Third Committee, 25th plenary meeting - General Assembly, 81st session General Assembly Date: 22 October 2026 Language: English Transcript: https://transcripts.un.org/en/ga/c3/81/25 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. --- Speaker 1 [13:55]: Play all songs of the Kapil Sharma Show. 3rd Committee · Chair [15:04]: Good afternoon, dear colleagues. Please take your seats. The 25th meeting of the Third Committee at the 81st session of the General Assembly is called to order. I now invite the Committee to continue its consideration for agenda item 70, entitled Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, and its sub-items A to D. I now welcome the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Ms. Nazila Ghanian. Participants wishing to make comments and pose questions to the speaker are invited at this time to press their microphone button within the next three minutes, after which the list will be closed. The time limit for each speaker will be announced before the floor is given to the first speaker. Thank you for your cooperation. I now invite the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief to make an introductory statement. Ms. Gagnon, you have the floor. UN · Special Rapporteur [16:00]: Honorable Chair, Excellencies, Distinguished Delegates, I express my warmest appreciation to you for your interest in Report A/81/376, which addresses freedom of religious belief and funeral rights in exceptional circumstances. The term funeral rites is used to describe the wide range of religious laws, observances, practices, and traditions associated with death and mourning. Last rites, preparation of the body through embalming or otherwise, burial, cremation, or other practices, such as early burial, washing, preparing, and shrouding the body, specific communal prayers, funeral processions, and commemorations or ceremonies of remembrance without religious elements. As freedom of religious belief is a universal entitlement, open to everyone on an equal basis, this necessarily includes the wide diversity of practices relating to death and honoring the deceased and remembering the deceased. The report observes that funeral rights are often overlooked as rights entitlements or denied in discriminatory ways. This is particularly so in the exceptional circumstances under discussion in this report. My previous thematic report to the UN Human Rights Council drew attention to this question, but in regular situations. It also highlighted eight specific contributions that freedom of religion or belief makes to funeral rights. Given the scope of the topic and the over 120 inputs received, It is followed up in this report in order to focus on exceptional circumstances such as law enforcement, deaths in custody, emergencies, mass fatalities, exceptional health or disaster contexts, counterterrorism, armed conflict, occupation, and post-conflict contexts, and climate change, environmental harm, and land-related impacts. Distinguished delegates, at the interactive dialogue presenting the previous report, there was resolute support by states that funeral rights are rightly understood as manifestation of freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. This is very encouraging because it confirms resounding support for the fact that any limitations to funeral rights, whatever the circumstances, must therefore be strictly in accordance with international law. Emergency situations do not suspend the obligation to respect freedom of religious belief, since that right is non-derogable and cannot even be suspended in times of public emergency threatening the life of the nation. Limitations on funeral rights in emergency situations therefore remain subject to the requirements of legality, absolute necessity, proportionality and non-discrimination, pursuit of a legitimate aim based on objective considerations and use of the least restrictive means. The only grounds for restrictions are public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others. Beyond freedom of religion or belief, other rights relating to funeral rights protect individuals against arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy and family life, including relationships between relatives and the remains of the deceased. Of course, they also prohibit torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in that prolonged withholding of bodies, concealment of burial locations, mutilation of remains or obstruction of mourning may amount to ill-treatment against their loved ones. International humanitarian law and international criminal law also relate to funeral rights in exceptional circumstances and impose specific binding obligations. Even amid hostilities and large-scale casualties or when responding to international crimes, the dead must be treated with respect and families afforded dignity and information. Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, this report emphasizes that the right to honor the dead is inseparable from the return of remains. Processes of return, identification, and repatriation are not merely ancillary humanitarian measures, but they engage states' obligations, including protection of freedom of religious belief and human dignity. And they are central to ensuring accountability in contexts where death has been accompanied by concealment, coercion, or discrimination. Accountability itself does not end with the return of remains. must be matched by reparations. Return of remains. States should treat memorialization as integral to truth, accountability, and remedy, rather than it being discretionary. At the same time, return and memorialization must be matched by reparations capable of addressing both the immediate and structural harms. Reparations must respond not only to the denial, distortion, or obstruction of funeral rights in individual cases, but also to the broader legal, institutional, and social contexts and conditions which enabled those violations to occur in the first place. The report ends with recommendations, which I will draw attention to in my final comments. Funeral rights deserve our utmost attention, as there are few experiences more painful than loss and grief, especially in the exceptional circumstances explored here. Whatever the circumstances, they should be upheld to the highest extent possible. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [22:08]: I thank the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief. I will now open the floor for any questions or comments to Ms. Gania. We have quite a list of speakers here, so as per practice, I would ask delegations to limit their comments to 1.5 minutes. I thank you for your kind cooperation. I now give the floor to a distinguished representative of Nigeria, to be followed by the Netherlands, Chile, Poland, Italy. Nigeria [22:38]: Nigeria? Oh. Thank you, Madam Chair. Nigeria thanks the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief for her report, and we welcome the Special Rapporteur's visit to the country from 8 to 19 June 2026, undertaken at the invitation of the Government of Nigeria. We appreciate your engagement with relevant stakeholders and look forward to your presenting your visit report to the Human Rights Council in March 2027. We recognize the importance of freedom of religion or belief and the right of individuals and communities to observe their religious practices, including those related to burial, mourning, and dignified treatment of the deceased. We agree that these practices are important expressions of human dignity, family bonds, and cultural identity, and that their protection remains essential even in exceptional circumstances. We also recognize the importance of cooperation among governments, religious leaders, traditional institutions, and local communities to promote peaceful coexistence, prevent religious intolerance, and ensure that affected families can mourn their loved ones. Nigeria remains committed to promoting mutual respect, interfaith dialogue, and peaceful coexistence among people of different religions and beliefs. Nigeria reiterate the importance of constructive engagement with the Special Rapporteur and looks forward to considering the findings and recommendations arising from a. 3rd Committee · Chair [24:05]: I thank the distinguished representative of Nigeria. I now give the floor to the Netherlands, to be followed by Chile, Poland, Italy, Afghanistan. Netherlands, you have the floor. Netherlands (Kingdom of the) [24:14]: Thank you, Chair. The Kingdom of the Netherlands aligns itself with the EU statement. We thank the Special Rapporteur for her report on freedom of religion and belief and funeral rights in exceptional circumstances, and reiterate its strong support for her mandate. The Kingdom of the Netherlands reaffirms that freedom of religion or belief is a fundamental human right that must be guaranteed to everyone without discrimination. This includes the freedom to have, adopt or change a religion or belief, or to have no religion or belief at all. We believe the Special Rapporteur's attention to the protection of funeral rights, particularly in exceptional circumstances. We underline the importance of respecting the diverse religious and non-religious practices of individuals and communities, including in exceptional circumstances. Madame Special Rapporteur, how can States ensure that affected communities are meaningfully consulted when adopting emergency measures that may interfere with funeral rights, particularly in situations where public health or security considerations are at stake. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [25:23]: I thank the distinguished representative of the Netherlands. I now give floor to Chile. Chile [25:29]: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. We are grateful to the Special Rapporteur on freedom of conscience and religion. Funeral rights in Chile are a sign of freedom of religion and belief and also as an inherent right, this is an inalienable right even when there are special circumstances that may affect the exercise of the right. There are few experiences as painful as the loss of a loved one and so in light of these circumstances such as natural disasters or conflicts, these rights should be exercised in full. Exceptional circumstances present a challenge and there may be limitations for the sake of public safety, however, in Tunisia we cannot limit the essential aspect of this. holding these rights as well as the necessities of each case should be upheld. Exceptional circumstances should not lead to a permanent limitation on these rights. We would like to ask you, what are the minimal guarantees that you think should exist in weighing up the needs and the exceptional circumstances and the need for funeral rights? Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [26:42]: I thank the distinguished representative of Chile. I now give floor to Poland, to be followed by Italy, Afghanistan, Israel, Turkey. Poland [26:50]: Thank you, Madam Chair. Poland aligns itself with EU statement to be delivered. Madam Special Rapporteur, we thank you for your report. It reminds us that the right to manifest one's religion or belief does not end with death, and that the harm caused by denial of funeral rights is often a continuing one, when access to grave is lost, remains are withheld, or memorial practices are disrupted for years. We share your concern about the desecration of the dead and of cemeteries in armed conflict, and about the refusal to return the bodies of persons killed in so-called counter-terrorist operation. including Crimean Tatar Muslim in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine. Secret punitive and discriminatory burials must be prohibited and families must be able to learn the fate of their loved ones and bury them with dignity. This issue resonates in Poland, a country whose history is marked by mass death and the destruction of places of memory, including Jewish cemeteries. Protecting such sites and supporting the search for dignified burial of victims of past atrocities remain part of our responsibility towards past and future generations. Poland remains a committed advocate of freedom of religion or belief. We are concerned about rising hatred and violence targeting persons on the basis of religion or belief of all faith and none. Madam Special Rapporteur, how can states ensure in practice that emergency and security measures affecting funeral rights remain necessary, proportionate and non-discriminatory? Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [28:05]: I thank the distinguished representative of Poland. I now give the floor to Italy. Italy [28:13]: Thank you, Madam Chair. Italy thanks the Special Rapporteur for her report and aligns with the EU statement. In Italy, freedom of religion or belief is enshrined in our constitution. This commitment to equality and. Non-discrimination also guides our broader efforts to promote peaceful coexistence among people of different religions or beliefs and to combat. Religious intolerance and antisemitism. At the international level, we actively support initiatives to advance freedom of religion or belief and protect religious minorities. This commitment is also reflected in the work of our Special Envoy for the Promotion of Freedom of Religion and the Protection of Religious Minorities in the World. Madam Special Rapporteur, what practical measures? Can state take to ensure that the protection of funeral rights is systematically integrated into emergency responses and recovery planning, particularly when burial site and places of remembrance has been damaged or destroyed? I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [29:15]: I thank the distinguished representative of Italy. I now give the floor to a distinguished representative of Afghanistan. Afghanistan [29:28]: Can we hear? 3rd Committee · Chair [29:29]: Yeah, thank you. You can go. Afghanistan [29:35]: Freedom of religion or belief is an essential human right, inseparable from human dignity, equality, and the principles of tolerance and peaceful coexistence. In Afghanistan, this freedom continues to face serious and growing restrictions under the Taliban rule. Religious and ethnic minorities, particularly Shia Muslims, including Hazaras, and Ismailis continue to face discrimination, restrictions on religious practices, and threats to their safety. Restrictions on religious ceremonies, interference with religious institutions, and the imposition of a single interpretation of religion undermine Afghanistan's long-standing religious and cultural diversity and tolerance. We are equally concerned by the use of religious interpretations to justify systematic discrimination against women and girls, including their exclusion from education, employment, and public life. The Taliban's discriminatory policies must not be equated with Islam or Afghan culture. Their denial of fundamental rights stands in stark contrast to Islamic principles of justice, human dignity, and the pursuit of knowledge. No religion or culture justifies discrimination, persecution, or exclusion of women and girls from education and public life. Afghanistan's rich Islamic traditions and cultural diversity have long reflected the values of knowledge, dignity, tolerance and coexistence. I thank you, Madam Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [31:04]: I thank the distinguished representative of Afghanistan. I now give the floor to Israel, to be followed by Turkey, Malaysia, European Union, Colombia. Israel, you have the floor. Israel [31:14]: Thank you, Chair. We take note of the Special Rapporteur's report. The State of Israel, a home to Jews, Muslims, Christians, Druze, and other faiths, is deeply committed to protecting the freedom of religion of all its citizens. We appreciate the report addressing the severe violations following the October 7th attack, specifically regarding the murdered victims of the horrific abuse of Israeli hostages' bodies. Jewish customs strictly forbid delaying burial, yet terrorists mutilated and burned Israeli victims beyond recognition, preventing their timely identification and burial. It is deeply regrettable that the report avoids naming Hamas as responsible for this blatant disregard for human dignity. Israel operates under the strict rule of law. Any alleged deviation from our policies is subject to the rigorous scrutiny of our independent justice system. We are confronted with an ongoing reality in which Hamas and other terrorist organizations deliberately hide beneath cemeteries and mosques, cynically exploiting the civilian population. This calculated abuse of holy sites must be fully addressed under international law. We call upon the international community to unequivocally condemn Hamas for these profound violations of basic human decency. Thank you, Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [32:36]: I thank the distinguished representative of Israel. I now give the floor to Turkey. Türkiye [32:42]: Thank you, Madam Chair. We would like to thank the Special Rapporteur for her report. Regarding the 2001 judgment of the European. Court of Human Rights 25781/94, cited in the paragraph 17 of the report, we would like to point out that this judgment does not contain any reference to damage to the cemeteries. The judgment addresses restriction on freedom of movement affecting access to places of worship. But does not establish a link between damage to cemeteries and violation of freedom of religion or belief. We therefore expect this inaccuracy to be corrected to ensure that paragraph accurately reflects the court's findings. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [33:26]: I thank the distinguished representative of Turkey. I now give floor to Malaysia. Malaysia [33:32]: Thank you, Chair. Malaysia thanks the Special Rapporteur for her presentation and report. We welcome the report's attention to the treatment of the deceased in situations of armed conflict and occupation. Respect for the deceased, including their religious beliefs and cultural traditions, must be upheld even in the most difficult circumstances. We are deeply alarmed by the report's findings highlighted in para 66 concerning occupied East Jerusalem. where Palestinians have faced restrictions on burial rights and the displacement of remains, including through the conversion of long-standing cemeteries into public spaces. Michelle stresses that international humanitarian law requires parties to armed conflict to respect the disease. Cemeteries and burial sites must also be protected against desecrations and destruction. This obligation must be respected without discrimination. Violations in this regard must be effectively investigated and those responsible held accountable. Madam Special Rapporteur, in light of the disturbing account highlighted in your report, how can the international community strengthen efforts to safeguard the funeral rights of Palestinians in the occupied Palestinian territory? Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [34:51]: I thank the distinguished representative of Malaysia. I now give the floor to European Union, to be followed by Colombia, Morocco, Bangladesh, Slovenia. European Union. EU [35:01]: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have the honor to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member states. Professor Ganeja, as you so rightly say, respect for the universal human right to grieve is a fundamental marker of respect and common humanity within and between societies. The issues covered by your report therefore connect with the fundamental humanity of every one of us. In conflict situations, the denial of dignified burials, inhibiting burial in accordance with customs, withholding of bodies, rendering families unable to identify deceased loved ones, post-mortem desecration and sexualized mutilation of bodies, desecration of tombs and cemeteries. in cases of climate change or environmental harm, lingering harm where access to graves is lost, memorial practices are disrupted, or displacement renders relocation permanent. Thank you, then, for putting the spotlight on funeral rights as a manifestation of the freedom of religion or belief and the essential connection between the right to honor the dead and the return of remains, which engages the obligations and accountability of states. Special Rapporteur, we welcome the great interest in this session as evidenced by the number of speakers. Which examples of best practice have you come across to guide our future actions? 3rd Committee · Chair [36:32]: I thank the distinguished representative of the European Union. I now give the floor to Colombia. Colombia [36:38]: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. We are grateful to the rapporteur for introducing the report and we reiterate our support for her mandate. Freedom of religion and belief represents a fundamental right for building peaceful, inclusive and democratic societies in a context where there continue to be phenomena of intolerance, hate speech, discrimination and violence against persons for this reason, we must strengthen the right to diversity and human dignity. We affirm the commitment to the protection of this right, guaranteeing that all people can profess a religious belief, change it or not have a belief without discrimination. We also recognize the importance of intercultural and interreligious cooperation to prevent intolerance and to strengthen peaceful coexistence. We believe it is necessary to strengthen efforts to stop incitation to discrimination for religious reasons, especially in digital spheres, while preserving fundamental rights and human rights. We reaffirm our readiness to work constructively and positively in multilateral fora in order to promote freedom of religion and belief and to strengthen interreligious and intercultural dialogue. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [37:56]: I thank the distinguished representative of Colombia. I now give the word to the distinguished representative of Morocco, to be followed by Bangladesh, Slovenia, Russian Federation, and Guatemala. Morocco [38:06]: Thank you, Madam Chair. My delegation thanks Mrs. Nazila Ghanem for her interim report on freedom of belief. and religion and funeral rites in exceptional circumstances. This report builds on her previous work on honouring the deceased. It reminds us that respecting the dead and the right of the living to mourn them accordingly to their beliefs is an essential part of human dignity, including in times of crisis. Morocco has long embodied a unique model of coexistence, tolerance, and interaction between Muslims and followers of other monotheistic religions. The constitution guarantees freedom of thought and expression and the free exercise of worship for all. It entrusts His Majesty the King as commander of the faithful with guaranteeing that freedom. It preambles recognizes the Hebrew, Christian, and Andalusian influences that are part of our national identity. Morocco thus guarantees all residents on its territory, whatever their nationality or belief, freedom to practice their religion. Madam Chair, my delegation welcomes the report's emphasis on memorialization, the protection of cemeteries and memorial sites, and meaningful consultation with communities. These principles are close to Morocco's approach. We share the Special Rapporteur's view that public authorities and religious leaders can work together to reconcile legitimate public objectives. Morocco remains committed to constructive engagement with the Special Rapporteur. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [39:26]: I thank the distinguished representative of Morocco. I now give the floor to Bangladesh. Bangladesh [39:34]: Thank you, Madam Chair. We thank the Special Rapporteur for her report. Bangladesh recognizes that funerals and mourning are important religious and social practices, including during conflicts, emergencies, and natural disasters. Our constitution protects freedom of religion and peaceful assembly, subject to the relevant constitutional provisions and lawful restrictions. Any measures taken by the authorities in connection with public gatherings must be assessed on their specific merits, including whether they are necessary for legitimate public safety, security, or public order purposes. This should not automatically be construed as deliberate attempts to interfere with religious observance. Regarding the report's reference to Bangladesh, we note that the concerns raised are based on submission, including a confidential submission, without sufficient detail about the alleged incidents. Bangladesh reject any generalized characterization suggesting that the authorities discourage public mourning or interfere with religious rights. Such claims should be assessed against verifiable evidence, specific circumstances of the incidents concerned, and the applicable legal and administrative context. Article 27 and 28 of our constitution guarantee equality before the law and prohibit discrimination, including on religious grounds. Article 71, 37, and 41 protect peaceful assembly and freedom of religion subject to constitutional provisions. We remain available for constructive engagement with the Special Rapporteur. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [40:57]: I thank the distinguished representative for Bangladesh. I now give the floor to Slovenia to be followed by Russian Federation, Guatemala, Australia, Lithuania. Slovenia, you have the floor. Slovenia [41:07]: Thank you, Madam Chair. Slovenia aligns with the EU statement. We thank the Special Rapporteur for her presentation and the report examining freedom of religion or belief and funeral rights in exceptional circumstances. Madam Special Rapporteur, Slovenia is committed to the protection and promotion of freedom of religion or belief, which is a universal fundamental right of each and every human being. We welcome the theme of your report and agree that regardless of circumstances, the dead must be treated with respect and dignity. A dignified burial for the dead is not only a moral and ethical obligation or civilizational norm, but it is also a fundamental human right. This guarantees families of the deceased the right to know the truth about the circumstances of the death, to receive the information about the location of the remains, and to ensure that the remains are treated with respect and given a dignified burial. In exceptional circumstances, it often happens that many deceased remain unidentified and unburied, and families often lack even basic information about the fate of their loved ones or even burial information. Madam Special Rapporteur, in your report, you mentioned the recommendation of the Committee of the Enforced Disappearances to states to ensure a dignified burial of the deceased consistent with the wishes and religious and cultural customs of the families and their communities. How can that be guaranteed in the context of health emergencies, including infectious disease epidemics and in instances of a natural disaster? Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [42:38]: I thank the distinguished representative of Slovenia. I now give the floor to Russian Federation. Russian Federation [42:45]: Thank you. We would like to reaffirm Russia's position that it's counterproductive for the Special Rapporteur to insert new legal concepts such as burial rights, R-I-G-H-T, without broad discussion with states. Paragraph 25 of the report carries a reference to reports of Russia's alleged refusal to release to families the bodies of persons of a particular ethnicity who died in the special military operation. These reports are unreliable. Russia and Ukraine regularly carried out humanitarian exchanges of bodies of fallen soldiers with the ICRC mediating. The last one was on the 17th of September, 2026. There are still a number of questions that require a swift response by the special rapporteur. For example, something unprecedented in scale, the persecution of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. We invite you to take a look at the report of Russia's foreign ministry. It's called "On the Unlawful Acts of the Kyiv Regime Against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, its Clergy and Parishioners." It spotlights legislative restrictions, the seizures of churches, forced mobilization of clergy, physical and psychological pressure on them as well. We laid out information in detail on our last Area Formula meeting on the 17th of July. We're disappointed that these circumstances have yet to be duly reflected in your report. We're convinced that such crimes that show gross violations by Ukrainian authorities of the rights of worshippers merit the strongest condemnation. We call upon the Special Rapporteur to seriously address this issue. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [44:14]: I thank the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation. I now give the floor to Guatemala, to be followed by Australia, Lithuania, Spain, Cuba. Guatemala [44:24]: Madam Chair, Guatemala thanks the Special Rapporteur for presenting her report. In this report, she underscores the importance of ensuring that people can practice their religious beliefs and traditions with dignity and free from discrimination, in full respect of their human rights, whatever the situation. Guatemala recognises that freedom of belief or religion is essential to peaceful coexistence and mutual respect. This is reflected in the multicultural, multilingual character of Guatemalan society, and it is also reflected through the promotion and protection of the traditions, languages, and cultural expressions of indigenous peoples. In this spirit, Guatemala also recognizes the importance of preserving the sacred sites of indigenous peoples and respecting the cultural and spiritual practices associated with them. As regards missing persons efforts to locate, exhume and identify victims of the internal armed conflict. This has helped to restore dignity to the deceased and their families. In this context, we wish to ask the Special Rapporteur: What have been the main challenges in implementing state measures in order to guarantee responses to emergencies, displacement or disasters, respect the funerary and spiritual practices of indigenous peoples. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [45:50]: Thank the distinguished representative of Guatemala. I now give the floor to Australia. Australia [45:57]: Thank you, Chair. Australia reiterates its commitment to protecting and promoting freedom of religion or belief for all. We thank the Special Rapporteur for her report on addressing how freedom of religion or belief relates to death and honouring the deceased in exceptional circumstances. All people should be able to mourn and honour the deceased safely, freely and with dignity, and in accordance with their religion or belief. This remains true in exceptional circumstances, such as periods of armed conflict, emergencies and transitions. States must act consistently with their obligations under applicable international law, including those relating to grave sites and the handling of remains. As we consider this topic, Australia highlights the importance of meaningful consultation with religious, belief and First Nations communities. In Australia, we have appointed special envoys to combat antisemitism and Islamophobia, adopted national responses to their recommendations, established education task forces and strengthened hate crime laws. These measures reinforce our commitment to protecting religious or belief communities, including when they mourn, conduct funeral and burial rites, and honour the deceased. Special Rapporteur, what else can States do to elevate the voices of affected communities when making decisions on the treatment, return, and commemoration of the deceased? Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [47:19]: I thank the distinguished representative of Australia. I now give the floor to Lithuania, to be followed by Spain, Cuba, Ireland, Pakistan. Lithuania, you have the floor. Can we have a mic for Lithuania? Lithuania · Nordic-Baltic States [47:36]: Thank you, Madam Chair. I am pleased to speak on behalf of the Nordic-Baltic States. We thank the Special Rapporteur for her report. In many parts of the world, individuals continue to be discriminated, persecuted and sometimes killed for attempts to exercise their freedom of thought, conscience and religion guaranteed by the international human rights law. We remain concerned about the misuse of religion for political purposes and for justifying aggression, violence, as well as repression within a country. The Kremlin politically instrumentalizes Russia's Orthodox Church for its war of aggression against Ukraine. Moreover, Russia arbitrarily destroys places of worship and presents its war against Ukraine as a holy war. The systematic destruction of religious sites, attacks on cemeteries, and obstacles faced by families seeking to recover, bury, and properly honor their dead illustrate how violations of freedom of religion or belief continue even after death, depriving communities of their religious and cultural mourning practices. Our concerted efforts are essential to promote and protect the freedom of religion or belief in line with international obligations. and confront mistreatment and violence based on these grounds. Madam Special Rapporteur, in situations of armed conflict and occupation, what additional measures should States and the international community take to ensure that individuals and communities can exercise their religious and belief-based practices related to mourning, burial, and commemoration of the deceased? Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [49:06]: I thank the distinguished representative of Lithuania. I now give the floor to the representative of Spain. Spain [49:13]: Madam Chair, Spain endorses the statement of the EU and we reaffirm our commitment to the defence of freedom of religion or belief as a fundamental expression of human rights. We are grateful for the work of the Special Rapporteur. We were delighted that she was able to attend the conscience and freedom conference in Toledo in March. The Spanish Constitution places freedom of religion and worship as an inalienable fundamental right that is inherent to the human dignity of all persons. Madam Chair, Spain agrees also that safeguarding funeral rights represents one of the basic pillars of religious freedom, requiring dignified and respectful treatment of the deceased. Similarly, we believe the right to a dignified burial in accordance with the beliefs of the deceased is part of religious freedom. Spain also fully agrees with the need to attach the utmost importance to commemoration and public recognition of deceased persons where there has been an attempt to erase their identity. In this regard, we recall the progress made in terms of our 2022 Democratic Memory Law. Madam Special Rapporteur, what ostensibly neutral but in reality discriminatory or measures that in fact limit religious freedom have you found to be the most frequent? Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [50:30]: Thank you, the distinguished representative of Spain. I now give floor to Cuba to be followed by Ireland, Pakistan, Canada and Greece. Cuba [50:38]: Thank you, Madam Chair. We are grateful for the presentation by the rapporteur and for her report on funeral rights in exceptional circumstances. Although little addressed, we agree that it is necessary to protect human rights with respect to death and honouring the deceased. The Cuban Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of religion and belief without discrimination. full exercise of this right is protected by our State. In Cuba, there is a vast range of religious beliefs. Catholicism, religions of African origin, Protestantism, Spiritism, Judaism and Haitian Vodou, amongst others, coexist in harmony. All beliefs and religions enjoy equal consideration. Their rights and customs are respected, including those related to the honor of the deceased and mourning practices. Intolerance, discrimination, or violence based on religion is proscribed and punished in Cuba. Chair, we reject the inclusion of Cuba in politically motivated lists drawn up by the United States Government that seeks to unilaterally judge religious freedoms in other countries. We condemn the political manipulation of the right to freedom of religion or belief, or any other human right. We reaffirm our commitment to freedom of religion and to multiculturalism, and we reject intolerance, stigmatisation and violence. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [52:08]: I thank the distinguished representative of Cuba. I now give the floor to Ireland. Ireland [52:14]: Thank you, Chair. Ireland aligns with the EU statement, and we thank the Special Rapporteur for her report and focus on ensuring the ability to honour the dead in exceptional circumstances. Ireland recognises the freedom of religion or belief as a fundamental freedom. We strongly condemn all forms of persecution on the basis of religion or belief, irrespective of where they occur or who the victims are, including Baha'is, Christians, Jews and Muslims. We note the special rapporteur's recommendations to ensure respect for the dignity of the dead and for those who mourn. That is elemental to the exercise of religion or belief. We note as well the particular challenges that are faced in situations of armed conflict and disaster contexts, which are described as being exceptional circumstances but which, unfortunately, are becoming less exceptional. Madam Special Rapporteur, can you highlight some recent examples of good practices of ensuring respect for the dignity of the dead in the exceptional circumstances you set out, in particular those in armed conflict and in disaster situations? Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [53:20]: I thank the distinguished representative of Ireland. I now give the floor to Pakistan. Pakistan [53:28]: Thank you. We thank Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion and belief for her report. This year's report highlights systemic denial of funeral rights for the Kashmiris killed by the Indian armed forces in Indian illegally occupied Jammu and Kashmir. India does not respect the dignity of Kashmiris and denies them the right of self-determination when they are alive. It does not allow them a dignified burial when they are killed in sham operations or tortured to death in prisons. This is appalling and unacceptable. We also echo report concerns on the preventing burial of Muslims killed by the Indian police in their ancestral villages This is a repeated pattern whereby senior Indian officials and top-tier BJP leaders have incited violence against Indian Muslims, provoked their public lynching, and forced them to live under fear, intimidation, and humiliation. No wonder that 18th OHRC report on Islamophobia issued last week has singled out India again for the highest concentration of Islamophobic incidents worldwide. We would like to thank again the Special Rapporteur and request her to continue reporting on the plight of religious minorities, especially those living in the situations of foreign occupation. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [54:34]: I thank the distinguished representative of Pakistan. I now give the floor to Canada, to be followed by Greece, Qatar, Azerbaijan, India. Canada, you have the floor. Canada [54:45]: Thank you, Chair. Canada thanks the Special Rapporteur for her report. The ability to honour the deceased in accordance with one's religion or belief is an important manifestation of freedom of religion or belief and an essential component of human dignity. At a time when armed conflicts and humanitarian crises are affecting communities worldwide, the report's findings are particularly timely. Canada is concerned by reports of interference with funeral and mourning practices, and we condemn the weaponization of these practices as tools of repression or discrimination. Canada agrees that emergency situations, armed conflict, public health crises, and climate-related disasters do not diminish the importance of respecting human rights. Canada welcomes the report's emphasis on protecting burial and memorial sites, facilitating access to places of remembrance, and ensuring that affected families and communities can participate meaningfully in decisions affecting them. Madam Special Rapporteur, when families are unable to recover, identify, or bury loved ones over an extended period, what accountability or reparative measures have proven effective in addressing ongoing harms and supporting reconciliation? 3rd Committee · Chair [55:56]: Second. Canada [55:57]: Where cemeteries, graves, and memorial sites are inaccessible in conflict settings, what measures are most effective in ensuring that affected communities can continue to honour and commemorate their loved ones? I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [56:10]: I thank the distinguished representative of Canada. I now give the floor to Greece. Greece [56:16]: Thank you, Madam Chair. Aligning ourselves with the EU intervention, we would like to extend our appreciation for the Special Rapporteur's thoughtful report, which examines the substantial issue of freedom of religion or belief and funeral rites in exceptional circumstances. Madame Special Rapporteur, Greece notes that your report touches upon very sensitive issues, such as related harms that often take the form of continuing interference when indicatively access to graves is lost or memorial practices are disrupted, as well as that it builds upon your elaboration in your previous thematic report on how freedom of religion or belief relates to death and honoring the deceased in regular situations. In this vein, we would like to mention that attaching great importance to this issue, Greece regulated by virtue of law 5324 of 2026, the conditions of specific preparatory services given to deceased Muslims in the mosque of Athens in conformity with the Islamic burial customs and rules, and in view the fact that there are more than 250 operative mosques in Thrace, Greece, the region where the thriving Muslim minority resides, which is the highest ratio of mosques per citizen of Islamic faith in Europe. Madam Special Rapporteur, in line with your recommendations to protect cemeteries, untested graves, and memorial sites from destruction or commercial development, as well as to integrate their protection into climate adaptation, disaster preparedness, and land use planning, what specific measures should be promoted and what concrete safeguards could ensure the meaningful consultation with affected persons when, for example, development plans? 3rd Committee · Chair [57:49]: I thank the distinguished representative of Greece. I now give the floor to Qatar, to be followed by Azerbaijan, India, Germany, Islamic Republic of Iran. Qatar, you have the floor. Qatar [58:05]: Madam Chair, we thank the Special Rapporteur on religious freedom. We thank her for her report. My country is committed to ensuring non-discrimination against anyone and the equality of everyone in light of the Charter, because there should be no discrimination based on religion or race. There should also be freedom of religion, which is guaranteed by everyone under our laws and under public laws, and also by our conviction. Qatar is a safe country characterized by our generosity. We've welcomed people from all areas and we have much respect for religion, given the fact that this is the basis of society and it's recognized by the charter. Qatar has a vision, the Vision 2030. It underscores the need for multicultural dialogue. We also have the International Doha Center, Center for Dialogue of Religions. This is to build a bridge among religions and cultures. My country reiterates the importance of tolerance and respect for diversity. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [59:27]: I thank the distinguished representative of Qatar. I now give the floor to Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan [59:33]: Madam Chair, freedom of religion or belief is rooted in the dignity and equality inherent in all human beings. As a multi-confessional society, Azerbaijan spares no effort to preserve and further develop these characteristics. Concerning the report of the Special Rapporteur submitted to the session, Azerbaijan underscores that upholding religious freedom, including the sanctity of places of worship and burial sites, is very important. In this regard, while preparing their reports, the Special Procedures mandate holders should include information and submissions that they check be reliable cross-checked and drawn from relevant credible sources in accordance with the HRC resolution 5/2 entitled code of conduct for special procedures mandate holders of 18 June 2007 Madame chair Azerbaijan rejects the allegations put forward in paragraph 16 and 17 of the above mentioned report concerning our country the special rapporteur could have referred to Azerbaijan where during the almost 30-year long occupation religious heritage of universal value, including the monuments associated with the Islamic faith, was deliberately destroyed and annihilated. In particular, at least 65 mosques were razed to the ground and cemeteries on a widespread scale were desecrated and robbed. The continued silence of the Special Rapporteur, while including groundless allegations in the report, raises the question of impartiality and objectivity. Madam Chair, referring to the. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:01:05]: I thank the distinguished representative of Azerbaijan. I now give the floor to India, to be followed by Germany, Islamic Republic of Iran, Egypt, and Sovereign Order of Malta. India, you have the floor. India [1:01:16]: Chair, as per the report, all discrimination and wrong practices during COVID-19 supposedly took place only in the Global South. What benefit does the report derive by not mentioning similar tragic situations in the developed world? Deriving political mileage out of people's pain and loss should not be a topic that SRs should base their relevance on. Burial rights for terrorists are being justified by indicating that states may restrict funeral rights of terrorists, but only within legal limits. Legal limits should be determined in accordance with the principles of sovereign rights. A terrorist not only kills innocent people, but damages the psyche of a nation. We are surprised that the fervent advocacy for the rights of terrorists, who violate the most sacred right of humans, the right to life, does not similarly extend to the victims of terrorism. The report goes back half a decade to find references to my country. It fails when it comes to grave violations committed recently in our region and in the developed world. It is deeply ironic that a state that did not even accept the bodies of its own soldiers who were killed in combat in 1999 in Kargil unabashedly speaks with fervor on faith, religious freedom, and burials. Let me remind them, it was the Indian army who buried a number of Pakistani soldiers with military honors and in accordance with Islamic rites. Pakistan's deep obsession with what is happening in the Indian Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir should be actually directed at the developments that are underway in the parts of Jammu and Kashmir under its illegal occupation, such as Rawalakot. In Pakistan, a number of minorities are shrinking, their rights regularly abused. A state that cannot ensure the safety of its own minorities has no standing to lecture India. Our full statement will be... 3rd Committee · Chair [1:02:46]: I thank the distinguished representative of India. I now give floor to Germany. Germany [1:02:51]: Thank you, Chair. Germany aligns itself with the EU statement and thanks the Special Rapporteur for her report. Germany continues to strongly support your mandate. We welcome the report's focus on funeral rights in exceptional circumstances and recognize that freedom of religion or belief extends beyond life. Germany shares the report's concern about the harrowing violations and restrictions in law and practice to such rights. Germany calls on all states to uphold funeral rites as an integral part of freedom of religion or belief, also in exceptional circumstances, and to strengthen efforts to combat religious intolerance. Meaningful consultation with affected communities is essential in this regard, also with a view to raising awareness for the diversity of practices pertaining to funeral rites. Madam Special Rapporteur, how can States systematically consult religion or belief communities on funeral rites in exceptional circumstances? What measures do you consider most effective in preventing the desecration of religious burial sites and ensuring accountability? I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:04:06]: I thank the distinguished representative of Germany. I now give the floor to Islamic Republic of Iran, to be followed by Egypt and Sovereign Order of Malta. Iran (Islamic Republic of) [1:04:16]: Thank you, Madam Chair. The Islamic Republic of Iran reaffirms its unwavering commitment to the freedom of religion or belief for all recognized religious minorities within its territory in full accordance with its constitution, national laws and charter-based obligations. Zoroastrian, Jewish and Christian communities are constitutionally recognized religious minorities. They freely exercise their faith, maintain their places of worship, have educational and charitable institutions and enjoy representation in the Parliament. During the recent unlawful war of aggression launched against the Islamic Republic of Iran by the United States and the Israeli regime, places of worship belonging to religious minorities were deliberately and recklessly destroyed. The St. Nicholas Orthodox Church sustained structural damage, and the Rafinia Synagogue in Tehran was fully destroyed because of the strikes. This selectivity is illustrated by the Special Rapporteur's unfortunate silence despite documented attacks on places of worship inside Iran. During the riots, hundreds of mosques were set ablaze by violent elements. The Special Rapporteur chose silence on the systematic targeting of Islamic places of worship. As a sovereign state, Iran will continue to protect the rights of its recognized religious minorities while firmly opposing any attempt to exploit such matters for political purposes. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:05:42]: I thank the distinguished representative of Islamic Republic of Iran. I now give the floor to Egypt. Egypt [1:05:49]: Thank you, Madam Chair, and I thank the Special Rapporteur for her efforts. And in this occasion, I reaffirm Egypt's commitment to freedom of religion and belief and combating religious intolerance, including Islamophobia. Every year, Egypt presents on behalf of the OIC the resolution on combating intolerance against persons based on religion or belief, and we call for its effective implementation to promote mutual respect and address discrimination and incitement to violence. As for the report, we respect the We emphasize on the respect for the deceased and that it's an integral part of human dignity. We're deeply concerned by the desecration of bodies and cemeteries and withholding of Palestinian remains as cited in the report. We call for the end of these practices and the dignified return for the remains to their families. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:06:49]: I thank the distinguished representative of Egypt. I now give the floor to Sovereign Order of Malta. SMOM [1:06:55]: Thank you, Madam Chair. Freedom of religion or belief is a fundamental human right, yet persecution and discrimination on account of faith remain widespread. As affirmed by Nostro etat, religious differences should inspire dialogue and mutual understanding, never division. For the Sovereign Order of Malta, this commitment is rooted. In its nearly 1,000-year mission of serving all those in need, without distinction of faith or ethnicity. The order has promoted religious freedom through its 2024 conference on religious freedom and integral human development, its 2025 expert round table with the. Atlantic Council, and the grand chancellor's 2026 meeting with the United Kingdom special envoy for freedom of religion or belief. Madam Chair, we must protect vulnerable communities, uphold the rights of religious minorities, and strengthen interreligious dialogue. For the Order, safeguarding religious freedom is inseparable from upholding human dignity and serving all those in need. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:08:07]: I thank the distinguished representative of Sovereign Order of Malta, who was the last speaker on my list for this dialogue. I now give the floor to a special rapporteur for her response. UN · Special Rapporteur [1:08:19]: Honourable Chair, Excellencies, Distinguished Delegates, I express my warmest appreciation to you for your rich engagement with this topic. You raised so many points on funeral rights and the related obligations that I can't possibly do them justice in responding to all of them, but I welcome and hope that we can follow up bilaterally. I don't believe that a new law has been created here. As many of you recognized, this is in recognition of the 1981 Declaration on all forms of intolerance based on religion or belief, which already recognizes funeral rights as a manifestation of religious belief, even if it doesn't use that same term. What is certain in this arena is that identical treatment does not deliver equality. as Spain commented. Differential treatment is required to accommodate the richness and diversity in matters of thought, conscience, and religion, beliefs, cultures, and practices. Otherwise, those who have suffered intolerance and discrimination in life and their loved ones and communities will indeed be guaranteed the same intolerance and even dehumanization after their death. This is where consultation and engagement is most critical, even with those that are not recognized in constitutions or systems that limit recognition only to some religions or beliefs. Religion or belief minorities, converts, other believers, and apostates will suffer disproportionately otherwise. And those who have been killed in political violence, armed conflict, or who have already been judged and serve their sentences in life, have been displaced or lost loved ones in other exceptional and emergency situations, will have their loss profoundly aggravated through disrespect of their funeral rights, speaking of intolerance and discrimination, erasure of their worthiness of their practices and dehumanization. through the fresh punishment being meted out even to their corpses and remains. If there cannot be freedom and equality in death, do we imagine it could possibly have been respected in life? Examples were shared, for example, by Afghanistan and Poland on challenges to this. The aim of this report was to be inclusive, as indeed this mandate is obligated and should be, and also to be illustrative of the scope of the relevance of various human rights, IHL and ICL obligations in upholding these rights. I'm deeply appreciative of the over 126 inputs that have been received as a result of the call for input for these two reports, and I believe, if my maths is not wrong, that 31 of you engaged today. Whilst as delegations, you may have been given instructions to robustly deny the veracity of some of those inputs, I would urge you to consider looking up the full inputs available on the mandate webpage under this report. I would also strongly encourage you to reach out to the civil society organizations and communities concerned to engage them in dialogue to address the root causes of the challenges and violations reported. and, in fact, the report cites these as having been reported. Very few of them were submitted as confidential, and, of course, I am duty bound to respect confidentiality. First-hand mandate observations would come from a country visit, and I'd welcome your invitation for this mandate to visit, as I did to Nigeria in June, and which there will be a report on in the March Council session, and I thank you for your statement today. States who responded to the call for input sometimes submitted in endorsing their own practices, and at other times also helpfully addressed the challenge of upholding these rights. I welcome their engagement. Where the issues are captured in allegation letters, there is, of course, an established modality for follow-up. Some of the references to the report were, of course, historical examples, some related to case law, which raised challenges that may have since been remedied. but gave depth to the coverage of this report. Others are very much alive and need urgent address, redress, and remedy. These are not merely illustrations of the phenomenon of freedom of religious belief in exceptional circumstances, but also of deeply institutionalized violations, which rest on a broader legal institutional and social condition that enable these violations to occur and continue. Examples in the reports included those of indigenous peoples and Afro-descendants in a number of jurisdictions, the treatment of executed prisoners in Belarus, of Rohingya in Myanmar, and the lack of dignified access to the bodies of loved ones subsequent to the mass protests earlier this year in Iran and the attempt some years ago to force Baha'is to bury, have their loved ones buried on the site of mass graves. These instances speak at their core to ongoing challenges which we have lived with for years, if not decades and sometimes centuries. Excellencies, distinguished delegates, the recommendations addressing states in this report include for states to uphold their IHRL, IHL, and ICL obligations in line with the imperative to uphold funeral rights to the highest extent possible in all circumstances, to strictly respect the legal framework regarding limitations on manifestation of religious belief and funeral rights on a case-by-case basis taking into consideration loved ones and next of kin, including in the context of victims of unlawful killing, those who have been subjected to the death penalty and encounter terrorism. I think I'm running out of time, so let me focus on a few of your comments. What is the minimum? Well, I think international human rights law spells that out. And I think, yes, exceptional circumstances. can be dire, such as the restrictions that we experienced in the Covid period, and it can be very hard to respect funeral rights fully. Nevertheless, I think that, if there is ongoing trust and consultation with the communities, then, at the very least, harm can be minimised, and the report talks about to the highest extent possible, given those circumstances. There were a number of there was a lot of interest in this report and how to take it forward. What are some of the good practices? And in fact, I'd like to suggest multilateral engagement on good practices and challenges. along with the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial killings, who also has a number of reports relating to the broader phenomenon, the Special Rapporteur on truth, the Working Group on enforced disappearances, and other relevant mandates. Perhaps this requires ongoing attention, so indeed we can gather those best practices and have them at hand in emergency situations. Thank you so much for your interest and your engagement. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:15:58]: I thank the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Ms. Ganeva. I now welcome the Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights, Ms. Zeina Jalad, who is joining us virtually. Participants wishing to make comments and pose questions to the speaker are invited to press their microphone buttons within the next three minutes, after which the list will be closed. The time limit for each speaker will be announced before the floor is given to the first speaker. I now invite the Special Rapporteur on the negative impact on unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights to make the introductory statement. Ms. Jilal, you have the floor. We cannot hear you. UN · Special Rapporteur [1:16:49]: No. Maybe you are unmuted. Maybe you can unmute us if we are muted. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:17:10]: No. We still have difficulties hearing you. Can you check, are you muted? UN · Special Rapporteur [1:17:52]: Hi, so if can you repeat again, please? 3rd Committee · Chair [1:18:26]: You have to unmute yourself. Dear colleagues, we have to pause for a few seconds just to fix the problem. Thank you for your understanding. Speaker 77 [1:20:19]: Hi, Ms. Chellali. We can hear you now. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:20:21]: Thank you. UN · Special Rapporteur [1:20:23]: Thank you so much. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:20:25]: We can hear you now. Please. UN · Special Rapporteur [1:20:29]: Thanks. Hi, Kholon. Madam Chair, Excellencies, distinguished delegates. It gives me a great pleasure to present my first report to the General Assembly as UN Special Rapporteur. I was very much looking forward to an interactive dialogue with you in person, precisely to avoid the kind of glitches that we just ran into. However, my visa application has been under administrative processing for over a month, and I'm left with no choice but to join you remotely. I'm joining you from Beirut, so I really hope the internet connection will help us. I want to open a conversation with you today because this mandate can only succeed through genuine engagement with all states. Since I took up my mandate in May, I have met with at least 70 states and civil society organizations, and their views have shaped the report before you. My report comes at a time of rapidly increasing use of unilateral coercive measures. They are now being applied to the international justice and human rights system itself, to judges and officials of the International Criminal Court, to human rights defenders and organizations, and even to mandate holders of the special procedure system. These institutions were built by states And when those who serve them are subjected to such measures, the whole system is weakened. If states do not respond with principle and resolve, the primacy of international law itself will be weakened. We are here today to protect the system built over more than 80 years of collective effort and commitment. Excellencies and distinguished delegates, Are we prepared to recommit together to preserve the principles of international law and multilateral cooperation on which that system rests and to safeguard it from the adverse effects of unilateral coercive measures? In the end, this is about people. These measures are becoming more sweeping and their effects are creeping, step by step. from their stated targets to entire populations. As they do, they risk compromising the rights of people who bear no responsibility for the policies being targeted. This is what I call the human cost. It falls hardest on those in the most vulnerable situations, and it can last across generations. A mother waits for money from her son working abroad. The bank refuses the transfer, even though it's not prohibited. For her, it's not a payment, it's a week's worth of food. When a farmer cannot get seeds or fertilizers in time, the harvest is smaller and the whole community pays for it at the market. A hospital needs a dialysis machine. But because some of its components are classified as dual use, the export license is delayed or never granted. Whatever the intention behind the control, the result is that patients go without treatment. A child with a rare disease needs a medicine that is exempt from sanctions. yet still cannot get it because the bank will not process the payment, the insurer will not cover the shipment, or the supplier withdraws. Over time, whole communities are kept on a drip feed. They survive, but they cannot develop. In each case, the harm comes less from the text of the measure than from how it travels through banks, insurers, suppliers, and export controls. None of these people appear on a sanctions list, but the measures still reach them. The consequences can be fatal. Research cited in my report links to unilateral economic sanctions to higher death rates, especially among children under five and older people. It is this human cost that shapes the vision in my report. I intend to advance the mandate and build on my predecessor's work by adopting a human rights-based and participatory approach. I will place the experiences of individuals and communities affected by unilateral coercive measures at the heart of my work. I will seek sustained dialogue with all stakeholders, including States that apply measures, states affected by them, while protecting the independence, impartiality, and integrity of the mandate. Excellencies and distinguished delegates, my first priority is access to the essential systems of life, such as health, food, water, electricity, and social protection. Closely linked to this are overcompliance, de-risking, and how humanitarian exemptions work in practice. I will look at development, recovery and debt, including what recovery requires once measures are lifted. My work will also cover the digital and knowledge infrastructure on which education, health and research depend, and the effects of unilateral sanctions on third states and on migration and displacement. I will also look at assets. Property and sovereign resources where immobilization and confiscation raise questions of due process, such as state immunity, private property, and the permanent sovereignty of peoples and state over their natural resources, which leads us to coercive conditionality, which is another priority for my mandate because it shapes negotiations and the choices left to affected populations on sanctions relief. back provisions, school arrangements and conditions on assistance. Access to justice and remedy runs through all of this, including for those who serve in international justice institutions. Throughout, my focus will remain on the rights, dignity and agency of affected people, which lie at the heart of self-determination. Both international covenants say it plainly. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence, because ordinary people are not collateral damage. I ask your excellencies and distinguished delegates to not allow these tools to become a means of collective punishment or of coercion against rights holders. My door is open. I look forward to a close and constructive collaboration with you over the course of my tenure. both in driving forward my thematic priorities and in addressing emerging and urgent issues as they arise. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:27:53]: I thank the Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights on her report. I will now open the floor for any questions or comments to Ms. Chalad. As per practice, I would ask delegations to limit their comments to two minutes. I thank you for your kind cooperation. I now give the floor to a distinguished representative of Nigeria, to be followed by Belarus, Angola, Russian Federation. Nigeria, you have the floor. Can we have a mic for Nigeria, please? Thank you. Nigeria [1:28:34]: Thank you. Nigeria thanks the Special Rapporteur for her position paper. and aligns with the principal position of non-aligned movement and expresses solidarity with countries and peoples affected by unilateral coercive measures. Such measures often extend beyond their stated objectives, leaving ordinary citizens to bear the greatest burden through restricted access to medicine, food, financial services, education, and other necessities. We are particularly concerned that banks, insurance and other commercial actors obstruct lawful debt transaction and humanitarian assistance, even where exemptions formally exist. This aggravates the vulnerability of women, children, older persons and persons with disabilities, while undermining international cooperation and development prospects. Nigeria underscore respect for the Charter of the United Nations, international law, and sovereign equality of states, and the right of people to self-determination and development. Measures with adverse humanitarian consequences require transparent assessment and effective safeguards, including human rights impact assessment before, during, and after implementation, with the meaningful participation of affected populations. We also support the Special Rapporteur's emphasis on accountability access to justice and effective remedies. Madam Special Rapporteur, what practical measures do you recommend to strengthen international cooperation and ensure that unilateral coercive measures do not undermine the right to development, humanitarian assistance, and fundamental human rights, particularly in developing countries? I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:30:12]: I thank the distinguished representative of Nigeria. I now give the floor to Belarus. Speaker 85 [1:30:17]: Special Representative. Belarus [1:30:19]: Thank you, Chair. Madam Special Rapporteur, we thank you for preparing and swiftly publicating your report A/81/286. We welcome the concept and the thematic priorities of your work, and we wish you successful continuation of this significant work started by the previous mandate holders. We support the idea of creating institutional options through which documentation, review and remedy could be connected, as well as mechanisms of assistance through which affected individuals and institutions could lodge a complaint in the event that their legitimate activities are blocked, and through which information about ongoing violations could be provided to the necessary channels. We agree that unilateral coercive measures violate the normal flow of trade, financial, and humanitarian operations, even in states that are not directly targeted, and also that the use of UCMs is associated with elevated mortality, specifically among children. We we can affirm that there is the existence of problems of overcompliance with sanctions. We can reaffirm the adverse impact UCMs have on the access to healthcare on the part of women, children, older persons, those with disabilities, and other population groups that are particularly vulnerable. The impact they have on food security, on the enjoyment of the right to develop. and the achievement of the SDGs. We agree with the data that the UCMs can cause displacement of populations and increase the intensity of migration flows. Distinguished colleagues, Belarus calls upon all stakeholders to act in timely and energetic fashion to respond to the request of the Special Rapporteur to provide information. For our part, we reaffirm our openness and our readiness to render any necessary assessments in the discharge of the mandate, and we express our hope that the practice of UCMs will stop quickly. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:32:16]: I give the floor to Angola, to be followed by Russia, Kenya, Cuba, and Nicaragua. Angola [1:32:23]: Thank you, Chair. Angola thanks the Special Rapporteur for presenting her report. The promotion and protection of human rights must remain central to international action, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and international law. We remain concerned about the humanitarian and development consequences of UCMs, particularly their extra-territorial implications and excessive compliance by financial and commercial institutions. Restrictions affecting access to financing, medicines, essential technologies and basic services undermine the right to health, education, work and development, overlying affecting women, children, persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups. Human rights must not become collateral damage in political disputes. International responses should be advanced dialogue, cooperation, and peaceful dispute resolutions, rather than deepen humanitarian hardship or undermine progress towards the SDGs. Madam Chair, Angola calls for three priority actions. First, Undertake independent, evidence-based assessments of the human rights impact of unilateral coercive measures, particularly on vulnerable populations. Second, strengthen humanitarian safeguards and address excessive compliance that obstructs legitimate humanitarian development activities. Third, review and remove measures inconsistent with the United Nations Charter and international law, prioritizing dialogue, multilateral cooperation, and peaceful solutions. As member of Human Rights Council for 2026-2028, Angola will continue promoting constructive dialogue, international cooperation, and practical solutions that place human dignity at the center of multilateral actions. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:34:11]: I thank the distinguished representative of Angola. I now give floor to Russian Federation. Russian Federation [1:34:18]: Madam Chair, we welcome Ms. Gillard in her new post, and we express our support for her report on the negative impact of UCMs on the enjoyment of human rights. We agree with the Special Rapporteur's concern about overcompliance with such measures on the part of the private sector. The fear of commercial institutions and banks of punitive measures of the United States and the European Union paralyze international settlements, destroy supply chains, and block even those transactions that formally fall under the category of humanitarian exemptions. The practice of the collective West in introducing unilateral sanctions has turned into direct economic aggression. As of October of this year, our country faces 26,000 restrictions. The 12th of October saw the EU add over 1,500 Russian natural and legal persons to the list. Madam Chair, the most pernicious sanctions hit developing countries and vulnerable population groups. As is clearly confirmed by the report's statistics, blocking of assistance and disruptions of medication procurement raises mortality among older persons and children. We urge the international community to close ranks to resist illegitimate restrictions. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:35:41]: I thank the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation. I now give floor to Kenya, to be followed by Cuba, Nicaragua, and Chile. Kenya · Africa Group [1:35:49]: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of the African Group. The Group warmly welcomes Ms. Zeina Jalad as the new Special Rapporteur and assures her of our support and constructive engagement. We appreciate her inaugural report and its eight thematic priorities, in particular the attention to the right to development, overcompliance, effects on third states, and access to justice and effective remedies. Unilateral coercive measures undermine livelihoods, impede sustainable development, and disproportionately affect people in vulnerable situations. Their consequences extend beyond targeted states, disrupting regional trade and financial cooperation. The African Group notes with concern the gap highlighted in the report between formal humanitarian exemptions and their practical effectiveness. over compliance by banks, insurers, and other private actors can obstruct even permitted transactions, restricting access to food, medicines, and essential services. We therefore reaffirm our opposition to unilateral coercive measures contrary to international law and the Charter of the United Nations and call for their removal. Madam Special Rapporteur, we are concerned the adverse effects of these measures may persist even after they are lifted, prolonging hardship and delaying recovery. What practical steps would you recommend to ensure that their removal translates into the restoration of financial, trade and development cooperation for affected African countries? I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:37:31]: I thank the distinguished representative of Kenya. I now give the floor to Kyoba. Cuba · Group of Friends in Defence of the Charter of the United Nations [1:37:36]: Muchas gracias, senora. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I will be reading just an extract of our position, and we will submit the full statement for publication in the journal. We reaffirm our strong condemnation of the host country's reprisals against mandate holders, including the Special Rapporteur and including mandate holders of the Human Rights Council. They are continuing to fail in their obligations as the host country. We reiterate our full support for the rapporteur. I have the honour now of speaking on behalf of the Group of Friends in Defence of the Charter of the United Nations. We congratulate Ms Zeine Chahlaad on her appointment, and we express our full support for her important work. The group takes note of the report. We reaffirm our strong condemnation of the continued, systemic, relentless, cruel and ever-increasing promulgation of unilateral coercive measures. They are aimed at advancing interventionist and destabilizing agendas, both political and economic in nature. These dramatically impact the enjoyment of human rights, preventing and hindering access, amongst other things, to food, medicines and medical treatments or equipment, financial services, education, technological advances, fuel and energy sources, amongst other basic goods and services. Their application is therefore contrary to both the spirit and letter of the Charter of the United Nations. Chair, the Group of Friends urgently calls on States to cease promulgating unilateral coercive measures, commercial, economic, financial or otherwise, that negatively impact the full enjoyment of all human rights. We would also call on States to refrain from drawing up illegal unilateral lists, such as the list of states that allegedly sponsor terrorism, which constitutes an additional... 3rd Committee · Chair [1:39:37]: The speaker's microphone is in front of you. I now give the floor to Nicaragua, to be followed by Chile, Namibia and Venezuela. Nicaragua [1:39:48]: Distinguished rapporteur, Nicaragua recognises the importance of continuing raising the visibility of the grave consequences of imposing illegal unilateral coercive measures and the impact this has on people's well-being. We reiterate our firm rejection of these unjust and illegal measures. These are used as instruments of political coercion against sovereign states. breaching the principle of sovereign equality, non-interference and self-determination. Unilateral coercive measures directly impact the living conditions of millions of people. They hinder access to medicines, foods, health services, education, technology and financial resources, all of which are indispensable for their well-being and their development. These effects go beyond national borders. They break down trade relations, banking operations, and international cooperation. Nicaragua believes that it is unacceptable that such measures continue to impose suffering on people. They deepen inequalities, and they impede the enjoyment of the full right to development. Economic coercion should not be used to impose political measures on other countries. We call for the immediate, full and unconditional lifting of all unilateral coercive measures. These violations of the Charter of the United Nations are a violation of basic human rights and deprive people of the basic means of subsistence and development. Distinguished rapporteur, in this regard, what concrete actions do you believe should be carried out in order to achieve the elimination of these measures and to ensure they do not continue to impede the full enjoyment of human rights of peoples? We fully defend the right to sovereignty, self-determination and non-interference. So we defend an international just order based on mutual respects, solidarity and full respect for international law and human rights. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:41:45]: Distinguished representative of Nicaragua, I now give floor to Chile. Chile [1:41:50]: Thank you, Madam Chair. Chile welcomes the Special Rapporteur and we thank her for her report. Our country defends a foreign policy that is based on multilateralism, respect for international law and the sovereignty of states. In this regard, we categorically reject unilateral coercive measures that are illegal, and we maintain that international sanctions should emanate from decisions adopted under the framework of the multilateral framework of the United Nations, especially those authorized by the Security Council. In your report, You present a roadmap for carrying out your mandate, highlighting the importance of a participative, transparent and evidence-based approach that allows us to better understand the impact of United Nations coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights. In this context, we wish to ask you What do you believe are the major challenges for implementing this methodology and how can states or other relevant stakeholders contribute to strengthening the work of your mandate, especially as regards identifying and preventing the impacts on the most vulnerable populations? Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:42:58]: I thank the distinguished representative of Chile. I now give floor to Namibia, to be followed by Venezuela, United Kingdom and Brazil. Namibia [1:43:07]: Thank you, Madam Chair. Namibia welcomes the report of the Special Rapporteur, which confirms that the harm arising from unilateral coercive measures extend far beyond the borders of the targeted state and felt most in humanitarian settings. Namibia also welcomes the General Assembly's decision in June 2025, designating 4 December as the International Day against UCMs, in an effort to raise awareness on the adverse impact of measures that are inconsistent with international law and the UN Charter. Regrettably, 51 states voted against the resolution, maintaining that sanctions are lawful and necessary instruments for addressing terrorism, security threats, and destabilizing conduct. We therefore welcome the report's correct interpretation that UCMs weaken multilateralism by undermining the protection and safeguard it was designed to provide, while justice mechanisms often fail to ensure adequate access to effective remedies. Namibia therefore calls for the rejection of UCMs and for a renewed commitment to multilateralism as the cornerstone of international relations and diplomacy. We maintain that support for UCMs undermine the rule of law by circumventing credible international institution, disregarding collective consensus, and weakening the institution entrusted with upholding international law. If UCMs are to be considered relevant to multilateralism, We draw your attention to the situation the International Criminal Court is facing, which is emanating from unilateral actions. Madam Special Rapporteur, what message would you convey to states that continue to support the use of UCM? Basically, what-- thank you. Yeah, thank you, sorry. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:45:03]: I thank the distinguished representative of Namibia. I now give floor to Venezuela. Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) [1:45:09]: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Venezuela is grateful to Madam Seneschal Land for presenting her report. and we welcome her to this interactive dialogue. Venezuela reaffirms its position of principle as regards the unilateral coercive measures. We consider that they are incompatible with international law, the Charter of the United Nations, and the principles of cooperation and respect for sovereignty that is supposed to govern relations between states. Venezuela reiterates once again that there is a need for the immediate and unconditional cessation of all unilateral coercive measures applied in breach of international law. In this regard, we value the fact that the report highlights how overcompliance and the limitations in the implementation of humanitarian exemptions can hamper access to essential food, medicine, and financial services. Experience has shown us that This can generate additional problems for states' development, affecting productivity and the availability of resources aimed at social investment programs and protection of the population. This is why Venezuela continues to advocate for solutions based on dialogue, respect for international law, and lifting of those measures that impede the efforts of development and recovery of nations. Venezuela welcomes the methodological approach announced by the Special Rapporteur. It focuses on the persons affected and on assessing the concrete impacts of these measures. We also believe it is important to continue going deeper in the analysis of their impacts on third states and on the dynamics of migration in order to promote more comprehensive and effective responses. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:47:04]: I thank the distinguished representative for Venezuela. I now give floor to United Kingdom to be followed by Brazil, European Union, and Malaysia. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [1:47:14]: Thank you, Madam Chair. We welcome the proactive engagement of the special rapporteur since taking up her mandate and the evidence and data-driven approach to gathering input she has set out in her report. The UK's autonomous sanctions are targeted and focused in accordance with international law and the UN Charter, and they are not so-called unilateral coercive measures, with which they are often confused. The UK uses sanctions to defend human rights. We target perpetrators of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, those who profit from modern slavery, those who utilise child soldiers, and those who engage in conflict-related sexual violence, amongst others. We challenge those who believe they can act with impunity, highlight their abuses to the world and ensure they cannot benefit from access to the UK or our economy. Sanctions can be a legitimate tool, and just as the UK supports the refining of United Nations sanctions, we do so with our autonomous sanctions. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:48:12]: I thank the distinguished representative of the United Kingdom. I now give the floor to Brazil. Brazil [1:48:18]: Thank you, Madam Chair. Brazil congratulates Dr. Zeina Jalad on assuming her mandate and appreciates her first report to the Third Committee. We regret that she is kept from being here today. Brazil reaffirms its principled stance that unilateral coercive measures violate international law. We welcome the rapporteur's vision to focus her report on the impact of UCMs on vulnerable populations, humanitarian actors, and sustainable development efforts. As the Special Rapporteur correctly highlights, the proliferation of these measures erodes the multilateral order and impairs international cooperation, including humanitarian assistance. Today, we are witnessing the weaponization of UCMs against human rights, democratic institutions, and the independence of the judiciary, as well as against the international order based on international law and the multilateral human rights system. Such measures are not only unlawful, but also inconsistent with the international obligations of sanctioning states as they disregard the principles of sovereignty, non-intervention and respect for human rights. Such measures seem also to be designed to interfere with the will of the people and even tilt the playing field necessary for free and fair elections in democratic societies. Madam Chair, given the emerging trend particularly the targeting of democratic institutions and the judiciary. How does the Special Rapporteur assess the long-term systemic consequences of these measures? Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:50:02]: I thank the distinguished representative for Brazil. I now give the floor to European Union, to be followed by Malaysia, Uganda, Zimbabwe. EU [1:50:12]: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member states. The European Union thanks the Special Rapporteur for her presentation and engagement with member states. It reiterates our steadfast commitment to promoting and protecting all human rights as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. EU restrictive measures are a targeted and carefully calibrated tool, deployed to defend universal values and international law, to preserve peace and security and to promote respect for democracy and human rights, in line with the principles of the UN Charter. They are a legitimate, rules-based and non-punitive instrument of the EU's common foreign and security policy, and are adopted in full compliance with international law. proportionate and reversible, they are always carefully designed to avoid any unintended consequences, including for food security of third countries around the globe. EU sanctions complement and reinforce UN action. The EU assumes its responsibility to uphold the purposes and principles of the UN Charter when the Security Council is unable to act, especially due to the veto of a permanent member. EU restrictive measures are thus a peaceful measure of last resort, adopted in response to violations and with the aim of deterring further violations. Together with its Member States, the EU is the world's largest donor of humanitarian and development assistance, including to countries under sanctions. In addition, the EU has swiftly transposed UN Security Council Resolution 2664 in all UN regimes concerned and has introduced an equivalent, if not broader, humanitarian carve-out across its autonomous sanctions regimes. This underlines our strong commitment to humanitarian principles and the protection of those most in need. Thank you very much. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:52:08]: I thank the distinguished representative of the European Union. I now give the floor to Malaysia. Malaysia [1:52:14]: Thank you, Madam Chair. Malaysia thanks the Special Rapporteur, Ms. Zainah Jalal, for her presentation and report. Malaysia's position on unilateral coercive measures is clear and consistent. We firmly oppose all forms of unilateral coercive measures that contravene the norms of international law, as well as the purposes and principles of the United Nations as set forth in its Charter. Such measures undermine sovereign equality, weaken multilateral cooperation, while imposing an unjust burden on ordinary people, particularly in developing countries. Of particular concern is the issue of overcompliance. As highlighted in the report, humanitarian exemptions may exist on paper, yet banking restrictions, insurance difficulties, and disruption to supply chains can prevent essential medicines, food, and humanitarian assistance from reaching those in need. These consequences disproportionately affect women, children, older persons, and other groups in vulnerable situations. Malaysia is equally concerned by the long-term consequences of unilateral coercive measures on sustainable development. Restrictions on access to finance, technology, and international cooperation can undermine national development efforts and impede progress towards the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Madam Special Rapporteur, given your report emphasis on compliance and humanitarian exemptions, what practical steps could be taken to ensure that such exemptions are effective in practice, particularly in addressing barriers to financial transactions and the delivery of essential goods and humanitarian assistance? Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:54:01]: I thank the distinguished representative of Malaysia. I now give floor to Uganda, to be followed by Zimbabwe, Eritrea, China, and Islamic Republic of Iran. Uganda · NAM [1:54:11]: Thank you, Madam Chair. Uganda is honored to take the floor on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. At the outset, we would like to express our appreciation for the briefing of Ms. Zeina Jalad, Special Rapporteur, on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights, while welcoming with appreciation the report she presented to the current session of the General Assembly, as contained in document A/81/286, which highlights the negative aspects of unilateral coercive measures and includes recommendations in order to minimize the adverse impact. Madam Chair, during the 19th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement held in January 2024 in Kampala, the heads of state and government reaffirmed their agreed positions particularly the opposition to all unilateral coercive measures, including those measures used as tools for political or economic and financial pressure against any country, in particular against developing countries, which violates the Charter of the United Nations, rules and principles of international law. Similarly, the Member States of the Movement reaffirmed that under no circumstance should people be deprived of their own means of subsistence and development while expressing their concern at the continued imposition of such measures which hinder the well-being of populations of the afflicted countries and that create obstacles to the full realization of their human rights. The Non-Aligned Movement also reiterates its strong concern at the growing resort to unilateralism and unilaterally imposed measures that undermine the UN Charter and international law and further reiterates its commitment to promoting, preserving, revitalizing, reforming and strengthening multilateralism and the multilateral decision-making process through the UN by strictly adhering to its Charter and international law. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:56:12]: I thank the distinguished representative of Uganda. I now give the floor to Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe [1:56:18]: Thank you, Chair. My delegation commends the Special Rapporteur for her comprehensive report, which highlights the multi-sectoral impact of unilateral coercive measures and their negative effect on the enjoyment of human rights. For more than two decades, UCMs have constrained our access to international financing, investment, lines of credit, and development partnerships, and have undermined our efforts towards sustainable development and the enjoyment of human rights. Of particular concern is the persistence of financial restrictions and overcompliance by international financial institutions and private actors, even when certain measures have been lifted. Financial transactions are being disrupted and economic cooperation impacted, with adverse consequences for ordinary citizens. We therefore welcome the Special Rapporteur's recognition of the long-term impact of UCMs long after their formal removal. Further, my delegation equally appreciates the report's emphasis on the right to development, By restricting access to financing and other resources, unilateral coercive measures impede investment in essential services, including health, education, and social protection, thereby undermining progress towards the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. On 25 October, our region will commemorate the SADC Anti-Sanctions Day, reaffirming the region's solidarity with Zimbabwe and its call for the unconditional removal of sanctions imposed against our country. This collective position underscores that extraterritorial effects of these measures affecting regional trade, investment, financial cooperation and integration, beyond being a national concern, you see, have also become a regional development challenge. Zimbabwe therefore reiterates its longstanding opposition to unilateral coercive measures and calls for the immediate, complete and unconditional removal wherever they've been imposed. Economic and political compulsion engenders mistrust and sometimes conflict. We firmly believe that dialogue, cooperation, and mutual respect must guide relations among states. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [1:58:18]: I thank the distinguished representative of Zimbabwe. I now give the floor to Eritrea, to be followed by China and Islamic Republic of Iran. Eritrea [1:58:29]: Thank you, Madam Chair. We congratulate Ms. Dena on her appointment as Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures and express our support and wish her success in her mandate. Eritrea reiterates its condemnation of all forms of UCMs. Those measures are illegal under international law and a breach of the cardinal principles of the Charter of the United Nations, specifically the sovereign equality of states and non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states. UCMs are not intended to enhance the enjoyment of human rights, They are tools certain states use to coerce developing nations into altering their independent political and development paths. The impact of ISMs is a lived reality that Eritrea and many other states face. Restrictions on banking relations, local transfers, impaired procurement of inputs, and a chilling effect on trade and investment sharply reduce fiscal space and the state's ability to deliver public goods and social services. Furthermore, overcompliance by financial actors and companies, including account closures and prohibitive transaction costs, is a glaring feature of the illegal coercive measures. We urge the lifting of those unlawful measures. I thank you, Madam Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:00:09]: I thank the distinguished representative of Eritrea. I now give floor to China. China [2:00:17]: Madam Chair, the Chinese delegation has carefully studied the first report of the newly appointed Special Rapporteur, Ms. Jalad, and has taken note of the vision and thematic priorities outlined in the report. We appreciate the report's identification of the multifaceted negative impacts of UCMs on human rights. UCMs grossly violate the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, undermine the fundamental norms of international law and the foundations of international rule of law, infringe upon basic human rights, such as the right to life and the right to development, hinder the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, and set back multilateralism, the international order, and the international governance system. A small number of Western countries have instrumentalized and weaponized UCMs in an attempt to justify and legitimize the law of the jungle, whereby the strong prey upon the weak. Although the international community has long called for the elimination of UCMs, the problem has not been effectively curbed. and many developing countries and their peoples continue to suffer deeply from the harmful effects. China urges the countries concerned to heed the just cause of the international community and immediately lift all illegal unilateral sanctions imposed on developing countries. As a victim of UCMs, China is willing to strengthen exchanges and cooperation with all parties, including the United Nations human rights mechanisms, to further deepen the international community's understanding of the illegality and harmful consequences of UCMs. China is also committed to eliminating the negative impacts of UCMs on all countries worldwide, and to jointly promoting the sound development of the international human rights agenda. Thank you, Madam Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:02:16]: I thank the distinguished representative of China. I now give floor to Islamic Republic of Iran. Iran (Islamic Republic of) [2:02:22]: Thank you, Madam Chair. We thank the Special Rapporteur for her first report to the Third Committee and welcome her emphasis on the human cost of unilateral coercive measures, in particular overcompliance, extraterritorial impacts, and the role of private actors and financial systems. For Iran, these concerns are not merely theoretical. They have acquired an even more tangible and devastating dimension in light of the recent war of aggression against my country, including the impacts of blockade and restrictions that further constrain the flow of essential goods and humanitarian supplies. For years, unilateral coercive measures have restricted Iran's access to financial channels essential goods, medicines, medical equipment, and other necessary resources for the full enjoyment of human rights. The recent hostilities have demonstrated how these pre-existing constraints can magnify the, sorry, can magnify the humanitarian consequences of all conflicts when banks, companies, insurers, and other private actors engage in overcompliance out of fear of secondary sanctions, The consequences extend far beyond the intended targets. They affect ordinary people, humanitarian actors, patients, hospitals, and the broader capacity of a society to recover from conflict. We encourage the Special Rapporteur to give particular attention to accountability, effective remedies, and the responsibility of states and private actors whose conduct produces extraterritorial and humanitarian consequences. I apologize. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:04:03]: I thank the distinguished representative of Islamic Republic of Iran, who was the last speaker on my list for this dialogue. I now give floor to the Special Rapporteur on the Negative Impact of Unilateral Coercive Measures on the Enjoyment of Human Rights, Ms. Zaineh Jalal. UN · Special Rapporteur [2:04:22]: Thank you so much, Madam Chair. I would like to sincerely thank all States for engaging in this interactive dialogue. Your input is invaluable, especially in my first dialogue with the General Assembly. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, I truly had wished to be in the room with you today, but I'm encouraged to see so many delegations willing to engage constructively with this important mandate. The participation that I have noted today is all the more encouraging, given that this is a moment of pronounced strain on the very multilateral system that brings us together. It is during these critical times when the mandate is at its most relevant that your engagement is needed most. This is exactly what I'm here on building, dialogue and bridges. Today is an example of what we are most in need of. I have taken note of the statements that reflected the human cost of these measures. In the context raised today and beyond, people and populations far removed from political decision-making have carried their heaviest weight. The dialogue confirmed what my report documents. Alongside the protracted conditions created by longstanding measures, we face contemporary forms of unilateral coercive measures whose architecture is increasingly complex and layered, and whose effects accumulate across time, where children grow up without adequate food, medicine, or schooling. The harm becomes intergenerational, and it may persist even after measures are modified or lifted. My report also sets out what each actor can do now through prevention, mitigation, and remedy. Any proposed measure should be assessed for its human rights impact before. Imposing authorities can provide clear general licenses, authoritative guidance, and protected payment channel. Allow me to restate what my report states, because it speaks to the whole room. States that impose unilateral coercive measures bear responsibility for the measures they adopt, maintain and enforce, and for their foreseeable consequences. They must define restrictions. The human rights obligations of states subject to measures do not diminish, transfer or offset that responsibility. And affected states, for their part, remain required to protect the people under their jurisdiction within the resources that remain available to them. Excellencies, the guarantee on which I will base my work on is Article 1, paragraph 2, common to the two international covenants. "In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence." In every case where unilateral coercive measures have been imposed, I will ask whether the system on which people's subsistence depends continues to function. We've heard from 19 States today, from Nicaragua, Belarus, Kenya, Mongolia, Russia, Cuba, Chile, Namibia, Venezuela, UK, EU, Brazil, Malaysia, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Eritrea, China, and Iran. And I think we are in a position today where we are coming together in order to address the adverse impact of unilateral coercive measures on human rights. Looking ahead, my door is open to every delegation and to affected communities. Calls for input will issue well in advance of each report, and I invite all of you to engage with the mandate. I heard distinctly the concerns of African states and the mandates work on third states' effects, food security, debt and development. These will be given particular attention. The work will expand, and the expansion will be anchored in evidence. Before concluding, I wish to apologize that I was not able to respond to all questions and comments made today, but be assured that I'm taking all points into consideration and would be happy to respond to individual questions in writing after the dialogue. Allow me to conclude by reiterating a central message. Unilateral coercive measures must never become instruments directed at populations. rather than policies, another form of collective punishment. There should be no room in this committee for the normalization of measures whose weight falls on people who had no part in the disputes behind them. No child, no woman, no person, or community in vulnerable circumstances should bear that weight. With that commitment, I look forward constructively engaging with you throughout my tenure, hopefully, and looking forward truly to be in person. I wish to thank you sincerely for your productive and encouraging engagement today. I thank you, Madam Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:09:43]: I thank the Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights. I now welcome the independent expert on the effect of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of states on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social, cultural rights, Ms. Atia Varis. Participants wishing to make comments and pose questions to the speaker are invited at this time to press the microphone button within the next three minutes, after which the list will be closed. The time limit for each speaker will be announced before the floor is given to the first speaker. I now invite the independent expert on the effect of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights, to make an introductory statement. Ms. Faris, you have the floor. UN · Independent Expert [2:10:39]: Thank you very much. It's a particular pleasure and an honor to be here to make my final presentation to this August Assembly in my capacity as a dependent expert on foreign debt and other international financial obligations and its implications for human rights. And I would like to thank Member States particularly, as well as other stakeholders, for their engagement and valuable contributions throughout my tenure. I have been informed by submissions, and this report examines a question that is largely overlooked in fiscal and financial debate. How can financial governance of the high seas ensure that benefits are shared equitably, how costs and risks are borne responsibly, and how human rights are therefore protected? Excellencies, if the ocean economy were a country, it would rank as the fifth largest in the world. And that is something we really need to think about. Global ocean trade was valued at 2.2 trillion US dollars in 2023, and yet only around 1% of the high seas are highly or fully protected. This is the language that is used. The high seas comprise of 64% of the ocean surface and cannot be subjected to state sovereignty. But legal freedom does not guarantee an equal capacity to benefit. Exercising these freedoms requires capital, vessels, insurance, and technology. And many developing states possess formal rights, but lack the means to exercise them. I wish to highlight four key points. Firstly, the legal order that we operate under treats different parts of the ocean differently. The high seas water column is governed principally by freedoms without a general obligation to share benefits. and the seabed beyond national jurisdiction, known as the area, is governed by a common heritage of mankind or humankind and must be administered as a result for humanity as a whole, with particular consideration for developing countries and landlocked countries. The agreement on marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction offers an opportunity to strengthen benefit sharing capacity building and technology transfer through fair and transparent financial arrangements. Secondly, existing maritime structures allow profit to be separated from responsibility. Flags of convenience and open registries let companies separate ownership and economic activity from the jurisdiction responsible for taxation and regulation. Low corporate tax rates and preferential tonnage taxes encourage a race to the bottom and can weaken protection for seafarers. Similar inequality is visible in high seas fishing. Fisheries subsidies amount to approximately $34.5 billion in 2018, and up to 54% of current high seas fishing grounds would be unprofitable without subsidies, and I will repeat this, would be unprofitable without subsidies. 97% of the deductible industrial fishing efforts on the high seas and within the exclusive economic zones comes from vessels flagged to higher income countries, while lower income coastal states face lost revenues, weakened livelihoods, and threats to the right to food. Thirdly, ocean activities can convert private commercial risk into public debt. Deep-sea bed mining provides a stark example. Under the proposed payment regime, approximately 70% of the project proceeds would accrue to companies and 24% to sponsoring States, while only 6% would accrue to the International Seabed Authority. I would like to remind Member States that this is the year the negotiations are taking place on the formula at the International Seabed Authority in Jamaica, and they continue into March year. This leaves little for broader benefit sharing, despite the requirement that resources of the sea area be administered for humanity as a whole, which is the agreement that member states have already committed to. Fourthly, illicit financial flows are embedded in ocean activities. Illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing is valued at between $10 billion to $23.5 billion annually. annually again, while related illicit financial flows can reach $50 billion. Opaque ownership, falsified catch documents, abusive transfer pricing, and weak vessel tracking facilities facilitate tax evasion, money laundering, and organized crime. 75% of industrial fishing vessels are not publicly tracked. and maritime surveillance, financial transparency, and human rights protection must therefore be addressed together. Excellencies, the central problem is clear. No institution has a comprehensive mandate to collect and redistribute financial value generated from the high seas. Private actors retain the profit, while states and communities bear the environmental, social, and financial costs. Ocean governance remains disconnected from international tax cooperation and reform of the international financial architecture. I therefore call for four areas of action. Firstly, Accountability and transparency must replace secrecy. Member States should establish effective tax standards for maritime activities, assess revenue foregone through permissive registries, disclose beneficial ownership, and connect vessel tracking information with customs and tax data. Secondly, responsibility must follow economic benefit and risk. Those deriving value from maritime activities must not externalize fiscal, environmental, or human rights obligations. Sponsorship and investment arrangements must not expose developing states to liabilities beyond their fiscal capacity. Thirdly, harmful incentives and regulatory competition must end. Subsidies and tax preferences sustaining destructive or unviable activities should be reformed. Port access should be conditioned on compliance, while food security should be protected through appropriate buffer zones, no-fishing areas and seasonal restrictions of parts of the high seas. Fourthly, the value of the global commons must be shared fairly. I call for a properly governed global institution and a fund for the commons, financed through seabed royalties, if at all allowed, high seas fishing levies, and shipping tonnage charges. These resources should prioritize least developing countries, small island states, as well as ensuring that landlocked developing countries can meaningfully benefit from the global commons. The fund should support human rights, sustainable development, and marine protection. excellencies, freedom of the seas cannot mean freedom from fiscal responsibility. The ocean cannot remain a space where private actors capture benefits while developing countries and communities carry the risks. A human rights economy requires the equitable allocation of profits, externalities, and financial obligations arising from the global commons. I would like to conclude by urging member states to seize this opportunity. Let us operationalize equitable benefit sharing, strengthen ownership and vessel transparency, and protect states from debt-generating seabed ventures, as well as integrate ocean governance into reform of the international fiscal architecture. The high seas belongs to no single state. Their value, use, and protection must serve humanity as a whole. I thank you very much for your time. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:19:00]: I thank the independent expert on the effects of foreign debt for her report. I will now open the floor for questions or comments to Mrs. Veris. As per practice, I ask delegations to limit their comments to three minutes. I thank for a kind operation. I now give floor to a distinguished representative of Namibia to be followed by Russian Federation, Cuba, and Kenya. Namibia, you have the floor. Namibia · Africa Group [2:19:26]: Thank you, Madam Chair. I take the floor on behalf of the African group. The African group thanks the independent expert for her report. This mandate ties with the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which binds each state to use maximum of its available resources for protection of these rights. It also binds all states to international assistance and cooperation towards that end. The group shares her finding that this Such cooperation is a legal obligation and not a charity. The debt question on our continent is a human right one. The African Charter guarantees every people the right to development and the free disposal of its wealth and natural resources. The group recalls the guiding principle on foreign debt and human rights endorsed by the Human Rights Council in 2012. which says the terms of the loan may not undermine the minimum core of economic, social and cultural rights and debt sustainability is to be judged against those rights, not against the repayment capacity alone. Our heads of state and government adopted a common Africa position on debt in February this year, and its implementation is underway. The group sees in the rights-based approach, the independent experts calls for, which the independent expert calls for, which is led by the, well, we can say the continent takes the lead. The group then asked the question, first, debt sustainability analysis still treats spending on health, education, and social protection as the residual ones, debt service is paid. How does the independent expert propose that the guiding principles impact assessment on economic reform be made part of this analysis. Second, her mandate also covers the non-repatriation of funds of illicit origin. What does she propose to us so that the assets recovered are brought, accounted towards the right of the people of the state where they were taken from, including those through the framework on the convention on international tax cooperation, which is currently under negotiation. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:21:54]: I thank the distinguished representative of Namibia. I now give floor to Russian Federation. Russian Federation [2:22:02]: Madam Chair, we closely read the report of Ms. Wares, Finance in the High Seas. We agree with her that the ocean and its resources should not serve as a space for the uncontrolled enrichment of a narrow group of countries and transnational corporations. The IMF and the World Bank continue to impose on needy recipients of assistance from the global south, harsh, liberal and economic formulas in terms of privatization, price setting, the decrease of subsidies and grants. Western shareholders exert control over these organizations. They set their agenda and the conditions and the volume of financial assistance. And as for the situation with global indebtedness, it's becoming ever more concerning. This is worsening the financial system, which is already in crisis. The aggregate debt has already reached around 93% of global GDP. However, it is specifically the states of the Global South that most encounter a rising debt burden, as well as pressure on their national exchange rates and the corresponding capital flight. Madam Chair, Russia advocates for reforming the global currency and financial system. That system should operate based on the principles of justice, transparency, and non-discrimination. The Bretton Woods institutions also need to be brought into alignment with the actual balance of power in the global economy. It's important for their activities and governance structure to reflect the growing role of developing countries in the global economy. Thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:23:40]: I thank the distinguished representative of Russian Federation. I now give floor to Cuba to be followed by Kenya. Cuba [2:23:47]: Muchas gracias. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. We welcome the independent expert and we reiterate our support for her mandate. We will continue to champion this issue in the Human Rights Council. External debt is one of the main obstacles impacting the South's efforts to focus on its development in the current unjust and unequal international economic order. Under such unfavourable conditions, the South will never have the resources necessary in order to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Urgent and profound reform of the international financial architecture is required. For more than seven decades, this architecture has demonstrated its inability to support developing countries where they need it most. It is imperative that we achieve a new international economic order based on equity, sovereign equality, interdependence, common interest, and cooperation of all states, whatever their economic or social systems. We should also implement the commitments made at the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development with additional resources and a specific multilateral mechanism for debt negotiation. The negative impact of foreign debt on human rights, and in particular on the enjoyment of economic, social, and cultural rights and the right to development, is undeniable. We regret that some developed countries still fail to recognize this, despite the evidence. In addition to the burden of debt, some countries of the South are being subjected to illegal, unilateral, coercive measures, as we heard in the previous dialogue. This has a negative impact on the enjoyment of all human rights. The independent expert has recognized and contributed to documenting the negative impact of the United States embargo against Cuba, which we greatly appreciate. The United States embargo against Cuba has intensified to unprecedented extremes with an oil stranglehold, secondary sanctions, and unfounded designation of Cuba as a country that allegedly sponsors terrorism, and this constitutes the main obstacle to the full enjoyment of human rights by Cubans. Its consequences are real and painful. We urge the expert to continue to dig deeper into the impact of these unilateral measures on efforts to address the problem of foreign debt and its consequences for human rights. I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:25:58]: I thank the distinguished representative of Cuba. I now give the floor to Kenya. Kenya [2:26:03]: Thank you, Madam Chair. My delegation aligns with the statement delivered on behalf of the African Group. Kenya thanks the independent expert for her report and for her service to this mandate for the last five years. Over the course of her mandate, the Independent Expert has effectively highlighted the profound impact of foreign debt on the capacity of many across the world to enjoy their human rights and realize their full human potential, especially in developing countries. Kenya continues to reiterate, including at the highest levels, that debt is never only an economic issue. It is also a human rights issue. A debt crisis becomes a human rights crisis when interest payments crowd out access to education, health, nutrition, and social protection, especially for those who need it the most. We fully recognize that the debt burden complicates the numerous problems facing developing countries and contributes to extreme poverty in a manner that constitutes an obstacle to sustainable human development. This is, without a doubt, a serious impediment to the realization of all human rights. It therefore follows that access to affordable finance and the reform of the international financial architecture is foundational to the realization of human rights and freedoms. In the same spirit, Kenya continues to look closely into the issues raised in the independent expert's latest report to ensure the equitable access of benefits from the international commons. Ms. Wares, as you conclude your mandate, how can member states work together to ensure that your efforts and recommendations over the last five years are actioned and lived for the benefit of all peoples, especially in the developing world? I thank you. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:27:46]: I thank the distinguished representative of Kenya, who was the last speaker on my list for this interactive dialogue. I now give the floor to the independent expert on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of states on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social, and cultural rights, Ms. Atia Veris for her response. UN · Independent Expert [2:28:09]: Thank you, Madam Chair. I thank you very much for the questions. Many of your questions have actually spanned several of my reports over the past few years, and so I'm also very grateful, of course, to Kenya for raising the numerous issues. As a Kenyan, it's an honor and a pleasure to have heard you speak. I would like to talk about the issues, firstly, that Namibia has raised, which are very important. In my third report to the General Assembly. I talked about two issues. One, I talked about the fiscal social contract, and the second was about fiscal legitimacy. Now, these two reports, I think, were particularly important because they outlined the principled approach which I've now used in the report on the high seas, which you're also referring to. And In trying to understand how to balance debt with health and education, as well as food and other social services, one of the things that I tried to do was widen the conversation, because my mandate covers not just economic, social, and cultural rights, but all human rights. And one of the biggest challenges facing countries is the people that get elected to rule a country are selected at a certain point in time, but then the debt is taken on at a different point in time, not necessarily in aligning with the political cycle of a country. And what starts to happen is the government of the day then takes the loan, but isn't necessarily the government that then has to start repaying the loan. And so this is where debt has a direct impact. And I'm reminded about Angola's comment in the previous sessions. But some of the concerns that I have seen is that when you're then trying to get your finances in place to now realize human rights, have the right to food, education, health sorted out, what you do start to see is an immediate problem because there's a sudden discovery of a lack of funding within your treasury. And so I call this the life cycle approach, and it's in that report. And the reason why I chose the high seas particularly is because so many countries right now are in incredible economic and financial pressure, yet here is a pot of money. And all you have to do as member states is be in the room, negotiate, and make sure you're getting your fair share. So even while countries are discussing debt and the need to repay debt, Here is revenue that doesn't take money out of the pockets of your citizens. And I think for me, this is a really important space to look. And like I said, the negotiations are continuing in March in Jamaica at the International Seabed Authority. So it is really important. And so that is the first part of what you referred to. The second part of what you referred to is that the Human Rights Council did ask me a few years ago to draft guidelines on the repatriation of state assets. And so that is one of the things I would like to encourage member states to do, is they are draft guidelines. It is up to this committee, and it is up to, of course, the Human Rights Council to take the guidelines and now turn them into actual guidelines so that they are not drafts anymore. There are 13 of them and they were drafted very specifically. They don't repeat the World Bank's star guidelines and they don't repeat any of the ones that are currently existing. My understanding is that three or four of them have already been adopted, for example, by Switzerland. And so these are guidelines in place, and member states should continue looking to adopt them at domestic level while looking to adopt the entire set of guidelines at global level. And that takes me then to your question about the tax treaty that is also being negotiated and will be concluded, hopefully, by July next year, incidentally, at the same time as I complete my mandate. And what is really important, I think, about that particular tax treaty is here again is an opportunity to get fair share of corporate tax revenue. And it's an opportunity to make a clear decision on how much should be taxed and what is the extent of subsidies. And if you read this particular report, and I thank you for making the connection for me, that I was looking at fishery subsidies here. And fishery subsidies are massive, which means that some fisheries corporations really would not exist if it was not for those subsidies. And so what becomes really important is with the tax treaty, is it pushes towards corporate taxation and away from subsidies. And so this is another space that one should look at. When it comes to the conversations around debt, which were mentioned by several member states. There is, of course, the consistent call I have made for debt cancellation. The Vatican declared debt cancellation as its Jubilee campaign during the financing for development negotiations, and they project a five-year period for debt to be fully cancelled. I think Member States need to really think about it seriously. Incidentally, the most indebted country in the world today is the country we are sitting in, is the United States of America. So debt is a truly global issue by every stretch of one's imagination. But there is also the conversation that rose during the financing for development negotiations, which Cuba mentioned. And of course, the conversation is about a global debt treaty. That too is important. While there is a debtors platform, there is a space for member states to go to that are indebted to have a conversation. One of the biggest challenges facing that platform right now, it is upon application. Unfortunately, member states are not willing to make that application because it is having a repercussion on their credit rating. So it's really important to go back and look at the rules of that debt platform, that is platform, and get it to be automatic. This is really important and to ensure that credit rating is not something that's going to affect a member state by choosing to be there and to negotiate and understand, because that particular challenge is the fact that like nations do not receive the same conditionalities or similar conditionalities. This opens the door and allows member states to negotiate with an open space. And so if I come to the issue around, and I thank you, Russia, for your reference also to the work I have been doing, is the issue about exchange rates. And there has been a huge conversation which is growing on de-dollarization. And because my work does bump into the issue of sanctions and unilateral coercive measures, I would like to remind member states that initially when the Bretton Woods negotiations were taking place, the idea was to have an IMF currency and that the dollar currency was chosen at that point in time because of the state of the world. It is something that member states really need to reconsider. Because when you put too much power in the space, in one space, then you lose control of your own domestic economy. And this is something that we are all seeing every time, of course, the United States changes even interest rates at its central bank, you see a repercussion across the entire world. So something even as benign as that has a repercussion. So can you imagine not having a conversation about whether member states are comfortable with that? And when I look at the high seas, then the conversations will continue, because if you continue to choose the same currency in the high seas negotiations, then you will face additional challenges in the power imbalance. I am in agreement that the principles you refer to of justice, transparency, and non-discrimination are crucial. Justice and transparency are both under my principles of fiscal legitimacy, and non-discrimination under human rights is something I very much do. refer to repeatedly in my reports. And so I would like to point out that my next report is on international fiscal architecture. It will be my report to the Human Rights Council. I think that many of the elements that I have been speaking about with you over the past five years are very, very crucial when it comes to trying to understand and develop what could be an alternative fiscal architecture, which we certainly need to think about. But I want to close with a reminder to member states that in some of my past proceeding, it's only because I can see the flag for Germany, although it is not up today, it's not personal, that in a previous session, I did have Germany state specifically that debt should not be allowed to be compromised in line with human rights obligations. And so there is appetite in the room for these types of conversations. And I just think we need to move the conversations out of the human rights spaces and into the global spaces. I want to thank you very much for your time. It will be my last time in New York. And I have to say it has been a truly enjoyable and very rich experience. I thank you for your time, Chair. 3rd Committee · Chair [2:38:08]: I thank the independent expert on the effects of foreign debt for her remarks. With this, we conclude the interactive dialogue segment for today. Dear colleagues, before we adjourn, I would like to remind delegations that the deadline for the submission of draft proposals under this item is Tuesday, 3 November at 1:00 p.m. The Committee will continue its consideration of agenda item 70, promotion and protection of human rights and its sub-items A to D, tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. We will hear statements by the special procedures mandate holders and other experts, and we will engage with them in interactive dialogues pursuant to the programme of work. Information on the work of the Committee, including the schedule of meetings, is available on iGOV. The meeting is adjourned.