From owner-imap@chumbly.math.missouri.edu Fri May 30 11:00:25 2003
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 08:15:54 -0500 (CDT)
From: radred@ix.netcom.com
Subject: AT UN, U.S. AGAIN REJECTS HUMAN RIGHT TO FOOD
Article: 156913
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
From: csamdup@ichrdd.ca
Date: Wed Apr 23, 2003 08:16:43 US/Pacific
Subject: UNCHR: Canada votes in favour of Right to Food
Right to food
Office of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, 23 April 2003
In a resolution on the right to food (E/CN.4/2003/L.27), adopted in a roll-call vote of 51 in favour and 1 against, with 1 abstention, the Commission encouraged all States to take steps with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the right to food, including steps to promote the conditions for everyone to be free from hunger and as soon as possible enjoy fully the right to food, as well as to elaborate and adopt national plans to combat hunger; and took note with interest the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food.
The Commission decided to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food for a further three years; requested the High Commissioner to provide all necessary human and financial resources for the effective fulfilment of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur; requested the Special Rapporteur to submit a report to the General Assembly at its fifty-eighth session and to report to the Commission at its sixtieth session on the implementation of the present resolution; and recommended that the Economic and Social Council endorse its decision to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food for a further three years.
The results of the vote were as follows:
In favour (51): Algeria, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Bahrain, Belgium, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, France, Gabon, Germany, Guatemala, India, Ireland, Japan, Kenya, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Malaysia, Mexico, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam and Zimbabwe.
Against (1): United States.
Abstention (1): Australia.
A Representative of the United States said his delegation could not support the resolution on the right to food. His Government was the largest donor of food aid in the world. His Government's commitment to provide food and end hunger was unquestionable. His Government could not in any way endorse the work of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Jean Ziegler. Instead, he should be reprimanded for his irresponsible statements and for abusing his mandate. His delegation would request for recorded vote and would vote against the text.
A Representative of Canada said it supported the progressive realization of the right to food and was therefore in a position to support the draft resolution. With regards to the right to water, the Government of Canada accepted that Governments had the responsibility to provide clean water, however, Canada did not accept the notion that there was a right to water, particularly between States.