General Assembly: 98th plenary meeting, 80th session

The 98th Plenary Meeting of the General Assembly is called to order. The Assembly will now take up, under Agenda Item 7, a request submitted by the Secretary-General contained in document A/80/243 for the inclusion of an additional sub-item in the agenda. As indicated in his note, the Secretary-General requests, pursuant to Rule 15 of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly, the inclusion in the agenda of the 80th the insertion of an additional sub-item entitled Appointment of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights under Agenda Item 115, entitled Appointments to Fill Vacancies in Subsidiary Organs and Other Appointments. Owing to the nature of the sub-item, unless there is an objection, May I take it that the Assembly agrees to waive the relevant provision of Rule 40 of the Rules of Procedure, which would require a meeting of the General Committee on the questions of the inclusion of this additional sub-item in the agenda? I see no objection. It is so decided. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to include in the agenda of the current session, under Agenda Item 115 entitled Appointments to Fill Vacancies in Subsidiary Organs and Other Appointments, an additional sub-item entitled Appointment of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights under Heading I entitled Organizational, Administrative, and Other Matters. I see no objection. It is so decided. The item is therefore included as Sub-item N of Agenda Item 115. In his note, The Secretary-General further requests that the sub-item be considered directly in plenary meeting. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to consider this sub-item directly in plenary meeting? It is so decided. The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of Agenda Item 7. The Assembly will resume its consideration of Agenda Item 13, entitled Integrated and Coordinated Implementation of and Follow-up to the Outcomes of the Major United Nations Conferences and Summits in the Economic, Social, and Related Fields, and Agenda Item 117, entitled "Follow-up to the Outcome of Millennium Summit" to take action on a proposal announced in the journal. The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/AT/L.86 entitled Status of the Human Rights Council. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/AT/L.86? It is so decided. Before giving the floor for explanations of vote, After the vote, as announced in the President's letter dated January 6th and May 20th, 2026, I propose that the time limits for statements in explanation of vote under this item be 5 minutes. Is there any objection to this proposal?

That's EOB?

Whatever.

Iran is pressing a button, but it's likely not objection, but it's for EOB after, so let me just No objection.

No objection.

If there is no any objection to this proposal, Yes.

No objection.

I hear none. It is so decided. Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 72 of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly, when a representative exceeds her or his allotted time, the President shall call the speaker to order without delay, which will be done by means of automatic microphone cutoff. To assist delegations in managing their time, a countdown clock will be displayed on the screens. Members are also reminded that explanations of vote should be made by delegations from their seats. I will now give the floor to the representative of Mali on behalf of the African Group. I will now give the floor to the representative of Mali. Mali, on behalf of the African Group.

Are they here?

My colleague is running there to help. Please, Michael. Yes, next. Mali is not ready.

As Mali is not ready, I'll now give the floor to the representative of Uruguay.

Muchas gracias.

Thank you very much. First, Uruguay would like to thank the permanent representatives of Ireland and Senegal for their excellent work as co-facilitators of the draft resolution on revising the status of the Human Rights Council. We would like to specifically highlight their transparency, broad-based consultations, and significant efforts to reach consensus on this resolution. With regards to the definition of the status of the Human Rights Council, Uruguay supports the decision to safeguard its nature as a subsidiary organ of the GA, and we support the mandate, including the resolution for a future review process. At the same time, and despite the fact that we are aware of the impossibility of moving forward in that direction, we would like to register that Uruguay maintains its principled position in favor of providing the Human Rights Council the category of main organ of the United Nations In our view, this would contribute to ensuring a balance between the three pillars of the organization, bearing in mind that currently the human rights pillar is at a disadvantage from the institutional point of view, which is also reflected in its lack of financing. At the same time, it would allow for reducing overlap that we see today between the Council and the Third Committee of the General Assembly. Uruguay also values that in the preambular paragraphs, the resolution recognizes the interdependence between UN pillars and the importance that the Council and its mechanisms have adequate and sustainable financial resources. We also value welcoming coordination between the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council. While Uruguay welcomes joining consensus on this resolution, we would like to register that we would have preferred a more ambitious resolution, even with regards to supporting the work and the added value of the Human Rights Council and the need to strengthen the financial resources for its work. We specifically regret that the proposal made by our delegation to give a consultative mandate in Geneva ahead of the upcoming review process of the status of the HRC in New York did not reach consensus, and in this In this sense, we would like to recognize and value the efforts of our co-facilitators to travel to Geneva and hold consultations in that office. Uruguay would like to reiterate its support to the work of the HRC and its mechanisms. We would like to recognize its added value and the fundamental contribution of civil society to its work. I thank you.

I thank the representative of Uruguay I now call— give to the special representative of South Africa.

Mr. President, South Africa aligns itself with the statement to be delivered by Mali on behalf of the African Group, and we would like to add the following in our national capacity. Firstly, our delegation would like to express sincere appreciation to Senegal and Ireland for facilitating this process. We also thank all of the delegations that participated in the process. We do understand that there were a range of diverse views on this matter, and we believe that the final result is a middle ground of all of the views expressed during the consultations and readings. For this reason, South Africa supports the adoption of Resolution A/80/L86 on the status of the Human Rights Council. In particular, South Africa endorses the decision to retain the Human Rights Council as a subsidiary body of the General Assembly and to undertake a review of its institutional status in the future when conditions permit. Mr. President, we believe that the three pillars of the UN—peace, development, and human rights—are inextricably linked and mutually reinforcing, and none can be fully achieved without the others. Pillars. As Kofi Annan stated, there can be no peace without development and there can be no development without peace, and there can be neither without respect for human rights. The pursuit of these pillars on an equal footing is thus essential for achieving the UN's overarching goals of fostering international peace, development, and prosperity. South Africa firmly believes in the promotion and protection of all human rights, including the right to development, recognizing that they are universal, inalienable, indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated. In the spirit of this resolution, South Africa calls for increased cooperation between the HRC and the Third Committee in order to avoid duplication and overlaps in the human rights mandate. Thank you.

I thank the representative of South Africa. I now give the floor to the representative of Mali on behalf of the African Group.

Thank you, Mr. President. I have the honor to deliver the following statement on behalf of the African Group. The African Group thanks His Excellency Koli Seck, Permanent Representative of Senegal to the United Nations, and His Excellency Fergal Mathen, Permanent Representative of Ireland to the United Nations, for their efforts throughout this process, including for consulting both Geneva and New York. The African Group welcomes the conclusion of the intergovernmental process on the status of the Human Rights Council, as well as the decision to maintain it as a subsidiary body of the General Assembly and to undertake any further review only during the period between the 90th and the 95th sessions of the General Assembly. This provides certainty regarding the Council's inter-institutional status while respecting the framework established by member states. The African Group's engagement in this process has been guided by the mandate contained in the General Assembly Resolution 65/281, in which we voted in favor in 2011. Accordingly, the Group has constantly emphasized that the review should maintain focus on questions of the Council's statutes and should never prejudice nor overlap with broader discussions concerning the functioning of the UN system. The results achieved today demonstrate our collective commitment to multilateralism and reaffirm the intergovernmental character of the Human Rights Council. The African Group believes that continued cooperation among member states based on dialogue, mutual respect, and consensus, remain the best path towards strengthening the effectiveness of the Human Rights Council in carrying out its mandate. The Charter shall remain its compass, with observance of its cardinal principles such as universality, objectivity, and non-selectivity, as well as the elimination of double standards and politicization of the consideration in the consideration of human rights issues. In conclusion, the Council should devote its focus towards the promotion and protection of human rights based on the principle of cooperation and genuine dialogue aimed at strengthening the capacity of member states to comply with their human rights obligations. I thank you.

I thank the representative of Mali. I now give the floor to the representative of Russian Federation.

Thank you, Mr. President. We wish to thank the delegations of Ireland and Senegal for the drafting of the draft resolution on the status of the Human Rights Council. The Russian Federation supports its adoption by consensus. At the same time, we would like to note the following: the content of the resolution does not fully reflect the mandate which was enshrined 15 years ago in the General Assembly Resolution 65/281. Paragraph 3 of its operative part contains a decision to maintain the status of the UN Human Rights Council as a subsidiary body of the General Assembly. And revisiting the matter of preserving the status in a period of 10 to 15 years following its adoption. In this way, the process of revisiting the status of the Council, which was begun this year, needs to be limited purely to addressing an institutional question without incursion into related fields such as financing, working methods, or coordination of bodies within the United Nations system. And this precise intention was declared by the authors of the document at the start of the negotiations process. Nevertheless, such provisions were indeed reflected in the final text. Therefore, the Russian Federation wishes to recall our position in principle that It is necessary to stringently comply with the mandates which were crafted following intergovernmental agreement. Providing for conscientious fulfillment of previous agreements constitutes the main obligation of states, and this lies at the heart of multilateral cooperation, which is rooted in mutual trust. Improvement of predictability, as well as the effectiveness and efficiency of our work, and also helps to preclude duplication of the discussion of the same matters at various platforms, which is of critical significance during this period of reform. In this connection, we are compelled to disassociate ourselves from consensus on paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Preamble part, which goes beyond the mandate that was entrusted to us. Thank you for your attention.

I thank the representative of Russia Federation. I now give the floor to the representative of Cyprus on behalf of the European Union.

Mr. President, I deliver this explanation of position on behalf of the EU and its member states. Let me start by thanking the co-facilitators for their hard work and for leading the process in an open, transparent, and inclusive manner. From the outset, our position has been clear. The EU and its member states continue to hold the view that the Human Rights Council should have the status of a UN principal organ to accurately reflect and ensure equal institutional weight and status of human rights in the UN system as the peace and development pillars. However, we understand that this was not feasible in the current context and could therefore support maintaining status quo with the possibility of future review. While we supported the co-facilitator's aim for a short and focused text, we would have liked to see a stronger text and regret that many proposals that enjoyed broad support by delegations were not reflected in the draft or were watered down in the final text. However, for the sake of reaching agreement and a consensual adoption of this resolution, the EU and its member states were able to support the text presented by the co-facilitators. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Cyprus. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of China.

Chinese Ambassador Zhang. President, China welcomes the GA's adoption by consensus of the draft resolution on the status of the HRC to maintain the HRC status as a subsidiary body of the GA. We appreciate the efforts of Ireland and Senegal as co-facilitators. As the main human rights body of the UN, the HRC is one of the core platforms for addressing human rights issues items and promoting human rights governance. Two decades ago, it replaced the original Human Rights Committee and became a subsidiary body of the GA with enhanced status, wider functions, and further optimized institutional arrangements. During its 20 years of development, it has played a crucial role in promoting and protecting human rights globally. Practice has shown that its current status and division of its functions and power can fully meet the needs of its work. Meanwhile, recent years have seen pronounced politicization and weaponization of the work of the HRC. It is therefore an urgent priority to ensure the impartiality, objectivity, and non-selectivity of its work. Facing the member states, the status review concerns the direction of the HRC's development. More importantly, it concerns the vital interests of the membership. China has always been of the view that the review process should be membership-driven, focus on the current status of the HRC, and avoid conflation with the UNEITE process or the HRC's efficiency process. This is in line with the mandate of the GA Resolution 65/281 and helps the member states maximize consensus and minimize divergences. Over the past few months, China has been responsible and constructive in the relevant discussions and consultations, focused on key issues, took practical actions, fully understood the concerns of all parties, and demonstrated flexibility. It is exactly thanks to the joint efforts of countries of the Global South that the final text made substantive improvement, made clear the maintenance of the HRC status as a subsidiary body of the GA and decided to revisit the issue in the next 10 to 15 years. This has provided solid legal basis and guarantee for the strict mandate delivery by and effective functioning of the HRC. President, the review of the HRC status is an important opportunity to revisit the original purpose and keep up with the times. Human rights are history-based, specific and reality-based, we cannot approach human rights divorced from the social and political conditions and historical and cultural traditions of different countries. When assessing whether human rights are enjoyed in a country, one must refrain from using the standards of other countries. More importantly, there must be no double standards, or using human rights as a political tool to interfere in the internal affairs of others, or turning the UN into a forum for pressuring and confrontation. This is not only going against the original purpose of protecting human rights, sabotages international human rights dialogue and cooperation, but also severely undermines the authority and coordination of multilateral human rights mechanisms and further worsens the global deficit in human rights governance. We must pursue sovereign equality, observe international rule of law, practice multilateralism, advocate human-centeredness, stay action-oriented, step up unity and cooperation under the UN's banner, strive to set the course of human rights governance right, improve the effectiveness of human rights governance, including promoting the impartial and objective work of the Council, promote all human rights in a balanced manner, eliminate politicization, enhance input in capacity building and technical assistance for developing countries, take practical steps to respond to global human rights challenges, and make global human rights governance fairer, more impartial, more equitable, and more inclusive. China attaches great importance to respecting and guaranteeing human rights and continues to improve guarantees of human rights in the Chinese modernization process. China has been elected 6 times member of the HRC and has always been an important participant, advocate, and promoter of global human rights governance. We're ready to continue joining hands with all parties and abiding by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, promote the common values of all humanity, jointly build a just, equitable, and inclusive global human rights governance system, and work for the HRC to better fulfill its mandate and duties. I thank you, President.

I thank the distinguished representative of China. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Nicaragua.

Thank you, President. Nicaragua would like to reiterate its concern over the constant and incessant policy of double standards and selectivity that has marred the activities of the HRC, intervening in internal affairs of states to exercise political pressure or promote actions to destabilize legitimately constituted— legitimately constituted governments, Nicaragua would like to reject mechanisms against specific countries. This contravenes the principles of objectivity, impartiality, non-selectivity, universality, and full respect for the sovereignty, political independence, and non-interference in internal affairs of states. And in this sense, we would like to disassociate from any provision of the resolution that could be interpreted as political or financial support 4. Selective and interventionist mechanisms of the HRC established against specific countries. We consider that these practices are not compatible with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and with the fundamental principles of international law. Moreover, any issue related to the financing of the HRC and its mechanisms should be examined exclusively within the framework of the relevant budgetary processes within the United Nations and on the basis of established procedures. For these reasons, we disassociate from the interventionist and selective character of the HRC. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Nicaragua. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of The Islamic Republic of Iran.

Thank you, Mr. Vice President. The Islamic Republic of Iran thanks the co-facilitators, Ireland and Senegal, for their tireless efforts in facilitating the negotiations and this resolution towards its adoption by consensus. Iran has constructively participated in negotiations and joined the consensus based on its principled position that the Human Rights Council must discharge its mandate in strict conformity with the principles of universality, impartiality, objectivity, and non-selectivity as enshrined in Resolution 60/251. However, my delegation regrets that the Council continues to face persistent challenges of politicization, selectivity, and double standards, all of which erode its credibility and legitimacy. We have reservations regarding Preamble paragraph 3 and the interlinking of peace and security with human rights, which is beyond the mandate of this resolution. We also have reservations regarding the reference to the financing of the Human Rights Council and its mechanisms. Administrative and budgetary matters fall within the mandate of the Fifth Committee as reaffirmed in Preamble paragraph 5 of General Assembly Resolution 147. Resolution 65/281. The resolution should have therefore avoided language, language that could be construed as prejudging discussions that properly belong within established budgetary processes. The rationale for singling out the Human Rights Council is not clear. We therefore consider this reference unnecessary and irrelevant to the purpose of this resolution. In the same vein, we emphasize that the Human Rights Council should avoid duplication and repetition of its country-specific mandates, which are politically motivated. The Islamic Republic of Iran remains prepared to engage constructively in the forthcoming review process with a view to strengthening the multilateral human rights architecture on the basis of equity, balance, and genuine universality. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Peru.

Gracias. Thank you very much, Mr. President. First, allow me to express the gratitude of Peru to the permanent representatives of Ireland and Senegal for leading negotiations on this resolution with commitment and dedication, and for the efforts carried out to attentively listen to the different positions of delegations and reflect them in the text that we have adopted today. Peru has supported consensus to adopt this resolution in line with its unshakeable commitment to promoting and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, and bearing in mind the value that we place on the work of the HRC. Peru welcomes the decision to maintain the Council as a subsidiary body of the GA, a critical element to ensure the institutional stability of the universal human rights system. We also welcome the inclusion of a reference to the importance of ensuring adequate and sustainable financing for the Council and its mechanisms. This is an essential aspect so that they may effectively implement the mandates entrusted to it. President, in an international context characterized by an unprecedented rise in armed conflicts, as well as human rights violations and deepening inequalities, Peru trusts that this resolution will contribute to strengthening the work of the Human Rights Council. This should be the occasion to once again renew Peru's commitment to a universal human rights system that is solid, effective, and based on dialogue, cooperation, and consensus that is capable of effectively responding to current challenges and to continue promoting the protection and full enjoyment of human rights for all people without exception. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Peru. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Cuba.

Muchas gracias. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Allow me to first thank the Permanent Representatives of Senegal and Ireland for the way in which they led negotiations for the draft resolution L.86, Status of the Human Rights Council. Human rights are a common cause that should not be used with hegemonic objectives. They are substantiated in universal and shared values that do not belong to any one country. Their promotion requires a true spirit of dialogue and constructive cooperation between nations, and with this purpose The HRC has an important role to play. Human rights should be addressed on the basis of the principles of universality, objectivity, indivisibility, and non-discrimination. Selectivity, double standards, punitive approaches, and politicization generate mistrust and confrontation and do not improve human rights on the ground. It is urgent to protect the Council from these negative practices that continue to dangerously advance and erode its mandate. Cuba supports the status of the Human Rights Council as a subsidiary body of the General Assembly, established pursuant to Resolution 60/251 and ratified in Resolution 65/281, and the one that we adopted today. For this reason, Cuba has joined consensus with respect to the draft resolution L86. My delegation would like to register that its support to this resolution, including preambular paragraph number 4, should not be interpreted as an endorsement or recognition whatsoever to selective exercises which are discriminatory in nature and politically motivated against developing countries, that do not have— that have not given their consent or have no real impact on the ground. In the context of a financial crisis, these mandates cost millions of dollars without any kind of practical results. These funds could be used to assist states in the implementation of recommendations accepted in the Universal Periodic Review. My delegation, therefore, would like to reiterate its firm rejection to mandates and resolutions adopted in the Council against Belarus, Burundi, Eritrea, Iran, Nicaragua, Russia, the DPRK, Sri Lanka, Sudan, South Sudan, and Venezuela. There is no way but respectful dialogue and international cooperation if we truly want to advance the noble cause of human rights. I would like to conclude by reiterating Cuba's staunch support to promoting and protecting rights for all people, and to support the Council's efforts that go in that direction. As a member of the Council, we will continue to contribute to this cause, and we will prioritize a spirit of dialogue and cooperation, and we will oppose selective practices that are punitive, politicized, and single out specific countries.

I thank you. I thank the distinguished representative of Cuba. We have heard the last speaker in explanations of vote. After the vote, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to His Excellency Fergal Mathen, Permanent Representative of Ireland to the United Nations, and His Excellency Kholi Cheikh, Permanent Representative of Senegal, the co-facilitators of the informal consultation, who demonstrated great ability and patience in guiding discussions and complex negotiations on the drought resolution. I am sure members of the Assembly Please join me in extending to them our sincere appreciation. The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of Agenda Items 13 and 117. The Assembly will resume its consideration of sub-item of Agenda Item 65 entitled— from the New Partnership for Africa's Development to Agenda 2063, progress in the implementation of sustainable development in Africa, and international support to take action on a proposal announced in the journal. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Uruguay to introduce draft resolution A/80/L/83.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President, I have the honor to introduce on behalf of the Group of 77 and China the draft resolution entitled New Partnership for Africa's Development: Progress in Implementation and International Support, NEPAD. This annual resolution remains a principal vehicle for the General Assembly to reaffirm the international community's commitment to Africa's development priorities and strengthens international support for implementing both the AU's Agenda 2063 and the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. It reflects our shared understanding that Africa's sustainable development requires renewed global solidarity, strengthened multilateral cooperation, and a supportive international environment that enables African African countries to achieve inclusive, resilient, and sustainable development. This year's draft focuses on updating our perspectives towards NEPAD and incorporates important developments that have taken place over the past period. In particular, it reflects the outcomes of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development and reaffirms the importance of implementing the via commitment. It also reinforces the international community's commitment to addressing the persistent financing challenges facing African countries through enhanced international cooperation, reform of the international financial architecture, strengthened debt sustainability, and increased investment in Africa's sustainable development and structural transformation. The draft recognizes the continued progress made by African countries in implementing Agenda 2063 and highlights the importance of supporting Africa's priorities in areas including industrialization, regional integration, infrastructure, food security, digital transformation, and climate resilience. It further reaffirms the central role of NEPAD and encourages continued cooperation between the United coordination system and African institutions in support of nationally owned development priorities. Another important feature of the text is its strengthened emphasis on the means of implementation. The resolution underscores the importance of mobilizing adequate, predictable, and sustainable financing for development, combating illicit financial flows, strengthening domestic resource mobilization, expanding access to concessional finance, and ensuring that international support remains aligned with Africa's own priorities and development strategies. It also highlights the importance of enhancing the voice and participation of developing countries in international economic governance. Mr. President, throughout the negotiations, delegations engaged in a constructive and cooperative spirit, demonstrating their shared commitment to advancing Africa's development agenda. I wish to express my sincere appreciation to all delegations for their flexibility and valuable engagement throughout this process. In particular, we would like to thank Algeria as the facilitator for its skillful leadership and tireless efforts in guiding the negotiations, as well as Egypt for its steadfast stewardship as coordinator of this resolution on behalf of the Group. We deeply appreciate the dedication, patience, and unwavering commitment put forth by both delegations throughout the consultations to help us achieve today's balanced text. This draft resolution sends a clear message that achieving Africa's development aspirations requires strengthened international partners. Partnerships, renewed commitments to multilateral cooperation, and concrete action to address the structural challenges that continue to hinder sustainable development on the continent. It reaffirms our collective commitment to supporting African-led priorities and advancing the implementation of Agenda 2063 through enhanced international support and cooperation. The Group of 77 and China hopes that this draft resolution will enjoy the widest possible support and be adopted by consensus. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Uruguay. We shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/80/ L.83. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

Thank you, Mr.

President. The present oral statement is made in the context of Rule 153 of the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly. The present statement will also be distributed to member states under the terms of operative paragraphs 18 and 57 of the draft resolution, the General Assembly would welcome the decision of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the African Union to establish the 2026-2036 as the Decade of Reparations, following the African Union theme of the year 2025. Further, welcome the decision of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of Union to designate assuring sustainable water availability and safe sanitation systems to achieve the goals of Agenda 2063 as the African Union theme for the year 2026, and request the Secretary-General to organize during the resumed 80th session of the General Assembly and subsequent sessions of a high-level policy dialogue between policymakers, practitioners, experts, and civil society in the context of the Africa Dialogue Series around the African Union theme of the year, and invite member states and all relevant entities of the United Nations system, including funds, programs, and specialized agencies and regional commissions, in particular the Economic Commission for Africa, and all relevant international and regional organizations to continue to contribute to the effectiveness, effectiveness and reliability of the United Nations monitoring mechanism process by cooperating in the collection of data and the evaluation of performance, and request the Secretary-General to organize an interactive multi-stakeholder dialogue to discuss the main finding and recommendations contained in the biennial report of the Secretary-General on the review of the implementation of commitments made towards Africa's development during the resumed 81st session of the General Assembly to coincide with the publication of the report. The request contained in operative paragraph 18 and 57 of the draft resolution would consist— constitute additional workload for the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management, Section 2, the Department for Global Communications, Section 28, and the Office of Information and Communication Technology, Section 29C. For the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management, the request for organization of a high-level policy dialogue, as contained in paragraph 18 of the draft resolution, would entail additional resource requirements estimated at $11,200, excluding staff assessment, in 2026 and in subsequent years annually for interpretation in 6 languages for 1 meeting of 3 hours during regular hours. The request for organization of an interactive multi-stakeholder dialogue as contained in paragraph 57 of the draft resolution would entail additional resource requirements estimated at $11,200 excluding staff assessment in 2027 and in subsequent years on an annual— on a biannual basis for interpretation in 6 languages for one meeting of 3 hours during regular hours. For the Department for Global Communications, each of the meetings referenced in paragraphs 4A and 4B above would entail additional resource requirements estimated at $300 in the applicable year for webcasting services. For the Office of Information and Communications Technology, likewise, each of the meetings referenced in paragraphs 4 and 4 above would entail additional resource requirements estimated at $1,400 in the applicable year for ICT conferencing services. In accordance with established practice, the dates of high-level policy dialogues and interactive multi-stakeholder dialogues in the future would be determined in consultation with the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management. Should the Assembly adopt draft resolution A/80/L83, every effort will be made by the Secretariat to meet the requirements within its capacity, and there would be no program budget implications for 2026. The Secretariat will also, to the extent possible, seek to, seek to absorb the requirements within the overall approved regular budget resources for 2027, with any portion that cannot be absorbed to be reported in the context of financial performance report for that year. The Secretariat also wishes to inform the Assembly that its ability to implement the mandate will depend on the availability of adequate liquidity resources. Requirements for 2028 and thereafter would be presented in the proposed program budgets for the respective year for consideration by the General Assembly. I thank you, Mr.

President. I thank the representative of the Secretariat. Before giving the floor for explanations of vote, before the vote, as announced in the President's letter dated 6th January and 20th May 2026, I propose that the time limits for statements in explanation of vote under this Item B, 5 minutes. Is there any objection to this proposal? I hear none. It is so decided. Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 72 of the Rules of Procedures of the Assembly, when a representative exceeds her or his allotted time, the President shall call the Speaker to order without delay, which will be done by means of automatic microphone cutoff. To assist delegations in managing their time, a countdown clock will be displayed on the screens. Members are also reminded that explanations of vote should be made by delegations from their seats. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United States.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Trump administration stands for genuine partnership with African nations, partnerships rooted in sovereignty, mutual respect, free market principles, and real economic results. We want to see a prosperous, secure, and independent Africa. However, the United States must vote against this resolution. Instead of focusing on practical, proven pathways to economic growth, such as cutting red tape, empowering entrepreneurs, and enforcing the rule of law, This text has unfortunately become a vehicle for massive bureaucratic overreach, unrealistic financial demands, and deeply divisive ideological agendas. We cannot accept the inclusion of language referencing a decade of reparations. The UN General Assembly should be focused on building a forward-looking future of economic cooperation, trade, and development. Injecting highly contentious and divisive concepts that look to the past into a consensus text does absolutely nothing to help an American— an African business owner or farmer today. It is a distraction from real progress. The United States has defined longstanding objections to the framing of reparatory justice and the duty of reparation for historical wrongs. While we acknowledge the horrors of the past, the United States does not recognize a legal right to reparations for historical wrongs that were not illegal under international law at the time they occurred. This text repeatedly demands a radical top-down overhaul of the international financial architecture and calls for the reallocation of special drawing rights in a manner that compromises their core purpose. Furthermore, the United States firmly objects to the promotion of a United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation. Tax policy is a fundamental matter of national sovereignty. True sustainable development is driven by private capital— technological innovation and sound domestic management, not by endless demands for trillions of dollars in public wealth redistribution. This resolution doubles down on rigid, unrealistic climate finance and official development assistance targets that ignore the economic realities facing donor nations and taxpayers. True partnership means being honest about what drives growth—free enterprise, transparent institutions, and robust private investment—not top-down global mandates. Further, the United States reiterates its opposition to references to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals, as they impinge upon state sovereignty as a soft form of global governments, and we will no longer reaffirm them as a matter of course. We also underscore that UN General Assembly resolutions are non-binding. The United States therefore emphasizes that this resolution does not create or modify rights or obligations under international law, nor does it change the current state of customary international law. The United States remains deeply committed to working with our African partners to expand trade, enhance security, and unleash the power of the private sector to create lasting prosperity. But we will not sign off on a document that sacrifices sovereignty and economic reality in favor of UN-centered command economics and ideological grievances. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of United States. We have heard the last speaker in the explanation of the vote before the vote. The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/80/L83 entitled "New Partnership for Africa's Development: Progress, Implementation, and International Support." A recorded vote has been requested. We shall now begin the voting process. Those in favor of Draft Resolution A/80/L83, Please signify those against, abstentions.

The Assembly is now voting on Draft Resolution A/80/L83 entitled New Partnership for Africa's Development Progress Implementation and International Support. Will all delegations confirm that The votes are accurately reflected on the screen. The voting has been completed. Please lock the machine.

The result of the vote is as follows: in favor, 153; against, 1; abstentions, 0. Draft Resolution A/80/L83 is adopted. Before giving the floor for explanations of vote after the vote, may I remind delegations that explanations of vote are limited to 5 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Hungary.

Dear Chair, thank you for giving me the floor. Excellencies, distinguished delegates, regarding the resolution entitled "New Partnership for Africa's Development: Progress in Implementation and International Support," Hungary wishes to add some remarks in its national capacity. Hungary remains committed to promoting sustainable development and lasting peace in Africa. Africa and recognizes the need to tackle the versatile and serious challenges it faces, including climate change, ongoing conflicts, or displacement. Hungary considers Africa a vital partner with whom close cooperation is essential. Therefore, the Hungarian government has invested in various development projects in Africa to provide lasting solutions for those in vulnerable situations. Hungary has provided around €300 million worth of development resources to American countries over the past few years in the field of water management, healthcare, healthcare services, infrastructure, and so on. In this period, we have voted in favor of the resolution. Nevertheless, we would like to take this opportunity to put on record Hungary's position regarding the reference to the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration in Preamble paragraph 21 of the resolution. I would like to recall that Hungary did not adopt the Global Compact on Migration and does not participate in its implementation either. In our view, we should focus on providing assistance to countries of origin by creating stable and secure conditions locally, thereby ensuring the people can stay in their homeland in peace and prosperity. Consequently, it is our firm belief that our collective efforts should focus on handling the root causes, root causes of migration. Furthermore, in accordance with Hungary's longstanding position on the topic, migrants cannot be considered a vulnerable group in the context of Operational Paragraph 8 of the resolution. For these reasons, Hungary disassociates itself from PP21 and OP8 of the resolution and underlines that migration policy remains a prerogative of states to define. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Hungary. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Russian Federation.

Mr. President, the Russian Federation supports the— has supported the adoption of Security Council— of General Assembly resolution, which is the dedicated to the New Partnership for African Development. Our delegation attributes paramount significance to enhancement of the economic component of the traditionally friendly relations with African states. We are united by a common desire to shape a more just, polycentric world order that is rooted in genuine equality and that is free from all forms of neocolonialism, intervention, interference in domestic affairs of others, and pressure from illegal unilateral coercive measures. Furthermore, we support the decision of the African Union to proclaim 2026 to 2036 as a decade of reparations. We see this as a step towards restoring historic justice and eliminating the remnants of the colonialist We firmly believe that overcoming the long-term repercussions of colonialism requires that the international community pool its efforts. Only through equitable partnership, through respect for sovereignty, and enhancement of multilateral cooperation is it possible to forge the necessary conditions for prosperity and well-being of the peoples of Africa. Mr. President, the Russian Federation is continuing to support NIPAD as well as other initiatives which are geared towards promoting financing for sustainable development, inclusive economic growth, and greater stability in the region. We underscore the importance of reformed international financial architecture, specifically fundamental reforms in trade and investment relations in order to alleviate the debt burden borne by African states and in order to eliminate risks caused both by trade wars and rampant imposition of illegitimate sanctions. We reaffirm our keenness to qualitatively enhance political and trade and economic cooperation with African states. Beyond the fact that Russian-African trade flow is expanding precipitously, the absolute figures point to ongoing substantial multifaceted capabilities in myriad spheres of our cooperation. We are continuing to enrich our cooperation with new content. On the 28th to the 29th of October this year, An important summit is planned to be held in Moscow, an important foreign policy summit, the 3rd Russia-Africa Summit. Preparations are currently well underway to ensure the practical results of this event. We look forward to the adoption of a new plan of action for the forthcoming 3-year period, which will serve as a strategic blueprint for the ongoing enrichment of our relations. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Russian Federation. We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote after the vote. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item of agenda item 65 and Agenda Item 66 as a whole. It is so decided. The Assembly will resume its consideration of Agenda Item 127, entitled Global Health and Foreign Policy, to take action on a proposal announced in the journal. Before proceeding further, I should like to inform members that the Assembly will hold a debate on this item at a later date to be announced. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Hungary to introduce draft resolution A/AT/2017.

A/81. Excellencies, distinguished delegates, I have the honor to present to you today draft Resolution A/80/A/81. L.71 entitled Sustainable and Safe Water Sanitation, Hygiene, Waste and Electricity Services in Healthcare Facilities. The draft resolution is submitted for your consideration by a broad coalition of member states consisting of Colombia, Egypt, El Salvador, Nepal, the Philippines, Poland, Slovenia, Thailand, the United Kingdom and my own country Hungary. As you are very well aware, this important work stream has its origins in the Secretary General's call to action in 2021. In response, Hungary and the Philippines established a group of friends in support of Washington healthcare facilities to sustain political momentum and champion this issue across the UN agenda. Co-chaired by our delegations, the group has remained actively engaged in advancing advocacy, supporting key UN processes, and helping drive concrete action to further elevate washing healthcare facilities as a global health and development priority. Our efforts led to the adoption in 2023 of Resolution 78/130 by consensus, which is the previous resolution adopted by this chamber on this subject. We are happy to note that since then there have been some measurable progress on this issue. Most notably, More than 80% of countries have established baselines or updated standards on the field of washing healthcare facilities and took action to address gaps and shortcomings. However, our work is not nearly finished, hence our presence here today. As the resolution notes, we are deeply concerned that the latest data indicate huge gaps in service remain. Globally, 1.1 billion people are served by healthcare facilities that lack basic water services. 3 billion are served by facilities that lack basic sanitation. 1.7 billion are served by facilities that lack basic hygiene. And 2.8 billion are served by facilities that lack basic healthcare waste management. Furthermore, nearly 1 billion people access healthcare facilities without reliable electricity or without electricity access at all. These are some grave numbers that require our immediate attention and continued efforts. With the tabling of this year's draft resolution, our aim was twofold: first, to sustain the progress achieved; second, to provide an update to the text. We believe that the draft text presented here today achieves both these goals. It is the result of an extensive and inclusive consultation process with the esteemed delegations. It represents the broadest possible consensus, taking into account all the concerns and positions expressed by delegations. I would like to take this opportunity thank the work of the two co-facilitators, Ms. Sharlan Bariana from the Philippines and Mr. Miklós Gá from Hungary. Excellencies, distinguished delegates, let us continue to work together to integrate water, sanitation, hygiene, waste, and electricity in healthcare facilities and to mainstream these efforts into national health planning, programming, financing, monitoring, and evaluation and to empower the health workforce to advocate for, appropriately use, and maintain such services. Let us move forward in making sure that healthcare facilities around the world have sustainable and safe wash services. We are looking forward to your support for this proposal. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Hungary We shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/80/L.71. For your information, the draft resolution has closed for e-sponsorship. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

Mr. President, I should like to announce that since the submission of the draft resolution, and in addition to the delegations listed on the L document. The following countries have also become co-sponsors of A/AD/L71: Bangladesh, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Malta, Panama, Portugal, Singapore, Switzerland, Timor-Leste, Uruguay, Vanuatu, and Vietnam. Vietnam. If any other countries wish to co-sponsor L71, please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see Saint Kitts and Nevis, Luxembourg, Ireland. That concludes additional co-sponsors. Ecuador is also pressing the button for additional co-sponsorship. That concludes the additional co-sponsorship. Thank you, Mr. President.

I thank the representative of the Secretariat. Before giving the floor for explanations of vote before the vote, As announced in the President's letters dated 6 January and 20 May 2026, I propose that the time limits for statements in explanation of vote under this item be 5 minutes. Is there any objection to this proposal? I hear none. It is so decided. Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 72 of the Rules of Procedure,— of the Assembly when a representative exceeds her or his allotted time, the President shall call the speaker to order without delay, which will be done by means of automatic microphone cut-off. To assist delegations in managing their time, a countdown clock will be displayed on the screens. Members are also reminded that explanations of votes should be made by delegations from their seats. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United States.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States recognizes the importance of safe water sanitation and hygiene services in healthcare facilities as well as the physical safety of humanitarian and medical personnel and facilities. The United States is the world's leader in global health, spending roughly $12 billion annually on global health since 2015. The enduring leadership that we have contributed forms the basis of the world's health infrastructure. We will remain the global leader in public health, saving millions of lives around the world by realizing the vision outlined in Trump administration's America First global health strategy. The vision will make the United States safer, stronger, and more prosperous by preventing infectious disease outbreaks from reaching our shores. We regret, however, that this resolution advances language that categorically undermines national sovereignty and the— and U.S. interests. First, this text repeatedly reaffirms the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Development Goals, SDGs, and related initiatives. As the United States has made abundantly clear, the 2030 Agenda and SDGs impinge upon state sovereignty as a form of global government— soft global governance, and we will not reaffirm them. Second, the resolution contains positive references to the World Health Organization. The United States withdrew from the WHO due to serious concerns about its performance, accountability, and lack of independence, and we cannot support language that validates it. The resolution also references universal health coverage without specifying that there is no one-size-fits-all government-centric approach. Universal health coverage must be tailored to national contexts and priorities. Finally, the text includes references to climate change. While we support targeted environmental protections, the United States will not endorse sweeping climate ideologies that seek to influence domestic policies. We reiterate that health policy must remain the exclusive responsibility of sovereign states shaped by domestic priorities, national contexts, and the will of citizens. It should not be imposed by international bureaucracies or multilateral mandates. For these reasons, United States votes no on this resolution. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the United States. We have heard the only speaker in explanation of vote before the vote. The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/80/L.71 entitled Sustainable and Safe Water, Sanitation, Hygiene, Waste and Electricity Services in Health Care Facilities. A recorded vote has been requested. We shall now begin the voting process. Those in favor of draft resolution A/80L.71, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The Assembly is now voting on draft resolution A/80/L.71 entitled Sustainable and safe water, sanitation, hygiene, waste, and electricity services in healthcare facilities. Will all delegations confirm that the votes are accurately reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the machine.

The result of the voting is as follows: in favor, 151; against, 2; abstentions, 0. Draft Resolution A/80/L.71 is adopted. Before giving the floor for explanations of vote after the vote, may I remind delegation that explanations of vote are limited to 5 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats. I give the floor now to the distinguished representative of Italy.

Mr. President, Excellencies, I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of Bulgaria, Slovakia, and my own country, Italy. Bulgaria, Italy, and Slovakia aligned themselves with the explanation of vote which will be delivered on behalf of the European Union and its member states and wish to make the following remarks in their national capacity. At the outset, we would like to express our sincere appreciation to the Permanent Mission of Hungary and the Philippines in their capacity as co-facilitator for their dedicated leadership and inclusive approach throughout the negotiation, which enabled the successful conclusion of this important resolution. We voted in favor of this resolution because we strongly support efforts to improve sustainable and safe water, sanitation, hygiene, waste management, and electricity services in healthcare facilities. We recognize that these elements are fundamental to resilient health system, quality healthcare, and the achievement of the SDGs. We also support strengthening international cooperation and capacity building in this area, particularly to assist developing countries. However, in light of the position of Bulgaria, Italy, and Slovakia regarding the pandemic agreement, we formally dissociate ourselves from Preamble paragraph 9, which welcome its adoption. Our position on this paragraph should not be interpreted as diminishing our strong commitment to international cooperation, nor our continued support for efforts to build resilient health systems and improve global health security. We remain committed to constructive engagement in the relevant multilateral health processes, with a view to advancing practical, balanced, and broadly supported solutions that strengthen global health. We kindly request that this statement be reflected in the official meeting, in the official record of the meeting. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Italy. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Ireland on behalf of the European Union.

Thank you, Mr. President. Excellencies, distinguished delegates, I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of the European Union and its member states. The candidate countries North Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania, Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, um, San Marino, and the United Kingdom align themselves with this statement. Let me start by expressing our sincere appreciation to Hungary and the Philippines for facilitating the negotiations. The EU and its member states fully recognize the importance of sustainable and safe water, sanitation, hygiene, waste, and electricity, WASH services in healthcare facilities. We have therefore engaged constructively throughout the negotiations. Mr. President, the climate crisis and the water crisis are putting tremendous pressure on WASH services in healthcare facilities. This is why the EU and its member states have sought to strengthened this year's resolution on these issues. We are therefore pleased that the resolution contains several important and necessary updates on these issues. The climate dimension now gets the attention it deserves in this resolution, and we commend the co-facilitators for their tireless efforts in this regard. We also underline the importance of the reference to the United Nations' System-Wide Strategy for Water and Sanitation, which will be crucial crucial for delivering on this and the other water-related resolutions. At the same time, we regret that not more of our proposals could be included on these and other issues, which would have further strengthened the resolution. These include our proposals relating to the climate-health nexus, which can be addressed through the effective operation of the One Health approach. In addition, on two issues we are not in a position to agree to divert from agreed language from more recent resolutions. The first is the reference to zero waste initiatives in PP17, which we can only recognize if local and national. And the second is the reference to traditional medicines in PP19, which we can only recognize if evidence-based. Therefore, on both these issues, we consider that no precedent it is set. Finally, in the future negotiation— negotiations on this resolution, and in line with the Sevilla commitment, we would like to reaffirm that the transition to health sovereignty with country ownership at its core is essential to achieve sustainable financing, and that strong partnership and international financing can act as an important complement to support this transition. The EU and its member states regret that a vote has been called on this normally consensual resolution. We believe this undermines our collective effort and the constructive spirit of striving for consensus, which has also guided the negotiations on this resolution this year. We support this resolution. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Ireland. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Cuba.

Muchas gracias, señor Presidente.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. The Cuban delegation voted in favor of this resolution because we recognize that safe and sustainable access to water, hygiene sanitation, and the adequate management of waste and a stable electricity supply in health facilities constitute an indispensable requirement to ensure the right to health and move towards universal health coverage and the realization of Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development. For Cuba, this issue is a top priority. Despite major economic challenges that our country is facing, we have been able to preserve a universal healthcare system that is free and offers holistic coverage. At the same time, we continue to develop programs to strengthen our healthcare infrastructure, broaden access to drinking water, and improve hygiene conditions in clinics and hospitals. Cooperation with the UN system has allowed us to sustain important support programs to our healthcare system. And our emergency response system, even in a context of growing economic limitations. Nevertheless, this issue cannot be analyzed ignoring the unilateral coercitive measures imposed by the United States against Cuba, specifically the executive order issued on the 29th of January and the 1st of May, 2026, that take the level to— take the blockade to unprecedented levels. This criminal policy limits Cuba's access to technologies, equipments, medical supplies, pumping systems, materials for hydraulic networks, and funding sources that are indispensable in order to modernize and maintain our healthcare infrastructure. Financial and commercial restrictions also make it difficult to acquire fuel and the necessary equipment to ensure ensure continuity for our electrical and water services, services required by our healthcare institutions. International organizations have recognized that these energy limitations affect healthcare services available on the island, as well as water supply, the cold chain, and our capacity to respond to emergencies. Cuban health authorities have estimated that between March 2024 and February 2025, Much before the aforementioned executive orders came into effect, the losses caused in the healthcare sector by the blockade were over $288 million. These are resources that could have been used to strengthen hospital infrastructure in Cuba, as well as to acquire equipment and to improve basic services in our health facilities. The international community cannot aspire to ensure safe water supply, as well as hygiene, sanitation, and electricity in our healthcare facilities while these unilateral coercive measures are still in place. They are a hindrance to develop the healthcare systems of developing countries. It is critical to respect the principles of the UN Charter and international law. To promote true international cooperation and to eliminate obstacles that bar states from fully complying with their obligations when it comes to sustainable development and the right to health. Cuba would like to reiterate its commitment to implementing this resolution, and we will continue working alongside the United Nations and other international partners in order to ensure resilient healthcare services that are safe and accessible for all of the population. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Cuba. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Bismillahirrahmanirrahim. The Islamic Republic of Iran firmly believes that the scope of this resolution must remain strictly confined to its its core technical mandate. Consequently, Iran dissociates itself from all extraneous provisions and references, including to the WHO Pandemic Agreement, which remains an incomplete and inconclusive instrument, as well as to antimicrobial resistance and electricity services. Regarding climate change, we underscore that any references to these issues without explicit recognition of the principle— of common but differentiated responsibilities is technically flawed and unacceptable. These issues have distinct and separate framework and should not be conflated with these technical texts. We reiterate that the realization of water and sanitation services must be pursued exclusively within the framework of national laws, domestic intangibles, and the sovereign prerogative of each member state. We categorically reject any attempt to politicize or misuse human rights language for purposes beyond the intended technical scope of this resolution. We stress that the only acceptable monitoring and evaluation mechanisms are those conducted through and authorized by national institutions. Any monitoring tool, indicator, or reporting requirement imposed without the explicit consent and authorization of the competent national authorities of member states constitutes a direct infringement of a national sovereignty and is therefore wholly unacceptable. The Islamic Republic of Iran expresses its profound regret and disappointment that this resolution fails to include any reference to unilateral coercive measures. These illegal and illegitimate measures constitute the single most significant and tangible obstacle preventing targeted countries, including Iran, from achieving the objectives of this resolution. Sanctions directly impede the procurement of essential equipment, spare parts, and critical chemicals needed for water treatment and waste management in healthcare facilities. This omission is a glaring gap that undermines the credibility and effectiveness of this instrument. We reiterate that for the Islamic Republic of Iran, the sole and ultimate criterion remains national laws and regulations. The provisions of this resolution are non-binding and in no case shall be measured against domestic legal frameworks. They may be considered by competent national authorities strictly within the parameters of national plans and legal systems. In conclusion, While we remain committed to technical cooperation in this field, we reject any interpretation or exploitation of this resolution to advance unrelated political agendas. We stress that the full and effective implementation of these services in all countries cannot be achieved without full respect for national sovereignty and domestic legal frameworks. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran. I now give the floor to the distinguished Representative of Argentina.

Gracias, Señor Presidente. Thank you, President. The Argentinian delegation fully shares the goal of strengthening basic services in healthcare establishments. Nevertheless, the text incorporates political and institutional references that go beyond that technical objective, and unfortunately Argentina cannot support it. We object mentioning Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals, as well as the Agreement on Pandemics in Resolution 80/216 of the General Assembly, which Argentina voted against. Moreover, President, we also would like to remind you that Argentina is not a member state of the WHO since March of 2026. For these reasons, Argentina voted against the draft resolution. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Argentina. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of New Zealand.

Thank you, President. New Zealand thanks the Philippines and Hungary for their efforts in presenting this resolution. New Zealand voted in favor of this resolution in recognition of the importance of the issues it addresses and of the important work that remains to be achieved in this space, as well as its connections to water and sanitation initiatives in New Zealand's own international development cooperation programmes. Notwithstanding its support for the overall text, New Zealand wishes to register its position on Preamble paragraph 9, which welcomes the adoption of the pandemic agreement. New Zealand supports the aim of strengthening global health systems and improving pandemic preparedness and response. However, we are unable to align with language welcoming the pandemic agreement. New Zealand has not signed or ratified the pandemic agreement, and as we noted at the time of its adoption by the World Health Assembly, any future decision on whether or not to do so will be informed by a full national interest test. My delegation kindly requests that this statement be included in the meeting record. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of New Zealand I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Paraguay.

Gracias, señor presidente.

Thank you, Mr. President. My delegation would like to make a general clarification regarding draft resolution A/80/L71 and A/80/L83 adopted during the session. On the reference to the Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals, in these two texts we wish to note that paragraph 74 of Resolution 70/1, which refers to the establishment of Agenda 2030 and the SDGs, as well as the voluntary nature of the follow-up and monitoring programs for the Agenda 2030, they need to be adapted to the normative framework and national priorities. Therefore, our national government is implementing development plans fully— with respect for the sovereignty of the State of Paraguay, with strictly in line with our constitutional principles.

Thank you. I thank the distinguished representative of Paraguay. We have heard the last speaker in explanations of vote after the vote. The Assembly has thus concluded the stage of its consideration of Agenda Item 127. The Assembly will resume its consideration of Agenda Item 131, entitled "The Responsibility to Protect and the Prevention of Genocide, War Crimes, Ethnic Cleansing, and Crimes Against Humanity," to continue the debate on the item. I now give the floor to the distinguished Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Bismillahirrahmanirrahim.

Mr. President, the Islamic Republic of Iran attaches great importance to the noble objective of fighting genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity, and bringing the perpetrators of egregious crimes to justice. Since our last consideration of this agenda item in 2025, perpetration of, among others, war crimes and crimes against humanity by the Israeli regime and the United States not only remained unabated but eventually increased in extent, intensity, and gravity in February 2026. In the course of the American and Israeli regime's unprovoked and premeditated war of aggression against my country in February 2026 onwards, the aggressors killed thousands of civilians, including women and children.. In one single instance, the aggressors killed 168 schoolchildren and teachers by targeting a school in city of Minab, south of Iran, while also attacked Iranian peaceful nuclear facilities, hospitals, medical centers, libraries, and historical monuments, among others. Despite the severity of such crimes, The international community has not been able to hold the aggressors to account. These crimes were even condoned by some countries. More reprehensibly, certain countries who portrayed themselves as champions of fight against egregious crimes aided and assisted the aggressors in the commission of these heinous crimes. In this respect, on 25th June 2026, the NATO Secretary General referred to the number of between 4,000 between 3,000 and 5,000 U.S. planes taking off from certain Western countries in support of Epic Fury. He added that, I quote, "This was crucial and important for the U.S. to be able to conduct that whole operation," end of quote. Mr. President, the crimes against humanity and war crimes committed against my country by the aggressors— and the foregoing open admissions of complicity in the aggression, which clearly entails international responsibility, as well as the ongoing genocide in Palestine— once again demonstrates that commitment to the effective prevention and suppression of atrocious crimes does not depend on creation of additional pseudo-legal terminology, nor on political slogans and mere utterances. Rather, it is actualized through genuine commitment and good faith in performance of obligations, free from hypocrisy, prolific double standards, and selectivity towards administration of justice. In our view, these are the main challenges posed to countering atrocious crimes. Mr. President, distinguished delegations, All these challenges are being exacerbated as a result of attempts to devise vague nomenclature and to fragment relevant international law through notions such as responsibility to protect. More than 20 years after the 2005 World Summit, member states did not arrive at common ground on the very notion of R2P. —views remained in sharp contention, and no such notion nor any consistent practice in this regard ever emerged in international law. Regrettably, such notions not only risk diverting attentions from imperative of combating impunity for heinous crimes, for which clear obligations already exist under international law, but as developments point out, these notions have been used as a conduit for justifying violations of the fundamental principles of international law, in particular sovereignty, non-intervention, and prohibition of threat and use of force. These flagrant violations of international law have even amounted to the very commission of atrocious crimes. Finally, in our view, the implementation of relevant applicable obligations in good faith, in accordance with international law, is the key to strongly counter atrocious crimes, obligations that must be upheld in the face of attempts that aim to fragment existing international law. This is a sine qua non for saving lives of innocent people from falling victim to heinous crimes. I thank you, Mr. President.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Ukraine.

Mr. President, Ukraine aligns itself with the statement of the EU and would like to make a few remarks in its national capacity. The full version of our statement will be posted in the UN Journal. We thank the Secretary-General for his report. Ukraine agrees with its main message. The responsibility to protect only works if it is a steady policy at the national, regional, and multilateral levels. For my country, this has been our daily reality for years. Since the start of Russia's aggression against Ukraine in 2014, Ukraine has documented a large-scale ongoing pattern of international crimes committed by Russia against Ukraine. Since the start, according to the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission of Ukraine, in May of this year, at least 274 civilians were killed and 1,763 were injured. That is the highest monthly figure since April 2022. Looking at the full period, the same UN mission reported that more than 62,700 civilian casualties have been recorded since the start of Russia's full-scale military invasion. I want to give you one recent example. Last night, less than 24 hours ago, Russian forces carried out a massive attack against Ukraine, launching 419 aerial weapons. Once again, Kyiv became the main target of Russian terror. We are still counting the civilian casualties, people killed in their own homes by Russian missiles and drones. And at least 21 people were killed and dozens were wounded in an attack. The real number of victims will likely be higher. Russia's crimes are not limited to attacks on Kyiv. Kharkiv, Odessa, Zaporizhzhia, Dnipro, Sumy, Kramatorsk, All these Ukrainian cities are targeted by Russia on a daily basis. This is not a random or isolated pattern. It is a planned, deliberate strategy of waging war against Ukraine and its people. The same pattern is why Russia is currently listed as a violator under two separate UN mechanisms. At the same time, the mandate on children and armed conflict and the mandate on conflict-related sexual violence. The report reminds us that the Security Council carries special responsibility to respond to atrocity crimes. But the onset of its full-scale invasion, Russia misused its own veto to block the Security Council from doing exactly that— acting quickly to protect civilians in Ukraine. Where the Security Council could not act, Ukraine has had to build its own mechanisms. The— the Secretary-General's report rightly stresses prevention, protection, and guarantees of non-recurrence as connected parts of one policy. And Ukraine has already put this in place at the national level. Ukrainian prosecutors have registered more than 200 70,000 criminal cases connected to Russia's war of aggression. Ukraine also cooperates closely with the International Criminal Court and together with the partners established the International Compensation Mechanism so that victims harmed by Russia's aggression can file claims and receive compensation. Documenting crimes and compensating victims is not enough on its own. Accountability for the crime of aggression itself remains essential. That is why Ukraine, together with partners, established a special tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine to look at the decision that led to this war, not only the acts committed on the grounds. Mr. President, prevention, protection, and accountability are connected, and they should cannot wait until the war is over. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Ukraine. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Azerbaijan.

Mr.

President, as the Secretary-General underscored in his report, the responsibility to protect must be implemented in a consistent and sustained manner at the national, regional, and multilateral levels, free from double standards. The same report further notes that permissive interpretations of legal obligations, assertions of exceptional circumstances, Circumstances, the use of disinformation, the denial of fact-based evidence, and non-compliance with international law erode respect for international norms and exact an immense human toll. Azerbaijan continues to bear the profound humanitarian consequences of the past conflict on its territory. These include approximately 300,000 refugees, more than 700,000 internally displaced persons, the widespread destruction of towns and villages, the growing number of civilians killed by or injured by landmines and other explosive remnants of war, and the continuing uncertainty surrounding the fate and whereabouts of over 4,000 missing persons. In the post-conflict period, 32 mass graves have been discovered and the remains of 877 persons have been recovered. These findings provide further evidence of the willful killing of civilians and other persons protected under international humanitarian law. Through forensic genetic identification, the remains of 220 victims have been identified, returned to their families, and laid to rest with dignity. Accountability lies at the heart of addressing the legacy of atrocity crimes. It is indispensable for establishing the truth, preserving the historical record, preventing denial and revisionism, restoring the dignity of victims and survivors, and laying the foundations for genuine reconciliation. States have a clear obligation to investigate, prosecute, and punish gross violations and abuses of international human rights law, as well as serious violations of international humanitarian law. Conversely, the denial or disregard of serious violations, as well as politically motivated attempts to discredit and obstruct justice, demonstrate contempt for international law and the rule of law and undermine efforts to combat impunity. It is therefore imperative that all relevant stakeholders assess allegations with the utmost rigor, impartiality, and objectivity, rely exclusively on credible, independently verified, and conclusive evidence, and clearly distinguish between unfounded allegations and disinformation on the one hand, on the one hand, and a state's legitimate right and responsibility to protect its population and ensure criminal accountability for serious violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law on the other. Azerbaijan has taken decisive steps to investigate and prosecute atrocity crimes committed during the past conflict. We remain fully, firmly committed to further strengthening the prevention and protection architecture and advancing accountability in full accordance with our obligations under international law. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Azerbaijan. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Suriname.

Mr. President, we thank the Secretary-General for his report. Suriname welcomes this timely debate on sustaining the responsibility its ability to protect against mass atrocities. First and foremost, we reaffirm that the primary responsibility for protecting populations from these horrific crimes rests with each state. Prevention begins at a national level through strong institutions respect for human rights, inclusive governance, and the rule of law. In Suriname, we remain committed to strengthening our national human rights architecture. This includes ongoing efforts towards the establishment of independent national human rights institutions, as well as the development and advancement of legislation aimed at safeguarding the rights and fundamental freedoms of all. We are equally determined to ensuring that the sustainable and transparent management of our natural resources, including our offshore oil sector, contributes to reducing inequalities, protecting our unique biodiversity, and promoting inclusive development that leaves no one behind. Mr. President, while national ownership is paramount, the credibility, consistency, and impartiality of the United Nations' most critical body, the Security Council, must remain essential to the effectiveness of the Responsibility to Protect. In this regard, Suriname shares the concern expressed by many regarding the perception of double standards in the application of the right to protect. For this responsibility to retain its moral and legal authority, it must be applied consistently, objectively, and without selectivity. The international community must ensure that responses to atrocity crimes are guided by international law and the gravity of the situation rather than by geopolitical considerations. In this context, Suriname reiterates its conviction that the veto should not be exercised in situations involving genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, or crimes against humanity. We therefore welcome the French-Mexican initiative on the suspension of the veto in case of mass atrocities, and are pleased to support this important initiative as a co-sponsor. Suriname remains firmly committed to a rule-based international order. We will continue to support nationally owned prevention strategies, strengthen the conditions for early warning and early action, protect civic space, and uphold human dignity as the foundation of lasting peace and sustainable development. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Suriname. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Ghana.

Thank you, Mr. President. Ghana thanks the Secretary-General for his timely report. The report reminds us that R2P is not an abstract promise made in calmer times. It is a moral and political test of our collective conscience in moments when civilians face the crimes known to humanity. At a time of multiplying conflicts, deepening geopolitical divisions, growing disregard for international law, silence cannot be our refuge and inaction cannot be our answer. Ghana reaffirms its unwavering commitment and support for the principles and the ideals of Responsibility to Protect, as articulated in paragraphs 138 and 139 of the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document. Mr. President, it is our conviction that there is no credible alternative to R2P as a legitimate and comprehensive framework for preventing genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity. As the Secretary-General's report rightly emphasizes, atrocity prevention must not be reactive, episodic, or selective. It must be institutionalized across national governance, regional cooperation, and multilateral action. This requires resilient institutions, inclusive governance, respect for human rights, the rule of law, accountability, early warning, and meaningful engagement with affected communities—the civil society, women, youth, and children. Ghana is deeply concerned that civilians continue to bear the heaviest burdens of conflicts, including attacks on hospitals, schools, humanitarian workers, journalists, peacekeepers, and critical infrastructure. We call on all parties to uphold international humanitarian and human rights law,, and we urge the Security Council to act decisively, creditably, wherever populations face atrocities risk. The credibility of R2P depends on consistency, courage, and non-selectivity. Ghana therefore supports stronger cooperation between the Security Council the Human Rights Council, regional organizations, and the Office of Genocide Prevention and R2P. In conclusion, Ghana renews its commitment to the work of all Member States and with the United Nations to ensure that the promise of 2005 is translated into timely action effective prevention, and real protection for vulnerable populations. We must measure our commitment by the lives we help to save. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Ghana. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Philippines.

Thank you, Mr. President. The Philippines thanks the Chef de Cabinet for presenting the Secretary-General's report. We also thank the Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect for the continued leadership and engagement with member states. The Philippines reaffirms its commitment to the 2005 World Summit outcome and the principle that every state bears the primary responsibility to protect its populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. During this time of rising conflicts, growing polarization, disinformation, and increasing threats against vulnerable communities, prevention cannot begin only when crisis erupt. It must be integrated into national institutions public policy and international cooperation. The Philippines therefore welcomes the report's emphasis on strengthening nationally-owned prevention mechanisms, integrating early warning into government governance, and reinforcing regional cooperation. At the multilateral level, the Philippines remains committed to strengthening accountability through the development of a legally binding convention on crimes against humanity. We remain engaged in this important process process, including in the preparatory committee early this year. At the regional level, we continue to support ASEAN's efforts to strengthen dialogue, confidence-building, and preventive diplomacy as practical contributions to sustaining peace and preventing atrocity crimes. At the national level, our experience demonstrates that prevention is most effective when it is nationally owned. The Bangsamoro peace process illustrates how Sustained dialogue, institution building, and transitional justice supported by international partners at the request of the state can address the root causes of conflict and build lasting peace. In this regard, we acknowledge the Special Rapporteur's— Special Adviser's contribution to the Philippines' transitional justice efforts in the Bangsamoro peace process. The Philippines also continues to implement Republic Act No. 9851, which criminalizes genocide, crimes against humanity, and other serious violations of international humanitarian law. Mr. President, as the report emphasizes, the responsibility to protect complements conflict prevention, human rights, and the protection of civilians by maintaining a dedicated focus on preventing the four atrocity crimes. Finally, Mr. President, the responsibility to protect must remain faithful to the Charter of the United Nations and the 2005 World Summit outcome. It must never be applied selectively or used as a pretext for political intervention. Respect for sovereignty, national ownership, and international law remains the strongest foundation for effective prevention. The Philippines stands ready to work with all member states to translate our shared commitment to protect populations and fulfill the promise of never again.

Thank you, Mr. President. I thank the distinguished representative of the Philippines. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United States.

Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Mr. President. State sovereignty is a foundational principle of international peace and stability. Yet respect for this principle has been steadily eroded in for— in favor of vague collective responsibilities and ever-expanding frameworks of global governance. The responsibility to protect is a dangerous concept and a clear example of the erosion of respect for state sovereignty. By encouraging interventions in conflicts that often lie beyond a state's strategic interests, R2P opens the door to selective politicized action under the guise of humanitarian concerns. This approach is destabilizing and threatens the very international order it claims to uphold. The United States acts in accordance with our national interest and will never subordinate our sovereignty to unrealistic aspirations of international advocates. The 2005 World Summit outcome is a political commitment that is not legally binding. Moreover,— as affirmed in paragraph 138, the responsibility is for each individual state to protect its own populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. Some member states must do much more to address the risks that lead to atrocities and to put an end to senseless conflicts. The United States will continue to advance the cause of respect for human life, an end to senseless conflicts, and the restoration of peace while preserving our national sovereignty. We urge all member states to do the same. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the United States, and I give the floor to the distinguished Ambassador Kordiashvili, Representative of Georgia.

Mr. President, we welcome today's meeting and thank the Secretary General for his report. Georgia aligns with the statement delivered by the European Union, and I would like to add the following remarks in my national capacity. Today's debate offers a valuable opportunity to reflect on the progress in recent years toward strengthening our collective commitment to international law and the principles of responsibility to protect. Regrettably, cycles of violence continue to affect millions of people worldwide, causing immeasurable suffering and undermining international peace and security. My own country, Georgia, has long endured the devastating impact of mass atrocities. Multiple waves of ethnic cleansing orchestrated by the Russian Federation since the '90s have resulted in the protracted forced displacement of hundreds of thousands of internally displaced persons and refugees from the Abkhazia and South Ossetia regions of Georgia, who are still denied access and their fundamental right to safe, dignified, and voluntary return. Furthermore, gross violations of international law and war crimes committed during the 2008 military aggression against Georgia have been formally recognized through judicial mechanisms, notably the International Criminal Court's arrest warrants issued in 2022. Today, the occupying power continues to fail in its obligations under international humanitarian law, shifting from a lawful military presence to a dangerous phase of creeping annexation. This is evident through administrative agreements, these regions and the unauthorized militarization of Georgia's maritime zones in the Black Sea, both of which directly undermine regional stability and international law.

Mr.

President, 5 years into Russia's aggression against Ukraine, the resulting destruction of civilian infrastructure continues to take a heavy toll on innocent civilians. Despite these efforts to translate R2P principles into action, The Secretary-General's latest report still reflects a growing number of such crimes, even as global consensus grows to put an end to atrocity crimes. OHCHR and its mechanisms, the Universal Periodic Review, special procedures, and treaty bodies have an important role in prevention and early warning. We once again reiterate our support for the ACT Code of Conduct and the French-Mexican Initiative on Veto Restraint. Bearing in mind our own veto experience, we stress the importance of adhering to the UN Charter's provisions on Security Council's decision-making, especially Article 27, Paragraph 3. We believe the veto should be restricted when a decision aims at preventing crimes against humanity, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and genocide. Dear delegates, Georgia remains committed to strengthening its national human rights system and cooperating with existing human rights mechanisms. Regrettably, our compatriots in the Russian-occupied Abkhazia and South Ossetia regions continue to suffer ethnic discrimination and systemic violations of their fundamental rights. The occupying powers restrict rights to life, safety, and freedom of movement, and denies access to medical care and education in the native Georgian language. In this regard, the landmark ruling of international judicial institutions, most notably the European Court of Human Rights have substantiated Russia's illegal occupation and effective control over Georgia's indivisible regions, establishing a clear record of state responsibility and holding the occupying power accountable for ongoing violations. Yet the Russian Federation continues to refuse compliance with the court's rulings. Before concluding, I would like to reiterate Georgia's dedication to advancing the global —objectives of the Responsibility to Protect, which remain vital for preventing conflicts, fostering peace, and delivering on the promise to leave no one behind. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Georgia. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Russian Federation.

Mr. President, the position of the Russian Federation regarding the responsibility to protect concept is well known and it remains unchanged. Our delegation does not support annual debates on this topic. They do not help to reinforce international law, nor do they prevent crises. The sole purpose thereof is to attempt to breathe new life into a notion that has irrevocably discredited itself in practice. We firmly believe that in the wake of the tragedy in Libya, our 2P has been bereft of a political future. Under the banner of this notion, the statehood of a once prosperous country was destroyed. Its economy has collapsed, and the region has plunged into decades-long period of instability, terrorism, illegal trafficking in weapons, and the migration flows. Tens of thousands of dead Libyan people are— not collateral damage. They are the direct result of the application of R2P. Against this backdrop, we are confounded by attempts to portray R2P as a tool for crisis prevention. The current report of the Secretary-General once again represents an attempt to embed this into the toolbox of the UN system. We also view as unacceptable the mention being made in the report of the so-called International Criminal Court. This organ has long ago lost any ties to genuine justice. It has been transformed into a cudgel of political pressure for the advancement of the interests of Western states. What is particularly cynical is the mentioning of the ICC in the context of the R2P and Libya. We remember when the pseudo-court in 2011, in mere days, drawing upon fabricated evidence, issued arrest warrants for the Libyan leadership, effectively making itself complicit in the devastation brought upon the country. At the same time, the Western countries' attacks on Libya, crimes perpetrated by their military officials and troops, as well as the grave crimes and the grave repercussions of these events for the entire region and beyond, did not result in any interest for the ICC. And now the NATO aggression— their attempts to sweep under the rug NATO aggression And the double standards of the ICC are blatant in the context of the migration crisis which was spawned from the devastation of Libya. EU states which aided and abetted attacks against this country blatantly inflicted inhumane conditions upon migrants who were abandoned to meet their fate in the open seas. Instead of assessments of such actions, the ICC is reporting on cooperation with European parties' investigation of crimes against migrants. Ultimately, arrests are targeting petty criminals, persons executing orders from third countries, whereas those who are directly complicit— representatives of military and political leadership of EU countries— are left unpunished. There's a crisis of trust in the ICC, which is apparent. Support for the resolutions dedicated to this in the General Assembly is dwindling. Countries are withdrawing from their Rome Statute, including Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger. We do not agree with the reports to focus on institutionalization of RTP, including through the early warning mechanisms. It is proposed that— there under— that states appoint national focal points to create corresponding mechanisms and to use the so-called framework of analysis for crimes. All of this is being portrayed as prevention. However, in fact, we are talking about the politicization of a mechanism— for the external assessments of sovereign countries with obscure criteria which are crafted without universal intergovernmental agreement. We would like to stress that the term "atrocity crimes" is not known under international law. The use of this term dilutes the legal regime for responsibility for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. What is also problematic is the fact that the framework is a product of the Special Adviser on Genocide Prevention and R2P. As is well known, the Russian Federation does not recognize the mandate of the Special Adviser on R2P, which was not agreed upon by member states. Thus, we cannot support attempts to grant the creative output of the Special Adviser the status of some kind of a blueprint for states and the United Nations system. On the whole, the UN should not promote notions which are devoid of a robust legal basis and which are not agreed upon by member states, which have shown themselves to be destructive. There is a need to leverage mechanisms of the Secretariat to— but it's not acceptable to leverage mechanisms of the Secretariat to uphold a contentious mandate. Now, turning to the attempts of Ukraine to leverage this platform for anti-Russia insinuations, we stress that the Russian Special military operation is being conducted in accordance with the right to self-defense, Article 51 of the UN Charter, which the Security Council was informed about. Neither Ukraine, which since 2014 has been waging war against the population of Donbas, which has been sabotaging the Minsk agreements, and currently the microphone has been cut off.

I thank, uh, the distinguished representative of Russian Federation. I now give the floor to the distinguished Representative of Liechtenstein.

Thank you so much for the floor, Mr. President. Mr. President, over two decades Over 2 decades ago, our leaders committed at the World Summit to protect civilian populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing. Yet we have witnessed over and over again populations in all parts of the world who have not been protected. Instead, they have been subjected to the atrocities this commitment was intended to prevent. While the R2P concept enjoys broad political support, all too often its implementation remains elusive. The challenge we face today is not a lack of legal norms but a lack of political will to implement them. We must therefore not only focus on reaffirming our commitment but strengthening its implementation. The commitment this Assembly made in 2005 was not only a recognition of the responsibility of States to protect their own populations from atrocity crimes, but also of our collective responsibility to act when authorities are unable or unwilling to do so. One important way to give effect to this shared responsibility is through timely and decisive —security council action. For such action to be effective, council members must translate their commitment to R2P into practice, including by acting collectively when populations are at risk of atrocity crimes. Too often, however, security council action is blocked because of political divisions and the threat or use of the veto leaving the Council unable to protect anyone or anything, least of all its own credibility. We therefore urge all member states who have not yet done so, including present and incoming Council members, to sign the ACT Code of Conduct, which involves— which involves committing to take measures to end and prevent atrocity crimes and not to vote against credible draft resolutions put forward to that effect. Liechtenstein also supports a strong and more proactive role of the General Assembly, in particular when the Security Council fails to address atrocity crimes in line with its charter mandate. We believe that the veto initiative has been an important step in realigning the relationship between the SC and the General Assembly and hope that this Assembly will be able to act on this basis. Mr. President, as noted in the report on the implementation of R2P by the Secretary-General, a sustained approach to R2P is relevant. Well, before atrocities are imminent or, or occurring, greater focus should be placed on prevention, early warning,— and addressing the underlying conditions that increase the risk of atrocity crimes. Early warning alone, however, is not enough. It must be supported by national legal frameworks, effective institutions, and accountability mechanisms capable of acting on warning signs before they escalate into atrocities. We therefore encourage member states to strengthen national prevention capacities including through dedicated national mechanisms and focal points for atrocity prevention. We also echo the recommendations contained in the SG's report to encourage all member states to become parties to relevant international human rights, humanitarian, and refugee law instruments, as well as the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, and to implement their obligations at the national level. Where national accountability falls short, the Security Council should refer relevant situations to the ICC, such as in the case of Myanmar. And finally, we call for the universal ratification and full implementation of the Genocide Convention. I thank you so much.

I thank the distinguished representative of Liechtenstein I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Cabo Verde.

Thank you, Mr. President. It is with a profound sense of responsibility responsibility and commitment to the universal values of human dignity, justice, and peace that Cabo Verde takes to the floor. We welcome the SG's report that reminds us that atrocity crimes do not occur overnight, nor are they inevitable. They are often preceded by warning signs that, if recognized and acted upon collectively, can prevent human suffering. The responsibility to protect rests first and foremost with each state. Governments bear the primary responsibility to protect their populations from atrocity crimes by upholding the rule of law, strengthening democratic and accountable institutions, respecting human rights, human rights and fundamental freedoms, and ensuring equal protection for all without discrimination. Prevention begins long before violence erupts, with addressing the root causes of conflict, combating discrimination and exclusion, promoting social cohesion, and ensuring that diversity is seen as a source of strength rather than We are witnessing a growing danger posed by hate speech, incitement to violence, misinformation, and the deliberate manipulation of ethnic, religious, and other identities for political purposes. The normalization of hate speech, whether offline or online, must never be ignored. It erodes trust fueled polarization and creates an environment in which violence becomes increasingly acceptable. The international community must strengthen its collective prevention architecture. We need more effective early warning mechanisms, stronger risk analysis, and better coordination across the UN system. Atrocity Prevention should be systematically integrated into peacebuilding, conflict prevention, mediation, humanitarian action, sustainable development efforts, and assessments of emerging risks, including those that may exacerbate social tension. Regional and sub-regional organizations, as well as civil society, women, Youth and local communities are indispensable partners. We must strengthen protection, giving attention to those who are disproportionately affected by violence and persecution, including women and girls, children, older persons, persons with disabilities, displaced populations, minorities, and other vulnerable communities. This is both a legal obligation and a moral imperative that lies at the heart of our common humanity. Prevention must be accompanied by accountability. Where genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity occur, impunity always increases the likelihood of recurrence. Kabuf Mr. Secretary-General, this effort reaffirms our support for the responsibility to protect and stand ready to continue engaging constructively, inclusively, and transparently with all delegations on this important agenda item. Let us move from reaffirmation to implementation, from early warning to early action, from indifference to solidarity and from commitment to effective protection. The credibility of the responsibility to protect will ultimately be measured not by the principles we endorse, but by our collective ability to prevent atrocities and protect people before it is too late. I thank you, Mr. President, And sorry for my voice.

Muito obrigado, distinguished representative of Cabo Verde. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Brazil.

The concept of the responsibility to protect emerged in response to the international community's failure to prevent genocide and other serious crimes under international law. Brazil firmly believes that the use of force must always remain a measure of last resort and must, in all circumstances, be exercised in strict conformity with international law. The international community should therefore prioritize conflict prevention through sustained diplomacy and the prevention— and the promotion of sustainable development. Experience has shown the painful consequences of interventions that have aggravated existing conflicts. Some of the interventions have contributed to the spread of terrorism, triggered new cycles of violence, and resulted in an alarming increase in civilian casualties. The responsibility to protect is neither enshrined in legally binding instruments nor recognized as a rule of customary international law. It remains a political concept to be implemented collectively through the United Nations in strict conformity with the UN Charter and all other applicable legal instruments. Any collective action must be guided by an agreed set of fundamental principles, parameters, and procedures, with particular emphasis on preventive diplomacy and the prior exhaustion of all peaceful means. Mr. President, More than two decades after the adoption of the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document, the international community continues to fall short of fulfilling our shared responsibility to protect. The situation in the Gaza Strip remains one of unimaginable human suffering. The death toll has reached intolerable levels, with a staggering number of women and children among the victims. Most of Gaza's physical infrastructure has been destroyed and nearly the entire population has been forcibly displaced with no safe refuge available. Similar situations persist or are unfolding in other parts of the world, while the international community too often appears unable to prevent flagrant violations of the fundamental principles and obligations of international humanitarian law. This persistent failure does not stem from a lack of available tools. Rather, they derive from an insufficient degree of political will. The international community must respond to these violations by making full use of the instruments already at its disposal, such as upholding international humanitarian law, implementing UN decisions and commitments, and ensuring accountability for those responsible for such violations. Brazil remains committed to engaging constructively in discussions on effective strategies to strengthen prevention and protection under the R2P framework. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Brazil. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the observer of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development.

Mr. President, Excellencies, and distinguished delegates, I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of His Excellency Dr. Workneh Gebeyaw, the Executive Secretary of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development . We meet at a time when the world is asking itself a very simple question: can we still act in time? Because when we speak of genocide, War crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity—we are not speaking about distant concepts. We are speaking about human beings. We are speaking about families driven from their homes, children growing up in fear, women carrying the burden of conflict, and young people being pulled into violence before they even have a fair chance in life. IGAD welcomes the continued attention of this General Assembly to the responsibility to protect. We appreciate the Secretary-General's report, especially its reminder that the responsibility to protect begins at home. That is true. But it's only the beginning, because when warning signs are clear, when tensions are rising, and when the local capacities are under strain, the wider system also has a duty to to help prevent the worst. From IGAD's own experience, one lesson is clear: prevention works best when it starts early and close to the people. That's why the story of Moyale matters. Along the Kenya-Ethiopian border, in a place where movement, trade, identity, and securities are tightly bound together, IGAD has supported a cross-border peace structure that brings together local authorities, community leaders, women leaders, religious actors, and organized youth groups from both sides of the border. This matters because peace in Moyele is not held together by speeches. It's held together by constant effort, by keeping dialogue open when mistrust begins to rise, by bringing people together before a local dispute turns into a wider confrontation, by working across the border, not after violence, but before violence. And one important lesson from Moyale is this: if organized youth groups are not supported, they cannot be expected to participate meaningfully in peace. Yet they are often the first to be dragged into conflict. They are mobilized by frustration, by exclusion, by manipulation, and by the absence of alternatives. But when they are engaged early, when they are organized for peace and not abandoned to stability. Dialogue has helped preserve stability in ways formal response alone cannot always achieve. So for IGAD, the message is straightforward: local peace infrastructure is not secondary, it is frontline. And that's where the multilateral system must prove its value, not only in reacting to catastrophe, but in preventing it; not only in defending principle, but in backing the people and institutions that make the principle real. The multilateral system must be more consistent, more responsive, and more connected to the realities on the ground. It must support national responsibility, yes, but it must also strengthen regional organizations and local mechanisms that seek risks and act early before they escalate. Our message today is simple. If we want protection to be real, we must invest in prevention. If we want prevention to work, we must support those doing the work closest to the ground. If we want prevention to work, we must strengthen the multilateral system, and the multilateral system must deliver before communities collapse and not after. In places like Muyale, Karamoja, People are already doing the work for peace. They are listening, mediating, restraining, warning, and holding communities together under pressure. They should not be left to do this alone. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the observer of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development. We have heard the last speaker in the debate on this item. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of Agenda Item 131? It is so decided. The meeting is adjourned.