Mr Chairman,
I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union. The Candidate Countries Croatia* and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia*, the Countries of the Stabilisation and Association Process and potential candidates Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia, and the EFTA country Norway, member of the European Economic Area, as well as Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova and Armenia, align themselves with this statement.
At its meeting in February 2009, the work of the Special Committee focused largely on the matter of basic conditions and standard criteria for the introduction and implementation of sanctions, on the basis of a further revised working paper submitted by the Russian Federation. The European Union is ready to approve the text at the current session of the General Assembly.
In past years the EU has been actively engaged in this process of reflection with the aim of enhancing the design, implementation and effectiveness of sanctions.
The European Union remains convinced that sanctions, applied in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, are an important tool for the maintenance and restoration of international peace and security. To be credible and effective, they must be targeted carefully and take into account rights of due process for the individuals concerned and the need to minimize their adverse consequences on third parties. They should also be implemented and monitored effectively and periodically reviewed in order not to be applied longer than necessary.
In this context, the European Union welcomes the important progress already achieved in various United Nations fora and remains willing to participate constructively in this continuing process of improving procedures for implementation of sanctions.
In particular, we would like to reiterate our welcome of the final report of the Informal Working Group of the Security Council on General Issues of Sanctions, under the chairmanship of Greece, which was endorsed by the Security Council in Resolution 1732 of 21 December 2006. The report led to the establishment of an impressive list of best practices and methods which in our view will undoubtedly contribute to making sanctions better targeted and more effective.
Important progress has been made by the Security Council, in particular regarding the listing and de-listing process on the sanctions list and the granting of exemptions. By resolution 1730, adopted on 19 December 2006, a focal point and a de-listing procedure, valid for all sanctions Committees, has been established. Further significant procedural improvements in the listing and de-listing process in relation to the 1267 Committee were included in resolution 1822 of 30 June 2008, including a requirement for mandatory provision of publicly releasable parts of statements of case for new listings, a review of the consolidated list over a period of two years until 30 June 2010, and the posting on the Sanctions Committee’s website of narrative summaries of reasons for listing of all names on the list. The EU particularly welcomes the thorough review process conducted by the 1267 Committee under the chairmanship of Austria, which has already led to important delisting decisions.
Similar improved procedures were instituted by the Security Council last autumn for the sanctions against Somalia (S/RES/1844 2008) and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (S/RES/1857 2008). The EU considers that such procedures should be extended also to other UN sanctions regimes.
The EU remains of the view that the transparency and procedures of all UN sanctions regimes need to be further enhanced and welcomes all efforts in this regard. In the context of the 1267 regime, we are of the view that the resolution to be adopted by the end of December 2009 is a valuable opportunity in this respect. EU Member States are ready to constructively contribute to this process.
The question of assistance to third States affected by sanctions was also studied by the Special Committee. As confirmed by the Secretary General report concerning this matter (A/64/125), none of the sanctions committees has been approached by Member States concerning special economic problems arising from the implementation of sanctions since 2003. This is so mainly because these sanctions are no longer comprehensive economic sanctions, thus minimizing their adverse effects on civilian populations and third States. Therefore, we reiterate our position that studying the question of assistance to third States affected by sanctions by the Special Committee is no longer relevant and could be removed from its agenda.
We also welcome the efforts undertaken by the Secretariat to clear the delay in publication of the Repertory of Practice of United Nations organs and the Repertoire of Practice of the Security Council. We particularly commend the Secretariat for the important milestone reached in the updating of the Repertoire by completing the thirteenth Supplement, covering the time-period up until 1993. In this regard, we again welcome the strengthening of cooperation with academic institutions and the progress achieved to make these publications, including advance versions, accessible on the Internet. Both publications are important as research tools for the international community, particularly the diplomatic community and universities, and as a means to preserve the institutional memory of the Organization, We are grateful to the States having made contributions to special trust funds established for each of the two repertoires and encourage other Member States to do likewise.
We strongly advocate implementation of the decision adopted in 2006 on reforming the working methods of the Special Committee. In this regard, we reiterate our support for reducing the duration of the Special Committee’s session to one week in order to focus on the key points of the debate. Thus, items such as the one on sanctions should be taken off the agenda once agreement has been reached on an outcome, while other topics discussed for several years and which do not appear likely to lead to consensus in the near future, should not be included in the agenda or should only be reviewed every two or three years. Similarly, for the sake of efficiency, we have reservations regarding the inclusion in the Committee’s agenda of any new topic, given the number of items with which it is charged. The European Union therefore welcomes the decision by the Special Committee not to keep the proposal by the Rio Group, entitled “Consideration of the legal aspects of the reform of the United Nations” on the agenda.
I thank you, Mr Chairman.