Европейский суд









Новости градозащиты


Наведение порядка на Руси



За эту красоту мы приняли бой

Free counters!

Спаси Питер! || Законы || Суды || ЕСПЧ || Публикации || Документы || Обращения к властям

Спасем Санкт-Петербург от варваров!

"Наши мертвые нас не оставят в беде.
Наши павшие - как часовые"

Снос памятника героям Великой отечественной войны и блокадникам

19 ноября 2009г. Резолюция Генассамблеи

19 November 2009 General Assembly

GA/SHC/3967 Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York Sixty-fourth General Assembly

Third Committee

43rd & 44th Meetings (AM & PM)



The Committee next turned to a draft on the inadmissibility of certain practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance (document A/C.3/64/L.53), introduced by the representative of the Russian Federation, who made oral corrections to the text.

The draft would have the Assembly express deep concern about the glorification of the Nazi movement and former members of the Waffen SS organization, including by erecting monuments and memorials and holding public demonstrations in the name of the glorification of the Nazi past, the Nazi movement and neo-Nazism, as well as by declaring or attempting to declare such members and those who fought against the anti-Hitler coalition and collaborated with the Nazi movement as participants in national liberation movements.

Further by the text, the Assembly would express concern at recurring attempts to desecrate or demolish monuments erected in remembrance of those who fought against Nazism during the Second World War, as well as to unlawfully exhume or remove the remains of such persons, and would urge States in that regard to fully comply with their obligations under article 34 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 [on remains of deceased].

Other provisions would have the Assembly note with concern the rise of skinhead groups responsible for racist incidents in several countries, as well as the resurgence of violence targeting members of ethnic, religious or cultural communities and national minorities, as observed by the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in his latest report. It would emphasize the need to act to put an end to those practices, and would call on States to take more effective measures in that regard. It would reaffirm the obligation of States parties to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination -- among other things -- to declare illegal organizations that promote and incite racial discrimination and to recognize participation in such organizations or activities as an offence punishable by law. They were also obliged to prohibit public authorities or public institutions, national or local, from promoting or inciting racial discrimination.

Speaking in explanation of position before action, the representative of Belarus said her delegation fully supported the text. She thanked the Russian delegation for its introduction. The phenomena it addressed had to be addressed and the current resolution had an important message for today’s youth, including its important historical message. The victory in the Second World War came at a high price. The war took the lives of millions of people, and Belarus, which lost a third of its population, believed that efforts to whitewash Nazism and the events of that war must be opposed.

The CHAIR then informed the Committee that a recorded vote had been requested, and, in response to the delegate of the Russian Federation, who asked which delegation had requested the vote, said the United States had made that request.

Speaking in explanation of vote before the vote, the representative of the United States said that there was much in the resolution with which her country could agree. It shared the repugnance of other Committee members towards any glorification of Nazism. But the United States was concerned that the text did not make a distinction between actions and expressions. Indeed, it did not consider the prohibition of expression an effective or appropriate means of eliminating intolerance. In a free society, hateful ideas would fail on their own merit. The best way to combat intolerance was a robust legal scheme that prohibited hate crimes and protected freedom of speech. Thus, her delegation could not vote for the text as drafted.

The representative of Sweden, speaking on behalf of the European Union, reiterated the Union’s strong commitment to the global fight against racism, xenophobia and related intolerance. Neo-Nazism had to be vigorously combated. It still existed in many countries of the draft’s co-sponsors, as well as of the European Union, and had to be tackled with all efforts to combat racism and xenophobia at the national and international levels. Indeed, the ideas that neo-Nazism tried to undermine – namely, that all men and women were born equal -- was at the core of what the United Nations stood for, and its mission should serve to unite all in combating neo-Nazism. Reiterating the Union’s strong readiness to engage in negotiations with the co-sponsors to ensure that the text did this, she noted that a few of its proposals were reflected in the text. In particular, the addition to operative paragraph 8 had improved the text’s clarity.

She said, however, that, given the importance of the issue, the Union regretted that the text did not reflect all proposals submitted by all delegations, which would have led to a more acceptable text. It further regretted that a number of its own more serious proposals had not been incorporated. As in past years, the text continued to be selective. Moreover, new paragraphs were introduced that contributed to further dilute the text. The Union would have also liked to have seen the text’s inaccurate reflection on the Nuremburg trials corrected, particularly by incorporating its proposal that a direct quote be inserted into the text. Another matter of concern related to the tact taken to address those practices. The Union fully believed that, to be effective, the fight against racism, xenophobia and related intolerance had to take into account articles 4 and 5 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Further, the Special Rapporteur needed to address contemporary forms of racism, xenophobia and related intolerance, and the request made to him in this year’s text would strongly undermine that approach.

She stressed that the Union was increasingly concerned about the approach taken in the current resolution. Its concerns from previous years remained. The text’s co-sponsors had not also taken into account the Union’s concerns related to this year’s text. For those reasons, it would abstain from voting.

The Committee then approved the text by a vote of 124 in favour to 1 against ( United States), with 55 abstentions. (See Annex I.)

The representative of Switzerland thanked the principal sponsor for taking account of the views of non-co-sponsors on issues that would have allowed his country to have voted in favour. But, his country had abstained from the vote, because the draft did not cover all contemporary forms of racism.

Following that action, the Committee took up the draft on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination (document A/C.3/64/L.57).

The Secretary, Mr. KHANE, informed the Committee that adoption of that resolution would not entail any additional resource requirements under the 2010-2011 programme biennium budget.

The draft was introduced by the representative of Cuba, who made several oral amendments to the text, which were being circulated on paper in the room.

By that text, the Assembly -- reaffirming the grave concern posed by mercenaries to States and recognizing that armed conflict, terrorism, arms trafficking and covert operations by third Powers encouraged the global demand for mercenaries -- would request States to be vigilant against the recruitment, training, hiring or financing of mercenaries by private companies. It would also request States to impose a specific ban on the intervention of such companies in armed conflicts or in actions to destabilize constitutional regimes. States that did import security services from private companies were encouraged to establish mechanisms to register and license those companies, as well as regulatory mechanisms to ensure that their services did not impede the enjoyment of human rights nor violate human rights in the recipient country.


Vote on Practices Fuelling Racism

The draft resolution on the inadmissibility of certain practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance (document A/C.3/64/L.53) was approved by a recorded vote of 124 in favour to 1 against, with 55 abstentions, as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cфte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against: United States.

Abstain: Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Montenegro, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Ukraine, United Kingdom.

Absent: Central African Republic, Chad, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Sao Tome and Principe, Somalia, Vanuatu.

Краткий перевод:

19 ноября 2009г. Резолюция Генассамблеи, в частности, "выражает глубокую озабоченность по поводу прославления нацистского движения и бывших членов организации "Ваффен СС", в том числе, путем сооружения памятников и мемориалов и проведения публичных демонстраций в целях прославления нацистского прошлого, нацистского движение и неонацизма".

Аналогичное осуждение членов ООН высказано и по поводу объявления или попыток объявить героями национально-освободительных движений "тех, кто боролся против антигитлеровской коалиции и сотрудничал с нацистским движением".

В документе также высказана обеспокоенность "непрекращающимися попытками осквернения или разрушения памятников" борцам с нацизмом в годы Второй мировой войны, а также "незаконной эксгумации или переноса останков" погибших в борьбе с нацизмом.

Впервые Генассамблее были представлены рекомендации специального докладчика по данной проблеме, пост которого был учрежден также по инициативе России. В частности, в резолюции отмечается рекомендация спецдокладчика о "важности уроков истории, на которых преподается информация о драматических событиях и человеческих страданиях, ставших результатом идеологий нацизма и фашизма, особенно ввиду предстоящей шестьдесят пятой годовщины победы во Второй мировой войне".

Вместе мы победим!