ECOSOC 26TH JULY 2007

General Segment


Morning Session

The purpose of the meeting was the examination of several items of the agenda.

Item 7 on coordination, program and other questions. The following points has been examined:
- Point (c) concerning international cooperation in the field of informatics (action on draft resolution E/2007/L.24). As no objections had been made, the resolution was adopted.
- Point (g) concerning an ad hoc advisory group on Guinea-Bissau (action on draft resolution E/2007/L.27). As this resolution has budget implications, the secretariat took the floor for explaining that the resource requirements to undertake the consultation mission is estimated at $ 35,800 and would provide for travel, daily subsistence allowance and terminal expenses ($ 27,100 for 3 members of the advisory group and $ 8, 700 for one staff member of the department of economic and social affairs).
Then, the chairman, who spoke on behalf of Haiti, welcomed the adoption by consensus of this resolution and hopped Guinea-Bissau will quickly recover stability.
Finally, the representative from Guinea-Bissau underlined that it was important that this resolution was adopted by consensus. He also stressed that it means that government must make the utmost efforts to eradicate poverty and ensure transparency of public funds asset. He also expressed that parliamentary election, which should be organized next year, will be very important to consolidate democracy.
- Point (h) concerning joint UN program on HIV/AIDS (action on draft resolution E/2007/L.23). The delegate from Thailand recalled that universal access to treatments and care form a part of MDG’s.
As the relevant delegations was not ready in this point, the chairman decided to take it up tomorrow.
- Point (i) concerning the calendar of conferences and meetings for 2008 and 2009 in the economic, social and related fields (action on draft resolution E/2007/87 and E/2007/L.10). As no objections had been made, the resolution was adopted.

Item 10 on regional cooperation (action on draft resolution E/2007/L.12 on Europe-Africa fixed link through the strait of Gibraltar). As this resolution has budget implications, the secretariat took the floor for explaining that budgetary provisions have already been made for the activities. As no objections had been made, the resolution was adopted.

Item 13 on economic and environmental questions. The chairman only focused on point (d) concerning human settlements (action on draft resolution E/2007/L.25). As no objections had been made, the resolution was adopted.
Item 14 on social and human rights questions. . The chairman only focused on point (c) concerning crime prevention and criminal justice (action on recommendations contained in document E/2007/30). As this resolution has budget implications, the secretariat took the floor in order to recommend for adoption of the chapter 1 of the report of the commission which contains the financial implications of the whole draft resolutions and resolutions.

Thereafter, the draft resolutions number 2, 3, 4, 5 (on child justice reform) and 6 (on access to legal aid particularly in Africa) was adopted as a whole. Nevertheless, the US delegate said he had serious concerns about the capacity of ECOSOC to change anything on these matters.

Afternoon Session

Item 9 : Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and People by the specialized agencies and the international institutions associated with the United Nations
Action on draft resolution E/2007/L.19

The President opened the meeting by asking if any delegations wanted to explain their choice before the vote on the resolution.

New Zealand explained that its country had a long experience concerning the functioning of the specialized institutions of UN for the Non-Self-Governing territories. They also reaffirmed their position in favour of the decolonization and in this regard, welcomed a future referendum in Tokelau. Thus, they announced that their vote would be in favour of the resolution.

Portugal on behalf of EU, notified that as the precedent years, EU will abstain on this resolution, as for EU the issues broached in it weren’t a matter for ECOSOC.

USA strongly affirmed they weren’t against the autonomy of Non-Self-Governing territories but will abstain as they didn’t like the approach unique adopted in the resolution and regretted also its politicization.

Then the vote was carried out.

El Salvador : Yes Rumania : Abstention
France : Abstention Russian Federation : Abstention
Germany : Abstention Saudi Arabia : Yes
Greece : Abstention Somalia : Yes
Guinee : Yes South Africa : Yes
Guinee Bissau : Yes Sri Lanka : Yes
Guinea : Yes Sudan : Yes
Tahiti : Yes Thailand : Yes
Iceland : Abstention United Kingdom : Abstention
India : Yes USA : Abstention
Indonesia : Yes Algeria : Yes
Iraq : Yes Albania : Abstention
Japan : Yes Angola : Yes
Kazakhstan : Abstention Austria : Abstention
Lithuania : Abstention Barbados : Yes
Luxembourg : Abstention Belarus : Yes
Madagascar : Not present Benin : Yes
Malawi : Not present Brazil : Yes
Mauritania : Yes Canada : Abstention
Mexico : Yes Cap Verde : Yes
Netherlands : Abstention Tchad : Yes
New Zealand : Yes China : Yes
Pakistan : Yes Costa Rica : Yes
Uruguay : Yes Cuba : Yes
Philippines : Yes Tcheq Republic : Abstention
Portugal : Abstention Congo : Yes
Denmark : Abstention

IN FAVOUR : 33 AGAINST : 0 ABSTENTION : 19

Resolution adopted.


The President asked if there were any delegations which wanted to explain their vote after the vote.

Russia explained they abstained because for them the exam of this very political issue within ECOSOC led the Council in a other way from its main preoccupations : the economic and social issues.

Argentina affirmed their support to the autodetermination of populations but reminded everyone that if the GA recognized this principle, it had no value in the cases of disputes concerning sovereignty. Thus, concerning the Malawines Islands, the settlement of the situation resides in the negotiation between the UK and Argentina.

Item 13.i) : United Nations Forum on Forests

This issue has been deferred to the next substantive session.

Item 14.b) : Social Development

The president asked if there were any delegations which wanted to express themselves before the vote.

Pakistan on behalf of the G77 and China, affirmed they were supporting the social development and asked each delegations to vote in favour the resolution, in order to obtain a consensus on this issue.

Then the vote was carried out.

Cap Verde : Yes
Tchad : Non present
China : Yes
Costa Rica : Yes
Cuba : Yes
Tcheq Republic : Yes
Congo : Yes
Denmark : Yes
El Salvador : Yes
France :Yes
Germany : Yes
Greece : Yes
Guinee : Yes
Guinee Bissau : Yes
Guinea : Yes
Haihiti : Yes
Iceland :Yes
India : Yes
Indonesia : Yes
Iraq : Yes
Japan : Yes
Kazakhstan :Yes
Lithuania : Yes
Luxembourg : Yes
Madagascar : Not present
Malawi : Not present
Mauritania : Yes
Mexico : Yes
Netherlands : Yes
New Zealand : Yes
Pakistan : Yes
Uruguay : Yes
Philippines : Yes
Portugal : Yes
Rumania : Yes
Russian Federation : Yes
Saudi Arabia : Yes
Somalia : Yes
South Africa : Yes
Sri Lanka : Yes
Sudan : Yes
Thailand : Yes
United Kingdom : Yes
USA : No
Algeria : Yes
Albania : Yes
Angola : Yes
Austria : Yes
Barbados : Yes
Belarus : Yes
Benin : Yes
Brazil : Yes
Canada : Yes

IN FAVOUR : 49 AGAINST : 1 ABSTENTION : 0

Resolution adopted

The President asked if any delegations wanted to take the floor to explain their vote after the vote.

USA explained that the text had been adopted in the Commission of social development in precipitation. According to the USA, this document is not as much as relevant as one could expect it to be, in view of the importance of the subject. That’s why USA had asked for a vote. Indeed they wanted to show officially their disagreement. Thus, they will reopen some parts of the text for the debate in the GA.

Portugal on behalf on EU, expressed their satisfaction concerning the content of the resolution but regretted that USA dissociated themselves.


Item 14.c) was adopted without any objection nor vote.


Item 11 : Economic and social repercussions of the Israeli occupation on the living conditions of the Palestinian people in the occupied territory, including Jerusalem, and the Arab population in the occupied Syrian Golan.

The President asked if any delegations wanted to express themselves before the vote.

Israel affirmed that this resolution was subjective, and that once again the agenda was exploited. Indeed, according to Israel, the resolution doesn’t show the violence perpetuated against Israel nor the violence inter-Palestinian. Israel stressed the lack of equilibrium of the resolution. Israel delegate unlighted that the real objective of this resolution was to blame and condemn Israel for political reasons. In this regard, they asked all delegations to vote against it.

Thailand highlighted that the current situation in the occupied territories was quite preoccupying and asked all delegations to adopt this resolution with consensus in order to show their support to Arabian populations.

Portugal on behalf on EU, thanked all the co-sponsors for their respect during negotiations. He reminded the assembly that EU was the best contributor concerning the assistance for Palestinian population. Unfortunately concessions made weren’t enough to EU.

Then the vote was carried out.

Tcheq Republic : Abstention
Congo : Not Present
Denmark : Abstention
El Salvador : Yes
France : Abstention
Germany : Abstention
Greece : Abstention
Guinee : Yes
Guinee Bissau : Yes
Guinea : Yes
Haiti : Abstention
Iceland :Abstention
India : Yes
Indonesia : Yes
Iraq : Yes
Japan : Abstention
Kazakhstan : Yes
Lithuania : Abstention
Luxembourg : Abstention
Madagascar : Not present
Malawi : Not present
Mauritania : Yes
Mexico : Yes
Netherlands : Abstention
New Zealand : Abstention
Pakistan : Yes
Uruguay : Yes
Philippines : Yes
Portugal : Abstention
Rumania : Abstention
Russian Federation : Yes
Saudi Arabia : Yes
Somalia : Yes
South Africa : Yes
Sri Lanka : Yes
Sudan : Yes
Thailand : Yes
United Kingdom : Abstention
USA : No
Algeria : Yes
Albania : Abstention
Angola : Non present
Austria : Abstention
Barbados : Yes
Belarus : Yes
Benin : Yes
Brazil : Abstention
Canada : No
Cap Verde : Yes
Tchad : Non present
China : Yes
Costa Rica : Yes
Cuba : Yes

IN FAVOUR OF : 29 AGAINST : 2 ABSTENTION : 18

The President asked if any delegations wanted to explain their vote after the vote.

Canada said that the resolution wasn’t reflecting the true role of the two parts.

USA also affirmed that the resolution wasn’t reflecting the complexity of the Palestinian conflict. According to them, the resolution is subjective.

Japan stressed the lack of equilibrium of the resolution and said that the evolution of the situation on the field wasn’t reflected in it. Then, they said that ECOSOC wasn’t the appropriate place to take political decisions.