tanzania.

*****


 Vote on Implementation of the Decolonization Declaration by Specialized Agencies

The draft resolution on Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples by the specialized agencies and the international institutions associated with the United Nations (document A/66/432) was adopted by a recorded vote of 115 in favour to none against, with 56 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  None.

Abstain:  Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Palau, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Vanuatu.

Absent:  Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Iran, Kiribati, Lesotho, Liberia, Myanmar, Nauru, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, South Sudan, Suriname, United Republic of Tanzania.

*****

Vote on Dissemination of Information on Decolonization

The draft resolution on dissemination of information on decolonization (document A/66/434) was adopted by a recorded vote of 166 in favour to 3 against, with 2 abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  Israel, United Kingdom, United States.


Abstain:  Belgium, France.

Absent:  Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Kiribati, Micronesia (Federated States of), Myanmar, Nauru, Niger, Nigeria, Palau, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, South Sudan, Suriname, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu.

*****
Vote on Implementation of Decolonization Declaration

The draft resolution on implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (document A/66/434) was adopted by a recorded vote of 168 in favour to 3 against, with 1 abstention, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  Israel, United Kingdom, United States.


Abstain:  France.

Absent:  Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Kiribati, Micronesia (Federated States of), Myanmar, Nauru, Niger, Nigeria, Palau, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Somalia, South Sudan, Suriname, United Republic of Tanzania.

09 December 2011

Anguilla continues to be affected by unilateral British authority

   
                                         United Anguilla for Transparency 
  
The Valley - Anguilla


The row between the most controversial Governor in recent memory, Governor William Alistair Harrison and Chief Minister of the island, Hon. Hubert Benjamin Hughes has reached a fever pitch. 


Anguilla, a colony (Overseas Territory) of England has been without budgetary aid since 1983 and has stood on its own feet since then. The local elected Government has been under lots of pressure to balance its budget soon after coming to office in February of 2010. The Anguilla United Movement was swept into office on February 15, 2010 and was immediately met with hostility by the UK appointed Governor who has some unusual relationships and questionable friendships with investors on the island. 



The local Government inherited a huge national debt and a $90 million deficit on the recurrent for 2009. Through fiscal measures by the Chief Minister who is also Minister of Finance, the country saw only a $11 million deficit for 2010 and is on pace for a huge recurrent surplus for 2011. What has baffled most including other Overseas Territory leaders is that in an unprecedented move, the Governor has decided to shift around the Permanent Secretaries of the island thus putting the recovery of the island's fiscal position at risk. 



 The Chief Minister addressed the nation (on the evening of 5th April). The full text is as follows:



Address of the Honourable Hubert Hughes
Chief Minister
Anguilla

Fellow Anguillians,



I thank you for paying keen attention to the affairs of Government which are really your affairs which recently took place in London during my attendance at the Overseas Territories Conference.

As you know I try to ensure that you are fully apprised of all matters of primary importance and I try to ensure that you are kept abreast.

One of the matters which occupied some attention on our trip to London concerned the issue of the movement of the Permanent Secretaries. As you know this has been an issue that I have referred to that is yet an added distraction placed on my administration which wishes to get on with the business of helping our island keep afloat against the tide of a bitter recession.

On that issue, I have spoken time and time again as to the fact that what the Governor and Deputy Governor were proposing to do was not in the best interest of Anguilla. You would have heard me refer to the fact that I was never consulted on this issue and that I was informed that the Permanent Secretaries would be transferred after that decision had already been taken.

I am fully aware that the movement of the Permanent Secretaries is meant to disrupt particularly my Ministry. It is proposed by the Governor that Mrs Kathleen Rogers who possesses a double masters in both Accounting and Finance and who has worked in the Finance areas in the Civil Service for over 30 years is to be transferred to the Public Administration. 

It is also proposed that Dr Aidan Harrigan our Economist is to take over the portfolio of Mrs Kathleen Rogers, even though he is not skilled in the area of Finance. It is also proposed that Mr Foster Rogers who has no background in Economics is to replace Dr Aidan Harrigan’s position and that Ms Arjul Wilson to take over the position of Foster Rogers.

I have explained that this does not make sense since it is a poor use of our precious human resources and does a disservice to you the taxpayer who pays for the salaries of these civil servants. In addition, given that specific timelines were set for us in relation to our Budget, the action of the Governor and Deputy Governor has amounted to a shifting of the goal posts in mid-stream and serve to handicap this administration in our recovery effort on the Budget.

What is more troubling however is that despite the expression of my concern over these transfers when Anguilla is in its toughest economic climate the Governor and Deputy Governor have total disregard for the interests of the People of Anguilla. In London, I raised the issue with my fellow Territory Premiers and Leaders all of whom felt as strongly as I did that what the Governor was attempting to do was out of sync and could not occur in their territories. Not only did they express that that kind of action could never happen in their respective territories, but some even felt that what was attempted to be done amounted to economic terrorism. 

As a matter of fact together with myself it was raised at a Luncheon organized by Mr Bellingham in which both I and the other Leaders expressed to Mr Bellingham that what was being proposed was unacceptable and that that type of decision should be with the express view of the Chief Minister. Mr Bellingham undertook to communicate to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to have the matter reviewed.



I am just informing everyone that I have received a letter from the Governor today 5th December 2011 indicating that Mr Bellingham had asked both him and Mr Stanley Reid to review the matter again. Interestingly, notwithstanding the request of Mr Bellingham, the Governor has informed me that his decision stands.



I just wish to indicate to the People of Anguilla that as your representative it is my duty to represent your interests, but that I think at this point our island is under threat by the action of the Governor and Deputy Governor. I feel it my duty to keep you informed.



God Bless you and God Bless Anguilla

08 December 2011

Warming Revives Dream of Sea Route in Russian Arctic

*****
New York Times

ARKHANGELSK, Russia — Rounding the northernmost tip of Russia in his oceangoing tugboat this summer, Capt. Vladimir V. Bozanov saw plenty of walruses, some pods of beluga whales and in the distance a few icebergs. One thing Captain Bozanov did not encounter while towing an industrial barge 2,300 miles across the Arctic Ocean was solid ice blocking his path anywhere along the route. Ten years ago, he said, an ice-free passage, even at the peak of summer, was exceptionally rare. 

But environmental scientists say there is now no doubt that global warming is shrinking the Arctic ice pack, opening new sea lanes and making the few previously navigable routes near shore accessible more months of the year. And whatever the grim environmental repercussions of greenhouse gas, companies in Russia and other countries around the Arctic Ocean are mining that dark cloud’s silver lining by finding new opportunities for commerce and trade.

Oil companies might be the most likely beneficiaries, as the receding polar ice cap opens more of the sea floor to exploration. The oil giant Exxon Mobil recently signed a sweeping deal to drill in the Russian sector of the Arctic Ocean. But shipping, mining and fishing ventures are also looking farther north than ever before.

“It is paradoxical that new opportunities are opening for our nations at the same time we understand that the threat of carbon emissions have become imminent,” Iceland’s president, Olafur Ragnar Grimsson, said at a recent conference on Arctic Ocean shipping held in this Russian port city not far south of the Arctic Circle.
At the same forum, Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin of Russia offered a full-throated endorsement of the new business prospects in the thawing north. 

“The Arctic is the shortcut between the largest markets of Europe and the Asia-Pacific region,” he said. “It is an excellent opportunity to optimize costs.”

This summer, one of the warmest on record in the Arctic, a tanker set a speed record by crossing the Arctic Ocean in six and a half days, carrying a cargo of natural gas condensate. The previous record was eight days.
Scientists say that over the last 10 years the average size of the polar ice sheet in September, the time of year when it is smallest, has been only about two-thirds the average during the previous two decades. The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program, a Norwegian group studying the Arctic, forecasts that within 30 or 40 years the entire Arctic Ocean will be ice-free in the summer.

And so business plans are being drawn up to capitalize on changes in a part of the world that for much of seafaring history was better known for grim final entries in diaries of explorers like Hugh Willoughby of England. He died with his crew in 1553 trying to navigate this shortcut from Europe to Asia, known as the Northeast Passage. 

The Russians, by traveling near the coast, have been sailing the Northeast Passage for a century. They opened it to international shipping in 1991, after the breakup of the Soviet Union. But only recently have companies begun to find the route profitable, as the receding polar ice cap has opened paths farther offshore — allowing larger, modern ships with deeper drafts to make the trip, trimming days off the voyage and saving fuel. In 2009, the first two international commercial cargo vessels traveled north of Russia between Europe and Asia. This year, 18 ships have made the now mostly ice-free crossing.

The voyages included a scenic cruise through the Northeast Passage, departing from Murmansk and arriving in Anadyr, a Russian port in the Pacific Ocean across the Bering Sea from Alaska. “The voyage offered attractions such as abandoned Russian polar stations,” the Australian operator, Aurora Expeditions, noted in its promotional literature. 

On some routes, the trip over the top of Russia is now competitive with the passage from Europe to Asia via the Suez Canal. The voyage from Rotterdam to Yokohama, Japan, via the Northeast Passage, for example, is about 4,450 miles shorter than the currently preferred route through the Suez, according to Russia’s Transportation Ministry. (Of course, the Arctic route has a way to go before catching up to the 18,000 ships a year sailing through the Suez Canal.

But the primary use of Arctic Ocean shipping has been to support other industries heading farther north, like mining and oil drilling, according to participants at the Russian conference. Tschudi, a Norwegian shipping company, has bought and revived an idled iron ore mine in the north of Norway to ship ore to China through the Northeast Passage. The voyage to Lianyungang in China took 21 days in 2010, compared with the 37 days typically required to sail to China through the Suez. Tschudi executives estimate they save $300,000 a trip.

“Very few people in the shipping community know about this route,” Felix Tschudi, the chairman, said in an interview.

The Russian company Norilsk’s nickel and copper mine can now ship its metals across the Arctic Ocean without chartering ice breakers, as in the past, saving millions of rubles for shareholders. In northwest Alaska, the Red Dog lead and zinc mine moves its ore through the Bering Strait, which is less often clogged with packed ice than in past decades.

Citigroup’s Moscow office has identified five Russian companies as well positioned to benefit from global warming in the north, where temperatures are rising about twice as fast as the global average.

Besides Norilsk, they included Sovcomflot, the state shipping company, and the nation’s two largest natural gas companies, Gazprom and Novatek. The fifth is Rosneft, the state oil company that has entered the joint venture with Exxon Mobil to drill in the Kara Sea, a part of the Russian sector of the Arctic Ocean. Russia is retooling a military shipyard outside Arkhangelsk that built the Soviet Union’s nuclear submarines to make ice-capable oil and gas drilling platforms.

For the international fishing industry, the target is the so-called Arctic Ocean doughnut hole — the millions of square miles in the ocean’s center that are beyond the 200-mile exclusive economic zones of the coastal nations. Until 2000, the entire doughnut hole was frozen year round. Now, large portions north of Alaska and eastern Siberia are usually ice-free in the summer.

The specter of hungry southern nations fishing the newly navigable doughnut hole prompted a recent report by the Pew Environment Group to warn that without a new set of regulations for the region, Arctic cod populations might be decimated.

Meanwhile, because ice floes still menace shipping even in the otherwise open sea lanes, authorities in the United States, Russia and Norway are studying the business potential of overhauling ports on both sides of the Northeast Passage to transfer containers from ordinary freighters to ice-class vessels that would ply the Arctic Ocean, serving Asia, Canada, the United States West Coast and Europe.

Under this plan, now hopelessly remote ports like Kirkenes in Norway or Adak in Alaska, south of the Bering Strait, might be transformed into bustling logistics hubs for Arctic shipping.
Alaska’s lieutenant governor, Mead Treadwell, was among those who attended the Russian conference. He noted that about $1 billion worth of goods passed through the Bering Strait last year. “The ships,” he said, “are coming.”

07 December 2011

Antigua and Barbuda endorsed by Latin American & Caribbean as President of 2013 United Nations General Assembly

Antigua and Barbuda's U.N. Ambassador to lead 
United Nations General Assembly in 2013


At their monthly meeting here on Wednesday, the 33 UN member States of the Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC) unanimously endorsed Antigua and Barbuda’s Ambassador to the United Nations H.E. Dr. John W. Ashe, to become the President of the Sixty-eight Session of United Nations General Assembly (UNGA 68), when that position rotates to the region in September 2013.

Prime Minister, the Honourable Dr. W. Baldwin Spencer immediately congratulated Ambassador Ashe on his achievement, noting that the early endorsement by the GRULAC was, by any measure, an indication of the group’s confidence in his ability to lead the august UN General Assembly as its President in 2013.

“The citizens of this nation can be proud of this singular achievement that has been bestowed on our UN Ambassador by the countries of the Latin American and Caribbean region. I have no doubt that Ambassador Ashe can and will provide the necessary leadership during his tenure as President of the 68th session of the General Assembly,” he said. 

he Presidency of the General Assembly follows a system of regional rotation. Each year one of the five geographic groups (African, Asian, Eastern European, Latin American and the Caribbean, and Western Europe and Other States) nominates one or more individuals. Once the regional group endorses its candidate for the PGA, the entire membership then elects him/her in the General Assembly, approximately three months prior to the start of the next Session. The session of the assembly begins every year in September. Hence the incoming President of that session is elected in June. The PGA’s term is for one year: from September of the year of his/her election to September of the following year). Any special, or emergency special, assemblies over the next year will be headed by the elected President of UN General Assembly.

The General Assembly is the main deliberative organ of the United Nations. It is composed of representatives of all 193 member States of the United Nations, each of which has one vote. Decisions on important questions, such as those on peace and security, admission of new Members and budgetary matters, require a two-thirds majority. Decisions on other questions are reached by a simple majority. These decisions may be adopted without a vote, or with a vote, which may be recorded, non-recorded or by roll-call.

The work of the United Nations year-round derives largely from the decisions of the General Assembly--that is to say, the will of the majority of the Members as expressed in resolutions adopted by the Assembly. That work is carried out by committees and other bodies established by the Assembly to study and report on specific issues, such as disarmament, outer space, peace-keeping, decolonization and human rights; in international conferences called for by the Assembly; and by the secretariat of the United Nations—the Secretary-General and his staff of international civil servants.

In a statement delivered to the GRULAC, Ambassador Ashe said: “I am indeed humbled and deeply honoured by the confidence you have placed in me by endorsing me to this office. And I will do everything possible to live up to the expectations that accompany this office, bearing in mind the path travelled before me by my fellow CARICOM colleagues, Ambassador Samuel R. Insanally of Guyana, President of the 48th session of the GA in 1993 and Ambassador Julian R. Hunte of St. Lucia, President of the 58th session of the General Assembly in 2003.” 

Ambassador Ashe as thanked the Chairman of GRULAC, Cuba’s Ambassador to the United Nations, His Excellency Mr. Pedro Nunez Josquera for personally facilitating the endorsement and for his and Cuba’s delegation successful chairmanship of the GRULAC for the month of November 2011.

The GRULAC endorsement represents the final step before the pro forma election of Ambassador Ashe as PGA by the UN General Assembly in June 2013, a process that began with the initial endorsement by CARICOM Ambassadors to the UN. As is the practice with candidatures at this level, the UN Ambassadors submitted Ambassador Ashe’s candidature for formal consideration by and subsequent approval of CARICOM Foreign Ministers meeting in the COFCOR. The COFCOR then sent the candidature for final approval by CARICOM Heads of Government. Ambassador Ashe subsequently received the support from every non-CARICOM member State of the GRULAC, which finally resulted in his unanimous endorsement by the group on Wednesday well in advance of the June 2013 elections by the General Assembly.

Lawsuit against Guam self-determination termed a 'perversion'

Davis lawsuit a perversion


Peter J. Santos
Letter to the Editor
Davis lawsuit a perversion
THE history of how Hawaii became the 50th state is a dark and sad chapter in U.S. history. The sovereign Hawaiian nation and people were overthrown by non-native settlers with the help of U.S. military forces. The non-native settlers then formed a government which excluded the Native Hawaiians. The newly formed government petitioned for statehood and was accepted into the union. This has been the paradigm for the newer states. This was not present in the Philippines, Cuba, or Puerto Rico.
The U.S. Congress later issued an official apology for the involvement of U.S. military forces and the dubious manner in which the State of Hawaii became a state. But what’s done is done and there’s no turning back. The official apology has been deemed as a symbolic gesture of the United States to the Native Hawaiians and cannot be used as a basis for any legal claims against the United States.
The Native Hawaiians are, to this day, trying to figure out how to proceed as a sovereign group. They were disenfranchised in their own homeland and their efforts to re-establish their sovereignty has been, and is still being, challenged by outsiders.
Mr. Arnold “Dave” Davis and his lawsuit are trying to repeat the history of Hawaii on Guam and put Guam on the track to statehood. He effectively wants to silence the native inhabitants, but this time using legal maneuvering. His legal claims are not in spirit of the 14th or 15th Amendments to the United States Constitution or the Voting Rights Act. He is perverting the justice system and the political process.
The situation on Guam of the plebiscite and decolonization is very messy because the political status of Guam and Guam’s history during the last 113 years is nothing like any of the other paradigms we have ever seen. Well, it doesn’t really need to be messy at all. This is a political process that should be allowed to finally take its course.
Enter Davis and his misguided and false legal claims and the waters get very, very muddy indeed. Instead of respecting the political process, he wants to claim rights in something he has no right in. He wants to make Guam into Hawaii. He’s also rabblerousing other non-natives to adopt his thinking and he’s playing on the fears and lack of understanding of what he claims are the “majority” of native inhabitants, to support his assertions. It’s tragic, but history tends to repeat itself. Should the U.S. Supreme Court get this wrong in principle, those natives too will be known to have betrayed their own people.
Don’t fret, after all is said and done, the natives of Guam will get an apology from the U.S. Congress like the Native Hawaiians did. It may take 100 years and the apology will be virtually useless, but the apology makes everything right. Just go and ask the Native Hawaiians. If you don’t believe them, go ask the Native American Indians and the Native Alaskans.
Peter J. Santos,
Ghazni, Afghanistan
##
Special to the Marianas Variety
Peter J. Santos,Ghazni
Afghanistan
The history of how Hawaii became the 50th state is a dark and sad chapter in U.S. history. The sovereign Hawaiian nation and people were overthrown by non-native settlers with the help of U.S. military forces. The non-native settlers then formed a government which excluded the Native Hawaiians. The newly formed government petitioned for statehood and was accepted into the union.
This has been the paradigm for the newer states. This was not present in the Philippines, Cuba, or Puerto Rico. The U.S. Congress later issued an official apology for the involvement of U.S. military forces and the dubious manner in which the State of Hawaii became a state.
But what’s done is done and there’s no turning back. The official apology has been deemed as a symbolic gesture of the United States to the Native Hawaiians and cannot be used as a basis for any legal claims against the United States.The Native Hawaiians are, to this day, trying to figure out how to proceed as a sovereign group. They were disenfranchised in their own homeland and their efforts to re-establish their sovereignty has been, and is still being, challenged by outsiders. 
Mr. Arnold “Dave” Davis and his lawsuit are trying to repeat the history of Hawaii on Guam and put Guam on the track to statehood. He effectively wants to silence the native inhabitants, but this time using legal maneuvering. His legal claims are not in spirit of the 14th or 15th Amendments to the United States Constitution or the Voting Rights Act. He is perverting the justice system and the political process.
The situation on Guam of the plebiscite and decolonization is very messy because the political status of Guam and Guam’s history during the last 113 years is nothing like any of the other paradigms we have ever seen. Well, it doesn’t really need to be messy at all. This is a political process that should be allowed to finally take its course.Enter Davis and his misguided and false legal claims and the waters get very, very muddy indeed. Instead of respecting the political process, he wants to claim rights in something he has no right in. He wants to make Guam into Hawaii.
He’s also rabblerousing other non-natives to adopt his thinking and he’s playing on the fears and lack of understanding of what he claims are the “majority” of native inhabitants, to support his assertions. It’s tragic, but history tends to repeat itself. Should the U.S. Supreme Court get this wrong in principle, those natives too will be known to have betrayed their own people.
Don’t fret, after all is said and done, the natives of Guam will get an apology from the U.S. Congress like the Native Hawaiians did. It may take 100 years and the apology will be virtually useless, but the apology makes everything right. Just go and ask the Native Hawaiians. If you don’t believe them, go ask the Native American Indians and the Native Alaskans.


05 December 2011

Prime ministers of Caribbean autonomous countries meet in Curacao ahead of meeting with Dutch Kingdom

WRITTEN BY  STEVEN CYRILLIEN


Prime Ministers prepare for Kingdom meeting
PHILIPSBURG, Willemstad - The Prime Ministers of Aruba, Curacao and St.Maarten met in Curacao this week, and high on the agenda were among others, the meeting of the Kingdom to be held in December.
The rights of the islands of Curacao and St. Maarten to seek their independence was one of the points discussed by the Prime Ministers in preparation for the Kingdom talks.
According to the prime Minister of St. Maarten Sarah Wescot-Williams. both St. Maarten and Curacao can learn a lot from the Island of Aruba noting that Aruba has a lot of experience with the constitutional status of "separate status" within the Dutch Kingdom.
Prime Minister of Aruba Mike Eman stated that corporation is an avenue for benefits to be had for all of the islands.

03 December 2011

New European Decision on the association of the Overseas Countries and Territories (OCTs); expected adoption in March 2012

Special to Overseas Territories Review

This indicative roadmap is provided for information purposes only and is subject to change. It does not prejudge the final decision of the (European) Commission on whether this initiative will be pursued or on its final content and structure.

The Overseas Countries and Territories (OCTs) are associated with the European Union (EU) through a regime based on the provisions of Part IV of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) and the detailed rules and procedures laid down at present in the Overseas Association Decision of 27 November 2001

This current Overseas Association Decision will expire on 31 December 2013. Thus, the European Council in its 22 December 2009 conclusions stressed the importance of updating the unique relationship between the EU and the OCTs to reflect new developments in the EU, in the OCTs and in the wider world. It also encouraged the Commssion, through appropriate dialogue with the OCTs and the Member States, to revise the Overseas Association Decision and to present it to the Council before July 2012.

Historically, the list of OCTs mainly included countries and territories that have in the meantime become independent sovereign countries, most of them ACP countries. This explains why the logic (of the 2001 Overseas Association decision) applied to cooperation between the EU and the OCTs is to a large extent identical to that applied to cooperation between the EU and the ACP states, despite the fact that the OCTs are covered by a separate legal base in the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU).

However, such parallelism does not correspond to the reality in the field, the specific social, economic and environmental challenges faced by the OCTs today, and the close historical, institutional and political ties between the OCTs and the EU. Furthermore, it does not take into account the potential of OCTs as strategically important outposts, spread all over the world, as proponents of the EU’s values. In addition, the wider international context has evolved, in particular as a consequence of globalisation, the ongoing liberalisation of international trade and also the increased regional integration of the ACP countries.

Who will be affected by it?

All OCTs: Aruba, British Virgin Islands, Bonaire, Curaçao, Saba, Sint-Eustatius, Sint Maarten, Anguilla, Cayman islands, Turks & Caicos islands, Montserrat, New Caledonia, French Polynesia, Wallis & Futuna, Pitcairn, British Indian Ocean Territory, Mayotte, St Pierre & Miquelon, Greenland, British Antarctic Territory, Falkland islands, South Georgian and South Sandwich Islands, St Helena, French Southern and Antarctic Territories.

The special relationship between the EU and the OCTs should move away from a classic development cooperation approach to a reciprocal partnership to support the OCTs’ sustainable development and promote the EU’s values and standards in the wider world. According to Commission Communication COM(2009)623 the focus of the renewed OCT/EU partnership should be on three central objectives tailored to the OCTs’ specificity:

i) Enhancing competitiveness

ii) strengthening resilience and

iii) promoting cooperation

These objectives are to be pursued via five inter-linked principles and axes of cooperation, which are: 

(a) to support the development of OCTs as centres of excellence

(b) to support the voluntary adoption by OCTs of EU rules and standards

(c) to cooperate with OCTs on environmental issues and disaster risk reduction

(d) promote OCT accessibility, and (e) to ensure trade and economic cooperation.
 

The future association will no longer require a relationship between donor and aid partner as is the case today, but will call for a new framework of cooperation. In this regard, the EUs internal policies offer interesting examples. 

This does not mean that these policies or parts of them should be applied as such to the OCTs, or that the OCTs should be brought within the scope of these policies. Instead, the detailed rules and procedures for the association of the OCTs with the EU after 2013 should continue to be based on Article 203 of the TFEU, but should draw inspiration from successful formulae followed in implementing the EU's internal policies. 

Following the outcome of the public consultation that was organised in 2008, the statements and declarations of the four relevant EU Member States and the OCTs themselves during the last OCT Fora as well as the Council Conclusions of December 2009, the next step would be to submit to the Council a proposal to revise the Overseas Association Decision. This would go beyond routine up-date of existing legislation and would concern the OCT-EU association in all of its aspects. 

Article 203 of the TFEU requires an act adopted by the Council, at the latest when the current Overseas Association Decision expires. As regards the future Financial Instrument a detailed analysis is carried out in the context of the Multi-Annual Financial Framework (MFF) post 2013. 

Nevertheless, it has to be recalled, that the 2009 Communication indicated that the aim of the new Association should be not to revise the current financial framework with a view to broadening assistance to the OCTs, but rather to limit cooperation to more concentrated areas. The new Association could provide a better access of OCTs to various European Programmes to which they are eligible but also to define rules that would take into consideration the administrative capacity and size of the OCTs.

01 December 2011

Bermudian scholar wins party nomination in upcoming elections

The (Bermuda) Progressive Labour Party held a press conference and confirmed that Walton Brown will represent them in Constituency #27 Pembroke Central. In September 2011, Mr Brown was announced as the winner of the candidate selection meeting for the Pembroke Central branch, selected as the winner over National Security Minister Wayne Perinchief, who presently holds the seat.
Walton Brown is President of Research Innovations Limited, and previously served as a lecturer at Bermuda College [1988-2000]. He served in the Senate from 2007 to 2010, and was Junior Minister of Education, Energy, Telecommunications and E-Commerce. Mr Brown recently released the book ‘Bermuda and the Struggle for Reform: Race, Politics and Ideology.’