|
|
Distinguished Co-facilitators,
Pakistan aligns itself with the statements made by the OIC and the Non Aligned Movement.
We take note of your non-paper of 12th April, which understandably is the result of wide ranging consultations you held with the Member States on the ongoing review process. As we stated on 12th April, we understand the complexity of the non-paper and continuing demands for additions and deletions. In our view, the only way out to this quandary is to focus on the given mandate entrusted to us by the Res 60/251 and advances in the other areas be made only on the basis of consensus. Pakistan reaffirms its full trust in your abilities to carry forward the process in a consensual manner bringing it to its logical fruition.
Distinguished Co-facilitators,
Our views are well known to you and our distinguished colleagues in the hall. However, as desired by you, we will take this opportunity to reiterate these and also comment on specifics of your non paper. Pakistan believes that the most pertinent issue under the New York chapter of the review is the status of the Council. In our view the general membership has almost unanimous position on maintaining the current status, which is a welcome sign. This effectively solves the core issue / mandate entrusted to us.
We are also aware that there are some linked issues to this mandate. From the very first meeting, Pakistan expressed its readiness to engaging in the most constructive manner to finding a mutually agreeable solution to these issues, which revolve around reporting methodology of the HRC to GA or Third Committee and aligning the HRC’s annual cycle to calendar year. We are equally open to finding an appropriate solution to addressing the issue of funding to the HRC for its unforeseen needs. These are the only issues, which in our view have found a general acceptance among the wider membership to be dealt under this review process.
We are aware that some distinguished colleagues have other preferences to be discussed under this review process. We acknowledge their noble ideas and objectives but the wider membership has expressed its desire to stay within the specific mandate of the resolution 60/251. We are also aware of the argument that these proposals are for operationalization of specific paragraphs, which does not amount to re-opening the resolution. However, we would respectfully argue that the same logic could be applied to almost all paragraphs of the resolution. Lets not involve in a cherry picking exercise and through you request all distinguished colleagues to concentrate on the mandate i.e. status stricto sensu. Only by following this approach we will be able to finalize the given task within the stipulated time frame of 15th June. We stand ready to help you reach this milestone.
On your present non-paper, we have following comments and observations:
First,Under the legal basis of the review, we would like to include HRC Res 5/1 and 5/2 and its annexes. The reason for this is that we would be endorsing the outcome of Geneva process, which was based on these two resolutions.
Second,We are fine with including the reference to 5th committee together with 3rd committee or have both of these out.
Third,As for the possible outcome, our preference is to follow the model of Geneva, i.e. one single resolution, which endorses the outcomes of two chapters as its annex.
Fourth,We have already reflected on the status, however, the issue of revisiting the status of the Council is a premature discussion. We have been asked to take a decision on the subject and we must do it now. A future review of status or for that matter any corresponding issue is to be decided by the GA and we stand ready to discuss it threadbare whenever it is so decided.
Fifth,Concerning the alignment of the HRC cycle with calendar year, we fully support your proposal. I am sure while doing so we would also take into account the tenure of the HRC President.
Sixth,On the issue of financing the HRC’s unforeseen expenditures, we have repeatedly stated our desire to find the best solution that appropriately addresses the requirements for effective and timely implementation of its mandates.
Seventh,As for the issue of HRC reporting lines to the Third Committee or GA, we would support finding a mutually agreeable solution that best encompasses the universal nature of the Third Committee, the existing status of the Council i.e. its subsidiary role to the GA as well as the right of each Member State to present resolutions and decisions as deemed appropriate. And lastly,
Eight,Concerning elements for further discussion, we have clearly stated our preference on how to deal with these issues. Discussions on these issues would only involve unnecessary delays and complicate progress on even those issues, which are ripe for consensus. I can assure you distinguished co-facilitators that my delegation could easily comment on the merits of each proposal as well as bring to fore a range of new ones for consideration. However, in our view, the best way forward is to park these issues for a future discussion, as and when decided by the GA.
I thank you,