Quick summary
- During the 74th session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA), the Third Committee, the UNGA Committee tasked with addressing human rights issues and concerns, ran from 1 October 2019 through 21 November 2019, at UN Headquarters in New York.
- This year’s Third Committee featured presentations by a number of senior UN officials, including Ms. Michelle Bachelet, the High Commissioner for Human Rights; Mr. Andrew Gilmour, Assistant Secretary General for Human Rights; and H.E. Mr. Coly Seck, President of the Human Rights Council. The full list can be found here.
- The High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms. Bachelet, now one year into her role, delivered her address to the Third Committee on 15 October and held an interactive dialogue with member States.
- On 17 October the UN General Assembly held elections for membership to the Human Rights Council (for three year terms (2020-2022)). With the decrease in clean slates, the 2019 HRC elections proved to be more competitive than in previous years. More information on the elections can be found here.
- The Third Committee considered 113 reports covering different items on the agenda. State representatives gave over 550 statements.
- 62 mandate holders and other experts, representing 53 thematic mandates and 9 country-specific mandates, submitted reports. Find the full list here. 62 of the mandate holders participated in interactive dialogues, in which States, either individually or jointly, offered over 600 questions and comments.
- The Third Committee adopted 62 resolutions: 43 by consensus (70%) and 19 by vote (30%). At least 6 have clear budget implications.
- During voting, 4 written amendments were put forward by States. All were voted on and rejected.
- This session of the Third Committee also saw the adoption of a number of new resolutions, including resolutions on International Equal Pay Day, integrating sport into youth crime prevention and criminal justice strategies, countering child sexual exploitation and sexual abuse online, and a new focus on accessibility for the resolution on the Implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Optional Protocol thereto.
- Approximately half of the resolutions passed at the Third Committee have corresponding or related resolutions passed at the Human Rights Council. URG will shortly release a more detailed comparative analysis of Third Committee resolutions and Human Rights Council resolutions passed in 2019, to determine the precise degree of overlap and duplication.
- Curious about how this year’s Third Committee compares to last year’s session? See our Post-Session Report for 2018. For more information about the resolutions and Human Rights Council Sessions leading up to this year’s Third Committee, see our 2019 Inside Track for the Third Committee, published following UNGA High Level Week.
UNGA High-level week
On 23 September 2019 the UN Secretary General convened a Climate Action Summit. The Summit brought together global leaders as well as youth climate activists from across the globe. One such climate activist was sixteen year old Greta Thurnberg, who gave an impassioned speech urging leaders to abandon their muted complacency for decisive action on climate change: ‘You are failing us. But the young people are starting to understand your betrayal. The eyes of all future generations are upon you. And if you choose to fail us, I say: We will never forgive you.’ The summit emphasised that time is running out and that the pace of climate action must be rapidly accelerated.
On 23 September 2019, the UNGA held a high-level meeting on accelerating access to universal health coverage, leading to the adoption of a political declaration. On 26 September 2019, a high-level plenary meeting to Commemorate and Promote the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons was held. On the same day, the GA held a High-Level Dialogue on Financing for Development, the first since the adoption of the Addis Ababa Action Agenda.
The SDG Summit (High-level political forum under the auspices of the General Assembly) was held from 24–25 September 2019 under the theme ‘Accelerating the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.’ The UN SDG Summit brought together Heads of State to comprehensively review progress made since the 2015 adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The SDG summit resulted in the adoption of a Political Declaration: ‘Gearing up for a decade of action and delivery for sustainable development.’ Since the summit, more than 100 accelerated actions have been announced. For example, Finland has pledged to achieve carbon neutrality by 2035 in order to meet SDGs 13 and 17. Read the report of the Secretary-General on SDG Progress here.
The UN General Assembly convened a one-day high-level meeting on 27 September 2019 to review progress made on the SAMOA Pathway (SIDS Accelerated Modalities of Action) Midterm Review. Meeting just one month after Hurricane Dorian devastated the Bahamas, the meeting emphasised the unique and urgent threat of climate change to the sustainable development of SIDS. Additionally, the meeting highlighted the need for a renewed global commitment to partnerships and to providing financial and technical assistance to SIDS: ‘It is a roadmap for action’ said Fekitamoeloa Katoa ‘Utoikamanu, High Representative for LDCs and SIDS.
High-level dignitaries
Prior to the start of the Third Committee, world leaders engaged in a general debate. The debate, chaired by the President of the GA, Tijjani Muhammad-Bande, began on 24 September and ended on 30 September 2019. It saw the participation of over 192 high-level dignitaries. Unfortunately, as the new President of the GA noted, only 16 of the speakers were women; ‘When we speak of a representative United Nations, this is clearly not what we mean,’ he said.
URG NYC’s detailed analysis of the 192 high-level speeches delivered at this year’s general debate identified references to 11,075 human rights-related topics or subjects. Like last year, the most commonly-referenced human rights topic by States in 2019 was climate change, closely followed by development. Also, as with last year, URG’s analysis found that the human rights impact of climate change was mainly referenced by Small Island Developing States (SIDS). Speakers from other countries repeatedly pointed out that SIDS and Least Developed States (LDCs) are least responsible for global warming, yet are the most vulnerable to its impacts – and are also in many cases doing the most to mitigate climate change with the least resources (i.e. climate justice).
Regarding civil and political rights, the main priority issues raised by world leaders included: democracy, good governance, the rights of women, and justice. When referring to economic, social and cultural rights concerns, States – perhaps unsurprisingly – focused heavily on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the SDGs. Specifically, States highlighted poverty, employment, education, health, and climate change, as key factors influencing their ability to promote the full enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights. Regarding country specific human rights violations and situations of concern, States made repeated references to Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (PTO); Syria; Venezuela; Iran; Libya; Yemen; and Myanmar. More positively, States expressed hopes for a peaceful transition to democracy, good governance, and rule of law in Sudan, and as well as for the new unity government in South Sudan.
A growing priority for States in 2019, as evidenced by the high-level speeches, was the ‘digital revolution.’ States repeatedly drew attention to both the positive effects and negative effects of technology for human rights. Unfortunately, there was very little mention of racism and xenophobia despite ubiquitous references to both in global media. On the eve of the 75th anniversary of the UN, many states called for a renewed commitment to multilateralism and the UN Charter to face the unique and urgent challenges of our modern world. Conversely, some States (although admittedly fewer) spoke of the need to respect the sovereignty of individual nations.
This is a word cloud of the key topics of concern related to human rights referenced by world leaders:
For additional word clouds, data and details, see URG’s full analysis here.
High Commissioner for Human Rights
On 15 October, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, addressed the Third Committee of the United Nations General Assembly, and then responded to questions, concerns, and complaints from member States. The High Commissioner outlined the growing threats to human rights, such as xenophobia, hate speech, inequality, and ‘push-backs on women’s equality and the rights of minorities.’She also highlighted the climate emergency as an imminent threat to the enjoyment of human rights, noting that her office has recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the UN Environment Programme (UNEP).
Ms. Bachelet discussed the work her office has done to provide practical assistance to States to fill in resource/capacity gaps in their work to promote human rights. Addressing the Universal Periodic Review, she pointed out the significant increase in States acceptance of the recommendations of the UPR, now at 75%. She stated that issues of substance raised during the UPR ‘often mirror the recommendations issued by the Special Procedures and Treaty Bodies, as well as by my office…which, if addressed, will build more resilient societies, and sustain development and peace. There is great potential for better and more focused use of human rights recommendations in system-wide action across the UN; such concerted action is supportive of the Secretary General’s emphasis on prevention, as well as the 2030 Agenda.’
Ms. Bachelet also emphasised the need to mainstream human rights: ‘the entire UN Human Rights system can be very helpful in identifying early warning signs that could lead to prevention in the peace and security area and the development area.’ She advocated for the presence of human rights in the prevention of conflicts, peacekeeping/peace building, and in the pursuit of transitional justice.
Lastly, Ms. Bachelet stated that the underfunding of OHCHR hampers their work and holds back the entire treaty body system (undergoing a review in 2020). She urged Member States to make voluntary contributions (particularly of non-earmarked funds so that OHCHR can set priorities). She noted that persistent underfunding for the human rights pillar creates a ‘credibility crisis’ and constitutes a denial of justice for victims of human rights violations.
For additional details, read URG’s blog post here, and watch the full speech and interactive dialogue here.
43 States participated in the interactive dialogue, represented in the following graph by regional group.
President of the Human Rights Council
On 1 November, Council President Mr Coly Sek presented the Resolution on the Human Rights Council A/74/53 to the Third Committee. In his statement, Mr. Sek emphasised the importance of the wide participation of stakeholders in the work of the Council, noting that civil society plays a crucial role ensuring that the work of the Council is relevant to events and actors on the ground. He commended efforts by Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and SIDS to participate in the Council, noting that the Special Trust Fund for these groups allowed for the involvement of 33 delegates from 32 of such countries, including 11 SIDS that do not have permanent representation in Geneva. He encouraged more states to contribute funds to allow for the ‘essential contribution of these States’ to the work of the Council.
In reply to questions and comments from States Mr. Sek stressed on prevention that the Council is a body that can preempt human rights violations before harm is done or a serious crisis unfolds; that is why the Council is such a ‘precious tool’ that aims for ‘prevention first and foremost rather than punishment.’
Mr. Sek recommended that instead of actors in New York and Geneva seeing themselves as working in either place, they should approach the work in a more integrated fashion. Furthermore, if reports are transmitted to the Security Council, it is because the human rights issues on which the reports are based are cross-cutting in nature. He added that work completed by Independent Investigations and Special Procedures must be recognised throughout the system so that recommendations can be adequately followed up by relevant parties, including actors in New York. Mr. Sek also believes that feedback from Geneva should be fed into the Human Rights Council review process in New York as actors in Geneva are aware of the particular challenges the Council is facing.
Read URG’s full analysis of both the High Commissioner and the HRC President’s statements and interactive dialogues here. Watch the full speech and interactive dialogue here.
22 States participated in the interactive dialogue, represented in the following graph by regional group.
Mandate holders and experts
- 62 mandate holders and experts (53 thematic, 9 country-specific), representing Special Procedures and Investigative Mechanisms of the Council, submitted reports to the Third Committee. Find the full list here.
- 62 mandate holders gave presentations and participated in interactive dialogues, in which States, either individually or jointly, offered over 600 questions or comments.
- 74 remarks/questions came from the Africa Group (11.8%); 130 from the APG (20.7%); 81 from EEG (12.9%); 87 from GRULAC (13.8%); and 254 from WEOG (40.5%).
- Special Procedures with the most interaction from States included the chair of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (37 comments/questions); the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders (24 comments/questions); the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences (22 comments/questions); and the Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity (22 comments/questions). The human rights situations in Iran and Myanmar precipitated 21 comments/questions from member states.
- SIDS and LDCs participated just 13 times in the special procedures. This number does not indicate distinct SIDS/LDCs as some more vocal SIDS spoke multiple times. While this is an increase in participation from last year, SIDS/LDCs are still under-represented in the Third Committee discussions. As with previous years, the incredibly crowded agendas and high number of resolutions at the Third Committee make it challenging for small States to find opportunities to engage.
Graph of participation by regional group for each special procedure:
Graph of total participation by regional group for the general discussion of all agenda items at the Third Committee:
Human Rights Council elections
Elections for membership of the Human Rights Council (for three year terms, 2020-2022) took place on 17 October in New York. The newly elected member states (and the number of votes they received) are Namibia (175), Sudan (175), Mauritania (172), Libya, (168), Indonesia (174), Japan (165), Republic of Korea (165), Marshall Islands (123), Armenia (144), Poland (124) Brazil (153), Venezuela (105), Germany (174), and the Netherlands (172).
With the decrease in clean slates, the 2019 HRC elections proved to be more competitive than in previous years. There were some incredibly close calls in the APG and GRULAC; Marshall Islands won by a mere two votes (beating Iraq) and Venezuela won by nine votes (beating Costa Rica). Costa Rica had entered the race very late on 3 October with a publicly stated goal of replacing Venezuela of the GRULAC group for membership to the Council.
Go to yourHRC for more information on the candidates and the elections results. For further analysis about the elections themselves, read this blog from URG. To learn more about how the yourHRC tools can assist member states with future elections, check out this useful blog from URG.
Third Committee general debates highlights
Many delegates highlighted the far-reaching effects of climate change. On numerous occasions States noted that climate change does not only affect the environment but also a cross-cutting array of human rights and development goals such as the advancement of women, access to housing, poverty, and more.
Mexico’s delegate, on behalf of the Group of Friends of Indigenous Peoples, suggested that 2022-2032 be proclaimed the international decade of indigenous languages, referencing that one indigenous language is lost every two weeks. Many delegates echoed that suggestion during the general debate. This suggestion was then implemented in the resolution ‘Rights of indigenous peoples,’ which proclaims 2022-2032 as the International Decade of Indigenous Languages (A/C.3/74/L.19/Rev.1).
Echoing the statements made during the UN Climate Summit and high-level debate, David R. Boyd, Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment, said that the world is experiencing a ‘global climate emergency.’ He highlighted four areas of action: addressing fossil fuel use; accelerated action on mitigation; protection of those most vulnerable to climate change; and increased financial support to SIDS/LDCs.
There was much discussion in response to the report of the chairperson of the Committee on the elimination of racial discrimination, Nouredine Amir. Over 20 countries such as Kenya and Cuba expressed concern over what they saw as the politicisation of human rights and interference with States’ sovereignty, specifically mentioning the Committee’s observations regarding the human rights situation in China. The United Kingdom, on behalf of 23 countries, contrasted this perspective, expressing concern about the human rights situation in Xinjiang.
Some states noted with concern the rollbacks on women’s rights around the world. Switzerland specifically mentioned the weakening of language on sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHRs) in some recent international agreements. Germany, among others, agreed with the High Commissioner’s call for a ‘pushback to the pushback’ on women’s rights.
Youth activists and delegates were particularly active during this session. Many youth delegates highlighted the climate crisis but others also discussed issues such as access to education, widening societal divides, poverty, and the negative impacts of social media. Additionally, many delegates raised the need to give youth real agency in decision making, allowing youth to have more control over the issues that directly affect their futures.
David Kaye, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of expression and opinion, focused his report on online hate speech. He reported that the lack of a clear international definition of the term hate speech allows Governments to suppress human rights defenders and ‘use hate speech like fake news, to attack political enemies, non-believers, dissenters and critics.’ Conversely, the ambiguousness of the phrase also hinders the efforts of Governments to address the genuine harms that hate speech can cause. Thus, Kaye advocated for the careful definition of hate speech in line with international law.
In an unprecedented joint statement to the Third Committee on 18 October, 71 countries urged the UN to enable civil society and human rights defenders to engage with the UN without fear of reprisal or intimidation, and called on all States condemn and ensure accountability for such actions. The International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)’s Tess McEvoy stated that ‘The statement highlighted that beyond the immediate impact on victims, these acts of intimidation and reprisals undermine the credibility and effectiveness of the UN as a whole, including the human rights system.’ The full statement delivered is available here.
Resolutions
The 74th session of the Third Committee concluded with the adoption of 62 resolutions (including those led by ECOSOC); 43 by consensus (70%) and 19 by vote (30%). For reference, at both the 73rd (2018) session and the 72nd (2017) session of the Third Committee 65% of resolutions passed by consensus and 35% by vote.
57 (92%) of this year’s adopted resolutions were thematic in nature, while 5 (8%) dealt with country-specific situations. Only 9.5% had clear/immediate budget implications.
States submitted 4 written amendments, all of which were voted on and rejected.
| Agenda Item | Symbol | Title | Lead sponsors | PBI | New resource requirements | Adoption | Date of adoption |
| 25 | A/C.3/74/L.9/Rev.1 | Persons with Albinism | Malawi and the United Republic of Tanzania | ✗ | Consensus | 51st meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 25 | A/C.3/74/L.17/Rev.1 | Promoting social integration through social inclusion | Peru | ✗ | Consensus | 47th meeting
15 November 2019 |
|
| 25(a) | A/C.3/74/L.12/Rev.1 | Implementation of the outcome of the World Summit for Social Development and of the Twenty-fourth special session of the General Assembly | State of Palestine (on behalf of the Group of 77 and China) | ✗ | Vote (183-2-0) | 51st meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 25(b) | A/C.3/74/L.8/Rev.1 | Policies and Programmes involving youth | Portugal, Cabo Verde and Kazakhstan | ✗ | Consensus | 51st meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 25(b) | A/C.3/74/L.13/Rev.1 | Follow up to the twentieth anniversary of the International Year of the Family and beyond | State of Palestine (on behalf of the Group of 77 and China) | ✗ | Consensus | 51st meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 25 (b) | A/C.3/74/L.14/Rev.1 | Follow-up to the Second World Assembly on Ageing | State of Palestine (on behalf of the Group of 77 and China) | ✗ | Consensus | 51st meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 25(b) | A/C.3/74/L.16 | Cooperatives in social development (orally revised) | Mongolia | ✗ | Consensus | 44th meeting
7 November 2019 |
|
| 26(a) | A/C.3/74/L.20/Rev.1 | Improvement of the situation of women and girls in rural areas (orally revised) | Mongolia | ✗ | Consensus | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
|
| 26(a) | A/C.3/74/L.22/Rev.1 | Violence against women migrant workers | Indonesia, Philippines | ✗ | Consensus | 51st meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 26(b) | A/C.3/74/L.65 | Follow-up to the Fourth World Conference on Women and full implementation of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action and the outcome of the twenty-third special session of the General Assembly | Chair’s text | ✗ | Consensus | 51st meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 61 | A/C.3/74/L.59 | Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees | Denmark (on behalf of the Nordic Countries) | ✗ | Vote (169-2-5) | 47th meeting
15 November 2019 |
|
| 61 | A/C.3/74/L.57 | Enlargement of the Executive Committee of the Programme of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees | Burkina Faso, Iceland, Mali, Malta | ✗ | Consensus | 44th meeting
7 November 2019 |
|
| 61 | A/C.3/74/L.50/Rev.1 | Assistance to refugees, returnees and displaced persons in Africa | Kenya (on behalf of the Africa Group) | ✗ | Consensus | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
|
| 65 | A/C.3/74/L.56 | Report of the Human Rights Council | Lesotho (on behalf of the Africa Group) | ✗ | Vote (115-4-60) | 44th meeting
7 November 2019 |
|
| 66 | A/C.3/74/L.23 | The Girl Child | Tanzania (on behalf of SADC) | ✗ | Consensus | 47th meeting
15 November 2019 |
|
| 66(a) | A/C.3/74/L.21 | Rights of the Child (orally revised) | Finland (on behalf of the EU) and Uruguay (on behalf of GRULAC) | ✗ | Consensus | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
|
| 67(a) | A/C.3/74/L.19 | Rights of indigenous peoples | Ecuador and Bolivia | ✗ | Consensus | 44th meeting
7 November 2019 |
|
| 68(a) | A/C.3/74/L.62 | Combating glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fueling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance | Russian Federation | ✗ | Vote (121-2-55) | 44th meeting
7 November 2019 |
|
| 68 (b) | A/C.3/74/L.60/Rev.1 | A global call for concrete action for the total elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and the comprehensive implementation of and follow-up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action | State of Palestine (on behalf of the Group of 77 and China) | ✗ | Vote (131-10-44) | 51st meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 69 | A/C.3/74/L.36 | Use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination | Cuba | ✗ | Vote (126-51-7) | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
|
| 69 | A/C.3/74/L.58 | The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination | Egypt (on behalf of OIC) | ✗ | Vote (164-5-9) | 51st meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 69 | A/C.3/74/L.61 | Universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination | Pakistan | ✗ | Consensus | 52nd meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 70 | A/C.3/74/L.33/Rev.1 | The Human Rights to Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation | Germany, Spain | ✗ | Consensus | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
|
| 70 | A/C.3/74/L.49 | International Equal Pay Day (orally revised) | Australia, Canada, Germany, Iceland, New Zealand, Panama, South Africa, and Switzerland | ✗ | Consensus | 47th meeting
15 November 2019 |
|
| 70(a) | A/C.3/74/L.24 | Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (orally revised) | Denmark | ✗ | Consensus | 43rd meeting
5 November 2019 |
|
| 70(a) | A/C.3/74/L.32/Rev.1 | Implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Optional Protocol thereto: accessibility | Mexico and New Zealand | ✗ | Consensus | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.25 | Freedom of Religion or Belief | Finland (on behalf of the EU) | ✗ | Consensus | 47th meeting
15 November 2019 |
|
| 70 (b) | A/C.3/74/L.31/Rev.1 | Implementing the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders through providing a safe and enabling environment for human rights defenders and ensuring their protection (as orally revised) | Norway | ✗ | Consensus | 52nd meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.34 | Terrorism and Human Rights | Egypt and Mexico | ✗ | Consensus | 47th meeting
15 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.35/Rev.1 | Protection of migrants | Mexico | ✗ | Consensus | 47th meeting
15 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.37 | The right to food | Cuba | ✗ | Vote (185-2-0) | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.38 | Promotion of a democratic and equitable international order | Cuba | ✗ | Vote (125-53-9) | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.39/Rev.1 | Strengthening United Nations action in the field of human rights through the promotion of international cooperation and the importance of non-selectivity, impartiality and objectivity | Cuba | ✗ | Consensus | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.40/Rev.1 | The right to development | Cuba (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement) | ✗ | Vote (137-24-26) | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.41 | Enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights | Cuba (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement) | ✗ | Consensus | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.42 | Human rights and unilateral coercive measures. | Cuba (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement) | ✗ | Vote (126-55-0) | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.43 | Promotion of equitable geographical distribution in the membership of the human rights treaty bodies | Cuba (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement) | ✗ | Vote (130-52-1) | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.44/Rev.1 | National Human Rights Institutions | Germany | ✗ | Consensus | 52nd meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.45/Rev.1 | The safety of journalists and the issue of impunity | Argentina, Austria, Costa Rica, France, Greece and Tunisia | ✗ | Consensus | 52nd meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 70 (b) | A/C.3/74/L.46/Rev.1 | Strengthening the role of the United Nations in enhancing periodic and genuine elections and the promotion of democratization | United States | ✗ | Consensus | 52nd meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.47/Rev.1 | Human rights and cultural diversity | Cuba (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement) | ✗ | Vote (131-55-0) | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.48/Rev.1 | Protection of and assistance to internally displaced persons | Norway | ✗ | Consensus | 52nd meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.51 | International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance | Argentina, France and Morocco | ✗ | Consensus | 44th meeting
7 November 2019 |
|
| 70 (b) | A/C.3/74/L.52/Rev.1 | Subregional Centre for Human Rights and Democracy in Central Africa | Cameroon (on behalf of Economic Community of Central African States) | ✗ | Consensus | 47th meeting
15 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.53/Rev.1 | United Nations Human Rights Training and Documentation Centre for South-West Asia and the Arab Region | Qatar | ✗ | Vote (176-1-2) | 47th meeting
15 November 2019 |
|
| 70(b) | A/C.3/74/L.54 | Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping, stigmatization, discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons, based on religion or belief | United Arab Emirates (on behalf of the OIC) | ✗ | Consensus | 47th meeting
15 November 2019 |
|
| 70 (b) | A/C.3/74/L.55/Rev.1 | Effective promotion of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities | Austria | ✗ | Consensus | 47th meeting
15 November 2019 |
|
| 70(c) | A/C.3/74/L.26 | Situation of Human Rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea | Finland (on behalf of the EU) | ✗ | Consensus | 45th meeting
14 November 2019 |
|
| 70(c) | A/C.3/74/L.27 | Situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran | Canada | ✗ | Vote (84-30-66) | 45th meeting
14 November 2019 |
|
| 70(c) | A/C.3/74/L.28 | Situation of human rights in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, Ukraine | Ukraine | ✗ | Vote (67-23-82) | 45th meeting
14 November 2019 |
|
| 70(c) | A/C.3/74/L.29 | The Situation of Human Rights of the Rohingya Muslims and other minorities in Myanmar | Finland (on behalf of the EU), United Arab Emirates (on behalf of the OIC) | ✔ | PBI contained in L.68 | Vote (140-9-32) | 45th meeting
14 November 2019 |
| 70 (c) | A/C.3/74/L.30/Rev.1 | Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic | Saudi Arabia, United States | ✗ | Vote (106-9-32) | 45th meeting
14 November 2019 |
|
| 106 | A/C.3/74/L.2 | Integrating sport into youth crime prevention and criminal justice strategies | ECOSOC | ✔ | Oral statement | Consensus | 43rd meeting
5 November 2019 |
| 106 | A/C.3/74/L.3 | Follow up to the Thirteenth United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice and preparations for the Fourteenth United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice | ECOSOC | ✗ | Consensus | 43rd meeting
5 November 2019 |
|
| 106 | A/C.3/74/L.4 | Education for Justice and the rule of law in the context of sustainable development | ECOSOC | ✗ | Consensus | 43rd meeting
5 November 2019 |
|
| 106 | A/C.3/74/L.5 | Promoting technical assistance and capacity-building to strengthen national measures and international cooperation to combat cybercrime, including information sharing | ECOSOC | ✗ | Consensus | 43rd meeting
5 November 2019 |
|
| 106 | A/C.3/74/L.6 | Countering child sexual exploitation and sexual abuse online | ECOSOC | ✔ | Oral statement | Consensus | 43rd meeting
5 November 2019 |
| 106 | A/C.3/74/L.7 | Technical assistance provided by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime related to counter-terrorism | ECOSOC | ✔ | Oral statement | Consensus | 43rd meeting
5 November 2019 |
| 106 | A/C.3/74/L.10 | Improving the coordination of efforts against trafficking in persons | Belarus | ✔ | Oral statement | Consensus | 47th meeting
15 November 2019 |
| 106 | A/C.3/74/L.18/Rev.1 | Strengthening the United Nations crime prevention and criminal justice programme, in particular its technical cooperation capacity | Italy | ✗ | Consensus | 52nd meeting
19 November 2019 |
|
| 107 | A/C.3/74/L.11/Rev.1 | Countering the use of information and communications technologies for criminal purposes | Russian Federation | ✔ | PBI contained in L.70 | Vote (88-58-34) | 49th meeting
18 November 2019 |
| 108 | A/C.3/74/L.15/Rev.1 | International cooperation to address and counter the world drug problem (orally revised) | Mexico | ✗ | Consensus | 52nd meeting
19 November 2019 |
To compare this session with previous ones, given that many resolutions are biennial and some are triennial, it is useful to compare this year’s 74th session with both the 73rd session (2018) and the 72nd session (2017) as well as the 71st session (2016). While this session saw its fair share of squabbles, it was, on paper, markedly less contentious than GA73 with fewer amendments and a slightly higher percentage of resolutions passed by consensus. Overall, the number of resolutions passed is consistent with previous years (particularly when looking at the 74th, 72nd, and 70th sessions together, which share biennial resolutions).
New resolutions
International Equal Pay Day
First, Australia, Canada, Germany, Iceland, New Zealand, Panama, South Africa and Switzerland sponsored a resolution which proclaims 18 October as International Equal Pay Day, to be observed annually beginning in 2020.
Rights of Persons with Disabilities
Following the resolution at GA72 which focused on women and girls with disabilities, the resolution at GA74 on the Implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Optional Protocol thereto focused on accessibility.
Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice
There were also two new resolutions recommended by ECOSOC: ‘Integrating sport into youth crime prevention and criminal justice strategies’ (A/C.3/74/L.2) and ‘Countering child sexual exploitation and sexual abuse online.’ (A/C.3/74/L.6). Both resolutions passed by consensus. The first, requests the Assembly to ask UNODC to examine and report on the use of sport in connection with crime and violence prevention. The second, asks member States who are parties to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography to enforce their legal obligations.
Analysis and conclusions
A closer look
On 7 October, the Third Committee tabled resolution A/C.3/74/L.56 on the Report of the Human Rights Council and opened the floor to State comments. Like last year, the two key areas of debate were the procedural necessity of the resolution itself, and the inclusion of country specific measures. On the first, the representative of Finland, on behalf of the European Union, expressed the view that it is enough to consider the report of the Human Rights Council in the plenary of the General Assembly and that the Committee should only consider, and when applicable take action on, the recommendations in the report. The representative of Liechtenstein (on behalf of Australia, Canada, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway and Switzerland) similarly expressed disappointment that the resolution on the HRC report is considered in the Third Committee, undermining the Council’s mandate.
All of the States who opposed the Council Report cited their opposition to country-specific resolutions (and all of them had been the recipients of country-specific Council resolutions themselves). While ultimately voting in favour of the text, the representatives of Venezuela, Eritrea, and Burundi objected to the country specific mandates.
On a positive note, unlike at the 71st session of the Third Committee when the African Group opened the Human Rights Council resolution in order to target the mandate of the Independent Expert on SOGI, the HRC resolution report passed at UNGA74 with no challenge to the extension of this mandate.
The resolution was adopted with 115 votes in favour, 5 against, and 60 abstentions.
Norway introduced a resolution entitled ‘Implementing the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders through providing a safe and enabling environment for human rights defenders and ensuring their protection.’ This is the latest version of Norway’s resolution ‘Promotion of the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,’ which last came up at GA72. The GA74 resolution on defenders passed by consensus, a promising step towards addressing the threats defenders face and providing the necessary protection. Norway’s shift towards implementation in this resolution aligns with the work being done in New York and Geneva towards bridging the implementation gap.
In 2018 Mexico and Egypt merged their resolutions on human rights on terrorism and counterterrorism, using a starting point their merged resolution from the Human Rights Council, rather than their two Third Committee resolutions. The resulting merged resolution, Terrorism and Human Rights, passed by consensus last year. This year, at the 42nd Session of the Human Rights Council in September, Mexico and Egypt attempted to work together, again, on a joint resolution on terrorism/counter-terrorism and human rights. A previous attempt to collaborate on this issue had broken down over Egypt’s demand that the Special Procedures mandate on this subject should also cover, inter alia, the negative effects of terrorism on the enjoyment of human rights, (i.e. in addition to the original emphasis on how to respect human rights while fighting terrorism). Somewhat surprisingly, this time around the extension of the mandate – included in OP 23 of the current resolution – was eventually accepted by traditional co-sponsors of the Mexican-led terrorism resolution, leading to the resolution’s adoption by consensus. The initial confusion in Geneva led to subsequent questions in New York about whether a merged resolution would again be presented to this year’s Third Committee. Ultimately Mexico and Egypt did table their merged resolution. Mexico remarked that this was simply a technical update of the previous resolution and acknowledged that it is a work in progress and thus does not yet include all the concerns of member states. The resolution was adopted by consensus.
Points of interest
On the first day of voting at the Third Committee on 5 November 2019, the Committee considered the draft resolution entitled ‘Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic.’ The United States and Saudi Arabia submitted the draft proposal three and a half hours after the deadline, so it was not initially included in the program of work. The representative of Syria argued that allowing this resolution to be considered would be a violation of the procedural rules of the UN Charter and would set a dangerous precedent. The United States and Saudi Arabia maintained that the committee should not allow a mere ‘misunderstanding’ to stand in the way of the protection of human rights, especially on such an important and longstanding resolution.
The Chair of the Committee noted that there is precedent to vote on a matter such as this and moved to proceed to a vote. However, before voting could begin Syria called a point of order and asked for a vote on the suspension of the meeting and for the matter to be looked into by the legal advisor to the Secretariat. The Chair did not request the legal advisor but did call for a vote to suspend the meeting, which was rejected. The Chair ultimately called for a vote on whether to consider the resolution. 91 states voted in favour of the consideration of the resolution, 19 voted against, and 39 abstained.
The resolution itself passed by a vote (106-9-32) on 14 November.
After leaving the Human Rights Council in 2017, the United States had emphasised that it would continue to champion human rights issues, including at the UN Security Council and Third Committee. Last year they attracted considerable attention at the Committee, with what some have described as a contentious presence when tackling agreed language particularly on gender and sexual health, launching 5 hostile amendments, none of which passed. This year, the United States presented fewer amendments, though again sought to modify agreed upon language regarding Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR), proposing three amendments: A/C.3/74/L.64, A/C.3/74/L.66, and A/C.3/74/L.67. These amendments sought to revise the resolutions ‘Rights of the Child’ and ‘Policies and Programmes involving youth.’ At the beginning of voting, the US delivered a general statement that outlined all of their concerns with issues such as sovereignty, the International Criminal Court, and SRHRs. The US referred back to this statement frequently when delivering an explanation of vote (providing an explanation following virtually every resolution) when supporting both consensus and by vote resolutions, a move seen by some as an attempt to be less disruptive and more cooperative.
Germany’s resolution regarding National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) makes a reference to the Belgrade Principles, the first time these principles have been directly referenced in a Third Committee resolution. The closest that they have got to a mention is A/HRC/Res/20/14 which welcomes the UNSG report (A/HRC/20/9) to which the Belgrade Principles were annexed. This is a commendable first step towards getting the Belgrade Principles endorsed in a resolution that annexes them, and potentially one day having the GA and Council recommending (by consensus) that parliaments and NHRIs follow the Belgrade Principles in engaging each other.
Final thoughts
The current funding crisis at the United Nations was in the backdrop of many discussions during the 74th session of the General Assembly. UNSG Antonio Guterres remarked at the 5th committee that the UN has been ‘forced to introduce extraordinary measures to cope with the record-level shortage of cash’ and called on Member States to ‘to resolve the structural issues that underlie this annual crisis without further delay.’ This financial crisis extended to the Third Committee. High Commissioner Bachelet, remarked that OHCHR is experiencing a ‘credibility crisis’ as funding has not been able to match the increase in the Treaty Bodies’ work, resulting in a backlog. During interactive dialogues with Special Procedures, some States and Special Rapporteurs echoed the High Commissioner’s concern: Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, Special Rapporteur on the protection of human rights while countering terrorism, stated that was she was forced to use research funds to finance country visits due to lack of consistent financial support for human rights protection.
In addition to urging for better financing of the UN human rights pillar, both the High Commissioner and the President of the Human Rights Council spoke of the critical relevance of the work of the Council and its mechanisms, as well as the larger human rights pillar, to the work of the development and peace and security pillars, particularly in the achievement of the SDGs and on prevention. President Sek noted that the Council is a crucial tool to provide space for States to discuss challenges and achievements in human rights and receive recommendations from other States. High Commissioner Bachelet pointed out that the Human Rights Council and Security Council are often grappling with the same issues and stressed a need to ensure a flow of information in both directions to ensure the best and most coordinated response to a crisis.
The Human Rights Council elections this year were more competitive with fewer clean slates. In addition, all of the candidates who had never before held a seat on the Council were elected to serve on it: Armenia, Marshall Islands, and Sudan. Lone SIDS candidate, Marshall Islands, was elected to the Council, increasing the presence of the historically underrepresented group at the HRC. Both LDCs, Sudan and Mauritania, were also elected.
This session has been defined by many, and like last year, by ‘line-holding’ and the protection of agreed language and human rights gains. That said, there were a number of successful bids for progress. For example, the resolution led Norway on human rights defenders, acknowledged threats facing rights defenders and included new language on policies for protection. This resolution also attracted a very high number of cosponsors. Both the High Commissioner and Council President noted the value of civil society and rights defenders in every phase of the UN’s work, and, as noted above, in an unprecedented joint statement to the Third Committee on 18 October, 71 countries urged the UN to enable civil society and human rights defenders to engage with the UN without fear of reprisal or intimidation. Conversations in many corners involved added attention on bringing the impact of these resolutions, debated in many ways in a diplomacy bubble at UNHQ, closer to those likely to be most affected by them.
The information and data presented in this report came from UN Web TV live streaming of Third Committee sessions and recorded videos of Committee sessions; observations made while present in Third Committee sessions; UN Press Releases of Third Committee sessions; The UN General Assembly Third Committee documentation and reports (see more here); confidential conversations with a number of UN missions and civil society representatives.
Featured Photos (in order of appearance):
Tijjani Muhammad-Bande, President of the General Assembly, addresses the general debate of the 74th Session of the General Assembly of the UN. Screenshot from UN Web TV/74th session of the General Assembly.
Michelle Bachelet, United Nations, High Commissioner for Human Rights at the 74th session of the Third Committee. Screenshot from UN Web TV/19th meeting of the General Assembly/74th session
Mr. Coly Seck, President of the Human Rights Council addresses the 74th session of the Third Committee. Screenshot from UN Web TV/42nd meeting of the General Assembly/74th session
Tendayi Achiume, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance addresses the Third Committee. Screenshot of UN Web TV/37th meeting of the General Assembly/74th session.
Election of members of the Human Rights Council. Screenshot of UN Web TV/17th meeting of the General Assembly/74th session.
The Chair of the Committee, Christian Braun, addresses the Third Committee during voting. Screenshot of UN Web TV/43rd meeting of the General Assembly/74th session.
Action on draft proposals. Screenshot of UN Web TV/52nd meeting of the General Assembly/74th session
All graphs included in this report have been created by the URG NYC team.
Share this Post
