Background
The Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization) met today to continue its general debate on decolonization issues. [For background, see Press Release GA/SPD/259 of 6 October 2003.]
Statements
ZULU KILO-ABI (Democratic Republic of the Congo) said consideration of the various reports showed how much work the Special Committee on decolonization had to do, and how much it had already done since 1961. Despite the tangible progress achieved, however, many challenges remained, some of them major. The future was fraught with many obstacles.
In that context, he made several recommendations for accelerating the process by which the Non-Self Governing Territories would be allowed to exercise their inalienable right to independence, including: encouraging the administering Powers to actively participate in the Special Committee’s work; the authorization of regular visits of United Nations bodies to the Territories; and the wide-scale involvement of the United Nations and the Territories in projects designed to remove the obstructions to sustainable development. Information on the situation of the Territories was also needed, both for the residents of the Territories and the outside world.
He supported the Special Committee’s recommendations, in so far as they were consistent with the spirit and letter of the United Nations Charter and relevant decolonization resolutions. The effective enjoyment of socio-economic and cultural rights found full expression only in the genuine exercise to the right to self-determination. It was a political, ethical and moral requirement, he said.
CHARLES AZUBIKE ONONYE (
Nigeria) said that efforts should be made by the United Nations to avoid delaying the granting of independence, so as to obviate frustration and violence. To that end, he added, administering Powers should be more sensitive to the legitimate aspirations of the peoples still under colonial rule.
Nigeria, he said, remained committed to all General Assembly resolutions in support of granting independence to colonial countries and peoples and to all measures undertaken by the United Nations to ensure that Non-Self Governing Territories gain independence without delay.
With respect to Western Sahara, he reaffirmed his country’s support for the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO), sponsored by the United Nations and the African Union. Nigeria, he said, considered the United Nations Settlement Plan the only guarantee of the right to self-determination for the people of Western Sahara. He also welcomed measures to enhance the socio-economic status of the people of the Non-Self Governing Territories.
ABDALLAH BAALI (Algeria) said if there was one area in which the Organization had achieved success, it was in decolonization. Many countries represented in the Chamber had been removed from the yoke of occupation and servitude. However, 16 remaining Non-Self-Governing Territories still existed and the peoples of those Territories were looking forward to exercising their sacred right to self-determination. That applied also to the people of Western Sahara.
The 16-year armed struggle, during which the Saharawi people had demonstrated great courage, had ended in a ceasefire referred to as the Settlement Plan, he said. The conclusion of that Plan, unanimously approved by the Security Council in resolutions 658 (1990) and 690 (1991) had opened the way to a just settlement of the conflict by means of an impartial referendum, organized by the United Nations, in cooperation with the African Union. Despite the obstacles to the organization of the referendum, and despite attempts to change the criteria and identification operations, the United Nations had managed, thanks to the architect of the Houston Accords, James Baker III, to complete the operations to identify the electorate.
Unfortunately, the troubles facing the people of Western Sahara had not ended, he said. Everything had been done to block the referendum, by submerging the process with thousands of appeals. Only a tiny number of the appeals contained a new element that would justify them. Despite the Secretary-General’s warning against the transformation of the appeals process into a second identification process, that had nevertheless happened. The United Nations had decided to move towards finding a political solution that would be acceptable, while affirming the Settlement Plan.
The Framework Agreement, then submitted by the Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy, had not found favour with anyone, with the notable exception of Morocco, he continued. The Security Council chose not to accept it and unanimously requested the Personal Envoy to submit a new proposal. The Council had felt even more comfortable in adopting that decision, as the Organization’s Legal Counsel had confirmed, on 29 July 2002, that Western Sahara was a Non-Self-Governing Territory, of which Morocco was not the administering Power. Significantly, the Council, thus, returned to its original position on decolonization and opened the way to a just and final solution to the conflict.
The “peace plan for self-determination of the people of Western Sahara”, submitted last January by Mr. Baker, was an honest and balanced proposal which was in keeping with his mandate. Algeria had studied the plan in-depth and believed that, despite certain shortcomings, the Baker proposal was a challenge for peace that was worth being met. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Saguia el-Hamra and Rio de Oro (POLISARIO Front) had resolved to support the proposal, demonstrating its flexibility and responsibility. The Security Council, in its resolution 1495 (2003), had approved the Baker plan by requesting the parties, namely Morocco, to work towards acceptance of the plan.
He hoped the voice of reason would prevail and that the peace plan would become a reality for the greater good of the Saharawi people. Algeria supported the plan and was prepared to continue to cooperate fully, as a neighbouring State, with the Secretary-General and his Personal Envoy. Now that the international community had given its full support, he hoped the Fourth Committee and the General Assembly would support the peace plan and add their efforts to those of the Council to see that the plan was implemented at the soonest, so that peace could finally prevail in the region.
V.K. NAMIBAR (India) remarked that the Special Committee on decolonization had come a long way since its establishment in 1961. Decolonization had truly been a success story of the United Nations. However, he noted, that with 16 Non-Self-Governing Territories still on the United Nations list, the “business” of decolonization was still incomplete. He called for special attention to the needs of the people of the Territories -- who had made considerable progress towards self-government –- in order to enable them to bequeath to themselves political and socio-economic institutions and structures of their choice.
He said that the importance of the role of administering Powers could not be overemphasized and called upon them to approach the task at hand in a spirit of cooperation, understanding, political realism and flexibility. In that context, he noted that spirit had imbued talks in recent years, the visit of a United Nations mission to Tokelau last year, and the 2003 Caribbean Regional Seminar in Anguilla. The presence of a senior-level representative from the United Kingdom during the entire seminar was particularly noteworthy, and the lead taken by the United Kingdom should encourage some of the other Powers to follow the same route, he added.
He praised the work of the Special Committee for its efforts to complete the unfinished business of decolonization and reaffirmed India’s commitment to the ideas enshrined in the Declaration on Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.
