第1回国連障害者の権利条約特別委員会

Disability Negotiations Daily Summary
Volume 1,#10 August 9, 2002

デイリー・サマリー第1巻第10号　2002年8月9日(金)

NGO 地雷生存者ネットワーク

以下全文（英語）

Meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee, 29 July - 9 August 2002 : NGO Daily Summaries :

Morning session

Delegates met at 9.30 am to resume informal consultations from the previous day, again Chaired by the Representative from the Philippines, Ambassador Enrique Manalo. The informal consultations remained closed to NGOs. The morning session scheduled for 12 pm was cancelled, and the afternoon session was scheduled to begin at 3 pm.

Afternoon session

Commenced: 16:05
Adjourned: 18:10

The Draft Report of the Ad Hoc Committee, A/AC.265/2 as orally amended during this final session, was adopted by consensus. The final Report will be published in the UN languages. The Report covered five procedural and substantive topics. Sections I and II, Introduction and Organisational Matters, dealt with Committee duration, election of officers, the agenda, and documentation. Section III summarized the Committee's Organisation of Work. Section IV covered Decisions adopted by the Committee, on the Modalities of Participation by NGOs and other matters. Section V listed Committee Recommendations, and included the draft Resolution to be submitted to the General Assembly for adoption.

Sixteen delegations contributed to the final discussions preceding the adoption of the Report, focusing on those Sections, IV and V, addressed in the informal consultations. These sections were submitted to the Committee in their revised form as a separate draft document. They were then further revised in these final discussions in conjunction with the official draft Report. Main topics of these discussions revolved around: the role of experts, accreditation of NGOs, the Bureau's mandate, nature of the Intersessionals, accessibility, the venue of the next meeting, and rules on documentation.

Several delegations as well as NGO representative Kicki Nordstrom of the World Blind Union and the Chairperson of the Bureau Ambassador Luis Gallegos made concluding remarks following the formal adoption of the Report.

The Vice Chairperson of the Bureau and representative of the Asia Group, Ambassador Manalo of the Phillipines, opened debate of the Draft Report by summarizing the main outcomes of the informal consultations. This included: 1] a reaffirmation of the need to promote and protect the rights of PWDs; 2] the awareness of the contribution a convention could make in this regard; 3] the need to therefore continue the consideration of proposals; and 4] the decision to meet again at least once, within existing resources, prior to the General Assembly sessions in 2003.

The Chairperson then led the Committee through each of the revisions to the Draft Report that had resulted from the informal consultations. Delegations intervened to make further suggestions adding, deleting, clarifying and grammatically correcting text.

Other than the following section on NGO Accreditation, only interventions dealing with substantive changes to the Draft Report's text are detailed below.

NGO ACCREDITATION

The Chairperson announced the end of the 7-day waiting period for states to object to the application of NGOs seeking accreditation to the Committee. The Chair declared two NGOs with such pending applications approved by the Committee. The Chair did not identify the NGOs.

Later in the proceedings, and at the end of the session, Pakistan noted that one of the 2 NGOs, identified by him as "CCCUN" and whose application for ECOSOC consultative status was pending, had yet to respond to objections and questions raised by members of the Secretariat's NGO Committee. The delegate from Pakistan questioned whether the Ad Hoc Committee had consulted with the Secretariat on this issue, making it clear that Pakistan had "nothing against the NGO or its participation."

India and Malaysia noted that they had not received particulars of the 2 NGOs in question that was sent to delegations via fax by the Secretariat, and therefore had not had the opportunity to consider the applications.

The Chairperson responded that since no objections had been raised when NGO applications for accreditation to the Ad Hoc Committee were pending and when the motion to approve the NGOs was on the floor, these applications had now been approved. This position was supported by Sweden, which added that they had received all particulars regarding the NGOs in question. The Chair assured the delegate from Pakistan that he would have the Secretariat respond personally to his questions later since they were "purely procedural" in nature.

SECTION I - INTRODUCTION

Receiving no comments on this section of the Report, the Chairperson announced the Committee's approval of this section.

SECTION II - ORGANIZATIONAL MATTERS

Receiving no comments on this section of the Report at the beginning of the session, the Chairperson announced the Committee's approval of this section.

Later in the proceedings, the United States had several suggestions regarding the format of the Report relevant to this section. Firstly, citing previous Reports of Ad Hoc Committees to the Third Committees, the US called for the addition of a new "Attendance" sub-section after subsection A: "Opening and Duration of the first session." This would list attendance of 1] Member States and their total number; 2] Observers; 3] all Participants that, unlike the current Participant List before the Committee, would also list all NGOs present, organised by type of consultative status, General and Special - which would be annexed to the Report. Secondly, citing the example of the Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of a Convention on Transnational Organised Crime, it recommended that the following paragraph be inserted in a separate Documentation section that would list all the documents and their sources.

At its first session the Ad Hoc Committee had before it, in addition to documents prepared by the Secretariat, documents containing proposals and contributions submitted by: … The list of documents is attached in Annex 2.

The US emphasized that the documents themselves should not be attached to the Report, only listed in the Report's Annex and updated regularly, with a numeric sequence reflecting these updates as they took place.

The Chair noted that decisions in relation to the US suggestions on the format of the Report would be taken later by the Secretariat reflecting UN precedent.

SECTION III - ORGANIZATION OF WORK

Following one technical change proposed by Canada, the Chairperson announced the Committee's approval of this section.

SECTION IV - DECISIONS

Accredited NGOs: Sweden requested that the two decisions regarding accreditation of NGOs without ECOSOC consultative status (first for 6 NGOs approved on Aug 2nd and then for 2 NGOs approved at the current session) be included in the Report. Pakistan noted that such inclusion was not necessary since there had been a previous, separate GA Resolution dealing with the accreditation of non-ECOSOC NGOs. Furthermore new NGOs would continue to become accredited to the Committee over the coming year so the report could not be a complete record of this decision, and it could be confusing if only NGOs accredited during the time the Committee was in session were listed without having a mechanism to list NGOs accredited later. The Swedish position was supported by the United States, which called for a Draft Report that would be "a comprehensive compilation" of all activities of the Ad Hoc Committee, as well as by the Czech Republic and the EU. The "suggestion, that the Committee decision in relation to NGOs that do not have consultative status be incorporated into the Report" was put to the floor - the Chair received no objection and this suggestion was approved.

Role of experts: Malaysia proposed new language elaborating on the Report's repeated use of the terminology "experts," so that the Report specified how experts would come to be determined by the UN and when they would be invited. Malaysia explained its motives behind this proposal by noting that most Malaysian experts work "at the national, or at the most, the regional level … and the UN may not always be aware that we also have our experts and who those experts may be." In order to facilitate such participation so that "our experts are not left out of the process," the delegate recommended that new text "in consultations with member states" be inserted in this paragraph. The Chairperson responded that it was his understanding based on informal agreement that the Secretariat would be circulating a letter to all member states asking for such nominations so Malaysia's concerns would be addressed. Pakistan supported the Malaysian position noting the importance of putting this understanding in writing. The US and the EU opposed the Malaysian proposal, not wanting to amend language in decisions that had already been made. The Chairperson appealed to the Malaysian delegation to accept his suggestion that the language of this section of the Report remain unaltered. He further suggested that the Bureau be put in charge of accommodating Malaysia's concerns with regard to sending follow up letters to Member States. Malaysia accepted, noting that the Bureau "would be more than capable to take into account our concerns."

SECTION V - RECOMMENDATIONS

Renewal of the Bureau's mandate: Pakistan, supported by Malaysia, noted that language regarding the elected officers of the Committee Bureau remaining "in office for the whole duration of the exercise" was "too open ended" and requested that the last word be replaced with the phrase "work of the Committee." The US "believed that the practice of the Third Committee in this regard has been to have the Bureau remain in office through the next meeting of the General Assembly," but in this particular case recommended language that specified " ... officers of the Bureau to remain in office through the second meeting of Ad Hoc Committee," at which point "we can again re-extend the mandate for the third meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee." The US further explained that its intentions were "purely procedural" to prevent the mandate of the Bureau "from expiring accidentally." Pakistan supported this position, recommending that when the mandate of the Bureau was extended, it should be with the same membership of elected officers, thereby ensuring continuity in the Bureau's composition and work. This, Pakistan noted, has been the precedent in other preparatory processes. This position was supported by the EU and the US. Canada then noted that the insertion of such language may necessitate a different resolution for submission to the GA than the one currently being discussed. Mexico intervened to point out that the Bureau was elected by the Committee, not by the General Assembly, and that as long as the Committee does not decide otherwise, "this Bureau will remain in operation and could continue throughout the entire process, all of the members of the Bureau or some of them, it would require a contrary decision by the Bureau for this to change." Mexico asserted that the paragraph in the draft report dealing with the renewal of the Bureau's mandate was redundant and recommended it be deleted entirely. The Chairman submitted Mexico's motion to the Plenary, seconded by Brazil, and the motion was passed without objection.

Venue and timing of the next meeting: Denmark agreed with the Chairperson's informal understanding that the next meeting would be in New York during the months of May / June. Malaysia and Pakistan requested that this understanding be reflected in the text of the report. The Chairperson agreed, noting that the exact dates would depend on the Secretariat.

Documentation: the United States, citing the example of the Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of a Convention on Transnational Organised Crime, recommended that the complete list of documents submitted to this Committee only be referenced in the Recommendations. Following up on this, Mexico suggested the following new paragraph replace the existing one, that would avoid burdening the Secretariat with extra work and where the actual documents would be made available in a single compilation under one document code, placed on a website and updated regularly as proposals and counter-proposals were submitted.

The Committee also requests the Secretary General to publish and periodically update a compilation of governmental proposals and contributions including those proposals already received.

Canada raised questions that the obligations of the Secretariat as implied in this paragraph seemed to be adding to similar obligations of the Secretariat as spelled out in the Draft Resolution itself. Canada also noted that the Report already deals with documentation separately in Section II of the report, where existing documents are listed with their own codes. Mexico clarified that its proposed paragraph did not conflict with that in the Resolution, since the latter only requested the Secretary General to "seek the views" of Member States, not their proposals and counter proposals. Mexico also noted that the compilation and identification of ongoing submissions for consideration by the Committee can follow whatever precedent may exist within the UN. The United States called for informal discussions on this point, but due to lack of time Mexico made the counter-proposal that the paragraph dealing with documentation in the Recommendations section be omitted entirely, and the Bureau be charged with looking for an appropriate mechanism for referencing documentation in the Report. The US and Canada accepted the Mexican proposal. Mexico's last intervention on this topic was to request that the latest document emerging from the Secretariat to be submitted to the Committee for consideration, 57/212, containing the complete report of the Experts Meeting that took place in Mexico, be included in the list of documents in the Draft Report.

Intersessionals: Norway requested the Bureau's consideration of 2 matters relating to the Bureau's interim obligations preparing for the next Ad Hoc Committee meeting as stated in the Recommendations: firstly, tentatively planning for meetings of the Committee beyond 2003; secondly, subsequent to the Intersessionals, arranging "an information meeting with NGOs accredited to the Committee, not necessarily everybody, but maybe a couple, subject to discussions between the Bureau and the organizations." The Chairperson was amenable to both requests from Norway, noting that they "complemented" the relevant paragraph, and as Canada later pointed out, did not necessitate changing any language in this paragraph. Malaysia, South Africa and Pakistan sought to qualify the Norwegian requests noting that these necessitated a selection from among NGOs that, as in the past "most of the time" did not include a representative number of NGOs from developing countries. They suggested that the Bureau "consider ways and means to encourage such participation" and that the Bureau post the outcomes of its Intersessionals on a website, thereby ensuring the widest access and equal input from civil society members from all regions. The Chair assured the delegations of his understanding of the Intersessionals as "a very transparent process." The Chair emphasized that the Bureau is "mandated," reflecting its own geographic representation, to "report to the countries and to the NGO community," which is "extensive and worldwide," on the outcome of its Intersessionals, and that this would be done via the web.

Role of Experts: Reflecting its concerns on this topic as expressed earlier, Malaysia suggested, and the Committee accepted, amendments to the following Recommendation, as indicated:

The Ad Hoc Committee further invites the Bureau to organize panel discussions at the next session…and in this regard invites Member States to nominate experts to the panel, with the participation of UN organizations regarding key thematic issues.

Accessibility: A new Recommendation, preceding and in addition to a brief one in the body of the Resolution, was proposed by Mexico, supported by South Africa and amended by Australia as indicated:

With regard to accessibility and in accordance with Resolution 56/473, the Committee strongly recommends the Secretary General to implement some measures, as first steps, to facilitate the accessibility to the United Nations premises, technology and documents. Therefore, the Committee invites, among others, persons with disabilities and experts to present proposals in this sense.

In explaining their intentions behind this Recommendation, Mexico noted that "given the cost entailed and time it could take" to implement the measures as outlined in the recently adopted GA Resolution 56/473, Mexico sought to recommend "small" and "simple" measures that could be adopted "slowly," making it "possible to resolve the problems that we have seen in the course of these 2 weeks of the Committee's work" and "that will facilitate access to these rooms and to the UN documents for PWD." Australia emphasized the need for a Recommendation that "stresses practical access issues" referring to "practical steps" that can be taken by the Secretariat to improve access to facilities and documents in real time to PWDs for the next meeting. South Africa supported this position and in addition emphasized the importance of incorporating "the principle of reasonable accommodation" in the relevant operative paragraph of the Resolution, to ensure meaningful "participation of delegates and all other participants with disabilities." This suggestion by South Africa was accepted by the Committee.

The US, Canada, Japan, Iran, and Malaysia made several technical and grammatical edits to the Preambular and Operative paragraphs of the Draft Resolution.

Japan proposed that "work" be replaced by "mandate" in the operative paragraph "requesting the Secretary General to continue to provide to the Ad Hoc Committee with the facilities necessary for the performance of its work…" but withdrew its proposal given opposition by Denmark, which noted that the wording of the paragraph reflected what was agreed upon in the informal discussions and should not be changed.

SECTION VI - ADOPTION OF THE REPORT

The Vice-Chair of the Bureau, Jeanette Ndhlovu of South Africa, formally introduced the Report to be submitted to the GA at its 57th session, noting among other things, that the Report would include both Annexes 1 and 2 and acknowledging the role played by NGOs. The Chair submitted the Report to the Plenary, and it was formally adopted.

CONCLUDING STATEMENTS

Cameroon, on behalf of the African Group, submitted a statement expressing its continued support for the development of a Convention. It stressed the need for any Convention to incorporate the principles of respect and human dignity; achievement of equality and elimination of all forms of discrimination; and the protection of African people from "factors that cause undue hardship and disability, particularly that from armed conflict." Cameroon called upon "all those engaging in activities that fuel conflicts in the continent to refrain from such practices." Cameroon also urged delegates to "give due cognizance to the cultural rights as contained in the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, and other international instruments" and expressed support for a "holistic" convention that does not separate civil and political rights from economic, social and cultural rights. Furthermore, it stressed that "lack of resources, human, structural and financial, should not in any way undermine the importance of recognising the fundamental freedoms and human rights of persons with disabilities."

New Zealand acknowledged the role of a new Convention but stressed that "future sessions of the Committee should also take into account of, and complement, the implementation of existing mechanisms and standards, and ensure that disability perspectives are mainstreamed into the monitoring mechanisms of the 6 core UN human rights treaties." It found it "encouraging and helpful to have the participation of experts ... and we look forward to their continuing engagement." It welcomed the valuable advice of PWDs and NGOs, and considered it "essential that future meetings of the Ad Hoc Committee are similarly open and inclusive."

Mexico expressed its gratitude to the Bureau and delegations for their facilitation of, and support for, the development of a Convention and hoped that future work of the Committee "could be carried out increasingly with the full participation of all of the delegations and all of the NGOs who have come to join this great project."

Denmark, on behalf of the European Union, also expressed its gratitude to the Bureau, as well as the NGOs, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Special Rapporteur, and independent experts whose participation "greatly enriched the debate and its results." It "appreciated one of the more creative means of communication of the Ad Hoc Committee, namely the Daily Negotiations Bulletin," noting that "none of us have at any point been in doubt of the engagement of the entire group of NGOs in this meeting and in the future process." It pledged that the EU would "proceed constructively" in preparations for the next meetings.

Vice-Chair Karina M蚌tensson, from Sweden announced that the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute and the World Committee on Disability had selected the Republic of Ecuador to receive this year's Franklin D. Roosevelt International Disability Award, in recognition of the government's strong commitment to promoting and protecting the rights of persons with disabilities. The Award would be accepted by the President of the Republic of Ecuador on 19 September 2002 at the UN in New York.

Kicki Nordstrom, President of the World Blind Union, spoke on behalf of the International Disability Alliance and the recently established International Disability Caucus. She thanked governments for their acknowledgement of the need for a Convention protecting the human rights of people with disabilities and for their efforts furthering the development of such a convention. Looking forward, she pledged the continued guidance of PWDs and NGOs, in particular in implementing the welcome call for improved accessibility as included in the Report, and encouraged states to fully utilise the expertise offered by the NGO community at the national level.

The Chairperson Ambassador Luis Gallegos noted that "in these 10 days of deliberations on the protection and promotion of rights for this vulnerable group… we have all learned to be more sensitive, to understand better, and to become engaged in the purpose of obtaining a change in the international society in relation to people with disability. It is not only the obligation of states … it is the nature of societies to change, against the discrimination against those who are considered to be disabled." The position "the majority of the delegations" have expressed here is the need for a realistic and comprehensive instrument that will permit these people to become members of a viable social structure. He recognised the "personal satisfaction" he had gained in his interactions with persons with disabilities, for whom he had a "great admiration" noting that "their attitudes towards life and their constant effort was a lesson to all of us."

The Disability Negotiations Daily Summaries are published by the Landmine Survivors Network, a US based international organization with amputee support networks in six developing / mine affected countries. LSN staff and consultants contributing to these summaries include Zahabia Adamaly, MA (zahabia@landminesurvivors.org), Katherine Guernsey, JD (Kathy@landminesurvivors.org), and Janet E. Lord, LLB (editor) (janet@landminesurvivors.org). Any questions or concerns relating to the Summaries should be directed to Janet Lord.