Chair: Welcome again to the Reconvened 67th Session. We’ll proceed the consideration on Merchandise 4 on strategic administration, budgetary and administrative questions. At our joint assembly with the CCPCJ yesterday, we thought of beneath Agenda Merchandise 4 the implementation of the consolidated for the biennium 2024-2025 for the UNODC. And the medicine proposed program plan for 2026 and program efficiency for 2024 is contained in…[links]. The Fee is now to take motion on the medicine decision of the implementation of the price range for the biennium 2024-2025 for the fund of the UN Worldwide Drug Management Program. I perceive that there have been two rounds of casual consultations throughout which the medicine decision was amended. The amended textual content of the drug decision after casual session was circulated through particular message on twenty ninth of October. In agreed by silence, procedural…on November twenty fourth. The doc is contained https://cndblog.org/2024/12/cnd-reconvened-67th-session/. Could I invite the Fee to undertake the decision as amended? I see no objections, it’s so determined. I want to recall that the Fee is predicted to endorse on the time of the 67th reconvened session, the members of the FINGOV Bureau for 2025 following the joint nomination of the bureaus CND and CCPCJ in accordance with ECOSOC resolution 2022/316E. I’m happy to recall that the Secretariat has formally obtained the next nominations which have within the meantime been earlier than the bureaus of CND and CCPCJ- Jap European Group Chair: Ambassador Germeni- Everlasting Consultant of Albania, Latin American and Caribbean Group 1st Vice Chair- Laura Gil -Everlasting Consultant of Colombia, Western European and different States Group Vice-Chair: Ambassador Makovich- Everlasting Consultant of Sweden. Could I ask the Fee whether or not it needs to endorse these three nominated candidates as members of FINGOV for 2025? I see no objections. It’s so determined. I additionally wish to point out that the Secretariat has obtained the nomination of the next individuals: Africa Group Vice-Chair: Ambassador [x] Everlasting Consultant of Sudan, Asia-Pacific Group Vice-Chair: Mr. Mustafah Shafizadeh second secretary of the everlasting mission of Iran. As defined yesterday morning, in accordance with ECOSOC resolution 2022/316, these two nominations might be submitted to the Prolonged Bureau of CND and CCPCJ for subsequent endorsement on the time of the common 68th session in March. We now transfer to Agenda Merchandise 5 entitled “Implementation of the Worldwide Drug Management Treaties.”
I’m instructed that Argentina want to communicate on strategic, price range, and administrative questions.
Argentina: Thanks Chair. We’re talking with reference to Agenda Gadgets 4 and 9 of the reconvened session of the CND and CCPCJ. Argentina want to state that with regard to phrase “gender” we perceive that as underlined to the worldwide treaties, when “gender” refers to 2 sex- masculine and female. Generally phrases, there aren’t any exceptions to what I’ve talked about. With regard to gender- Argentina’s dedication to the rights of girls has been sustained over time and is in its laws and its effort which transcend worldwide efforts. For Argentina, the 2030 Agenda consists of nonbinding targets, which every state has the liberty to pursue because it needs and with regards to the Pact to the Future, there is no such thing as a restriction to the person’s rights. With regard, to what’s been mentioned, the delegation of Argentina that sooner or later we use a wording that’s acceptable to all delegations and we additionally want to request that this intervention be mirrored within the data of the assembly.
Chair: We’ll now transfer to Agenda Merchandise 6 entitled “Observe as much as the Implementation of Nationwide, Regional, Worldwide Ranges of All Commitments as Mirrored in Ministerial Declaration 2019 to Deal with and Counter the World Drug Drawback.” Yesterday afternoon, we had an introduction presentation by the Secretariat, which was adopted by interventions on the ground. Could I take it that the merchandise might be closed down? I thanks. We now proceed on Agenda Merchandise 9, entitled Contributions by the Fee to the work of the ECOSOC Council in step with Normal Meeting decision 75290 A and determination 75290B, together with observe as much as and evaluate, and implementation of the 2020 Agenda for Sustainable Improvement. Yesterday morning, we had an introductory presentation by the Secretariat, which was adopted by interventions on the ground. Could I take it that the merchandise might be closed down?
Argentina: Argentina want to state that with regard to the phrase “gender” we perceive that as worldwide legislation does, and worldwide treaties that the phrase “gender” refers back to the two sexes- masculine and female within the context of society. Generally phrases, we’d haven’t any exceptions.. (repeat of earlier assertion). SDG’s are non binding and Argentina disassociates with the Pact of the Future as a result of it doesn’t acknowledge the rights of people..
Chair: The subsequent merchandise on our agenda is a continuation of the provisional agenda for the 68th session for the Fee, which was additionally open yesterday. Dates of the 68th session [x] organizational association. The prolonged bureau really helpful the next dates: Common session: 10-14 March, 2025; Session Consultations seventh March; Reconvened Periods 4-5 December 2025. Are there any feedback on the dates? I see no objections. It’s so determined. I now are likely to the pre-session session to maximise the effectivity of our use of interpretation sources and in step with [x]. The prolonged bureau has really helpful [x] eleventh assembly on twenty fifth November that we conduct the pre-session casual consultations scheduled for 7 March 2025 in English solely. Any feedback? I see none. It’s so determined. Deadline for the submissions of drug resolutions. In accordance with CND resolution 55/1, the agency deadline for the submission of medicine resolutions is often one month previous to the graduation of the session. Drug resolutions for the session with us should be submitted by Monday, 10 February 2025. Do you will have any feedback on this? It’s so determined. Provisional agenda for the 68th session- the drug provisional agenda for the 68th session as contained within the report of the CND on its 67th session was authorized by the ECOSOC Council in its resolution 2024/321 entitled report of the CND on its 67th session and provisional agenda of its 68th session. Concerning the bureau for the 68th session, I want to recall that elections will happen as soon as this session is closed on the opening of the 68th session. Integration of the primary theme of the ECOSOC and the Excessive Degree Political Discussion board to 2025. As you’ll recall, in Normal Meeting Decision 75/2 908, as subsidiary our bodies of ECOSOC, I encourage you will have [x] discussions aligned with the primary theme of the ECOSOC Council. As really helpful by the prolonged bureau on its eleventh assembly on 25 of November, I encourage delegations to hyperlink their statements on the 68th session to the primary group of the council and the excessive degree political discussion board for 2025, which is Advancing Sustainable, Inclusive, Science and Proof-based Options for the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Improvement Targets for leaving nobody behind. Aspect occasions and its visions: the rules for aspect occasions and its visions had been shared with all member states. Within the particular message of twenty eighth of November. The appliance interval for aspect occasions and its imaginative and prescient might be from 13-24 January, 2025. Delegations are inspired to use as quickly as the appliance interval begins and effectively upfront of the deadline. We now transfer onto Agenda Merchandise 11. We had yesterday an introductory presentation of the drug resolution entitled, “participation of the EU within the work of the Fee” which was tabled by Poland on behalf of the state, members of the UN which might be members of the EU, and which is contained in doc [x]. I’ve requested final evening that the sponsors of the drug resolution and the representatives of the Russian Federation, which had submitted written amendments doc [x], would attempt to sit collectively and attempt to come to a joint understanding of a method ahead. Since yesterday, we’ve all been working very onerous to succeed in consensus on this matter and I’m happy to make some proposals for the consideration of the Fee. We’ve on the penultimate paragraph of the choice, a slight modification and we’ve added a brand new OP-1 and added a brand new OP-2. For OP-1 reaffirms the present apply the place by the representatives of the EU might proceed to take part with out the fitting to vote within the work of the CND and proceed to be inscribed on the checklist of audio system with a view to make interventions on behalf of the EU, together with for opening remarks reserved for teams which might be members of the prolonged bureau. OP-2 Recognizing that the identical apply will apply upon their requests to regional, intergovernmental organizations which have observer standing within the Normal Meeting and whose member states have agreed preparations that permit the organizations’ representatives to talk on behalf of the group and its member states, together with for opening remarks. At this second, I want to ask Poland if Poland is in settlement with the proposals I’ve submitted.
Poland: Sure certainly, that is the consensus we’ve reached with Russian delegation throughout the dialogue this morning and yesterday night. I want to underline that allowing for the consensus that we managed, the Russian delegation additionally accepted the withdrawal of the modification from yesterday.
Chair: I thank Poland. I now give the ground to the Russian delegation.
Russia: Thanks chair-person. The textual content on the display is suitable to us and I would love affirm that. We withdraw our modification from yesterday. Thanks.
Egypt: Because it’s the primary time to advertise ourselves formally relating to the draft resolution launched by Poland on behalf of the EU, Egypt want to reiterate its excessive appreciation for the EU and the EU member states for his or her full engagement within the deliberations of the Fee as per the present practices. Egypt additional reiterates its sturdy choice to refer the matter into consideration on this draft resolution to the ECOSOC because the governing physique of all purposeful Commissions. Furthermore, Egypt is of the view that the wholesome and constructive deliberations throughout the casual consultations have proven that there’s an settlement on the present apply in step with rule 74 of the foundations of process of the purposeful commissions of the ECOSOC. Due to this fact there is no such thing as a want for such a draft resolution and if the fee desires to pronounce itself on the matter, this may be addressed within the report of the reconvened session, based mostly on the operative paragraphs within the draft resolution. Moreover, Egypt want to specific its appreciation to the constructive strategy by the EU and the Russian Federation in taking up board some issues raised throughout the casual consultations. Having mentioned that, Egypt want to specific its issues relating to the primary Operative Paragraph within the second revised model: Egypt stresses the significance of highlighting within the OP that the present apply won’t set a precedent for the EU participation in different purposeful commissions of ECOSOC. Egypt insists of utilizing the agreed language in Rule 74 of the Guidelines of Process of the purposeful commissions of the ECOSOC and proposes altering the phrase “work” with “deliberations” as within the preambular paragraph 3 of the draft resolution. Egypt proposes altering “reaffirms” to “acknowledges” originally of the paragraph. Egypt additional proposes to delete the time period “representatives of” from the primary line of the operative paragraph. Egypt proposes the deletion accordingly. Egypt proposes the next paragraph, “acknowledges, with out setting a precedent for different purposeful commissions of the ECOSOC Council. The present apply within the Fee, whereby the EU might proceed to apply, with out the fitting to vote, within the deliberations of the Fee.” Thanks.
Colombia: Colombia as chair of the G77 and China would love ensures that this resolution won’t have an effect on the fitting of the G77 and China to intervene as an current apply. We perceive that the clause together with for opening teams reserved for teams which might be members of the prolonged bureau will embody the G77 however I want to ask on report ensures from the Secretariat and the events concerned that that is their understanding too.
Pakistan: We want to specific our issues relating to the matter over how these selections had been performed. The discussions had been held in closed teams, with out adequately involving all member states, which undermines the ideas of inclusivity and transparency that ought to information our collective resolution making course of. Moreover, we stay unable to completely comprehend the rationale behind this resolution. The present textual content merely reaffirms the present apply of the participation of the EU and different intergovernmental organizations within the work of the Fee. This raises the query of whether or not the intensive effort and time spent on this procedural matter had been actually warranted, particularly on condition that the Fee’s mandate are to handle the world drug drawback and points associated to crime prevention and felony justice. We additionally search clarification from the Secretariat on two essential factors. 1. Does the adoption of this resolution set the precedent that would have an effect on the work of different ECOSOC Commissions and wouldn’t it haven’t been extra acceptable to handle this difficulty at ECOSOC. 2. May the Secretariat present readability on the excellence between deliberations and the phrase of the Fee as referred within the resolution? We insist on clear response from the Secretariat to make sure that member states right here have a correct understanding of the implications of this resolution. In conclusion, Pakistan re[x] its principled place that procedural selections of this nature needs to be addressed on the acceptable discussion board, which is ECOSOC, given their broader implications. Allow us to refocus our energies on the substantive challenges that the worldwide group expects us to handle.
United States: There does appear to be broad consensus within the room that the apply we’ve adopted, stemming from an ECOSOC resolution that utilized to our sister Fee, that we take pleasure in this apply and we wish to see it proceed so the proposal that was provided beforehand to have an entry into the report is one thing that’s attention-grabbing. If we had extra time, we’d wish to contemplate that. However we perceive that for the EU, they should have some assurance. We’re fairly pleased with the primary paragraph and will assist that however we’ve some misgivings concerning the second. Like others, we’re involved with the breadth of the brand new proposal and the truth that we don’t have a transparent understanding on what the influence could also be. We all know that there are some 200 organizations which have observer standing so we’ve some concern whether or not we’re opening the doorways and including to the work of our fee, with out including substance to the work that we do. We additionally want a while to seek the advice of with the capital. We’ve simply gotten this. And to the extent that this will likely have broader implications for the broader UN apply. We want a while to seek the advice of and we perceive that we don’t actually have time on this reconvened session. We do suppose maybe a few of our issues might be addressed by a slight tweak to the second paragraph, the place we are saying “intergovernmental organizations which have observer standing” if lets say “intergovernmental organizations that at present have observer standing” that method we’re limiting it to a recognized pool of entities that may high quality. And once more we’d like extra time however with that modification, we’ll be on the fitting path.
Iran: We imagine that the great thing about making selections by consensus lies in respecting the views, feedback, and views of all member states. Whereas thanking the events for his or her constructive strategy, we want to emphasize that some authorized points weren’t adequately addressed on this course of. These ideas are as follows: this delegation firmly believes that the present resolution falls outdoors the choice of the CND. Second- moreover introducing this resolution throughout the reconvened resolution just isn’t in accordance with the procedural guidelines governing the agenda for aspect periods. In line with the ECOSOC guidelines of process, new objects can’t be added except they’re a part of the authorized agenda. This resolution was not launched throughout the CCPCJ session in Could nor throughout the CND session in March. The present reconvened periods are restricted to addressing administrative and budgetary issues that stay unresolved in the primary periods. Regardless of these issues, we won’t stand in opposition to this resolution, with the understanding that such selections shall not make any precedent for the long run.
Sudan: Thanks Mr. Chair. This delegation joins the assertion given by our colleagues from Egypt. The earlier audio system who counsel that it could be extra acceptable that this difficulty be addressed by ECOSOC. Nonetheless if this Fee is wishing to undertake this draft resolution, we’d assist the amendments made by our distinguished colleague from Egypt made to the textual content. We’ve a query in relation to the final line of the OP, OP2. In relation with the final line of the second OP, we acknowledge that there’s an opportunity to have us or intergovernmental organizations to apply the identical rights because the EU as an intergovernmental group. The final line of the primary OP is contradicting the second working paragraph. So if the room is okay with the second paragraph, there is no such thing as a want. As a result of this new intergovernmental group that we are going to have within the image should not a part of the prolonged bureau after all so limiting the audio system to the prolonged bureau is clearly deleting the second paragraph. So both the final line of the primary paragraph or the second paragraph. If we wish to add the second paragraph, we must always take away the final line within the first paragraph as a result of its actually contradicting. We’re in search of clarification.
Singapore: My delegation has expressed our views within the draft selections within the casual consultations. I wish to thank the EU for taking up our issues on board. I really feel obliged to talk for the report : Our delegation doesn’t imagine this resolution just isn’t mandatory. We imagine the present apply is adequate to handle the issues of the EU however we perceive that they really feel the necessity to convey it. We don’t suppose this type of resolution needs to be determined on this physique. We echo our different colleagues- this resolution needs to be determined within the ECOSOC Council to determine on. It needs to be the precept organ that decides on the participation of such entities within the work of the purposeful Commissions. We’ve simply seen this proposal. We’re involved concerning the course of that has taken place to permit the EU and Russian Federation to succeed in consensus. We’re very glad they reached settlement. We’re simply involved that nobody else’s views had been although or thought of. I want to hear the Secretariat’s responses to the questions posed by Pakistan however Chair, at a minimal my delegation wants time to evaluate this proposal that we’ve simply seen. We have to contemplate what it means and we predict it’s a good request and this truly has implications for our regional group and the functioning of the Fee by way of the participation of the now many intergovernmental organizations that we’re seeming to incorporate. I might take a while to take a look at this.
Thailand: We’ve one other assertion. We specific our displeasure on the course of. We’re right here to resolve the difficulty of 1 delegation which isn’t a member of the Fee not having the ability to take part in casual consultations and COW and but many of the members of the Fee had been excluded from consultations on this present yellow textual content on the display. In the identical method quite a few delegations have expressed, we’d like time to think about this morning. We’re right here to assist and to assist however we should be heard as effectively. We’re a member to each Commissions. We’ve quite a few inquiries to this draft. The textual content from my angle is difficult to see. The textual content saying “consultant of organizations” I’m unsure if the one who proposed this could make clear whether or not this implies member of the Secretariat, or Secretariat Normal of the Group, or Chair of the group. It sounds a bit clear to me and I feel I’ve heard a the delegate of Egypt proposal to delete that phrase. One other query I’ve is on the order of talking. I feel the consultant of america have additionally requested about this earlier on the truth that whether or not these organizations might be talking earlier than our ministers of the member states of UN as a result of there are lots of of them. If it’s the case solely part of a company representing of nations might be talking earlier than a head of state or minister, that is a matter we are going to take account into our consideration. These are the 2 questions we’ve on the textual content as a result of it sounds unclear to me. Within the first paragraph it says “reserved for members of the prolonged bureau” but it surely doesn’t say this once more within the second paragraph. We should always make clear this earlier than we determine on the matter. I’m questioning if we may even be contemplating the proposal by Egypt. If we’re, I might additionally humbly request we’ve it in writing on the display so we are able to see it whereas we contemplate this draft.
Chair: I simply wish to make one thing clear. As you recognize in attempting to succeed in consensus, you enter into smaller teams to result in proposals for the bigger group to think about. This present dialogue on this matter is to make sure inclusivity. And the proposal introduced earlier than us- no resolution might be taken on that proposal with out member state. What we’re doing at this very second is ensuring that each one members of the CND train their views and opinions and preferences on what’s earlier than us. There is no such thing as a try to exclude anybody from the method. That is what we’re doing now.
UK: Chair- the UK has sensible issues concerning the second paragraph of this textual content. It’s tough for us to grasp what it provides. We be part of with others in asking the Secretariat for evaluate on what it modifications. We’ve severe issues concerning the breadth within the wording and the unintended penalties it creates, as some delegations have identified. We’re additionally confused concerning the motivations behind the addition of the second paragraph. Throughout the [x] discuss, we heard a lot of objections about altering the foundations of process. But this paragraph clearly introduces a brand new rule. In truth at [x] discuss, all of us agreed that we didn’t wish to change guidelines of process and but this paragraph introduces a brand new rule and with out session on why that is mandatory. This stands as stark distinction to the paragraph from the EU which is effectively thought of and is being full defined throughout consultations. We suggest at present to proceed with OP1 and to depart OP2, which raises an entire host of points for additional and future dialogue.
India: We’re glad that EU and RF might give you a standard draft. We want to reiterate that this discussion board just isn’t the fitting place for this space on this difficulty. It must be tabled with the principal physique, which is ECOSOC. Nonetheless, this new draft we’ve simply obtained so we additionally want time to think about the [x] on this draft and are available again. I’ve one query in regard to OP 2, along with the questions already raised by different colleagues. It mentions that member states who’ve agreed preparations that permits the organizations representatives to talk on behalf of the the organizations and its member states. How will this be verified by the Secretariat- whether or not a selected group has a mandate to talk on behalf of all of the member states? Will or not it’s a [x] from every of the member states of the worldwide group? How will the sanctity of this settlement be verified? If there’s an ambiguity, will the Prolonged Bureau determine on it? Say one member state of a selected group just isn’t keen to be a part of the assertion? How will or not it’s decided- will or not it’s prolonged bureau or will or not it’s referred to the Fee?
Morocco: Mr. Chair I want to echo the issues of earlier delegations, notably the consultant of Thailand, that some delegations had been excluded from consultations on the second operative paragraph. Nonetheless, due to the place of my delegation as a constructive, on this matter, I want to add the next wording on the primary sentence of the OP 2 so it should learn the next: “it acknowledges that the identical apply will apply upon the request and with out prejudice to the respective mandates.” We predict that this is essential to mirror “ with out prejudice to the respective mandates” once we are referring to the regional and intergovernmental organizations. We will solely settle for this if this modification is mirrored on this OP2.
Chair: You’ve simply contributed to this textual content so you haven’t been excluded. Nobody has been left behind in taking a call on this matter.
China: First, we respect Russia and EU effort to hunt an answer. Second, we’re not in opposition to the intergovernmental organizations in compliance with the operate of the Committee Guidelines of Process of ECOSOC to take part within the work of CND and CCPCJ. However the circumstances needs to be that they need to adjust to the foundations of process. In guidelines of process, if some events have completely different views within the guidelines or its interpretations, options needs to be discovered via pleasant negotiations and consultations. Nonetheless if no resolution might be reached, joint efforts needs to be made to hunt joint interpretations from authoritative organizations or organs which designed such form of guidelines. Fourthly, we’ve famous that some delegations have raised technical points. Within the spirit of consultations, we want to have interaction in consultations with related events and we are going to assist the settlement reached on the convention.
Russia: I’ll attempt to answer some questions. The initiative to incorporate the second paragraph of this decision got here from our aspect and we’ll make clear what that has to do. We imagine in a democratic world, there needs to be equal rights for all. This pertains to nationwide states and corresponding worldwide organizations. Having agreed to simply accept the second paragraph, the EU underscored that it was not in search of to have any unique standing, recognizing that different intergovernmental organizations have a proper to the identical standing because the EU in our two Commissions. That may be a optimistic level and I welcome it. Turning to the second paragraph, it proposes that each one the worldwide organizations ought to actively work with our fee. What we’re speaking right here is that those that want to take action and make the corresponding request. We heard issues about america delegate…about having 200 organizations who’ve observer standing. The language used within the second paragraph does vital extent, removes these issues. By the way, this wording is predicated on Decision 65/276 of the UN Normal Meeting. So that is language which already exists and right here there are specific variety of filters which permit us to make sure that there gained’t be a mass inflow of intergovernmental organizations into the work of the commissions- it’s speaking about regional intergovernmental organizations. And with regards to these organizations, which have observer standing to the GA, there aren’t a lot of them. There’s a second filter- those that have the corresponding inside procedures permitting their representatives to talk on behalf of those organizations and their member states. Not solely all regional intergovernmental organizations have such procedures. They usually can not take part on this work till they’ve agreed on such procedures. The consultant of Thailand requested some clarification on who was meant by “representatives of the group” and I want to reply that the members of the group ought to determine on that for themselves. If Thailand is a member of Asia, then along with their colleagues on this group, they need to determine who speaks on behalf of Asia. It doesn’t should be Secretary Normal or consultant of the Secretariat. It might be chair or any member of the group. The primary factor is that they’re approved to take action by their colleagues in that group, to talk on behalf of their groupong via a completely democratic process. I’d like to answer the consultant of the UK. No this isn’t a brand new process, completely not. If we take a look at the textual content rigorously, the primary and the second paragraph, within the first paragraph what’s being talked about is current apply. And within the second paragraph, it underscores that this current apply is obtainable to different regional organizations. This isn’t a brand new process and it underscores that our world is about up on democratic principles- no one has exclusivity and different intergovernmental areas might take part, inside sure circumstances, within the work of those Commissions. And to answer the query of the consultant of Colombia with reference to G77, after all this draft resolution doesn’t have an effect on the present standing of the G77 plus China, which can proceed to be as earlier than G77 plus China and can have each cause and foundation to talk originally of each Commissions. That is clearly indicated within the final line of OP 1. Right here it says “teams which might be members of the prolonged bureau.” The G77 is such a member so this shouldn’t be a priority.
Canada: We additionally actually respect all of the efforts undertaken final evening and this morning to hunt consensus on this resolution. We’re undoubtedly supportive of the efforts of the EU to affirm the present apply. On condition that this new textual content has simply been offered, and the questions which have been raised within the room on the way it applies, questions that we’d additionally like to raised perceive, I famous that there was a footnote included and given our quick time for our consideration, I’m questioning if that may be displayed in case that helps to make clear. Thanks.
Venezuela: Thanks to the delegations involved for in search of an answer. The delegation of Venezuela believes that the difficulty needs to be addressed in New York, throughout the ECOSOC, not right here in Vienna in step with the apply that has already been created, with out creating detrimental procedural priority for different purposeful Commissions of ECOSOC. Alongside one other line on a special difficulty however which I have to communicate on, the delegation of Venezuela want to inform you that at present is the final day, formal day for the participation of a colleague, a minister and council Daniela Alandez. On behalf of the group of the Venezuelan delegation, we want to specific our gratitude for the dedication to multilateralism, for dedication and dedication, which we’re all conscious of us on this room. We want him well being and all one of the best in his future.
Ukraine: I wish to pose a query. Whereas it’s not clear why this [x] needs to be made now to long run apply and long run lengthy standing guidelines, what we advise is that hardly…in regard to democratic precept and standards..her place whereas in introducing these guidelines. We’ve severe doubt in that. And questions on some background of how this rule was made. What had been the essential causes or standards on why this rule was made and why different regional intergovernmental organizations weren’t included within the checklist of audio system?
Chair: I might wish to shut the checklist of audio system after which take some selections on this issues. If there’s any delegation that wishes to talk, except for Belarus, tell us.
Belarus: Belarus would additionally desire that this resolution be taken to New York and handled by ECOSOC. The factor that has at all times distinguished Vienna is that we’ve at all times tried to work within the spirit of Vienna and discover the golden medium. I feel that this textual content we’ve on the display, which was agreed on by Russia and EU is such golden medium and is a textual content that we are able to work on additional. We’ve heard of some invaluable proposals by from a number of delegations- america, Egypt, Morocco. I feel that maybe [x] to mirror these proposals on the display would make it simpler for us to return to some settlement.
Chair: I’ll take Egypt and Senegal. I’ll request Poland to talk after I aks the Fee to interrupt for a while. That is the method that I want to undertake. I’ll give the ground first to Senegal.
Senegal: The aim is to return to a larger diploma of democracy. I feel we are able to simplify. These organizations are observers so I feel we must always restrict their intervention to the opening remarks and if it doesn’t exist already, we are able to have concluding remarks. That may permit the collaborating member states to steer the deliberations after which observer our bodies might specific their issues originally of the session, after which having adopted the deliberations and after having the likelihood to satisfy with members of the body- they might throughout the closing session making concluding remarks so this might permit us to have a larger diploma of democracy and would lighten our workload.
Egypt: I want to echo what our colleague from Belarus had talked about pertaining to the significance of reflecting numerous proposals. We see from our viewpoint that there’s advantage in additionally the proposal launched by the delegate of Morocco and we want to see for consideration. I want to echo and align myself with the request of Signature relating to to the reply from the Secretariat to the query raised by Pakistan on the place we must always contemplate this difficulty? In our view it needs to be thought of within the ECOSOC and we hope we are able to get a solution from the Secretariat earlier than adjourning for a break.
Secretariat: We’ve a query from the G77 as to whether or not they would proceed to be thought of a bunch that may communicate on the opening remarks I feel the anticipation is that the apply won’t change. That members of group, as defined by the delegate from the Russian Federation, the teams which might be members of the prolonged bureau will proceed to talk on the opening remarks however this anticipates that others might have the chance to talk at that time. There was a query from Pakistan, “Does this create precedent for different Commissions?” The reply is not any as a result of it’s a call of this Fee and there may even be a call within the CCPCJ and people would then apply to our our bodies. They’d not have a precedent to different ECOSOC our bodies. In the event that they needed to be detailing with us on a broader degree, then certainly NY could be the place to convey this type of consideration, the place they might contemplate in context of the foundations in making use of it extra functionally to all of the commissions of ECOSOC. There was one other query by Pakistan on distinction between deliberations and work. The time period deliberations is a time period on the foundations of process and the phrases of labor. The time period deliberations is a time period used within the guidelines of process so it has some authorized pressure. I can’t inform you precisely what which means as a result of I don’t have the knowledge of these guidelines. These roles beneath the purview as a result of they’re guidelines of the purposeful commissions of ECOSOC of broader guidelines which might be actually ruled in NY to all of the purposeful our bodies. They don’t simply apply to this physique or CCPCJ so OLA is the workplace of authorized affairs is the workplace that provides interpretations of these guidelines. We would wish to go to them and ask them what which means. My understanding is that the use the time period “Work” was seen extra broadly as a result of we had been speaking about apply of the EU, a apply that which beneath the understanding of the Secretariat is usually three issues utilized in that practice- a recognizing for the EU in our our bodies right here in Vienna- that they will communicate on the opening remarks with different our bodies of the prolonged bureau such because the G77 and the 5 regional teams of the UN. Additionally they have been talking, and that is the apply in step with guidelines or non in step with the foundations, its as much as the body- however they’ve been talking in informals they usually have been talking on behalf of their member states at occasions within the plenary amongst member states. These are the three areas that we’d contemplate the work of the Fee the place there was some apply on behalf of the EU. There are questions on how this might be utilized. For instance, how would we all know if organizations have procedures in place, if they’ve agreements from their member states to characterize them and who would design on who’re the fitting organizations. Would it not be the bureau, wouldn’t it be others? We’re getting language actual time and we don’t have procedures arrange that we are able to share with you at this level but when the fee strikes ahead we are going to do our greatest with managing it.
Chair: We’ll take a ten minute break now.
Chair: Earlier than we proceed the session, I want to give the ground to Nigeria.
Nigeria: I simply wish to current updates on our pledge for motion. We’re happy to tell that we’ve taken complete motion to satisfy our guarantees as follows: two new forensic laboratories have been constructed in Abuja and Lagos, refurbished and outfitted. This places an finish via over 25 years of conducting forensic evaluation in a single laboratory. The laboratories have been designed and constructed to satisfy all related regulatory necessities. Whereas the laboratory in Lagos is totally operational, the one in Abuja [x] after the profitable completion of procurements of procuring the mandatory equipments. 2. Rehabilitation centers- the rehabilitation facilities have been constructed in Abuja, [x], and Lagos. It’s anticipated that the facilities might be furnished and outfitted with cutting-edge amenities to make sure the consolation of sufferers with substance use problems when operational. 3. Different improvement unit. Another improvement unit has been created within the workplace of the chairman [x] whereas the AD challenge has commenced inside one week, full funded by the worldwide partnership on drug insurance policies and improvement Berlin, Germany…Workshops for different improvement happened in Nigeria in Abuja in August 2024. Nigeria will proceed to mainstream these pledges in further to a nationwide drug grasp plan in addressing the challenges of further cultivation, manufacturing of narcotic medicine psychotropic substances, in addition to illicit trafficking of these substances.
Chair: Now let’s return to Agenda Merchandise 12. A report on issues we’ve mentioned this morning might be compiled and finalized on my own as Chair with the help of the Rapporteur Mr. Fabian Esteban Duraza Torres of Colombia. Any feedback on this? It’s so determined. Earlier than we proceed with the adoption, I might request delegations to abstain from taking the ground if they’ve feedback associated to editorial or translation issues and to supply these feedback in writing to the Secretariat. I first invite the Fee to show its consideration to doc [x], the elements of the report on group of the session and administrative session. Are there any feedback? Can I invite the fee to undertake this a part of the report? I see no feedback. It’s so determined. Allow us to now flip to the portion to the doc coping with our dialogue on merchandise 4 of the Agenda entitled “Strategic Administration, Budgetary, and Administrative Questions” contained in https://cndblog.org/2024/12/cnd-reconvened-67th-session/. Are there any feedback? Can I invite the Fee to undertake this a part of the report? I see no feedback. It’s so determined.
Argentina: Sadly, the intervention by my nation just isn’t mirrored within the report.
Secretariat: Thanks very a lot. This might be mirrored afterwards. That is the a part of the report by way of the deliberations because it was earlier than the Fee yesterday so any additions might be included in line of what the Chair has introduced originally of this.
Chair: Final however not least, there’s a portion of the doc coping with our dialogue on Merchandise 9 of the Agenda entitled “Contribution by the Fee to the work of ECOSOC Council.” In step with Normal Meeting decision 75/290A and 75/290B together with observe as much as and the evaluate and implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Improvement contained in https://cndblog.org/2024/12/cnd-reconvened-67th-session/. Are there any feedback? Can I invite the Fee to undertake this a part of the report? It’s so determined. Now we get again to every other business- Agenda Merchandise 11. We’ve on the display OP1 and OP2 with the feedback and inputs made by members of the Fee. I’ll now ask delegations to have a cautious take a look at the 2 paragraphs on the display and I’ll now take about 3-4 feedback by delegations the place that is acceptable to us all. I give the ground to Canada.
Canada: Only a variety request to please see the textual content of the footnotes.
Poland: The proposal which you could see on the display is now our last proposal. We imagine it that it missed your expectation however sadly if we can not attain the settlement, we want to name for a vote on our preliminary proposal.
Egypt: Because of all those that have engaged constructively for attempting to succeed in a compromise pertaining to a draft resolution. Enable me first to reiterate a common sturdy choice to not having a decision. Having mentioned that, we won’t be in opposition to reaching a consensus and upholding the Vienna spirit relating to this and we are able to go together with the proposal as modification and launched on the display.
Pakistan: I’ve been directed to particularly search readability concerning the participation let’s say group of Islamic international locations to return ahead and make negotiating participation interventions throughout the future conferences after the adoption of this resolution. So we want to have particular readability on behalf of nations of the Islamic group.
Chair: Can I now invite the Fee to now undertake the choice? I acknowledge United States for the ground.
United States: The query simply requested by the Pakistani delegate is definitely fairly pertinent and we might respect a solution on that earlier than we make an adoption.
Chair: Would you favor that we undertake or that we reply that query earlier than the adoption?
United States: We want a solution to the query earlier than we decide our place on the adoption.
Chair: Can I ask the Secretariat to reply the query.
Secretariat: I’m afraid I don’t have a solution to your query proper now as a result of we’ve not appeared on the organizations listed which have been accepted or credited to the Normal Meeting and we must decide which of them are on that checklist and which of them are thought of regional organizations. We’ll attempt to give you a course of for this if the Fee adopts these procedures. Sorry I can’t say something greater than that so we don’t know.
Chair: I want to give the ground to the Russian Federation.
Russia: I feel that the group of the Islamic Convention, whether it is excited by working with our two Commissions, that it might submit a request as is supplied for in paragraph 2. The Fee would then contemplate that and decide so that’s certainly potential.
United States: If the Secretariat has not even analyzed these texts to grasp what their influence could be, I’m at a loss on how we are able to make an knowledgeable resolution.
Chair: I would love america to rehash- I’m not a local speaker. May you say in different phrases what you meant?
United States: What I’m saying is I feel repeating what many different delegations have mentioned within the room at present that this isn’t a textual content that we’ve had an opportunity to judge extensively, focus on with capitals, or have the recommendation of the consultants on the Secretariat as to the influence of this and I feel that makes it difficult for us to grasp what we’re accepting, what the implications of the language might be for considerably increasing the participation of teams or an entire vary of different issues. So I feel its truthful to have an authoritative judgement about how this might change what occurs in our room.
Chair: So is it that america just isn’t prepared to affix consensus if there needs to be in adopting the choice?
United States: We had been snug with the choice as tabled by the EU as a result of we had sufficient time to grasp it. This isn’t prepared.
Chair: I now perceive what you imply.
Poland: I want to ask…when you might ask the distinguished delegate to if might at present undertake the textual content at present, if we are able to see the textual content on display. Until we’ve to maneuver to the closure of the talk.
Russia: I’d prefer to recall, and I’ve already point out that this isn’t some form of new invention. That is wording taken from Decision 65/276 of the UN GA so there isn’t something new within the doc within the textual content.
Chair: So I want to submit the query once more. Can I invite the Fee to undertake the choice as seen on the display?
Pakistan: We’ve been saying that it wants extra time. It wants the suitable discussion board to debate this difficulty in additional element earlier than adopting and we second the opinion shared by the Ambassador of america that when the Secretariat has not additionally assessed the implications of the choice, do you suppose we’d like extra time to debate the implications of the choice as an alternative of adopting it in a haste.
Chair: It’s query to members of the Fee. It’s not a query that the Chair can reply as a result of the chair can not determine for the Fee. I feel I’m not going to simply accept anymore feedback. I’m not going to simply accept as a result of generally- we’ve had two objecting to the adoption and Poland has indicated that it’s reverting to the unique textual content. So we put it to a vote. By process, if I permit delegations to talk, it’s out of courtesy that I’m permitting however I don’t intend to pull this matter any additional.
Venezuela: All international locations needs to be allowed the fitting to talk on this matter out of rights, sovereign rights. I used to be going to make a proposal, made on the widespread understanding that everyone appears to be working strongly to attempt to have a consensus settlement earlier than passing into vote, in any other case that is going to be an imposition and never a call actually. I want to perceive on the one hand the urgency for the textual content when the Secretariat has no right solutions to sure legitimate questions raised by the international locations, my delegation proposal would be- except the EU and Poland has a really clear clarification on why it’s so pressing to take this resolution at present, our delegation want to suggest to go this debate for the common session in March or in Could to permit the international locations to have extra time and along with the Secretariat to judge all the problems at standing and to then to have correct discussions throughout presently after which to take a call by consensus and never by forcing voting.
Chair: I perceive Rule 50 of the foundations of process. Only for us to mirror rigorously on what we’re doing, I want to ask Poland when you stand by what you’ve requested me to do.
Poland: Sure I reiterate my earlier opinion that we want to name for a vote now, based mostly on rule 50.
Chair: The consultant of Poland…I feel by the rules- it’s clear when a delegation requires a vote, we proceed instantly with that, except somebody would inform me there’s one other rule opposite to what the foundations are.
Egypt: We search clarification on what we’re going to vote on precisely. Are we going to vote or those that are entitled to vote are going to vote on what’s on the display or one other model of the textual content?Singapore: My query was the same one. Is Poland calling a vote on the Chair’s proposal or is Poland calling a vote on revision 2?
Chair: I perceive what Poland is that we must always shut the talk and we’re voting on whether or not we’re closing the talk and we’re voting on whether or not we must always shut the talk or not. And after we vote on the closure of the talk, then we vote on their unique textual content that they introduced earlier than us.
Russia: Naturally, we might transfer to a vote however right here, its established apply that we base ourselves in consensus. I feel it could be untimely to maneuver to a vote now. With respect to the issues that had been expressed by america, I’d prefer to cite decision 65/276 of the UN GA. As I perceive, america voted in favor of that decision and it considers this very state of affairs that we’re confronted with right here, that’s described within the second operative paragraph. Paragraph 3 of that decision states “following a request on behalf of a regional group because it has observer standing within the common meeting and whose members have agreed preparations that permit that organizations’ representatives to talk on behalf of the group and its member states, the Meeting might undertake modalities for the participation of the regional organizations representatives, equivalent to these set out within the annexed for the current decision.” In our case, there is no such thing as a annex however we’ve current apply. I feel that this decision was adopted in consensus, there needs to be no want for a vote. I feel we must always keep away from a vote.
Chair: A delegation has made a movement to shut the talk in accordance with rule 50. That’s what we now have earlier than us. I intend to proceed in accordance with the foundations at this stage.
Poland: Because the compromised proposal hasn’t been formally tabled, we want to name for a vote for REV-2.
Chair: The consultant of Poland has moved inside rule 50 of the foundations of process of the purposeful Commissions of ECOSOC council, for the closure of debate on resolution entitled L9REV2. [reads rule 50]. A easy majority of the Fee members current and voting is required. In line with guidelines of process, current and voting means members casting an affirmative or detrimental vote. The Fee will now proceed to vote to shut the talk on L9REV2. I now name solely on members of the Fee in favor of the movement to shut the talk to boost their nation indicators and hold them raised till their nation identify is named out.
Secretariat: These which might be voting in favor: Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Finland, France, Guatemala, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Lithuania, Malta, Mexico, Morocco, Kingdom of the Netherlands, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, Ghana, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uruguay
Chair: I now name on solely members of the fee not in favor of the movement to shut the talk to boost their indicators.
Secretariat: Singapore, Algeria, India, Indonesia, Russian Federation, China, and Tunisia
Chair: I now request the members of the Fee who’re abstaining to boost their nation indicators.
Secretariat: Thailand and South Africa.
Chair: In respect to closure of the talk on L9REV2 – we had 33 in favor, 7 in opposition to, and a pair of abstentions. Due to this fact, the choice is for us to shut deliberations on L9REV2.
Russia: I want to counsel that we invoke rule 64- there was an modification proposed. We withdrew an modification from the preliminary textual content however then there was a brand new textual content that appeared, which was mentioned at size at present so this new text- I want to request that it needs to be ptaced to a vote at the start after which we are able to vote to the decision as an entire. So let’s actually adhere to the foundations of process.
Chair: The clarification that we’d wish to have right here is whether or not you’re speaking concerning the amended textual content that was confirmed on the display or your amendments.
Russia: No no no I imply the textual content that was there 5 minutes in the past for the second operative paragraph. That textual content changed the preliminary modification. We solely withdrew it as a result of there was new language of comparable content material. That’s our modification. I might counsel that we put it to a vote first, please.
Chair: I would wish some authorized steering on the foundations from the secretariat.
Secretariat: Thanks Mr. Chair. So our understanding is that since we voted to shut the talk, there might be no amendments in the intervening time. Nonetheless, that modification was proposed earlier than the movement to the closure and its an oral modification and if the Fee decides, it may possibly vote as a result of amendments do have precedent to be voted on earlier than the precise proposal. If the Fee agrees, they will vote on the oral amendments as amended. If not- the Russian delegation had proposed amendments. You’re asking for a vote on what was on the display?
Russia: Sure that’s it. That’s our modification. No person has withdrawn it. We withdrew the unique textual content as a result of new language was launched that we had been agreeable to. So we want to have it on the screen- the textual content of operative paragraph 2, along with the extra feedback or amendments that we had from delegations current within the room. Respective mandates. So please convey that textual content again onto the display. We have to vote on that first, it hasn’t evaporated. Then we are able to vote on the decision as an entire, with out that paragraph.
Chair: I might ask the Fee to offer us guidelines on the steering after we take heed to america.
United States: I feel our director of Treaty Affairs did in actual fact learn out thoughts. It’s a procedural difficulty. It’s a procedural query which was an modification tabled with this physique. There was an modification to the prior model however our understanding is that that individual modification was withdrawn. What we had been contemplating earlier at present was the Chair’s proposal. It was not formally tabled. We had been contemplating it as a consensus doc so by way of our guidelines of process, the closure of debate restricted the chance to make additional amendments and so now the suitable factor for us is to conder the REV2 proposed by Poland and no additional amendments to that textual content.
Chair: I’ll give the ground to the Russian Federation.
Russia: I want to remind america that we’re current right here at an official session on the Fee. And something that had been submitted for consideration has been submitted formally. The second paragraph was launched formally for consideration as an modification so it must be voted on first, or the second possibility could be to revive the second paragraph and vote on the textual content as an entire.
Chair: I now give the ground to the Secretariat to offer us steering on the foundations.
Secretariat: In fact the Fee might contemplate amendments and once more we closed the talk. The vote was to shut the talk so these amendments must be supplied earlier than the movement to shut. Rule 52 does say that amendments might be mentioned and put to the vote no sooner than 24 hours after copies have been circulated to all members. I feel that’s what america has been citing. If the Fee desires to maneuver ahead an contemplate these amendments, they could however we appear to have an objection to that. The US can make clear. And if we’ve an object, since these amendments weren’t supplied inside 24 hrs and made out there to the Fee, we’d go instantly to the vote on REV 2.
Chair: My query to america I’m not a Native English speaker however I perceive English fairly a bit. Are you objecting to a vote on the amendments, which we simply noticed on the display not too way back?
U.S.: Chair, our concern is that there was no formal modification tabled in step with the foundations of process. We do should observe the foundations. We’ve to be particular right here and these guidelines they serve a goal. They’ve us an everyday course of. The modification that the Russian Federation most lately proposed, might be delivered to the Fee in March once we meet, the place we’d have time to think about it. Presumably we’d meet the 24 hour rule and we might have variations in all languages circulated and everyone would have an opportunity to evaluate it. We don’t must race or do harm to our guidelines of process. There’s no urgency right here. We’ve all acknowledged that. Let’s all take a deep breath. Let’s cope with the difficulty in entrance of us- which is the exact query of the participation of the EU and we are able to cope with the opposite difficulty at one other time. And we are going to observe the common course of that’s set out in our guidelines of process. And Chair, if I can ask for clarification- Did you because the Chair submit this as a proper modification. That may assist us. If we might get readability on that.
Chair: I feel you heard the Russian Federation clearly and that’s what I heard as well- that the really helpful proposals that had been made though orally deemed to be formal submissions however I want to proceed with a vote as requested presently. Any delegation that want to problem the method?
Russia: Our modification was made 24 hours earlier than and the Secretariat can affirm that. Within the essence of the thing- OP 2, which we mentioned, contains our preliminary modification made 24 hours earlier than with the proposed amendments, which appeared throughout the consultations and discussions, together with at this assembly. However that doesn’t change that the modification was made 10:15 yesterday. Now it’s 1 o’clock. The rule of 24 hours has been utterly complied with and I want to request that we put to the vote at the start our modification within the type wherein it was simply proven on the display ten minutes in the past. I’d prefer to repeat this modification was made at 10:15 within the morning yesterday formally. And it was circulated to all members of the Fee, and the Secretariat and the Chair obtained it. I would love this modification to be voted on proper now in accordance with the foundations of process.
Chair: I thank the Russian Federation. I might wish to perceive the way you need us to proceed. You need us to vote on REVL10 first. Is that the case?
Russia: Sure. We want to vote on the textual content we virtually agreed on till the second fifteen minutes in the past when one delegation referred to as it into query.
Mexico: Only for the profit for everybody to understand- I want to share what I perceive concerning the state of affairs we’re in. We had a draft decision-resolution submitted by the EU-by Poland. An modification to that was submitted by the Russian Federation. Thats how we and people two paperwork complied with the 24 hour rule. You Mr. Chair made an effort to discover a resolution between to the variations between the modification and the unique draft textual content. All of us witnessed what occurred at present this morning and on this session. My understanding is that that effort failed. Poland requested for the closure of the talk on that proposal by the Chair- it was voted in favor. The talk on that’s closed. So Poland says, “Let’s get again to our unique draft textual content, which is the one we’ve on the display.” And the Russian Federation, I feel rightly so, “If that’s what we’re discussing now, then our modification can be legitimate and we are able to resort to that as effectively as a result of that isn’t affected to the closure of the talk that was requested by Poland. That’s the method as I perceive and I feel that if everyone shares that we agree on. Then we must always, as the foundations set up, vote on the unique modification submitted in writing by the Russian Federation, see what occurs with that after which we vote for the rule for decision. However we’re in your fingers Mr Chair.
Chair: We’ll now proceed with a vote on the proposal REVL10. And we are going to now transfer onto voting..the Secretariat will learn it out for the sake readability.
Secretariat: In order these written amendments had been, as was simply confirmed by the ambassador of Mexico, REVL10 had been submitted yesterday morning, earlier than the 24hours. The Chair is now calling for a vote first on what’s contained in doc L10, specifically the written modification to within the OP REV 2, delete the next wording “reserved for prolonged members of the prolonged bureau” from the tip of the paragraph and after “together with for opening marks” add the next “and affirms this apply ought to apply on an equal foundation to different intergovernmental organizations referred to in rule 74 of the foundations of process of the purposeful commissions of the financial and social council upon their request, together with with regard to opening remarks.”
Chair: We’ll now proceed to the vote. In accordance with rule 61 of the foundations of process with the purposeful fee of ECOSOC, no consultant might interrupt the voting besides on some extent of order in reference to the precise technique of voting. Let me remind the fee that in accordance with rule 58 of the foundations of process, of the purposeful fee of ECOSOC, a easy majority of the fee members current and voting is required. In line with guidelines of process, current and voting means members casting an affirmative or detrimental vote. Members abstaining from voting are thought of as not voting. Rule 58 of the foundations of process of the purposeful commissions of ECOSOC.
Chair: Members in favor of the amendments to boost their nation signal and hold them raised till your identify is named out.
Secretary: Russian Federation
Chair: I now name on members of the Fee not in favor of the proposal by elevating their indicators.
Secretariat: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Finland, France, Guatemala, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Lithuania, Malta, Mexico, Netherlands, Poland, Peru, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States.
Chair: Of the Fee abstaining, please point out so by elevating up your nation signal.
Secretariat: Algeria, Brazil, China, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Morocco, Qatar, Singapore, South Africa, Thailand, Tunia, United Republic of Tanzania, and Uruguay.
Chair: There’s a complete vote of 42 votes: in favor 1 votes in opposition to 27 abstentions 14. So it means the Fee has determined to not undertake the amendments. Italy do you wish to make a proof of vote?
Italy: My studying of rule 60 is that the reason of vote might be made earlier than or after the voting process has commenced. We made it very clear from the very starting that the one and easy cause for the EU and its member states to desk this textual content was to reaffirm the present apply for the participation of the EU representatives within the two Commissions and the EU ambassador mentioned yesterday- nothing much less nothing extra. One other essential level for us was to work on reaching consensus. This is the reason we mentioned the draft throughout informals and we took onboard many views of member states and we got here up with REV2. Within the last try to succeed in this consensus, the proponent of the decisions- Czechia, Poland and the RF labored on the language and we did it; to begin with as a result of we tried to get to widespread floor with one delegation whose objection final yr gave rise to this matter and since the delegation the Russian Federation offered this modification so we had been attempting to work on the modification that we simply rejected. Most significantly, we labored on that proposal as a result of we heard the requests from the Russian delegation to offer a authorized framework however extra importantly a political message of equality. Sadly at present we noticed this compromise on these last makes an attempt weren’t reached however the unique proposal from the Russian Federation was not mature in our view and that’s why in our view we voted in opposition to this textual content we’ve in entrance of us. I simply wish to conclude that if the authorized framework we needed to place on the market, just isn’t there, no less than we needed to underline and stress and placed on the report the political message for the EU, its member states and and Italy most importantly- there no animals extra essential than others.
South Africa: Thanks Chair I’ll clarify our vote after our vote on the subsequent resolution. I skip this one.
Chair: A vote has been requested on draft proposal L9REV2. I’ll suggest that any statements made by members of the fee in clarification of vote in addition to common statements might be made after voting. In accordance with guidelines 61, of the roles of process of the purposeful fee of ECOSOC, no consultant might disrupt voting besides on some extent of order in reference to the precise technique of voting. Let me remind the Fee that accordance with rule 58 of the foundations of process of the purposeful fee of ECOSOC, a easy majority of the fee members current and voting is required. In line with guidelines of process, current and voting means members casting an affirmative or detrimental vote. Members abstaining from voting are thought of as not voting. I now name on solely the members of the fee in favor of the adoption of the proposal contained in L9REV2 to boost their nation signal and hold them raised till their identify is named up.
Secretariat: Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Finland, France, Guatemala, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Lithuania, Malta, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay.
Chair: I name on member states not in favor:
Secretariat: Russian Federation
Chair: Abstentions
Secretariat: Algeria, China, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Islamic Republic of Iran, Qatar, Singapore, South Africa, Thailand, Tunisia, and United Republic of Tanzania.
Chair: We’ve a complete vote of 44. 31 votes in favor, 1 vote in opposition to, 12 abstention. Due to this fact, I declare that the Fee has determined to undertake the proposal as an L9REV2. Does any member of the Fee want to make a proof of vote or assertion?
Russia: As america has simply proved that for Washington, some animals are extra equal. No shock. The US is known for [x]. As the identical time, we notice that the EU has no braveness to defend equality in worldwide relations. They aren’t in opposition to however they can not permit themselves to take a principled place. I have to inform you that in accordance with this resolution, the EU can have the fitting to make statements because the opening a part of periods. I agree with it. It have to be maintained. However in [x] the present apply will proceed to suggest that the EU has no proper to be engaged within the drafting course of, neither in casual teams, neither in COW and the Russian Federation will proceed to demand that the participation of the EU within the Commissions needs to be restricted to oral statements and presentation of proposals on behalf of EU.
South Africa: Initially, we want to thank the collaborating international locations for tabling this resolution and permitting just a little little bit of a course of to make some modifications to their draft resolution. The method that has been adopted. Although in impact and seemingly discriminately, ought to have been allowed to proceed. To present member states enought time to seek the advice of additional within the curiosity of guaranteeing that we revive the spirit of Vienna, the spirit that appears to have evaporated of consensus. We predict there’s been unhealthy religion in imposing a call that would have been postponed to permit additional consultations. The amendments made by a number of counties are real and had been meant to make sure that we’ve one thing that covers the vast majority of the international locations. Already, this apply the place the EU is allowed to take part exists and taking this resolution on this hasty method does not likely bode effectively for reviving this Vienna spirit. So chair, we abstain as a result of we predict we must always have given sufficient time and house for us to proceed to debate moderately than impose such an imperfect resolution.
Thailand: Enable me to acknowledge the contribution the EU and its member states have made in addressing the world drug drawback, in addition to the good function performed by the EU and its member states within the deliberations throughout the framework of this fee. Nonetheless, we additionally imagine that the foundations of procedures of the ECOSOC purposeful commissions have already acknowledged clearly, the methods intergovernmental organizations can take part within the work of this Fee. In any try to make clear these guidelines in writing ought to occur via a cautious, open, inclusive, and clear deliberations because it might set a precedent on how all intergovernmental organizations- not simply the EU- to be handled in different ECOSOC subsidiary our bodies. To keep away from confusion or inconsistency, we see that one of the best venue for this dialogue is the dad or mum of those commissions, which is ECOSOC. I wish to thank the sponsors of this resolution for having tried to handle numerous issues, together with a few of ours, which arose from the casual consultations. Nonetheless since we imagine that this resolution shouldn’t be taken in a rushed method, and that extra time might be wanted for dialogue, extra [x], and likewise together with in NY, we determined to abstain within the consideration of this resolution. We reaffirm our readiness to proceed working carefully with the EU inside this Fee and past and expressing our hope that different comparable, regional, intergovernmental organizations could be accorded with comparable rights ought to a query relating to their participation ever come up sooner or later.
India: India totally helps the established apply in regards to the participation of the EU in conferences of CND. Nonetheless right here our concern lies within the course of and never within the substance of the matter. We imagine that the suitable discussion board for addressing this difficulty and making this resolution is ECOSOC- the principal physique as was the case for the GA and subsidiary physique resolved via the GA decision 65/276 in 2011. With a number of purposeful commissions in ECOSOC, adopting such selections individually in purposeful commissions would set a fallacious precedent of conflicting selections on the choices of participation of intergovernmental organizations. It’s important to stick to the foundations each in letter and spirit to uphold confidence within the guidelines within the worldwide order.
Mexico: I wish to sit the place of Mexico relating to these two earlier votes and there are three concerns. The primary one- As many delegations have already expressed, we’d have most popular this to have been a call that was taken in ECOSOC in NY and all-encompassing to all of the Commissions, not simply the present one and the one assembly within the afternoon. Second is that we additionally really feel that the modification proposed by Russia was in a sure method legislating and establishing new circumstances to the present apply, which is legitimate however once more our place is that this might should be all encompassing and pretty completed inside ECOSOC. We voted in favor of the EU’s decision as a result of we additionally voted in favor of decision 65/276 and we didn’t see any inconsistencies between the 2 paperwork.
Singapore: Chair- Singapore has no objection to the present apply with the EU in its capability as observer…nevertheless we stay unconvinced that the choice to reaffirm current apply ought to have been delivered to the Fee for motion. Singapore firmly believes that the ECOSOC council because the precept organ dad or mum of this fee is the suitable physique to think about and determine on the essential difficulty of in accordance rights and privileges to a non state observer entity within the work of ECOSOC and its purposeful commissions. This can be a matter of precept and process and of upholding the ECOSOC’s authority and oversight of its purposeful commissions. In addition to respect for the established UN framework and construction. It’s for these causes that Singapore abstained this resolution.
China: Initially, we want to respect the Chair in attempting to hunt the compromise…It’s a pity this difficulty was put into vote in a matter of haste with so many opinions and views current and this might have been higher addressed if the consultations might proceed. So contemplating these parts, we abstained in vote and we hope that this vote won’t represent one other detrimental precedent in won’t [x] to the Vienna spirit of consensus.
Pakistan: Regardless of the questions and issues raised by many delegations, the Fee determined to proceed with its adoption. Some questions posed to the Secretariat remained unanswered and it was notably stunning to listen to that the process to operationalize the choice could be thought of after this adoption. This strategy displays a hasty resolution making course of that has left ambiguities unresolved. Pakistan reiterates that the formalization of such apply needs to be addressed within the acceptable discussion board, primarily the ECOSOC council. This strategy ensures consistency throughout all commissions beneath ECOSOC and [x] setting precedent and broader implications for the participation of different intergovernmental organizations and regional teams. Pakistan reiterates that this resolution, whereas adopted stays topic evaluate and oversight by ECOSOC, given its nature and its potential implications.
EU: I want to thank all delegations for his or her engagement and cooperation. We remorse that it was not potential to succeed in consensus. We thank all delegations for the sturdy assist. We don’t search exclusivity. In our view, different regional organizations in the identical positions as us ought to be capable to take part on equal phrases. We’ve proven that we’re prepared to simply accept this and we stay prepared to take action. As Italy mentioned very eloquently, “All animals are and needs to be equal.”
Chair: The final time I checked, I’m nonetheless a human being and I don’t belong to the animal kingdom. That was a joke. Allow us to resume agenda merchandise 12. As talked about earlier, the report might be compiled on my own and the Rapporteur. Moreover, the reconvened session of the fee will transmit that call to convey to the eye to the ECOSOC Council. The report will comprise a draft resolution to this impact for adoption by the ECOSOC Council. Any feedback or questions? I see none. It’s so determined. Closure of the 67th session of the Fee. Women and gents, we’ve concluded work program for the 67th session of the Fee. Right now I’ve encountered triumph as a result of I come to the tip of my tenure as ambassador in Vienna- catastrophe! As a result of I’ve not had my want. I imagine within the Vienna spirit however as Kipling would say- I deal with these two imposters triumph and catastrophe simply the identical. 7 within the function as Chair in a number of UN our bodies, together with the CND, has been an honor. This expertise has deepened my perception within the energy of multilateralism and the enduring spirit of collaboration that defines this Fee. Collectively we’ve succeeded in our efforts in very tough worldwide political surroundings. I go away Vienna with reminiscences of our true collective efforts, onerous efforts and resilience will conquer onerous occasions. As I go away Vienna, I urge you to proceed fostering the Vienna spirit- a spirit of unity and consensus that has been our best energy. It’s via this shared dedication that the Fee will stay a beacon of hope and progress to future generations and present generations, guaranteeing peace, safety, and sustainable improvement for all. Thanks in your belief, collaboration and inspiration. It has been a privilege to serve with you. I thanks.
Russia: Want you all one of the best on future endeavors.
South Africa: Want you all one of the best on future endeavors.
Chair: I declare the session of the 67th session closed. We now proceed with the opening of the 68th session for the aim of electing the chair particular person and bureau of that session. As you might recall, in step with ECOSOC decision 1999/30 the foundations of process of the purposeful fee, the fee ought to elect on the finish of its reconvened session. Right now a chair particular person, three vice chair individuals, and a rapporteur for its 68th session. In view of rotation of officers based mostly on regional distribution, the Chairperson of the Fee was to be nominated from amongst members of the fee belonging to the group of Asia and Pacific States. I’ve the consideration to tell the Fee that the Asia-Pacific group has nominated Ambassador Shambru Kumaran of India for the place of chairperson of the 68th session of the Fee. If there aren’t any objections, I suggest that the Fee elect Ambassador Kumaran as Chair of the 68th Fee by acclamation. [applause] it’s so determined. I used to be knowledgeable that Ambassador Kumaran couldn’t be right here in particular person. I give the ground to the India delegation.
India: It’s each a profound honor and accountability for India to imagine the Chair of the CND at its 68th session. We specific honest gratitude to all member states for putting their belief in India to steer this Fee at a time when the worldwide group continues to face complicated and evolving challenges in addressing the world drug drawback. We strategy this accountability with an unwavering dedication to uphold the spirit of Vienna and spirit rooted in dialogue, multilateralism and shared accountability. This has guided our collective efforts to handle the various dimensions of countering the world drug drawback…guaranteeing that insurance policies are firmly grounded in human rights, well being, and sustainable improvement. We pledge to work inclusively, transparently, and in shut partnerships with all member states, UN companies, and different stakeholders to make sure that the Fee stays a platform for consensus constructing and significant progress. As we embark on this journey collectively, our strategy have to be guided by a holistic and balanced strategy in step with the three worldwide drug management conventions. We should always try to strengthen worldwide cooperation to fight trafficking, abuse of illicit medicine, whereas addressing rising challenges, equivalent to proliferation of artificial medicine, misuse of know-how, and evolving trafficking routes. We should always promote well being middle approaches that prioritize prevention, therapy, rehabilitation, and reintegration. We should have complete human rights and fairness in all elements of drug management, recognizing the necessity for tailor-made responses for susceptible populations together with ladies, youth, and marginalized communities. We should always advance science based mostly options to make sure proof guides our insurance policies, together with harnessing new applied sciences and analysis. We should stay steadfast in our shared imaginative and prescient of a world free from illicit medicine and its dangerous impact whereas recognizing the sovereignty of every member state and respecting their distinctive elements in reaching these objective. As shared, India is dedicated to fostering an surroundings the place each voice is heard and each perspective valued. Allow us to be reminded that our collective energy lies in our range and unity via open dialogue and participation, we are able to be sure that the fee displays the aspiration and priorities of all member states and all stakeholders.
Chair: We’ll now proceed with the opposite elections. 1st Vice-Chair-position nonetheless vacant. 2nd Vice Chair Ambassador Peter Portman of the Netherlands. third Vice Chair Ambassador Everlasting Consultant of Chile. Rapporteur Mohammed Amin of Morocco. Could i suggest that if there aren’t any objections that the fee elects the officers by acclamation? [applause] So it’s so determined.
