▾

External sources (not reviewed)

At its sixty-first session, under the current item, the General Assembly urged all Member States to reject any denial of the Holocaust as a historical event (resolution 61/255).

And, as the word “likewise” in [...] [...]

[...] [...] it was also countered by other members [...] [...]

A few participants, however pointed to a danger that the term “quality education” tended to become too broad complicating any assessment of outcomes or measurement of results, and that an agreed-to definition was warranted.

It was also suggested that FAO should undertake technical work in the following five priority areas to assist States and RFMOs implement resolutions 61/105 and 64/72 and the FAO Guidelines: (i) improving and expanding application of the criteria for the identification of VMEs beyond corals, sponges, seamounts and hydrothermal vents; (ii) developing guidance on impact mitigation measures and best practices for developing and applying encounter protocols relevant to VMEs, particularly by RFMOs; (iii) developing guidance on what and how information should be collected to implement measures for managing fishery impacts on VMEs; (iv) defining certain terms that could clarify implementation of the FAO Guidelines; and (v) developing guidance on best practices for conducting assessments.

The Security Council is meeting on the eve of a historic moment, which must lead us to make an incontrovertible reality of a Palestinian State that is recognized and fully welcomed into the fold of this Organization, thereby finally implementing all the provisions of General Assembly resolution 181 (II), which calls specifically for the creation of two States in Palestinian land — one Arab, the other Jewish.

The author stresses that the temporary suspension injunction and the urgent application for the protection of a fundamental freedom were found to be admissible but were rejected by the Council of State, whereas the application on the merits was found to be inadmissible, even though consistent jurisprudence has held that the stages of a competitive examination, such as the “qualification” stage, involve decisions and not preliminary acts and that it should therefore be possible to contest them at any time during the examination without it being necessary to await the publication of the final results on qualification.

After discussion, the Working Group agreed that the questions for further consideration on that matter would include (A/CN.9/717, para. 143): (i) whether a provision on protection of the integrity of the arbitral process should be in the form of a general formulation or should contain specific instances that were meant to be specifically addressed; (ii) the interplay between the protection of the integrity of the arbitral process and the provisions in the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules already dealing with that issue; and (iii) how to determine the threshold for a limitation to transparency based on the ground of the need to protect integrity of the arbitral process.