You are viewing our old site. See the new one here

ENB:07:41 [Next] . [Previous] . [Contents]

THE PREAMBLE

Peru, supported by the EU, said the second preambular paragraph contained few principles, but noted the relevancy of the provisions. Japan said the word "principle" was used because not all States have ratified UNCLOS.

Bangladesh, supported by Canada, said the phrase "assure conservation and management" should be replaced by "ensure conservation and management". Canada, supported by Poland, said that paragraph one noting "long-term conservation" and paragraph three noting the need for "improved cooperation" should be merged. The Chair, supported by Poland, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Korea and New Zealand, suggested leaving paragraph one as is and changing paragraph three to "resolved to improve cooperation between States". The EU wanted to add at the end of paragraph one "and throughout the entire range of their distribution". The EU, supported by China, sought deletion of reference to Agenda 21, Chapter 17, Programme Area C in paragraph five. Peru, supported by Argentina, Australia and Papua New Guinea, objected to this proposal. Argentina, supported by Poland, the Republic of Korea, Australia and New Zealand, said that in paragraph seven the word "utilization" should be preceded with "sustainable". New Zealand supported highlighting UNCLOS in the preamble. Malta, supported by Papua New Guinea, considered it unnecessary to refer to the FAO Code of Conduct, but that reference to the Compliance Agreement would be pertinent. The Chair said that there is no need to refer to every agreement. India especially welcomed the strengthening of paragraph seven in favor of the needs of developing States.