Third Committee, 46th plenary meeting - General Assembly, 80th session General Assembly Date: 18 November 2025 Language: English Transcript: https://transcripts.un.org/en/ga/c3/80/46 Transcripts available through this tool are created by using automatic speech recognition and are not official records nor official documents of the United Nations. Official records and official documents are available on the Official Document System of the United Nations. --- 3rd Committee · Chair [0:01]: Morning, colleagues. The 46th meeting of the Third Committee of the General Assembly is called to order. The documentation before the committee for this meeting is listed on ICAV, which to remind delegations that statements made in explanation of vote before or after the vote, or general statements, shall not exceed three minutes. Delegations are also reminded that in accordance with Rule 128 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly, the sponsor of a proposal is not permitted to speak in explanation of vote on the proposal. I invite the Committee to now resume its consideration of agenda item 25, Social Development, in order to take action on draft resolution A/C.3/80/L/14, revision 1. entitled "Persons with albinism". I would like to inform the Committee that draft resolution L.14/Rev.1 contains no programme budget implications. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Malawi. Malawi [1:13]: Thank you, Chairperson. I have the honour to introduce for adoption the draft resolution titled "Persons with albinism", contained in document AC.103.1. 3/80/L14, revision 1, on behalf of the United Republic of Tanzania and my own country, the Republic of Malawi. This year, we decided to break the trend of technical updates for the resolution since the last substantive update six years ago. Therefore, while the resolution builds on the previous resolution, A/RES/78/171, it contains updates that are based on the Secretary-General's two most recent reports on social development challenges faced by persons with albinism. It has two new paragraphs in the preambular section, addressing issues of the impact of health emergencies and climate change on persons with albinism. It also has five new paragraphs in the operative section, which, among other issues, call for stronger support for programs for persons with albinism. provisions of accessible, affordable, and quality healthcare and assistive devices, and protection from diverse effects of climate change through inclusion in national climate adaptation and resilience strategies. We have also revised parts of the pre-existing paragraphs to incorporate new language that speaks to the challenges faced by persons with albinism. Chairperson, the present draft is a product of an open and transparent process. We strived as best as we could to reconcile divergent positions on certain elements in the text, and whereas consensus could not be reached, even withdrew our own proposals and reverted to previously agreed language. As such, we are convinced that the draft represents the most satisfactory text. We thank all delegations for their constructive engagement and inputs, which have resulted in a richer and more progressive text. We are grateful to all delegations who have already co-sponsored the resolution and we invite delegations who have not yet done so to join the list of co-sponsors and support this resolution. Chairperson, we look forward to successful adoption of this draft resolution by consensus, as has been the norm in the previous years. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [4:14]: I thank Malawi for the statement. I'll give the floor to the Committee Secretary. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [4:22]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wish to inform that in addition to those delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have joined as sponsors of L14 revision one. Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Congo, Czechia, Denmark, Djibouti, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mozambique, Panama, Poland, Republic of Korea, South Africa, Sweden, Tunisia, Turkey, and Ukraine. If any other countries wish to join as co-sponsors of draft resolution L.14, revision 1, please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see Ecuador, the Central African Republic, Morocco, Kuwait, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Gambia, India, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Pakistan, Nepal, Angola, Venezuela, Cote d'Ivoire, Botswana, Guinea, Senegal, Uruguay, Sierra Leone, Bangladesh, I understand the Philippines as well with microphone issue. I see no further requests. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [6:43]: Right. Thank you. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L14, revision 1, entitled "Persons with albinism." Any delegation which to make a general statement or explanation of vote before the vote in connection with draft resolution L14/1? I give the floor to the United States. United States of America [7:14]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its objections to resolutions such as this one that are effectively performative and wasteful of U.N. resources. Third Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, this resolution contains to include, continues to include problematic language that does not advance the United Nations core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. While the United States shares deep concern over the serious issue that this resolution purports to address, namely protecting persons with albinism from attacks and discrimination, we regret that the resolution itself is another example of the type of performative documents produced by this committee that wastes UN and member state resources while failing to meaningfully improve the lives of our collective citizenry. President Trump has delivered a very clear message that the United Nations and so many nations of the world have gotten wildly off track, exaggerating climate change into the world's greatest threat. This practice will no longer be tolerated. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. The number of report conferences and negotiations has grown beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Accordingly, the United States requests a vote and will vote no on this resolution. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we hope to work together in advance of next year's session of the Third Committee to make it more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position that will be posted on our mission's website for more information. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [8:53]: Thank you. I give the floor to Tanzania. United Republic of Tanzania [9:00]: Thank you, Chair. I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of the delegation of the Republic of Malawi and my own delegation, the United Republic of Tanzania. We regret to learn that a delegation has called for a vote on this draft resolution on persons with albinism, which has traditionally been adopted by consensus. During the negotiation, the facilitators made every effort to accommodate the concerns of all delegations. Whenever concerns were not being reached, the facilitators went as far as deleting their own proposals and relating to previously agreed language, all in the spirit of compromise and consensus building. Mr. Chair, this resolution does not recycle nor reintroduce any contentious issues. The matter that this resolution aimed to is the matter that the matter that it aims to address remaining highly relevant to many countries and persons with albinism. The Secretary-General's report A/78/0903 and the report of independent expert on the enjoyment of human rights by persons with albinism, A/80/222, clearly highlight the health-related challenges faced by persons with albinism, including visual impairment and skin cancer, as well as physical attacks and other forms of violence. These are precisely the issues that this resolution seeks to address. We believe that calling for a vote for a resolution for this resolution undermines these efforts and the constructive spirit of engagement that this committee has long demonstrated to build consensus we are deeply concerned that this development departs from the long-standing practices of adopting resolution and agenda item on social development by consensus such consensus not only strengthens the international solidarity but also affirm reaffirms shared commitment to advancing the United Nations development agenda, including issues affecting persons with albinism. We will therefore vote in favor of this draft resolution, and we strongly encourage all delegations to do the same. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [11:27]: Thank you. I'll now give the floor to India. The floor is yours. India [11:33]: Thank you, Chair. This is for a point of order. On the list of co-sponsors, I did not hear my delegation's name being called. If the Secretariat could kindly confirm if India is included in the list of co-sponsors. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [11:49]: All right, procedure. You are not on the list right now. If you wish to do so, please say so. So we'll record. Go ahead. India [12:18]: I had pressed the mic and that's why I was reconfirming. We would like to co-sponsor the resolution. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [12:24]: Perfect. Thank you. We're good. Cuba, the floor is yours. Cuba [12:33]: Thank you very much, Chair. Good morning. We are grateful to Tanzania and Malawi for the work undertaken in introducing this resolution. It helps to raise awareness about a topic that is highly sensitive and also highlights transparent negotiations that have been led by both countries. Once again, we must regret the attitude of the United States in requesting a vote for any resolution that has a humanitarian or social development focus and to point to crucial rights issues. This resolution, colleagues, is not just a pro forma, as the US delegation is indicating. It is a sign of humanity that the country in question ignores in their daily practice. In Cuba, healthcare is free, it is universal, it is a right that is enshrined in our constitution. and it is given the utmost priority in our state. While albinism is not frequent in Cuba, representing one in 19,000 births, our country is nevertheless increasing efforts to protect the human rights of these individuals. And the Civil society organizations and projects are crucial in this regard. Persons with albinism receive multidisciplinary support that includes genetic support, dermatological, ophthalmological, and other kinds of support. All of this is carried out despite the huge limitations caused by the United States blockade against Cuba, causing in the area of health. This policy will not drive our focus away from providing these people with the most care as their needs require, both in Cuba and elsewhere, as people with albinism may require. Cuba is voting in favour of this resolution. We would encourage others to do the same. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [14:45]: Thank you very much. With that, we'll commence with the process of voting on draft resolution L.14, revision 1. In accordance with rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegates are now requested to indicate their votes. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [15:19]: The committee is now voting on draft resolution L.14, revision 1. entitled Persons with Albinism. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 3rd Committee · Chair [15:49]: The result of the vote is as follows: 174 in favour, 3 against, and 0 abstentions. Draft resolution AC.3.80.L.14, revision 1, is adopted. Any delegation wish to make an EOV or general statement after the vote on the draft resolution? I invite the Committee to resume its consideration of agenda item 26A, Advancement of Women, in order to take action on draft resolution A/C.3/80/L.18, revision 1, entitled "Violence against women migrant workers". I would like to inform the Committee that draft resolution L.18, revision 1, contains no programme budget implications. With that, I would like to give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Philippines. The floor is yours. Philippines [17:07]: Thank you, Mr. Chair, on behalf of the Philippines and Indonesia. We have the honor to present for adoption the draft resolution on violence against women migrant workers, document A/C.3/80/L.18/Rev.1. The UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs report states that women represent 38.7% of the world's international migrants in the labor force. Our collective action today is driven by the imperative to protect the rights and dignity of these women worldwide, who continue to face risks of violence, exploitation, and discrimination. This year, we note with concern the evolving landscape of risk, including the use of digital technologies to perpetrate violence against them. The 2025 resolution builds upon a resolution 78 slash 180, which extensively covers the topic and contains strong language agreed by consensus. This year's text preserves the essential elements of previous resolutions traditionally adopted by consensus while updating provisions to reflect recent global developments with a particular focus on technology. We deeply appreciate that this approach was widely accepted and supported by delegations, resulting in the text that we now have for consideration of the Committee with language on the following key points. One, reaffirmation to ensure that the benefits of digital technologies are available to all migrant women and girls and to also close all digital divides. Secondly, urging of governments and relevant stakeholders, including digital technology companies, to prevent and respond to violence that occurs through or is amplified by the use of technology and to strengthen digital literacy, safe reporting mechanisms and equal access to justice. Thirdly, encouragement of data collection and analysis on the situation of women migrant workers, including on the incidence of violence that occurs through or is amplified by the use of technology. The Philippines and Indonesia express gratitude to the Member States that have co-sponsored the resolution and invite those that have not done so to co-sponsor it as well. Let this resolution reaffirm the commitment of the international community to empower all women migrant workers and end the cycle of violence against them. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [19:45]: Thank you, Philippines, for the statement. I now give the floor back to the Committee Secretary. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [19:51]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wish to inform that in addition to those delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have joined as co-sponsors of L18, revision 1. Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Bangladesh, Belarus, Canada, Congo, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, India, Japan, Kenya, Lebanon, Malawi, Morocco, Myanmar, Panama, Peru, Timor-Leste, Uruguay, and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. If any other countries wish to join as co-sponsors of L18 revision 1, please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see Jordan, Cambodia, Djibouti, Madagascar. And I see no further requests. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [20:53]: Thank you. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L.18, revision 1, entitled "Violence against women, migrant workers". Before we proceed to the vote, I will give the floor to any sponsored delegation wishing to make a general statement in connection with the draft proposal, or non-sponsored delegation wishing to make a statement in explanation of vote. Any delegation which is to make a general statement or a UOV? I give the floor to the United States. The floor is yours. United States of America [21:34]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its objections to resolutions such as this one that are effectively performative and wasteful of UN resources. Third committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, this resolution continues to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the UN's core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. President Trump has delivered a very clear message that the United Nations and so many nations of the world have gotten wildly off track, exaggerating climate change into the world's greatest threat. This practice will no longer be tolerated. We believe that the most critical principles of migration governance include national sovereignty, border security, and the right of every country to set their own immigration policies. The United States is clear that we will not permit any form of global migration policies that erode our sovereignty. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has grown beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Accordingly, the United States requests a vote and will vote no on this resolution. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we hope to work together in advance of next year's session of the Third Committee to make it more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation position that will be posted on our mission's website for more information. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [23:00]: Thank you. Next speaker on my list is Cuba, to be followed by Paraguay and Indonesia. Cuba, please. Cuba [23:10]: Chair, we are grateful to the Philippines and to Indonesia for the work that went into the presentation of this resolution. It helps to make visible an issue of the utmost importance and that affects millions of women migrant workers all over the world. It is not surprising that a vote has been requested by the United States, the country that has time and again indicated its lack of commitment to migrant workers and to women migrant workers in particular. In recent years, a significant proportion of the 23 million migrant workers that it is estimated to live in the United States have had to suffer the forced separation of their families, in particular their children, and the brutal persecution of the immigration services and the border control services, ICE, that the current administration has taken to unprecedented levels. This does not include the multiple other forms of violence that women are subjected to by machismo and the discriminatory practices that are promoted by government apparatus. Voting against this resolution, as the US will do, means closing your eyes to a real and living problem. and we know who is responsible for this. Cuba will be voting in favour. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [24:40]: Thank you. Paraguay. Paraguay [24:45]: Thank you, Chair. Paraguay is making this explanation of vote in relation to all of the votes that will be taking place here today. Paragraph 73 of resolution 73/1 of the UNGA, through which the Agenda 2030 and the SDGs were established, underscores the voluntary process of the follow-up and review mechanism. And so this should be adjusted to national priorities and legal frameworks. As indicated in paragraph 56, the aspirational, i.e. legally binding nature of the SDGs is highlighted, and it is therefore voluntary whether or not we incorporate these into our national frameworks. We will be exercising our full sovereignty in this regard, with the respect for our constitution, national independence, and the self-determination of peoples. And so my delegation wishes to recall that in Paraguay, in accordance with our national constitution, under the legal framework in place, no form of discrimination is permitted, and the legal order lays the foundations for true equality. In this regard, it's worth clarifying for us that any definition of gender is limited only to the difference between men and women. In this regard, we have made significant progress in harmonizing our legal order, in strengthening our constitution, and in the design and implementation of public policies aimed at protecting and guaranteeing women's human rights and also empowering women and ensuring their independence in economic, social, cultural and family spheres. Also, under Paraguay's legal framework, we protect the right to life from the moment of conception and therefore the instruments in relation to women's health that we are discussing today does not for us include termination of pregnancy. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [26:58]: Thank you. Indonesia, the floor is yours. Indonesia [27:02]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Indonesia as co-facilitator of this resolution alongside the Philippines wishes to make a general statement. This resolution marks a significant milestone in our global efforts to combat gender-based violence and protect women in migration. It sends a powerful message that the international community will not tolerate violence against women migrant workers. It addresses one of the most urgent issues. Of our time, the protection of women migrant workers from violence and exploitation. It is regrettable that we could not achieve consensus on a matter that should unite us all in common purpose. The overwhelming support for this resolution has received demonstrates the international community's unwavering commitment to protect the rights and dignity of women migrant workers. We express our profound disappointment that this important resolution addressing violence against women migrant workers has been put to a vote. Indonesia calls to all delegations to vote in favor of this resolution based on three fundamental principles. First, violence against women migrant workers constitutes a grave violation of human rights that demands our collective action and an undisputable condemnation. This resolution represents a carefully balanced text that respects national sovereignty while advancing the international human rights framework. It is the product of extensive, transparent and inclusive consultations with all Member States. Lastly, as co-facilitators, we have. Also demonstrated maximum flexibility and accommodation throughout the negotiation process, ensuring that all voices were heard and considered. Let me be clear, when it comes to protecting vulnerable women from violence, there can be no compromise. Every woman migrant worker deserves to live and work with safety and dignity. As co-facilitator, Indonesia remains committed to working with all member states in the implementation of this resolution. We will continue to champion the rights of migrant workers and ensure that no woman is left behind. We thank Philippines for the excellent collaboration and all member states who supported this important initiative. We thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [29:10]: Thank you. With that, I ask the committee to commence with the process of voting on draft resolution L18, revision 1. In accordance with Rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. You are kindly requested to indicate your votes. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [29:34]: The Committee is now voting on draft resolution L.18, revision 1, entitled "Violence against women migrant workers". Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 3rd Committee · Chair [30:12]: The result of the vote is as follows: 172 in favor, 3 against, 3 abstentions. Draft resolution AC.3.A0.L18 revision 1 is adopted. After the vote, I will repeat again. Any delegation which is to make an explanation of vote or general statement after the vote on the draft resolution? I have Argentina to be followed by the Russian Federation and Malaysia. Argentina. Argentina [30:56]: Thank you, Chair. Argentina recognizes the importance of countries protecting the rights of regular migrants on their territory, especially in the case of violence against women. We understand that there are very diverse situations and practices globally that may require solutions such as those proposed under this text. But the resolution has actually prescribed the implementation of migration policy that actually goes beyond the powers within each country according to the nation's sovereign right to secure their territory and ensure regular migration across their borders. The goal here, which seems to leave out other vulnerable profiles, such as young people, minors, or others who might be exploited in the labor force. We understand that it's necessary to continue working to find a path back to consensus and to recognize the powers of states to provide assistance and public policy that is focused on regular migrants, including women migrant workers in accordance with international law and the budgetary realities in each country. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [32:24]: Thank you. The Russian Federation, the floor is yours. Russian Federation [32:29]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. At the outset, allow me to thank the delegation of Indonesia and the Philippines for submitting the draft of this important resolution. We believe that during the work on the document, the coordinators were able to balance the interests of all parties, and we regret that the document was not adopted by consensus. We call upon all those who are unsatisfied with the draft in the next time to partake in the consultations and together with the coordinators, try to ensure the consensus-based adoption of this text. The Russian Federation is disappointed that the text fails to include a mention of the report prepared by the Specialized Human Rights Council on women and girls. Reem Al-Saleh, the Special Rapporteur. We are convinced that today, women and girls are increasingly held hostage to neoliberal approaches. The proponents of those approaches find it very much more interesting to fight for the right to wave rainbow flags on the street and they find it less interesting to take action to address the root causes of gender-based violence. We are convinced that the inclusion of references to the aforementioned report would make the resolution even more timely and action-oriented. Furthermore, it is our hope that, in the context of the UN's work to optimize its activities, the coordinators in negotiations on draft resolutions going forward will continue the positive trend that was set, namely deleting passages that don't have any direct bearing on the declared topic of the document. The Russian Federation views any mentions of gender and derivative terms in U.N. documents exclusively in the context of males and females. Furthermore, our country disassociates ourselves from the consensus on paragraphs that contain references to the phrase "multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination." I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [34:34]: Thank you. I have Malaysia to be followed by Denmark and Burkina Faso. Malaysia, the floor is yours. Malaysia [34:42]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Malaysia extends its appreciation to Indonesia and the Philippines for their continued leadership in tabling this important resolution. We also value the constructive process led by the co-facilitators, which have paved the way for the successful adoption of the resolution today. Malaysia remains committed to promoting and protecting the rights of women migrant workers. The Government of Malaysia continues to put in place programmes aimed at safeguarding their well-being. In this spirit and consistent with our long-standing position on this issue, Malaysia is pleased to vote in favour of the resolution. However, Malaysia notes that the term "multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination" is featured in preamble paragraph 32 and operative paragraph 2 of the resolution. In this regard, we wish to put on record that Malaysia's interpretation of the state term will be based on its national laws, values, and customs, and does not include any concepts that are inconsistent with the existing international human rights architecture. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [35:36]: Thank you. Queue to follow to Denmark. Denmark · EU [35:40]: Thank you, Chair. I have the honor to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member states. Let me start by thanking the Philippines and Indonesia for the transparent and constructive conduct of the negotiations. Your openness to dialogue and finding solutions is well noted and appreciated. The EU is committed to improving the working conditions of migrant workers, including by eradicating all forms of forced labor and exploitation. We are committed to protecting migrant workers, including women, from violence, trafficking in persons, or other forms of exploitation or abuse and discrimination, as well as those who are victims of these violations. We support migrant workers in third countries, especially women and their communities, to defend their rights, report, seek justice and organize for advocacy. The European Union was one of the many delegations that had hoped to see more language in the text on, among other things, preventing and eliminating all forms of sexual and gender-based violence and providing access to sexual and reproductive health care services. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [36:52]: Thank you. I give the floor to Burkina Faso, to be followed by Libya and Nigeria. Burkina Faso, the floor is yours. Burkina Faso [37:02]: Thank you, Chair. Chair, I have the honour of delivering this statement, explanation of position, on behalf of Burundi, Cameroon, and my own country, Burkina Faso. Our delegation's wish, first of all, to highlight our constant commitment in support of women migrant workers and our support aimed at preventing and eliminating all forms of violence against them. We recognize the importance of concrete, balanced, and universally accepted measures to improve the situation of migrant women all over the world. However, we wish to highlight our regret as regards the inclusion in the adopted text of non-consensual terms and cross-sexing intersectional forms of discrimination. We disagree with this concept and discrimination here in this context is not recognized internationally nor is it enshrined in our legislation and public policies and therefore we would highlight the need for us to be restricted to consensual language agreed by all member states. In addition, our delegation wish to highlight that we understand the term gender as referring exclusively to men and women as biological sexes in accordance with Annex 4 of the Fourth International Conference on Women. Any interpretation beyond this understanding cannot be applied to our states. We therefore reiterate our intention to continue working internationally to strengthen the protection for female migrant workers within the national legal frameworks and the sociocultural background of our countries and universally agreed norms. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [38:52]: Thank you. Libya, the floor is yours. Libya [38:54]: Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Chair. First of all, we wish to thank Indonesia and the Philippines and their coordinators, because they defend us from discrimination against women migrant workers. We have voted in favour because we believe that this is an extremely important question, and we are convinced the protection of all vulnerable individuals, and especially women migrant workers is an extremely important issue. We must combat all forms of violence and discrimination that women migrant workers may face. This is a principle that we hold very dear in Libya. We are in favor of human rights and human rights based approaches. Chair, we wish to place on the record that our position can in no way be understood as a change in our position regarding the resolution of the GA 73/169. We have not voted in favour for reasons that we have expressed at the time when that resolution was adopted. In terms of the Global Migration Compact and items 8 and 18 of the preamble and paragraph 10 of this instrument, the management of migration is a state prerogative. Each sovereign state has the right to make decisions as regards the adoption of legislation and ensuring migration on their territory, including regular, irregular, legal or illegal migration. My country therefore has reservations as regards the multiple intersecting forms of discrimination in paragraph 43 of the preamble and paragraph for of the document itself, this is non-consensual language and may be interpreted in a way that runs counter to our legislation and our sociocultural values. By way of conclusion, Chair, Libya reaffirms its commitment to international cooperation and the importance of respecting all fundamental rights of migrants, including women migrants in accordance with our national legislation and international agreements. I thank you, Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [41:52]: Thank you. I give the floor to Nigeria, to be followed by Hungary and then Zambia. Nigeria, the floor is yours. Nigeria [42:00]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. My delegation thanks the facilitator for their hard work and underscores the importance of this resolution in strengthening protections for women migrant workers, who remain among the most vulnerable groups globally. Nigeria voted in favor of the resolution. However, we regret the inclusion of the non-consensual term multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination. We do not accept any interpretation that introduces categories of discrimination that are not internationally agreed or that are not recognized under Nigeria's national law and policies. Nigeria also retrace that our understanding of the term gender is limited to men and women as biological males and females. This aligns with Annex 4 of the Beijing Platform for Action, Article 3 of the Rome Statute, and the Nigeria's domestic legal framework. I thank you, Mr. Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [42:53]: Thank you. Hungary, the floor is yours. Hungary [42:57]: Mr. Chair, Hungary aligns itself with the statement made by the European Union. Hungary reaffirms its commitment to international human rights law, including when enacting and implementing national legislation in the area of migration and protecting. The human rights of all persons within Hungary's jurisdiction. We are committed to protecting the human rights of all women. As well as to protecting women migrant workers from violence, exploitation, abuse and discrimination. In this vein, we welcome the important focus of this year's. Text on the digital sphere, especially with the emphasis on violence amplified by the use of technology, including online harassment. Abuse. We recall, however, that Hungary voted against the Global Compact for Safe, Regular and Orderly Migration and does not. Take part in its implementation either. Therefore, we dissociate ourselves from all paragraphs mentioning the GCM and the IMRF in the text. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [43:50]: Thank you. I give the floor to Gambia, to be followed by Senegal and Colombia. Gambia, the floor is yours. Gambia [43:58]: Thank you, Chair. The Gambia welcomes the adoption of this resolution, which offers a springboard for deeper reflection. In this spirit, The Gambia emphasizes the necessity for united and coordinated action. We advocate for the implementation of a comprehensive approach that prioritizes international cooperation, bringing together all relevant stakeholders to address the challenges faced by migrant women. A strong and effective criminal justice response must complement these efforts, ensuring that perpetrators of violence are held accountable and that justice serves as a deterrent to future offenses. These measures are crucial in supporting the development and execution of effective policies, which form the foundation for mobilizing proactive steps towards the elimination of violence against migrant women. It is our considered position that violence against migrant women and girls diminishes us all, but the movement to end it inspires us all. As a country, we continue to hold the view that ending violence against women generally enhances opportunities for empowerment and assertiveness towards equality. In this period, we call for the protection of migrant women in both areas of origin, transit and destination in international borders, and the strengthening of access to digital technology. Every migrant woman deserves to work in safe environments where their dignity is respected and enhanced. The high level of commitment shown here today is hugely encouraging for future collaborative work and engagement. For these reasons, we continue to call for placing the needs of survivors at the center, while recognizing the need for designing a global policy to complement existing efforts for successful prevention and response programs. While we wish to put it on record that The Gambia regrets the inclusion of the non-consensual term, multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination in this text, The Gambia reiterates that it does not align to any interpretation that includes categories of discrimination that are not internationally agreed or that are not recognized in our national laws and policies. In conclusion, let me assure you that the Gambia is a committed partner in the effort to protect migrant women. We will not relent until we have delivered the change migrant women and girls demand and deserve. I thank you, Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [45:56]: Thank you. Senegal, the floor is yours. Senegal [46:02]: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. My delegation would like to thank the co-facilitators and reaffirm our commitment to crafting more inclusive societies better prepared to tackle immigration issues. Thus, we voted for the resolution. Setting aside reflections on migration policies, migrant workers' rights must be fully recognized. It's essential to recognize that the defense of their human dignity entails and the protection of their rights is our collective responsibility, even though they continue to face violence, abuse, and exploitation. Senegal has ratified the International Convention on the Rights of all Migrant Workers and the Members of their Families, followed by the adoption of a national strategy grounded in the recognition of the rights of migrants. And we also have laws buttressing the rights of women at work. We've taken measures such as revising our labor code. In order to ensure non-discrimination, we've also adopted a framework to protect pregnant women. Senegal also encourages the portability of social rights through agreements with destination countries to ensure that migrant workers can protect their rights that they've acquired. Nonetheless, Senegal would like to express its reservations about the use of the term multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination, which does not enjoy consensus. We also want to say that the use of the term gender and all related terminology can apply only to the two sexes, male and female, in accordance with Annex 4 of the Fourth World Conference on Women. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [48:00]: Thank you. And now give the floor to Colombia. Colombia [48:03]: Thank you, Chair. Colombia is grateful for the presentation of this draft resolution and for the work done by the co-facilitators during its negotiation. For my delegation, all issues linked to the rights of women and girls, gender equality and the empowerment of women in all of their diversity occupies a key place in our foreign policy and as part of our multilateral commitments. In this regard, we recognize the value of this resolution that comprehensively addresses intersectional challenges across migration and gender. To both of these dimensions require coordinated responses that are human rights based and sensitive to the needs of women who mobile. We regret that despite the efforts to build a broad consensus, the text has been submitted to a vote. Colombia would have preferred the resolution to be adopted by consensus as part of our abiding commitment to protect migrant workers and in relation to the various frameworks aimed at defending them against violation and discrimination. Calling for a vote is not only unfortunate, it sends the wrong signal as regards the importance the community should give to these topics. Colombia voted in favor because this reaffirms our sustained commitment to gender equality, the empowerment of women, and the promotion of women's rights in all contexts, including those marked by human mobility. Our country will continue to drive migration policies and international protection actions that should incorporate an intersectional approach to ensuring that no woman or girl is left behind. We reiterate our position to work constructively with all Member States to make progress towards more inclusive, cooperative and human dignity-based and human rights-based approaches. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [50:03]: Thank you. With that, the Committee has now concluded its consideration of agenda item 26A. I now invite the Committee to turn to its consideration of agenda item 66, Report of the Human Rights Council, in order to take action on draft resolution A/C.3/80/L/24, entitled Report of the Human Rights Council. I would like to inform the Committee that draft resolution L/24 contains no program budget implications. With that, Let me give the floor to the distinguished representative of Mauritania on behalf of the Group of African States. The floor is yours. Mauritania · Africa Group [50:51]: Thank you, Chair. The Third Committee, as the main committee of the General Assembly responsible for the human rights issues, among other, is significantly impacted by the work of the Human Rights Council. This is widely acknowledged and respected as a critical, important relationship in the multilateral systems. The Human Rights Council is a subsidiary organ of the General Assembly, is empowered to make decisions on questions related to human rights, and even refer the outcomes of the decision to the General Assembly. In this vein, it's my great honor to introduce the annual and procedural resolution on the General Assembly. The resolution is meted on the spirit of strengthening the cooperation relation between the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council. This was emphasized in the last year's resolution on the working method of the Third Committee, which also worked within this dynamic. As such, this year's resolution has additional paragraph to recall this resolution within the context of the report of the Human Council. The African group recognized the value of the resolution on the working method, resolution The interaction with the Human Rights Council lies in its entirety as opposed to selective aspect, albeit an important aspect. We therefore wish to make an oral revision to the text and its stance in document 380/L.24 by removing or deleting operative paragraph 2 that read as follows. encouraged member states to streamline the requests for interactive dialogues with the Third Committee. With this oral revision, the group has worked constructively to strengthen and underline the spirit of this resolution to institutionalize the respect of the General Assembly for the Human Rights Council. That is the spirit in which the African group always submits the resolution on the report of human rights. We have read the respective position on the principle of the resolution, but that negates the point at its core. The resolution in the line, the General Assembly respects and accepts the decision-making capacity of the Human Rights Council as a subsidiary organ of the General Assembly, further recognized that is the role of General Assembly, therefore it's third committee to discuss the work of the Council. Mr. Chair, the African Group would like to reiterate their gratitude to all countries for their support and will continue to look forward to engaging with the delegation to reach common understanding of the important issue. It's also inferred that a vote has been called on this. We respect the position of all delegations to vote accordingly, and we encourage the delegation to support the resolution as. 3rd Committee · Chair [53:58]: Thank you, Mauritania, for the statement. I now give the floor to the Secretary. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [54:03]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. In addition to those delegations listed on the L document, the delegation of Afghanistan has joined as a sponsor of draft resolution L24 as already revised, and the delegation of the Sudan has withdrawn its sponsorship of the draft resolution. If any other countries wish to co-sponsor draft resolution L24 as orally revised, please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see no requests. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [54:40]: Thank you. I record that what has been requested on draft resolution L24 entitled Report of the Human Rights Council as orally revised. Any delegation which is to make a general statement or explanation of vote before the vote in connection with draft resolution L24 has only five minutes. I see the Islamic Republic of Iran to be followed by Denmark and Sudan. Iran, the floor is yours. Iran (Islamic Republic of) [55:09]: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. It's a kind of a point of order. We would like through you to request delegation of Mauritania to reread the paragraph that they have already revised in the meeting. Thank you very much. 3rd Committee · Chair [55:25]: Mauritania, the floor is yours if you wish to go ahead. Mauritania · Africa Group [55:45]: So the paragraph is encourages member states to streamline requested for interactive dialogue with the third committee. Deleted. 3rd Committee · Chair [56:00]: Thank you. Iran, do you have any additional statement to make? Right. Denmark, the floor is yours. Denmark · EU [56:11]: Thank you, Chair. I have the honor to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member states. Let me start by underlining our strong support for the important work of the Human Rights Council and appreciation for its annual report. However, we maintain our longstanding position that this annual resolution is both procedurally unnecessary and incorrect, disregarding what was established in the review of the Human Rights Council. This resolution creates a false impression that the Third Committee has power to overrule decisions made by the HRC. which is not the case. The HRC is a subsidiary organ of the General Assembly and is independent from the Third Committee. We are disappointed that the resolution before us continues to disregard this basic fact. This is also one of the reasons why the EU Member States supported the amendments submitted by Mexico, as we believe the new elements introduced this year exceeded the thematic and procedural scope of the resolution and would have been an undue attempt for the Third Committee to seek to impose, steer or limit the work of the Human Rights Council, an independent UN body, which would set a dangerous precedent for the future. We thank the African Group for the oral revision introduced to the text, which we believe is a reasonable and acceptable way forward. We are fully committed to engage actively and constructively in the follow-up to the 3C working methods resolution, including on the proposed elements for a joint roadmap that has been shared by the Bureau, as well as other elements to address the growing workload of the Committee, also taking into account the ongoing work in Geneva to streamline and rationalize the work of the Human Rights Council led by Spain and Thailand as well as the UN 80 initiative addressing this redundancy of adopting this resolution in 3c as well as duplicating the general debate on the Human Rights Council report that takes place in the GA would be an efficient clear and logical way to address the concerns with the growing workload of the third committee we hope that EU Member States will consider this unnecessary and unjustified duplication of work within the context of the ongoing negotiations on a resolution on the working methods of the Third Committee and before a resolution under this agenda item is proposed in the future. In line with our principled position that this resolution is procedurally unnecessary and incorrect, EU Member States will still abstain in the vote on this resolution. Thank you, Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [58:37]: Thank you. Next will be Sudan, to be followed by Belarus and the United States. Sudan, the floor is yours. Sudan [58:49]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We would like to explain our vote before the vote on this resolution entitled Report of the Human Rights Council, contained in the L24 document. the Sudanese army has carried out its constitutional obligations, namely preserving unity, sovereignty, and independence of our country while protecting citizens. The Sudanese armed forces are doing this while the Rapid Support Forces militia has continued its aggression with their regional sponsors, they've continued to flout international law. This obligation is incumbent on our army, and we flatly reject what was contained in the Human Rights Council report, which is contained in the report A/C.3/80/L.24/Add.1. The aforementioned militias have committed serious violations of the and war crimes. These include genocide, forcible displacement, besieging, using hunger and destruction of infrastructure. There's also a human tragedy and systematic violations committed in El Fasher. These are exacerbating the suffering of the Sudanese people. who have endured a siege of that city for over 18 months. Mr. Chairman, the Human Rights Council decision 54/18 on investigations on violations in Sudan is politicized and doesn't consider the sovereignty of Sudan or the independence of its institutions. or it doesn't consider the current situation. It also doesn't pay any attention to cooperation between the Sudanese institutions and various mechanisms. Sudan, despite various human rights mechanisms operating, regardless of the situation, we've continued to cooperate with all stakeholders. We did not provide more details because we explained our position in Geneva during the adoption of the resolution in October at the Human Rights Council. Our position will be to abstain from this document, L24, the report of the Human Rights Council. And we will not be sponsoring this resolution. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:01:39]: Thank you. Give the floor to Belarus. Belarus [1:01:43]: Mr. Chairman, distinguished colleagues, the Human Rights Council was and remains a key platform for the discussion of all aspects of human rights. According to its mandate, the Council is to engage in genuine matters of human rights which substantially impact the quality of people's lives, and it should strengthen capacity building of states in this area. However, the Council continues to stray ever farther from the principles of universality, impartiality, objectivity, and non-selectivity. It sometimes even engages in brazen harassment of states along political lines. Selective country-specific topics are only one of the elements of the instrumentalization of human rights for political reasons, which undermines the trust in the Council and its decisions. We've seen a paradoxical situation when the Council, which supposedly fights repression in certain countries, has turned into a repressive organ itself. The abuse of human rights issues goes hand in hand with unilateral coercive measures, which are at odds with international law. And here, what we're encountering is another paradox. On the one hand, the work of the HRC is actively used to substantiate illegitimate sanctions policies seeking to intervene at every turn in the domestic affairs of independent states. But on the other hand, the Council has continued to ignore the negative impact of UCMs on human rights. and these UCMs, which are introduced by a group of countries arbitrarily, supposedly considering the decisions of the Council. We regret to note that over the last year, the Council has not taken on board any, has not engaged in any effective actions to fight politicization and double standards, the imbalance in the attention given to various categories of rights. And they haven't counted the non-objective assessment of human rights situations or the excessive overburdening of selective country-specific topics and the increase in confrontation among states. Colleagues, we have always been committed to improving the human rights situation. We've always been open for mutually respectful, constructive dialogue, seeking to achieve genuine progress in this area. And we welcome all initiatives that seek to promote and protect economic, social, and cultural rights in order to eliminate inequality both within states and among states. However, we will never agree with the approaches imposed on us through the Council. These are approaches that involve coercion and pressure and entail intervention into our domestic affairs and lead to the degradation of state sovereignty. This is precisely why the report of the Human Rights Council on its work for 2025 is unacceptable for our country and we're forced to vote against it. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:04:41]: Thank you. I have the United States to be followed by Nigeria and Israel. The United States. United States of America [1:04:49]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its objection to resolutions such as this one that are effectively performative and wasteful of UN resources. Third Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, this resolution continues to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the UN's core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has grown beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Accordingly, the United States will vote no on this resolution. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we hope to work together in advance of next year's session of the Third Committee to make it more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position that will be posted on our mission's website for more information. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:05:43]: Thank you. Nigeria, the floor is yours. Nigeria [1:05:48]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. My delegation expresses its support for the resolution tabled by Mauritania on behalf of Group of African States. Our support is rooted in the longstanding and principled position of the African group, which seeks to preserve the institutional integrity and effectiveness of U.N. bodies. We affirm that this committee is the rightful and appropriate forum within the General Assembly to consider and discuss the report of the Human Rights Council. This committee, dedicated to social, humanitarian and cultural issues, possesses the requisite mandate, expertise and historical precedence to engage meaningfully within the Council's findings and recommendations. Any attempt to dilute or divert this function undermines the very structure and efficiency of our human rights architecture. We must ensure the seamless integration of human rights deliberations into the broader work of General Assembly assists our duty. The resolution put forward by the African Group is a crucial affirmation of institutional clarity and integrity of Human Rights Council's work. We implore all members to join us in supporting this resolution. A strong vote in favor would demonstrate our collective commitment to multilateralism, uphold the established working method of this body, and ensure that the vital work of Human Rights Council receive the serious and dedicated consideration it deserves within the General Assembly. I thank you, Mr. Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:07:06]: Thank you. Kate, to follow, Israel. Israel [1:07:11]: Thank you, Chair. Israel remains steadfast in its commitment to the protection and promotion of human rights for all. We believe that human rights system guided by its founding principles of universality, objectivity, and non-selectivity, a system that upholds the dignity and rights of every individual free from discrimination and politicization. However, We cannot ignore a troubling reality. The Human Rights Council has, for far too long, strayed from the principles of impartiality and integrity that it was meant to embody. Instead of serving as a universal forum for the protection of human rights, the Council has become a platform where political agendas overshadow and distort its purpose. The current liquidity crisis facing the United Nations is a wake-up call. And the Human Rights Council stands out as a mechanism in particular need of the reform, especially regarding its politicized and disproportionate treatment of Israel. From the biased treatment, from the biased permanent item seven on the council's agenda, the only item which focuses on a particular situation through the so-called database, which is an unprecedented and discriminatory mechanism. The open-ended Commission of Inquiry with its perpetual mandate, and the endless statements and reports by special rapporteurs and mandate holders, all these represent a systematic and institutional singling out of Israel within the Human Rights Council. It is time to end the Council's disproportionate fixation on Israel, in addition to selecting its members specifically for their predetermined antagonistic positions towards Israel. Israel called a vote on this resolution as we have strong reservations on the ability of the Human Rights Council to provide impartial and objective recommendations. Until the way of the Human Rights Council changes the bias and unbalanced approach towards Israel, we intend to vote no on this resolution, and we encourage all member states to do the same. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:09:15]: Thank you. With that, The Committee will now commence with the process of voting on draft resolution L.24 as orally revised. In accordance with rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [1:09:46]: The Committee is now voting on draft resolution L.24 entitled Report of the Human Rights Council, as orally revised. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:10:21]: The result of the vote is as follows: 112 in favour, 7 against, and we have 59 abstentions. Draft resolution AC.3.A0.L.24 as revised is adopted. Any delegation which to make explanation of vote, general statement. Cuba, the floor is yours. Cuba [1:10:57]: Cuba is committed to the promotion and protection of all rights for all people and to the efforts of the Council in that direction. As a member of the Council, we will continue to contribute modestly to this cause by giving priority to the spirit of cooperation and dialogue and opposing selective practices, a punitive approach and politicization. My delegation is grateful to the African Group for introducing draft resolution L.24, which takes note of the report of the Human Rights Council. The Council is a subsidiary body of the General Assembly. By virtue of resolution 70/251, given that the agenda item entitled Human Rights Council report is under the work and the remit of the Third Committee, it is down to this Committee to give a view on the report. That is the purpose of the resolution that we have just adopted and that Cuba has historically supported. Report A51 and its addendum includes important elements as regards the work of the Council over the past year. We have approved reports on matters of great relevance and importance, especially with the Global South, and so approving resolutions on developing countries. has shown selectivity and double standards continues to be present in the work of the Council, given that nothing has been said or done in relation to the human rights violations by or in highly developed countries. And so the vote in favor of my delegation in relation to L24 should not be interpreted as an endorsement or any kind of recognition of the selective discriminatory and politically motivated practices against developing countries that do not enjoy our consent and that have a real impact on the ground in the context of a financial crisis. These mandates involve multi-million dollar budgets without any real results. We reject mandates and resolutions adopted by the resolution against Belarus, Burundi, Eritrea, Iran, Nicaragua, Russia, the DPRK, Sri Lanka, Sudan, South Sudan, and Venezuela that feature in the report and its addenda. There is no other path but dialogue and international cooperation if we truly want to make progress in the area of human rights. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:13:47]: Thank you. Now I have Nicaragua to be followed by Eritrea and Liechtenstein. Nicaragua, the floor is yours. Nicaragua [1:13:58]: Thank you, Chair. Nicaragua is grateful to the delegation of Mauritania for introducing draft resolution in relation to the Human Rights Council report. Nicaragua reaffirms that the promotion, protection and achievement of human rights that this organization should deliver can only be carried out in full respect of the identity, sovereignty and historic specificities of each state and on the basis of the principles of universality, impartiality, objectivity and non-selectivity and also on the basis of constructive dialogue and genuine cooperation without politicization or double standards. In this regard, Nicaragua firmly rejects manipulation and instrumentalization of human rights for ends counter to this spirit, including hegemonic actions aimed at financial and imperialist approaches that are an affront to independence and sovereignty and the right of states to forge their own destiny. The report submitted by the Human Rights Council contains biased elements, including politically motivated resolutions against Nicaragua and the unilateral designation a so-called group of experts. These decisions are against the cooperative principle of the Council and violate the principles that should govern its work. We firmly reject any resolution or mechanism that is partial or or against the national efforts that we have been undertaking to go deeper in structural changes, and this is aimed at guaranteeing significant progress in the voice and enjoyment of human rights of our people, as well as the sustainable development across our entire territory. Our struggle for social justice, equality, and human dignity also obliges us to indicate that these fora should not be used to justify aggressions, such as the illegal unilateral coercive measures imposed against Nicaragua. These represent real and direct violations of the human rights of our population. For the aforementioned reasons, Nicaragua voted against this draft resolution in relation to the report of the Human Rights Council. Chair, we would respectfully request that this explanation of vote be recorded in the official record of the meeting. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:16:12]: Thank you. We give the floor to Eritrea. Eritrea [1:16:18]: Mr. Chair, Eritrea supports this resolution traditionally tabled by our group, the African group, with the conviction that it's imperative to discuss the report of the Human Rights Council as a subsidiary organ of the General Assembly in accordance with resolution 60/251. Eritrea's vote should not be interpreted in any way as an endorsement of the report of the Human Rights Council contained in A/80/53. Eritrea opposes. Any politically motivated mandates and disassociates itself from the part of the report that includes resolution 59/1, entitled "The situation of human rights in Eritrea". This resolution is politically motivated and goes against the mandate of the Council. The mandate to promote human rights in a universal, objective and non-selective manner. I thank him, Mr. Chair. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:17:18]: now Liechtenstein, to be followed by El Salvador and Uruguay. Liechtenstein, the floor is yours. Liechtenstein [1:17:25]: Mr. Chair, I have the honor to deliver the statement on behalf of Australia, Canada, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, and my own country, Liechtenstein, seven member states that are strong supporters of the Human Rights Council and actively contribute to its work. Since its creation in 2006, the Human Rights Council has established itself as an authoritative voice in the promotion and protection of human rights, including through the universal periodic review process, its body of special procedures, as well as other independent mechanisms, and through its close engagement with civil society representatives and human rights defenders. With the adoption of resolution 65/281, the General Assembly reached an understanding on institutional arrangements between the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly, including its main committees. We express our disappointment that the resolution before us continues to disregard this understanding, as have its predecessors, by asking the Third Committee to take note of the report of the Council. It undermines the Council's mandate, which we regret. The newly added reference to resolution 79/192 is also problematic in this case, as it does not respect existing institutional arrangements which we have all agreed to. It is now upon the bureaus of the Human Rights Council and the Third Committee, in consultation with the wider membership, to address working methods and ensure that the work of both bodies remains effective and relevant while avoiding duplication. We are grateful that the facilitators have listened to the concerns expressed by a cross-regional group of member states and have revised the resolution before adoption today. In light of our ongoing procedural reservations, however, we were not in a position to support the resolution once again. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:19:06]: Thank you. And I give the floor to El Salvador. El Salvador [1:19:12]: Chair, our delegation A priority involves driving and supporting any efforts aimed at improving the efficiency and efficacy of the General Assembly and its main committees. Under this vision, we constructively and proactively participate in the process of the negotiation of resolution A/79/192 on the working methods of the committee, in full harmony with our governing principle, which is to focus on procedural issues and to respect existing mandates. Part of the spirit of resolution A/RES/79/192 is specifically addressing duplication and improving the efficacy of the committee. However, we once again find us engaged in a vicious circle. The Third Committee is adopting a resolution that takes note of the Human Rights Council report, despite the fact that paragraph 5j of resolution 60/251, created the Council and established its independence, normative authority and competencies provides that the Council should submit an annual report to the GA. In practice, this mandate is being filled. In fact, the President of the Council submitted their report to the GA on 31 October. And so, the resolution that is being submitted today for consideration is in contradiction of the very spirit of the resolution on the working methods, as it generates Additionally, it's important to highlight that there are already mandates under resolution 79/192 that instruct on other questions the Bureau of the Third Committee and the Human Rights Council to coordinate a calendar of interactive dialogue together with the special mandate holders, the presidents and chairs of the body created pursuant to the treaty, in order to They also address what should be done within each session, which should be submitted to all of the membership during the 80th session. Both bureaus have been working together and are working on a proposal. And so the new language proposed refers to resolution 79/192. is redundant and counterproductive because it blends together two processes that relate to two distinct mandates. It is not down to the Third Committee to instruct nor to go beyond its remit. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:21:53]: Thank you. Next, I have Uruguay, to be followed by the Islamic Republic of Iran, Brazil, Colombia, and Sri Lanka. Uruguay, you have the floor. Uruguay [1:22:06]: Thank you, Chair. Uruguay wishes to take this opportunity to explain our positive vote in relation to the resolution presented by the African Group. We voted in favour because we fully support the Human Rights Council as a body of the United Nations promoted for ensuring promotion and protection of all human rights and the fundamental freedoms of all individuals. We have been active observers and members of the Council since its creation in 2006, and we are candidates for the period 2027 through 2029. In this regard, we wish to reaffirm that resolution 79/192, constituting the Human Rights Council, clearly states that this is a subsidiary body of the GA, not the Third Committee. This is highlighted in resolution 51/192 in relation to the review. We regret that this rule continues to be ignored. by other delegations through procedural actions that are not necessary. Finally, we wish to thank the African Group for their oral statement, and we are open to constructive dialogue that helps us achieve consensus in relation to Mexico's and Uruguay's amendments. We would have preferred removal of the reference to resolution 79/192, but its incorporation should not constitute a precedent. We hope to achieve greater efficiency in the work of this committee and the Human Rights Council, reduce duplication and strengthen coordination across Geneva and New York with strict adherence to the mandate the institutionality and the independence of the Human Rights Council and the leadership that this body should have in relation to any mandates established by its own resolutions. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:24:02]: Thank you. I give the floor to the Islamic Republic of Iran. Iran (Islamic Republic of) [1:24:06]: The floor is yours. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I take the floor to express my delegation's explanation of vote after voting on the resolution on the report of the Human Rights Council contained in document A/80/L.24. We highlight the Human Rights Council's role in promoting and protecting human rights within its mandate. However, we vigorously object to the exploitative politicization of human rights, which undermines the Council's integrity, impartiality, and effectiveness. The inclusion of country-specific resolutions in the Council's report raises serious concerns, particularly given the Universal Periodic Review mechanism has proven success in addressing human rights issues fairly and equally for all nations. Regrettably, some specific countries employ confrontational approaches, prioritizing naming and shaming over constructive dialogue and cooperation, exploiting such a platform and jeopardizing the Council's credibility. In light of the above, the Islamic Republic of Iran voted abstain for the whole resolution since it did not concur with the parts of the report of the Human Rights Council pertaining to country-specific resolutions and ensuing mechanisms and mandates related to the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran. I thank you, Mr. Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:25:27]: Thank you. Brazil, you have the floor. Brazil [1:25:33]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Brazil voted in favor of the resolution, bearing in mind the country's active engagement with the Council and its commitment to multilateralism at large. However, we regret the lack of a constructive approach in the process by which the text was presented, given that two new paragraphs were introduced, which bore no relation to the subject matter of the resolution, and in particular, were not open for negotiations, despite broad appeals from numerous delegations. We appreciate and thank the flexibility shown by the facilitators in eliminating one of those paragraphs, and we hope that the new remaining paragraph will not be instrumentalized to restrict the holding of interactive dialogues within the framework of the Third Committee, nor to limit its role in sharing information and promoting highly relevant dialogues on human rights situations. While Brazil is in favor of improving the efficiency of the Third Committee's working methods, this discussion must be conducted in a broad, inclusive, and harmonious manner, free from politicization or fragmentation. The resolution under consideration does not constitute an appropriate forum for such a discussion, either thematically or procedurally. It is worth recalling that the framework for examining the Human Rights Council's report in the Third Committee stems from the establishment of the Council as a subsidiary body of the General Assembly pursuant to resolution 60/251. However, as has been observed, this process has increasingly been used as yet another instrument to politicize the treatment of this issue. reiterate its support for the Council's work, grounded in the principles of impartiality, objectivity, non-selectivity, as well as constructive dialogue and cooperation. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:27:32]: Thank you. Give the floor to Colombia. Colombia [1:27:36]: Chair, my delegation has decided to vote in favour in recognition of the value that we attribute to the work of the Human Rights Council. However, if this Committee wishes to continue taking note of their annual report, we should do so objectively, transparently and without introducing elements that modify the delicate balance of their mandate. In this regard, we wish to express a general reservation. My delegation does not see the value of including even indirect references to the working methods. In our view, these are two distinct processes. The resolution on the HRC report is not the appropriate vehicle to mention issues relating to streamlining or procedural issues. The purpose, in accordance with our consolidated practice, is exclusively to receive the report and take note of its recommendations without adding mandates or reinterpreting its institutional framework. While we recognize that the HRC is a subsidiary body of the GA, it has administrative and functional independence that should be fully respected. Its functioning is governed by resolution 5/1. and any modification to its methods should be done within the framework of the appropriate institutional rules. We recognize the shared concern for the increasing workload both in Geneva and in New York. Nevertheless, we would insist that any reflection on efficiency should be based on objective information and agreed outcomes. And so we voted in the end in favor because it is essential that we preserve the technical nature of this resolution and also support the report. We also wish to leave on the record our reservations in relation to any references that could mix up this with any issues relating to working methods and other matters. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:29:41]: Thank you. I give the floor to Sri Lanka, to be followed by Costa Rica, Venezuela and the Dominican Republic. Sri Lanka, the floor is yours. Sri Lanka [1:29:57]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. My delegation thanks the African Group for introducing the resolution. The Government of Sri Lanka is fully cognizant of the responsibility that accompanies the unprecedented mandate it has received from the people from all segments of the society, and is committed to fulfilling the aspirations of a just, fair and prosperous country. We sincerely believe that the external action will only serve to create divisions, thereby jeopardizing the genuine and tangible national processes that have already been set in motion. On 8 September, the interactive dialogue on Sri Lanka was held in the Human Rights Council. Addressing the Council, the Honourable Minister of Foreign Affairs, Foreign Employment and Tourism of Sri Lanka stated that Sri Lanka does not accept the external evidence gathering mechanism set up pursuant to resolution 51/1 under the name Sri Lanka Accountability Project at a time when the Government is continuing to strengthen the domestic security institutions and roll out new national processes process based on its genuine commitment to reconciliation and human rights in the interests of our own people. For this reason, Sri Lanka rejected the resolution 60/L.1/Rev.1 presented to the Human Rights Council. Mr. Chair, within a short time, the Government of Sri Lanka has taken a series of tangible and decisive steps to end divisive politics, combat corruption, and advance reconciliation and human rights, including strengthening of the domestic reconciliation mechanisms, such as the Office on Missing Persons, Office for Reparations, and Office for National Unity and Reconciliation, undertaking a process to set up a truth and reconciliation commission, and a number of confidence-building measures. As reiterated by the Honourable Minister, the Government is committed to advancing accountability through credible domestic processes. Therefore, it is only fair that Sri Lanka be allowed to seize the historic opportunity, the momentum identified by the High Commissioner for Human Rights, to advance the rights of its own people through a national process. I thank you, Mr. Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:32:15]: Thank you. Costa Rica, you have the floor. Costa Rica [1:32:21]: Costa Rica has a firm commitment to the international human rights system and recognizes the value of the work of the Human Rights Council and the annual presentation of their report to the GA. The Council has its own mandate and its structure to answer directly to the GA. This design, this institutional design, guarantees its autonomy in its work and protects the integrity of this body within the UN system. In this regard, we wish to highlight that it is not up to the Third Committee to assess adoption of the report, given that the Council is a subsidiary body of the General Assembly and acts with functional independence in relation to this Committee. All we do is take note of the report. We should not address its thematic or procedural issues. These distinct processes and their incorporation into this resolution is not necessary. In application of the resolution of the methods of work of the Third Committee, there is a roadmap and this was presented to the bureaus of the Third Committee and to that of the Human Rights Council, and these bodies will analyze and implement them as necessary. The Third Committee does not have the powers to guide, limit or influence the work of an independent body such as the Human Rights Council. Trying to advance in this direction could lead to an undesirable precedent. And for these reasons, Costa Rica has abstained. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:33:59]: Thank you. Venezuela, you have the floor. Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) [1:34:04]: Thank you, Chair. Venezuela is grateful to the delegation of Mauritania for introducing L20 for behalf of the African group on the HRC report. Aware of the growing importance, as we are, of this body at the current juncture, at a time of major global challenges, including the proliferation of exceptionalist, racist, isolationist, and warlike tendencies, as well as the growing politicization of human rights, in addition to the negative impact of UCM. Venezuela's contribution to the human rights system has always been aimed at strengthening institutionality, as aware as we are of the many different threats and interests in this body. and we want to see a truly democratic, impartial, and a sense of dialogue in this body, amongst other things. And for this reason, we reject the imposition of mechanisms imposed without the consent of the Venezuelan state, such as the HRC resolution 5436 that manipulates human rights, creating partial inconsistent approaches without any kind of methodological rigor, including self-appointed sources of third and fourth levels together with propagandistic pamphlets. So this is rejected by us for this type of mandate when there is no consensus. For this sort of thing, it seems that there is no liquidity crisis. But for other things, defending the Charter or denouncing unilateral coercive measures, there is a lack of resources. Venezuela ratifies its conviction to promote and protect human rights. We will continue to work in favor of a progressive and robust system of the United Nations without distinction on generations, on the principles of universality, objectiveness, non-politicization, non-selectivity, and non-confrontation on the basis of dialogue, transparency, and cooperation. And this will be part of our efforts to move us closer to the goals and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and in defence of it. I thank you, Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:36:46]: Thank you. I see no further requests for the floor. With that, the Committee has now concluded its consideration of agenda item 66. I now invite the committee to resume its consideration of agenda item 70, rights of peoples to self-determination, in order to take action on two draft resolutions. I first invite the committee to turn to draft resolution A/C.3/A/26, entitled the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. like to inform the Committee that draft resolution L.26 contains no program budget implications. With that, I would like to give the floor to the distinguished representative of Egypt on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. The floor is yours. Egypt · OIC [1:37:51]: Thank you, Mr. Chair, distinguished delegates. I have the honor on behalf of the OIC. Group to introduce the draft resolution entitled the right of Palestinian people to self-determination. This resolution, which has long enjoyed consistent and broad support across the United Nations membership, reaffirms a principle that lies at the heart of the UN Charter and the international legal order, the right of all peoples to self-determination. The resolution recalls the relevant international instruments. Including the International Covenants on Human Rights and the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, and is guided by the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of 19 July 2024 on the legal consequences arising from Israel's policies and practices in the occupied Palestinian territory. It underscores the urgency of ending the occupation and of preserving the territorial integrity. Of all the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem. This text is balanced, principled and forward-looking. It simply reaffirms the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including the right to an independent State of Palestine, and calls upon all States, UN bodies and specialized agencies to continue supporting the Palestinian people in the early realization of this right. My delegation wishes to thank all Member States for their constructive engagement and their continued support for the principled, rules-based foundation upon which this resolution stands. We invite all delegations to support the adoption of this draft resolution. We deeply regret that, despite the text being a technical update to an already balanced and principled resolution, a vote has been requested, an action that reflects a selective approach and undermines the right. Of the Palestinian people to self-determination. We therefore respectfully call on all delegations to vote in favour of the draft resolution to reaffirm the broad and consistent support to this topic. I thank you, Mr. Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:39:58]: I thank Egypt on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. With that, let me give the floor to the Committee Secretary. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [1:40:07]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wish to inform that in addition to those delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have also become co-sponsors of draft resolution L26: Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, the Central African Republic, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Denmark, Eritrea, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Honduras, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Namibia, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, and the State of Palestine. If any other countries wish to co-sponsor draft resolution L26, please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see Zimbabwe, the Bahamas, the United Republic of Tanzania, Cote d'Ivoire, Vietnam, who's already a sponsor, and Sierra Leone. I see no further requests. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:42:03]: Thank you. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L.26 entitled "The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination". Any delegation which is to make a general statement or EOV before the vote in connection with draft resolution L.26? I see the State of Palestine to be followed by South Africa and Tunisia. Palestine, the floor is yours. State of Palestine [1:42:30]: Thank you, Mr. Chair, distinguished colleagues. We convey our sincere gratitude to the members of the OIC, the main sponsors of this important draft resolution, and we extend our special thanks to Egypt for the coordination efforts and for submitting the draft on behalf of the group. We are grateful to all the co-sponsors of this for their endorsement and principal support. The right to self-determination of the Palestinian people is a basic condition for achieving a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace in the Middle East, and the violation of it precludes any durable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We appeal to all delegations to vote in favor of this draft resolution as a primary collective step towards achieving shared peace and prosperity in the Middle East. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:43:29]: Thank you. I give the floor to South Africa. South Africa [1:43:33]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The right to self-determination is a wholly understood and established principle. Sadly, the State of Palestine remains occupied and its people still yearning for this freedom and for justice. The people of Palestine continue to be denied their right to exist as a state, despite the many decisions that have been taken in this regard. The right to self-determination must be respected, protected and fulfilled. It is for this reason that South Africa continues to support this resolution, more so given its alignment with the opinions of the International Court of Justice. South Africa maintains the state of Palestine's right to self-determination and maintains the Palestinian state should exist as a two-state solution along the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital, and in line with UN resolutions, including this one. We are concerned that increasing settlements and illegal occupations have been used to prevent the creation of a Palestinian state. We call on all Member States to amplify their support for the Palestinian cause. This requires the departure of Israeli settlements within Palestinian territory that are recognized as a clear violation of the State of Palestine's territorial integrity and right to self-determination. We must reinforce all efforts for the two states and the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including the right the right to the independent state of Palestine. In this regard, South Africa is grateful for the ceasefire that is bringing some respite to the Palestinian people, but remains concerned that sporadic outbreaks of violence, primarily from Israel, persist. We are nonetheless informed and guided by the recent advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice. Overall, the court anchored its findings in the Palestinian people's right to self-determination, affirming that humanitarian and UN operations are essential to upholding this right. Similarly, South Africa maintains that the cornerstone of lasting regional peace and stability lies in the full realization of the Palestinian people's right to self-determination through a just and inclusive process. This accords with South African submissions to the court that Israel may not deny the Palestinian people's inalienable right to territorial integrity and sovereignty of the entirety of the occupied Palestinian territory, including the West Bank and East Jerusalem. This includes, and was recalled by the Court, the prohibition on the forcible transfer and deportation of Palestinians in the occupied Palestinian territory, and the right of Palestinian detainees, as protected persons under international humanitarian law, to be visited by the International Committee of the Red Cross. We further wish to place emphasis on the opinion that underscored that Israel must continue to respect, protect and fulfill the human rights of the population of the occupied Palestinian territories, an obligation which persists even in case of armed conflict and occupation. We will always support this resolution, Mr. Chair, and the principle it reaffirms, and we encourage all delegations to continue to support it. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:46:22]: Thank you. I have Tunisia, to be followed by the United States, Israel, and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Tunisia, the floor is yours. Tunisia [1:46:33]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Tunisia is honored to support the draft resolution on the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. The text reaffirms the fundamental principle of international law and a core purpose of the United Nations. The right to self-determination is firmly anchored on the Charter and international human rights instruments. Its remain is essential for achieving a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace in the Middle East. It also reflects the need to end the occupation and to preserve the territorial unity and integrity of the occupied Palestinian territory. The resolution clearly reaffirms the Palestinian people's right to establish their independent state of Palestine. It calls on all states and all entities of the United Nations system to continue supporting the legitimate and long overdue aspiration. Tunisia will vote in favor, and we encourage all member states to do the same in a spirit of responsibility and respect for international law. I thank you, Mr. Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:47:46]: Thank you. United States, the floor is yours. United States of America [1:47:53]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its objections to resolutions such as this one that are effectively performative and wasteful of UN resources. Third Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, this resolution continues to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the UN's core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. We firmly oppose this resolution as an effort to politicize the work of this committee, which undermines the credibility of the UN. This resolution is the type of performative exercise that fails to improve the lives of our collective citizenry in any meaningful way. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has grown beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste. to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Accordingly, the United States will vote no on this resolution. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we hope to work together in advance of next year's session of the Third Committee to make it more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position that will be posted on our mission's website for more information. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:49:06]: Thank you. I'll give the floor to Israel. Israel [1:49:13]: Thank you, Chair. As a people, the Jewish people, we know the importance of the right to self-determination. Israel has demonstrated its willingness to compromise and make hard sacrifices for peace. Unfortunately, for too long, others have chosen to run a defamation campaign instead of engaging bilaterally. We have seen how every legal term was twisted in order to vilify Israel in our defensive war with Hamas. The October 7th massacre was not resistance and not self-determination. It was a brutal terrorist attack by an organization committed to Israel's destruction. Yet there are delegations in this room who have yet to condemn Hamas or denounce their refusal to recognize Israel's right to exist. Chair. Yesterday, the Security Council fully endorsed President Trump's 20 points plan and the appointment of the Board of Peace. We believe this will lead to peace and prosperity because it insists upon full demilitarization, disarmament, and the de-radicalization of Gaza. Israel extends its hand in peace and prosperity to all of our neighbors. and calling them to normalize relations with Israel and join us in expelling Hamas and its supporters from the region. However, this resolution is nothing more than an attempt to politicize the work of the committee, and we see it as such. We do hope that in future submissions of it, it will be reconsidered in light of current developments. For Israel, a resolution which speaks of territorial unity and contiguity does not promote self-determination. It undermines the sovereign UN member states' territorial integrity and denies the Jewish people of their own right for self-determination, playing in the hands of those who call for our destruction. Israel called a vote on this resolution and will vote no. We urge all member states to do the same. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:51:18]: Thank you. And now I give the floor to the Islamic Republic of Iran. The floor is yours. Iran (Islamic Republic of) [1:51:25]: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. There has been a long-standing denial of the Palestinian people's legitimate right to self-determination in the occupied Palestinian territories. The world has witnessed the brutality of the Israeli regime and its blatant use of force, leading to the killing of thousands of Palestinians, including women, children, the elderly, journalists, and medical workers each day. Iran vehemently condemns such atrocities against the Palestinians and urges the international community to stand up to secure the right of Palestinian people to self-determination. The Israeli adventures in the region have not been limited to the occupied Palestinian territories. In June 2025, as a result of brazen acts of aggression by the United States and the Israeli regime against Iran's sovereignty and territorial integrity, 1,100 Iranian people, including women, children, scientists, and in some cases, entire of a family, innocently lost their lives. It also attacked our critical civilian infrastructure, as well as residential areas and nuclear peaceful facilities, including under the IAEA safeguards, in a blatant violation of the UN Charter and international law. We strongly condemn such atrocities in the region by the Israeli regime, while asking for its accountability. The Charter of the UN enshrines the principle of self-determination and places upon this organization the duty to uphold and respect the rights of all people to freely determine their political future and destiny. With such conviction, Iran reaffirms its principal position that lasting peace and security in the region can only be achieved through the establishment of an independent, sovereign state of Palestine. rooted in the genuine will of its original inhabitants, regardless of their religion, whether Muslim, Jews, or Christians, as would be expressed in a free and inclusive referendum. The Islamic Republic of Iran continues to support Palestinian people in their struggle against occupation and exercising their inalienable right to self-determination. Therefore, the Islamic Republic of Iran strongly supports the draft resolution presented on behalf of the OIC and encourages other delegations to do the same to show their opposition to the Israeli apartheid regime's crimes against humanity and atrocities in the occupied Palestinian territories, as well as the region. I thank you, Mr. Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:53:50]: Thank you. With that, I ask the committee to commence with the process of voting on draft resolution L26. And in accordance with rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are now requested to indicate their votes. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [1:54:17]: The committee is now voting on draft resolution L26 entitled the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:54:52]: The result of the vote is as follows: 164 in favour, and we have seven against, and nine abstentions. Draft resolution AC.3.A0.L.26. is adopted. Any delegation wish to make an EoV or general statement? I see Cuba, to be followed by Chile. Cuba. Cuba [1:55:21]: Senior President, Chair, my delegation is grateful to Egypt for introducing on behalf of the Islamic Cooperation Council this resolution L26 that reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination Cuba is proud to have been a historic sponsor of this. This is a short, a brief resolution. As the United States has repeated many times, there are barely 10 paragraphs. This is nevertheless deep, relevant, and highly insightful. As we are speaking here, men and women and children continue to be condemned to hunger, extermination, and the ethnic cleansing of Israel with the military and other provisions that are guaranteed to the Israeli government by the United States. This is a horrendous breach of the human rights of the Palestinian people, beginning by the most important of these, the right to life and the right to self-determination. We hope that the overwhelming support in favor of two states that we heard at the high-level international conference on the peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine and the implementation of the two-state solution and the historic agreements reached then should be implemented in order to make the right of Palestine to an independent state a reality. At the time of the 80th anniversary of the United Nations Organization, we should increase our efforts and act decisively to give an urgent and effective response to the critical human outlook in the OPT and to support this noble people. The cause of Palestine is not just a remaining outstanding political question. It is a major issue for the multilateral system and a test of the United Nations' ability to really protect the purpose and principles for which it was created. Cuba is in favor of a broad and lasting settlement for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on the basis of a two-state solution that will allow Palestinians to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination. We underscore that any attempt to recover and reconstruct should address the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people and guarantee their right to return and to self-determination. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:57:54]: Thank you. Now, Chile, to be followed by Argentina and Jordan. Chile. Chile [1:58:07]: Chile has voted in favor because this reaffirms a fundamental principle of international law, the right of peoples to self-determination. right is enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, human rights resolutions, and many other resolutions of the Assembly, and is thus a crucial pillar for peace, justice, and coexistence between nations. Our position is clear and coherent. Chile believes the Palestinian people have a right to an independent, viable, and contiguous state that coexists in peace and security with the State of Israel within internationally recognized borders. This vote therefore reflects the historic commitment of Chile to a two-state solution that is negotiated and based on international law. We reiterate that the quest for a just, lasting and sustained peace requires the continued abiding respect for human rights, law, international humanitarian law, and an end of the illegal occupation in accordance with the advisory opinion of the ICJ. Finally, Chile would call on the international community and stakeholders to renew their serious and credible diplomatic relations that help us move towards a definitive response that ensures dignity, security, and development. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:59:20]: Thank you. Argentina, the floor is yours. Argentina [1:59:26]: Thank you. The Argentine Republic wishes to express its full support to the right to self-determination of peoples that have been submitted to colonialism and foreign occupation. This right should be interpreted in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and resolutions 1514, 2625, and other relevant resolutions. of the UN. When there is a rights holder and when there is a people subjected to domination, first, Resolution 1514 should be applied. The right to self-determination first. And so the resolution should be applied in accordance with other relevant resolutions of the GA. and other committees. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:00:21]: Thank you. And now, Jordan, you have the floor. Jordan [2:00:26]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Jordan voted in favor of this resolution. Our vote reflects a simple and enduring truth. The Palestinian people have an alienable right to self-determination, which is a right rooted in the UN Charter, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and international humanitarian law, and in the very foundation of modern international legitimacy. This is not a new principle. It is one of the core pillars upon which the UN was built. The resolution before us reiterates what the international community has affirmed for decades, that the Palestinian people are entitled to determine their political future and establish their independent sovereign state on their national soil, with occupied Jerusalem as its capital on the June 4, 1967 lines. We would like to refer to the ICJ advisory opinion on July 2024, as the court affirmed that Israel's continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, is unlawful, that Israel must end this presence, seize all settlement activity, evacuate settlers, and make full reparations, that all states must not recognize, aid, or assist this illegal situation, and that the United Nations must take the necessary action to end it immediately. Yet, despite the clarity of laws, the situation on the ground continues to deteriorate. Israel possesses in unilateral violations of international law, international law and international humanitarian law, expanding illegal settlements, displacing communities, and altering the demographic and legal character of the occupied land. We cannot dismiss the rise in settler terrorism. the spread of hate speech and dehumanization, and the violence that Palestinians face on a daily basis. Mr. Chair, the wound of Gaza is still open, still bleeding, as it remains one of the gravest humanitarian tragedies of our generation and will continue to haunt us for years to come, as we witnessed a genocide being committed live in front of our eyes. Mr. Chair, I would like to also recall the New York Declaration, supported by 142 states, which overwhelmingly reaffirmed the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, including self-determination. This global consensus reflects what we all know. The issue is not the absence of resolutions or legal clarity or literature. The issue is the absence of compliance by the occupying power. Today's resolution adds to a long and consistent body of UN resolutions, legal opinions, and international instruments that all affirm the same fundamental truth. that Palestinian people to self-determination is undeniable, indivisible, and indispensable to any just and lasting peace. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:03:24]: Thank you. I see no further requests. Let's turn to draft resolution L/3380/L/53 entitled "Universal Realization of the Right of Peoples to Self-Determination". I would like to inform the Committee that draft resolution L.53 contains no programme budget implications. With that, let me give the floor to the distinguished representative of Pakistan. The floor is yours. Pakistan [2:04:00]: I have the honour to introduce, on behalf of my delegation and the co-sponsors, the draft resolution A/C.3/80/L.53, entitled Universal Realization of the Right of Peoples to Self-Determination. The Charter of the United Nations. Places equal rights and self-determination of peoples at the heart of its purposes and principles. This foundational right is reaffirmed in common article 1 of the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and further consolidated through the Declaration on Principles of International Law on Friendly Relations, which confirms self-determination as a norm of customary international law. Chair. The General Assembly Resolution 151415 and numerous subsequent resolutions further elaborate this right. The Human Rights Committee, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, and eminent jurists have also provided authoritative guidance on its scope and implementation. The vast majority of member states represented in this assembly. Achieved independence through the exercise of this inalienable right. Yet, there remain peoples living under foreign occupation who are still denied this fundamental freedom. Their legitimate aspirations are often met with excessive use of force, extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detentions and forced disappearances, communication blockades and attempts at demographic engineering including illegal settlements. Mr. Chair, given the universal nature of this right and its enduring relevance to situations of foreign occupation and alien domination, this resolution has traditionally enjoyed consensus in both the Committee and the General Assembly. We trust that Member States will once again reaffirm this collective commitment by adopting the draft resolution by consensus. We extend our sincere appreciation to. The broad cross-regional group of co-sponsors and request all delegations that have not yet done so to join as co-sponsors before the adoption of the resolution. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:06:43]: I thank Pakistan for the statement. I now give the floor to the Committee Secretary. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [2:06:51]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wish to inform that in addition to those delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have joined as co-sponsors of draft resolution L53. Antigua and Barbuda, Bahrain, Belize, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Congo, Jamaica, Kenya, Lesotho, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Paraguay, Qatar, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, and Uzbekistan. If any other countries wish to join as co-sponsors of draft resolution L.53, please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see Maldives, Gambia, Islamic Republic of Iran, who's already a sponsor, Jordan, who's already a sponsor, Djibouti, Mauritania, Egypt, who's already a sponsor, Guinea, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, who's already a sponsor, Suriname, and Cote d'Ivoire. I see no further requests. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:08:35]: Thank you. Any delegation wishes to make a statement in connection with draft resolution L/53? I see India. The floor is yours. India [2:08:47]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The right to self-determination is a fundamental right for people of non-self-governing territories and trust colonies. This would allow people to freely choose and establish their governance structures. India has played a leading role in the historic struggle for decolonization. and was at the forefront of the movement to secure the right of peoples to self-determination, to enable them to determine their own political status and pursue their economical, social, and cultural development. Mr. Chair, India aptly understands and values the importance of the principle of self-determination. However, the right to self-determination cannot be abused to encourage secession and undermine pluralistic and democratic states. The value and importance of the principle of self-determination should not be misunderstood. The right to self-determination should always be seen in historical perspective. The international community has consistently affirmed that the right of self-determination does not extend to component parts or groups within independent sovereign states. Self-determination in the UN context refers to the rights of people that have been colonized or continue to be under foreign domination. It clearly refers to the peoples of non-self-governing territories or trust territories. The UN has established that the principle of self-determination is a vehicle for decolonization, not a justification for secession or undermining territorial integrity of any member state. Mr. Chair, It is unacceptable that attempts are continuously made at the United Nations and elsewhere to reinvent some of the basic principles of the Charter, such as self-determination, and to apply them selectively for narrow or domestic political ends. To conclude, we would like to reiterate that in States that have now become independent, self-determination is best maintained through regular exercise of democratic choice. I thank you, Mr. Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:10:51]: Thank you. With that, may I take it that the Committee wishes to adopt draft resolution L.53? I hear no objection. It is so decided. Any delegation which wishes to make a statement after the adoption of the draft resolution? Spain, to be followed by Argentina. Spain, the floor is yours. Spain [2:11:26]: Chair, Resolution 1514 of 1960 establishes that the right to self-determination of peoples submitted to a colonial situation coexists with the principle of territorial integrity of states. This implies that there are cases where colonization has initially attacked a state's ability to preserve its territory intact, something that is incompatible with the Charter and the doctrine of this organization. The right to self-determination cannot and should not be used to address colonial situations against the territorial integrity of states. And administering power and the authorities of a colonized territory cannot try to create an illusion that the colonial link has disappeared. the right to self-determination does not override the principle of territorial integrity. We deny that in the case of Gibraltar there is a supposed right to self-determination covered by international law. as supported by resolution 2353 of the GA. The doctrine of this organization recognizes that the colonial situation of Gibraltar gravely impacts the territorial integrity of my country. This is why we have spent decades asking for a solution through dialogue with full respect for the peaceful settlement of disputes based on good faith. This call is also part of the doctrine of the organization as through resolution 2070 Spain and the United Kingdom were invited to begin conversations on this without delay. It's important to highlight that there are still issues with this on the camp of Gibraltar where people have been excluded since the beginning of the 18th century. We are fully ready to take up dialogue between the United Kingdom and Spain. given that we must take into account the interests of the current inhabitants. Let me now refer to what was said by the King. On the 11th of June, a political agreement was determined on the fundamental aspects on the future agreement between the EU. EU and the UK, a historic agreement for the position of my country as regards the sovereignty and jurisdiction over Gibraltar that will provide confidence, legal certainty and stability to the lives of the populations of the camp of Gibraltar and Gibraltar itself. We wish to reiterate once again our invitation to the United Kingdom to undertake dialogue within the framework of the United Nations to put an end to this anachronistic colonial situation that belongs in the past. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:14:27]: Thank you. Give a vote to Argentina. Argentina [2:14:34]: Thank you. The Argentine Republic wishes to express its full support to the right of self-determination of people that have been submitted to foreign occupation or colonial context. This right should be interpreted in accordance with the person principles of the Charter of the United Nations and resolutions 1514, 2225, and the other resolutions of the UN. The self-determination should be applied when there is a rights holder that is entitled to this. This is a people subjected to subjugation domination, foreign occupation as covered by resolution 1514. Without a right holder there is no self-determination, so the resolution that has just been approved should be interpreted in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the GA and the SPDC. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:15:29]: Thank you. Now the exercise, sorry, Um, give the floor to France. France [2:15:40]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We thank Pakistan for its work on the resolution on the universal… Implementation of the right of peoples to self-determination. France reaffirms its commitment to the right of peoples to self-determination, which is a fundamental principle of international law and one enshrined in the United Nations Charter, as well as in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. France, however, wants to clarify its position about certain elements of this text. This resolution indicates in OP 1 that the universal right to peoples to self-determination is a fundamental condition for respect for human rights. France believes that the promotion of and the respect of human rights cannot be subordinate to any condition whatsoever. We recall the universal, indivisible, and inalienable character of human rights. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:16:41]: Thank you. Now the exercise of the right of reply has been requested in accordance with Rule 115 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly. I should like to remind delegations that the number of interventions in exercise of the right of reply for any delegation at a given meeting should be limited to two per item. The first intervention should be limited to five minutes and the second to three minutes. I give the floor to the United Kingdom. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [2:17:22]: Thank you. I'm exercising the right of reply in response to the statement from the delegation of Spain. The United Kingdom has no doubt about its sovereignty over Gibraltar and its surrounding waters. The United Kingdom also recalls that the people of Gibraltar enjoy the right to self-determination, as enshrined in the UN Charter and in article 1 of the two UN covenants on human rights, by virtue of which they have freely determined their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. The people of Gibraltar have repeatedly and overwhelmingly expressed their wish to remain under British sovereignty, and we will respect their wishes. The 2006 Gibraltar constitution, which was endorsed in referendum. By the people of Gibraltar, provides for a modern and mature relationship between Gibraltar and the UK. The United Kingdom Government will never enter into arrangements under which the people of Gibraltar would pass under the sovereignty of another state against their free will and democratically expressed wishes, and we will never enter into a process of sovereignty negotiations in which Gibraltar is not content. The United Kingdom's relationship with Gibraltar and all of its overseas territories is a modern one based on partnership, shared values and the rights of people to each territory to determine their own future. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:18:43]: Thank you. I give the floor to Spain. Spain [2:18:57]: Having listened to the statement of the UK delegation, we wish to make the following remarks. Firstly, the colonial situation of Gibraltar is governed by the principle of territorial integrity, not by that of self-determination. In this regard, we would recall resolution 2353 of the General Assembly, which affirms that any colonial situation that partially or totally destroys national territory and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. This same resolution stipulates that Gibraltar should be covered by the principle of territorial integrity. This organisation has been clear in denying the supposed right to self-determination for Gibraltar. Secondly, Gibraltar is a colony. It is a non-self-governing territory that should be decolonised. Let us recall that we consider that Gibraltar is a colony. It is included in the list of 17 non-self-governing territories. Only the United Nations has the power to verify the culmination of the process of decolonization of Gibraltar. Neither the colonizing power nor the authorities of that power can claim to supposed changes in its authority that do not modify the reality. Spain rejects the claims of the administering power, the colonial power, to lay claim to this supposed right to self-determination. There is no people that have been colonized, but rather a territory. Spain is the country that has suffered colonization of its territory, and therefore it is Spain that is the right holder, the right to the decolonization of this territory by recovering its national unity and territorial integrity. Thirdly and finally, we should recall territorial limits by Article 10, according to Article 10 of the Treaty of Utrecht, together with the port and its fortifications, we have the jurisdiction over this territory. A portion of the isthmus and part of the sea was granted But this is an occupation. We have protested against this, and we have requested a return of these territories that were taken from us by force. the attempts at expansion in violation of existing environmental norms, so together with international public law and the need to settle disputes by peaceful means, is disappointing. Spain has no limits about the limits of its territory. The waters surrounding Gibraltar are waters under Spanish jurisdiction, including our coverage of this area since time immemorial. Oh, thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:22:21]: Thank you. I see no further requests. Right. With that, the Committee has now concluded its consideration of agenda item 70. Let's move on. I invite the Committee to resume its consideration of agenda item 71B, human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, in order to take action on a number of draft resolutions. First, I invite the Committee to turn to draft resolution A/C.3/80/L.21, entitled Subregional Centre for human rights and democracy in Central Africa. Let me give the floor to the Secretary to read out the statement of programme budget implications of draft resolution L/21. The floor is yours. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [2:23:21]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. This statement is made in accordance with rule 153 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly. I would also like to draw the attention of the Committee to the oral statement of programme budget implications in connection with draft resolution AC.3.AT.L.21 that was circulated to all delegations through the third committee module of the e-delegate portal on 17 November 2025. Reference is made to operative paragraph 12 of the draft resolution. The request for documentation contained in operative paragraph 12 would change the timing and frequency of the recurrent report from a biennial basis, whereby the next report would have been submitted in 2027, to a triennial basis, whereby the next report would be submitted in 2028. The documentation workload of the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management for one pre-session document with a word count of 8,500 words in all six languages would be adjusted in the applicable years. Accordingly, should the General Assembly adopt draft resolution AC.3/ATL/21, the corresponding change in resource requirements estimated at 24,500 US dollars for the applicable years would be reflected in the proposed programme budget for the relevant years for consideration by the General Assembly. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:24:44]: Thank you. Let me give the floor to the distinguished representative of Cameroon on behalf of Economic Community of Central African States. The floor is yours. Cameroon · ECCAS [2:24:59]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, on behalf of the Central African States, I have the right I would like to present this resolution on the subregional UN Center for Human Rights in Central Africa. The regional center is in Yaounde, in Cameroon, and it was created in 2021 upon the request of the African states. Since then, it has worked on human rights and democracy in accordance with the request of the General Assembly. The center has focused on human rights, taking into account the need to to take on board the demand of the 11 countries under its sphere and to focus on economic, social, and cultural rights as well. After nearly 25 years, the General Assembly decided at the 28th session to increase the resources of the center. However, due to the liquidity crisis, the relevant provision of Resolution 28/235 are still to be implemented. This year's draft resolution has been only technically updated to avoid PBI triggered by the original OP 11. In addition, in the lively resolution 79/192 on the third committee working method, the panel holders have decided to triannualize the request for Secretary General report and consequently this resolution. Mr. Chair, the main sponsors, Angola, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Rwanda, Swaziland, and the Principality of Monaco, all countries, Cameroon, would like to thank all delegation for their support throughout the process. We are grateful to those countries that have already co-sponsored the draft and extend our position to those who will join the list of co-sponsors today. In case a vote is requested on this short, actionable, forward-looking resolution which contains no problematic issues, we call on all delegations to vote in favor. I thank you, Mr. Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:27:00]: Thank you. I now give the floor back to the Secretary. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [2:27:07]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wish to inform that in addition to those delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have also joined as sponsors of L21. Belarus, Burkina Faso, China, Djibouti, Gambia, Kenya, Malawi, Mali, Morocco, Namibia, Pakistan, Uganda, and the United Republic of Tanzania. If any other countries wish to join as co-sponsors of L21, please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see Nigeria, Niger, Senegal, Cabo Verde, Tunisia, Guinea, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Mauritania, as well as Togo. I see no further requests. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:28:10]: Thank you. A recorded vote has been requested. or draft resolution L21, entitled "Subregional Centre for Human Rights and Democracy in Central Africa." Does any delegation wish to make a general statement or EOV before the vote in connection with draft resolution L21? I see the United States. The floor is yours. United States of America [2:28:39]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its objection to resolutions such as this one that are effectively performative and wasteful of UN resources. Third Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, this resolution continues to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. The United States will not support initiatives that establish or reasonably lead to the establishment of any new financial obligations for UN member states. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has grown beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Accordingly, the United States requests a vote and will vote no on this resolution. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we hope to work together in advance of next year's session of the Third Committee to make it more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position that will be posted on our mission's website for more information. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:29:48]: Thank you. With that, I will ask the committee to commence with the process of voting on draft resolution L21. In accordance with rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. You are now kindly requested to indicate your votes. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [2:30:23]: The Committee is now voting on draft resolution L.21, entitled "Subregional Centre for Human Rights and Democracy in Central Africa". Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:30:55]: And the result of the vote is as follows, 176 in favour and we have three against, zero abstentions. Draft resolution LC.3.A0.L21 is adopted. Any delegation wishes to make an EOV or general statement? I see none. We now invite the Committee to turn to draft resolution A/C.3/A/43 entitled Terrorism and Human Rights. I would like to inform the Committee that draft resolution L.43 contains no program budget implications. With that, let me give the floor to the distinguished representative of Mexico. The floor is yours. Mexico [2:31:53]: Thank you, Chair. I am honored to introduce, on behalf of Mexico and Egypt, draft resolution L43, entitled "Terrorism and Human Rights." It reflects the convergence of two initiatives that our countries have been spearheading over the course of many years, the resolution on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the fight against terrorism. traditionally presented by Mexico since 2002, on the one hand, and the resolution on the impact of terrorism on the enjoyment of human rights, introduced by Egypt in 2017. to ensure that measures to combat terrorism never impinge on human rights, and also recognize the profound human suffering that terrorist acts continue to cause in all regions of the world. This year, we have presented a technical update to the text adopted by consensus in 2023. Following careful analysis, we consider that this is the most appropriate approach given the current context. We think that maintaining the current text that offers balanced language already will allow any future adjustment to be made in an informed way based on substantive discussions that are well documented and underpinned. We profoundly regret that despite this being a technical update to a balanced text that has previously been agreed by consensus, one delegation has requested a vote on the text. We consider that this development does not reflect the spirit of cooperation that has historically characterized this topic, nor does it reflect the overall commitment to human rights in the fight against terrorism. And therefore, we would respectfully call on all delegations to vote in favour of this draft resolution and reaffirm the support that this initiative has received broadly and consistently over the course of the years. At a time when terrorism continues to represent a threat to the human rights of all persons, it is crucial that we reaffirm that any measure against terrorism should respect international law. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:34:31]: Thank you, Mexico, for the statement. With that, I'll give the floor to the Committee Secretary. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [2:34:38]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wish to inform that in addition to those delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have joined as co-sponsors of draft resolution L43. Armenia, Belgium, Belize, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Indonesia, Ireland, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malta, Morocco, Kingdom of the Netherlands, Panama, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Tunisia, and Uruguay. If any other countries wish to join as sponsors of L43, please signify by pressing your microphone button. I see Estonia, the Dominican Republic, and I see no further requests. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:35:39]: Thank you. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L.43, entitled Terrorism and Human Rights. Any delegation which is to make a general statement or an EOV before the vote in connection with this draft resolution? I see the United States. The floor is yours. United States of America [2:36:04]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its objections to resolutions such as this one that are effectively performative and wasteful of U.N. resources. Third Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, this resolution continues to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and international peace and security. The United States also supports the elimination of discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, national origin, and genetic information. The United States expects the United Nations to ensure that its documents and programming avoid using diversity, equity, and inclusion concepts and terminology at the expense of recognizing hard work, excellence, and individual achievement, and upholding the equal dignity and respect of every person. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has grown beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Accordingly, the United States requests a vote and will vote no on this resolution. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we hope to work together in advance of next year's session of the Third Committee to make it more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position that will be posted on our mission's website for more information. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:37:31]: Thank you. I give the floor to Cuba, to be followed by Burkina. Cuba. Cuba [2:37:41]: Chair. We are grateful to Mexico and to Egypt for the timely presentation of the resolution, the purpose of which Cuba supports. The recent vote against and request for a vote from the US doesn't surprise anyone here in this room. What more could we expect from a state that, under the banner of counterterrorism, has carried out direct and indirect aggression against peoples and nations who are sovereign, or has justified grotesque violations of human rights and international humanitarian law. This is a question. How could we be surprised that a country that uses terrorism for political ends, that creates unilateral and unfounded lists on this subject, and that arrogates to itself the right to inflict those countries that do not subject to its dominion? We energetically reject the instrumentalization by the United States of terrorism as a tool of political aggression against countries. The so-called US State Department list of states sponsors of terror, under which Cuba has been arbitrarily included, is has no contribution to the overall combating of terror globally. It is simply an instrument of political coercion by economic means. It has no foundation or legitimacy. Cuba reiterates that we condemn terrorism in all of its forms and manifestations. We have never allowed our territory to be used to organized terrorist acts. And at the same time, we will continue to support international efforts to combat international terrorism, and we will vote in favor of this resolution. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:39:43]: Thank you. I see no further requests for the floor. The committee will now commence with the process of voting on draft resolution L43. In accordance with rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [2:40:12]: The committee is now voting on draft resolution L.43, entitled "Terrorism and human rights". Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:40:41]: the result of the vote is as follows we have 171 in favor 3 against and 2 abstentions draft resolution a 3 3 8 0 l 43 is adopted any you'll be our general statement after the vote right I see Switzerland you have the floor Switzerland [2:41:11]: Mr. Chair, I have the honor to deliver this explanation of vote on behalf of Australia, Canada, Iceland, Liechtenstein, New Zealand, Norway, and my own country, Switzerland. We thank Egypt and Mexico for presenting this resolution. Generally, we support efforts to streamline resolutions and avoid duplications on similar topics at the Third Committee. even more so in the context of the UN 80 reform. However, such measures should never be taken to the detriment of the promotion and protection of human rights. While we support this resolution, we are concerned that, following the merger of the two resolution, its focus has shifted away from states' responsibility to respect human rights towards abuses committed by non-state actors, such as terrorists. Global trends show that states increasingly violate and restrict human rights and fundamental freedoms in the context of countering terrorism or under the pretext of ensuring security and political stability. We therefore reiterate our call for updated language in future resolutions that addresses the importance of States' responsibility and commitments to fully respect international human rights law, international humanitarian law and international refugee law in all their counter-terrorism efforts. To conclude, we support the work of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism and call upon all States to cooperate with the mandates. Effective counterterrorism and human rights protection are not opposing goals. They are mutually reinforcing. Upholding human rights is not a luxury in times of crisis. It is a strategic necessity for lasting peace and security. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:43:09]: Thank you. I see no further requests for the floor. Let's move on to the next agenda item. Draft resolution AC3 Germany [2:43:43]: Thank you, Chair. Colleagues. Germany has the honor to introduce draft resolution L.45. At the outset, we want to express our gratitude to all delegations for the very constructive and cooperative engagement throughout the negotiation process. The resolution sets the framework for the cooperation between the United Nations and the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions. National Human Rights Institutions, or NHRIs, are present all over the globe. Currently, there are more than 110 NHRIs worldwide. operating fully or partially in compliance with the Paris Principles. 32 NHRIs are located in Africa, 18 in the Americas, 28 in the Asia-Pacific and 38 in Europe. Because of this global presence, this resolution enjoys strong cross-regional support. This year's resolution introduces a new thematic focus on the rights of persons with disabilities. We acknowledge the contributions of NHRIs to protect and promote the rights of persons with disabilities, We recognize that guided by the Paris Principles, NHRIs can monitor the implementation of disability rights, advocate for inclusion and accessibility, and work together closely with persons with disabilities and their representative organizations to ensure their voices shape legislation and policies. NHRIs can serve as a bridge between governments, civil society, and communities, ensuring that the fundamental freedoms and human rights of all persons with disabilities can be upheld. Let me conclude by thanking all delegations who have already become co-sponsors of this resolution. If a vote were to be called, we count on member states' support in order to send a strong signal of support to all NHRIs and to recognize the indispensable work to strengthen human rights around the world. While this resolution might not be focused directly on peace and security, it does not undermine this pillar. Rather, it advances another core mandate of the United Nations, the protection and promotion of human rights. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:45:45]: Thank you, Chairmany, for the statement. I now give the floor back to the Secretary. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [2:45:50]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wish to inform that in addition to those delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have also joined as co-sponsors of L45 revision 1. Australia, Belgium, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Iceland, Latvia, Lebanon, Libya, Malawi, Mexico, Mongolia, Myanmar, North Macedonia, Palau, Paraguay, Peru, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Rwanda, Serbia, Slovakia, and Thailand. If any other countries wish to join as co-sponsors of L45 revision 1, Please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see Jordan, the Dominican Republic, and Uruguay, who's already a sponsor. I see no further requests. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:46:57]: Thank you. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L.41, revision 1, entitled, "National Human Rights Institutions." Any general statement or EoV before the vote in relation with this draft resolution? I see Denmark to be followed by the Russian Federation. Denmark. Denmark · EU [2:47:20]: Thank you, Chair. I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union and its Member States. The resolution on national human rights institutions has originally been adopted by consensus by the Third Committee. We thank the facilitator Germany for their work and efforts to bringing us towards a consensual agreement on the text this year by taking into account different perspectives and concerns raised during negotiations. The resolution does not introduce an obligation to establish national human rights institutions, but it highlights the crucial role that NHRIs, in compliance with the Paris Principles, can play in protecting, promoting and monitoring human rights of persons with disabilities and in fostering inclusion and accessibility. We regret that a vote has been called on this normally consensual resolution. The Member States of the European Union will therefore vote yes on resolution L45, and we strongly encourage others to do the same. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:48:15]: Thank you. I give the floor to the Russian Federation. Russian Federation [2:48:26]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The issue of national human rights institutions, NHRIs, in the Russian Federation is given the utmost attention. In our country, for several decades already, there is an institution of the Federal Human Rights Commissioner that has been successfully functioning, but there's also a broad network of regional and thematic human rights ombudsmen. Regrettably, certain international organizations and formations, including the Global Alliance, the GONRI, designed to support and protect ombudsmen, have subordinated their activities to the current political landscape, which has compelled the Human Rights Commissioner of the Russian Federation, Tatyana Moskalkova, to leave its European network. What's more, amid unprecedented foreign political pressure, the Commissioner has continued not only to completely carry out her duties, but she's actively fostered the strengthening of international cooperation among NHRIs, including by broadening the membership of the Eurasian Alliance of Ombudsman, which she heads. Nonetheless, The draft for the consideration of the Committee today does not reflect this new reality. GANHRI is still portrayed as the sole platform for cooperation of human rights institutions. Furthermore, we think it's important for alliances of NHRIs to remain free from politically biased influence. In this regard, we cannot support encouraging its interaction with biased entities, such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. We believe that this cooperation is not useful for GANRE. But this is not the only flaw of the document we are considering. Paragraph PP23 is taken from the Pact for the Future, and it has to do with the functioning of the NHRIs. This issue was subject to meticulous negotiations in the past, but this text is not reproduced in its entirety, but only partially, without the key element, which is a reference to national and which creates the legal basis for such institutions to operate. And also, there's no explanation for the refusal of authors to include in PP24 a part about the contribution of NHRI's to the work of the UN system bodies. And there's no direct reference to the rules of procedure here. Finally, what's completely unacceptable is the arbitrarily harsh tone mentioning the outcome documents of the international conferences of our eyes in the thematic report of the Secretary General and PP30 and OP1, which certainly does not reflect the actual attitude of states to these documents. We don't accept this approach, so we are going to put the resolution L45 to a vote and we're going to abstain on it. We urge states to follow suit. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:51:29]: Thank you. I have the United States. The floor is yours. United States of America [2:51:36]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its objection to resolutions such as this one that are effectively performative and wasteful of UN resources. Third Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, this resolution continues to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. President Trump has delivered a very clear message that the United Nations and so many nations of the world have gotten wildly off track exaggerating climate change into the world's greatest threat. This practice will no longer be tolerated. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has grown beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Accordingly, the United States will vote no on this resolution. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we hope to work together in advance of next year's session of the Third Committee to make it more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position that will be posted on our mission's website for more information. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:52:47]: Thank you. I see no further requests. The Committee will now commence with the process of voting on draft resolution 45, revision 1. In accordance with Rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. You are kindly requested to indicate your votes. 3rd Committee · Committee Secretary [2:53:15]: The Committee is now voting on draft resolution L.45, revision 1, entitled "National human rights institutions". Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:53:39]: Thank you. The result of the vote is as follows. 160 in favor. We have two against and 12 abstentions. Draft resolution AC3A0L45 revision 1 is adopted. Any EOV or general statement after the vote? the draft resolution. I see Argentina to be followed by China. Argentina, the floor is yours. Argentina [2:54:20]: Thank you, Chair. The Argentine Republic reaffirms its commitment to the protection of the individual rights of all living persons without distinction, in accordance with the express obligations as per international treaties and our internal legislation. and national human rights institutions' contribution to this are important. Let us recall also that Agenda 2030, to which we have been committed in good faith, is made up of non-binding legal instruments that each State, in the exercise of their sovereignty, has the right to interpret and pursue freely. We dissociate ourselves from the preambular paragraph referred to in the Pact for the Future that we cannot support. Argentina encourages the sponsors of this resolution to continue working to find the best way to express support for human rights institutions in each state in a way that is respectful of the sovereignty of each country to choose their own development path and establish their own national priorities. For Argentina, this will always have to respect life, freedom and property. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:55:29]: Thank you. I give the floor to China to be followed by Colombia. China, the floor is yours. China [2:55:36]: Mr. Chair, China asked for the floor to explain our position on the just adopted resolution. China engaged in the consultations actively and constructively and acknowledges the facilitator's effort towards the adoption of the resolution. As regards the reference in the resolution to, quote unquote, human rights defenders, China reiterates that the term human rights defenders have has no internationally agreed and accepted definition that is anchored in law, as countries are divided as to who these human rights defenders are. China objects to the inclusion in the draft resolution of this term on which consensus at the UN is absent. Given the foregoing, we disassociate ourselves from the paragraph that contains a reference to human rights defenders and request the Secretariat to reflect our position and this intervention in the meeting record. I thank you, Mr. Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:56:31]: Thank you, China. Colombia, you have the floor. Colombia [2:56:36]: Thank you, Chair. Colombia is grateful for the presentation of this resolution and we welcome the work of Germany in co-sponsoring and facilitating this text. This resolution has a cross-cutting approach to address vulnerabilities and barriers faced by persons with disabilities, advancing towards more inclusive public policy focused on human dignity and aligned with the principles of sustainable development. And so we welcome the incorporation of a vision that highlights the centrality of care and support from a human rights based approach. For Colombia, this vision is fundamental and it reflects the importance that we give in our domestic policy to care and to the multilateral approach to the care economy as promoting equality, advancing independence, reducing gaps and building more cohesive societies. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:57:33]: Thank you. I see no further requests. With that, colleagues, the Committee has now completed its consideration of draft proposals for this meeting. We will reconvene this afternoon at 3 pm in this conference room to take action on the remaining draft proposals listed in today's programme. As usual, the live schedule for the consideration of draft proposal is available on iGov. Thank you for your cooperation. Enjoy your lunch break and the meeting is now adjourned.