Final Document of the XIII Conference of Heads of State or Government of the Non-Aligned Movement Kuala Lumpur, 24 - 25 February 2003

Introduction

1. The Heads of State or Government of the Movement of the Non-Aligned Countries met in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, from 24 – 25 February 2003, to address the crucial global issues affecting their peoples with the view to agreeing to a set of actions in the promotion of peace, security, justice, equality, democracy and development, conducive for a multilateral system of relations based on the principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of States, the rights of peoples to self-determination and non-intervention in matters which are essentially within the jurisdiction of States, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and international law.

 2. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed their determination to preserve intact the noble ideals and principles of the Movement as initiated by its founders so as to further consolidate and make the Movement a leading force in the 21st century. In this regard, they expressed their full satisfaction and appreciation to the Government of the Republic of South Africa for the excellent organisation in 2002 of the celebration to mark the 40th anniversary of the founding of the Movement, an event of great significance, which demonstrated the continued relevance, and effectiveness of the Movement.

CHAPTER I: GLOBAL ISSUES

Review of the International Situation

3. The Heads of State or Government emphasised that the international situation continues to be marked by rapid and dramatic evolution, presenting numerous opportunities and challenges to the international community and the Non-Aligned Movement. Recent events have again demonstrated that a peaceful, just and secure world continues to elude human kind. Simmering disputes, violent conflicts, aggression and foreign occupation, interference in the domestic affairs of States, policies of hegemony and domination, unilateral and coercive measures, ethnic strife, religious intolerance, xenophobia, new forms of racism and narrowly conceived nationalism pose major and dangerous obstacles to harmonious coexistence among States and peoples and have even led to the disintegration of States and societies.

4. In this context, the Heads of State or Government expressed their rejection of unilateralism, which is increasingly leading to the erosion and violation of international law, to the use and threat of use of force and to pressure and coercion by certain countries as a means to achieving their policy objectives. The Heads of State or Government stressed their commitment to multilateralism.

5. The Heads of State or Government therefore reiterated the importance of addressing the challenges and problems by strictly abiding the United Nations Charter and the principles of international law. In this regard, they stressed the vital role of the United Nations in the maintenance of international peace and security and the strengthening of international co-operation. They also reiterated their firm condemnation of all unilateral military actions including those made without proper authorisation from the United Nations Security Council, as well as of threats of military action against the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of Member States of the Movement which constitute acts of aggression and blatant violations of the principle of non-intervention and non-interference.

6. The Heads of State or Government acknowledged that the global economy continues to be characterised by vastly different levels of development while developing countries continue to confront problems of access to markets, capital and technology, and many still grapple with the institutional transformation necessary for meaningful integration into the world economy. They also noted that many developing countries have taken significant steps to liberalise and integrate further into the world economy. However, anticipated benefits have not been realised and the economic gaps between rich and poor countries have not diminished. They recognised that the globalised economy offers great opportunities, but expressed concern that its benefits are very unevenly shared and its costs unfairly distributed, and that developing countries face difficulties in responding to that central challenge.

7. The Heads of State or Government underscored the importance of revitalising international development co-operation and multilateral negotiations with a North-South or development orientation. They also welcomed the recognition by developed countries that the needs of the developing countries cannot be met solely by a focus on the market economy, and called for a recommitment to and an urgent resumption of international actions aimed specifically at improving the global environment for development, such as aid on concessional terms, measures to counter the instability and weakness of commodity markets, preferential tariffs for developing country exports, debt reduction, mechanisms for the transfer of technology and basic reforms in the international financial architecture.

8. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the outcome of the South Summit, held in Havana from 10 - 14 April 2000, in particular the decision adopted on strengthening of co-ordination and co-operation between the Non-Aligned Movement and the Group of 77 and China through the Joint Co-ordinating Committee (JCC) in the promotion and defence of the common interest of the developing countries, and called on the Group of 77 and China to take steps to accelerate the implementation of the Plan of Action adopted therein. They noted the growing importance of Economic Co-operation among Developing Countries/Technical Co-operation among Developing Countries (ECDC/TCDC) for the enhancement of people-centred development as well as capitalising of local resources through interaction among development actors and partnership. In this context, while recognising that developing countries have the primary responsibilities for expanding ECDC/TCDC, through the strengthening of South-South Co-operation, the Heads of State or Government stressed the role that development partners, particularly donor countries, can play in supporting these endeavours, facilitating triangular co-operation and strengthening South institutions.

9. The Heads of State or Government noted that the gap between the developed and developing countries, especially the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), continues to widen, and the problems deriving from poverty and social injustices, have been significantly aggravated. They expressed particular concern over the economic situation in the LDCs, the majority of which are in Africa. They reiterated that economic under-development, poverty and social injustice constitute a source of frustration and a cause of new conflicts and that democracy, stability, security, and peace cannot be consolidated without rectifying the growing international inequalities.

10. The Heads of State or Government therefore reaffirmed the Movement’s commitment to continue to work in co-operation with all countries towards the establishment of an international system based on peace, justice, equality, democracy and full respect of all human rights and the principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter and international law.

11. In this regard, the Heads of State or Government reiterated their determination to make every effort to further strengthen the Movement’s capacity for action and to develop concrete modalities to enhance the influence and impact of its decisions on world affairs. They recognised that the Movement should take up the challenge of fundamentally transforming international relations so as to eradicate aggression, the use of force, unilateral coercive measures, foreign occupation, unfair economic practices, racism and xenophobia in order to achieve world of peace, justice and dignity for all.

12. The Heads of State or Government considered that the damage to the environment in times of armed conflict impairs ecosystems and natural resources long beyond the periods of conflict, and often extends beyond the limits of national territories and the present generation. In this context, they emphasised the necessity to increase international awareness in the field of environment preventing the exploitation of environment in war and armed conflict.

13. The Heads of State or Government recalled the decision of the Organisation of African Union (OAU) Summit in Algiers in July 1999, calling for the restoration of constitutional legality in States whose governments had come to power through unconstitutional means. They noted that other intergovernmental organisations had also taken similar decisions. They encouraged Member States to continue to uphold the democratic ideals consistent with the principles of the Movement.

14. The Heads of State or Government took note of the forthcoming V International Conference of New or Restored Democracies to be held from 18 - 20 June 2003 in Mongolia to which all Member States of the United Nations had been invited. They called upon the Member States to actively participate in the Conference pursuant to all relevant United Nations resolutions and to project the principles of the Non-Aligned Movement.

15. The Heads of State or Government underscored the inherent dangers in the emerging trends towards a unipolar world, where unilateral and hegemonic policies could violate the basic principles of the Non-Aligned Movement and the United Nations Charter. They strongly condemned any labelling of countries as good or evil and repressive based on unilateral and unjustified criteria and reiterated their firm condemnation of all unilateral military actions or threat of force against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of any State. They also firmly condemned unfounded biased accusations by certain countries against members of the Movement and underscored the dangers those accusations might entail for peace, security and stability.

16. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the rejection by the Non-Aligned Movement of the so-called “right” of humanitarian intervention, which has no basis either in United Nations Charter or in international law and requested the Co-ordinating Bureau in New York to continue to be seized with this issue as well as other related matters in accordance with the principled position of the Non-Aligned Movement; they also observed similarities between the new expression “responsibility to protect” and “humanitarian intervention” and requested the Co-ordinating Bureau to carefully study and consider the expression “the responsibility to protect” and its implications on the basis of the principles of non-interference and non-intervention as well as the respect for territorial integrity and national sovereignty of States.

17. The Heads of State or Government emphasised the Movement’s support for the United Nations Millennium Declaration as an important step in addressing the urgent needs of developing countries.

The Role of the Non-Aligned Movement

18. In order for the Movement to enhance its role at an international level, the Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the positions of the NAM Summits and Ministerial Meetings on the Role of the Non-Aligned Movement. They took note of the roundtable discussion at the Ministerial Meeting of the Coordinating Bureau of the Non-Aligned Movement held in Durban on 27 - 29 April 2002, which, among others, addressed this issue. They also took note of the deliberations in the Interactive Ministerial Session held on 22 February 2003 in Kuala Lumpur on the theme “Continuing the Revitalisation of the Non-Aligned Movement”.

19. In order to address the challenges facing the Movement, the Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the need to continue the process of revitalisation of the Movement and the strengthening and creation of mechanism that would facilitate their actions in the new international scenario. In this regard, they stressed the need for the identification of concrete actions to be carried out by the Movement in order to pursue its aims and objectives in all fields. They decided that the Co-ordinating Bureau prepare a Plan of Action for adoption by the Ministers at their Annual Meeting at the 58th Session of the General Assembly. They also welcomed Malaysia’s offer to organise a meeting at Senior Officials level on Methodology to prepare recommendations for adoption by the Ministers.

20. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed their irrevocable political and moral commitment to, and full respect for, the founding principles of the Movement as well as the principles set forth in the United Nations Charter. In order for the Movement to enhance its role at the international level, they agreed that the Movement must continue to work on expanding and reinforcing its ability and capacity for initiative, representation and negotiation, as well as its ethical, political and moral strength as the principal forum representing the interests and aspirations of the developing world. Furthermore, they recognised that the attainment of the objectives of the Movement hinges upon the solidarity of its Members, its unity and cohesion, founded on a culture of peace, development and co-operation.

21. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed that the solidarity among its members is a must for the Movement, mainly when NAM countries are threatened from abroad through acts of aggression, the threat to use force or unilateral coercive measures, all of which are, by nature, contrary to the principles of the Movement and of the international law.

22. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the initiative of the Government of Indonesia, to hold in co-operation with the Government of South Africa, the commemoration of the golden jubilee of the Asia-Africa Conference in Bandung, Indonesia in 2005, to be preceded by the First Conference of the Asia-Africa Sub Regional Organisation in Bandung, on 16 – 17 April 2003 and the Second Conference to be held in South Africa, in April 2004. They believed that such an occasion could further strengthen good relations and solidarity among developing countries.

North-South Dialogue

23. The Heads of State or Government reiterated their intention to pursue effective North-South dialogue based on the mutuality of interest and benefits, shared responsibilities and genuine interdependence. They called for an increased and constructive dialogue with the developed countries, in particular, the Group of 8, in forging a common effort in dealing with international issues.

Dialogue among Civilisations

24. The Heads of State or Government recalled the positions of the NAM adopted at both the XII Durban Summit and the XIII Cartagena Ministerial Conference stressing that the Dialogue among Civilisations should be a durable process, and reaffirmed their support for the strengthening and institutionalisation of these processes at regional and international levels. They emphasised that in the current international environment, dialogue among civilisations is not an option but an imperative. In this connection, they recalled the United Nations Millennium Declaration of 8 September 2000, which underscored tolerance as a fundamental value of international relations in the 21st Century, and which called for the promotion of a culture of peace and dialogue among civilisations. They further welcomed the adoption by the General Assembly of a Global Agenda for Dialogue among Civilisations contained in Resolution A/56/6, and are convinced that implementation of its programme of action positively contributes to international efforts to attain universal peace, welfare and stability.



United Nations Millennium Declaration

25. The Heads of State or Government acknowledged their collective responsibility to uphold the principles and implement the commitments of the Millennium Declaration. They emphasised that the focus should now be on the implementation by all of the Declaration and took note of all relevant resolutions on the follow-up to the outcome of the Millennium Summit adopted by the General Assembly.


Strengthening, Restructuring, Revitalising and Democratising the United Nations

26. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the Movement’s commitment to the Charter of the United Nations and underscored the need to preserve and promote the centrality and sanctity of its principles and purposes.

27. The Heads of State or Government expressed their concern that the impact of the United Nations reforms on the developing countries is yet to be felt, given the continuous decline in the resources made available to the United Nations for multilateral development co-operation as well as the impasse in the appropriation of new resources for the development account. They considered that the success of the reform of the United Nations can only be judged in terms of the improvements in its functioning and due consideration of the interests of the developing countries. They recognised the need for further reform of the United Nations to make it a more effective instrument for pursuing the purposes and principles as enshrined in its Charter, especially the promotion of economic development and the maintenance of international peace and security notably the principles of peaceful settlement of disputes and the non-use of force in international relations as reaffirmed by United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/40/70 on 11 December 1985. In this regard, they noted the relevant United Nations General Assembly resolutions on the strengthening, restructuring, reform and revitalising the United Nations.

28. In the ongoing reform that should be actively accelerated to strengthen the United Nations, the Heads of State or Government underlined the need to preserve and promote the principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter and General Assembly mandates. They also underscored the need to keep under close inter-governmental oversight and review of all proposals, which are yet to be considered and acted upon by the General Assembly, as well as those, which are being implemented. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the proposal calling for the establishment of the International Committee of Personalities to support the role of the United Nations in resolving crisis and to promote the ideals of understanding, co-operation, and peace among religions, peoples and nations.

29. The Heads of State or Government again stressed that any further efforts with regard to the reform of the United Nations should focus on strengthening the role of the Organisation in promoting international co-operation for development and in implementing the Development Goals through enhanced mechanisms, adequate resources and effective follow-up activities, as well as in the maintenance of international peace and security. In this context, they proposed that the resources released as a result of the implementation of new reformed measures as approved by the General Assembly should be devoted to activities and programmes related to international co-operation for development.

30. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the adoption of decisions aimed at strengthening and revitalising the role of the General Assembly as the highest deliberative and decision-making organ of the United Nations. They also noted the ongoing discussions to improve the working methods and procedures of the General Assembly, and reaffirmed the Movement’s readiness to continue to participate actively in that process and to ensure that the General Assembly resolutions are being implemented since it is the highest deliberative and decision making organ of the United Nations.

31. The Heads of State or Government underscored the inter-governmental character of the General Assembly and its subsidiary bodies. They welcomed efforts to strengthen the contribution of Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) to the work of the United Nations and its bodies through the consultative arrangements of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). They also emphasised that the contribution of the private sector, NGOs and civil society in the realisation of the United Nations’ goals and programmes should be in accordance with the appropriate United Nations General Assembly resolutions and should serve the purposes and principles laid out in the United Nations Charter. This contribution should also seek to address the obstacles that developing countries face in mobilising the resources needed to finance their sustainable development.

32. The Heads of State or Government noted with concern the lack of progress in the discussions in the General Assembly on the question of equitable representation and increase in the membership of the Security Council, and other matters related to the Security Council. These discussions have shown that while a convergence of views has emerged on a number of issues, major differences still exist on many others. They called on the Permanent Representatives of the NAM Member States in New York to continue, in the ensuing negotiations in the Open-Ended Working Group, to pursue NAM directives adopted during the XI and XII Summits, which have been contained in the Movement's position and negotiating papers and the decisions of the Ministerial Conference and Ministerial Meetings since the XII Ministerial Conference. They requested the working group to continue its consideration of the issue.

33. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s position that the imposition of sanctions is an issue of serious concern for Non-Aligned Countries. They reaffirmed that the imposition of sanctions in accordance with the United Nations Charter should be considered only after all means of peaceful settlement of disputes under Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter have been exhausted and a thorough consideration undertaken of the short-term and long-term effects of such sanctions. Sanctions are a blunt instrument, the use of which raises fundamental ethical questions of whether sufferings inflicted on vulnerable groups in the target country are legitimate means of exerting pressure. The objectives of sanctions are not to punish or otherwise exact retribution. In this regard, they reiterated that the objectives of sanctions regimes should be clearly defined. These should be imposed for a specified time frame and be based on tenable legal grounds and should be lifted as soon as the objectives are achieved. The conditions demanded of the country or party on which sanctions are imposed should be clearly defined and subject to periodic review. Attempts to impose or to prolong the application of sanctions to achieve political ends should be rejected.


Financial Situation of the United Nations

34. The Heads of State or Government noted the recent improvement in the financial situation of the United Nations. However, they agreed that the financial situation of the Organisation continues to be a cause for concern, as a result of the failure on the part of some Member States, especially the major contributor to meet their assessed contributions in full, on time and without conditions, in accordance with the United Nations Charter and the relevant General Assembly resolutions. They therefore urged all countries in arrears, in particular the major contributor to settle their outstanding dues without further delay and to pay their future assessments in full, on time and without imposing preconditions. They also expressed their concern over the continuing practice of cross-borrowing from the Peacekeeping Budget to the Regular Budget of the United Nations, and the delay in reimbursement of troop and equipment contributing countries, and affirmed the principle of capacity to pay as a fundamental criterion in the apportionment of the expenses of the Organisation. They recognised the special situation faced by some developing countries that hamper the ability to pay their assessed contributions.

35. The Heads of State or Government recognised the special situation faced by some developing countries that hamper the ability to pay their assessed contributions and affirmed the principle of capacity to pay as a fundamental criteria in the apportionment of the expenses of the Organisation.

36. The Heads of State or Government noted the introduction in the United Nations of a result-based budgeting system and expressed their expectation that it would contribute to ensuring the efficient and effective implementation of all mandated programmes and activities, and will be implemented in accordance with General Assembly resolutions.

37. On the programme budget for the biennium 2004-2005, the Movement believed that the resources to be approved by the General Assembly should commensurate with all mandated programmes and activities in order to ensure their full and effective implementation, in accordance with the provisions of General Assembly Resolution 41/213 of 19 December 1986. They also reaffirmed the priorities approved in General Assembly Resolution 55/234 and emphasised the need for sufficient allocation of resources.

38. The Heads of States or Government noted with concern the negative impact in the implementation of mandates and the quality of services provided to Member States of the cutback measures adopted by the General Assembly Secretariat in implementing General Assembly resolutions. In this regard, they stressed the need for providing the Organisation with the level of resources needed for the full implementation of all mandated programmes and activities as well as those required to guarantee the quality of services needed for the functioning of the inter-governmental machinery.

39. As far as peacekeeping operations are concerned, the Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the general principles underlying the financing of United Nations peacekeeping operations as set out in the relevant General Assembly resolutions and reiterated that the expenses of peacekeeping operations are expenses of the United Nations to be borne by Member States in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and on the basis of the scale of assessments approved by the General Assembly.

40. The Heads of State or Government were of the view that, while it is important to finance the real needs of United Nations peacekeeping expeditiously and in full, proper balance should be struck between the level and urgency with which peacekeeping activities are funded on the one hand, and availability of adequate resources for full implementation of programmes mandated by the General Assembly in the economic and social spheres on the other.

United Nations Peacekeeping Operations

41. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the guiding principles regarding peacekeeping operations adopted at the XI Ministerial Conference held in Cairo in 1994 and reiterated the Movement’s position on peacekeeping operations adopted by the XII Summit held in Durban in 1998.

42. The Heads of State or Government also reiterated the Movement’s longstanding position that the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security resides with the United Nations and that the role of regional arrangements, in that regard, should be in accordance with Chapter VIII of the United Nations Charter, and should not in any way substitute the role of the United Nations, or circumvent the full application of the guiding principles of United Nations peacekeeping.

43. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed that peacekeeping constitutes an important instrument at the disposal of the Organisation in fulfilling its responsibility, and stressed the need to avoid selectivity and double standards in establishing United Nations peacekeeping operations, especially in Africa.

44. The Heads of State or Government continued to believe that peacekeeping operations should not be used as a substitute for addressing the root causes of conflict, which should be addressed in a coherent, well-planned, coordinated and comprehensive manner, with other political, social and developmental instruments. They further maintained that consideration should be given by the United Nations to the manner by which those efforts can continue without interruption after the departure of peacekeeping operations, so as to ensure a smooth transition to lasting peace and security.

45. The Heads of State or Government emphasised that the United Nations should be able to plan and manage peacekeeping operations effectively, some of which involve complex tasks of a multidisciplinary nature, and to deploy the operation rapidly after the adoption of a United Nations mandate. They also acknowledged the recent contributions of the United Nations Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations in the deliberations of the Report of the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations (Brahimi Report) and in the adoption of important recommendations contained in the report.

46. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the position that the funding of United Nations peacekeeping operations through voluntary contributions should not influence United Nations Security Council decisions to establish peacekeeping operations or affect their mandates.

47. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the establishment of consultations between troop contributing countries and the Security Council, and called for their institutionalisation. In keeping with this objective, they urged the Security Council to implement, without delay, proposals for establishing a new mechanism for such co-operation, as envisaged in the Report of the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations, and in the proposals made by a number of troop contributing countries. As a first step, they called for the effective implementation of the mechanisms laid down in Security Council Resolution 1353 (2001) and in the Note of the President of the Security Council dated 14 January, 2002 (S/2002/56).

48. The Heads of State or Government expressed the Movement’s belief that the Security Council should ascertain the views of prospective troop contributing countries before and during the drafting of mandates for United Nations peacekeeping operations, since these countries are primarily responsible for ensuring the implementation of the Council’s mandate on the ground. While authorising the use of force, the Security Council should adhere to the provisions of Articles 43 and 44 of the Charter of the United Nations.

49. The Heads of State or Government underlined that planning within the Department of Peacekeeping Operations must be more transparent and effective and that troop contributing countries should be consulted at all stages of a mission. The Movement remains concerned over the staffing structure of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations of the United Nations Secretariat whereby NAM Member Countries are insufficiently represented, particularly at professional levels. They reiterated their belief that personnel from Non-Aligned Movement Member Countries should be sufficiently represented, without prejudice to the principle of equitable geographical representation.

50. The Heads of State or Government encouraged the participation of Non-Aligned countries in United Nations peacekeeping operations and, mindful of the difficulties faced by many countries in complying with rapid deployment timeframes, meeting deployment costs and bridging the gap between troops and equipment, they emphasised that the United Nations should work toward overcoming these difficulties.

51. In recalling the proposals by the United Nations Secretary General for procurement reform as outlined in A/52/534, the Heads of State or Government again emphasised the critical importance of timely, efficient, transparent and cost-effective procurement of goods and services in support of peacekeeping operations. The Movement remained concerned over the negligible share of Non-Aligned and other developing countries in United Nations procurement. In this regard, the Movement reiterated its view that there is a need to ensure greater United Nations procurement from developing countries, especially Non-Aligned countries, in particular through the implementation of the provision of preferential treatment.

Post Conflict Peace-Building Activities

52. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the adoption of the concept of Disarmament, Demobilisation, Reintegration and Rehabilitation (DDRR) to be implemented during United Nations peacekeeping operations and post conflict reconstruction. They also reaffirmed the importance of sustaining peace to allow time and resources required to rebuild war torn societies and states, which would promote the irreversibility of peace achieved and provide meaningful reintegration of combatants into the society.

53. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the distinction between humanitarian assistance and United Nations peacekeeping and peace enforcement operations as well as operational activities and emphasised that humanitarian assistance is designed to address the consequences and not the causes thereof. Humanitarian assistance should be kept distinct from and independent of political or military action. It must be provided in accordance with the principles of humanity, neutrality and impartiality as well as guiding principles contained in General Assembly Resolution 46/182 of 12 December 1991, national legislation and international humanitarian law.

54. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed that without any prejudice to the competence of the other principal organs of the United Nations’ respective roles in post conflict peace-building (PCPB) activities, the General Assembly must have the key role in the formulation of PCPB activities. In this regard, they also recognised the importance of the concerted actions of international agencies to actively support the national programmes particularly of NAM Countries, which are in the process of recovery from recent conflicts, for reconstruction and rehabilitation, including the promotion of a culture of peace, which paves the way for the achievement of economic and social development. They reaffirmed that the implementation of PCPB activities requires the full consultation and consent of the parties concerned, and should be based on the principles of international law and United Nations Charter.

55. The Heads of State or Government noted that the United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations has concluded a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to enhance cooperation between them, and to seek to increase the effectiveness of peace-keeping and human rights activities. While reiterating that the General Assembly must have the key role in the formulation of PCPB activities, they expressed concern over the signing of such an MOU without any discussion on this subject in the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations, and in the absence of inter-governmental agreement on this subject and reaffirmed that such a practice would not constitute a precedent.

Regional Organisations

56. The Heads of State or Government underscored the important role that regional arrangements and agencies, composed of Non-Aligned and other developing countries, can play in the promotion of regional peace and security as well as economic and social development through co-operation among countries in the region.

57. The Heads of State or Government called for the intensification of the process of consultations, co-operation and co-ordination between the United Nations and regional and sub-regional organisations, arrangements or agencies, in accordance with Chapter VIII of the Charter, as well as on their mandates, scope and composition, which is useful and can contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security.

The Right to Self-Determination and Decolonisation

58. The Heads of State or Government underlined the continued validity of the fundamental and inalienable right of all peoples to self-determination, the exercise of which, in the case of peoples under colonial or alien domination and foreign occupation, is essential to ensure the eradication of all these situations and to guarantee universal respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. The Movement strongly condemned ongoing brutal suppression of the legitimate aspirations to self-determination of peoples under colonial or alien domination and foreign occupation in various regions of the world.

59. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the inalienable right of peoples of the non-self governing territories to self-determination and independence in accordance with United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960 regardless of the territory's size, geographical location, population and limited natural resources. In this regard, the Non-Aligned Movement renewed its commitment to hasten the complete elimination of colonialism and support the effective implementation of the Plan of Action of the Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism. They welcomed General Assembly Resolution 55/146, which declares the Second Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism from 2001 to 2010. In this respect, the principle of self-determination with respect to the remaining territories within the framework of the Programme of Action of the Special Committee on Decolonisation should be implemented in accordance with the wishes of the people consistent with United Nations General Assembly resolutions and the Charter of the United Nations.

60. In the above context, the Heads of State or Government reiterated that any attempts aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country are incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.


61. The Heads of State or Government once again reaffirmed the right of the people of Puerto Rico to self-determination and independence on the basis of Resolution 1514 (XV) of December 1960 by the United Nations General Assembly. The Movement took note of the resolution on Puerto Rico adopted by the Special Committee on Decolonisation by consensus in 2000, 2001 and 2002, which, inter alia, urged the United States Government to order the immediate halt of its armed forces military drills and manoeuvres on Vieques Island and to return the occupied land to the people of Puerto Rico.

62. The Heads of State or Government reiterated its strong support for the Committee of 24, which is an important subsidiary body of the General Assembly and again called upon the Administering Powers to grant their full support to the activities of the Committee.

63. The Heads of State or Government called on United Nations Members for the full implementation of the resolutions and the decisions of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) concerning the return of cultural properties to the peoples who were or still under colonial rule or occupation. They also stressed the need for UNESCO to identify the stolen or illegally exported cultural properties in accordance with the relevant conventions on the subject.

64. They further emphasised the need to expedite the process of returning these properties to their countries of origin, in compliance with the resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly. They emphasised furthermore the right of the Non-Aligned countries to maintain and conserve their national heritage, as it constitutes the foundation of the cultural identity of these countries.

65. They reaffirmed the right of all people who were or are still subjected to colonial rule or occupation to receive fair compensation for the human and material losses they suffered as a result of colonial rule or occupation. They further reaffirmed the call made in the final document of the XII Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement, that colonialist countries should shoulder their responsibility and pay full compensation for the economic, social and cultural consequences of the occupation of developing countries. They also expressed their concern at the loss, destruction, removal, theft, pillage, illicit movement or misappropriation of and any acts of vandalism or damage, directed against cultural property in areas or armed conflict and territories that are occupied.

Mercenaries

66. The Heads of State or Government condemned the practice of recruiting, financing, training, transit, use or supporting of mercenaries as a violation of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. They reiterated their belief that mercenarism, in all its forms, constitutes an obstacle to peace and the exercise of sovereignty by Non-Aligned countries. This endangers the national security of States, especially small States, as well as the safety and stability of multi-ethnic States and impedes the exercise of the rights of peoples to self-determination. They therefore urged adherence to the provisions of United Nations General Assembly Resolution 49/150, especially its call on States to consider the possibility of signing and ratifying the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries and reaffirmed United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/57/196 of 18 December 2002 as well as Resolution 2002/5 of the 58th Session of the Commission on Human Rights.

Disarmament And International Security

67. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed and reiterated the long-standing principled positions of the Movement on disarmament and international security, including the decisions taken at the XII Summit in Durban and the XIII Ministerial Conference in Cartagena.

68. The Heads of State or Government expressed their strong concern at the growing resort to unilateralism and unilaterally imposed prescriptions and in this context strongly underlined and affirmed that multilateralism and multilaterally agreed solutions, in accordance with the United Nations Charter, provided the only sustainable method of addressing disarmament and international security issues. In this regard, they welcomed the adoption of Resolution 57/63 by the General Assembly on the “Promotion of Multilateralism in the Area of Disarmament and Non-proliferation”.

69. The Heads of State or Government remained deeply concerned at strategic defence doctrines that set out rationales for the use of nuclear weapons. They remained deeply concerned over the "Alliance Strategic Concept" adopted by North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) in April 1999, which not only maintain unjustifiable concepts on international security based on promoting and developing military alliances and policies of nuclear deterrence, but also includes new elements aimed at opening even more the scope for possible use or threat of use of force by NATO.

70. In the context of the Nuclear Posture Review that has been undertaken by the United States of America, the Heads of State or Government expressed serious concern that the development of new types of nuclear weapons are being considered and reiterated that the provision for the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons against Non-Nuclear Weapon States is in contravention of the negative security assurances that have been provided by the Nuclear Weapons States. They restated that the development of new types of nuclear weapons is in contravention with the assurances provided by the Nuclear Weapons States at the time of the conclusion of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty that the Treaty would prevent the improvement of existing nuclear weapons and development of new types of nuclear weapons.

71. The Heads of State or Government reiterated their principled positions on nuclear disarmament and the related issue of nuclear non-proliferation. They also reiterated deep concern over the slow pace of progress towards nuclear disarmament which remains their highest priority. They also expressed their concern about the lack of progress by the Nuclear Weapon States to accomplish the elimination of their arsenals leading to nuclear disarmament. They stressed their concern at the threat to humanity derived from the continued existence of nuclear weapons and of their possible use or threat of use. The Heads of State or Government underscored the need to accomplish the total elimination of nuclear weapons and emphasised, in this regard, the urgent need to commence negotiations without delay.

72. The Heads of State or Government, while noting the signing of the Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reduction between the Russian Federation and the United States on 24 May 2002, stressed that reductions in deployments and in operational status cannot substitute for irreversible cuts in, and the total elimination of, nuclear weapons.

73. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed that in efforts towards the objective of nuclear disarmament, global and regional approaches and confidence building measures complement each other and should, wherever possible, be pursued simultaneously to promote regional and international peace and security.

74. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the importance of the Conference on Disarmament as the sole multilateral negotiating body on disarmament. They regretted that the continued inflexible postures of some of the Nuclear Weapon States continue to prevent the Conference on Disarmament from establishing an Ad Hoc Committee on Nuclear Disarmament. They emphasised the necessity to start negotiations on a phased programme for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons with a specified framework of time, including a Nuclear Weapons Convention. They reiterated their call on the Conference on Disarmament to establish as soon as possible and as the highest priority, an Ad Hoc Committee on Nuclear Disarmament. They underlined once again the unanimous conclusion of the International Court of Justice that there exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and to bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control. In this regard, they regretted that no progress has been made in the fulfilment of this obligation despite the lapse of six years.

75. The Heads of State or Government again called for an international conference, at the earliest possible date, with the objective of arriving at an agreement on a phased programme for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons with a specified framework of time to eliminate all nuclear weapons, to prohibit their development, production, acquisition, testing, stockpiling, transfer, use or threat of use, and to provide for their destruction. In this context, they reiterated the resolve at the Millennium Summit by the Heads of State or Government as contained in the United Nations Millennium Declaration to strive for the elimination of weapons of mass destruction, in particular nuclear weapons, and to keep all options open for achieving this aim, including the possibility of convening an international conference to identify ways and means of eliminating nuclear dangers.

76. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed that the total elimination of nuclear weapons is the only absolute guarantee against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons. They reiterated their conviction that pending the total elimination of nuclear weapons efforts for the conclusion of a universal, unconditional and legally binding instrument on security assurances to Non-Nuclear-Weapon States should be pursued as a matter of priority by the Members of the Non-Aligned Movement.

77. The Heads of State or Government continued to be concerned over the negative implications of the development and deployment of anti-ballistic missile defence systems and the pursuit of advanced military technologies capable of being deployed in outer space which have, inter alia, contributed to the further erosion of an international climate conducive to the promotion of disarmament and the strengthening of international security. The abrogation of the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-ballistic Missiles (ABM) brings new challenges to strategic stability and the prevention of an arms race in outer space. They remained concerned that the implementation of a national missile defence system could trigger an arms race(s) and the further development of advanced missile systems and an increase in the number of nuclear weapons. In accordance with United Nations General Assembly Resolution 57/57, they emphasised the urgent need for the commencement of substantive work, in the Conference on Disarmament, on the prevention of an arms race in outer space.

78. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the report prepared by the Panel of Governmental Experts on the Issue of Missiles in all its aspects, which marked the first time the United Nations considered this issue. They noted with satisfaction the convening of another Panel of Governmental Experts to explore further the issue of missiles in all its aspects. They remained convinced of the need for a multilaterally negotiated, universal, comprehensive and non-discriminatory approach towards missiles in all its aspects as a contribution to international peace and security. Pending the achievement of such a universal mechanism related to delivery systems for weapons of mass destruction, any initiative to address these concerns effectively and in a sustainable and comprehensive manner should be through an inclusive process of negotiations in a forum where all States could participate as equals. They stressed the importance of the security concerns of all States at regional and international levels in any approach to the issue of missiles in all its aspects. In this context, they emphasised the role of the Conference on Disarmament as the sole multilateral disarmament negotiating body of the international community.

79. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s long-standing principled position for the total elimination of all nuclear testing. They stressed the significance of achieving universal adherence to the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), including by all the Nuclear Weapons States, which, inter alia, should contribute to the process of nuclear disarmament. They expressed their satisfaction that 166 States have signed the Treaty and 97 States have ratified it thus far. They reiterated that if the objectives of the Treaty were to be fully realised, the continued commitment of all States signatories, especially the Nuclear Weapon States, to nuclear disarmament would be essential.

80. The Heads of State or Government continued to consider the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones (NWFZs) created by the treaties of Tlatelolco, Rarotonga, Bangkok and Pelindaba as a positive step towards attaining the objective of global nuclear disarmament. The Movement welcomed the efforts aimed at establishing new nuclear-weapons-free zones in all regions of the world and calls for co-operation and broad consultation in order to achieve agreements freely arrived at between the States of the region concerned. They reiterated that in the context of nuclear-weapon-free zones, it is essential that Nuclear Weapon States should provide unconditional assurances against the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons to all States of the zone. They urged States to conclude agreements with a view to establishing new nuclear-weapon-free zones in regions where they do not exist, in accordance with the provisions of the Final Document of the First Special Session of the General Assembly devoted to Disarmament (SSOD-I) and the principles and guidelines adopted by the United Nations Disarmament Commission at its 1999 substantive session. In this context, they reiterated their support for Mongolia's nuclear-weapon-free status and considered that the institutionalisation of that status would be an important measure towards strengthening the non-proliferation regime in that region. They welcomed the ratification by Cuba of the Tlatelolco Treaty which, by making all the Latin American and Caribbean States Parties to the Treaty, brought it into full force in its area of application. They welcomed the on-going consultations between ASEAN and the Nuclear Weapon States (NWS) on the Protocol of Southeast Asian Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone (SEANWFZ) Treaty and urged the NWS to become parties to the Protocol of the Treaty as soon as possible. They also welcomed the decision by all five Central Asian States to sign the Central Asian Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty as soon as possible. They also expressed their support to the initiative of convening an international conference of the States parties, ratifiers and signatories to the treaties of Tlatelolco, Rarotonga, Bangkok and Pelindaba to discuss and implement further ways and means of co-operation among themselves, their treaty agencies and other interested States, at an appropriate time.

81. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the support for the establishment in the Middle East of a zone free of all weapons of mass destruction. To this end, they reaffirmed the need for the speedy establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East in accordance with the Security Council Resolution 487 (1981) and paragraph 14 of the Security Council Resolution 687 (1991) and the relevant General Assembly resolutions adopted by consensus. They called upon all parties concerned to take urgent and practical steps towards the fulfilment of the proposal initiated by Iran in 1974 for the establishment of such a zone and, pending its establishment, they demanded on Israel, the only country in the region that has not joined the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) nor declared its intention to do so, to renounce possession of nuclear weapons, to accede to the NPT without delay, to place promptly all its nuclear facilities under IAEA full-scope safeguards according to Security Council Resolution 487 (1981) and to conduct its nuclear related activities in conformity with the non-proliferation regime. They expressed great concern over the acquisition of nuclear capability by Israel which poses a serious and continuing threat to the security of neighbouring and other States and condemned Israel for continuing to develop and stockpile nuclear arsenals. They were of the view that stability cannot be achieved in a region where massive imbalances in military capabilities are maintained particularly through the possession of nuclear weapons which allow one party to threaten its neighbours and the region. They further welcomed the initiative by H.E. Mr. Mohammed Hosni Mubarak, President of the Arab Republic of Egypt, on the establishment of a zone free from weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. They stressed that necessary steps should be taken in different international fora for the establishment of this zone. They also called for the total and complete prohibition of the transfer of all nuclear-related equipment, information, material and facilities, resources or devices and the extension of assistance in the nuclear related scientific or technological fields to Israel. In this regard, they expressed their serious concern over the continuing development whereby Israeli scientists are provided access to the nuclear facilities of one Nuclear Weapon State. This development will have potentially serious negative implications on the regional security as well as the reliability of the global non-proliferation regime.

82. The Heads of State or Government of the States Parties to the NPT welcomed the outcome of the 2000 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty. In this regard, they reiterated their call and the firm commitment by all States parties to the Treaty and called for the full implementation of the unequivocal undertaking given by the Nuclear Weapons States to the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals. They expected that this undertaking be demonstrated without delay through an accelerated process of negotiations and through the full implementation of the thirteen practical steps to advance systematically and progressively towards a nuclear-weapon-free world. Pending the total elimination of nuclear weapons, they also recalled that the 2000 Review Conference in its Final Document reiterated that legally binding security assurances by the five nuclear weapons states to the non-nuclear weapon States Parties to the Treaty strengthen the nuclear non-proliferation regime. They took note of the First Preparatory meeting for the 2005 NPT Review Conference and emphasised the need for a substantive interaction beyond formal exchange of views between the States Parties at these meetings. The issues raised at the Preparatory meetings need to be addressed so as to continue strengthening the implementation of the Treaty and the undertakings agreed upon at the 2000 NPT Review Conference, and also to lay the necessary foundation for the development of recommendations at the Third Preparatory session for the 2005 Review Conference. They recalled that specific time was made available at the 2000 Review Conference and its Third Preparatory session for the discussion on and consideration of proposals on the provisions in Article VI of the NPT and in paragraphs 3 and 4 (C) of the 1995 decision on "Principles and Objectives for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament", dealing with nuclear disarmament, as well as on the Resolution on the Middle East adopted at the 1995 Review and Extension Conference. In this context, they reaffirmed the importance to establish at the 2005 Review Conference a subsidiary body to Main Committee I to deliberate on practical steps for systematic and progressive efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons, as well as a subsidiary body to Main Committee II to consider and recommend proposals on the implementation of the resolution on the Middle East adopted by the 1995 Review and Extension Conference of the NPT. In this regard, they emphasised the need for Preparatory Committee meetings to continue to allocate specific time for deliberations on nuclear disarmament, implementation of the 1995 resolution on the Middle East, and security assurances. They also welcomed the accession of Cuba to the NPT.

83. The Heads of State or Government of the States Parties to the NPT noted the withdrawal of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) from the NPT. They expressed the view that the Parties directly concerned resolve, through dialogue and negotiations, all issues related to the withdrawal of the DPRK from the NPT as an expression of their goodwill.

84. The Heads of State or Government continued to note with concern that undue restrictions on exports to developing countries of material, equipment and technology, for peaceful purposes persist. They again emphasised that proliferation concerns are best addressed through multilaterally negotiated, universal, comprehensive and non-discriminatory agreements. Non-proliferation control arrangements should be transparent and open to participation by all States, and should ensure that they do not impose restrictions on access to material, equipment and technology for peaceful purposes required by developing countries for their continued development. In this regard they also expressed their strong rejection of attempts by any Member State to use the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) technical co-operation programme as a tool for political purposes in violation of the IAEA's Statute.

85. The Heads of State or Government regretted unsubstantiated allegations of non-compliance with relevant instruments on Weapons of Mass Destruction and called on States Parties to such instruments that make such allegations to follow the procedures set out in those instruments and to provide the necessary substantiation for their allegations.

86. The Heads of State or Government of the States Parties to the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BWC) reaffirmed their conviction that the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction is essential for the maintenance of international and regional peace and security. They reaffirmed the Movement's continued determination, for the sake of humankind, that the possibility of any use of bacteriological (biological) agents and toxins as weapons should be completely excluded, and the conviction that such use would be repugnant to the conscience of humankind. They recognised the particular importance of strengthening the Convention through multilateral negotiations for a legally binding Protocol to the Convention. They believed that the effective contribution of the Convention to international and regional peace and security would be enhanced through universal adherence to the Convention. They stressed the importance for all States Parties to pursue the objectives that were set forth by the Fourth Review Conference and underlined that the only sustainable method of strengthening the Convention is through multilateral negotiations aimed at concluding a non-discriminatory legally-binding agreement. They have been deeply disappointed at the inability that has been demonstrated in the endeavours of the States Parties of the BWC to successfully undertake initiatives to strengthen the implementation of the Convention. They further regretted the limited nature of the decision that was taken during the resumed session of the Fifth Review Conference held from 11-15 November 2002 in Geneva and were disappointed that the opportunity to strengthen the Convention was foregone and that limited work, which at best only has the potential of enhancing the implementation of the Convention, is all that could be achieved despite the Movement’s best endeavours. They believed that, however, the Movement has succeeded in preventing any attempt to foreclose the option of more meaningful work in the future. In this regard, the movement has succeeded in preserving multilateralism as the only vehicle for preventing reprehensible use of disease as instruments of terror and war in a sustainable way. They further noted that the 2004 meeting of States Parties to the BWC is to be chaired by a member of the Non-Aligned Movement.

87. The Heads of State or Government of the States Parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) welcomed the increasing number of ratifications of the Convention and invited all States who have still not ratified it to do so as soon as possible with the view to its universality. They also underlined the urgency of satisfactorily resolving the unresolved issues in the framework of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) with a view to paving the way for the effective, full and non-discriminatory implementation of the Convention. In this context, they reiterated their call on the developed countries to promote international co-operation through the transfer of technology, material and equipment for peaceful purposes in the chemical field and the removal of all and any discriminatory restrictions that are contrary to the letter and spirit of the Convention. They also called upon States having declared possession of chemical weapons to bring about the destruction of their chemical weapons at the earliest possible date. While recognising the financial and technical challenges for some possessors, they called upon those States Parties in a position to do so, and where requested, to assist such possessor States in the achievement of the ultimate goal of the Convention – the total elimination of chemical weapons. They noted that the First Review Conference of the CWC will be convened in The Hague, from 28 April-9 May 2003 and looked forward to a significant outcome towards the strengthening of the implementation of the Convention.

88. The Heads of State or Government expressed their concern at the use of coercive methods by some countries inside international organisations, including financial influence, in the pursuit of unilateralist interests. They also expressed their concern at the impact that such unilateral acts could have on the independence of the functioning of international organisations and the multilateral system as a whole.

89. The Heads of State or Government affirmed the need to strengthen the Radiological Safety and Protection Systems at facilities utilising radioactive materials as well as at radioactive waste management facilities, including the safe transportation of these materials. They encouraged the design of an appropriate international regime for physical protection of radioactive materials during their transportation. They reaffirmed the need to continue working at the multilateral level, with the purpose of strengthening existing international regulations relating to safety and security of transportation of such materials, and provisions for liability in the case of accidents or damage, resulting in contamination of the sea and seabed. They emphasised the need for the provision of information to concerned States regarding shipment routes, the mandatory requirements for contingency plans in case of leakage, accidents or incidents, the commitment to recover the waste material in such cases, and a comprehensive regulatory framework for obtaining compensation in case of nuclear damage. They welcomed the convening of a conference on these issues to be held in 2003.

90. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the importance of Resolution 56/24 L of the United Nations General Assembly on the Prohibition of the Dumping of Radioactive Wastes and called upon States to take appropriate measures to prevent any dumping of nuclear or radioactive wastes that would infringe upon the sovereignty of States. They welcomed also the resolution adopted by the Council of Ministers of the Organisation of African Unity in 1991 (CM/Res.1356 {LIV}) on the Bamako Convention on the Ban on the Import of Hazardous Wastes into Africa and on the Control of Their Trans-boundary Movement within Africa. They called for effective implementation of the Code of Practice on the International Transboundary Movement of Radioactive Waste of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as a means of enhancing the protection of all States from the dumping of radioactive wastes on their territories.

91. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the inviolability of peaceful nuclear activities and that any attack or threat of attack against peaceful nuclear facilities – operational or under construction – poses a great danger to human beings and the environment, and constitutes a grave violation of international law, principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter and regulations of the International Atomic Energy Agency. They recognised the need for a comprehensive multilaterally negotiated instrument, prohibiting attacks, or threat of attacks on nuclear facilities devoted to peaceful uses of nuclear energy.

92. The Heads of State or Government remained deeply concerned over the illicit transfer, manufacture and circulation of small arms and light weapons and their excessive accumulation and uncontrolled spread in many regions of the world. They welcomed the adoption by consensus of the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects at the United Nations Conference held from 9 - 20 July 2001 in New York which outlines a realistic, achievable and comprehensive approach, to address the problems associated with the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons on the national, regional and global levels. They remained deeply concerned over the inability of the Conference to agree, due to the position of one State, on language recognising the need to establish and maintain controls over private ownership of small arms, and the need for preventing sales of such arms to non-State groups. They considered that these issues are directly related to the problems associated with the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons faced by many Members of the Movement. They reiterated their call on all States to ensure that the supply of small arms and light weapons is limited only to Governments or to entities duly authorised by Governments and to implement legal restrictions on the unrestricted trade in and ownership of small arms and light weapons. They emphasized the importance of early and full implementation of the Programme of Action. They welcomed the decision to convene the First United Nations Biennial Meeting of States on the Implementation of the Programme of Action of the United Nations Conference to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in all its Aspects in New York on 7 – 11 July 2003 to consider national, regional and global implementation of the Programme of Action. In this regard, they encouraged the Member States to continue to play an active role in defining and elaborating the objectives of all future Conferences. They encouraged all initiatives to mobilize resources and expertise to promote implementation of the Programme of Action and to provide assistance to States in their implementation of the Programme of Action. They also welcomed the decision of convening the Review Conference in 2006 and stressed the need for a representative of the Movement to preside over the Conference.

93. The Heads of State or Government continued to deplore the use, in contravention of international humanitarian law, of anti-personnel mines in conflict situations aimed at maiming, killing and terrorising innocent civilians, denying them access to farmland, causing famine and forcing them to flee their homes eventually leading to de-population and preventing the return of civilians to their place of original residence. They again called upon the international community to provide the necessary assistance to landmine clearance operations as well as the rehabilitation of victims and their social and economic reintegration in the landmine affected countries. They further called for international assistance to ensure full access of affected countries to material equipment, technology and financial resources for mine clearance. They also called for increased humanitarian assistance for victims of landmine.

94. The Heads of State or Government of States Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction invited those States that have not yet done so to consider becoming parties to the Convention. They took note of the convening of the Fourth Meeting of States Parties to the Convention held from 16 - 20 September 2002 in Geneva. They also welcomed the decision to hold the Fifth Meeting of States Parties to the Convention from 15 - 19 September 2003 in Bangkok, Thailand.

95. The Heads of State or Government expressed concern about the residue of the Second World War, particularly in the form of landmines which have caused human and material damage and obstructed development plans in some Non-Aligned countries. They called on the States primarily responsible for laying the mines outside their territories to co-operate with the affected countries, provide the necessary information, and maps indicating the locations of such mines, technical assistance for their clearance and contribute towards defrayal of the costs of clearance and provide compensation for any ensuing losses.

96. The Heads of State or Government of States Parties to the Convention on Prohibition or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (CCW) and its Protocols encouraged States to become parties to it. They took note of the outcome of the Second Review Conference of the CCW. They also took note of the outcome of the Third Meeting of States Parties to the CCW held from 12 - 13 December 2002 in Geneva.

97. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the importance of the United Nations Disarmament Commission (UNDC) as the sole specialized, deliberative body within the United Nations multilateral disarmament machinery that allows for in-depth deliberations on specific disarmament issues, leading to the submission of concrete recommendations on those issues, and also underlined the importance of successful conclusion during the 2003 session of the UNDC.

98. The Heads of State or Government reiterated once again their support for the convening of the Fourth Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly devoted to Disarmament (SSOD-IV). They reiterated their deep concern over the lack of consensus on the deliberations held by the United Nations Disarmament Commission in 1999 on the agenda and objectives. They continued to call for further steps leading to the Convening of the Fourth Special Session with the participation of all Member States of the United Nations as well as the need for SSOD-IV to review and assess the implementation of SSOD-I, while reaffirming its principles and priorities. They welcomed the decision by the General Assembly to establish an open-ended working group to consider the objectives and agenda including the possibility of establishing the preparatory committee, for the Special Session. In this regard, they looked forward to the substantive discussion in the open-ended working group and its positive recommendations with a view to facilitating the convening of the Special Session.

99. The Heads of State or Government stressed the importance of the reduction of military expenditures, in accordance with the principle of undiminished security at the lowest level of armaments, and urged all States to devote resources made available therefrom to economic and social development, in particular in the fight against poverty. They expressed their firm support for unilateral, bilateral and multilateral measures adopted by some governments aimed at reducing military expenditures, thereby contributing to strengthening regional and international peace and security. They recognize that confidence building measures (CBMs) assist in this regard. They took note of the measures being examined by some governments such as the Andean Community of Nations.

100. The Heads of State or Government expressed their satisfaction with the consensus among states on measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction. They welcomed the adoption by consensus of the General Assembly Resolution 57/83 entitled “Measures to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction” and underlined the need for this threat to humanity to be addressed within the United Nations framework and through international NAM. While stressing that the most effective way of preventing terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction is through the total elimination of such weapons, they emphasized that progress was urgently needed in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation in order to help maintain international peace and security and to contribute to global efforts against terrorism. They called upon all member states to support international efforts to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery. They also urged all member states to take and strengthen national measures, as appropriate, to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction, their means of delivery and materials and technologies related to their manufacture.

101. The Heads of State or Government commended the co-ordination carried out by the NAM Working Group on Disarmament and encouraged delegations to continue their active work on issues of common concern to the Movement, particularly towards ensuring respect for the principles of multilateralism and transparency in the areas of disarmament and non-proliferation.

Indian Ocean

102. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the validity of the objectives of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace. They also reaffirmed the importance of international co-operation to ensure peace, security and stability in the Indian Ocean region. They noted that greater efforts and more time are required to facilitate a focused discussion on practical measures to ensure conditions of peace, security and stability in the region. They also noted that in the light of Resolution 56/16 of the United Nations General Assembly, the Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee of the Indian Ocean would continue his informal consultations on the future of the Committee.

Terrorism

103. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the Movement’s principled position concerning terrorism as adopted in the final document of the XII Summit Conference of the Heads of State or Government of the Non-Aligned Movement in Durban, 1998, as well as the subsequent Ministerial meetings.

104. The Heads of State or Government reiterated that terrorism cannot be attributed to religion, nationality, or civilisation.

105. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed that criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for whatever purposes, wherever and by whomever committed are, in any circumstance, unjustifiable, whatever the considerations or factors that may be invoked to justify them.

106. The Heads of State or Government rejected recent attempts to equate the legitimate struggle of peoples under colonial or alien domination and foreign occupation, for self-determination and national liberation with terrorism in order to prolong occupation and oppression of the innocent people with impunity.

107. The Heads of State or Government unequivocally condemned international terrorism as a criminal act. They noted that terrorism endangers the territorial integrity, as well as national and international security. Such acts also violate human rights, in particular the right to life, destroys the physical and economic infrastructure, and attempts to de-stabilise legitimately constituted governments. They expressed their resolve to take speedy and effective measures to eliminate international terrorism including the need to address the underlying causes of terrorism and urged all States to fulfil their obligations under international law, including prosecuting or, where appropriate, extraditing the perpetrators of such acts and preventing the organisation, instigation and the financing of terrorism against other States from within or outside their territories or by organizations based in their territories. They reaffirmed their support for General Assembly Resolution 46/51 of 27 January, 1992 which unequivocally condemned as criminal and unjustifiable all acts, methods and practices of terrorism wherever and by whomever committed and called upon all States to fulfil their obligations under international law and international humanitarian law to refrain from organising, instigating, assisting or participating in terrorist acts in other States, or acquiescing in or encouraging activities within their territory towards the commissioning of such acts.

108. The Heads of State or Government further called on all States to endorse in principle the convening of an international Conference under the auspices of the United Nations to define terrorism, to differentiate it from the struggle for national liberation and to reach comprehensive and effective measures for concerted action. They also denounced the brutalisation of peoples kept under foreign occupation as the gravest form of terrorism. They condemned the use of State power for the suppression and violence against innocent victims struggling against foreign occupation to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination. They stressed the sanctity of this right and urged that in this era of enlarged freedom and democracy, people under foreign occupation should be allowed to freely determine their destiny. In this context, they also reaffirmed their support for General Assembly Resolution 46/51 of 27 January 1992 as well as other relevant United Nations resolutions and the principled position of the Movement that the struggle of peoples under colonial or alien domination and foreign occupation for self-determination do not constitute terrorism.

109. In this regard, the Movement remained greatly concerned over acts of terrorism which, under various pretexts, result in the most flagrant violation of international law including international humanitarian law, and seek to de-stabilise the prevailing constitutional order and political unity of sovereign States. Terrorism also affects the stability of nations and the very basis of societies and impedes the full enjoyment of the human rights of peoples. The Movement reiterated its condemnation of all acts, methods and practices of terrorism as unjustifiable whatever the considerations or factors that may be invoked to justify them.

110. The Heads of State or Government noted the entry into force of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and invited States that have not yet ratified the twelve international conventions relating to terrorism to do so. They reiterated the Movement’s condemnation of all acts, methods and practices of terrorism, including those in which States are directly or indirectly involved as they have adverse consequences, inter alia, on the economic and social development of States. Terrorism also affects the stability of nations and the very basis of societies.

111. While recalling the Movement’s principled position on a comprehensive convention on international terrorism, and in the light of the previous initiatives and considerations adopted by NAM, and of their conviction that multilateral co-operation under the United Nations auspices is the most effective means to combat international terrorism, the Heads of State or Government reiterated their call for an International Summit Conference under the auspices of the United Nations to formulate a joint organised response of the international community to terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, including identifying its root causes. They further reiterated the need for the conclusion of a comprehensive convention for combating international terrorism and, in this respect, they noted the progress made in the Ad Hoc Committee on Terrorism established by Resolution 51/210 on the negotiations for elaboration of a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism and called upon all States to co-operate in resolving the outstanding issues.

112. In this regard and pending the conclusion of a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism, the Heads of State or Government welcomed the initiative launched by Tunisia in order to elaborate by consensus an international Code of Conduct within the framework of the United Nations aimed at reinforcing co-ordination and multilateral efforts for the prevention of terrorism, in all its forms and manifestations, wherever and by whomever committed, in conformity with international law and the United Nations Charter.

113. The Heads of State or Government fully supported national, regional and international efforts and arrangements to implement the pertinent United Nations legally binding instruments as well as General Assembly and Security Council resolutions, including General Assembly Resolution 46/51 and Security Council Resolution 1373, relating to combating terrorism. In this context, they reiterated their support for regional arrangements and instruments concluded with a view to combating international terrorism.

114. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the recent adoption and entry into force of different regional conventions related to combating terrorism, in particular, the entry into force of the Convention of the Organisation of African Unity on the Prevention and Combating of Terrorism adopted by the Heads of State and Government of the OAU at the Algiers Summit in July 1999 as well as the Plan of Action adopted in Algiers at the High Level African Union Meeting held from 11 - 14 September 2002, the entry into force of the Arab Convention to Combat Terrorism on 7 May 1999 and the adoption of the Islamic Conference Convention on Combating International Terrorism in Ouagadougou on 1 July 1999. They also noted the adoption of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) Declaration at the Extraordinary Session of the Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers on Terrorism held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia from 1 - 3 April 2002.

115. The Heads of State or Government also reaffirmed the Movement's principled position under international law on the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples under colonial or alien domination and foreign occupation for national liberation and self-determination, which does not constitute terrorism and once again called for the definition of terrorism to differentiate it from the legitimate struggle of peoples under colonial or alien domination and foreign occupation, for self-determination and national liberation.

116. The Heads of State or Government urged all States to co-operate to enhance international co-operation in the fight against terrorism in all its forms and manifestations and, wherever, by whoever, against whomsoever it occurs, at the national, regional and international levels, and to observe and implement the relevant international and bilateral instruments, taking into account the Final Document of the United Nations Conference on the Prevention of Crime and Criminal Justice held in Cairo in 1995.

117. The Heads of State or Government emphasised that international co-operation to combat terrorism should be conducted in conformity with the principles of the United Nations Charter, international law and relevant international conventions, and expressed the Movement’s opposition to selective and unilateral actions in violation of principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter. In this context, they called upon the competent United Nations Organs to promote ways and means to strengthen co-operation, including the international legal regime for combating international terrorism.

118. The Heads of State or Government reiterated that all States are under the obligation pursuant to the purposes and principles and other provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and other relevant international instruments, codes of conduct and other rules of international law and Security Council and General Assembly resolutions to refrain from organising, assisting or participating in terrorist acts in the territories of other States or acquiescing in or encouraging activities within their territories directed towards the commission of such acts, including allowing the use of national territories and territories under their jurisdiction for planning and training or financing for that purpose. They solemnly reaffirmed the Movement’s unequivocal condemnation of any political, diplomatic, moral or material support for terrorism. In this context, they emphasised that States should ensure, in conformity with international law, that refugee status is not abused by the perpetrators organisers or facilitators of terrorist acts and that claims of political motivation are not recognised as grounds for refusing requests for the extradition of alleged terrorists. They also encouraged all States to consider to accede to and implement existing international conventions against terrorism.

119. The Heads of State or Government rejected the use, or the threat of the use of the armed forces against any NAM country under the pretext of combating terrorism, and rejected all attempts by certain countries to use the issue of combating terrorism as a pretext to pursue their political aims against non-aligned and other developing countries and underscored the need to exercise solidarity with those affected. They affirmed the pivotal role of the United Nations in the international campaign against terrorism. They totally rejected the term "axis of evil" voiced by a certain State to target other countries under the pretext of combating terrorism, as well as its unilateral preparation of lists accusing countries of allegedly supporting terrorism, which are inconsistent with international law and the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter. These actions constitute, on their part, a form of psychological and political terrorism.



International Law

120. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed that many new areas of concern have emerged which warrant the renewal of commitment of international community to uphold and defend the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law as well as a fuller utilisation and means for the peaceful settlement of disputes, as envisaged in the United Nations Charter. In this context, the Heads of State or Government committed themselves to conduct their external affairs based upon the obligations of international law.

121. The Heads of State or Government recalled the Declaration by the NAM Ministerial Meeting of the Co-ordinating Bureau of the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court (ICC). They took note of the entry into force of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court on 1 July 2002, the conclusion of the work of the Preparatory Commission, and the Meeting of the Assembly of States Parties of the ICC from 3 – 7 February 2003 which elected 18 judges of the ICC. They stressed the importance of safeguarding the integrity of the Statute and the need to ensure that the Court remains impartial and fully independent of political organs of the United Nations which should not direct or hinder the functions of the Court nor assume a parallel or superior role to the Court. They observed with concern actions geared at establishing a process to grant immunity to the members of the United Nations established or authorised peacekeeping operations. These actions seriously affect treaty law, are not consistent with the provision of the Rome Statute and severely damage the Court’s credibility and independence.

122. The Heads of State or Government noted with great interest the establishment of a special working group by the Assembly of States Parties of the ICC on the crime of aggression, open on an equal footing to all States Members of the United Nations or members of specialised agencies or of the International Atomic Energy Agency, for the purpose of elaborating proposals for a provision on aggression. The Heads of State or Government urged the active and consistent participation of the members of NAM in the work of the special working group and they called on all States to work together to ensure the timely completion of a provision on the crime of aggression for its inclusion in the Statute which would be acceptable, especially to members of the Non-Aligned Movement.

123. The Heads of State or Government stressed the Movement’s deep concern over the intention of a group of States to unilaterally re-interpret or re-draft the existing legal instruments in accordance with their own views and interests. The Movement again emphasised that the integrity of international legal instruments by Member States must be maintained. They further reiterated the Movement’s deep concern at the decrease of the representation of Non-Aligned countries in several treaty bodies and called upon the members of the Movement that are parties to these bodies to work collectively with a view to increasing and enhancing its representation, particularly by supporting the candidatures of experts from the Non-Aligned Countries.

124. The Heads of State or Government expressed concern at the unilateral exercise of extra-territorial criminal and civil jurisdiction of national courts not emanating from international treaties and other obligations arising from international law including international humanitarian law. In this regard, they condemned the enactment of politically motivated laws at national level concerning foreign entities, of national entities, inter alia, the selective application of sovereignty of states, they stressed the negative impact of such measures on the rule of international law as well as on international relations, and called for the cessation of all such measures.

125. The Heads of State or Government emphasised the need for a renewal of commitment by the international community to uphold and defend the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law as well as the means envisaged in the United Nations Charter for the peaceful settlement of disputes. In this regard, they encouraged the Security Council to make greater use of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, as a source of advisory opinions, and interpretation of relevant norms of international law. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed that further progress is necessary to achieve full respect for international law and the International Court of Justice and, inter alia, for promoting the peaceful settlement of disputes and combating crimes against humanity as well as other international offences. The Charter refers to the International Court of Justice as the Organisation’s principal judicial organ. The Security Council should make greater use of the World Court as a source of advisory opinions, and in controversial instances, use the World Court as a source of interpreting relevant international law and consider decisions to review by the World Court.

126. The Movement remained firmly opposed to evaluations, certifications and other coercive unilateral measures as a means of exerting pressure on Non-Aligned Countries and other developing countries. Coercive unilateral measures and legislation are contrary to international law, international humanitarian law, the United Nations Charter and the norms and principles governing peaceful relations among States and thus are to be further decried by the international community. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s rejection of the increasing trend in this direction. The Movement also strongly objected to the extra-territorial nature of those measures, which, in addition, threaten the sovereignty of States and call on States applying unilateral coercive measures to put an immediate end to those measures.

127. The Heads of State or Government condemned the continued unilateral application, by certain powers, of coercive economic and other measures, including the enactment of extra-territorial laws, against a number of developing countries, with a view to preventing these countries from exercising their right to decide, by their own free will, their own political, economic and social systems. The Movement called on all countries not to recognise the unilateral extra-territorial laws enacted by certain countries, which impose sanctions on other States and foreign companies and individuals. They reaffirmed that such legislation contradicts the norms of international law and run counter to the principles and purposes of the United Nations, as well as the basis of the “Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations” adopted on 24 October 1970 by the General Assembly. They further expressed their regret at the continued enforcement of these laws, in total disregard for the calls of the Movement, the General Assembly and other International Organisations.

128. The Heads of State or Government called on all States to refrain from adopting or implementing extra-territorial or unilateral measures of coercion as a means of exerting pressure on Non-Aligned and other developing countries. They noted that measures such as Helms-Burton Law, D´Amato-Kennedy Acts and other laws recently enacted related to other issues, constitute flagrant violations of international law, the established principles of the multilateral trading system and the Charter of the United Nations, and called on the international community to take effective action in order to arrest this trend.

129. The Heads of State or Government rejected all attempts to introduce new concepts of international law geared at internationalising the essential elements contained in extra-territorial laws through multilateral agreements.

Peaceful Settlement of Disputes

130. The Heads of State or Government re-emphasised the need for a renewal of the commitment by the international community to uphold and defend the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law, in particular, the non-use or threat of use of force as well as the means the United Nations Charter has envisaged for the peaceful settlement of disputes. In this context, the role of the Movement in promoting a just international order would largely depend on its inner strength, cohesion, solidarity and unity. It is therefore incumbent on all Member States to work earnestly towards that end.

131. Recalling the decisions of the Cartagena Summit to mandate the Co-ordinating Bureau to study further the question of mechanism for peaceful settlement of disputes between Member Countries, the Heads of State or Government urged the Bureau to undertake the study as soon as possible in a transparent manner.

Culture of Peace

132. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s support for the Declaration and Programme of Action on the Culture of Peace adopted by the General Assembly on 13 September 1999. They called upon States, Governments, organisations and peoples to promote a culture of peace based on respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity of States; non-interference in internal affairs of States; the right to self-determination; prevention of violence, promotion of non-violence; strict adherence to the principles of international relations enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and full realisation of the right to development. They further called for the promotion of democracy, justice, tolerance, economic and social development, human rights, gender mainstreaming and the free flow of information and correcting imbalance of such flows to and from developing countries as well as the elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and foreign occupation.

133. The Heads of State or Government expressed concern that religious and cultural prejudices, misunderstanding, intolerance and discrimination on the basis of religions or beliefs or different systems of belief undermine the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms while hindering the promotion of the culture of peace. They affirmed that pluralism, tolerance, and understanding of religious and cultural diversity are essential for peace and harmony. They recognised that acts of prejudice, discrimination, stereotyping, and racial, religious and sectarian profiling are affronts to human dignity and equality, and should not be condoned. Respect for democracy and human rights and the promotion of understanding and tolerance by governments as well as between and among minorities, are central to the promotion and protection of human rights. They affirmed that States are under obligation to ensure the full exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms without discrimination and full equality before the law and that this would contribute to the culture of peace.

134. The Heads of State or Government emphasised that tolerance of religious and cultural diversity and pluralism are essential for peace and understanding among individuals and peoples of different culture and nations in the world. They urged that States should exert utmost efforts, in accordance with their national legislation and in conformity with commitments made by them under international human rights instruments, to ensure that all religious places, sites and shrines are fully respected and protected and that the safety and security of all worshippers are ensured. States are urged to ensure that religious and cultural diversity is fully respected in their national, political and legal system and that state machinery is not used to propagate religious or cultural hatred. They affirmed their rejection of terrorism and reiterated that it cannot be justified on religious or any other grounds. It should be ensured that religious and other identities are not used for the promotion and incitement of terrorism. Terrorism cannot be attributed to any particular religion, nationality or civilisation. They noted the efforts of the United Nations to promote a culture of peace.


CHAPTER II: ANALYSIS OF THE INTERNATIONAL SITUATION

PALESTINE AND THE MIDDLE EAST

Palestine

135. The Heads of State or Government, recalling the historic injustices inflicted upon the Palestinian people, reiterated their traditional principled support for and longstanding solidarity with the Palestinian people. They recalled, in this regard, that in 1948 more than half of the Palestinian people were uprooted from their land, homes and properties, dispossessed and forced to live as refugees until today, awaiting the implementation of United Nations resolution 194(III). They also recalled that the establishment of the State of Palestine, in accordance with United Nations Resolution 181(II), has been obstructed for more than fifty years. They further recalled that the remainder of the Palestinian territory has been under foreign occupation of Israel since 1967, and that since that time the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, have been subjected to the continuous oppression and brutality of the occupation. They further noted that the occupying power has systematically established and expanded settlements which reflect a new and special form of settler colonialism.

136. The Heads of State or Government expressed their deep concern at the tragic situation prevailing in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, since 28 September 2000. In this regard, they strongly condemned the systematic human rights violations and reported war crimes that have been committed by the Israeli occupying forces against the Palestinian people. They condemned in particular the wilful killing of Palestinian civilians, including extrajudicial executions; the wanton destruction of homes, infrastructure and agricultural lands; the detention and imprisonment of thousands of Palestinians; and the imposition of collective punishment on the entire Palestinian population, including severe restrictions on the movement of persons and goods and prolonged curfews, resulting in the socio economic debilitation of the Palestinian people, amounting to a dire humanitarian crisis.

137. The Heads of State or Government condemned land confiscation, settlement building and the transfer of Israeli nationals to the Occupied Territory that have been carried out by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. This settler colonialism has also aimed at negating the national rights and the existence of the Palestinian people. The Heads of State or Government affirmed and called upon all Member States to take the necessary measures to ensure the immediate end and reversal of this settler colonialism. The Heads of State or Government recalled in this regard the many relevant Security Council resolutions on all illegal Israeli measures, including measures and action taken by Israel to change the status, character and demographic composition of Jerusalem, which are null and void, and called for full implementation of those resolutions.

138. The Heads of State or Government underscored the obligations of the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention and Additional Protocol 1, which are applicable to all of the territory occupied by Israel since 1967, to respect and to ensure respect of the Convention and Additional Protocol 1 in all circumstances. They reaffirmed the obligations of the High Contracting Parties with regard to penal sanctions, grave breaches and responsibilities of the High Contracting Parties. They affirmed the importance of and called for the application of legal remedies without impunity, to war crimes committed in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. The Heads of State or Government expressed the necessity of upholding international law, international humanitarian law and the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations with regard to the question of Palestine.

139. The Heads of State or Government reiterated that unwavering support for the realisation of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, including the right to national independence and the exercise of sovereignty in their State, Palestine, with East Jerusalem as its capital. They reaffirmed that the question of Palestine is the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict. In this regard, they also reaffirmed the responsibility of the international community, particularly the permanent responsibility of the United Nations, including Security Council, until the question of Palestine is resolved in all its aspects.

140. The Heads of State or Government reiterated their support for a peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine and the Arab-Israeli conflict as a whole. In this regard, they reiterated support for the longstanding position of the international community of a two-State solution of Israel and Palestine. They stressed the imperative of the withdrawal of Israel from all of the territory occupied in 1967, bringing an effective end to its occupation, as well as the right of all States in the region to security and peace. In this regard, they reaffirmed the importance of Security Council Resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973) and 1397 (2002) and the principle of land for peace as the basis for a peaceful solution. While expressing grave concern about the disintegration the peace process has suffered, they reiterated their calls for an internationally-promoted peace settlement and the intensification of efforts to revitalise the process towards the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace.

Syrian Golan

141. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed that all measures and actions taken, or to be taken by Israel, the occupying power, such as its illegal decision of 14 December 1981 that purports to alter the legal, physical and demographic status of the occupied Syrian Golan and its institutional structure, as well as the Israeli measures to apply its jurisdiction and administration there, are null and void and have no legal effect. They also reaffirmed that all such measures and actions, including the illegality of Israeli settlement construction activities in the Occupied Syrian Golan since 1967 constitute a flagrant violation of international law, international conventions, the Charter and decisions of the United Nations, particularly Security Council resolution 497 (1981), the Fourth Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949 on the Protection of Civilians in Time of War, and the defiance of will of the international community. They reiterated the Movement’s demand that Israel comply with Security Council resolution 497 (1981) and withdraw fully from the occupied Syrian Golan, to the lines of 4 June 1967, in implementation of Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, and that Israel adheres to the Madrid terms of reference based on the principle of land for peace, which are in their entirety considered to be a primary and basic element in the negotiation process that should be adhered to, including the immediate commencement of the demarcation of the 4 June 1967 line.

142. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the NAM’s unwavering support and solidarity with the Syrian just demand and rights to restore the full Syrian sovereignty over the occupied Syrian Golan on the basis of the terms of reference of the Madrid peace process, the decisions of the international legitimacy, as well as the principle of land for peace. They again demanded that Israel respects all commitments and pledges it entered into with the aim of laying down the basis for a substantive progress on the Syrian-Israeli track.

Lebanon

143. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed Lebanon’s legitimate right to defend its territories and to liberate the remaining parts under Israeli occupation and demanded that Israel puts an end to its continuous: threats, aggression and violations of the Lebanese territories, air space and territorial waters. They reiterated their support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Lebanon and its right on its natural resources and for Lebanon’s demand to maintain the peacekeeping mission deployed in Southern Lebanon (UNIFIL) without any further reduction in the number of its troops and without any change in the nature of its mandate in accordance with Resolutions 425 (1978) and 426 (1978). They encouraged and supported all international efforts aimed at expediting the removal of landmines planted by Israel during its occupation of Southern Lebanon, and called on Israel to release all Lebanese prisoners in Israeli jails, detained in defiance of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and its relevant protocols.

The Peace Process

144. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed their support for the Middle East peace process based on Security Council Resolutions 242, 338, 425 and the principle of land for peace. They reiterated the need for ending the Israeli occupation of all occupied territories since 1967 and the establishment of the State of Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital. The Ministers welcomed and supported the Arab peace initiative adopted by the 14th Arab Summit in Beirut. They urged the Security Council to act upon that initiative towards achieving just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East.

AFRICA

145. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the transition from the Organisation of African Unity to the African Union and took note of the holding of the First Summit of the African Union held in Durban, South Africa from 28 June – 10 July 2002 and the First Emergency Summit held from 3 – 5 February 2003 at its headquarters in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. They further noted that the African Union was borne out of a common vision for a united and strong Africa that would enable the African continent to take up the multifaceted challenges that confront the continent and its peoples in the light of the social, economic and political changes taking place in the world. In view of these challenges, they noted that the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), for being an initiative led and managed by the African Union, is anchored on the determination of Africans to extricate themselves and the continent from the malaise of under development and exclusion in a globalised world. They further expressed a view that the Union in co-operation with the other grouping will help in addressing the challenges of the 21st century including the search for peace, prosperity and security the world over.

146. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the work of the Open-Ended Working Group on the Causes of Conflict and the Promotion of Durable Peace and Sustainable Development in Africa established by the General Assembly resolution 53/92. They welcomed the active participation of African countries and other Members, in the deliberations of the Working Group and recommended that all its proposals be fully implemented. In this regard, they welcomed the establishment of the ECOSOC Ad Hoc Advisory Group on African Countries Emerging from Conflict on 15 July 2002. They also welcomed the establishment and presentation of the first report of the Ad Hoc Advisory Group on Guinea Bissau.

147. The Movement also reaffirmed the existence of an intrinsic link between peace and development, which requires an integrated approach to conflict prevention, resolution and management. In this regard, they commended the efforts undertaken by African countries towards the resolution of incipient and persistent conflicts in the continent and call on the United Nations and the international community to support these efforts as well as social and economic development.

148. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the increased attention the Security Council is showing towards African issues and problems, and in particular, they supported the contents of the Communiqué issued by the President of the Security Council on 31 January 2002, as contained in Document S/PRST/2002/2, whereby an Ad Hoc Working Group on Conflict Prevention and Resolution in Africa has been established by the Security Council with the specific task to prevent the eruption of conflict in Africa and their resolution, in co-ordination with the Organisation of African Unity, the sub-regional organisations and the central organ of the mechanism for conflict prevention, management and resolution in the continent. They urged the Council to support their efforts politically, financially, and with manpower, similar to what is provided to peacekeeping missions in other regions.

149. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the need to meet the special needs of Africa as recognised in the Millennium Declaration, the Ministerial Declaration of the High Level Segment of the substantive session of 2001 of the Economic and Social Council on the role of the United Nations in support of the efforts of African countries to achieve sustainable development, adopted on 18 July 2001, the Monterrey Consensus of the International Conference on Financing for Development adopted on 22 March 2002 and the Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development adopted on 4 September 2002.

150. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the NEPAD, as an African led, owned and managed initiative, and recognised that it is a serious commitment to addressing the aspirations of the continent, as decided by the Assembly of Heads of State or Government of the Organisation of African Unity, at its thirty-seventh ordinary session, held at Lusaka from 9 – 11 July 2001.

151. The Heads of State or Government affirmed the necessity of international support for the implementation of the NEPAD and urged the United Nations system and the international community, in particular donor countries, to assist with the implementation of the NEPAD.

Democratic Republic of the Congo

152. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the NAM’s support for the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement of 10 July 1999 as a negotiated framework accepted by all the parties for arriving at a peaceful settlement of the conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and guaranteeing respect for the sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of the DRC. They again welcomed the general respect for the ceasefire among the parties to the Lusaka Ceasefire Agreement. They called on the orderly withdrawal of all foreign forces in accordance with Security Council Resolution 1304 (2000). They welcomed the conclusion in Pretoria, on 17 December 2002 of the comprehensive Peace Accord for the Transition in the DRC, and requested all parties concerned to fully co-operate with the Facilitator, Sir Ketumile Masire, in order to convene as soon as possible the Inter-Congolese Dialogue (ICD) that would formally endorse the Pretoria Accord, to ensure its effective implementation. In this regard, they encouraged all parties who were involved in the ICD to continue in their efforts to find an all-inclusive political solution for the Congolese people. They called upon all parties to refrain from resumption of hostilities, and respect the aspirations of the entire Congolese people for peace, stability and national reconciliation.

Rwanda

153. The Heads of State or Government commended the Pretoria Agreement signed on 30 July, 2002 between the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and the Government of the Republic of Rwanda in which the sovereignty of the DRC and the security concerns of Rwanda were recognised and re-emphasised. They welcomed the withdrawal of foreign forces including the Rwanda Defence Forces (RDF) in accordance with the Lusaka Agreement of 10 July, 1999 and Pretoria Agreement mentioned above. The total withdrawal of RDF was completed in October 2002 and confirmed by the third party verification mechanism (United Nations, South Africa and MONUC).

154. The Heads of State or Government called upon all States in the Great Lakes Region to meet their commitments in accordance with both Agreements.

Côte d’Ivoire

155. The Heads of State or Government expressed their support for the efforts undertaken for a peaceful resolution in Cote d’Ivoire. They welcomed the Linas Marcoussis Accord signed on 14 January, 2003 endorsed by the Security Council Resolution 1464(2003) and called on the interested parties to work together in the strict implementation of this Accord.

156. They appealed to all Ivorians to engage into a true national reconciliation process so as to maintain the sovereignty and territorial integrity of their country as a strong and prosperous country. To this end, they invited them to work in a spirit of forgiveness, tolerance and solidarity.

157. They called on the Heads of State of the sub-region to continue working for the restoration of peace in Cote d’Ivoire and expressed its appreciation to France for its assistance to the sub-region in the search for a peaceful resolution of the crisis.

Burundi

158. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the signing on 2 December 2002 of the Ceasefire Agreement between the Transition Government and the armed group CNDD-FDD of Pierre Nkurunziza, which followed another Ceasefire Agreement signed on 7 October 2002 between the Transition Government and the armed groups CNDD-FDD of Jean Bosco NDAYIKENGURUNKIYE and FNL-PALIPEHUTU of Alain MUGABARABONA.

159. They reaffirmed that the Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement signed on 28 August 2000 under the auspices of ex-President Nelson Mandela whom they commended for his tremendous contribution remains the basic reference of the Burundi peace process. They noted with appreciation the role played by President Omar Bongo, Vice President Jacob Zuma, the Regional Peace Initiative on Burundi, the Government of South Africa, the United Nations and the African Union in bringing the belligerents to the table of negotiation and requested them to follow closely the full implementation of all Agreements in order to end war in Burundi.

160. They urged the FNL-PALIPEHUTU of Agathon Rwasa to join the peace process and sign a Ceasefire Agreement with the Transition Government as soon as possible, and requested the United Nations to explore the possibility of sending a United Nations peacekeeping mission to Burundi once the ceasefire is inclusive and permanent.

161. They also requested the donors to release the assistance and economic aid promised at the Round Table, which took place in Geneva on 26 – 27 November 2002, and to extend the financial and logistic means to the African Mission assigned to observe the Ceasefire Agreements signed so far.

Somalia

162. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed their commitment to a comprehensive and lasting settlement of the situation in Somalia, reaffirming their respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence and unity of the country, consistent with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

163. The Heads of State or Government also appreciated the efforts of the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) leaders for their continued support and contribution in the peace and national reconciliation process in Somalia, and the Arta Peace Conference which established the Transitional National Government.

164. The Heads of State or Government firmly supported the unified approach of the (IGAD) for the national reconciliation process in Somalia, and expressed their strong support for the ongoing national reconciliation conference in Nairobi, Kenya, as sponsored by IGAD. They called upon all Somali parties to continue participating in the peace process in accordance with the framework established by IGAD, and urged them to implement and abide by all the decisions and agreements adopted throughout the process, including through expeditious implementation of the Declaration on Cessation of Hostilities and the Structures and Principles of the Somalia National Reconciliation process adopted on 27 October, 2002 in Eldoret, Kenya. In this context, they called upon the United Nations, the African Union, the League of Arab States, the Organisation of Islamic Conferences to fully support the IGAD peace process for National Reconciliation in Somalia.

165. The Heads of State or Government commended the Government of Kenya for its special commitment as host and IGAD’s Technical Committee, comprised of the three frontline States, Kenya, Ethiopia and Djibouti, for its role in facilitating the peace process. They strongly supported their continued active and positive role in promoting and facilitating the peace process.

166. The Heads of State or Government underlined that the future of Somalia depends, first of all, on the commitment of Somali leaders to end the suffering of their people by negotiating a peaceful end to the conflict and strongly urged all parties including the Transitional National Government to continue to participate constructively in the national reconciliation process, with the view to establish an all inclusive government in Somalia.

167. The Heads of State or Government emphasised the importance of combating terrorism in accordance with Security Council Resolution 1373 of 28 September 2001. They welcomed the stated intention and commitment of the Transitional National Government to combat international terrorism and to make a firm commitment against terrorism and to cut any link with individuals or groups in terrorist activities or otherwise supporting such activities. The Heads of State or Government, insisting that persons and entities must not be allowed to take advantage of the situation in Somalia, to finance, plan, facilitate, support or commit terrorist acts from the country, emphasised that efforts to combat terrorism in Somalia are inseparable from the establishment of peace and governance in Somalia.

168. The Heads of State or Government called on all States and other actors to comply scrupulously with the Arms Embargo established by the Security Council Resolution 733 of 23 January, 1992 and appreciated the establishment of the Panel of Experts by the Council, pursuant to Security Council Resolution 1407 of 3 May 2002. They called on all States not to interfere in the internal affairs of Somalia and underlined that the territory of Somalia should not be used to undermine stability in the Sub-region.

169. The Heads of State or Government noted with serious concern that the humanitarian and security situation remained fragile in several parts of Somalia. They strongly urged the parties to respect, protect and promote human rights and international humanitarian standards including full respect for the security and safety of the personnel of the United Nations and its specialized agencies, the International Committee of the Red Cross and the non-governmental organisations. They welcomed in this regard the agreement by all Somali parties in Eldoret, Kenya to guarantee the safety and security of all international personnel and installations and strongly urged them to take practical steps to ensure the safe access to aid for all people in Somalia.

170. They appealed to the international community to provide humanitarian, economic and reconstruction assistance to the people of Somalia with the goal of advancing the peace process. They further urged the international community to contribute, as a matter of priority, to the United Nations Trust Fund for Somalia pursuant to Security Council Resolution S/Res./1425(2002) and S/PRST/2002/8 with a view to accelerating the establishment of a United Nations peace building Mission for Somalia.

Libyan Arab Jamahiriya

171. The Heads of State or Government recalled the position adopted by the Movement as outlined in the Final Document of the XII Summit, held in Durban in September 1998, and the subsequent ministerial decisions. They also reiterated their satisfaction with the brave decision taken by the Libyan authorities, encouraging the two Libyan suspects to stand trial before the Scottish Court sitting in the Netherlands, and they further appreciated the full co-operation accorded by the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to the investigation authorities, and the trial, in its various stages.

172. The Heads of State or Government reconfirmed their conviction that the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya has fulfilled all its obligations in terms Security Council Resolutions 731 (1992), 748 (1992), 883 (1993) and 1192 (1998), including the requirements contained in Resolution 731 (1992). In light of these considerations, they reiterated their call for the Security Council to adopt a resolution calling for the immediate and final lifting of the sanctions imposed on Libya. Recalling in this regard the Movement’s decision that the sanctions must be totally terminated once the suspects have appeared for the trial and decided that the Non-Aligned Movement shall act accordingly. They expressed once again their support to, and solidarity with, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in its demands for compensations for the human and material losses it suffered as a result of the sanctions.

173. The Heads of State or Government expressed their deep regret over the conviction of the Libyan citizen Abdulbsit El-Maghrahi, including that of the appeal decision issued on 14 March 2002. They demanded the immediate release of the said citizen, in view of the fact that his conviction was politically motivated, and without any valid legal grounds, as confirmed by the United Nations observers, and a large number of international legal experts. In this context, they recalled their position that the politicisation in any form and by any party whatever would be unacceptable.

174. The Heads of State or Government reiterated their call for the immediate lifting of all unilateral sanctions imposed against the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, outside the United Nations regime, and acknowledged Libya’s right to compensations for the damages incurred as a consequence of these sanctions. They asked the concerned States to enter into negotiations, with the aim of resolving the outstanding issues in a manner that safeguards the interests of all parties concerned.




Angola

175. The Heads of State or Government welcomed with satisfaction the return of peace in Angola, which represents and added value to the stability and development of the Southern and Central African regions as well as the African continent as a whole. They further encouraged the people of Angola to pursue the path of peace and sustainable development.

176. The Heads of State or Government urged the international community, particularly the international financial institutions, to lend their much needed support to mitigate the current humanitarian situation and to accelerate the economic recovery of Angola, and expressed their support to the holding of an International Round-Table Conference with the objective of mobilising funds.

Zimbabwe

177. The Heads of State or Government acknowledged actions taken by the Government of Zimbabwe in its endeavours at correcting historical injustices through the land redistribution programme in accordance with its national laws and called upon the international community to give full support to these efforts.

178. The Heads of State or Government condemned the unilateral imposition of targeted sanctions on Zimbabwe by the United States, Britain, the European Union (EU), Switzerland, New Zealand and Australia in violation of the United Nations Charter and called for the immediate lifting of sanctions.

179. The Heads of State or Government expressed dismay and great concern over the decision by the Bretton Woods Institutions to withdraw financial support from Zimbabwe on political considerations and called for the immediate disbursement of financial support from these institutions.

180. The Heads of State or Government expressed deep concern at the grave humanitarian situation in Zimbabwe and other parts of the sub-region as a consequence of the worst drought which is ravaging the region and continued to call upon the international community to provide urgent short and long term assistance to avert a human catastrophe.

Ethiopia and Eritrea

181. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the decision of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission regarding the delimitation of the boundary between the two countries and regarded it as an important step in the implementation of the Algiers Peace Agreement. They also noted with satisfaction the endorsement by both Parties of the decision of the Commission. They further encouraged the Parties to fully co-operate with the Boundary Commission with the view to expeditiously carrying out the demarcation of the boundary.




Western Sahara

182. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the support of the Movement for the efforts of the United Nations to organise and supervise an impartial, free and fair referendum in accordance with the Settlement Plan, the Houston Agreements and with relevant Security Council and United Nations resolutions.

183. The Heads of State or Government supported the efforts pursued by the United Nations, under the auspices of the Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy, aimed at implementing the Settlement Plan and the Houston Agreements, accepted by the two parties, in accordance with the United Nations Charter and relevant United Nations resolutions, or any other political solution agreeable to the parties, in accordance with the United Nations Charter and relevant United Nations resolutions.

Chagos Archipelago

184. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed that Chagos Archipelago, including Diego Garcia, is an integral part of the sovereign territory of the Republic of Mauritius. In this regard, they again called on the former colonial power to pursue constructive dialogue expeditiously with Mauritius for the early return of Chagos Archipelago, including Diego Garcia, to the sovereignty of the Republic of Mauritius.

Sudan

185. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the signing on 22 July 2002 of the Machakos Protocol between the Government of the Sudan and the Sudan Peoples’ Liberation Movement, which represents a significant breakthrough on major issues and a major step towards the realization of a just and lasting peace in the Sudan. In connection with that signing, they paid tribute first of all to the parties, the ongoing efforts by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), led by Kenya, as well as the efforts exerted by other facilitators including the IGAD Partners Forum (IPF) and appealed to the parties to continue to work for a successful conclusion of a comprehensive and lasting peace.

186. Encouraged by those positive developments, the Heads of State or Government urged the international community to support efforts aimed at achieving peace in the Sudan. In this regard, they further urged the international community to provide assistance to meet the economic and developmental needs, including the reconstruction and rehabilitation of areas affected by the conflict, after the realization of peace in the Sudan.

ASIA

Situation between Iraq and Kuwait

187. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the assurances given by the Republic of Iraq to respect the independence, sovereignty and security of the State of Kuwait and to ensure its territorial integrity within its internationally recognised border with a view to steer away from any action that might lead to a recurrence of the 1990 events. They called for the adoption of policies that would set the aforementioned guarantees in an operational framework of good intentions and good neighbourly relations. In this regard, the leaders stressed the significance of halting negative media campaigns and statements toward the creation of a favourable environment that would reassure the two countries of their commitment to the principles of good neighbourliness and non-interference in domestic affairs.

188. The Heads of State or Government demanded respect for the independence, sovereignty, security, territorial integrity and non-interference into the internal affairs of Iraq.

189. The Heads of State or Government were encouraged by the resumption of the tripartite technical sub-committee on 8 January 2003 on the fate of persons unaccounted for since 1990 - 1991. They expressed their strong desire for concrete and substantive progress on this matter. They were also encouraged by the return to Kuwait by Iraq in October 2002, the Kuwaiti archives previously taken or removed from Kuwait and the promise by Iraq to return any documents and archives that could be found in the future. They called for continuation of these efforts aimed at resolving this issue urgently.

190. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the decision by the Government of Iraq to allow the unconditional return of weapons inspectors in accordance with the relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. In this regard, they wished to encourage Iraq and the United Nations to intensify their efforts in search of a lasting, just and comprehensive solution to all outstanding issues between them in accordance with the relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. They emphasised the urgent need for a peaceful solution of the issue of Iraq in a way that preserves the authority and credibility of the Charter of the United Nations and international law as well as peace and stability in the region.

191. They demanded lifting of sanctions on Iraq and ending the suffering of its brotherly people in order to promote stability and security in the region.

192. The Heads of State or Government examined threats of aggression against some Arab States, especially Iraq. They affirmed their categorical rejection of assaulting Iraq as well as of any threats made to the security and safety of Iraq, Kuwait and any Arab State as these are considered menaces to the overall national security of all Arab States.

Iraq

193. The Heads of State or Government deplored the imposition and continued military enforcement of "No-Fly Zones" on Iraq by individual countries without any authorisation from the United Nations Security Council or General Assembly. In this respect, they recalled the statement on the situation in Iraq issued by the Movement of the Non-Aligned Countries on 17 December 1998, which was issued as a document of United Nations General Assembly (A/53/762).

194. The Heads of State or Government urged that help be extended to Iraq for the restoration of all objects of art and antiquity stolen from Iraq during the hostilities in 1991.

195. The Heads of State or Government strongly condemned the repeated actions of Turkish armed forces violating the territorial integrity of Iraq under the pretext of fighting guerrilla elements hiding inside Iraqi territory. These actions of Turkish armed forces constituted stark illegal violations of the international boundaries mutually recognised between the two countries and a threat to regional and international peace and security. The Heads of State or Government also rejected the so-called "hot-pursuit" measures by Turkey to justify such actions that are abhorrent to international law and to the norms of practice amongst States.

Korean Peninsula

196. The Heads of State or Government expressed their concern over the fact that the Korean Peninsula still remains divided in spite of desires and aspirations of the Korean people for reunification and reaffirmed their support to the Korean people to reunify their homeland through dialogue and negotiations based on the three principles set forth in the North-South Joint Statement on 4 July 1972 and Agreement concluded in February 1992.

197. The Heads of State or Government noted the importance of guaranteeing a durable peace and security in the Korean Peninsula for the sake of the common prosperity of the Korean people as well as the peace and security of Northeast Asia and the rest of the world. They in particular, expressed their hope that the Korean peninsula would be reunified through the genuine aspirations and concerted efforts of the Korean peoples themselves in a way as is stated in the North South Joint Declaration issued at the historic North-South Summit talks held in Pyongyang on 15 June 2000.

198. The Heads of State or Government expressed serious concern over the recent developments on the Korean Peninsula. They expressed hope that these issues be resolved peacefully, including through dialogue and negotiations. They called upon all parties concerned to do everything possible to resolve the nuclear issue peacefully. They also recognised the contribution of the ASEAN Standing Committee and ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) as well as their chairs towards a peaceful settlement of these issues.

Afghanistan

199. The Heads of State or Government reiterated their commitment to the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of Afghanistan. They welcomed the Bonn Agreement signed 5 December 2001, as an important step in the commencement of political activity in Afghanistan. They also welcomed the successful convening of the Emergency Loya Jirga, held from 11 – 19 June 2002, the election of President Karzai as the Head of State, by a secret ballot, and the establishment of the Transitional Authority, and expressing its full support for President Karzai and the Transitional Authority.

200. They recognised that the challenges faced by the Afghanistan Transitional Authority and by the Afghan people are enormous. They expressed the Movement’s resolve to contribute to Afghanistan’s reconstruction and rehabilitation. They noted with satisfaction that individual Member Countries of the Movement had already taken several concrete measures to assist Afghanistan with humanitarian relief and rebuilding activity.

201. The Heads of State or Government took note of the International Conference on Reconstruction Assistance to Afghanistan in Tokyo on 21 - 22 January 2002, and thereby the strong commitment by the international donor community, including Member States of the NAM, for reconstruction assistance to Afghanistan.

202. The Heads of State or Government expressed their deep concern that the terrorist groups, including former Taliban cadres, were regrouping in the Southern and Eastern parts of Afghanistan. Equally of concern was that the efforts of the international community to fight terrorism were being undermined by support, protection and shelter that these forces of destabilisation continued to receive.

203. The Heads of State or Government believed that the establishment of peace and security was essential for the reconstruction efforts to be successful in Afghanistan. They also expressed hope that the holding of the elections scheduled in June 2004 will pave the way towards the restoration of full democracy in Afghanistan. They stressed that the efforts of the international community on Afghanistan should be co-ordinated through inclusive and co-operative forums, rather than through competitive and exclusive groupings.

204. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the Kabul Declaration on Good Neighbourly Relations of 22 December 2002, in which a commitment to constructive and supportive bilateral relationships based on the principles of territorial integrity, mutual respect, friendly relations, co-operation and non-interference in each other’s internal affairs have been reaffirmed.

Southeast Asia

205. The Heads of State or Government recognised the important role of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in promoting peace, stability and prosperity in the region and in enhancing co-operation in the wider Asia-Pacific region. They also recognised the role of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in promoting political security dialogue and mutual confidence among its participants. They welcomed the progress of ASEAN continuing efforts to realise the objective of establishing a Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality in Southeast Asia (ZOPFAN) and to implement the Southeast-Asia Nuclear-Weapons-Free-Zone Treaty (SEANWFZ). In this regard, they encouraged all Nuclear-Weapon States to accede to its Protocol. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the continuing commitment made by the leaders of ASEAN and China, Japan and the Republic of Korea as well as other ASEAN Dialogue Partners to enhance co-operation and collaboration, thereby further contributing to the promotion of peace, stability and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region and the world over. They encouraged Dialogue Partners of ASEAN to accede to the Treaty of Amity and Co-operation.

206. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the call to solve all sovereignty and territorial disputes in the South China Sea by peaceful means without resorting to force and/or threat to use force, and urged all parties to exercise restraint with a view to creating a positive climate for the eventual resolution of all contentious issues. In this context, they reaffirmed their support for the principles contained in the 1992 ASEAN Declaration on the South China Sea as well as 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and stressed the need for the full implementation of such principles by all concerned. They also expressed the hope that all parties concerned would refrain from any actions that may undermine peace, stability, trust and confidence in the region. They reaffirmed their respect for and commitment to the freedom of navigation in and over flight above the South China Sea as provided for by the universally recognised principles of international law. To this end, they welcomed the signing of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea by ASEAN and China on November 4, 2002 during the ASEAN-China Summit in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, as an important step to achieve a code of conduct in the South China Sea, which would help to create a conducive environment for the maintenance of peace and stability in the region. They also welcomed the positive contribution of the on-going bilateral and multilateral consultations among the parties concerned at the intergovernmental level, the extensive consultations at the ASEAN-China Dialogue, the regular exchange of views in the ARF, and the informal Workshops on Managing Potential Conflicts in the South China Sea and encouraged their continuance.

EUROPE

Cyprus

207. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed all previous positions and declarations of the NAM on the question of Cyprus. The Movement considered the present status quo in Cyprus, established through the use of force and sustained by military strength, as unacceptable and is deeply concerned over the lack of progress in the search for a just and viable solution to this long-lasting question, primarily due to Turkish intransigence. The Movement noted the recent ongoing efforts of the United Nations towards finding a just and viable solution to the Cyprus problem through inter-communal dialogue and reaffirmed its position that the solution agreed must be based on the implementation of all United Nations resolutions and NAM’s decisions on Cyprus, in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law. In this regard, the Movement also considered the statement by the President of the Security Council of 19 December 2002, which expressed its regret that the Turkish Cypriot leadership had not responded in a timely way to the initiatives of the Secretary General. The Movement also took note that the attitude of the Turkish Cypriot leadership is in direct contrast with the will of the Turkish Cypriots themselves. To this effect, the Movement welcomed the recent mobilisation of the Turkish Cypriot civil society in favour of a solution. The Movement urged both sides to continue negotiating in the period ahead in a positive and constructive spirit so that full agreement can be reached the soonest.

Security and Co-operation in the Mediterranean

208. On developments in the Mediterranean region, the Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s determination to intensify the process of dialogue and consultations in the promotion of comprehensive and equitable cooperation in the region towards resolving the problems existing in the Mediterranean region, in the elimination of the causes of tension and the consequent threat to peace and security, respect for self determination, elimination of foreign occupation, foreign bases and fleets, non-interference in the internal affairs and respect for the sovereignty of states as prerequisites for the establishment of peace and stability in the Mediterranean region. In this regard, they welcomed the various conferences held as part of the Barcelona process in order to provide a strong stimulus to relations in the Euro Mediterranean region and to give this process a comprehensive, balanced and multidimensional approach based on the necessary balance between the three parts of Barcelona Declaration.

209. They welcomed the consultations within the (5+5) framework and stressed the importance of their continuation with the aim of contributing to finding solutions to common concerns, including economic and technological inequalities between the countries in the region. In this regard, they expressed their expectation that the (5+5) Summit to be held in Tunisia during the Second Part of 2003 will give a new impetus to this dialogue.

LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN

South American Zone of Peace and Co-operation

210. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the decision of the Presidents of South America, adopted at their second meeting, held in Guayaquil, Ecuador, on 27 July 2002, to declare South America as a Zone of Peace and Cooperation, as well as its recognition by the General Assembly through Resolution 57/13 that the establishment of this Zone of Peace and Cooperation will help to strengthen international peace and security and promote the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Cuba

211. The Heads of State or Government again called upon the Government of the United States of America to put an end to the economic, commercial and financial embargo against Cuba which, in addition to being unilateral and contrary to the UN Charter and international law, and to the principle of neighbourliness, causing huge material losses and economic damage to the people of Cuba. The Heads of State or Government once again urged strict compliance with the Resolutions 47/19, 48/16, 49/9, 50/10, 51/17, 52/10, 53/4, 54/21, 55/20, 56/9 and 57/11 of the United Nations General Assembly. They expressed deep concern over the widening of the extra-territorial nature of the embargo against Cuba and over continuous new legislative measure geared to intensifying it. The Movement also urged the United States Government to return the territory now occupied by the Guantánamo Naval Base to Cuban sovereignty and to put an end to aggressive radio and TV transmission against Cuba.

Venezuela

212. The Heads of State or Government expressed their support to the Government of Hugo Chavez Frias, elected democratically with the support of the majority of votes and reiterated their wish for a peaceful, institutional, just solution to be found within a legal framework to the current Venezuelan situation. In this regard, they recognised the international initiatives to facilitate the search of a solution. They underlined that the dialogue between the government and a democratic opposition is of fundamental importance for a solution. The recent Declaration against violence approved by the Table of Negotiation and Dialogue could contribute to stop the action of destabilisation.

Guyana and Venezuela

213. The Heads of State or Government noted with satisfaction the efforts made by Guyana and Venezuela to strengthen their bilateral relations as agreed upon at the High Level Bilateral Commission meeting held in Georgetown, Guyana and in Caracas, Venezuela, in February and October 2002 respectively and look forward to the next Ministerial Meeting to be held shortly in Georgetown.

214. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the renewed commitment of both countries to avail themselves of the Good Offices of the United Nations Secretary-General, through his Personal Representative, in the search for a peaceful settlement of the controversy, in accordance with the Geneva Agreement of 1966.

Belize and Guatemala

215. Mindful of the fundamental principles of the Movement, which uphold respect for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of States, the Heads of State or Government recalled that the Movement has closely followed the developments in the Belize-Guatemala territorial dispute.

216. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the fact that on 16 September, 2002, a Facilitation Process agreed to by the Parties resulted in the presentation of Proposals for a definitive, just and honourable solution to the dispute.

217. The Heads of State or Government noted with satisfaction that on 7 February 2003 the Parties signed an Agreement to Establish a Transition Process and Confidence Building Measures aimed at maintaining peace and neighbourly relations between the two countries until the said Proposals can be dealt with and Treaties of Settlement putting an end to the dispute are ratified.

218. The Heads of State or Government commended the parties on this initiative and urged the international community to provide every assistance that will make the proposed settlement effective.

Colombia

219. The Heads of State or Government condemned the recent terrorists acts perpetrated by illegal armed groups in Colombia which claimed numerous lives and injured numerous civilians, and stressed that such acts, like any act of terrorism, are a threat to peace and security. They reaffirmed the need to combat by all means, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, threats to peace and security caused by terrorists acts, and urged all States, in accordance with their obligations under United Nations General Assembly and Security Council resolutions including Resolution 1373(2001) to work together and co-operate with and provide support and assistance as appropriate, to the Colombian authorities in their efforts to find and bring to justice the perpetrators, organisers and sponsors of this terrorists attacks.

CHAPTER III: ECONOMIC ISSUES

Globalisation and Interdependence

220. The Heads of State or Government remained deeply concerned over the continued marginalisation of the developing countries from the benefits of globalisation, and persistent income and economic gaps between the developed and developing countries. They also expressed their concern that developing countries continue to face barriers to markets, capital and technology and that many grapple with the structural transformation necessary for practical and meaningful integration into the world economy. The ability to exploit new opportunities depends on the economic, technological, trade, industrial and institutional capacities to enter the global markets. As globalisation deepens, the technological, financial and productive gap, including the digital divide, between the developed and developing countries increases. Hence, the Non-Aligned Movement is of the belief that the central focus of international development efforts should be on the creation of an enabling international economic environment, which is critical for developing countries to acquire the requisite capacities to successfully compete and fully benefit from globalisation. They called therefore for an equitable international economic order. They also called for measures to ensure that developing countries participate in and benefit from globalisation, in particular through their full and effective participation in the processes of decision-making on world economic problems.

221. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the central role of the United Nations in the promotion of international co-operation for development in the context of globalisation and interdependence. The global economy has become increasingly interdependent, characterised by rapid growth in flows of trade, finance, information and technology, in the 1990s, which led to increased interdependence among countries. While the developing countries have little share of the global prosperity, they will be the primary victims in the slowing down of the global economy which have adversely impacted on the prospects for sustained economic growth and sustainable development in developing countries. It is evident that a large number of Member Countries of the Non-Aligned Movement, particularly in Africa and the LDCs, have been marginalised and others risk marginalisation, and are thus unable to fully share in the benefits of these processes, while they remain most vulnerable to adverse impacts.

222. In this regard, the Heads of State or Government recalled the United Nations Millennium Declaration which commits all Members States at the highest level to make globalisation a positive force for all the world’s people and seeks to ensure that the benefits of globalisation are shared evenly by all as a central challenge for the international community and called upon all Member States to remain focused on the development needs of the developing nations and achievement of the Millennium Development goals including the target of halving of poverty by 2015.

223. The Heads of State or Government remained deeply concerned over the fact that developing countries are shouldering a disproportionate share of the adjustment burden, taking into consideration the rapid changes and transformations of the world economy. These concerns relate to the imbalances contained in the current architecture of the multilateral trading system, which benignly tolerates market distorting policy instruments by the North and yet denies developing countries legitimate policy space to pursue development objectives.

224. Noting that integration into the global economy in order to benefit from multilateral rules without destroying national comparative advantage is a critical challenge for the developing countries, and recognising that economic reforms are only a means to an end and that in the pursuit of development, the human goals of security, freedom, justice and the opportunity for a fulfilling and empowering life for all humanity must not be neglected, the Heads of State or Government emphasised the need for a New Global Human Order aimed at reversing the growing disparity between rich and poor, both among and within countries through, inter alia, the eradication of poverty and the promotion of sustainable development. They called for the elaboration of consensus for action in this regard, including the identification of specific measures. They also emphasised that the effective implementation of the outcomes of the United Nations Millennium Summit and the outcomes of other major United Nations summits and conferences will require political will to implement the commitments undertaken particularly in making available the means of implementation.

225. The Heads of State or Government reiterated that the participation of developing countries in global economic decision-making, in particular in the international financial institutions, as well as in multilateral trading organizations, should be enhanced as developing countries represent the majority of countries participating in trade and economic negotiations. They reaffirmed the importance of good governance at the international level through democratisation and transparency and accountability in international economic and financial decision-making in all fora and at all levels with the full and effective participation of developing countries so as to ensure that their development interests are fully taken into account, including enhanced access to markets, to international capital flows and to technology.

226. The Heads of State or Government expressed their deep concern about the increasing social pressure that developing countries are facing as a result of decreasing or negative economic growth, widening poverty and soaring unemployment. In this regard, they called upon the international community, in particular the financial and development multilateral institutions, to establish innovative and new financial mechanisms to support developing countries to meet their immediate social and economic demands as they implement their long - term development programmes.

Revitalising International Co-operation for Development

227. The strengthening of international co-operation for development is necessary in order to facilitate an increased participation by developing countries in the world economy on terms, which are beneficial to them and promote their development efforts. In this context, the Heads of State or Government reiterated the call for renewed emphasis on technical assistance in the development co-operation programmes of the United Nations system, including specialised international agencies.

228. The Heads of State or Government emphasised that the achievement of the objectives of poverty eradication, economic and social progress, sustained economic growth and sustainable development depends on a more favourable and equitable international economic environment and revitalised international development co-operation supportive of developing countries' efforts. While subscribing to the values of environmental protection, sound macroeconomic management and promotion and protection of all human rights in particular the right to development, the Heads of State or Government expressed concern at the “new protectionism” in the form of labour standards, environment standards, other social and human rights standards and technical standards which are coming to the fore. The Heads of State or Government totally rejected all attempts to use these issues as conditionalities and pretexts for restricting market access or aid and technology flows to developing countries or linking them to the multilateral trade negotiations.

229. The Heads of State or Government again expressed deep concern over the declining level of Official Development Assistance (ODA) and the lack of concrete commitments by the developed countries in the Monterrey consensus. They reaffirmed their view that ODA continues to constitute an important source of financial flow for many developing countries. They expressed appreciation to Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden for reaching or exceeding the internationally agreed target of 0.7% of Gross National Product (GNP) for development. They urged other developed countries to ensure the fulfilment of their commitment to meet the internationally agreed target of 0.7% of their GNP as ODA for all developing countries, as well as to meet the internationally agreed target of 0.15% - 0.20% of their GNP to LDCs, as soon as possible, and at the latest by the end of the first decade of the twenty first century.

230. With a view to the achievement of the internationally agreed ODA Target, the Heads of State or Government looked forward to early action by developed countries to fulfil commitments announced during the International Conference on Financing for Development to increase ODA levels within specified timeframes.

231. The Heads of State or Government expressed their serious concern over the continuous decline in the level of regular resources of the United Nations’ funds and programmes and its negative impact on the achievement of development objectives of developing countries.

232. The Heads of State or Government again emphasised the importance of dialogue on strengthening international co-operation and partnership based on the mutuality of interests and benefits, common but differentiated responsibilities and genuine interdependence. They welcomed the decision to reconstitute the existing dialogue biennially held by the United Nations General Assembly as the high-level dialogue on financing for development so that it becomes the intergovernmental focal point for general follow-up to the International Conference on Financing for Development and related issues. They further stressed the need for more effective collaboration between the United Nations, the Bretton Woods Institutions and the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in order to promote co-ordination on economic, financial, technological, trade and development issues at the global level with the view of assisting developing countries to benefit from globalisation. In this context, they welcomed the establishment of a mechanism for the follow-up to the Financing for Development conference in Monterrey, which should contribute to such collaboration. They affirmed their commitment to implement fully the proposals and measures for the follow-up to financing for development, including those aimed at achieving more effective collaboration between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods Institutions and the WTO.

233. The Heads of State or Government recognised the right of all States to determine freely their own political, economic and social system. The Non-Aligned Movement condemned the continued application by certain countries of extra-territorial measures and legislation, and their imposition of unilateral coercive economic measures against certain developing countries, and reaffirmed that no State may use or encourage the use of economic, political or any other type of measures to coerce another State, including through non-extension of Most Favoured Nations (MFN) status with the view to preventing these countries from the exercise of their right to determine, of their total free will, their own political, economic and social system. They reiterated the Movement’s call on all States not to recognise the unilateral, extraterritorial laws enacted by certain countries which impose sanctions on companies and individuals belonging to other countries, since these measures and legislation threaten the sovereignty of States, adversely affect their social and economic development, marginalise developing countries from the process of globalisation, and are contrary to international law, the principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter, the norms and principles governing peaceful relations among States, and agreed principles of the multilateral trading system.

234. The Heads of State or Government remained concerned over the lack of implementation of the outcomes of the major United Nations conferences and summits, due mainly to the lack of political will and to the failure of the developed countries to fulfil their commitments for new and additional resources, the transfer of knowledge and technology to developing countries as well as enhanced access to the markets of the developed countries. They therefore renewed the call upon countries to implement their commitments undertaken and to make tangible progress towards the achievement of the targets, goals and objectives set by the United Nations conferences and summits. Consequently, they underlined the need for strong political will by the international community for the successful implementation of the commitments of all summits, United Nations conferences and special sessions.

235. There is also a need to mobilise sufficient resources for their implementation so that they can contribute effectively to promote sustained economic growth in the developing countries and to remove existing imbalances in the world economy. The Heads of State or Government affirmed the importance of a sustained follow up to the International Conference on Financing for Development. In this regard, they agreed to undertake the necessary actions, in collaboration with G-77, to ensure that the international community stays engaged in the FfD process, particularly with respect to increasing external financial resources for growth and creating global economic conditions that foster the domestic resource mobilisation in the developing countries.

236. The Heads of State and Government emphasised the need to enhance infrastructure development in developing countries, which will spur economic growth. For this purpose, they urged the international community to create a dedicated multilateral mechanism of international financing for the development of infrastructure in developing countries.

International Trade

237. The Heads of State or Government again reaffirmed the need to establish an open, rule-based, accountable, transparent, predictable, just, secure, equitable, development oriented and non-discriminatory global trade system. They agreed to work towards seeking greater market access for agricultural and other non-agricultural exports of interest to the developing countries in multilateral negotiations. They reiterated that negotiations on these issues must fully take into account the concerns and special needs of the developing countries, especially the need for operationalisation of Special and Differential treatment to promote, inter alia, food security, rural development and export diversification in developing countries, which are predominantly agrarian economies. In this regard, they stressed the importance of the further strengthening of their productive capacities and creation of an environment conducive to product and export diversification. They also called for improved terms of trade for products of export interest to developing countries.

238. The Heads of State or Government called for the full implementation of the Fourth WTO Ministerial Declaration. They expressed deep concern over the lack of progress in the WTO negotiations on issues of interest to developing countries in particular on special and differential treatment, implementation issues and in the Declaration on the Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement and Public Health.

239. The Heads of State or Government recognised that the outcome of the Doha Ministerial Meeting, November 2001, calls for concerted efforts to uphold and strengthen an open, rule-based, equitable, secure, non-discriminatory, transparent and predictable multilateral trade system, as well as to review and assess the implementation of existing agreements and to place the needs and the interests of developing countries at the heart of the WTO Work Programme. In this regard, they reiterated the Movement’s belief that the negotiations on international trade at the WTO should:

 Facilitate the integration of developing countries particularly LDCs and small economies into the multilateral trading system and provide assistance in trade related capacity building to developing countries;
 Ensure urgent implementation of Uruguay Round Agreements, in line with the proposals put forward by the developing countries, especially in areas of export interest to developing countries, including the agricultural, textile and clothing sectors, and decisions taken in favour of LDCs and net-food importing developing countries as provided for in the Marrakech Ministerial Declaration;
 Remove the inequity in the WTO Agreement on Agriculture including approval of the development box as prepared by the developing countries;
 Operationalise the commitments contained in the Doha Declaration towards special and differential treatment provisions for developing countries including the adoption of a framework agreement on Special and Differential treatment for developing countries;
 Ensure preservation, of existing preferential trade arrangements, consistent with the WTO multilateral trading regime, with developed countries from which a significant number of developing and LDCs and Small Islands Developing States benefit;
 Ensure that the preferences granted by developed countries under their GSP schemes will be based on the principles of non-discrimination and non-reciprocity and be continually expanded to cover products that correspond to the actual and potential export supply capabilities of developing countries;
 Ensure the implementation of the decision on the two new Working Groups on Trade, Debt and Finance and Trade and Transfer of Technology as contained in the Doha Ministerial Declaration;
 Ensure that ongoing negotiations on trade in services provide the most sustainable and effective conditions for service sectors where developing countries have comparative advantages, and further ensure that these negotiations facilitate the increased participation of developing countries in global trade in services sector, as well as the effective liberalisation of the movement of natural persons;
 Ensure that the package of implementation issues which was put forward in Doha by the developing countries to rectify the imbalance of the past is immediately acted upon;
 Remove tariff peaks and tariff escalation in the non-agricultural tariff negotiations. These tariff peaks and tariff escalation discriminate directly against developing countries’ exports and impede the diversification of developing countries supply side and must be eliminated. These negotiations shall fully take into account the principle of special and differential treatment for developing countries;
 Review the TRIMs and TRIPS Agreements from a developmental dimension with a view to neutralise the negative aspects of these agreements on the development of the developing countries and stressed the importance of implementing, and interpreting the TRIPS Agreement in a manner supportive of public health and access to medicines for all;

240. The Heads of State or Government were particularly concerned that major trading countries have yet again sought to place the question of Special and Differential Treatment for developing countries at a level less than at par with the other aspects of the negotiations. They called for immediate negotiations on the proposed Framework Agreement on Special and Differential Treatment for developing countries during the course of the present negotiations and reaffirmed that special and differential treatment applies to all developing countries.

241. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the importance of facilitating the relocation of production and other productive capacities to developing countries, inter alia, the restructuring of grandfather industries in developed countries in order to facilitate the implementation of measures necessary for enhancing exports and other related productive capacities.

242. The Heads of State or Government stressed that developing countries and LDCs’ WTO accession process should be accelerated, taking fully into account their different stages of development and the basic principles of special and differential treatment. They also emphasised the need to facilitate the accession of developing countries, particularly LDCs, into the WTO with a more streamlined and non-discriminatory process of accession, as reflected in the Zanzibar Ministerial Declaration of the LDCs.

243. The Heads of State or Government underscored the need for developed countries to fully and immediately implement the provisions for special and differential treatment for the products and services exported by developing countries, and for the safeguarding and strengthening of the system of trade preferences.

244. The Heads of State or Government emphasised that the imbalance and asymmetries that have been apparent in the course of implementation of the WTO Agreements be urgently addressed. These include the lack of full and faithful implementation of existing obligations by developed countries in the area of textiles and agriculture, lack of market access for products of special interest to developing countries, non-realisation of the provisions for special and differential treatment, and the curtailment of developing countries’ ability to pursue policy instruments that promote development.

245. In this regard, the Heads of State or Government reiterated the need for developed countries to grant LDCs duty-free market access and welcomed the European Union’s “Everything-but-Arms” initiative and the commitment undertaken by the Third United Nations Conference on LDCs to expedite the work towards duty-free and quota-free access for all products originating from LDCs in markets of developed countries.

246. The Heads of State or Government also reiterated the important role that United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has to play in helping developing countries to integrate into the world economy in areas of special interest such as investment, enterprise development and technology, trade in goods and services, in particular commodities, and services infrastructure for development and trade efficiency. In this regard, they called for taking concrete steps to strengthen UNCTAD and its capacity to assist developing countries in trade and development-related issues, including through the provision of new and additional resources, and in the implementation of the Doha work programme. They reiterated also the important role that UNCTAD has to play in helping developing countries to forge a positive agenda for present and future negotiations. In this connection, they welcomed the establishment, in collaboration with UNCTAD of the International Institute for Trade and Development (IITD) in Bangkok, Thailand in May 2002 to help developing countries to navigate increasingly complex regional and international economic arrangements resulting from globalisation and liberalisation processes, in particular to enhance the capacity of trade negotiations of developing countries to participate effectively in the ongoing WTO negotiations.

247. The Heads of State or Government stressed the importance for developing countries to undertake a co-ordinated effort in order to guarantee that their interest be properly reflected in the negotiation process of UNCTAD XIII.

248. The Heads of State or Government emphasised that the delivery of technical assistance by the WTO and other trade related organizations should be tailored to the needs of developing and least developed WTO Member Countries, as well as acceding countries, in adjusting to WTO rules, implementing WTO agreements and participating in WTO negotiations, and that in this regard, while addressing supply side constraints, priority should be accorded to capacity building, infrastructure development and human resource development.

249. The Heads of State or Government expressed deep concern about the negative impact of the declining trend of most commodity prices on commodity dependent developing countries and underlined the need for building the capacity of these countries to diversify exports through, inter alia, financial and technical assistance, international assistance for economic diversification and sustainable resource management, and addressing structural changes in international commodity markets, instability of commodity prices and declining terms of trade as well as strengthening the activities of Common Fund for Commodities and UNCTAD to support commodity dependent developing countries.

Financial, Investment and Monetary Issues

250. In view of the continued effect of recent financial and economic crises that have adversely affected a number of developing countries, the Heads of State or Government again underlined the need for effective surveillance and early warning systems to protect developing countries against the excessive volatility of short-term capital flows and international speculation. Whilst reiterating the call for an increase in Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) into developing countries, it is essential to ensure the transparency of capital flows with a view to strengthening the early warning system and improving crisis management to mitigate the possible adverse impact of financial crises in the future. The international financial system should create and enhance mechanisms, including surveillance mechanisms, technical assistance and adequate information facilities, so as to prevent such crises and neutralise their adverse impact and recommend ways to limit the potential dangers of speculative capital flows. In this regard, they called for more effective regulation of the operation of financial institutions and for greater transparency in the way financial markets operate, including trade in currencies. They again called upon the developed countries to increase their financial contribution to the international financial institutions and to enhance the ability of the Bretton Woods Institutions to respond to crisis. The increasing level of private and non-transparent international financial flows calls for the reform of the international financial architecture, as one of the key elements towards a truly democratic and fair international financial system. There is an urgent need to address systemic concerns such as the need to ensure the effective and full participation of the developing countries in the norm setting and decision-making processes of the financial and monetary system.

251. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s call for the reform of the Bretton Woods Institutions, in order to guarantee democracy and transparency in the decision-making process in these institutions. In this regard, they reiterated the need for a stable, adequately financed international financial system that assists developing economies to respond adequately to the challenges of development.

252. The Heads of State or Government also urged the developing countries to strengthen their financial co-operation. In this connection, they welcomed the proposal of the member countries of the Asia Co-operation Dialogue to launch the Asian Bond as an example of ECDC to enhance the financial self-reliance of developing countries.

253. The Heads of State or Government again called on the Bretton Woods Institutions to refrain from any unfair practices against the developing countries and not to link their credit facilities with any conditionalities particularly on security and political considerations. They emphasised that these institutions should resist efforts by certain countries to use such conditionalities to promote their narrow interests. These institutions should extend their maximum help to developing countries facing serious liquidity problems.

254. The Heads of State or Government strongly urged the international community through the United Nations to strengthen international tax co-operation through enhanced dialogue with national tax authorities and co-ordination of the work of the concerned international bodies and relevant regional organizations, giving special attention to the needs of developing countries.

Foreign Direct Investment

255. The Heads of State or Government, noting that FDI is crucial for the economies of Members of the Non-Aligned Movement, reiterated the importance of promoting and abiding by the principles of good corporate governance by both the foreign investors and host governments.

256. The Heads of State or Government underscored the fact that just as there are obligations by host governments to protect foreign investment, there should be corresponding obligations by foreign investors to make decisions that take into account the interest of host countries and abide by the laws and regulations of those countries.

257. The Heads of State or Government again urged developed countries to refrain from protectionist tendencies against FDI outflows to developing countries, in the interest of new growth opportunities.

External Debt

258. The Heads of State or Government noted with concern the persistence of the external debt problem and its unfortunate consequences in the countries of the Movement, where the vicious cycle of debt and underdevelopment has become further entrenched. They expressed their alarm at the burden of debt payments which has become heavier in many countries of the South. They emphasised the need for the durable solution of the external debt problems of developing countries. They therefore urged the intensification of measures on debt relief to promote development and investments in accordance with the priorities and needs of developing countries.

259. The Heads of State or Government acknowledged the progress made with the Enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor Country (HIPC) debt initiative while recognising that significant challenges remain to ensure that those countries achieve a lasting exit from unsustainable debt.

260. While recognising the advances made on measures towards the relief of external debt of developing countries, the Heads of State or Government again underlined the need to strengthen and expand these measures for the benefit of all developing countries. They also called for further flexibility in the eligibility criteria of the enhanced HIPC debt initiative in order for it to be able to provide faster, broader and deeper debt relief. They further stressed the need to keep the computation of debt sustainability under review in order to be able to compensate for changing circumstances at the national and international levels.

261. The Heads of State or Government noted with serious concern that over the past years a number of financial crises caused the amount of debt servicing in many countries to surpass the sustainability level due, inter alia, to the increased external debt burden of developing countries. In the above context, they proposed the following as concrete steps towards addressing the debt problem:

 Observing a temporary standstill on debt repayment from low income countries which experience excessive financial and economic constraint with a view to bring immediate relief to the affected countries;
 Refinancing of existing debt on concessional term using new financial resources through new financial assistance and credit on concessional terms to assist the low and middle-income debtor countries to meet their debt servicing obligations on a regular basis;
 Full and effective implementation of the enhanced HIPC Initiative, which should be fully financed through renewed additional resources, taking into consideration measures to address any fundamental changes in the economic circumstances of those developing countries with unsustainable debt burden caused by natural catastrophes, severe terms-of-trade shocks or affected by conflict, taking into account initiatives that have been undertaken to reduce outstanding indebtedness;
 Bringing international debtors and creditors together in relevant international forums to restructure unsustainable debt in a timely and efficient manner;
 Acknowledging the problems of debt sustainability of some non-HIPC LDCs, in particular those facing exceptional circumstances;
 Reducing the unsustainable debt burden of developing countries through such actions as debt relief and debt cancellation and other innovative mechanisms geared comprehensively to address their debt problems;
 Exploring innovative mechanisms to comprehensively address the debt problems of developing countries, including middle-income countries. Such mechanisms should include debt-for-sustainable-development swap arrangements;
 Assisting developing countries in establishing debt tracking mechanisms and strengthen technical assistance for external debt management and debt tracking;
 Ensuring that resources provided for debt relief do not detract from ODA resources intended to be available for developing countries and that the debt relief arrangements should avoid imposing any unfair burden on other developing countries;
 Establishing a clear link between debt relief and the capacity of the countries concerned to achieve the Millennium Development Goals;
 Address the issues of HIPC to HIPC debt and creditor litigation;
 Streamline conditions and retain more realistic projections and assumptions associated with debt relief; and
 Refocusing debt relief on debt servicing rather than debt stocks.

262. The Heads of State or Government also noted with concern that a growing number of highly indebted low and middle-income developing countries and LDCs were facing difficulties in meeting their external debt servicing obligations. In this regard, they stressed the need to consider a comprehensive solution to the debt problems of developing countries as an important factor among others in their poverty reduction and sustained economic growth so that they can join the world economy. They also called for exploring innovative sovereign debt restructuring mechanisms, including proposals to allow debtors and creditors to achieve agreements and solutions to the problem of external debt.

Sustainable Development

263. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the Non-Aligned Movement’s commitment to pursue the goals of sustainable development in an integrated manner as enshrined in Agenda 21 and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation in accordance with the principle of common but differentiated responsibility. They expressed the Movement’s deep disappointment with the lack of progress made in the implementation of Agenda 21 and reiterated the Non-Aligned Movement’s call to developed countries to fulfil their international commitments to provide new and additional financial resources; technical assistance and transfer of environmentally sound technology on concessional, preferential and non-commercial terms, including time bound commitments to developing countries.

264. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the adoption of the Johannesburg Declaration and its Plan of Implementation during the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) held in Johannesburg, South Africa from 26 August - 4 September 2002. In this regard, they emphasised the need to reinvigorate the commitment of the international community at the highest political level to achieve the goals of sustainable development, as well as, the need for a strengthened North-South partnership resulting in a higher level of international solidarity for the accelerated implementation of Agenda 21 and the promotion of sustainable development. They reiterated that the Plan, which further builds on the achievements made since United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) must be accompanied with the necessary financial, technological and technical support to developing countries to ensure its effective implementation based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities.

265. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the Non-Aligned Movement’s principled position that economic growth, poverty eradication and the right to development constitute a priority and a fundamental right of countries. They reiterated the need to promote the integration of the three pillars of sustainable development: economic development; social development; and environmental protection, as interdependent and mutually reinforcing pillars. They further emphasized that poverty eradication, changing unsustainable patterns of production and consumption and protecting and managing the natural resource base of economic and social development are overarching objectives of, and essential requirements for achieving sustainable development.

266. The Heads of State and Government emphasised that the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) should continue to function as the high-level body on sustainable development within the United Nations system and serve as a forum for consideration of issues related to the implementation of the three pillars of sustainable development, and in this context called for a strengthened CSD.

267. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Non-Aligned Movement’s full support for United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and called for its strengthening as a leading global environmental authority that sets the global environmental agenda, that promotes the coherent implementation of the environmental dimension of sustainable development within the United Nations system and that serves as an authoritative advocate for the global environment, as stipulated in the Nairobi Declaration.

268. The Heads of State or Government again stressed the need for UNEP and UN HABITAT to increase their co-operation and co-ordination, within the framework of their respective mandates and separate programmatic and organisational identities, as well as their separate Executive Directors. They reiterated that capacity-building and technical assistance must remain important components of the work programmes of both UNEP and UN HABITAT.

269. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed their support for United Nations General Assembly Resolutions 54/225, 55/203 and 57/261 on promoting an integrated management approach to the Caribbean Sea in the context of sustainable development. They encouraged the international community to assist Caribbean countries and their regional organisations in their efforts to ensure the protection of the Caribbean sea from illegal or accidental release of highly radioactive and other hazardous materials, as well as from degradation caused by pollution from ships in particular through the illegal release of oil and other harmful substances, in violation of relevant international rules and standards, and also from land-based pollution.

270. The Heads of State or Government, noting the celebration of the 20th Anniversary of the signing of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) at Montego Bay, Jamaica, on 10 December 1982, recognised the important contributions made by the two institutions that have evolved from the UNCLOS Accord:

 The International Seabed Authority – the standard bearer of the concept of the oceans as the Common Heritage of Mankind; and
 The International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea – an evolving repository and advocate of international maritime jurisprudence.

They pledged their active participation in the work of these institutions as well as in the related Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf to safeguard the interests of developing countries.

271. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s concern over the increasing number and scale of natural disasters including the extreme weather events, earthquakes and technological catastrophes, which have resulted in immense loss of life and long-term negative social, economic and environmental consequences for vulnerable societies world-wide, in particular in developing countries. In this regard, they reiterated their full support for United Nations General Assembly Resolutions 54/219, 56/195 and 57/256 and their call on States and relevant intergovernmental bodies to ensure that the Yokohama Strategy for a safer world is translated into concrete disaster reduction programmes and activities.

272. The Heads of State or Government again emphasised the fundamental principle of the sovereignty of peoples under foreign occupation over their natural resources. In this regard, they expressed their concern about the activities of those foreign economic, financial, and other interests that exploit the natural and human resources of the Non-Self-Governing Territories to the detriment of the interests of the inhabitants of those Territories and deprive them of their right to control the wealth of their countries. They condemned those activities and in this regard reiterated that the exploitation and plundering of the marine and other natural resources of colonial and Non-Self-Governing Territories by foreign economic interests in violation of the United Nations Charter and the relevant resolutions of the United Nations is a threat to the integrity and prosperity of those territories.

273. The Heads of State or Government stressed that new and additional financial resources to developing countries have not been provided, that the transfer of environmentally sound technologies on favourable, concessional and preferential terms has not been realised, and that the developed countries have not assumed and performed practical commitment to the principle of common but differentiated responsibility.

274. The Heads of State or Government stressed the urgent need for the developed countries to make available the increased commitments in official development assistance announced by several developed countries at the International Conference on Financing for Development. They also urged the developed countries that have not done so to make concrete efforts towards the implementation of the target of 0.7% of GNP as official development assistance to the developing countries. In this respect, the Heads of State or Government recognised the importance of the proposed creation of the International Humanitarian Fund taking into account of the Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development which called for additional measures to ensure that available resources are used to the benefit of humanity. They also underscored the need to encourage exploring innovative mechanism to comprehensively address the debt problems of the middle-income developing countries through among others debt-for-sustainable development-swap and proposal to use special drawing rights allocations for development purposes.

275. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the successful and substantial third replenishment of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the decision of the Second Assembly of the GEF held in Beijing, China, from 16 – 18 October 2002, particularly in designating the land degradation, desertification and deforestation as a focal area of GEF to receive GEF support for the successful implementation of the United Nations Convention on Combating Desertification (UNCCD). They further reiterated the Movement’s call for simplifying and expediting the process for the approval and the execution of projects. They also welcomed the decision of the GEF Assembly to declare GEF as a financial mechanism for the UNCCD.

276. The Heads of State or Government once again called for the democratisation of the GEF, for transparency in its decision-making processes and for co-ordination between the implementing agencies of the GEF to be strengthened. They reiterated the Movement’s commitment to continue reinforcing the developing countries’ joint participation in the GEF to safeguard their common interests, both in the orientation of its policies as well as in the financial allocation of resources.

277. The Heads of State or Government expressed concern over the continuous deterioration and degradation of the unique ecosystem of the Dead Sea and emphasized the importance of working progressively towards reversing this environmental catastrophe. They drew the attention of the international community to the need for international action to protect the Dead Sea and prevent any further environmental degradation of its ecosystem through concessional grants.

278. The Heads of State or Government reiterated their support for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety by the Conference of Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). They again extended their invitation to all Governments to consider taking the necessary steps to make possible the entry into force of this important international instrument as soon as possible, and help developing countries through capacity-building and other co-operation mechanisms in the relevant areas of the Protocol.

279. The Heads of States or Government welcomed the generous offer by the Government of Malaysia to host the Seventh Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the CBD and the Fourth Meeting of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Cartagena Protocol, to be held in Kuala Lumpur in 2004.

280. The Heads of State or Government called for the early elaboration of an international legal regime, within the framework of the CBD, to promote and safeguard the fair and equitable sharing of benefit arising out of the utilization of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge. The Movement will work to ensure that proprietary patents are developed only after obtaining the prior informed consent of the developing countries concerned, after reaching agreement on benefit sharing, to ensure a flow back on benefits from patentees to original developers. They also underscored that the rules and habits of local communities must be respected and protected. They further agreed that the management and conservation of biodiversity is essential for sustainable development, especially in the most important areas of national economies such as forests, agriculture, fishing, wildlife management, health, industry and tourism. They emphasised that the achievement by 2010 of a significant reduction in the current loss of biological diversity as agreed in the Johannesburg Summit, will require the provision of new and additional financial and technical resources to developing countries.

281. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the generous offer by the Government of Chile to host the First Global Forum on Biotechnology, to be held in Concepcion, from 9 - 12 December 2003.

282. The Heads of State or Government called for the implementation of the work programme arising from the Jakarta Mandate on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversity including through the urgent mobilization of financial resources and technological assistance and the development of institutional capacity in developing countries.

283. The Heads of State and Government reiterated the importance of the decision of the Fourth World Trade Organization Ministerial Meeting to examine, through the World Trade Organization Council on TRIPS, the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD, as well as the protection of traditional knowledge and folklore and other relevant new developments by members. In this regard, they stressed on the need to take fully into account the development dimension.

284. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the generous offer by the Government of Cuba to host the Sixth Session of the Conference of the Parties to UNCCD to be held in Havana, from 25 August – 5 September 2003.

285. The Heads of State or Government stressed the need to strengthen the UNCCD as a global sustainable development convention and called for the provision of adequate and predictable financial resources, transfer of technology, and capacity building, for its effective implementation, particularly in Africa, in order to restore land for agriculture to address poverty resulting from land degradation.

286. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the successful holding of the 12th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) in Santiago, Chile from 4-15 November 2002.

287. The Heads of State or Government recalled the legally binding commitments for the parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to reduce their emission of Greenhouse Gases (GHG) as contained in Annex B of the Kyoto Protocol. They reiterated their call on the developed countries to undertake necessary and immediate steps to implement these commitments particularly through domestic action. They also called on developed countries to implement the new funding provisions adopted by the VI Session (Part II) of the Conference of the Parties (COP) in Bonn, July 2001. They urged the international community to make every effort to ensure the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol, in accordance with the Millennium Declaration. They further called on States that have not already ratified the Kyoto Protocol to do it in a timely manner to ensure its entry into force without further delay.

288. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the Marrakech Declaration and the Marrakech Accord adopted at the Seventh Conference of the Parties of the Climate Change Convention held in Marrakech in November 2001. They also welcomed the Delhi Ministerial Declaration on Climate Change and Sustainable Development adopted at the Eighth Conference of the Parties held in India in October/November 2002, which emphasized that taking into account the common but differentiated responsibilities, all parties should continue to advance the implementation of their commitments under the UNFCCC. They further welcomed the call in the Delhi Ministerial Declaration for the provision of financial resources and transfer of technology to developing countries through concrete projects and capacity building.

289. The Heads of State or Government reiterated their categorical rejection of all attempts by some developed countries to link their ratifications of the Kyoto Protocol with the question of participation by developing countries in the reduction of GHG emissions, taking into account that the creation of a clean development mechanism implies the possibility for industrialised countries to reduce significantly the cost of emissions reductions within their own boundaries.

290. The Heads of State or Government also urged developed countries to implement effective measures, to meet their commitments through domestic action and to ensure that the rules, principles and modalities of the Kyoto mechanisms, namely emission trading, joint implementation and clean development mechanisms are adhered to once the Kyoto Protocol comes into force. They reiterated that reduction under the Clean Development Mechanisms and other mechanisms under the Kyoto Protocol must be seen as supplementary to domestic action undertaken by developed countries.

291. The Heads of State or Government acknowledged that the depletion of the ozone layer poses a serious threat to the whole world. They once again urged Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer to comply with its requirements and amendments and to phase out the production and consumption of regulated ozone depleting substances (ODSs) in accordance with the phase out schedules agreed to by countries in terms of the Protocol. They also urged Parties to the Protocol to provide affordable, accessible, cost-effective, safe and environmentally sound alternatives to ozone depleting substances before 2010 in order to assist those countries in complying with the phase-out schedule under the Protocol.

Food Security

292. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the Movement’s view that the right to food is a fundamental human right and its promotion and implementation constitute a moral imperative for the international community. They emphatically rejected the use of food as an instrument of economic or political pressure.

293. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s concern over the large number of people, in particular children who suffer from hunger and malnutrition. They again emphasised the need to take urgent action to meet the commitments for achieving food security for present and future generations, taking full account of the priorities and objectives set out in the World Food Summit of 1996. In this regard, they welcomed the adoption of the Declaration of the World Food Summit: five years later, entitled International Alliance Against Hunger adopted in June 2002 which affirmed the global commitment of reducing by half the number of undernourished by the year 2015.

294. The Heads of State or Government noted that the issues of implementation of the Uruguay Round Agreement concerning agriculture remain marginalised in negotiations at the WTO. They expressed disappointment that the Doha Declaration has only led to best endeavour clauses, instead of an agreement on resolution of the implementation issues concerning liberalisation of agricultural trade. They expressed deep concern over the continuation of negative impact of the Agreement on Agriculture, which is impeding the realisation of the right to development and the right to food.

295. The Heads of State or Government also noted that the developed countries were providing exorbitant subsidies, more than US$1 billion a day, to protect their agricultural sector, which is six times the amount of their aid to the developing countries and in addition to depriving the developing countries’ farmers from markets to sell their products.

296. The Heads of State or Government noted with deep appreciation the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on Globalisation and its Impact on the Full Enjoyment of Human Rights, presented to the 58th session of the Commission on Human Rights, in which the High Commissioner had noted the negative impact of the Agreement on Agriculture on Food Security, on the effective realisation of the Right to Development and the Right to Health. They encouraged the High Commissioner and his office to continue with his endeavours in this regard. They also requested the High Commissioner to bring the report to the attention of the relevant international organisation especially the WTO.

Science and Technology

297. The Heads of State or Government expressed the Movement’s deep concern over the increasing disparity in science and technology capacities between rich and poor nations posing a serious impediment to the development of developing countries. In this context, they stressed that the uneven distribution of new information and communication technology capacities is further exacerbating the divide between rich and poor nations. In this regard, they again urged developed countries to facilitate the transfer of technologies to developing countries without conditionalities on preferential, non-commercial and concessional terms. Cognisant of the enormous potential of science and technology to accelerate economic and social development, the Non-Aligned Movement called for a strengthening of the United Nations Commission on Science and Technology for Development to enable it to be more effective in supporting and assisting the developing countries in their national efforts to enhance research and development, particularly in the fields of health, education and agriculture.

298. The Heads of State or Government also emphasised the urgent necessity for the international community to address the terms on which technology is made available to developing countries. They stressed the need for the urgent operationalisation of commitments to transfer technology to developing countries on concessional, preferential and favourable terms. They also called for the transfer of environmentally sound technologies on affordable terms where such technologies and production methods have been mandated under national laws and international regulations.

Information and Communication

299. The Heads of State or Government emphasised that there is an urgent need for the international community to intensify its efforts to address the development of information and communication technology as a means of redressing the continued imbalances and inequalities between developed and developing countries in the field of information and communication and the ever increasing digital divide.

300. The Heads of State or Government emphasised the importance of information and communication technologies for development, and welcomed recommendations contained in the ECOSOC 2000 Ministerial Declaration in that regard. They also welcomed the successful holding of the General Assembly Meeting on Information and Communication Technologies and Development on 17 – 18 June 2002.

301. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the decision of the United Nations General Assembly at its Fifty-Sixth and Fifty-Seventh sessions to organise a Summit on World Information Society (Geneva in 2003 and Tunis in 2005). They welcomed the broad support the Summit had received and the sense of common purpose and mobilization it created within the international community. They stressed the importance of an active and dynamic participation in the Summit in order to ensure its success. They reiterated their support for the unity of the two phases of the Summit and of its preparatory process, which entails the necessity of an integrated and comprehensive approach to the two phases of the Summit combining complementarities, interdependence and synergies between the two phases. They stressed the importance of carrying out in earnest the preparatory process of the Summit, giving equal importance to both parts of it. In this context, they emphasised the importance of the development dimension of the WSIS process and urged the developed countries to co-operate in order to facilitate the adoption of a framework and a comprehensive Plan of Action in this field aimed at allowing better access to and use of information technology, thus helping to bridge the digital divide between developed and developing countries.

302. The Heads of State or Government again urged Member States to accelerate the process of setting up the New International Information Centres of the Non-Aligned Movement.

303. The Heads of State or Government reiterated their concern over the undisguised attempts of some countries to eliminate the concept of a new equitable and just world information and communication order and stressed that the establishment of a new world information and communication order should aim at ensuring impartiality, freedom, fairness, effectiveness, and balance in the information flow.

South-South Co-operation

304. The Heads of State or Government remained committed to further strengthening South-South Co-operation. In this context, they emphasised the importance of having effective strategies and mechanisms, for promoting accelerated economic growth and development and self-reliance, giving a greater dynamism to the world economy, and promoting the restructuring of the international economic relations. Developing countries should accelerate the establishment of new South-South relations by broadening and intensifying South-South Co-operation including through enhanced regional and sub-regional co-operation, pooling of resources as well as strengthening the South’s effectiveness in multilateral processes and organisations. Drawing on the successes and experiences in South-South Co-operation so far, strategies should be orchestrated for South-South Co-operation suited to new situations and continue to initiate new projects, including those in social and economic fields in order to ensure effective participation in the international economy.

305. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the outcome of the South Summit, held in Havana, 10 - 14 April 2000, in particular the decisions adopted on strengthening of co-ordination and co-operation between the Non-Aligned Movement and the Group of 77 through the Joint Co-ordinating Committee (JCC) in the promotion and defence of the common interest of the developing countries. They underlined the importance of the implementation of the outcome of the South Summit and decided to take practical steps, especially in the field of South-South Co-operation. They also supported the ongoing implementation follow-up of the Havana outcome including the Tenth Session of the Intergovernmental Follow-up and Coordination Committee (from 18 – 22 August 2001, in Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran) and called for the implementation of the provisions of the Tehran Consensus.

306. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the generous offer by the Kingdom of Morocco to host the High-Level Conference on South-South Co-operation to be held in December 2003 in accordance with the decision of the Havana Summit.

307. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the activities of the NAM Centre for South-South Technical Co-operation (NAM CSSTC) which complement the ongoing efforts of developing countries to further promote international economic co-operation as well as strengthening their national and collective self-reliance through technical co-operation. The Heads of State or Government agreed that the Centre should be governed by a Governing Council to be set up in due course. In further promoting and increasing South-South Co-operation, the Heads of State or Government called upon NAM member countries, governmental and non-governmental organisation, international organisations, individuals and private corporations to render support and participate actively in the work program of the NAM CSSTC.

308. The Heads of State or Government also welcomed the contribution by the South Centre in Geneva in providing advice, guidance and support, including through policy papers and studies on various topics in the interest of developing countries. The Heads of State or Government encouraged further contribution of the Centre to the strengthening of the capacity of developing countries in participating in substantive negotiations on issues critical to the developing countries.

309. The Heads of State or Government recognised the role of the Centre for Science and Technology for NAM in capacity building and in providing a forum for the developing countries to bring them to the frontiers of science through networking, sharing knowledge and experiences, pooling of resources and collective self-reliance. They strongly urged all NAM countries to reinforce the Centre by participating and ensuring adequate financing for its activities.

310. The Heads of State or Government recognised the significant role of economic and technical co-operation between developing countries and countries with economies in transition in promoting implementation of development programmes and projects.

311. The Heads of State or Government emphasised that developing countries should coordinate their priorities and negotiating strategies to promote their common interests of ensuring that multilateral trade negotiations take fully into account the needs of developing countries so that trade policies serve the objective of development and also provide enhance market access to developing countries.

312. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the initiative by Malaysia to organise the NAM Business Forum on South-South Co-operation on 23 - 24 February 2003 in Kuala Lumpur, in conjunction with the XIII NAM Summit, which is aimed at strengthening business and economic co-operation among NAM member countries. They expressed the hope that the Business Forum will become a regular feature of future NAM Summits.

Critical Economic Situation in Africa

313. The Heads of State or Government acknowledged that the socio-economic situation in Africa remains precarious, despite the critical role played by Africa and the African people in world economy, over centuries, and despite the many efforts made by African countries, individually and collectively, to lay a solid foundation for Africa's development. In the context of globalisation and liberalisation, they remained concerned that the decline in ODA and other financial flows to Africa will increase the marginalisation of the continent in the global economy. In addition, they were also deeply concerned that FDI flows to Africa still account for a mere 2% of the total FDI flows to developing countries, and that its share in global trade accounts for less than 1%. In this respect, they continued to call for the reversal of this negative trend. Furthermore, it is recognised that FDI can only complement concessional finance and not replace it.

314. The Heads of State or Government commended the adoption of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) as representing the collective determination and commitment of African governments and people to take control over their future development and assume their pressing duty to fight poverty by placing their countries on the path of sustainable economic and social development. They also welcomed the endorsement of this initiative by the United Nations General Assembly, United Nations Economic and Social Council, the United Nations Secretary General as well as the support for the initiative by the Group of Eight Industrialised Countries and the EU. They underlined the importance of these steps in achieving one of the most important goals of the NEPAD, namely the establishment of a new relationship based on partnership and mutual responsibility and accountability between Africa and the international community to overcome the Continent’s marginalisation. In this regard, they expressed the Non-Aligned Movement’s sincere endorsement of, and support for the implementation of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development.

315. The Heads of State or Government shared the approach to development as embedded in NEPAD and which is based on a thorough evaluation of past experience, in particular the realisation that Africa’s economic growth and sustainable development cannot be achieved through an approach solely or predominantly based on the aid-and-credit pattern, which has failed. Therefore, they supported the new comprehensive development approach which calls for a substantive new partnership including with the international and African private sectors, as well as with bilateral and multilateral financial and technical partners, together with the African civil society and people as a whole.

Least Developed Countries

316. The Heads of State or Government remained deeply concerned over the continuing declining rate of economic growth of the LDCs as a group, with no sign of change in this trend, in spite of the broad structural and economic reform measures undertaken by them. The problems of the shrinking aid levels and FDI, the heavy debt burden, lack of market access, supply side constraints and a decline in commodity prices hinder the growth of LDCs. They noted that whilst the debt burden for the LDCs continues to increase considerably, the flow of FDI remains insignificant.

317. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the Third United Nations Conference on Least Developed Countries held in Brussels in 2001 and the adoption of a Plan of Action, which once again commits countries to address the urgent needs of LDCs as well as to increase their assistance to prevent the further marginalisation of LDCs. They called on all countries to ensure the implementation of these commitments according to the targets set in the Plan of Action.

318. The Heads of State or Government stressed the urgent need for the developed countries to achieve the target of 0.7% of GNP as official development assistance to developing countries and effectively implement their commitment on such assistance to LDCs as contained in paragraph 83 in the Programme of Action for the LDCs for the Decade of 2001 – 2010.

Landlocked Developing Countries

319. Noting the additional costs incurred by land-locked developing countries in developing their import and export markets, the Heads of State or Government reiterated their call on the international community to give special attention and support to the special development problems and needs of these countries, particularly through technical co-operation with, and financial assistance by developed countries and multilateral financial institutions, to enable these countries to effectively participate in a rapidly globalising world economy.

320. The Heads of State or Government again noted that transit developing countries face serious economic problems and that their efforts at developing a viable transit infrastructure also need financial and technical assistance from the international community. They also noted that in some cases regional integration and co-operation efforts have also provided additional solutions to the specific problems confronting landlocked developing countries.

321. In this context, the Heads of State or Government welcomed the United Nations General Assembly decision to convene an International Ministerial Conference of Landlocked Developing Countries, Transit Developing Countries and Representatives of International Financial and Development Institutions on Transit Transport Co-operation at Almaty, on 28 – 29 August 2003 and invited the organisations and bodies of the United Nations system, including the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development and the regional commissions, the international financial institutions, in particular the World Bank, and other relevant regional and international organisations and the international community to provide the necessary substantive, financial and technical support to the preparatory process and organisation of the Conference and to participate actively therein.

Small Island Developing States

322. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s support for the implementation of the Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island States and the Millennium Declaration in particular paragraph 17, which recognise the need to address the special concerns of Small Island Developing States (SIDS).

323. While reaffirming the Non-Aligned Movement’s full support for the system-wide Implementation of the Programme of Action (POA) for the Sustainable Development of SIDS, the Heads of State or Government recognised the efforts made by SIDS to implement the Programme of Action. In this regard, they noted with concern that the support of the international community has been affected by financial and other resource constraints and by global economic and environmental factors.

324. The Heads of State or Government emphasised the need for the provision of adequate, predictable, new and additional resources, transfer of environmentally sound technologies on concessional and preferential terms, the establishment of a globally sustainable energy programme by 2004, and the promotion of non-discriminatory, non-reciprocal, stable and predictable trading arrangements on which most of these countries depend. They therefore urged all countries, in particular developed countries, to fulfil the commitments contained in the POA of the SIDS.

325. The Heads of State or Government supported the decision to convene an international meeting in 2004, for the comprehensive review of the POA for the sustainable development of SIDS in accordance with the decision of the Twenty Second Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly and General Assembly resolution 57/262. In this regard, they urged the developed countries to provide financial and technical support for the organization of this meeting and the implementation of its outcome.

326. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the generous offer by the Government of Mauritius to host the International Meeting on SIDS to be held in Mauritius in 2004.

CHAPTER IV: SOCIAL ISSUES

Social Development

327. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s commitment to the accelerated implementation and follow-up to the Copenhagen Declaration and Program of Action as well as its full support to the outcome of its five-year review and appraisal as contained in “Further Initiatives” for Social Development adopted by the 24th Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly. They also reiterated their request to the international community to fulfil its commitment and fully co-operate in the implementation of the goals of the Copenhagen Declaration and Program of Action as well as the Special Session. The international community must maintain the momentum generated by the Social Summit geared at the eradication of poverty, the generation of full employment, and promotion and achievement of social integration and the attainment of broad social development, while taking action to mitigate those aspects of globalisation, which have an adverse impact on developing economies. The strengthening and sustaining of an enabling environment for social development, implementation of the POA and its follow-up is necessary.

328. The Heads of State or Government recognised that the average life expectancy would increase in the 21st Century and that population ageing would become a major social and economic challenge, particularly for developing countries. In this regard, they welcomed the Declaration and International Plan of Action on Ageing adopted at the Second World Assembly on Ageing held from 8 – 12 April 2002, at Madrid, Spain, which provides a practical tool to assist policy makers to focus on the key priorities associated with individual and population ageing and affirm their willingness to take appropriate measures to implement the commitments contained in the POA.

329. The Heads of State or Government emphasised that the eradication of poverty through sustained and accelerated economic growth and the empowerment of their people through education remains the overriding priority for developing countries. In this context, they again emphasised the need for a supportive international environment to address long-term problems of poverty, under-development, marginalisation, social exclusion, insecurity and instability, and reaffirmed the need to make the right to development a reality for everyone. In this regard, they expressed concern over the slow progress in the realisation of the development goals and objectives of the developing countries and stressed the importance of implementing the international commitments contained in the outcomes of all the major United Nations summits and conferences within their agreed targets and timeframes.

330. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the adoption by the United Nations General Assembly during its Fifty-Seventh Session of Resolution 57/265 endorsing the decision of the World Summit on Sustainable Development to establish the World Solidarity Fund aimed at eradicating poverty and promoting human development across the world on a long-term basis. The decision is a concretisation of the initiative to enhance international solidarity, in the framework of a comprehensive approach with the objective of reducing the gap between developed and developing countries, while reinforcing stability and prosperity in the world. They reiterated their appreciation for the efforts made by all states and the support they lent to the establishment of the Fund. They expressed the hope that all governments would remain mobilised for the operationalisation of the Fund. They also underlined the collective responsibility of the international community, particularly the donor countries, in conformity with United Nations General Assembly Resolution 57/265, for the mobilisation of the financial resources required for the immediate entry into functioning of the World Solidarity Fund so as to allow it to achieve its objectives in a framework of complementarity with other United Nations development bodies.

331. The Heads of State or Government expressed their deep concern over the fact that more than 113 million children had no access to primary education, 880 million adults were illiterate, while gender discrimination continued to permeate education systems. Without accelerated progress towards education for all, national and internationally agreed targets for poverty reduction would be missed, and inequalities between countries and within societies would widen. In this regard, they welcomed the proclamation by the United Nations General Assembly of the United Nations Literacy Decade (2003 – 2013), and reiterated their support and commitment to cooperate in attaining the goals of the decade.

332. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the importance of health as indispensable for sustainable development, and in this regard, they remained deeply concerned that HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and other communicable diseases continue to threaten the achievement of economic and developmental goals of developing countries. They reiterated the Movement’s support for the outcome of the United Nations General Assembly Special Session of HIV/AIDS held from 25 - 27 June 2001. In this regard, they also welcomed the efforts by the United Nations Secretary-General to put the issue of HIV/AIDS on the international agenda by launching a Global AIDS and Health Fund. In addition, they reiterated their appreciation for the pledge by the G8 to this fund as being an important step in fighting the scourge of communicable diseases and to obtain safe and affordable essential medicines. They expressed their deep and continued concern that the people in developing countries are the most affected by HIV/AIDS and emphasised the need for an urgent and sustained global response to the pandemic. In this regard, the Non-Aligned Movement called on all countries to support the Global AIDS Fund and the activities of UNAIDS. In this connection, they welcomed the Kathmandu Declaration adopted by the Ministerial Regional Conference on “Accelerating the Momentum to Fight Against HIV/AIDS in South Asia” held from 3-4 February 2003 in Kathmandu, Nepal, in co-operation with United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and UNAIDS and the convening of the 15th International Conference on HIV/AIDS in July 2004 in Bangkok, Thailand in co-operation with UNAIDS.

333. The Heads of State or Government underscored the central role that health plays in development, by being both a necessary precondition to and an outcome of the overall development process. They noted that the primary determinants of ill-health such as poverty, the lack of education and environmental degradation are also amongst the critical causes of underdevelopment.

334. The Heads of State or Government stressed the urgent need to address the public health problems affecting many developing countries, in particular least developed countries. In this context, they welcomed the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health which clearly recognised that the TRIPS Agreement should be interpreted in a manner supportive of the right to protect public health, in particular, to promote access to medicine for all. They, therefore, expressed serious concern on the attempts by some Member Countries at the WTO to make an extremely restrictive interpretation of the provisions of the Doha Declaration.

International Migration and Development

335. The Heads of State or Government reiterated their call on Member Countries of the Movement and the international community to work towards the effective respect for the human dignity and well being of migrants, international norms and full compliance with relevant international instruments. They again expressed their concern over the prevalence and enforcement of stringent immigration policies in various developed countries, which severely restrict the free movement of people, and breed xenophobia due to the discriminatory manner in which these policies are implemented. They also expressed deep concern over new immigration laws and regulations adopted by some developed countries, which lead to massive deportations of immigrants from Non-Aligned Countries and other developing countries and the violation of their fundamental human rights. They reiterated their call on those developed countries to take fully into account the social and economic effects those deportations would have on the affected developing countries, particularly those facing high debt burdens and high unemployment situations. They encouraged all countries to consider becoming parties to the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families bearing in mind that only one ratification is needed for the entry into force of the Convention. They further encouraged all countries to consider taking the appropriate steps to implement the recommendations as they relate to migrants, contained in the Durban Declaration and Plan of Action of the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance as adopted in September 2001.

Human Rights

336. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the Movement’s long-standing and principled position that all human rights, in particular the Right to Development are universal, inalienable, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated and that the international community must treat all human rights globally in a fair and equal manner, on the same footing and with the same emphasis, and that the significance of national and regional particularities and various historical, cultural and religious backgrounds must be respected. It is the duty of States, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems, to promote and protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms of all peoples, in particular the right to development in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations as well as international human rights law, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, the Declaration on the Right to Development, the provisions of the United Nations Millennium Declaration and the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. Furthermore, they agreed to work towards the transformation and the continuing adaptation of human rights machinery to current and future needs in the promotion and protection of human rights and to contribute significantly to the prevention of their violations. They also stressed the importance of addressing the international human rights agenda and the mandate of the Commission on Human Rights in a fair and balanced manner, taking into account the need for equal treatment of both civil and political, economic, social and cultural rights.

337. The Heads of State or Government emphasised that human rights issues must be addressed within the global context through a constructive, dialogue-based approach, with objectivity, respect for national sovereignty and territorial integrity, non-interference in the internal affairs of the States, impartiality, non-selectivity and transparency as the guiding principles, taking into account the political, historical, social, religious and cultural characteristics of each country. Exploitation of human rights for political purposes, including selective targeting of individual countries for extraneous considerations, which is contrary to the principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter, should be excluded. They reiterated that co-ordination of human rights activities must be carried out by the United Nations organs, bodies, programmes and specialised agencies, whose activities deal with human rights, so as to co-operate in order to strengthen, rationalise and streamline those activities, taking into account the need to avoid duplication.

338. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s view that every State should provide an effective framework for the protection and promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms in accordance with the United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, and other relevant international and regional instruments on human rights, as well as a framework of remedies to redress human rights grievances or violations. In this context, they reaffirmed the important and constructive role to be played by independent national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights and stressed that every effort should be made for the impartiality and objectivity of national institutions and call upon the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to provide greater assistance upon request by interested governments in the establishment and operations of the national institutions. Each national institution has the right to choose its framework in accordance with national legislation taking into account the Paris Principles, among others, on the establishment of national institutions.

339. The Heads of State or Government expressed dismay at and condemnation of gross and systematic violation and situations that constitute serious obstacles to the full enjoyment of all human rights as they continue to occur in different parts of the world. Such violations and obstacles include, torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, involuntary or forced disappearances, arbitrary detentions, all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, apartheid, foreign occupation and alien domination, poverty, hunger and other denials of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, religious intolerance, terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, discrimination against women, violation of children’s rights and lack of the rule of law.

340. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s recommendation to States to ensure that their constitutional and legal systems take into account the respective country conditions, provide effective guarantees for human rights and fundamental freedoms including freedom of speech, association, thought, conscience, religion and belief to all without discrimination. They also reiterated the Movement’s unequivocal condemnation of all violent acts and activities, which infringe upon human rights and fundamental freedoms, democracy, tolerance and respect for diversity.

341. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed that democracy, good governance at both the national and international levels, development and respect for all human rights and fundamental freedoms, in particular the right to development, are interdependent and mutually reinforcing. Adoption, for any cause or consideration, of coercive and unilateral measures, rules and policies against developing countries constitute flagrant violations of the basic rights of their populations. They also reaffirmed that poverty, underdevelopment, marginalisation and instability engender social and economic exclusion and violation of human dignity and human rights. It is essential for States to promote efforts to combat abject poverty as well as foster participation by the poorest members of society in decision-making processes. In this context, they urged developed countries to assist the developing countries, particularly the LDCs, in fulfilling the basic needs of the society determined for the purpose of the right to development and also to concretise their commitment to the realisation of the goals of the NEPAD.

342. The Heads of State or Government recalled General Assembly Resolutions 46/51 entitled “Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism”, 56/160 entitled “Human Rights and Terrorism” and 57/219 entitled “Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms while countering terrorism”, as well as United Nations Commission on Human Rights Resolution 2002/35 adopted in April 2002, and renewed their concern at the gross violation of human rights, in particular the right to life and the right to development, resulting from terrorist acts, and reiterated their condemnation of all acts, methods and practices of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. They also called for the need to promote and intensify international co-operation in order to implement effective measures against terrorism.

343. The Heads of State or Government noted with regret the adoption and enactment of legislation in certain countries, on fighting terrorism, which limit a number of individual rights and whose substance is discriminatory and xenophobic. They called upon all Governments concerned to take appropriate measures to protect the rights of the vulnerable groups, such as migrant workers and their families, and ethnic and religious minorities.

344. The Heads of State or Government urged all States individually and through international co-operation to fight terrorism and related transnational crimes, such as, drugs and arms trafficking and money laundering so as to ensure greater protection for communities and their fundamental human rights.

345. The Heads of State or Government remained determined to promote and protect all human rights, in particular the right to development, as enunciated in the Declaration on the Right to Development. While stressing the indivisible nature of all human rights, they again placed emphasis on the importance of the right to development as a universal and inalienable right and as an integral part of all human rights. In this regard, they stressed the need to strive for the greater acceptance and operationalisation and realisation of the right to development at the international level and called on all States to undertake necessary policy formulation and institute measures required for the implementation of the right to development as a fundamental human right. They emphasised the duty of States to co-operate with each other in ensuring development and eliminating obstacles to development. The international community should promote an effective international co-operation for the realisation of the right to development. Lasting progress towards the implementation of the right to development requires effective development policies at the national level, as well as equitable economic relations and a favourable economic environment at the international level (paragraph 10 of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action). The United Nations Commission on Human Rights' Open-Ended Working Group on the Right to Development should continue to give priority to the operationalisation of this important right including, inter alia, elaboration of a Convention on the Right to Development. They welcomed with appreciation the agreed conclusions of the Working Group on the Right to Development adopted at its last two sessions focusing on the major obstacles to the realisation of the right to development. They also noted with appreciation the six studies/reports prepared by the Independent Expert on the Right to Development and their constructive contribution towards deepening the current international dialogue on the realisation of the right to development.

346. The Heads of State or Government stressed the need for mainstreaming the right to development in the operational programmes and objectives of the United Nations, specialised agencies, programmes and funds and in the policies and objectives of the international financial and multilateral trading systems. They underlined that in relation to the international economic, commercial and financial spheres, core principles such as equity, non-discrimination, transparency, accountability, participation and international co-operation, including partnership and commitments, are important for the realisation of the right to development and prevention of discriminatory treatment to the issues of concern to the developing countries arising out of political or other non-economic reasons.

347. The Heads of State or Government emphasised the importance of strengthening the international co-operation and co-ordination in the field of Human Rights and therefore, they agreed to reinforce the Non-Aligned Movement’s presence by advancing its positions during the deliberations taking place in the main international fora, particularly, the Human Rights Commission, the ECOSOC, and the Third Committee of the United Nations General Assembly.

348. The Heads of State or Government stressed that corrupt practices, including lack of sound international corporate governance, bribery, money laundering and the transfer abroad of illegally acquired funds and assets undermine the economic and political stability, and the development efforts of developing countries. Therefore, they called for early conclusion of the negotiation on the United Nations Convention against Corruption, which should include clear provisions for the repatriation of all illegally acquired funds and artefacts to their countries of origin, through international and bilateral co-operation necessary to achieve this aim.

International Humanitarian Law

349. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s concern over the systematic and gross violations of international humanitarian law and principles, both in terms of denial of safe and unimpeded access in accordance with international humanitarian law to people in need and through increasing violence against all those protected by international humanitarian law. They therefore urged all parties to conflicts to respect international humanitarian law and human rights instruments, stressed the importance of the promotion and dissemination of these laws and instruments and called upon all parties to take measures to ensure the safety security of international and local humanitarian personnel.

350. The Heads of State or Government reiterated that priority should be given to promoting knowledge of, respect for and observance of obligations assumed under International Humanitarian Law, in particular those of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their 1977 Protocols, and they encouraged States to consider ratifying or acceding to the two 1977 Additional Protocols. In particular, they recognised the obligation of the parties to armed conflicts not of an international character to apply the provisions contained in Article 3, common to the four Conventions. They also emphasised the importance of national implementation of international humanitarian law and urged all States to take such measures as may be necessary to implement their international obligations, including the enactment of legislation and/or regulations.

351. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s condemnation of the increasing attacks on the safety and security of humanitarian personnel and urged the Governments of Member States of the United Nations to ensure respect for the protection of the personnel of humanitarian organisations in conformity with the relevant international law. Humanitarian agencies and their personnel should respect the laws of the countries they work in and the principles of neutrality and non-interference, as well as cultural, religious and other values of the population in the countries where they operate.

352. The Heads of State or Government recognised the need for rules to protect and preserve cultural property, as such objects constitute the collective memory of humanity and are examples of its greatest achievements. They took note of the adoption of the Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict in this regard, and invited those States which have not yet done so to consider ratifying the 1954 Convention and its two additional Protocols.

Humanitarian Issues

353. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s concern over the lack of adequate resources for responding to and addressing humanitarian emergencies in a uniform manner across the globe without favouritism and double standards and, more specifically, the process of transition from relief to development and regretted the persistent trend of low and uneven funding for humanitarian assistance. They reiterated that failure to provide adequate resources and balanced contributions, both geographically and sectorally, undermines the Guiding Principles of Humanitarian Assistance, and weakens the ability of humanitarian actors to respond in a coherent and timely manner to emergencies. They called upon donor countries to increase their contributions to humanitarian appeals commensurate with the needs of affected populations, without being influenced by levels of media interest or geographic location of the emergency requiring humanitarian assistance. At the same time, contributions for humanitarian assistance should not be at the expense of development assistance. Furthermore, the Movement again called on the United Nations to fully utilise the capacities existing within developing countries, which are available closer to the site of a disaster and often at lower cost.

354. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the Movement’s commitment to enhance international co-operation to resolve international problems of a humanitarian character in full compliance with the Charter of the United Nations, and, in this regard, they reiterated the rejection by the Non-Aligned Movement of the so-called “right” of humanitarian intervention, which has no basis either in the Charter of the United Nations or in international law.

355. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s deep concern over the considerable rise in the number of refugees and internally displaced persons in developing countries. They also noted with concern the increasingly large numbers of refugees being hosted by developing countries. They again acknowledged the urgent need to further sensitise the international community, particularly the donor community and the international financial institutions to alleviate the negative consequences on the economies, social development and environment, developing countries hosting large refugee populations and those who are in situations of post-conflict reconstruction with protracted and heavy refugee caseloads. They reiterated the necessity for international burden-sharing and responsibility in refugee situations and called for intensified financial and moral support to developing countries hosting refugees, upon request, while scrupulously observing the principles of neutrality, non-conditionality and non-interference.

356. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed that international assistance to respond to humanitarian emergencies, including natural disasters, should be provided impartially upon request, and be based upon humanitarian considerations solely in accordance with the needs arising out of the particular natural disaster. In this respect, they reiterated the need to increase funding for international co-operation and disaster management, including early warning systems, taking into account particularly the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction as it relates to the transition from relief to development.

Racism and Racial Discrimination

357. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the outcome of the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, held in Durban, South Africa, in September 2001 and called for the implementation of its objectives. They also commended the international community for recognising that slavery and slave trade, including trans-Atlantic slave trade, are crimes against humanity. The Conference also recognised that legacies of slavery, slave trade, colonialism, genocide and other forms of servitude have manifested themselves in poverty, underdevelopment, marginalisation, social exclusion and economic disparities. They commended the Conference for having agreed on the NEPAD as a framework within which amongst others, remedial measures for redressing the legacies of these practices could be addressed and called for the formulation of similar programmes of reparations to descendants of slaves in the African Diaspora.

358. The Heads of State or Government expressed the Movement’s commitment to the effective follow-up to and implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, adopted by the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. In this regard, they welcomed Commission on Human Rights Resolution 2002/68 and General Assembly Resolution 57/195 creating the necessary mechanisms and guiding the effective follow up to and implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. They also reiterated the Movement’s opposition to all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and expressed deep concern on the resurgence of contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in various parts of the world. They reaffirmed that all forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, constitute serious violations of human rights, which should be rejected through all political and legal means. They condemned the misuse of the new communications technologies, including the internet for inciting racial hatred and intolerance.

359. The Heads of State or Government remained convinced that political platforms and activities based on doctrines of superiority and violent nationalist ideologies, which are based on racial discrimination or ethnic exclusiveness and xenophobia, must be condemned as incompatible with democracy and accountable governance and expressed their determination to oppose such political platforms and activities which can undermine the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms and of equal opportunity.

360. The Heads of State or Government emphasised the need for the establishment of complementary international standards to strengthen and update international instruments against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

Advancement of Women

361. The Heads of State or Government recommitted the Movement to the implementation of the Declaration and Platform for Action adopted by the Fourth World Conference on Women as well as fully supported the outcome of the five-year review and appraisal as contained in “Further Actions and Initiatives” to implement the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action adopted by the 23rd Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly. They pledged to combat all forms of discrimination against women, and to supporting measures to prevent and eliminate all forms of violence against women and girls. They also called on countries to take effective actions to prevent the trafficking of women and girls and the victimisation of and violence against women and the girl child, especially in situations of armed conflict. They called upon those States which were still not parties to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women to work actively towards ratification of or accession to it and encouraged all Member States to consider signing, ratifying or acceding to the Optional Protocol to the Convention.

362. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed that major change in social development patterns, including providing opportunities for active participation of women is considered among the top priorities for achieving sustainable development. In this regard, the role of the family unit that respects the human rights of all its Members as an institution that provides the highest degree of material and moral well being is extremely important.

363. The Heads of State or Government again expressed abhorrence at the continuing victimisation and violence against women and the girl child, especially in situations of armed conflict and the systematic use of abduction and rape by the parties to the conflict as an instrument of war. They called upon States to take the necessary measures against all such perpetrators of violence and to ensure adherence to the principles of international law and domestic legislation, make provision for protection of women and girls in armed conflicts. In this regard, they reaffirmed Chapter IV.E of the Beijing Platform of Action on Women and Armed Conflict. They also expressed concern at the continuing trafficking in and abduction of particularly women and children.

364. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the generous offer by the Government of Malaysia to host the NAM Ministerial Meeting on the Advancement of Women in 2004.

The Situation of Children

365. The Heads of State or Government recommitted the Movement to the implementation of the World Declaration’s Plan for Action on the Survival, Protection and Development of Children in the 1990s adopted by World Summit for Children 1990.

366. The Heads of State or Government endorsed the final outcome document of the 27th Special Session on Children - A World Fit for Children, by which the international community committed itself to action for the improvement and development of all children particularly those in developing countries. They urged the implementation of the Plan of Action contained in the document.

367. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s concern over the intolerable persistence of adverse social and economic conditions faced by children on account of poverty, use of children in armed conflict, including abduction of children for training as child mercenaries and in terrorism, mass killing of children in communal and sectarian violence, child labour, particularly the worst forms of child labour, the continued exploitation and trafficking of children for pornography, prostitution and drug trafficking, the sale of children and their organs, the increasing number of children affected by HIV/AIDS, as well as the suffering of refugee and displaced children especially in Africa. Urgent steps, including through international co-operation, must be undertaken to address these problems. In this regard, they noted the entry into force of the Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict and on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography and encouraged all Member States to consider signing, ratifying or acceding to the Optional Protocols of the Convention.

368. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace recognising that they serve, inter alia, as the basis for the observance of the International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-violence for the Children of the World (2001 – 2010). Convinced of the benefit of successful observance of the International Decade for future generations, they invited States to expand their activities promoting a Culture of Peace and Non-violence at the national, regional and international levels.

Transnational Crime

369. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s commitment to co-ordinate the efforts and strategies at national, regional and international levels against transnational crime and to develop an adequate database on transnational crime and the methods most effective in combating crime of this nature. They also reaffirmed that international efforts against transnational crime should be carried out with the necessary respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States.

370. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the generous offer by the Government of Thailand to host 11th United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice to be held in 2005.

371. The Heads of State or Government welcomed the opening for signature of the Convention against Transnational Organised Crime and its additional Protocols to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children; and against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Air and Sea. They also welcomed the adoption of the Protocol against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Their Parts and Components and Ammunition. They urged all developing countries, particularly members of the Movement, to consider ratifying the Convention and its three protocols. They also stressed the importance of providing technical assistance to developing countries to tackle issues covered by the Convention and its protocols.

International Drug Control

372. The Heads of State or Government reiterated that on account of its transboundary and global nature, the illicit drug problem can only be dealt with effectively through international co-operation based on the principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter and the principle of shared responsibility in which national measures are articulated with a global, integral and balanced response to the narcotic and illicit drugs problem. They also stressed that the illicit drug chain begins with the insufficiently controlled trade of the precursors and essential chemical substance for the production of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, and is completed with the laundering of money through the international financial and commercial channels.

373. The Heads of State or Government reiterated the Movement’s call for enhanced international co-operation in favour of alternative development programmes to be implemented in the process of eradicating illicit crop, providing a special priority to local rural population as target beneficiaries of this programme and for environmental rehabilitation in the areas of illicit crop cultivation. They also reiterated the Movement’s call on the United Nations Drug Control Programme and developed countries to fully support developing countries in their fight against cultivation, production, trafficking and transit of illicit drugs, through providing them with adequate financial and technical assistance. In this context, they stressed that the sustainability of alternative development programmes require also access to markets of developed countries under competitive conditions.

374. The Heads of State or Government also remained committed to the pledge undertaken at the XI Summit to strengthen international co-operation to eradicate the growing and dangerous links between terrorist groups, drug traffickers and their paramilitary gangs, and other armed criminal groups which have resorted to all types of violence, thus undermining the democratic institutions of States and violating basic human rights. Effective measures must be taken to halt the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons, which is linked to illicit drug trafficking and which is generating unacceptable levels of crime and violence affecting the national security and the economies of many States.

375. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed the Movement’s determination to fully implement the Final Document of the 20th Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly, on the basis of the principles of shared responsibility for addressing the demand and supply-side of narcotic drug trafficking, in conformity with principles and purposes enshrined in the United Nations Charter and other international instruments, in particular respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, and non-interference in the internal affairs of States.

Developed, maintained and hosted by GCIS 
Contact the webmaster