CYIL vol. 13 (2022)

CYIL 13 ȍ2022Ȏ ACTIVITIES OF THE SIXTH COMMITTEE OF THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY … unacceptable for other delegations as the ILC products are not the same in terms of their nature and content and, therefore, no universal approach towards them is possible. Despite many meetings, the informal consultations were inconclusive and no consensus on the draft resolution was reached. After unsuccessful negotiations, the co-facilitators put forward a draft resolution that was assessed as not ambitious enough by the group of like-minded. The text kept the following elements: (a) taking note of the draft articles, (b) calling upon the Member States to hold informal dialogues with the aim to discussing the draft articles, (c) inviting States to submit written comments to draft articles, (d) recommendation ( sic! ) to establish a “framework” for further discussion on the draft articles during the 78 th session of the General Assembly. This draft was put under the silence procedure by the co-facilitators. The EU Member States decided, despite their dissatisfaction with the unambitious draft, not to break the silence. The silence procedure was, nevertheless, broken by Mexico and Cuba, for different reasons. Mexico did not consider the text acceptable for lack of any progress in consideration of the draft articles. Cuba broke the silence for opposite reason and invoked uneven treatment of the ILC products by the Sixth Committee. A discussion on the way forward followed as there was no more time for further negotiations on the text of the resolution. There was an option of another mere technical rollover of the 2019 resolution, or deferral of the consideration of the agenda item to the 77 th session of the General Assembly. The EU and some others strongly preferred the deferral (i.e., not adopting any resolution at all) over another technical rollover, which would send a signal that these States can no longer accept lack of meaningful progress on this issue. The facilitators, however, decided to put forward a technical rollover, which passed the silence procedure, as the EUMember States eventually decided not to break silence on this. Outcome of the consideration during the 76 th session The work of the Sixth Committee ended once again (for the third consecutive year) in so called technical rollover of the resolution originally adopted in 2019 (resolution A/ RES/76/114 12 ). In this rollover, the General Assembly took note of the draft articles for the third time, without achieving any progress on implementing the ILC’s recommendation to elaborate a convention. The technical rollover was adopted by consensus in the Sixth Committee. However, Mexico dissociated itself from the consensus and delivered an explanation of position 13 . According to Mexico, the text of the resolution was unacceptable and clearly demonstrated paralysis of the Sixth Committee when it comes to considering the ILC products. Mexico underlined that during informal consultations a huge majority of delegations supported achieving progress on this topic. The representative of Mexico also more generally criticized consensus as a working method of the Sixth Committee. Finally, the United States mentioned that consensus required engagement and discussion, instead of absolutism and blackmailing the others. 14 12 Resolution No. A/RES/76/114 adopted by the General Assembly on December 9, 2021. 13 Explanation of Position delivered by the representative of Mexico on November 18, 2021 (available here: https:// www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/76/pdfs/statements/cah/29mtg_mexico.pdf ). 14 Explanation of Position delivered by the representative of the United States on November 18, 2021 (available here: https://www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/76/pdfs/statements/cah/29mtg_us.pdf ).

391