Home » Resolution L8. Mainstreaming a gender perspective into drug-related policies and programmes

Resolution L8. Mainstreaming a gender perspective into drug-related policies and programmes

Mexico: Would like to thank Australia for its co-sponsorship of this resolution.

PP1. No comments.

PP2. Russia: Can we delete “Welcoming the efforts made by Member States to achieve and comply with the provisions of” and replace with “Reaffirming the obligations under”? And add “as the cornerstone of the international drug control system” to the end of the paragraph.

Guatemala: Since this is the first resolution we’ve taken up in the CoW, we want to stress that it’s not the place here to bring up topics that are not entirely relevant to the resolution. We must focus on the principal topic here – gender – not debate whether the 1988 convention is the cornerstone of the drug control system.

Russia: I would like to remind my colleague that this is a resolution of the CND, and it is not the case that we cannot insert other content about the drug control system. This is a drug-related resolution, so we can insert some basic relevant elements. We propose two paragraphs: we want to swap the position of PP1 and PP2. Suggest an additional, new PP3 and PP4 that reiterates support for demand and supply reduction, and importance of the drug conventions.

Chair: We’ll only now discuss changes to PPs agreed already that are about gender. So we’ll come back to your proposed new paragraphs.

Uruguay: I think this is not a very constructive approach. Let’s not copy and paste the whole text of the UNGASS declaration. I urge delegations to be more constructive. Uruguay cannot even consider the proposals that have just been made. We don’t think they should take up any time in this room.

Cuba: We support the proposals made by the Russian Federation. Any discussion should mention these basic issues.

Colombia: We were happy with draft presented by Mexico, and are concerned the debate is moving away from the original aim of the resolution – to safeguard the rights of women.

The UK: We add our voices to the other moderate voices around the room. We ask for the Russian amendments to be deleted. We do not want a laundry list of amendments here.

Pakistan: Useful recommendations from Russia. We endorse them.

Nicaragua: We welcome the draft proposal made by the co-sponsors. Cuba’s amendment would be useful.

Mexico: It’s difficult for us to decide what to say given that there is now a number of co-sponsors. The mentions of the three drug conventions were at the request of Russia – they proposed the original paragraph. So it is strange that they are now requesting amendments.

Peru: We think suggestion by Russia and amendment by Cuba to PP2 is a good one. We agree we should go back to informals to discuss this.

PP3. No comments.

PP4. No comments.

PP5. No comments.

PP6. No comments.

PP7. Peru: Will discuss proposed amendment in informals.

PP8. No comments.

PP9. No comments.

PP10. No comments.

PP11. The Holy See: We prefer “welfare of the family”, rather than “families”.

Sweden: In informals, we asked for a commitment to the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women. This was supported by some in informals.

Russia: Support proposal of Holy See, to have “family” as singular. We prefer “drug-related crime” rather than “drug-facilitated”.

Mexico: “Drug-facilitated crime” appears in some UNODC guidelines. That is why we chose it – it is linked to domestic violence and discussion of other gender-specific issues.

Australia: We’d like to put “women’s contribution to the development of society” before “and to the welfare of the family”.

PP12. Russia: Term “affected populations” is too broad. We’d like to delete this PP.

China: We’d like to clarify the term and then we think we can keep this paragraph.

Mexico: We agree with comments made by the Australian delegation. The change to PP11 they mentioned was agreed in informals, and hasn’t been reflected in the text. The reference to “affected populations” can be removed if that saves the paragraph.

PP13. Russia: Want to change start of PP13 to “Recognizing the role of the CND in organizing and holding inclusive, transparent and open-ended preparation process for the UNGASS 2016 and to that end”.

OP1. Algeria: Insert at beginning: “Calls upon Member States to develop, as needed, and implement national drug policies and programmes in full conformity with the international drug control conventions.”

OP2. Russia: Delete sentence on reproductive and sexual health services.

Holy See: Agree with Russia. This language is deeply problematic.

Iran: We’d like to delete this too.

OP2 bis. Russia: Change “crucial” to “important”.

OP3. UK: Delete “execution” due to death penalty connotations.

OP3 bis. No comments.

OP4. Russia: Add “where appropriate and in conformity with national legislation” at end of OP.

OP6. No comments.

OP7. Russia: We propose restoring “non-governmental organisations”, which was deleted. Add also “religious and academic organisations”.

France: Russia is reprising suggestions made in informals. This new proposal mentioning religious organisations is not acceptable to my delegation.

OP8. Russia: Skip references to UN Women as they have no relevance to drug related issues.

OP9. Pakistan: Remove adjectives here so not “actively and visibly mainstream” – just “mainstream”.

OP10. No comments.

OP11. No comments.

Mexico: We will resolve these suggestions in informals. Thank you very much.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *