New York, Tuesday, 28 May 2024
Dear co-facilitators,
At the outset, we would like to thank you for convening this meeting. We align ourselves with the statements delivered by Uganda on behalf of the G77 and China, and by Pakistan on behalf of the LMG.
As we indicated last week, we believe that the Rev1 reflects major improvements in comparison with the zero draft of the Pact. While we acknowledge this, we would like to highlight several elements that, in our view, still require to be addressed.
In chapter 1, it is necessary to add more emphasis to the eradication of poverty and hunger. In order to do so, the inclusion of stand-alone actions for both ideas would be the most appropriate solution, considering that these have been core objectives of the international community since the Millennium Development Goals.
In chapter 2, we are still concerned about the focus on peace and security through the lens of human rights. Human rights should be addressed in a cross-cutting way, most suitably in the Chapeau.
Having specific actions and criteria for human rights and other highly contested terms, such as human security, could lead to the securitization of human rights, which is certainly something we would not like to see. We do not believe either that the request to develop national prevention strategies should be reflected in the text, since this is not relevant for every country.
In chapter 3, we consider that the treatment to Intellectual Property Rights is unbalance and leans more towards the protection of patents and not towards the promotion of science, technology and innovation.
On chapter 4, we have some doubts about the global standard to measure the engagement of youth in the UN. We have the perception that developing countries, most likely, will be at the bottom of this standard.
Chapter 5 presents positive elements, like the reform of the international financial architecture and the global treatment of debt, which could still be improved.
On the other hand, we remain worried by the inclusion of ideas that remain unclear for us, like the Emergency Platform. We would not be able to endorse this until we have clarity on the specific design and functions this would accomplish. We do not understand either why there are requests to the Secretary General to suggest improvements on subsidiary bodies of the ECOSOC when its membership should be the one carrying on this endeavors.
To conclude, we would like to reaffirm our constructive spirit for the success of this negotiation.
I thank you.